SCHALLER ON COOPERATION
One of America 's outstanding church diagnosticians, Lyle E. Schaller, has come to similar conclusions concerning hyper-cooperativism and church growth. He says, “While this runs completely counter to the hopes and expectations of the advocates of church unity and intercongregational cooperation, the evidence is increasingly persuasive. Church growth and cooperative ministries are not compatible!”
Schaller's five reasons concerning hyper-cooperativism and lack of church growth bear examination and commentary as a summary to this chapter. To the degree they are understood, hyper-cooperativism can be avoided.
“ A cooperative ministry may blur the distinctive identity of each participating congregation. ” This was seen in the case of the military chaplaincy. Churches that have a well-understood philosophy of ministry have growth advantages over churches that continually have to ask themselves, “Why are we here, anyway? What is our specific contribution to the kingdom of God ?” Fuzzy answers to these questions will lessen growth potential.
“ People unite with a specific worshipping congregation, not with a cooperative ministry.” There are some exceptions to this, as Schaller admits, but it is generally true. This is a chief reason that it is not conducive to eventual church membership if the person's decision for Christ is made in a neutral public place such as a stadium, particularly in the midst of a week or two of high-energy meetings. The new Christian may attend several crusade rallies that focus on their spotlights and crowds and 300-voice choirs and celebrities. It is a tough act for any local church to follow, and when reality sets in, disappointment often sets in.
“ People with a strong interest in evangelism and church growth rarely are interested in interchurch cooperation and vice versa.” The exception to this is the parachurch evangelistic associations, which have strong interests in evangelism and by their very natures depend on interchurch cooperation for exercising their ministries. That is certainly true of many dynamic, growing local churches. Participating in cooperative evangelism is frequently determined by a different kind of motivation. These churches may not think they need the citywide effort for church growth and vitality, but at the same time they are aware of the effort's high visibility in the community and thereby understand that if they choose not to participate, their decisions would likely be interpreted as unsupportive of Christian unity. This is not the public image they desire, so they frequently go along with the movement, although somewhat reluctantly.
“ Many cooperative ministries come into existence as the result of pressures of dwindling resources.” Church mergers, in particular, are often a clear sign of approaching decline, if not death. On the other hand, church splits, whether unintentional or planned, are often signs of vitality and growth. Cell division, not cell fusion, produces healthy, growing bodies.
“ Interchurch cooperation does use the time and energy of ministers and laity in creating and maintaining a new institution, and thus that time is not available for membership outreach. ” The broader the cooperation, the more complex the social relationships necessary to hold it together. Add to this the seemingly incompatible doctrines and policies, and the result is an association that is extremely demanding of available energy.
In a more recent work, Lyle Schaller applies these principles directly to the reasons certain churches grow and others do not. He says, “It is only a minor exaggeration to suggest that [the compulsion for promoting interchurch cooperation] is one of the most influential differences between large and numerically growing congregations and most small churches. The former assume that competition is the norm. The latter believe that cooperation should be the norm. That difference in perspective is one more reason why large congregations are large and small churches are small!”
IS THERE ANY HOPE?
Because both evangelism that helps churches grow and interchurch cooperation are commendable activities, it seems reasonable to assume that there must some way to join the two. Putting past disappointments to one side, it does appear now that some models for programs of cooperative evangelism, that in fact do result in measurable church growth, are emerging on the horizon.
Edgardo Silvoso, an Argentine evangelist, is one of the foremost leaders in developing strategies for evangelizing cities that combine the two. Silvoso's pilot project, called the “Rosario Plan,” was designed and executed in Rosario , Argentina , in 1975 and 1976. More than half of the Protestant churches in the city joined the movement, so it was a good example of interchurch cooperation. The difference was that as early as 15 months before the public evangelistic event—which featured Silovoso's brother-in-law, Luis Palau—teams of church growth experts, including Vergil Gerber, Juan Carlos Miranda, Edward Murphy and Silvoso, worked with the cooperating churches. They helped each church develop plans and goals for growth in its own congregation, as well as in new churches they would plant.
