5 Reasons Why We Should Church Plant?

Over thirty years ago Donald McGavran pointed out that recent history is often a powerful inducement to keep doing what we have recently been doing. American Christianity as a whole has experienced 4 decades of small growth, non-growth or decline (depending on the denomination). As well, most of our local congregations have had the same experiences. The result is that most Christians have never experienced vibrant, growing churches! Our past has made the vibrancy of church planting abnormal to us. So why should we break out of our recent histories in order to church plant?

Reason #1 - God commands it.

The Great Commission (Mt. 28:18-20) reflects God's desire that we intentionally pursue people for Jesus. It is not enough for us to keep our doors open and our services running. Our commission is to be deliberate, purposeful and fruitful. These are precisely the qualities involved in church planting.

Reason #2 - Church Planting is a sign of the Holy Spirit.

JW McGarvey said that Acts might best be called the "Acts of the Holy Spirit." The book is a record of the Spirit's activity in leading, calling and propelling the early Christians into the world, and wherever they went, churches sprang forth!

Reason #3 - Americans are demonstrating renewed interest in spirituality.

George Gallup surveys show that there has been a steady rise in spiritual interest in the West, but that interest is quite undefined and eclectic in nature. People are looking for spiritual experiences of all kinds and from everywhere. At the same time the percentage of Christians attending religious services in the US has dropped from 59% in 1978
(Malphurs) to 50% in 2000 (Glenmary).

Reason #4 - New churches grow faster and evangelize better.

New churches are exciting places where people see the work of God, often clear and direct ways. People are drawn to those points where new life and positive change exist. Malphurs reports a Christianity Today finding that churches under 3 years old win 10 people to Christ each year for every 100 members (10:100). Churches from 3-15 years win 5:100. Churches older than 15 years win 3:100. In the 1970's Churches of Christ were converting the unchurched at a rate of 1:80 (Flavil Yeakley). In the 1980's growing churches were converting the unchurched at 5:100 while declining churches were converting the unchurched at 2:100 (John Ellas). While these numbers tell us little about new church plants, street wisdom would indicate that new plants must have higher conversion rates than this in order to survive.

Reason #5 - People are still lost!

In fact, there are more lost in the US now than ever before. George Barna reports 34% of Baby Busters (people ages 18 to 35) say they are "absolutely committed to the Christian faith," compared to 52% of Baby Boomers (ages 1946-64), 63% of the Builders (ages 55 to 73), and 70% of the Seniors (ages 74 and older). The younger the people, the less churched they are. Jack Sims (in Malphurs, p. 37) says of the babyboomers, "Most of the babyboomers I have interviewed describe their experience with church and religious media as boring, irrelevant or high-pressured." The international evangelistic Alpha Course titles its first lesson Christianity: Boring, Untrue or Irrelevant to speak straight to this modern attitude, and its attendance at its 10 week seminars has grown from 2,000 to 2,8 million in the last 10 years. The lost do respond when they are approached with a vibrant Christianity!

There are more reasons that could be given for church planting, but surely these 5 are enough for us. Planting new churches is part of God's plan and desire, a process He has been guiding for 2000 years. Let's set our minds, our hearts and our people on His task.

5 Humorous Reasons for Church Planting

1. Why clean up after someone else's mess when you can start from scratch?
2. Finally -- you can have it your way.
3. Church Planters have more fun.
4. Church planting is an extreme sport
5. You can be like Nike and "just do it."

For the sake of the kingdom,
Stanley Granberg

Beyond 200 - Mark T. McLean

Beyond 200

Characteristics of the Effective 21st Century Church

By Dr. Stanley E. Granberg, Cascade College

By all accounts the 20^th century may prove to be as much of a watershed in the history of Christianity as was the 16^th century. In the 1500s Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Knox and others initiated a reform of Christianity which changed the substance of what it meant to be church in the world. But this great theological reform developed, in large part, in response to the great sociological reforms spawned by the Renaissance. In other words, these religious reformers responded to the changes in the world around them so that people found their message relevant and life-giving. And thus the people responded.

