Nine out of ten.
That’s a lot.
Nine out of ten churches in America have an average worship attendance of less than 350. And that percentage has not changed significantly for many years. Yet the unchurched pool of persons is increasing in most communities. There are people yet to be reached.
But most churches will never exceed 350 in attendance. Why?
A Few Caveats
Allow me to preface my analysis. First, big is not necessarily better. A church with more people in attendance is not necessarily more faithful than a smaller church. Second, some churches are in very sparsely populated areas. There may not be 350 people in a five-mile radius (though every community still has people who need to be reached).
My third caveat is key. I believe leadership is indeed a biblical and theological issue. It’s really a matter of healthy stewardship. I offer this third caveat because I will be addressing the issue of leadership in this post.
Attendance Levels of Churches in America
We are a nation and continent of smaller churches. And though we have far more small churches than large churches, there is a big migration of people from smaller to larger churches. In other words, many of the smaller churches are getting smaller, and many of the larger churches are getting larger.
Here is a simple depiction of the number of churches at three different levels:
- 50% of all churches in America average less than 100 in worship attendance.
- 40% of all churches in America average between 100 and 350 in attendance.
- 10% of all churches in America average more than 350 in attendance.
Keep in mind that the upper 10% tend to include more of the growing churches, while the lower 90% tend to include more of the declining churches.
One of the Key Reasons
There is no single reason to explain the apparent ceiling of 350 in attendance of most churches. I do believe, however, that there is a major reason for this barrier. Such is the thesis of this post:
One of the key reasons most churches do not move beyond 350 in average worship attendance is they do not have sufficient leadership and structures in place.
Many smart people have provided analyses of what is commonly known as the 200 barrier. I believe that the 200 barrier is highly elastic. In other words, the barrier is really somewhere between 150 and 350, depending on a number of circumstances. Again, I believe that the key reason stated above is among the greatest inhibitors of growth.
Increasing Organizational Complexity
Moses was an unintended victim of organizational complexity. He was trying the Lone Ranger approach to the leadership of Israel. The nation would implode and he would lose his leadership authority if he kept doing what he was doing.
His father-in-law, Jethro, saw the flaws of his leadership and said:
“What you’re doing is not good . . . You will certainly wear out both yourself and these people who are with you, because the task is too heavy for you. You can’t do it alone” (Exodus 18:17-18, HCSB).
So, following Jethro’s advice and wisdom, Moses became a different kind of leader with a different kind of organization.
Here are the five major levels of organizational complexity in churches according to average worship attendance:
- Under 100: Family and friends
- 100 to 250: Basic
- 251 to 350: Challenging
- 351 to 750: Complex
- Above 750: Highly complex
Most churches cannot or are not willing to make the types of changes that are necessary in complex organizations. In future resources, I will share what many leaders and churches are doing to move beyond the 100, 250, and 350 ceilings. In the meantime, let me hear from you.
Posted on March 25, 2015
With nearly 40 years of ministry experience, Thom Rainer has spent a lifetime committed to the growth and health of local churches across North America.
More from Thom
128 Comments
I don’t understand why having 350 and under in attendance for a church should be a “problem” anyway (as Thom mentions in the beginning, here)? And … BTW – “Leadership” is neither Biblical nor Theological. The word “Leadership” does not even exist – anywhere in the Bible; out of the 5 times it is hinted at in the Hebrew Bible, which was based on the Septuagint and Targums (the oldest translations going back 200 years B.C.), it refers to Jehoiada (Joadas in the Septuagint) as the “chief of the family” or the remaining as “chief officers” in the Army. Isaiah 55:4 is referring to Jesus Christ, the Messiah: “Behold, I have made Him a testimony among the Gentiles, a “prince” and commander to the Gentiles (Septuagint trranslation). The other 2 remaining references are referring to “leaders” in a negative context – one of which is Jesus speaking of “blind leaders.”
With that all said … what is really the key issue here, is that churches should be focusing on Quality, not Quantity!! Why are we taking “head counts” in church? The Early Churches were small House Churches, and were mostly named by the Women of the household – Paul refers to “some of Chloe’s household,” as well as Lydia, Nympha & Priscilla … and John, in his personal letter (2 John: 1), addresses it “The elder to {the) elect lady and her children, whom I love in truth.”