Approximately 40 churches decided to cooperate. By the time Palau arrives, 45 new churches had been established. A strong growth process had been initiated, and new converts were already being made at rates not seen in Rosario for years. The evangelistic event then was introduced into the growth process at the most appropriate time. The evangelist was coming, not to begin the harvest, but rather to accelerate a harvest already begun. The barns were by then ready for the increased harvest, so to speak.
In the traditional models of citywide cooperative evangelism, between 3 percent and 16 percent of those who make first-time decisions for Christ become responsible members of the local churches. In Rosario , however, of the decisions registered during Palau 's meetings, an amazing 57 percent were incorporated as members of churches. The follow-up gap had been considerably reduced.
THE PROCESS AND THE EVENT
As I see it, the secret of the success of the Rosario Plan, compared to the more traditional models of communitywide efforts in other cities, is skillfully coordinating the evangelistic event by using a growth process in the cooperating churches. When churches cooperating with citywide crusades are not in a healthy growth pattern themselves, the big meetings or the media blitz will not usually stimulate real growth. When the church is already growing, however, and when it is in the habit of folding in new converts before the start of the large, public evangelistic event, the event can then help the churches to grow.
The following are two examples:
In 1969 when Billy Graham conducted his crusades in Anaheim , California , many Orange County churches reported a pleasant, stimulating experience, but little resultant growth. On the other hand, The Crystal Cathedral, which already had been growing at a 10-year rate of more than 500 percent, received hundreds of new members. The church had been tuned up for the crusade by previous growth momentum. It knew well how to take care of new converts. It was ready for the harvest.
The national follow-up rate for Here's Life America was 3 percent. Lake Avenue Congregational Church in Pasadena , California , however, which had previously developed a sophisticated pattern of folding new converts by Pastor Kent Tucker, folded 30 of 74 decisions, a rate of 42 percent. The evangelistic event helped both The Crystal Cathedral and Lake Avenue because it fit properly into an already established growth pattern.
My view is that a long-range component of church growth planning and consultation should be provided as part and parcel of a great high-visibility evangelistic event sponsored by some interdenominational association. This should start as much as one or two years before the event. The timing of the event itself needs to remain flexible until all cooperating churches (or a predetermined percentage of them) have corrected the problems causing their nongrowth or slow growth and are reasonably sure that by the time of the event they will be growing and absorbing new converts. When the cooperating churches are growing at an estimable rate, bring on the evangelist or the media blitz or whatever method may be appropriate. The follow-up gap will narrow dramatically because the barns will be ready for the harvest.
This kind of thing can be done well through interchurch cooperation. Because the primary growth goals are not focused on the stadium, but on the local church, the local churches remain central to the program. Many local churches together can combine their resources to pay for areawide media, the professional evangelist and the church growth consultation services, which most churches by themselves might not be able to afford.
THAT NONE SHOULD PERISH
Edgardo Silovoso contracted a life-threatening disease soon after the Rosario Plan had ended and he was forced to curtail his ministry for the better part of a decade. The Lord healed him miraculously, though, and he is once again strategizing citywide evangelism, this time using the added dimensions of power healing, prayer and spiritual warfare. Silvoso's book That None Should Perish (Regal Books) is in my opinion the state-of-the-art exposition of how to combine high levels of evangelism and Christian unity in reaching a city for Christ.
If I were to write a prescription for a cure to hyper-cooperativism, I would require reading That None Should Perish , but in tandem with another of the finest recent books I have seen, Primary Purpose (Creation House) by Pastor Ted Haggard of New Life Church in Colorado Springs . Silvoso is the master strategist, and Haggard is the practical, down-to-earth local church pastor, who, out on the front lines of his own city has seen pastors come together across theological lines for the purpose of evangelizing his city. Haggard's advocacy of Christian unity is not unity as an end in itself, but unity aimed at the goal, which he uses as the subtitle of his book: Making It Hard for People to Go to Hell from Your City!
Notes
This research was reported in Win C. Arn, " A Church Growth Look at Here's Life America," Church Growth: America (January-February 1977); 4ff.; and C. Peter Wagner, "Who Found It?" Eternity (September 1977); 13-19.
Lyle E. Schaller, "Reflections on Coperative Ministries," The Clergy Journal (September 1977); 21.
Lyle E. Schaller, The Small Membership Church (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1994), p62.