Looking through my Google Reader, I’ve noticed a spike in stories on multi-site churches, or churches that open new campuses operated by the originating church. They are not a new phenomenon, but have taken on a new form in recent years as the internet allows one pastor to be several places at once via telecast.
So take this as a gateway topic, ie. a blog post where people can share resources and opinions and we can base future blog posts off of this one.
We’ve talked about multi-site churches previously here at HX!
- Walmart Church Devours Small Churches – notes on how well-financed and trained multi-site campuses siphon from other churches.
- Saddleback’s Gated Church Community – notes on how new sites are directed towards closed groups, even those *not* in gated communities!
Here’s a linkdump from my GReader to bring more discussion!
- A schismatic Presby church in Tulsa plans a new site – interesting to note that the site of the church plant will also be sold to local businesses to create a community.
- A USA Today article (h/t @gavoweb) on the multi-site phenomenon struck me when it said “even if people are just watching a preacher on a screen”…I wonder if embracing preaching as televised edutainment is a problem…
- Jenny Smith has notes from Rick Warren, one point which I would contest. Warren claims moving from large gatherings to small groups, from large church meccas to multi-site parishes, is decentralization. I disagree because the theological agenda still comes from the head…Rick Warren.
- Mark Driscoll has five reasons why multi-site is awesome (and he’s pledged 100 sites of Mars Hill).
Here’s the definition of Wal-marting. It is my contention that it is an accurate label to give multi-site churches, as I’ve said previously. Let me know if you see some parallels to the multi-site model.
The Wal-Mart business model includes: marketing to a broad “family” demographic that includes rural as well as urban, ethnic minorities as well as mainstream, people without a higher level education, lower- or working-class consumers, as well as the middle-class; one-stop shopping based on a very large selection of goods and services; the use of intense price competition and high-technology inventory management to stimulate and satisfy end-user demand; extreme economies of scale based on big-box delivery of consumables; aggressive supply-chain management that requires producers to reduce their costs significantly to find an outlet for their goods; employment of store workers for low wages, few benefits, and little job security to reduce overhead.
Thoughts or other links? Post them below or start conversation on this topic.
Great topic. I have little to add, other than a bit of ill-informed skepticism. But I look forward to seeing what discussion others bring to the topic.
*I know this is an old post and hope my commenting now is still ok. I found it from today’s other post.
Personally I think this is two fold and depends on how you further define some additional terms. “Multi-site” only implies by it’s name that the church has multiple sites. UMC, Lutheran, Baptist, Roman Catholic, and many more denominations are “multi-site” in this sense. The issue mainly becomes in that non-denominational (generally “evangelical”) churches have begun doing this. With no real central affiliation that the bigger actual denominations have, this has appeared odd.
The other part that is generally done by non-denom multi-site churches, and I think this is what is included by most in their definitions, is that the sub-sites often see the service from the “main campus” on some sort of screen. This has different views to it. I don’t mind if you have a large campus having screens so people in the back can see clearly enough, but having only an on screen preacher doesn’t feel as “authentic” in my opinion.
The last part of the definition, which I only most recently saw attributed here on HC, is the idea of temporary spaces. The idea that they will constantly move to meet the new community. I have not seen this as part of the larger multi-site movement before. I don’t doubt it’s existence, but I feel it should be separated into less of Wal-Mart (constantly making new locations), and more of the traveling-salesman-store (best name I could make on the spot lol). I think the TSS approach could be detrimental to the congregation because unless they are willing and able to move with the church to the new “outreach location” (my made up name), then they may lose a worship spot and fellowship all together.
Personally, if you believe that what your church is doing is great and people want to come and they are growing in their relationship with Christ and others, then I would expect you to want to spread it to other areas. I personally believe this should be done with new locations, with new head pastors, that should work in cooperation with the original campus (or superior functions of the denomination in those cases). There should still be a pastor in the flesh in front of you, a worship team in the flesh in front of you, and small groups that meet in that community. I believe that as long as there are people willing to come and worship and a ground for outreach, the community should stay in that location. If a new community forms, and the Spirit leads the Church to be there, then the costly expedition of renting/acquiring a new building does seem beneficial to me.
I do not run a church, I only ponder the implications of doing so