February 2012

The small church has been neglected for quite a while. Tragically, the neglect has been intentional. It is also short-sighted.

Denominational middle management stressed viablity in congregations at a time when the economy was impacting their own bottom line. Small churches became attractive targets for closure. Their weaknesses were highlighted while the denominations’ struggles were hidden from view. The attitude was, “We know what’s best for you. We can make better use of your resources. Praise God for your 100-150 years of dedication. Hand over the keys and where do you keep the money?” No “please”; no “thank you.”

This attitude reflects a dereliction of duty. Denominations exist to serve and once you write off your constituency, ethical dilemmas soon abound.

Suddenly, the failure of small churches becomes a goal — the sooner the better, and please make it easy. Little time and attention are spent on the problems of the small church. Clergy fail to hear God’s call for small parish ministry. Small churches must rely on lay skills and the devotion of retired clergy, whose training and active years predate the current thinking.

This is a shame. Small churches are ideally situated to address many of the problems faced by denominations today.

It’s a David and Goliath scenario.

A Goliath church is large and cumbersome. It looks down on the rest of the world and can be haughty about its wealth and prestige. The budget is top-heavy with professional salaries and property maintenance. Parish life revolves around making these assets function. This makes it more difficult to identify change in the community and refocus on changing ministry priorities. Any priorities to be addressed must fit the skills and interests of salaried leaders. The priority is always paying pastors and keeping up the building. A Goliath church has an army of support. Armies work best when there is someone giving orders.

A David church is small, agile and wiry. It meets the rest of the world eye to eye. It doesn’t have the status of larger churches, but it is likely to know very well where its strengths lie. It has a hard time getting the attention of denominational leadership. It presses forward, relying on members’ talent, fueled by a spirit and devotion that is ready to overcome any obstacle. It does not have much in the way of internal hierarchy to weigh it down. It can change ministry plans and emphases easily as neighborhoods change and new challenges arise. Any member can implement a new idea. A David church is likely to change quickly and the denomination, who may have been paying no attention for years, is none the wiser.

Mainline denominations face challenges today that are ideal for David-sized church ministries. Small churches are likely to interact personally with visitors and less likely to depend on someone else taking the lead. Multicultural ministries can be easily pursued in neighborhoods where populations are changing. The disabled and disenfranchised can be served one on one without unwieldy programs. Families led by single parents can easily find support and acceptance. David churches have been training their own leaders for decades. They have skills and energy that King Saul would not notice — until he is desperate.

Of course, large churches can also address these issues, but there is a greater tendency to create programs led by well-paid experts, while small churches will roll up their sleeves and embrace challenges personally.

The problem is that denominations come to their David churches with Goliath expectations and solutions. Small churches know they cannot afford Goliath budgets. That doesn’t mean that closing David churches and reallocating their assets is the answer. The answer is in finding ways to help David churches be the best they can be with their resources. Use their resources to help them with their challenges.

Wise denominations will look to their small David churches for ideas and energy and stop viewing them as tomorrow’s dinner.