The Church in Crisis? A Catch-22 for Megachurches

The churches can only embody or mediate a true identity to their members when the fellowship of members represents the interdependencies of human life. Inclusiveness is intrinsic and not accidental to the nature of the Church. This crucial problem confronts all churches in the modern metropolis.

(Gibson Winter)

Victory Christian Fellowship is ranked by Leadership Network as the

largest megachurch in the Philippines and the 4th largest in Asia

Photo courtesy of Outreach Magazine

Recently, President Rodrigo Duterte publicly predicted the death of the Roman Catholic Church in the Philippines in the next 25 years. For a predominantly Roman Catholic nation, this may appear as yet another questionable statement from a president known for antagonizing Roman Catholicism. However, it raises again to public attention a question that has been plaguing Christianity in general: Is the Church in crisis? As of 2017, surveys show that only 46% of Filipinos regularly attend church (that is, weekly), with Muslims topping the list at an incredible 98%. Protestants (including Evangelicals) posted a relatively impressive 67%, followed by members of Iglesia ni Cristo (INC) at 58% (despite their leadership's strict adherence to attendance similar to that of Islam). Peak attendance percentage was recorded in 1991, when 66% of Filipinos said they regularly attend church. Many sources can point to various reasons why they do not believe in participating in the Church. For instance, scandals such as abuses and corruption have seeped into the public eye, not only in the past few years, but for centuries. In the words of Karl Marx, "Religion is the opiate of the masses", and of Friedrich Nietzsche, "God is dead. God remains dead." The prevailing view for such scholars is that the Church has contributed to the ills of society, and must therefore be rendered useless if the world is to move forward. In retrospect, Duterte's statements against Catholicism may not yet be considered as bold as theirs. Then again, even if it can be argued that the Church is not dead, it might be dying. Pew Research Center shows that by 2070, Islam would take over Christianity as the world's largest religion in terms of population. While Christianity is still expected to grow by 35% by 2050, it has to be taken into consideration that the world population would also grow by 35% within the same period. In sum, Christians would not be having any net gain as far as percentages are concerned. What is Christianity's response then?

Enter the Megachurch

Jesus feeds the multitudes
Photo courtesy of Pinterest

Defined loosely as a church with an average weekly attendance of 2,000 people or more, the megachurch (or derogatorily, McChurch) has penetrated the Christian strategic circles since the 1950s as a response to accommodate growing populations all around the world. The megachurch phenomenon has since then been seen as Christianity's response to further evangelize people. However, megachurches appear to have historically begun as an American trend. Warren Bird writes that the nondenominational Moody Church, founded by Dwight L. Moody in 1864, can be considered as the first megachurch with its 10,000-seater church facility in Chicago, Illinois. As Moody put it, "Church attendance is a vital to a disciple as a transfusion of rich, healthy blood to a sick man." Nonetheless, it was also argued that the megachurch model is not exactly new. The Bible recounts how Jesus Himself spoke to crowds of more than 5,000 and then fed them (Matthew 14, Mark 6, Luke 9, John 6), as well as the 3,000 and 5,000 believers, respectively, who heard the message as delivered by Jesus' disciples (Acts 2, 4). Of course, the number was larger in terms of percentage than in Moody's time because the crowds who followed Jesus at the time already accounted to more than 1% of the population in Judea and Galilee, and Jesus is not exactly excited to see the crowds as He was excited to know they are committed to truly follow Him. In addition, megachurches have been regarded as exclusively Protestant, which comprise somewhere around 5% (PSA, 2010) to 14% (Joshua Project, 2019) of the Filipino population. This can be rooted in the initial Protestant churches being quite small. House churches or simple churches as they were called is still a global phenomenon today, especially in areas where Christianity is outlawed. In Europe, the average attendance of such churches in 96 people. Therefore, it excludes large Roman Catholic churches, which are quite abundant in the first place, and non-Catholic churches, such as the initially nationalistic Iglesia Ni Cristo (INC) with its estimated 2.66 million members (according to the Philippine Statistics Authority as of 2015, but Leadership Network offers a figure of 20,000), Philippine Independent Church (Gregorio Aglipay) with 756,225 members (again according to the Philippine Statistics Authority as of 2015, not listed by Leadership Network), the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormon, LDS) with 765,000 members (claimed, PSA lists 196,303 as of 2015), the Kingdom of Jesus Christ (Apollo Quiboloy) with 6 million members (claimed), and the Members Church of God International (Ang Dating Daan, ADD) with 470,000 members (estimated, no official claim), among others.

