Actscelerate.com Forum Index Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
r/Actscelerate

Are there churches that are beyond help?
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
   Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Acts-Celerate Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Message Author
Post Are there churches that are beyond help? Aaron Scott
I have heard some ministers that I have great respect for speak of churches that, do what they might, they just could not get it to "go."

Sometimes, this came out with a bit of anger/bitterness...such as, "Those people didn't want to change," or what have you.

And sometimes it was much more benign, as in: "We tried various things, but nothing seemed to work. We wanted it to work, but the (you name it--town, community, culture, people, age groups, music, workers, etc.) just didn't work out."

ARE THERE CHURCHES THAT WILL NEVER AGAIN BE ON ANYTHING MORE THAN LIFE SUPPORT?

If a church cannot pay its bills, that's a pretty good sign that it needs to be closed. Especially if it's due to having a very small attendance. But what about those churches that bring in enough money to pay the bills, yet still are not making much headway?

Should we base it on the number of visitors? salvations? what? How do we discern when a church really needs to fold its resources into another church that is being more effective?

To say that a church CAN advance under the right leadership is probably true. But the fact is that many "failing" churches cannot attract or afford the sort of leadership that could transform them. For instance, if you wanted a T.L. Lowery to come pastor, well, unless he had a specific word from the Lord, he's going to have to bypass a lot of bigger, wealthier, more vibrant churches that would also like such a pastor's services.

So we're right back where we started. To say that it COULD do better under the right conditions, but to not be able to bring about those conditions, gives us the same result, right?

What do you think?
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6027
10/17/15 1:49 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post c6thplayer1
Quote:
But what about those churches that bring in enough money to pay the bills, yet still are not making much headway?


What is headway ? A church that pays bills and worships our God is worthy of remaining in tact. IMO
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6385
10/17/15 4:25 pm


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post C6thplayer... Aaron Scott
I know where you're coming from, bro.

At the same time, when you consider that resources could be freed up for greater service...it's not an easy choice, I don't think.

Consider if we had five small churches in an area. Each are paying a pastor something (usually), they may be paying a mortgage, and are certainly paying a light bill.

If you sold two of those properties, folding the people into another church with as much sweetness and wisdom as you could, those churches might reach the point of critical mass...or at least some degree of financial self-sufficiency...or might even be able to pay the pastor a salary...etc.

You get the idea.

For instance, I doubt most of us would think it's fine for a church to have a million dollar property, have 8 people in church, no growth for years, and other, nearby churches that are growing but needy.

We'd surely want to see some sort of balance in terms of the kingdom.

I don't know that we would be right...but we might feel that way anyway. Especially if it was our church that was growing and struggling.

What say you?
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6027
10/17/15 5:22 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Cojak
A tough call. Yesterday I posted about a church I pastored 50 years ago, One church was birthed from this little church in that time. It was not a joyful birth as is many times but the 'Other' church has done well. The church I pastored averaged less than 40, still does.

I had a good time there worshiping with the folks and praising God, but as a kid I tried everything I could that came out of HQ, nada. The only LIVE convert was due to my oldest son who was 5 at the time. He brought little Jimmy his buddy in and Jimmy brought his mama in. She stayed.

Should the church stay open? It is paying its bills and reporting it always has. Everyone needs a pastor, one that loves them even if they are not 'productive'.

Will this church grow? I doubt it. The people in the town, if they want to attend a COG would have to travel 10 miles. When I was there Half the people got there by the pastors car, and I didn't mind.

In the end, yep it should stay open. The people think they own the church it would hurt their souls if it was sold out from under them. I don't like that thought. Sorry to ramble. Embarassed
_________________
Some facts but mostly just my opinion!
jacsher@aol.com
http://shipslog-jack.blogspot.com/
01000001 01100011 01110100 01110011
Posts: 24269
10/17/15 7:52 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post As far as closing churches... Clint Wills
I'd probably lean more toward closing ineffective churches than most. However, even I would be very hesitant to close the doors on any church that meets all of its own financial obligations.
While I think there is a lot more to being effective for the Kingdom than paying all your bills, I do have a hard time telling that church that they aren't getting it done.
IMHO, if a church is consistently needing support from the state office that is a different story. When I read Aaron's words, "life support" that looks like a church that is not able to survive on its own without outside support. Close those churches. For all the great things that the COG is, I certainly hope one of those things is never being a church welfare system.
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5163
10/17/15 8:28 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: As far as closing churches... Cojak
Clint Wills wrote:
I'd probably lean more toward closing ineffective churches than most. However, even I would be very hesitant to close the doors on any church that meets all of its own financial obligations.
While I think there is a lot more to being effective for the Kingdom than paying all your bills, I do have a hard time telling that church that they aren't getting it done.
IMHO, if a church is consistently needing support from the state office that is a different story. When I read Aaron's words, "life support" that looks like a church that is not able to survive on its own without outside support. Close those churches. For all the great things that the COG is, I certainly hope one of those things is never being a church welfare system.


