Since when did church size become a guarantee of spiritual quality? What are the propensities of a healthy church?
The annual report of a small evangelical denomination quotes the prophet Isaiah: "Behold, I am doing a new thing" (Isaiah 43:19, ESV). In the report, leaders of the denomination explain that "healthy churches" are communities of Christ-centered people that exemplify "five balanced passions." However, the statement soon devolves into mere statistics. All of a sudden "healthy churches" seem to be characterized not by the five passions, but by their numbers.
Since when did church size become a guarantee of spiritual quality? And if the catchword is health, what are the propensities of a healthy church?
Healthy churches measure their well-being by their spiritual maturity, not merely numbers. Luke, after he mentions that three thousand people were added to the church on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:41), immediately writes the formula for healthy churches of all generations ??? "And they devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers." (Acts 2:42-47, ESV). Healthy churches do grow, but not all growing churches are healthy. Furthermore, we must never look down upon smaller or "plateaued" churches. Believers in smaller churches may exhibit greater spiritual maturity than believers in large churches.
Healthy churches have members exhibiting a spirit of unity, mutuality, and generosity. The first century believers were known for their unity and generosity rather than programs and catchy titles. "Now the full number of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one said that any of the things that belonged to him was his own, but they had everything in common." (Acts 4:32-35, ESV). The fellowship (koinonia) emphasized in the New Testament includes responsibility and accountability to both the Word and to one another.
Healthy churches maintain a biblical model of spiritual effectiveness in achieving their mission. Many churches today are taking their cues from sociology, in the process ignoring biblical theology. Healthy churches continue to function on a biblical model of spiritual effectiveness rather than models of success as defined by the world.
Healthy churches adopt a biblical model of leadership rather than secular. Church government by plurality of elders is set forth by the New Testament writers with clarity and cogency. Too many churches have given much power to one person. More people are hurt in churches by secular models of leadership than by inadequate theology or dilapidated buildings.
In closing, the spirit of the age says that a church cannot be healthy without contemporary and cutting-edge approaches to ministry. However, we need to realize that churches will never become spiritually healthy merely by programs or paradigms. Churches must first aim for God's priorities and then allow Him to produce in each of them what He wants to produce.