If we truly find that people are leaving churches and not coming back, it’s mostly due to the fact that people either have been hurt by the church, abused, rejected, or are just plain weary of the hypocrisy. They don’t care about “Leaders” – they just want to be Loved and come to a church where they are truly Welcomed – not just “Greeted” by some plastic, smiling, “Stepford Husband or Wife” type! Where are the true Servants & Slaves (as Jesus puts it) of the Church?! Until people Stop trying to be Leaders and be more concerned with Loving, Caring, Supporting and Washing the Feet of their congregations, will they notice a real change in the attitude of the people attending.
If you refer to Thom’s other post on “Mean Churches” and read many of the comments, you will find how this whole fascination of “Leadership” has created a Legion of Church Drill Sergeants & Tyrants within the Church – which either causes there to be consistent transients, coming and going, or people just leaving the church, outright.
If you want to speak of “Church Attendance” – I have personally witnessed our current church grow from approximately 50 people in a small theater, to 350 people (using a school facilities) – to a former Movie Theater, with a capacity of 500 people (with 2 services) … to our current “Megachurch” status – which was built from the ground up – and has a capacity of 900 seats, with 3 services. With all of this, from our family’s perspective (as well as many charter members and elders who ended up leaving), our church better served it’s congregation and was a tighter-knit church “family,” when it was a “350 and under” church. Now … with a total of approx. 3,000 people attending, there is such a turnover of people coming and going (and leaving the church), there is no unity or community, though they always try to convince newcomers that they will be joining this great “community.” And all they talk about is “Leadership”!
It’s all about the “Big Show” – Leadership, Business, Real Estate, & Money and has become nothing more than a “Country Club” Church. It’s a great ploy to increase your attendance numbers, but it does nothing to honor The Lord. Hitler knew all about “Leadership” and had One Million people at his Nuremberg Rally. You can be a “Leader” and have amazing attendance at your gatherings, but nothing in the definition of Leader or Leadership is synonymous with Christianity. I challenge you to look up the word “Leadership” in the Thesaurus. The words “Jesus,” “Christianity,” “Holy Spirit” & “God” appear nowhere!! Also … pull up “Leadership” in Wikipedia and in the entire description, with all of its History & varieties of different Types of Leadership, it says nothing about The Bible, Jesus, or Christianity … except one sentence – referring to Mother Teresa: “According to Howell, Mother Teresa is an exceptional example that embodies integrity, assertiveness, and social abilities in her diplomatic dealings with the leaders of the world.” It does say that Julius Caesar was one of the World’s Greatest Leaders! Do we want to follow the Julius Caesar model or Jesus Christ??!!
My son is a “Millennial” (“growing up” in our church, from the time he was 6 years old) and he admitted that he likes the big “Rock Concert” type atmosphere in church, otherwise he’s bored! I recently had a gig in Teaneck, NJ and my son and his girlfriend stayed over in NYC and my wife and I in Hackencack. The next day, a Sunday, my son took his girlfriend to Hillsong in NYC, while my wife and I spent the day at The Cloisters (museum and gardens, the branch of The Metropolitan Museum of Art devoted to the art and architecture of medieval Europe, was assembled from architectural elements, both domestic and religious, that largely date from the twelfth through the fifteenth century.) in NY. Quite a dynamic!! Compared to our Megachurch, spending a day at The Cloisters, for my wife and me, was one of the most uplifting, inspirational, spiritual experiences we have had on a Sunday, far surpassing most of what we experience at our “Megachurch.”
My wife and I attended a Hillsong concert a number of years ago. What was was really appalling, was the fact that, immediately following the concert, with all the thousands of people who attended, my wife and I watched in amazement, how everyone paid no attention to the homeless people sitting on the sidewalks, – right in everyone’s path – and had no problem walking right by these poor people!
So … which is it – Quality or Quantity??!! Should we really be caring about whether we have 350 (more or less) people in our congregation, or are we treating Church as a Business and using the congregation as Pawns on a Chessboard? It was only The Lord, not Moses, Who delivered the Jews from captivity. Moses was simply a Servant of The Lord, for it was The Lord who provided the Manna and the Cloud of protection, which proceeded no faster than the slowest person or animal. And similarly, Jesus Christ says “If a man has a hundred sheep and one of them wanders away, what will he do? Won’t he leave the ninety-nine others on the hills and go out to search for the one that is lost? And if he finds it, I tell you the truth, he will rejoice over it more than over the ninety-nine that didn’t wander away!” (Matt 18:12)
Be Servants, my friends – Not Leaders – and The Lord will increase your flock tenfold!
Amen! When will Thom reply to this comment?
Out of your entire comment, the part that stuck out was “our church better served it’s congregation and was a tighter-knit church “family,” when it was a “350 and under” church.”