Good point Clint, I also agree if the church cannot meet its obligations, it is a different story. I know of two churches where the jobs have moved away, leaving only the retired folk and other seniors who have paid into this church for years. They pay the bills, The death knell is on the church, but not yet.

I come from a little town that has fast become the bedroom for a large city. The council passed an ordinacne that there will be no chickens inside the city limits. I tried to get them to allow a grandfather clause, only two old women had chickens, I pointed out the problem would solve itself in a few years, but they took the ladies chickens.

The churches I know will die a natural death, no sense in Killing them. Shocked Shocked
_________________
Some facts but mostly just my opinion!
jacsher@aol.com
http://shipslog-jack.blogspot.com/
01000001 01100011 01110100 01110011
Posts: 24269
10/17/15 8:39 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post JLarry
In 1978 I went to pastor a church that was running about 20. If I remember right the church was founded in the 40's. To my knowledge it never ran over 20 for a period of time. In almost three years we go up to over 30.

A good man followed me and stayed 16 years. Before he left he built a new church and was running over 300.

So I suppose the answer would be yes.

I went to a church that was running about 50 and the first Sunday we had 80. It was obviously not me if so the church I left would have ran much more. They simply needed a change. My timing was good, timing is very important.

I went to one church and the timing was bad, very bad.
_________________
Recorded Sermons @ www.pastorwiley.com

No one who died without Christ is happy about their decision.
Acts Mod
Posts: 3340
10/17/15 9:20 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post c6thplayer1
Some of the best spirit filled services I've been in were in small churches. Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6385
10/17/15 10:02 pm


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post Quiet Wyatt
Everybody who lives around here says tear that lighthouse down,
The big ships don't pass this way anymore,
Ain't no use in it standing 'round...
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12784
10/18/15 1:15 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post diakoneo
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
Everybody who lives around here says tear that lighthouse down,
The big ships don't pass this way anymore,
Ain't no use in it standing 'round...


Yep. No matter what it's done. No matter that it is still an assembly of believers. No matter, even if they still pay there bills. Too small. Too yesterday's news.
Golf Cart Mafia Consigliere
Posts: 3382
10/18/15 7:34 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Clint Wills
I would ask the question a little differently...what is the purpose of the church? Are we here simply so that we can gather together and hang out with our friends once a week? Do we leave an organization alone just because the people there are happy and want to continue to get together?
I can't answer those things one the denominational level, but as a pastor I can answer it on a local level. If our small groups stopped making disciples and became a social club that simply wanted to get together and taste each others cooking, it would be over. In fact, last February I had a Life Group running around 20 people. Our ideal group is around 10-12, so I wanted to branch the group. The leaders of that group came at me hard against it. The long and short of it was that they were 1) building their Kingdom and 2) they wanted to continue hanging out with all of their friends more than they cared about the spiritual formation of those same friends. Those leaders no longer lead a Life Group.
This isn't an age thing or to say anything about aging churches, this is an effectivity thing. If a church (which is the people - not the organization) has decided that they are happy meeting with the same 7 people every week and don't really care that there is a lost world around them, then close it!! The same could be said about a church of 300...though that church is much more difficult to close. Very Happy
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5163
10/18/15 10:54 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Quiet Wyatt
Having had quite a bit of experience with small, declining or plateaued churches (which make up something like 80% of churches in the USA today), I can say that never once have I sensed from those involved in such churches that they were happy with things staying the way they were. Mostly, they were indeed quite concerned about the future of their church, and didn't know how to turn it around or they definitely would have!

The condemnatory attitudes and comments such churches typically receive from so many in what I call the church growth cult is very much like the condemnation heaped on fat people by skinny people, as if they WANT to be stuck the way the are. Such comments are really unhelpful and are in fact hurtful. No church wants to be closed down. All of them wish they could grow. A new pastor every year or two probably won't help spark growth, but then again a long-term pastor may not be able to make it grow, either. If 80% of churches in the USA are either plateaued or declining, there has to be another reason other than just supposed lack of interest in growing.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12784
10/18/15 11:38 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post georgiapath
Cojak wrote:
A tough call. Yesterday I posted about a church I pastored 50 years ago, One church was birthed from this little church in that time. It was not a joyful birth as is many times but the 'Other' church has done well. The church I pastored averaged less than 40, still does.