The 20^th century is characterized by two major sociological events which are also changing the shape of Christianity in the world. The first of these is urbanization. In 1900 232 million people lived in cities, 15% of the total population. Today there are nearly 3 billion city dwellers, almost half of all the people in the world (David Barrett and Todd Johnson, "Annual Statistical Table on Global Mission: 2001." International Bulletin 25, no. 1, pp 24-25). The church of the 21^st century must therefore be an urban church. The second major sociological event is the demise of modernity, the rational, structured approach to the world that has under gird western thought for at least the last three centuries. Today, in our post-modern world, experientialism is replacing rationalism. People are not much willing to enter into extended conversations based on logic and linear thinking. Rather, they seek to experience the truth of the issue within the context of their personal lives. In short, when it comes to religion people are more inclined to seek out answers with their hearts and less with their minds. They want to experience the life-giving vitality of religion first, then they may be willing to discuss the reasons behind the religious experience.

Given these two sociological realities, urbanization and experientialism, how is the church to respond so that it will be effective in producing responses for God in the 21^st century? From my reading and observations I have identified the following 8 characteristics which seem to be common to churches that are being effective in causing people to respond to God in our world today.

1. Celebratory Worship. This is worship which touches the heart and gives voice to the full range of human emotions. It predominantly expresses positive emotions such as joy, thanksgiving and serenity. But, celebratory worship is also bold enough to call for sorrow, brokenness and contrition with tears. Celebratory worship, much like the Psalms, is unafraid to touch all the emotions of life. The church which practices celebratory worship must be focused on the current activity of God in the lives of its people, it must be sensitive to the needs of its people and it will be aware of the emotions of the times as people respond to the events of life.
   
2. Deliverance Theology. Cities are overwhelming to the individual. There are demands and decisions to be made everywhere. The pressures of the city are both to perform and conform, or be swept away into insignificance. Even the environment of the city with its noise, activity, pollution and density contribute to the feeling of battling for survival which causes a callousness in people. In the city the opportunity for evil and exposure to it abounds. In the radical environment of the city people are in need of radical salvation:deliverance. They are seeking deliverance from fear, from oppression and from sin. Much like the psalmist the people of the city are crying, "Rescue me from my enemies, O Lord, for I hide myself in you. Teach me to do your will, for you are my God; may your good Spirit lead me on level ground" (Ps. 143:9-10). Churches which are effective in the city use liberally the vocabulary of deliverance to provide people hope that they too may escape the havoc of broken relationships, bankruptcy, addictions and the other ravages of life (Col. 1:13; 1 Cor. 4:20; Ro. 8:31-39).
   
3. Victorious Prayer. Along with a deliverance theology is the practice of victorious prayer. In Acts 4:23-31 the church was faced with persecution and the potential loss of their leading apostles, Peter and John. Their response was a request for boldness and recognition that God would ultimately prevail. Victorious prayer does not necessarily mean displays of shouting, binding Satan and rebuking the demonic hoards (Jude 9). But victorious prayer does seem to be characterized in these ways:
   
   
   
   1. It takes people's requests to God specifically and immediately with the well-founded belief God will work.
      
   2. It occurs at the moment the need is revealed, whether publicly or privately.
      
   3. It follows up the immediate prayer with continuing prayer and counseling with the Word of God.
      
   4. It celebrates the answer of prayer.
   
   
4. Apostolic Leadership. When we speak of apostolic leadership I believe we should be speaking about the characteristics of biblical leadership, particularly as it is displayed by the apostles. In my reading of the Bible there are five characteristics of apostolic leadership which seem to best convey the spirit of effective leadership for the 21^st century church. Apostolic leaders are those who:
   
   
   
   1. Lead as servants but with the authority of Christ (1 Cor. 4:9-16; Jn. 13:1-17).
      
   2. Are fearless for the Lord and the work to which the Lord has called them (Acts 5:29).
      
   3. Work hard (2 Cor. 6:3-13).
      
   4. Give up their personal rights and privileges (the right to privacy, comforts, to keep quiet, not to be abused or accused) in order to minister on God's behalf to God's people (1 Cor. 9:3-6).
      
   5. Are willing to boldly speak the commands of the Lord as well as applying their own best judgment when appropriate (1 Cor. 7:10, 12).
   
   
5. Empowerment/Boldness. People, particularly the newly reached unchurched, need permission and authority to live victorious lives. People's past--their family histories, bad personal choices and debilitating circumstances--bind them to old, dysfunctional patterns of living. New Christians often times need verbal permission to leave such old patterns for new, victorious ones in Jesus Christ (Col. 3:5, 12; 1 Cor. 3:3; 6:9-11; Rom. 6:1-4). When people are instructed to live boldly, expected to live powerfully and shown how to live victoriously for Christ usually they will.
   