JIL founder, Bishop Bro. Eduardo "Eddie" Villanueva attracts large crowds.
In 2004, when he sought the presidency, his rally in Rizal Park (Luneta)
claimed to have brought 3.8 million people, the largest in Filipino history.
Meanwhile, in the church's 40th anniversary in 2018, it is
estimated to have gathered more than 80,000.
Photo courtesy of Jesus is Lord

The Philippines saw its first megachurches early in the 20th century, with the likes of Iglesia Evangelica Metodista En Las Islas Filipinas (IEMELIF, founded 1909) having 11,000 members as of 1914, and the United Church of Christ in the Philippines (UCCP, founded 1948, but tracing its history to the Iglesia Evangelica of 1901) having 125,000 members as of 1955. However, the megachurch movement began to be carried by later Christian churches having denominational and nondenominational affiliations. Among the denominational megachurches, Pentecostal (often interchanged with Full Gospel and Charismatic, albeit Pentecostalism may be regarded as the "First Charismatic Movement") ones such as Jesus is Lord Church Worldwide (JILCW, founded 1978), Philippines General Council of the Assemblies of God (PGCAG, founded 1940), Church of the Foursquare Gospel in the Philippines (Foursquare, founded 1949), Pentecostal Missionary Church of Christ (PMCC 4th Watch, founded 1973), Cathedral of Praise (Manila Bethel Temple, founded 1954), and Group of 12 Conference/G12-affiliated churches (supposedly inspired by the Yoido Full Gospel Church, reputedly the world's largest megachurch) such as LifeChurch Philippines (formerly Life Renewal Christian Ministries, founded 1982), Doulos for Christ World Harvest Ministry (Doulos, founded 1988), Hope for the World International Ministries (HWIM, founded 1995), and Destiny Church (Destiny Church Manila, founded 2001) have posted significant following. JILCW claims to have 4 million members (2013), PGCAG claims to have an attendance of 420,000 (2000), Foursquare has 95,000, PMCC has 60,000, Cathedral of Praise 24,000 (2002), and G12-affiliated churches 45,000 (2018). Taken together, this amounts to some 4.6 million members. While this is not reflected by third party statistics (Leadership Network lists JILCW with 53,000, PGCAG with 35,000, and Cathedral of Praise with 6,000, with no data for the rest), Pentecostalism still figures to have built some of the largest megachurches in the Philippines and in Asia. Other denominational megachurches also have achieved significant membership, such as the Bible Baptist Church (BBC, 480,000 members in 2010), Christian and Missionary Alliance Churches of the Philippines (CAMACOP, 470,000 in 2014), Convention of the Philippine Baptist Churches (CPBC, 65,000 members in 2010), Lutheran Church of the Philippines (46,000 members in 2010), Church of the Nazarene (26,000 members in 2016), Iglesia Evangelica Unida de Cristo (Unida Church, 25,000 members in 2012), the Presbyterian Church of the Philippines (GAPCP, 11,000 members in 2009), and Greenhills Christian Fellowship (GCF, 8,000 members in 2015), the last being the site of Duterte's formal discussion with Protestant and Evangelical leaders. Meanwhile, rising to megachurch status include the Union Church of Manila (UCM, 1,500 attendees in 2010), United Evangelical Church of the Philippines (UECP, 1,000 members in 2017), and Victory Churches of Asia (VCA, 1,500 attendees in 2009), which is not to be confused with Victory Christian Fellowship (Victory). VCA is affiliated with the Charismatic Victory Churches International (VCI, founded 1979), while Victory is nondenominational.