I had a good time there worshiping with the folks and praising God, but as a kid I tried everything I could that came out of HQ, nada. The only LIVE convert was due to my oldest son who was 5 at the time. He brought little Jimmy his buddy in and Jimmy brought his mama in. She stayed.

Should the church stay open? It is paying its bills and reporting it always has. Everyone needs a pastor, one that loves them even if they are not 'productive'.

Will this church grow? I doubt it. The people in the town, if they want to attend a COG would have to travel 10 miles. When I was there Half the people got there by the pastors car, and I didn't mind.

In the end, yep it should stay open. The people think they own the church it would hurt their souls if it was sold out from under them. I don't like that thought. Sorry to ramble. Embarassed


Going to church may be the only thing they have to look forward to all week.
Acts-dicted
Posts: 7578
10/18/15 12:30 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post c6thplayer1
Our church has stalled in growth the past 3 years. We want it to grow and have tried several things but it hasn't. In part because of the older folks that attend.

We dont have the mentality that if your church doesnt grow or if you have very few members that you should shut it down. We , even small in members , have helped other churches that are smaller than ours with their services in hopes that either would gain attendance.

Here's a thought.

Joel Osteen has a mega church with thousands in attendance every sunday. Maybe he should take the stance and preach that if your church attendance is lesser than his , then you should shut your services down and seek a bigger church. After all he is by far doing more than anyone's church on this board which makes your efforts miniscule and thus worthless in comparison. { like the smaller churches spoken about here } Anyway that appears to be the context presented on some of these posts.


Last edited by c6thplayer1 on 10/18/15 7:24 pm; edited 1 time in total
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6385
10/18/15 2:25 pm


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post Cojak
georgiapath wrote:


Going to church may be the only thing they have to look forward to all week.


When the average age in a church is 64, because the furniture factories, cotton mills or Orange Juice producers have moved over seas, and the youth have headed for the cities to find work, What GP said is a fact. It may seem a social club, but it isn't. It is a functioning booster house for the ones in my age group that are headed for the nursing homes.
_________________
Some facts but mostly just my opinion!
jacsher@aol.com
http://shipslog-jack.blogspot.com/
01000001 01100011 01110100 01110011
Posts: 24269
10/18/15 5:37 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post c6thplayer1
forget it.. Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6385
10/18/15 7:23 pm


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post Cojak
c6thplayer1 wrote:
forget it..
Idea you got it!
_________________
Some facts but mostly just my opinion!
jacsher@aol.com
http://shipslog-jack.blogspot.com/
01000001 01100011 01110100 01110011
Posts: 24269
10/18/15 8:26 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Methocostal
Precisely

When we grew our cell to be in the 30's, we asked that it be split to allow for growth.

However, I do have somewhat of a different view from your comment. Yes, our group did involve a lot of social functions, but that is precisely how we got to know them as people, not simply as an opportunity to share the word, (as the major services were already doing), but to know them! Therefore, they weren't just a fellow congregant, but a fellow human being that we felt their pain and their joys. I don't see anything wrong with fellowship as long as it is understood the part of the underlying reason is to be able to truly care for people as individuals -- not as some generic, nameless, church member. I do understand there is a fine line and perhaps it is too easy to cross that line to be a pure social club. In our case, it definetly was not.

We have ton's of opportunity for Bible study and learning of the scriptures, but the cell group can provide an opportunity to put those theories to actual practice.

I fully understand the concept of "us four and no more", but a balanced approach of providing for both personal and spiritual needs can be met. Congregational meetings on Sunday morning/night/Wednesday night, do not lend themselves well to get to really know one another. Particularly, if the pastor or Bible Study leader, does more lecture than active participation. Nonetheless, the cell group can be that avenue to provide both -- spiritual and fellowship.

Even Church dinners often provide rather superficial opportunities to get to know one another--particularly if people congregate at the table with friends they have already developed. Groups of 10 to 12 enable one to get to know a variety of people that groups of 4 or 40 do not.