Not to over simplify, but the mission of the church is not to serve the needs, wants, and desires of the congregation. The mission of Jesus is also our mission, to seek and save the lost.
Hey Mike,
Thanks for your response to my comment! I was happy to hear that at least there was one thing in my long comment that stuck out! 🙂
I totally agree with you, that first and foremost, the Mission of the Church should be (as Jesus commissioned us) to “Go out into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature” – meaning that we spread the Good News of the Birth, Life, Crucifixion, Death, Resurrection, and Ascension of Jesus Christ to all the world – which kind of goes without saying, if we are already Belivers! However … it seems that many churches are so busy preaching “Leadership,” that they end up rarely preaching anything out of the Gospels and Jesus’ words and spend most of their time worshiping Moses & the Apostle Paul!
When it comes to our actual Gathering Together in “church” I would have to disagree with you, though, Mike.
Church is Supposed to be a Gathering of Believers, Not of the Lost. When the Disciples gathered together to Worship in the Early Church, they were All Believers – they didn’t bring non-believers into their churches. How can you Worship if you have Nothing that you believe you’re Worshiping?
I know people bring Atheists & Non-Believers into churches with the hopes that they will be saved, but our Lord Jesus Christ told us to Go Out into all the world – Not to bring the non-believers into church. The Only people who were allowed into the main court of the Temple, were Jews who believed in YHWH, and a special Outer Court was made for everyone else (the Gentiles). This is another whole Topic – about how Churches Compromise their messages to accommodate the Non-Believers who have come into their (“Seeker-Friendly”) churches and has become a problem with how Worship is conducted and the Gospel of Christ watered-down and compromised. I know it’s a tough issue because All are Welcome into The Lord’s Kingdom, but our Mission To the Lost, should be Outside of Church. Jesus did His work of reaching The Lost – Outside of the Temple! Then … once the Lost have become Believers, they come in to Worship The Lord they already know.
Jesus had specific instructions to His Disciples – first, He says: “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. “It is not this way among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your Servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your Slave.” Then He said in John 13:34-35, “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. “By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.”
Therefore … based on what Jesus says, it’s quite clear that when we Gather Together As Believers – Yes – we are to Serve the Needs, Wants & Desires of the Congregation! When we are finished worshiping in Church and exit through the doors, it is Then that our Mission is to “Go Out into All the world and preach the Gospel to Every Creature!” And by how much we love and serve the needs, wants & desires of our fellow Believers (the Congregation), the world will know we are Christians.
Many thanks, Mike!
God Bless 🙂
Mark –
I don’t see any size church as a problem, specifically the 350 barrier. The issue is obedience to the Great Commission and the Great Commandment.
So, if there is no issue on the size of the church, why place a specific number in the title of the article? Why refer to it as “breaking the barrier?” If it is not about size of the church, and competition to see whose church can be larger, why is this article not about planting new churches once a church gets to a substantial size? There is no one formula that can be used to figure out why some churches grow larger than others. If you can explain the reason you are growing with the words I or we, without using the words obedience and following Jesus, then there is no true growth. True growth is a spiritual growth, and with the spiritual growth, may come numbers, maybe not, but what you will be getting then is a generation that is working inside and outside of the church walls to complete the task that has been set before us. One of the issues I have found with a larger church, and in the past actually purposely attended larger churches for, is that you can easily get lost in the crowd, and just check off that you have done your Christian “duty” for the week by attending church.
I’m looking forward to your future posts. I’m a church planter that has hit and seems to stick around this mark, but naturally and then as we continue to send out groups of people to plant new works. I’d be interested about how to structure leadership when you don’t have the budget to add more staff or you don’t want to create the culture of firing current staff to bring in hired hands to create a bigger business structure when you’ve worked to hard to plant a New Testament-esque church that is a family of missionaries to a specific location.
Thanks, Noah. More is on the way.
Love the post and thankful for your insights in this area:
The current church I pastor has been plateaued around 110 for the past 20 years. It seems that for every member who joins, one seems to drop out.
I know your analysis is right and know that we must do better in the area of leader development. We want to be a growing church and a church that is a blessing to our community.
My prayers for you and your church, Jeremy.
I am looking forward to the follow up to this post as well… I pastor a church that is pushing the three hundred mark. (currently running in the 280’s) Our structure is currently more of a small church mentality but we realize that changes are necessary for future growth and thankfully the church is up for the challenge. We are looking for direction and I am interested to see the future posts. I attended the ALPHA pastor training recently and found it to be SUPER. A tremendous blessing. Excited about the future! Thanks for all you do Dr. Rainer.
Blessings!