Overlapping adherence

Are Christ's sheep easy to steal for larger pens?
Photo courtesy of Roblox

In the 21st century, however, it seemed that the megachurch growth in the Philippines, as well as in the global scale, shifted from the established denominational churches to the emerging nondenominational (or transdenominational) churches. Leading this pack is the carrier of the so-called Manila Miracle, Victory Christian Fellowship (or simply Victory). Founded in 1984, the church came into national prominence of growing at an annual rate of 25% from 2000 to 2012, resulting to a membership of 110,000 as of 2015. Leadership Network ranks Victory as the largest megachurch in the country, and the fourth largest in Asia (again, led by Yoido Full Gospel Church with its estimated 800,000 to 900,000 members). Following suit is Christ's Commission Fellowship (CCF, founded 1984) with its 75,000 members (2018), Bread of Life Ministries International (BOL, founded 1982) with its 25,000 members (2012), Day by Day Christian Ministries (DBD, founded 1985) with its 6,000 members (for the main center only), and Grace Christian Church (GCC, founded 1948) with its 2,000 members. Likewise, there are also nondenominationl churches nearing megachurch status. Starting with relatively small numbers (Victory with 165, CCF 40, and BOL 120), nondenominational megachurches appear to be the solution to fragmentation caused by affiliation to any one Christian denomination. However, it also raised the argument that megachurches, especially nondenominational ones, tended to "steal" already Christian members from their home churches. Not only so, nondenominational megachurches tend to be less clear when it comes to its statement of faith and its core beliefs, causing enough confusion for both "new" and "old" members alike. This compels local pastors of such megachurches to urge their "new" members to reconcile with their past churches. Nonetheless, this assumption is not entirely backed by data. In the United States, around 72% of megachurch members say that they moved from another church, which is just around the same as the average for all churches (66%). No similar survey has been done in the Philippines yet, but using PSA data, it shows that Protestants actually declined in terms of percentage (6% in 2000 to 5% in 2010) while increasing in number (4.6 million in 2000 to 4.9 million in 2010). The membership data released by megachurches just does not seem to add up. Denominational megachurches alone should have a membership of over 5.9 million. Also, it cannot be directly correlated that megachurches with all their gravitational power are hastening the unification (or reunification) of the Church, especially those which promote their own "brand" or "trademark" as if the gospel is a product for sale (1 Corinthians 9). Are optimistic estimates such as that of Joshua Project (14.8 million) correct or is there overlapping adherence among churches? In the latter, it might be the reason behind the "stealing" assumption, albeit ultimately, members have the mobility to choose churches. Then again, the explosive growth of some megachurches in recent years may be traced to the fact that they are not extremely large to begin with. For a 2,000-member church, growing by another 2,000 already means 100%, but for a 200,000-member church, growing by 2,000 is just a measly 1%.

Tempering the megachurch
Would have it been possible that growing too large churches is unsustainable, especially for a country of chronic economic tendencies such as the Philippines? CNN reports in 2010 that an average megachurch has an annual budget of 6.5 million USD (340 million pesos), but as presented by the Washington Post in 2018, an American megachurch only has an average attendance of 2,750, which is just above the threshold. In the Philippines, the largest megachurches listed by Leadership Network have an average attendance of 28,900, which is extremely above the global average of 6,000. This means the requirement of significantly larger finances to run church operations, as well as the assumption that large church leaders tend to corrupt them. However, more than money, there are much greater points of contention to turn off the unreached population. Surely financing is vital, but in the words of BOL's founder, Reverend Caesar "Butch" Conde, "Remember how the Korean Church started about one hundred years ago? Did they have the money? Even though they were poor, they sacrificed a lot and did great works." Indeed, Seoul is regarded as the world's megachurch capital with at least 17 megachurches located in the Korean city, including Yoido itself, which remains as the world's largest despite the 12 million USD embezzlement case against its founding pastor, Reverend Dr. David Yonggi Cho, in 2014. More than its financial infrastructure, megachurches should examine their other aspects, because even in sharing the Gospel, money is not everything (Acts 8).

