Comments on: Was The Church Growth Movement Racist?

By: Arthur Ramsey

Arthur Ramsey — Mon, 11 Jul 2022 11:51:50 +0000

I took a CGD class in college and did a local church survey required by the class. Jesus taught us to love not grow big churches (Eph 4). The CGM was a trick of Satan to put the focus on us, fuel the egos of men, and leave the glory of God to make a fair show in the flesh.

By: Phil Scheul

Phil Scheul — Mon, 11 Jul 2022 02:16:01 +0000

Thanks for helping me understand why the HUP made me uncomfortable back when we were reading McGavran.

By: Michael Frost

Michael Frost — Mon, 11 Jul 2022 01:35:40 +0000

In reply to Michael Fast. Actually, McGavran based his model on his *observations* of the Indian situation. Seeing that churches of one caste or another grew more quickly he exported the approach to California. So, yes, it did work in India, but it also entrenched the social stratification you're referring to. McGavran thought the effects of the HUP could be overcome by churches of different cultural backgrounds coming together to form a mosaic effect across a city or region, but he never explained how he saw this happening.

By: Michael Fast

Michael Fast — Mon, 11 Jul 2022 01:17:48 +0000

My understanding is that the CGM was formulated by McGavran based on his experience as a missionary in India. My limited understanding of India is that there are serious issues related to social stratification (commonly called the caste system) that are not so easy to overcome. I can’t help but think that McGavran was trying to work within that system when he came up with the HUP. However, what may have been considered appropriate in a caste environment (and that is debatable) certainly hasn’t translated well in other parts of the world. At the very least it argues for our need for a more contextual theology. It also leads us to ask if this actually worked in India?

By: Eric Hatfield

Eric Hatfield — Mon, 11 Jul 2022 00:08:30 +0000

My feeling is that racial homogeneity wasn’t so much of a church aim in Australia (we were pretty homogeneous in our churches without any church growth considerations). So I feel the biggest damage in Australia was the evangelism vs justice dichotomy, which is very much still here in some churches. This is opposite to another emphasis in my lifetime as a christian – the kingdom of God, which is holistic. If our aim is to further the kingdom of God, we won’t even ask which is most important, evangelism or justice, we’ll see them both as reinforcing the other and get on with them both.

Having said all that, isn’t it the case here of good ideas taken too far? There’s nothing inherently wrong using sociological understandings and research to inform our decisions, just so long as we don’t get too carried away and we have the right values and aims. I feel CGM missed there because it ignored the kingdom of God.