Nazarene Trends During the 2010s by Rich Houseal

Small Churches Produce Leaders

Former general superintendents V. H. Lewis and J. K. Warrick and retired pastor Bobby Huffaker—who was senior pastor of the largest Church of the Nazarene in the U.S. and Canada region (Grove City, Ohio)—all have roots in small, rural Nazarene churches. These and many other leaders and pastors have been influenced by small churches.

Further evidence supporting the point that small churches do indeed produce leaders can be found in a survey conducted by the Association of Nazarene Sociologists and Researchers (ANSR). A 1996 ANSR poll asked pastors, “What was the size of the congregation that most influenced your acceptance of the call to preach?” Fifty-six percent indicated it was a church with less than 100 members.3 This is a striking statistic when one considers the fact that in 1996, only 26 percent of Nazarene members were in churches with less than 100 members. In other words, the influence of small churches was over-represented in the pastoral corps by 30 percent. I wish I had more recent data on the influence small churches have had on those called to the ministry, as it would be interesting to compare this poll to more recent ones.

Small Churches Work Everywhere

Small churches are everywhere. They are not confined to just rural settings but can be found in the suburbs, in the cities, in wealthy as well as poor neighborhoods, and among all cultural groups. Table 2 shows the percentage of churches in urban, suburban, and rural community types by worship attendance size. It reveals that even in heavily populated areas, the large majority of churches average less than 100 in worship. The table also shows that in rural areas, only three percent of Nazarene churches reach 250 or more people. This is understandable when one considers that only 20 percent of the U.S. population lives in rural areas, yet more than 90 percent of U.S. territory is defined as rural. The population is just too spread out for churches to become large in rural areas.

“Research suggests there is roughly one congregation per every 500 people living in small town and country areas; roughly one congregation per every 1,500 people in metropolitan areas.”4 This statement suggests that churches could be much larger. If just half of the population attended church, then rural churches would average 250 people and metropolitan churches would average 750. However, statistics show that the vast majority of churches never reach these sizes, and I imagine there must be a variety of reasons why. Therefore, I would suggest that we need many more small churches. We need more in rural areas because of the size of the territory, and we need more in metropolitan areas because of the size of the population.

Table 2: USA/Canada Churches of the Nazarene by Community Type and Size, 2019

Worship Attendance Size

1 to 99 100 to 249 250+ Totals

% Urban

68% 22% 10% 100%

% Suburban

70% 22% 9% 100%

% Rural

86% 11% 3% 100%

Small churches also make up the majority of every ethnic group’s congregations. Table 3 shows the percentage of churches among the largest ethnic groups in the Church of the Nazarene by worship attendance size. It reveals that in several of these ethnic groups, more than 80 percent of their congregations average less than 100 people. (Haitian congregations have the lowest percentage of churches under 100 [56 percent] and the highest percentage of churches with 250 or more [13 percent]). Do you want to reach a particular cultural group near you? Chances are they grew up and will feel comfortable in a small church.

Table 3: USA/Canada Churches of the Nazarene by Ethnic Group and Size, 2019

Worship Attendance Size

1 to 99 100 to 249 250+ Totals

% White/ English Speaking

74% 18% 8% 100%

% Hispanic

85% 13% 2% 100%

% African American

83% 11% 6% 100%

% Haitian

56% 31% 13% 100%

% Native American

100% NA NA 100%

% Korean

96% 4% NA 100%

% Other

76% 15% 9% 100%

Summary

Nothing I have written here should be taken as a negative against large churches. All I’ve tried to show is that the small church is by far the most common-size church, small churches do make a significant impact within the Church of the Nazarene and for the kingdom of God, and small churches are effective in all kinds of settings. By accepting the small church as the norm, wouldn’t we start a lot more churches? Wouldn’t we expand the number of those in our Nazarene fellowship and the number reached for the kingdom of God? Wouldn’t a lot of small churches make a huge impact? “The kingdom of heaven is like yeast that a woman took and mixed into a large amount of flour until it worked all through the dough” (Matthew 13:33).

RICH HOUSEAL serves with Nazarene Research Services. Email Rich at rhouseal@nazarene.org if you have a research question.

1. This has been documented in several ways, including by Faith Communities Today in A Report on Religion in the

United States Today, by Carl S. Dudley and David A. Roozen, 2001 (available online at ww.faithcommunitiestoday. org), and “Understanding Church Size Based on Empirical Data,” a presentation to the 2007 annual meeting of the

Association of Nazarene Sociologists and Researchers by Bill M. Sullivan (available online at www.nazarene.org/ansr). 2. New Nazarenes are those who become members either by profession of faith or by transferring from another denomination, as opposed to just transferring membership from one Nazarene church to another. ANSR Poll,

Research Center, Church of the Nazarene Global Ministry Center, 1996. 3. Roozen, David A., American Congregations 2005 (Faith Communities Today, Hartford Institute for Religion

Research, Hartford Seminary, 2007), 4. 4. Available online at www.faithcommunitiestoday.org.

Theology of Giving

B y C a r l Le t h

What does the offering have to do with worship? A survey of practices in our churches suggests that we are not really clear what the answer to that question should be. Sometimes we resort to “collection” language: “It’s time to take up the collection.”