6. Youth and Family Focused. While the West is graying, the rest of the world is growing younger. For example, in most African countries half of the population is below 15 years of age. But, even in the US, research shows that growing churches are typically composed of younger rather than older members (John Ellas, Clear Choices for Churches. Houston: Center for Church Growth, 1994). The church for the 21^st century must be willing to focus its attention on the youth and their families. One problem we often encounter is that the leadership of many congregations is older with grown children. Sometimes it is easy for an older leadership to forget the struggles and needs of younger people. At other times there may be a strong dislike for the new trends associated with youth. 21^st century church leaders will be committed to not succumbing to these temptations and be strong supporters of the youth and families of their churches. And, dare we say, they will be willing to show that support even in the face of potential opposition from their peers.
   
7. Life Oriented Teaching. 21st century people do not readily accept doctrine in a non-applied form. Young people may say, "Who cares, it does not apply to me," while their parents simply disappear from the church pew. Paul typically began his letters by giving the theological "whys" (doctrine) and ended with the practical "whats" (application). The 21^st century church will begin with the "whats" then move to the "whys." The felt needs principle from missions (which says begin by scratching the existing itch) is also a good principle for the 21^st century church. For the American church this may take place in the form of dependency and addiction programs, parenting classes, Moms' program, etc. In order for the church to be relevant it must provide practical, real-life help to the very real problems of the people it is reaching.
   
8. Personal Intervention. In Gal. 2:11 Paul intervened quite forcefully in Peter's life. Typically we would look at this as confrontation, but whatever term we may call it, Paul was not shy to meet a problem face to face, neither will the 21^st century church or its leaders. Urban living destroys accountability. People develop different circles of relationships, which usually do not overlap. This leads to the feeling that no one sees, none knows and no one cares, a dangerous combination for the moral integrity of today's Christian. The church today must be personally involved in the lives of its members, training them in Christian living and Christian values. This will require lots of leaders in many ministries, and lots of personal mentoring. Church leaders will need to become experts in multiplying themselves or risk the growth/health of their church being crushed by the overwhelming needs of its members. 

Aug. 31, 2001

The Growth and Decline of the Churches of Christ in the United States: A Visual Review, 1980-2000

Types of Church Plantings

Have you ever heard someone say, 'Yes, our church would like to church plant, but we can't possibly do it until we grow to X number of members'? Or perhaps you've thought that yourself. We hear this statement because, typically, most of us think in terms of only one kind of church planting: when a congregation sends out 50 to 100 of its current members to a nearby location to begin another congregation. We call this type of church planting hiving, like what bees do when a swarm moves out of an established hive to begin a new one. There are, however, other types of church plantings. This week in our countdown article we're looking at different types of church planting, including hive planting, daughtering, mission planting, and vocational church planting teams.

First, let's consider church planting using a biological analogy based on DNA. We are familiar with the function of DNA as that replicating mechanism within cells that guides their reproduction and growth. Healthy cells multiply themselves according to their DNA patterns, creating new cells which have the same DNA structure as their parent cell.  This is the whole basis around which cloning occurs. When an animal is cloned the resulting new animal carries the same genetic codes, DNA, that the original animal had. The same is often true for the hiving method of church planting. When a large group of people from one church move out to form a nearby, new church, they will typically take with them most of the same ways of thinking and acting that they experienced in their original congregation. It is who they are, their DNA. So the new church is likely to be a clone of the old church in function, structure and practices. Now there is nothing inherently wrong with church cloning, but just like in the animal world, when there are too many 'identical twins,' the gene pool becomes depleted and these churches will begin to experience a loss of vitality. There is not enough diversity in the churches to meet the challenges of new people, new circumstances, and new thinking in the world around them. The old ways become simply that 'old ways' not sufficient to sustain viable life in the new world.

One of the great benefits of church planting is that there are ways for churches to reproduce rather than clone. Just like in reproduction where parents produce children who are similar to them, yet different, with lives and character of their own, church planting using reproductive methods creates churches that are reassuringly similar to their parent, yet vitally different.

The reproductive analogy is easiest to see in daughter church planting. Daughter church planting occurs when an originating church (the mother church), supports the establishing of a new church through people, financial and expertise resources.  While we don't know for sure, it is probable that a number of churches in Acts were begun using such a pattern (Acts 21:20). Like hiving, daughter church planting is usually geographically near to the mother church; near enough where fellowship and shared activities can occur fairly regularly. What distinguishes daughter church planting from hiving is that daughtering focuses on evangelizing unchurched people to form the central core of the church while hiving forms the church core from transfer members. Daughter church planting is a powerful method to raise the density of churches in a focused geographic area. This quality makes daughter church planting well suited for urban environments.

