MISSION PREDICTS POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS
The majority of people have the basic belief that positive relationships within a congregation will dictate a powerful mission. This wisdom seems to make sense. If people are fighting, this force will stagnant the work of the church. This wisdom creates an unhealthy cycle. Congregations will direct attention toward building relationships with little results. Positive relationships do not come first, rather a united mission does.
Congregations will constantly spin in circles where there is no operational alignment. There could be elements in a church that are supporting the flow of energy, while other elements are distracting to the mission. A congregation is out of alignment when entities work at cross-purposes. This produces wasted energy. What is unrealized is that energy in a congregation is a limited resource. But when entities are working in harmony, this produces a common spirit and synergy throughout the body.
What is interesting is that within the paradigm of a 200 member congregation, often the energy of the congregation is expended on creating positive relationships. This focus is self-defeating. Without alignment of mission, various groups will be at cross purposes. The groups will not unite on mission, and hence will lay the foundation for division, and essentially block any coherent flow of energy. This produces unofficial split off groups every few years.
In the example of Jesus and Peter, where Jesus sternly rebukes his disciple, Jesus is practicing this wisdom. Jesus has the mission of going to the cross, and Peter attempts to sidetrack this goal. Jesus does not allow his relationship to overshadow his mission. The reason is because of this needed focus on alignment. We cannot be at cross purposes and move forward. When a congregation is united in mission, it will be united in all the other areas too.
Related posts:
- Peace or Mission
- Mission or Confusion
- Understanding the Church’s Mission
- Deacons That See The Mission
- THE MOST IMPORTANT RELATIONSHIPS WITHIN THE CHURCH
About The Author
Interesting idea. And when it comes to larger congregations, I think you’re on to something.
Question — Would you say that the same principle holds true in smaller congregations (like, say, the 90% of churches of Christ with fewer than 200 members) that are more defined by their relationships than their mission?
Ben,
Sorry for the delay. This is a great question. So let me see. Yes, here are a few reasons. In a congregation within a 50-150 size, typically the relationships come first. There are family, friends, core leaders, but someone is keeping them there. But once again, if it is built on relationships, this is the reason that the congregation is still that size. People cannot handle more than 150 people in a social network. Also, I believe it is harder to make the transition to a mission focused congregation instead of a relationship focused congregation at that size dynamic. Relationships will only take your so far, but the great commission will take you throughout the world.
Thanks for your work on this subject. I think there’s a lot that small churches can learn from thinking in these terms.
I love your comment at the end about the great commission taking you throughout the world.
And it raises a follow-up question, if I may: At what point does a relationship-based congregation reach such a critical mass that the good of the kingdom & mission and the relational nature of the group calls for a split? Clearly there isn’t a “magic number” that applies to everybody (but if I were picking one, I’d put it between 150 & 200). I’m more interested in characteristics. Are there any signals (other than size) that indicate that it might be time for a congregation to start thinking in terms of forming a second group?
Ben,
Great question. First, I do not see anything more holy about 30 people in a house over 3000 in a building. It is not the size that is holy, rather the people in the group. So, a magic number for me is when there is opportunities that the church is not reaching because of the size or location. If you have people driving an hour to attend, it is better for that group to be doing church in the community. Only split when the work can increase. Sometimes there are strength in numbers, as well as weakness. So I would not look at it through a numbers paradigm, rather through through a mission perspective.