Hacker News Reader

Comment by mydriasis | Hacker News Reader

> "You can just sort of wander in and be anonymous and worship there and be a spectator for as long as you want," he says. "But there's an almost equal number of people who are going out the back door because they didn't find their place."

I know a _lot_ of people who follow that first sentiment. In a smaller church there's so much to be done that you inevitably get sucked into helping the church just to survive, which means getting sucked into the politics of a small congregation.

For people who just want to show up and go to church and enjoy being at church, I can see why a large congregation would be a popular choice, and I know several people who attend them for exactly that reason.

View on HN

I wonder the degree to which the dominance of the internet has contributed to this trend.

People are more and more accustomed to low-stakes anonymous social interaction with huge numbers of faceless people. These interactions feel simultaneously safer and far more stimulating than small communities.

Megachurches seem to have a similar appeal—you're not under any obligation to maintain a relationship, and at the same time the energy given off by thousands of people in one place probably feels more intensely spiritual for some people than can be had in a small congregation.

It’s easy to get in a mindset that the church isn’t something I’m a part of, but something that’s a service to be consumed and subscribed to. If I’m not happy with the “content” I find a different service. This is absolutely the wrong mentality but it’s hard to fight.

It’s interesting how wildly the “politics” of a small congregation can vary. I’ve been a part of a number of small/medium congregations and some have been very great and wholesome experiences where I felt uplifted and grateful to serve alongside others. And others have been terrible, gossipy and judgemental/racist/sexist/etc… Mind you these were all congregations of the same denomination in the same general region of the US. I truly wonder what makes the difference. I suspect the leadership of these congregations really set the precedent for what their congregation will act like.

I know exactly what you mean. I've seen churches actually split in half because of the direction that leadership was taking the church. It's wild!

It's often communication patterns/style and leaderships goals/ideals that shape the org.

Same with companies.

> I know a _lot_ of people who follow that first sentiment. In a smaller church there's so much to be done that you inevitably get sucked into helping the church just to survive, which means getting sucked into the politics of a small congregation.

I recently had a conversation with a pastor and we talked about this. It also has to do with service size, aka venue size. The requirements to man a service are something like

- Sermon creation: 1+ pastor/week

- Creative enhancements: 1-3 people/week

- Sermon delivery: 1 pastor/2-3 services

- Live music: 5-10 people/2-3 services

- Sound: 1-2 people/2 services

- Lights: 1-2 people/2 services

- Kids: 1 person/10(?) kids/~1 service

- Front door hosts: 1 person/100(?) attendees/1 service

Some requirements scale per week, some scale per service, some per attendee. But with more services and larger venues you can save a lot in labor requirements.

i would've imagined the reason for church isn't just to worship, but to also find a community.

That's definitely a big part of it. At the same time, different people have different ideas of what that means. For many, being directly involved in the affairs and the machinery of the church is just too much -- they'd rather make new friends, go to bible study sessions, or have fun barbecues and stuff like the article mentions.

Don't get me wrong -- lots of people find their community through volunteering -- it's just that it can get to be a lot.

But that involves what you and others want instead of what you want.

That’s socialism.

Weird take...?

Wanting what's best for others instead of what's best for yourself is, like, one of the core commands in Christianity.

I would argue that it's deeper than that. In wanting what's best for others, you find what's best for yourself.

(Note that it has to be what's genuinely best for others, not what they say is best for them, nor what they want most at the time. It's not just "go along with whatever they want" - that's being a doormat.)

It should be. (You can't obey all those commands that contain the words "one another" in isolation.)

But not everyone who walks in the door is looking for that. For at least some of the people, the purpose is just to worship. (And for those who are there for community, well, there are also commands to worship...)

The issue is being able to choose your degree of involvement. I know people who like to attend church but won't if their only choice is a small one, because of the social demands made of them in a small group.

There is something odd about joining a large congregation so that you don't have to congregate with the people around you. :D

As an introvert, I was actually happier at a large university than I would have been at a smaller college, because I had more control over the degree to which I had to interact with other people. If I didn't really want to deal with people, I could sit in a busy space and everyone was just anonymous and coexisting.

I'm also what I would call an introvert. And I'm happy to not be part of large groups, but I can't deny that there are massive productivity and motivational benefits to being in a group.

The trap is how to be in a group and not fall back to random gossip. Teams and such are usually great for this, as you keep an objective. College sucks at this, as very little effort is made to keep cohorts together.

Church is odd here, as almost by definition, people are going for that sense of attachment and purpose. Letting it bubble up to giant groups paints a giant target for attention and energy harvesting. With many of the results that we see from such groups. :(

My family has gone to some smaller churches and a few bigger ones. We're currently at a bigger one and have been for quite a while.

We like the quality of the preaching and the music. The smaller churches were better at some hands-on aspects, but it's hard for them to have the musicians (and the bench depth) that more population brings.

I'm waiting for people to figure out you can actually do quite a bit of good in a church. Food drives, clothing give-aways, etc. (Our church has a 'cars ministry' where we give away oil changes to needy families and sometimes give away donated cars.) It's tough to compete with Reddit and the like, where people can get a short-term feel of 'doing good' from behind a keyboard. But I don't think that's as 'real'. I'm hoping in time we'll see more people get excited about 'doing' in a hands-on manner.

I've seen this same dynamic.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com