Another type of church planting is what may be referred to as mission planting. This is what Paul and his band of traveling companions did during Paul's missionary journeys. Paul was commissioned to preach and assemble new bodies of believers (Acts 13:2; 14:21-22). What distinguishes mission planting is that there is an identifiable individual or team of church planters who typically go further afield than daughter church planting. The greater distances require more preparation for the church planter(s), often times more financial support and greater attention given to communicating and encouraging the church planting effort. Sometimes mission church planting is referred to as parachute planting because the church planter is dropped into a new area isolated from other churches in the fellowship. Mission church planting is a powerful method for increasing the extensiveness of the church across large geographic regions or nations.

Right now there are teams of college students planning to move to target cities around the United States with the express purpose of planting new churches. There are at least 3 vocational church planting teams committed to come to the Northwest from Harding, Lubbock Christian University and Abilene Christian University. These teams may have one or two full-time church planters, but for the most part the 5 or 7 or 10 families are planning to come as vocational missionaries. These teams are similar in that respect to the exodus movements of the 1960s. The team will locate in their target city, get jobs as school teachers, bankers, computer programmers or whatever vocation they are trained for, and through friendship evangelism make contacts, develop evangelistic small groups in homes, and coordinate these church cells into a cell-based church, or perhaps, eventually, into a more traditional church.  A primary benefit of vocational team church planting is to help re-distribute the concentration of Christians, moving committed Christians out of highly churched areas to settle in less churched regions of the country.

Hiving, daughtering, mission planting or vocational church planting teams, there are a variety of ways to plant new churches. Each approach brings its own distinctive strength to the arsenal of kingdom advancing strategies. Now which one you or I or any other church might choose will depend much on what God is calling you or I to do, but the critical idea is that each of us hear God's call to advance the kingdom- then answer Him with action.

For the sake of the kingdom,
Stanley Granberg

What Are We Talking About When We Say "Church"?

If I were to ask you right now to write a definition of church, what would you include in that definition? You might take a theological approach and speak of 'the people whom God has saved through the blood of Jesus,' which would be good. But, what if you had to speak of church at a visible, practical level? Would you talk about size of membership? Activities such as Sunday AM, PM and Wednesday night services? Is a church really a church when it has a building? What are we meaning when we talk about the church in church planting?

One of the great resources you will receive as an attendee of the Northwest Church Planting Workshop is a CD Rom with a pdf download of the 300 page The New Dynamic Church Planting Book published by Dynamic Church Planting International. On page 52 Paul Becker, Jim Carpenter and Mark Williams include a simple exercise to help us think through the question of what we mean when we speak of the church in church planting. I include part of this exercise here for you try.

Instructions: for each of the following descriptive items place the following designations

A. for absolutely essential
B. for good, but not essential
C. for sometime in the future, but not immediately
D. not important at all

_____ the Gospel is proclaimed (evangelism)
_____ Regular gatherings of professing believers for worship
_____ The Sacraments are properly administered (baptism and the Lord's supper)
_____The group is self-supporting (not receiving support money from outside the local church)
_____ The group is self-governing with no outside control
_____ Children's classes and youth ministry
_____ Biblically qualified elders
_____ Owns a building
_____ A minimum of _____ people gathering together regularly for worship
_____ Has an official membership roster

What are your A items? How many do you have? Steve Steele of the DAWN church planting ministries suggests the following 3 minimum items:

1. Regular gathering of believers
2. Trained leadership
3. Observance of sacraments

Why Church Planting?

C. Peter Wagner has often stated that, historically, church planting has been the single, most effective means for advancing the kingdom of God. There is a need to distinguish at this point what Wagner is and is not meaning with this statement.

What Wagner is not meaning is that the most effective way for any given local congregation to grow is by planting new churches. Planting a new church may or may not be what a local church ought to do. Is the timing right? Does the church have the experience and people in place? Is there a written plan of action that would increase the possibilities of successfully planting a new church? Has sufficient commitment to the task been raised within the congregation? At the local, individual church level there are many variables to consider before a proper determination to church plant or not can be made.

What Wagner is saying is that on the macrolevel of history, and when looking at broad, geographic areas, church planting has demonstrated itself to be the single, most effective method of expanding the kingdom. I believe Wagner's conclusion is valid for both biblical and practical reasons.

