Lowering Membership
Standards
Robert Leonard is
worried about declining membership.
He’s seen the bottom drop out of his national figures in the last 50
years—from 4.1 million in 1959 down to 1.6 million this year. That’s a “reverse growth rate” (as the
church growth movement used to call it) of –.013 per year. While losing less than 2% of membership a
year never seems to be an “emergency,” over 50 years it can pile up and bite
you in the rear [pocket].
Why aren’t they
attracting new members? Daniel Wilson
from the New Jersey region thinks
they’ve got to reach out to the younger people. He along with other leaders thinks the membership standards may
be too high for the newer generations.
They want to shorten the length of new member training, cut out some of
the hoops a candidate has to jump though, and maybe even compromise on some of
the stringent requirements for new members.
So what do you
think? To get themselves
on the map again should these guys lower standards to grow or leave them high
because people value things more when they cost more? What do you think?
So which
denomination are we talking about here?
None. The story above is about the Masons. Their membership has been dwindling since the 1950’s. They are desperately trying to reach what
they call “the younger generations 21-55” (55?). They’re shortening the year-long membership process collapsing
the first three (of 33) Masonic steps (“degrees”) in an attempt to bring in the
next generation and keep their local “lodges” alive. While they are still unwilling to open up membership to women
(the Mason’s version of the church’s WMS is the “Eastern Star”) they are
willing to make other compromises.
After 50 years of declining membership they think its time.
So what is the
lesson for us church folk?
Think
about these things. Discuss them with
someone else who cares about the church like you do.
- __Yes __No We
should we lower membership standards to reach new generations.
- __Yes __No
We
ought to hold to the membership standards as they are—it is who we are.
- __Yes __No We
should make membership training shorter and easier for people.
- __Yes __No We
ought to make membership training harder and longer—people don’t value
bargains.
- __Yes __No We
could compromise on at least some current membership standards.
- __Yes __No We
should let anyone who claims to be a Christian join our church.—why have
higher standards than God?
- __Yes __No
Membership should become leadership in our church—people don’t need
to join unless they want to lead
- __Yes __No
Denominations shouldn’t have membership standards any more—that
should be up to local churches.
- __Yes __No
We
should quit making the number of members a criterion of success for
pastors.
- __Yes __No We
ought to get rid of membership altogether—anyone who attends should be
able to vote on anything.
- __Yes __No We
should ban or expel people who use alcohol from membership.
- __Yes __No We
should ban or expel people who use tobacco from membership.
- __Yes __No We
should ban or expel people who gamble—even buy lottery tickets or go to
casinos—from membership.
- __Yes __No We
should ban or expel divorced people who did not have a biblical cause from
membership.
- __Yes __No We should
ban or expel people who have a continuing sexual affair from membership.
- __Yes __No We
should ban or expel people who practice the gay lifestyle from membership
- __Yes __No We
should have higher standards for leadership then we have for membership.
- __Yes __No We
should have a higher standard for ministers than for lay membership in the
church
- __Yes __No
- __Yes __No (What question would you add?)
So
what do you think?
By
Keith Drury December
15, 2004
Keith@DruryWriting.com