Scott
Thank you as well, Scott.
I do not think there is one single reason why churches do not grow. But a number of smaller churches do not grow is because a certain number of established members do not want to lose their ‘small’ church. They will not make room for new members to get involved in leadership or they will not participate in discipleship. They enjoy having their uninhibited connection with the pastor and do not want to lose their place. In a nutshell, they will sabotage growth.
Very true.
Im curious, how much of this has to do with the ability to hire the needed additional staff members as a church is in the 150-350 range? I’m sure various demographics impact this question, but am curious about how not having the resources to bring that needed staff memeber to help take it to the next level impact this issue ?
Adam –
The need could indeed be hiring more staff; or it could be equipping more volunteer laity.
THANKS for the daily emails! It is much appreciated by those of us who are in the trenches of local church ministry! I would like to make one comments on this article. First a very brief background. 16 years ago I took the lead pastor position in a small community of 15,000 people in Western Indiana. When we began, the church was running 20 people, with the average age being 64 years old. Today we run 1100 in worship on Sunday mornings. So, we have faced all of the growth barriers you mentioned in your article. From my perspective, looking back 16 years, one thing is key …
1 – the leader has to be willing and intentional, to grow his personal leadership ahead of the growth of the church. If this doesn’t happen the church will hit it’s ceiling and get stuck.
Thanks again,
Terry
Thanks for letting me invade your inbox, Terry. And you nailed it with your response.
I am probably viewing this outside the regular box. We have determined not to be larger than 500 because we want to remain personal, vertical, and simple. Those are our values. So when we get to 500 we will have a holy split and move 150 down the road to birth a new church complete with a pastor, leadership, worship team, ministry teams…. We planted 2 years ago with 4 families and now run 140. Most people who join our church come from the mega church model. And there is a group of churches here in SC that have done this successfully for a decade planting 4 new churches.
I believe that believers in our nation want personal. The huge desire for mega church days are subsiding, I believe, as people seek more real relationships and not just spectating attendance.
You mentioned that complexity is a reason churches have a ceiling, agree. But maybe their lives are too complex as is and people want simplicity at least with their spiritual desires. When a church gets beyond simple, the organism becomes an organization and the business model begins to run the church. We don’t have consumers, products, and profits. We have individuals, sanctification, and glory.
So as least from this aspect, an end game is a good thing to hold on to. I suggest that having a prescribed ceiling is something to consider as positive.
Preaching to people you know and so can care for them is good. When a pastor begins preaching to so many people he cannot know them, he ceases being a pastor and becomes a preacher alone. But that is another issue for the church to consider.
You are to be commended. You leading growth by multiplication rather than addition.
Thank you! There is a culture and generation where every bit of what you said resonates… simplicity over CEO… relational over acquisitions. It’s not an “us-four-no-more” philosophy. It’s just an acknowledgement that deep, connecting relationships were the point of the church. Numbers came b/c the relational meant something more than an event attended.
Separate the secular and religious sides. The two are rarely related yet some church leaders attempt to do both and then micromanage everything. Also, organizational management is something that frequently needs a manager, not a minister, to do. It takes some gutsy leadership to hire someone and give that person authority.
True.
Thank you for addressing this topic. I’m realizing this is more and more important the more I observe churches. It’s often difficult even to raise or speak about in a lot of churches.
I wonder if you have any observations on how this works outside the US? I’m in a UK context, and it feels like all the major organisational barriers come at much smaller church sizes than is described in US material I have seen (e.g. Tim Keller). Ray Evan’s recent book ‘Ready Steady Grow’ did tackle this helpfully from a UK perspective, but in my experience we’re seeing the particular challenges some see at 350 at 80-90!
Obviously UK churches are much smaller on average, but it would be interesting to know if there are structural differences as well? Or different expectations?
Sam –
Different cultural and geographical contexts do affect the specific barrier levels. In reality, the most common US church attendance barrier is 75, since about half of the churches in America are smaller than that.
Would you know of any resources on how to structure that leadership for above 750? I can’t seem to find anything good.
Much appreciated!
Sam –
I will check. I do plan on addressing these issues more fully later myself.
Take a look at St. John the Divine in Houston, St. Thomas Church in New York City. These are very large parish churches.
I’m looking forward to read what you have to offer.
Being an Umc pastor, I always wonder if the organizational structure, suggested by the book of discipline, is really suitable for the context of each ministry. Does the complex structure really enhance the church being missional, or does it work the other way around. Also, for most of the churches that are small, do they really need this complex structure?
Those are the questions I hope I can earn insight from your post. Hopefully…