6. Benefits of a small church: It would require less overhead, land and resources.
It’s far easier to find land and build facilities for 50 small churches than for one massive church.
And if the small churches work cooperatively, they can bear the mutual burden of other financial issues, too.
7. Benefits of a small church: More people would get pastored by their pastor.
The bigger the church, the fewer people can have access to the pastor. For some people, that’s OK. But for many, it’s not.
They’re not being demanding, invasive or petty to want to attend a church where their pastor baptizes them, dedicates their children, counsels them through marriage problems and visits them when they’re sick.
8. Benefits of a small church: We could reach more types of people.
When we’re trying to get more people in the same building, we tend to aim for the mainstream, often at the cost of forgetting those who live on the fringes.
The forgotten and the outcasts should never be forgotten or outcast by the church.
Besides, the mainstream is getting smaller than ever, while the fringes are growing.
There have, and will always be people who choose to live outside the mainstream of culture. People who don’t want to do what’s popular. People who want a church worship experience that is more quirky, less predictable.
Those people are less likely to be reached in large, mainstream groups. Only in small batches.
9. Benefits of a small church: Failure wouldn’t be fatal.
Shooting for 50 churches averaging 100 people doesn’t mean we have to cap each church at 100. So, if one or two of the groups happen to get bigger, that’s great!
But nothing comes without a cost.
When a church of 5,000 fails, the damage is massive.
But if there are 50 churches of 100 and one, two or even ten of them fail, the damage, while horrible for those in the failed church, doesn’t affect the rest of the churches.