I recently spoke with an elder of a local church who confided in me that his elder board was beginning to explore the possibility of a new building campaign. Their church presently has two crowded services and is having to move to a third service.  My response about initiating a building campaign was less than enthusiastic. 

If you have read some of my past articles like “Bye, Bye, Boomers” then you know my concerns regarding churches that accumulate massive debt that cannot be paid off within the next ten years.  Research guru George Barna is convinced that within the next fifteen to twenty years, institutional churches are likely to experience an attendance decline of 50%!  I am inclined to agree with his perspective.  The era of the mega-church and mega-budget-buildings and programs is quickly drawing to a close.  Young adults are fleeing the large institutional church because it lacks intimacy.  They also feel that large churches have proven themselves incapable of nurturing spiritual authenticity and depth.  Everything that today’s young adult desires is what our present church paradigms refuse to offer.  Young adults seek:

• Intimacy
• Authenticity
• Spiritual experiences
• To serve the world, not an institution
• In depth Biblical study with in-the-moment application (See Previous Article)
• Spiritual mentorship

The larger an institution becomes, the less likely that these important values will be supported.  This is why the polls and trends confirm that the emerging generations are abandoning the established institutional church model.  But wait a minute…didn’t this article begin by relating how a church was growing?  Yes.  Many churches are still growing.  However, church growth does not automatically equate to spiritual health.  The real issue at hand is how effective a church is at retaining and spiritually nurturing those that come to the church.  Young adults do come to contemporary churches because they are deeply spiritually motivated.  They are hungry to know and experience God. 

But two years later, how many of these young adults have been retained?  Even more importantly, how many would claim that these churches helped them to significantly grow in their relationship with God?  The crucial markers of “retention” and “maturation” are the issues at stake, not how many people we have in our Sunday morning crowds.  And yet the sad thing is that I have not yet met a pastor who can tell me their retention rate over a 1, 2, 5, or 10 year span, nor can they tell me objectively what defines spiritual maturity and how many people have grown spiritually through the ministry.  I believe most church leaders and boards don’t really want to ask these questions because they don’t really want to come face-to-face with the answer.  To come face-to-face with the answer means that how we do ministry would have to change, and change in the church culture often results in political and vocational suicide. 

But what if there was a way to ensure that the ministry continued to grow without endangering the pastors or staff, and to grow in a manner that empowered change and effectively addressed the needs of the present and emerging generations?  One ministry paradigm, that I believe can achieve these goals quite effectively, is the Satellite Church Model.

I first encountered the Satellite Church Model approximately ten years ago.  An East coast ministry had grown so large, that they decided rather than continue to “build bigger barns”, they would strategically build smaller barns throughout their ministry region.  Each congregation belonged to one large church that met corporately once a month in a large arena for a massive worship service.  See the graphic below:

Because the individual congregations were smaller, and were visionary church plants, they were able to more effectively target the needs of their community and mold their ministry around the needs of their people.

The philosophy behind the Satellite Church Model has always held two dominate beliefs:

1) Smaller churches are more nimble and relational, but on their own, they lack the resources and professionalism our culture has come to expect.

2) By sharing human, administrative and capital resources, the satellite churches can better steward the resources God has given the entire ministry. 

While the Satellite church growth model has many virtues, organizations who have attempted this model have experienced difficulties.  In particular, the dominate hurdles include:

• Communication of available human resources
• Communication of administrative resources
• Communication of people with each other

Communication, Communication, Communication…some might say, “Three strikes and you’re out”.  But since Christ is leading His Church, there is always a way to overcome ministry barriers.

This past year, I once again encountered another church organization, this time on the West coast who were implementing the Satellite church model and had grown to approximately eighteen satellites.  However, they also were experiencing the very same communication challenges other such ministries had struggled with over ten years prior.  They were searching for technology solutions to help them overcome these crucial barriers to further growth, and could not find an established solution.

Fortunately, internet-based technology has now matured to a point that, in the very near future, the Satellite ministry model (and other mission networks) will be able to truly thrive. A large part of the solution is found in E-Church Essentials, but E-Church Essentials is a ministry program, not a business management program.  E-Church Essentials is presently in the early stages of exploring a strategic partnership with a major church management company.  If this strategic partnership becomes a reality in the months to come, ministries will finally have at their disposal the most powerful web-based internet ministry and business administration system in the world!  The Satellite model would then look like the following graphic: