Andy Stanley on: Small Churches
There are some links floating around the blogosphere where Andy Stanley got involved with commenting on some blogs that were critical of North Point. Overall, some very interesting discussion, and Andy was very interested in what people had to say.
There was something he said, though, that I have to share with you. It connects with some of what Andy talked about at the last session of Catalyst back in October. In my blog post, Accepting Change, I summarized something he had said:
Stanley mentioned that significant improvement often costs money, but that we’re usually already stretched too thin financially when we’re at the point of needing to do something to generate momentum. He warned us to not spend money on mediocre ministries – we should focus on the core of the organization, and concentrate on the vision. If we would focus on the vision, and abandon areas that are not essential to that vision, momentum will take hold and as the organization grows, the resources will be there to replenish what used to be mediocre with a better quality program. Funding a large number of mediocre ministries gets us nowhere – funding a small number of high-quality ministries will gain sustained momentum.
Nearly a month before Catalyst, Andy Stanley was commenting on Adam Cleaveland’s blog, where Adam related his experience of visiting North Point. A lot of discussion went on, but at one point Andy had this to say:
Small churches should always play to their strengths. Small churches should only do what they can do well. What you can’t do well, don’t do at all. Sounds extreme, but remember, mediocre never triggers momentum. Ever. Mediocre just uses up resources.
New churches that try to have something for everyone usually end up with nothing great for anyone.
I think too many times we try to act like we’re the “big church” because we feel like we have to compete. What we need to do, instead, is play to our strengths, execute our vision, and unapologetically allow people to move on if what we’re doing isn’t connecting with them. We can’t be everything to everyone. If we try, we end up being mediocre, and “mediocre just uses up resources.”
Funny.
Amen, of course. There are so many things to address ….
First of all, we have so many churches who do just what you’re talking about … and I think part of it is a will to compete, to draw others in. I think another part is that they think that the mega-church model IS success. I don’t know if Andy Stanley would agree with that, but probably not. But lastly, in order to give the benefit of the doubt, I think many ministers and churches honestly think that they HAVE to supply every need in a program or service, to be inclusive of all their members in order to be a good “church.” This is unfortunate because they do exactly what Stanley suggests, that NO ONE is ministered to, and what is even more tragic is that we develop a mentality within the Body of Christ that its all about ME and what I WANT out of worship.
I feel we see this in part because of our idea of a “pastor” as well. I’m all about spiritual leadership, but in many churches we have this mentality that everything is the “pastor’s” job since we pay him. Some leaders of local assemblies foster this with their own control issues and others just submit to it because its their livelihood. Others, again, however unfortunate, are convinced this is how it is supposed to be.
These are gross generalizations, but big problems, nonetheless, that many feel powerless to address. This is perhaps the most tragic to me. Don’t we have the Spirit within us? Isn’t He that is within us greater than He that is in the world? We have not been given a Spirit of fear, but of power and love and a sound mind. You wouldn’t know it by how most of us act, though.
Peace.