Another aspect of congregational life that has dramatically changed in the past 8 years is the increasing emphasis on small groups. While small groups have always been seen as important to megachurches, they haven’t always been central to how many of these large churches function. In 2000, just half (50%) of the megachurches said small groups were central to their strategy for Christian nurture and spiritual formation. In 2008, that number had risen to 84% of megachurches affirming the centrality of a small group strategy.This shift in emphasis by the leadership did not appear to have a corresponding significant change in involvement (or the perception of it by the survey informant) in small groups among congregational participants. When survey respondents were asked to estimate the percentage of persons in their churches that participated in small groups in 2005 and 2008, there is slight evidence of change but nothing that would correspond to the 34% increase in churches making small groups a central component of their Christian nurture and spiritual formation efforts.
Now, this is fascinating. It’s become increasingly common for church leaders to declare, “We aren’t a church with small groups; we’re a church of small groups!” And yet, this shift in emphasis has not increased participation. Interesting.
It’s possible the shift in thinking hasn’t had enough time to be fully felt. Or it may be that it takes much more than slogans to change members’ behavior.
As you can, most churches had participation rates of from 20% to 60%, centering around 40% — hardly making a church a church of small groups. Therefore, leadership that has participation rates of 40% or better ought to take comfort in the fact that very few are doing much better, even among the largest churches.
The report also notes,
Likewise, there has been a significant decline in the number of megachurches who somewhat or strongly agree that the phrase “like a close-knit family” describes them, falling from 72% in 2005 to 62% in 2008. Given these findings, perhaps the renewed emphasis on small groups by over a third of megachurches is in reaction to a perceived social disconnectedness more than a proactive strategy.
This certainly suggests that many churches are struggling to get what they want out of their small group program. Personally, I’m not surprised. If the small groups program is just a poorly taught Bible lesson and a meal, it’ll meet the needs of some, but it will be seen as lacking by many, especially the more mature.
While I certainly don’t see this as a cure all, I think we do better to point our small groups toward mission. I’ve posted a discussion of what we’re trying here. It’s going very well.
In a nutshell, these numbers tell us that the likelihood that a person will attend a non-Sunday-morning-worship church event is the same (45-55%) whether the congregation offers the traditional Sunday night and Wednesday night meetings or small groups in homes.
Hmmmm . . .
You’re right, but I think there are a couple of telling differences. The 50% that attend a Sunday night worship will mainly be your older members. The 50% that attend small groups will be skewed more toward the younger members.
Now, in a small church, a Sunday night worship can serve some of the same functions as a small group. The way you can tell is this: if young couples are also coming and if people are either hanging around the building to talk or going out to eat together, your worship service does much of what a small group program would.
But if people come, worship, and leave, then even if you have excellent attendance, it’s hard to figure what you’re accomplishing on Sunday nights that hasn’t already been accomplished that morning.
My experience is that as the church gets larger, Sunday night becomes less attractive and small groups become more attractive to the members. I doubt that many megachurches have much success with Sunday night worship.
Now, I wouldn’t push small groups solely as an age matter. Rather, to me, small groups offer several advantages that you just can’t get with a Sunday night worship service —
* A small group program is a great way to get people involved in service to others. /2007/11/06/whats-wrong-with-how-we-do-church-on-being-a-benevolence-program/.
* Small groups is a great way to help new members assimilate, make friends, and get involved.
* Small groups can work well for spiritual formation.
* Small groups can serve as accountability groups, helping us encourage one another to greater commitment.
* Many churches have had great success at evangelism through small groups.
On the other hand, Sunday night worship can be a chance for fellowship and assimilation, and can be a chance to do additional teaching, but it’s generally not a good means for spiritual formation, accountability, evangelism, or community service. And in a larger church, Sunday night worship is unlikely to be effective at assimilation.
Therefore, to me, the case for small groups over Sunday night worship is overwhelming. And the case grows stronger as the church grows larger.
Nonetheless, I think the leadership needs to be respectful of the differing needs of older members. We have one small group meet at our building on Sunday night and they offer communion to those who were unable to attend that morning. It’s attended by our older members who prefer the rhythm of being at the building on Sunday night. But we have our staff in the homes with the small groups, not at the building, where they can be the most effective.
Pingback: Leading Change: Small Groups vs. Sunday Night Worship « One In Jesus.info