So many people want large churches but fail to realise that this means the end to being a 'family' church. When I say this the listener throws up their hands and starts explaining how they want families and how families are oh so important. So I have to explain that somewhere around the forty to fifty member mark the church runs like a family - often, but not always, with the minister are the father (but always invariably the primus inter pares*) and above this we find more pastoral support structures which evolve into programmes and stratification before eventually giving way to a corporate structure (which I'm increasingly seeing relabelled as a 'modern minister' model).
Church and management are words that should go together but the problem is that they seem to mix like Guinness and Lemonade (if you fancy a bit of fun ask for a Guinness shandy some time - two drinks in one!).
Many of those who are spiritual eschew structures and anything that sounds like management whilst some I meet have well organised and well-oiled machines running like clockwork but without love, joy, peace and all the other fruit and traits that speak of Jesus and new life. But there is a balance and this is one of the rarest things to behold and yet a joy when we do. I know because I've seen it (but just don't seem to be able to make it mine!).
When talking to one dogcollar recently I was amazed at the passion they had for their sub-fifty church to become a 'large church'. They were longing for the day when they might become a 'midi' church and continue on to the diadema that is a 'larger churches day' at the cathedral. I have to say that having been at them the journey would definitely be better than the arriving but hey ho, you've got to have a dream and talk about the things you'd like to do. After all as hymn 999 in hymns Ancient and Ancienter so rightly continues: 'You gotta have a dream, if you don't have a dream, how you gonna have a dream come true?'
The problem is that I see people organising church out of existence (and yet we really do need structures, organisation and processes - accountability, lines of support (and management) and job descriptions and the like). The problem is I do see churches where there's so much dissipation and chaos that any talk of a God of order is taking the mickey. Letting the lunatics run the asylum is not delegation and the Stalinist approach to church management only fuels transfer growth (at best) and the end of church-going (at it's worst).
One of the greatest aids to growth is a mixed-mode, mixed-economy Church. One where Emerging church emerges and lives alongside Fresh Expresssions and traditional church models and all live in harmony. One where churches send their members out to 'make Christ known' and do this as the end in itself, not as press gangs who will bring back impressed church members to the mother ship.
So, following on from some troubles conversations and some querulous folk who are exploring what it means to be leading church and are confused by what they see in the place they belong, I thought I might intersperse the baptism dialogue (which will continue at a pace at which other might keep up and perhaps take the lead) with some thinking about collaboration and delegation and how it is neither 'do what you want' or 'do what I tell you to' but us reasoning together and walking in step with our eyes on the cross and our hands joined in fellowship and common purpose.
* First amongst equals
