Featured Multi-site Churches: Good or Bad

No. no, Mitchell.

You made this audacious claim: "I can tell you it is an unorthodox view and not widely supported. Add to that it is a result of very loose hermeneutics."

and you did not feel compelled to offer one SHRED of support for it.

I think that's kinda sorry, bro.

It is belly-crawlin', low down.

If you are going to say someone is peddling a view that is contrary to CHRISTIAN ORTHODOXY you ought to have the moral and ethical character to feel COMPELLED to provide plenty of support for such a claim.

 

I agree. It certainly isn't the Baptist model. I can see a distinction between a missions work (church plant) and an autonomous church. The former is not to be confused with a muti-site church as it's purpose is to be eventually autonomous.

 

Why would a Baptist church even want to go multi-site? Wouldn't it be preferable to plant new churches?

 

Of course you do. I doubt anyone is surprised by that.

 

Respectfully I disagree that multi-site churches violate autonomy. Particularly in Baptist churches they don't seem to do this. So long as the sites are within a reasonable geographic distance and have the ability to separate to form their own community as they desire, the campuses and model doesn't violate autonomy. In reality multi-site churches are little different than churches with multiple worship services on a Sunday morning.

It should be telling that most churches using multi-site church strategy are baptist churches or use a kind of congregational polity.

The success rate of multi-site churches is, right now, about 95%. The success rate of church plants in the United States is low, comparatively, after five years to multi-site churches. Some people have said there is an 80% failure rate in church plants...I don't buy that stat. Its just too high. I'd put the number closer to 40% on high end and the median at about 35%.

There are many reasons why a church plant struggles. Too often they never get above a certain attendance number (150) which will provide financial and membership stability. However, multi-site churches usually start with over 250 adults involved, a secure financial base for sustainability, and proven leadership to guide the transition.

I do think that for every new campus a church starts an church plant in another region should be started to compliment the trend. Multi-site is a good model which provides a basis for mission and growth.

 

Can you provide the source you used to come up with these statistics?

 

Baptists forsaking biblical congregationalism for an episcopal scheme is nothing new:

"We have never sought to hinder the planting of other churches from our midst or in our neighborhood. It is with cheerfulness that we dismiss our twelves, our twenties, our fifties to form other churches. We encourage our members to leave us to found other churches—no—we seek to persuade them to do it. We ask them to scatter throughout the land to become the goodly seed which God shall bless. I believe that so long as we do this we shall prosper. I have marked other churches that have adopted the other way and they have not succeeded. . . .I have heard from some ministers. . . . [who] do not encourage their [village stations] becoming distinct churches. . . .I have marked those who have followed this course and I have seen that the effect of trying to keep all the blood in the heart is to bring on congestion. And very soon the whole body has been out of health. My Brethren, if you can do more good elsewhere than you can do here, for God’s sake, go! And happy shall I be that you have gone. If you can serve my Master in the little rooms in the neighborhood—if by forming yourselves into smaller churches you can increase the honor of my Master’s name I shall love you none the less for going—and I shall delight to think that you have Christ’s spirit in you and can do and dare for His name’s sake!" —Charles Spurgeon, "The Waterer Watered"