Biblical Insights Supporting Church Planting

The book of Acts is such an extraordinary book tracking the growth of the church through church planting. There are no fewer than twenty references to cities in which believers lived, where the inference if not the fact is that these were churches. David Hesselgrave makes this statement about Acts, 'From here (Acts 13) on the New Testament clearly indicates that churches were formed wherever some became Christians' (Planting Churches Cross-Culturally, 1980:.27). So closely linked are the ideas of evangelizing and church planting in Acts, it would be difficult for us not to accept that church planting was an essential part of the evangelistic work of the Holy Spirit. The New Testament seems to call us to recognize church planting as an indispensable part of the program of preaching of the New Testament church.

Practical Insights Supporting Church Planting

From around the world there are astounding reports confirming that we are living in a period of great religious receptivity. The Southern Baptist Mission Board recently published a small booklet highlighting the evangelistic impact of Church Planting Movements (David Garrison, 2000). Garrison reports in a South American country two Baptist evangelistic unions overcame government persecution to grow from 235 churches in 1990 to more than 3,200 churches in 1998. Among the Khmer people of Cambodia a new strategy for church planting was implemented in 1989. The Baptist churches had only 6 congregations with about 600 members that year. By 1998 their churches had grown to over 60,000 members in 194 congregations. And again, in a Hindu province in central India another work grew from 28 churches in 1989 to over 2000 in 1998. This growth represented over 55,000 people who made decisions to leave Hinduism for faith in Jesus Christ. Among Churches of Christ the amazing results in African countries such as Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya, Zambia and others have demonstrated the practical power of evangelizing through the planting of new churches.

I am pleased that our primary workshop presenter, Marc Bigelow, has been involved in the planting of over 60, middle-class, urban-oriented Restoration churches in the northern California area since 1986. These church range in size from 130 to over 7,000 members! Marc brings with him the testimony that when we look at larger geographic areas, church planting consistently has proven itself to be an amazingly powerful method for bringing the gospel into the lives of lost people.

For the sake of the kingdom,
Stanley Granberg

What Kinds of Churches are There? (part 1)

The New Testament Church, House Churches and Cell Churches

Do you remember the joke about the wife, who after riding for hours with her husband finally asks, "Dear, do you know where you're going?" And the husband replies, "No, but I think we're making really good time."

One of the fog banks that prevents many people and churches from becoming involved in church planting is that we often don't have a clear idea of the end product. Some people envision a neighborhood style church with a steeple on the roof and brightly dressed, neat parishioners gracing the church doors on Sunday morning. Another person may see a bunch of high energy, sartorially challenged twenty somethings meeting in a coffee house. And still a third person might picture 3 or 4 families meeting in a living room. Are these all valid pictures of churches? They might be. Last week we looked at some of the basic concepts involved in defining a church. In this article we're going to look at different types of churches.

The New Testament Model

One of the most interesting phenomenons in American Christianity is that our churches have typically not looked like the church of the New Testament. In his insightful book on the NT church Robert Banks argues that the meeting groups of the NT ekklesia are best thought of in terms of house-churches. "Whether we are considering the smaller gatherings of only some Christians in a city or the larger meetings involving the whole Christian population, it is in the home of one of the members that ekkesia is held."

We are certainly familiar with the references Banks uses to make this statement. Paul greets Nympha and the church in her house (Col. 4:15). The church in Colossae may be meeting in Philemon's home (Philemon 2). And when Peter is miraculously delivered from prison, the church is praying in the home of Mary, mother of Mark (Acts 12:12). So influential was the household to the early church that the conversion of the household head, the paterfamilias, was crucial to the spread of the early church (Clarke, 1 Cor. 1:16; Acts 10:2; 16:31; 18:8).

The Modern House Church Movement

Today a return to a similar pattern of church is occurring with the house church movement. These churches are really what you would expect, they are small groups of people who meet in homes to share their Christian life together unencumbered with buildings, size or the superstructures of administration characterizing traditional church. Wolfgang Simson is so committed to the
benefits of the house church to Christianity that he speaks of the house church movement as the Third Reformation, a reformation based on structure.

What do house churches do? Simson says they are characterized by 4 activities: 1) eating together, 2) teaching each other how to obey, 3) sharing material and spiritual blessings and 4) praying together. Sounds simple? It is, and that is what is considered the strength of the house church.