This leads to the plateau hypothesis for the megachurch model. Despite the Filipino propensity for large and grandiose things, as articulated by Pastor Ed Lapiz, there are issues which might be hampering further megachurch growth, and had therefore cause membership increase to plateau. The PSA data provides a general overview of the shrinking Protestant population despite the increasing size of churches. The retreat of the Church? If Reverend Gibson Winter observed the "suburban captivity" of the Church, today might be the exact opposite. The Philippines displays a unique case of "urban capture" for the Church. While the country has at least 22 megachurches (get it? Catch-22?), most of them are located or founded in urban centers. As one pastor put it, this is the "strategic" target of the Filipino megachurch model. However, despite still having large unreached populations in the urban centers, saturation for "strategic" targeting is near its peak. One need not to travel far to see yet another megachurch in an urban center, but fewer people seem to get involved. For instance, Billy Graham can expect to gather 412,000 at Manila in 1977, but his grandson saw only an audience of 100,000 in 2019, even when Filipino population increased greatly since then. This is also probably why the Roman Catholic Church, and for that matter other large churches such as the Iglesia ni Cristo, retains their grip among most Filipinos despite the best efforts of megachurches. They are ready to take the risk of planting churches in the inner cities, the troubled places, and the rural areas, establishing foothold in the long term. That is, areas which are not "strategic" in any sense. For instance, as of 2018, the INC has established more than 7,000 congregations, while CAMACOP in 2014 has more than 3,000 congregations, compared to Victory's 114 (from 82 in 2017) and CCF's 72 (from 60 in 2017). This means an average of around 320 for each INC congregation, 150 for CAMACOP, 1,340 for Victory, and 1,040 for CCF, and their worship centers usually accommodate around as many people in any one service, except for their larger main centers. CCF Center, for one, has a seating capacity of 10,000, making it the largest worship center in the Philippines, even larger than INC's Central Temple (7,000) and BOL's Crossroad Center (Crossroad77, 2,500). While one can say INC and CAMACOP had a few decades headstart, their strategies are clear ever since. For example, in its first 50 years, INC had a membership of 200,000 spread across 1,285 congregations. This means their congregations are way smaller then, but their vision reaped benefits in the long run. This is why as early as the 1950s, INC's evangelism success in the Philippines has been studied despite stark differences in terms of doctrine in comparison with most megachurches. While the megachurch urban strategy is supposed to penetrate in the provinces, it does not appear to "trickle down" as expected. With their "urban capture", megachurches are often associated with the middle and upper classes of society, since only these people can survive the difficulties of urban life, not because the lower classes do not want church. Really, if a certain megachurch has to choose between a beggar and a businessperson to admit as member, would not the latter be the more obvious choice? Then again, does that not make the Church more of an exclusive club than an inclusive institution that it is supposed to be? Also, is the megachurch model contributory in convincing people that it is okay not to attend on Sundays? Despite the greater social responsibility of megachurches compared to smaller churches (despite exceptions such as reports of Joel Osteen's Lakewood Church not accommodating flood victims in their area), and the higher possibility for members to invite others to join, the disconnect has hurt the chances of megachurches to jumpstart evangelism. The larger populations of each congregation has also decreased the opportunity to develop better relationships between its members. One can only relate being asked by a horde of nice-looking people if it was your first time attending or if you are connected to their small group networks, even though you are actually an "old" member. If members cannot connect with each other well, how then can they expect to connect others with God? Worse, poor coordination and information administration seeps not only for members, but also for leaders. Almost always, church leaders even do not know each other, especially those in the peripheries. Meanwhile, those in the central church leadership have the tendency to be less impartial with their selections, approving only those who are favorable within their circles, whereas James would point out how God displays no favoritism, and we should do so as well. This shows that megachurches tend to put a generic good intention face for every person whereas individuals have their certain differences to be treated with.

Breakdown of organizational structure

Do non-church goers just dislike the Church?
Or is megachurch evangelism running out of steam?
Photo courtesy of CartoonStock

Speaking of small groups, megachurches have taken opportunity of the "staying small" approach by incorporating small groups (or cell groups, discipleship groups, life groups) in their expansion packs. One of the more known examples of this approach is Richard "Rick" Warren's Saddleback Church, which had 6,000 small groups to integrate more than 20,000 members. A much larger scale can be observed with Yoido. However, the small group model is not always effective. For one, so-called leaders lack the capacity to lead their small group, so much so that members gravitate towards "superstar" leaders (who are usually the established church leaders and pastors) or disappear out of disappointment. This deters small group multiplication. If the intent of small groups is to engage people better than the usual megachurch service does, then leaders ought to do better in catering to the group's needs. Jesus Himself personally trained the 12 disciples for three years, and they still did not feel ready enough until the Holy Spirit has come upon them and then begin their commission (Acts 1). Meanwhile, Paul may have just been converted for three days before he went to engage, but he had three decades of Biblical studies behind him (Acts 9). In that regard, God has also made him ready for his commission. He need not superstars, only those who remain in Him to do the work. The current small group model applied by megachurches in the Philippines tend to have a much faster, perhaps even consumerist pace. For instance, the G12 gives its leaders at least two years to multiply its small groups. The first year to build the initial small group, which is supposed to be of 12 members, and the following year to train the succeeding leaders who would also form their own small groups. This is called the PEPSOL process, an acronym for Pre-Encounter, Encounter, Post-Encounter, and School of Leaders (1-3). In reality, the artificial growth caused by this model tends to collapse in the long run, and discipleship breaks down. As Pastor Peter Tan-Chi put it, "Growth is a byproduct of church health, and church health is a byproduct of leadership health." A survey shows that most small group leaders tend to give up within their first year, they do not necessarily mentor succeeding leaders, and small group leaders actually tend to be more authoritarian in their handling of operations, as if "lording" the flock would do them better. Various reasons can be said for this trend, but it is likely that leaders tend not to gain all the support they need to disciple others, while continuing their own discipleship journeys at the same time. Their readiness is in doubt. Meanwhile, those who are quite capable are usually suspected of ambitions in the church, and therefore denied their days in the sun. For instance, while there are leaders who can only handle three to five people, there are also some who can handle 20 to 30. This may seem small in the context of the megachurch, but there are churches which are already as large, such as the house churches in China. Why be wary of leaders in the peripheries? This may explain why in a span of two years, a megachurch can double its number of leaders, and then go back to its original number thereafter. It can be likened to throwing seeds in rocky or weedy ground. As every person is different, so does their growth in the faith. Small groups are not one size fits all model, discipleship cannot be treated as a one stop shop for all to be accommodated generically, and megachurch leaders ought to diversify their evangelistic charge if they are to expect their groups to share the same vision as they have for the Church. Not all people are leaders, but even they can use their spiritual gifts to serve the Church through other means (1 Corinthians 12). Are megachurches up to the task of developing all these talents together? If the center and head is Jesus, should megachurch leaders look at each other with reservations and uncertainty?