We often do this with little or no theological explanation and sometimes without any offertory prayer at all. These practices suggest that collecting funds for the operation of the church is a pragmatic necessity but essentially disconnected from the service of worship. Those sensing this disconnection—and the uncomfortable character of “fundraising” in the middle of a service—relegate the offering to plates or boxes at the entrance to the place of worship outside of the worship service.

Even when we explain the offering, it is often in pragmatic terms. We say things like, “It is necessary to support the church and its ministries.”

When we raise money in special campaigns—a building campaign, for instance—we often explain the reasons for raising money in practical or business terms: We need to expand the ministries of the church, to relocate to a more outreachconducive area, or to avoid greater expense in the future. All of these may be valid explanations, but they identify the business of giving as simply a means to a higher end: We need money to be able to do the “spiritually important” work of the Kingdom.

But what if our giving is already the work of the Kingdom? What if the offering belongs in the heart of the worship service, as an important part of worship?

The Larger Context of the Offering

It will help if we place the act of giving in a larger context of stewardship. Sometimes we reduce stewardship to a synonym for giving. A stewardship campaign is a “fundraising campaign.” But the meaning of stewardship is much broader than this.

We encounter the idea of stewardship early in the biblical narrative. While the term “stewardship” is a more recent linguistic development, the ideas of stewardship emerge clearly in Genesis (vv. 1:28–30). Humans are entrusted with the care of God’s creation. Stewardship is the management of something entrusted to the steward’s care. God leaves the world in our care.

Unfortunately, the narrative of our stewardship takes a sad turn in Genesis 3. Through Adam and Eve’s disobedience, sin was introduced into the creation that God had just concluded was “good” (Gen. 1:31). The consequences of sin began to be revealed, identified with “the curse” that produces disorder and death. All of life—humans, society, and nature—would suffer from this deadly disorder. Creation was “broken,” suggesting our tenure of stewardship should be over—a brief and failed experiment. However, as God’s “project” turned from managing a “good” creation to redeeming and restoring a “lost” creation, so did His vision of humanity’s stewardship. We are, of course, subjects of that redemptive work. But we are also called to participate in the divine project to restore a disordered and broken world. Paul referred to this divine intention in Ephesians: “[God] made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment—to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ” (Eph. 1:9–10). Everything sin has disordered will be restored into submission to the lordship of Christ and the rule of the Kingdom of God. When this has come to fruition, “no longer will there be any curse” (Rev. 22:3). This is now the focus of our stewardship: not merely managing creation, but participating in its recovery and healing.

This broader vision of stewardship encompasses restoration of people, families, society, and the natural world. We are agents in the work of the restoration of the Kingdom on earth and the realization of the New Creation. This is at the heart of the message of holiness. But what does this broader vision of stewardship mean for our finances and giving?

As we learn to worship in our giving, God will attend to our practical financial needs.

The Implications Upon Our Giving

One of the ways sin has disordered us is in our understanding and use of resources, including our money and goods. A casual survey will quickly reveal the power of money and its misuse in our families and society. As Christians, how we use money is an expression of our faith. Proper management of what we are given is an act of discipleship—making Christ Lord over all of our lives. Struggle with tithing (or with giving God financial priority in any measure) is often a spiritual struggle. The fundamental issue is not financial management but spiritual priority.

God’s lordship over our lives will not be complete until He rules (orders) our finances. The significance of this dimension of our lives is underscored by the prominence of the topic of money in Scripture. Our struggle to surrender to God’s purposes for our lives is often described in terms of money (see, Matthew 6:24,33; 1 Timothy 6:9–10, for instance). Significantly, this struggle refers to both the possession of money and the desire to possess money—a challenging issue for everyone, rich and poor.

God’s reordering of our understanding and use of resources and the full recovery of God’s intention for our lives is a point of serious struggle, with our salvation at stake!

The Offering and Its Relationship to Worship

When we give our offering, we are (or should be) declaring God’s lordship over the financial dimensions of our lives. On any given Sunday, this may be a step of obedient faith by givers who are responding to God’s reordering initiatives. Some people may be tithing, uncertain of how they will make their adjusted budget balance, but committed to the priority of God’s lordship and stepping out in faith. Others may be giving for the first time, an initial step of response, acknowledging that surrendering to God’s will is more important than what they could have purchased with that money. Yet another is a mature disciple and giver who is responding to a special need and giving generously beyond tithe because this person has submitted all resources to the Lord’s disposal, available on call.

The primary concern of all of these examples is not simply supporting operating budgets or funding timely expansion initiatives. This may be a byproduct, but it is not the main emphasis. When we do the giving in worship, primarily in pragmatic terms, we diminish the meaning and spiritual importance of giving. We also fail to teach and encourage disciples in this important dimension of God’s reordering work in their lives. As a pastor, I understand the pressing nature of these pragmatic financial concerns. However, I would also call us to teach giving from the Kingdom perspective first. As Jesus said, “Seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well” (Matt.6:33). As we learn to worship in our giving, God will attend to our practical financial needs.

CARL LETH is former dean of the School of Theology and Christian Ministry at Olivet Nazarene University.

“DO NOT BE AFRAID”

A Reflection from John’s Revelation

B y M a ry Pau l