There are also some weaknesses with the house church model. One is the weakness of visibility. In Issue 3 of House2House magazine the experience of a house church planter in Austin, Texas records, "I thought I was being creative, dreaming up something new . . . but I certainly didn't know that a global network existed- or that there were at least three home churches within five minutes of my house (p. 6)." The urbanized world of the 21^st century provides a distinctly challenging environment to the house church in making an impact that can reach public proportions. A second weakness is that of leadership development. Without broader scale institutions or processes for training leaders biblically and practically many house churches succumb to leader weakness. And finally, house churches lack many of the support systems that large churches provide.

Still, the house church movement has been hugely successful in many parts of the world.

Cell Churches

The most famous cell-based church is probably the Yoiddo Full Gospel Church in Seoul, Korea, led by Paul Yonggi Cho. This church of over 700,000 members is based on small groups, or cells. Each cell is overseen by a cell leader, who in turn is overseen by a district or regional leader and so on. Cell churches, often called cell-celebration churches, are different from house churches in that they are usually part of a much larger system of cells where specialized ministries, leadership training, etc. are provided from with in the structure of the larger body. Thus they overcome some of the weaknesses of the house church model.

What then makes cell churches different from traditional churches with small groups? The primary difference is one of identity. A church with small groups still uses the traditional Sunday AM service as the defining point of identity for the church. Without that service meeting regularly, there would not be a church. The small groups are peripheral to the core identity. But in cell churches the identity is in the cells themselves. It is in the cells that church happens. Then
periodically, typically once a month, the cells will meet together for a large celebration worship. As Robert Logan and Jeannette Buller say about the cell church, if you're not in a cell, you're not in the church.

The cell church overcomes many of the weaknesses in the house church model while maintaining house church strengths. In addition, the cell-church appears more at home in urban environments where strength of numbers equates to strength of impact and visibility. But, the cell church has weaknesses as well. Simson lists several weaknesses including a strong hierarchical structure and feel to the organization, the need for highly charistmatic and organizationally adept senior pastors (such as Bill Hybels, Paul Cho and Cesar Castellanos), typically high-end church headquarters and susceptibility to corruption in high-level leaders. None of these weaknesses is necessarily fatal; many church organizations share them. But these susceptibilities do require attention.

For the sake of the kingdom,
Stanley Granberg
 

References

Robert Banks (1980). Paul's Idea of Community: The Early House Churches in Their Historical Setting. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, p. 41.

Cesar Castellano. http://www.mci12.com/english/churchnet/churchnet.htm.
25,000 cells in Bogota, Columbai.

Paul Yonggi Cho. http://english.fgtv.com/.

Andrew D. Clarke (2000). Serve the Community of the Church. Grand Rapids,
MI: Eerdmans, p. 161.

Robert Logan & Jeannette Buller (2001). Cell Church Planter's Guide.
ChurchSmart Resources. www.churchsmart.com .

Wolfgang Simson (1998). Houses that Change the World. Waynesboro, GA:
Paternoster.

What Kinds of Churches are There? (part 2)

The Traditional Church as Family, Neighborhood, Magnet, Resource and Concept Churches

On a recent trip to Dallas, Texas I met a number of you who are receiving this church planting workshop bulletin. I gathered from comments that the "daily" (it really has been just weekly) updates have made an impact. I have been out of town for the past 2 weekends, so you got a bit of a break, but it's time to get back into the saddle.

In the last bulletin we began looking at structures of churches, reviewing the concept of house churches and cell churches. In this week's bulletin we're going to look at traditional churches and their structures.

Most of us (very probably all of us) grew up in what is termed a traditional church. Our churches were often times from 50-200 members in size. We met twice on Sundays and probably had a mid-week service or Bible classes as well. We knew who the church members were because we saw them at services Sunday mornings. We also knew who the really committed members were because they attended all the other services and all the other activities as well. That, in fact, was the chief criterion by which the spirituality of church members was evaluated, by their attendance at church functions. What we were less aware of is that these ideas were the result of both size and value assumptions. We assumed that our experience was normative.

Today, the traditional church is more varied in size, structure and organization than it was in the past. What distinguishes the traditional church from the other types of churches is that it still retains congregational worship services as a defining criterion (as compared to the small group basis of the house and cell churches). The following chart identifies 5 types of traditional church structures, and compares them by 7 key identifiers: size, structure, staff, levels of ministry, assimilation, metaphor and key activities. There is not the space here to go into detail on each cell in the chart, but let's look at the 5 types of traditional churches through their 7 key identifiers.

Chart of Traditional Church Structures
(This is a MWord table)