In addition, while some megachurches tend to retain their hierarchical structure, most megachurches do not exhibit similar organizations, probably as caution to "lording" over the flock. This may seem egalitarian at first, but when leaders realize that they are all of the same footing, order breaks down. Surely, Jesus is the center of the Church, but then what? Are they like sheep without a shepherd? The Bible (Acts, 1 Timothy, Titus) outlines a hierarchical structure of bishops (overseers, or episkopos), elders (presbyters, or presbyteros), and pastors (deacons, or diakonos). It figures that small group leaders can be placed below these positions, but a number of megachurches do not even have elders, bishops, or both. Provided the early Church can be considered a megachurch model, especially since these offices were created to accommodate the increasing number of believers (Acts 6, Romans 16), should not a similar defined structure be applied? Jesus Himself did not confine with training the 12 disciples. He trained and sent out 72 more (Luke 10). In this sense, the organizational structure expands flexibly considering the increase in membership, not as a matter of pride but as a matter of necessity. The Church is not for perfect people, but it can be a venue for them to get better. Believers are works in progress, and they should be provided a system where they can do so. From larger, bigger, faster, why not become more efficient, more effective, more responsive, more responsible? Time must not come that a megachurch has become large enough to be complacent and rest well on its laurels, not to mention mega-projects, because even in our sleep, Christ is at work.

Is media influencing for the better?
Filipino megachurches have also gained access to both mainstream and social media to spread the message of salvation to more people. For instance, CCF has a social media following of over 1.04 million, JILCW 825,000, Victory 376,000, Doulos 81,000, Destiny 56,000, Cathedral of Praise 35,000, Day by Day 33,000, and Word of Hope (affiliated with PGCAG) 25,000, among others. These numbers are great, especially for a social media savvy country like the Philippines. However, if we are to believe conservative estimates, they are not quite effective yet. For one, it takes more persuasion power to bring the lost into the church from a distance than when they are closer at home. You can expect believers to travel far to go to church, but not much so with unbelievers. While not discounting the amazing strides made by megachurches to evangelize through air, personal discipleship is still as powerful as it ever was. Jesus Himself always lets the people near Him, because knowing God from people other than yourself does not have as much staying power in one's life. It is still a relationship between you and God, but megachurch members tend to put their perquisites in the equation, such as charismatic leaders, enjoyable worship, good amenities, company of friends, and so on. While media can still be helpful in the long run, the Church might need to prepare how to integrate those who media has attracted, especially because things always appear better through media (say, those who are suspicious of scams, perhaps?), but Jesus articulated how it would not be easy to follow Him all the way.

A future for megachurches to believe in?
Has this brief article been contributory to the study of megachurches, if any at all? The Church may not die within our lifetimes, but who knows the future? While we can trust God that He will not abandon His Church, are we committed and dedicated enough to be part of its growth? Is the Church all about the numbers, as Pastor Steven Furtick would put it, or the substance behind the facade of these numbers? Is God's vision for the Church also our vision, or has faith goals shifted more into the favor of a privileged few? Even to this day, we can see how the emerging megachurches become pulsating. This is their catch-22. They only grow as much when there is some large event (e.g., revival, encounter, conference, etc.) or mega-project (e.g., building, feeding, giving, etc.), and then retreat to their "urban capture." If indeed this is the model that works for the Philippines, as Pastor Steve Murrell has concurred, then let God grow His Church in accordance to His will (1 Corinthians 3). Even as times change, God has ensured that growth is still rooted on the basics, the Rock where He founded His Church (Matthew 16). As megachurches flourish, may the foundation laid by Jesus Himself remain firmly in place, and may the teachings being taught to His disciples be right, because truth may have a million faces, but there is only one truth.

By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as a wise builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one should build with care. For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ.

(1 Corinthians 3:10-11)