Clint Wills wrote:
I would ask the question a little differently...what is the purpose of the church? Are we here simply so that we can gather together and hang out with our friends once a week? Do we leave an organization alone just because the people there are happy and want to continue to get together?
I can't answer those things one the denominational level, but as a pastor I can answer it on a local level. If our small groups stopped making disciples and became a social club that simply wanted to get together and taste each others cooking, it would be over. In fact, last February I had a Life Group running around 20 people. Our ideal group is around 10-12, so I wanted to branch the group. The leaders of that group came at me hard against it. The long and short of it was that they were 1) building their Kingdom and 2) they wanted to continue hanging out with all of their friends more than they cared about the spiritual formation of those same friends. Those leaders no longer lead a Life Group.
This isn't an age thing or to say anything about aging churches, this is an effectivity thing. If a church (which is the people - not the organization) has decided that they are happy meeting with the same 7 people every week and don't really care that there is a lost world around them, then close it!! The same could be said about a church of 300...though that church is much more difficult to close. Very Happy
Friendly Face
Posts: 496
10/19/15 9:25 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Clint Wills
Methocostal wrote:
Precisely

When we grew our cell to be in the 30's, we asked that it be split to allow for growth.

However, I do have somewhat of a different view from your comment. Yes, our group did involve a lot of social functions, but that is precisely how we got to know them as people, not simply as an opportunity to share the word, (as the major services were already doing), but to know them! Therefore, they weren't just a fellow congregant, but a fellow human being that we felt their pain and their joys. I don't see anything wrong with fellowship as long as it is understood the part of the underlying reason is to be able to truly care for people as individuals -- not as some generic, nameless, church member. I do understand there is a fine line and perhaps it is too easy to cross that line to be a pure social club. In our case, it definetly was not.

We have ton's of opportunity for Bible study and learning of the scriptures, but the cell group can provide an opportunity to put those theories to actual practice.

I fully understand the concept of "us four and no more", but a balanced approach of providing for both personal and spiritual needs can be met. Congregational meetings on Sunday morning/night/Wednesday night, do not lend themselves well to get to really know one another. Particularly, if the pastor or Bible Study leader, does more lecture than active participation. Nonetheless, the cell group can be that avenue to provide both -- spiritual and fellowship.

Even Church dinners often provide rather superficial opportunities to get to know one another--particularly if people congregate at the table with friends they have already developed. Groups of 10 to 12 enable one to get to know a variety of people that groups of 4 or 40 do not.


Clint Wills wrote:
I would ask the question a little differently...what is the purpose of the church? Are we here simply so that we can gather together and hang out with our friends once a week? Do we leave an organization alone just because the people there are happy and want to continue to get together?
I can't answer those things one the denominational level, but as a pastor I can answer it on a local level. If our small groups stopped making disciples and became a social club that simply wanted to get together and taste each others cooking, it would be over. In fact, last February I had a Life Group running around 20 people. Our ideal group is around 10-12, so I wanted to branch the group. The leaders of that group came at me hard against it. The long and short of it was that they were 1) building their Kingdom and 2) they wanted to continue hanging out with all of their friends more than they cared about the spiritual formation of those same friends. Those leaders no longer lead a Life Group.
This isn't an age thing or to say anything about aging churches, this is an effectivity thing. If a church (which is the people - not the organization) has decided that they are happy meeting with the same 7 people every week and don't really care that there is a lost world around them, then close it!! The same could be said about a church of 300...though that church is much more difficult to close. Very Happy


I agree, and my point had nothing to do with the size of the group, but rather the attitude of those involved. Jesus actively discipled 12 men. There were larger groups that He was less actively involved with, but 12 (and maybe even 3) was the number that Jesus spent a bunch of time with. It wasn't for Bible study, but for relationship building and spiritual formation through that relationship. If Jesus can handle 12, then I guess that I doubt that many of us can handle more in that kind of discipleship relationship. The catch is that these leaders had no desire to actually make disciples - which is done in relationship. They wanted to have a great big party every week and have as many people look up to them as possible. I think that part of the reason they didn't want to branch was fear that everyone may attend the other leaders' group.

As far as this comment:

Quote:
Going to church may be the only thing they have to look forward to all week.


That is no reason to keep church doors open. Surely there is another church in town that they can all attend together. I am not at all for keeping church doors open just so to watch it die. The church does not exist so that people have something to look forward to each week. We exist to spread the gospel to the nations and make disciples. If there is a refusal (overt or otherwise) to do that, then what are we doing?
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5163
10/19/15 11:20 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post deltaman
family run, with a majority of family members, and family controlled churches are the most difficult. If they are small they will be the ones with least amount of hope until new non related families out number the original family members. Member
Posts: 40
10/19/15 1:12 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Acts-Celerate Post new topic   Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Acts-celerate Terms of Use | Acts-celerate Policy
Contact the Administrator.


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group :: Spelling by SpellingCow.