The Ongoing Open vs Closed Group Debate
Where do you stand on the open vs closed group debate? I’ve written about this in the past (Open or Closed Groups, Do Good Groups Really Practice the Open Chair, and my spoof Top 10 Reasons I’m a Fan of Open Groups). I also like the direction Rick Howerton took the conversation in Open Small Groups Are More Intimate Than Closed Groups.
It’s an important conversation. In fact, it’s probably more important than many realize.
Believe me, both camps make a good case. We all have our arguments down. But at its very heart, I believe the open vs closed group debate is really about whose needs get prioritized.
Open vs closed group philosophy surfaced again in the discussion around Belonging or Believing…Which Comes First? Although the surface issue in that article is about the wisdom (or morality) of requiring church membership before allowing people to join a small group…deep down it’s really a question of whose needs get prioritized. After all, it is a zero sum game. If I let you in, it takes something away from me. Right?
In the classic closed group argument, proponents claim that closed groups allow members to focus on growing in intimacy without the distractions that a new member brings. I like to ask what I think are two important questions:
- How does this line up with Philippians 2:3-4? “Don’t be selfish; don’t try to impress others. Be humble, thinking of others as better than yourselves. Don’t look out only for your own interests, but take an interest in others, too.” The biblical line of thinking has almost nothing to do with the airline prescription to “put on your own oxygen mask first.”
- What will the passage of time (12 to 18 months) do to your group members’ external relationships? Will their relationships with outsiders ever be as vibrant and strong as they are right now? This for me is the clincher. It’s the reason I say that the x-factor is near the edge! All you have to do is interview church members who are truly connected. When you ask who their 10 closest connections are they’ll almost always tell you that 8, 9, or even all 10 are insiders.
The Titanic, Lifeboat 14, and Kathy Bates
There’s a great scene in The Titanic. The ship has gone down. The lifeboats have all been launched and are safely away. Kathy Bates, playing the part of real life survivor Molly Brown, is one of the passengers on board Lifeboat 14, captained by the real life 5th Officer Harold Lowe.
In the distance the passengers on the lifeboat can hear the screams and pleadings of those in the 28 degree water. Molly Brown, unable to sit idly by and do nothing, says, “We have to go back!” Another of the passengers tells her if she doesn’t shut up, he’ll make her shut up.
Only one of the 20 lifeboats went back to pick up the people in the water. Lifeboat 14. The only reason we know the name of 5th Officer Harold Lowe is that he gave the order to go back. Every other lifeboat, all 19 of them, rowed safely away…looking out for their own interests.
It is 2011. We are living in a post Christian era. It is absolutely time to wake up and smell the coffee. If you want to hear “well done,” you will not be controlling who can be in a small group.
(This is a complicated issue. I clarified my thinking the next day in Open Groups, Closed Groups, and Specialized Groups.)
What do you think? Make sense? Want to argue? Got a question? You can click here to jump into the conversation.
The two greatest commandments; 1) Love God AND 2) Love others. There should always be an openess to others. God is a relational God (see 2 commandments) so the importance of a group should not trump the priority of relationships… the dynamics of how these relationships can always be tweaked as they are a means, not the end.
Thanks for jumping in here Bryan! Like your thinking. The Great Commandment certainly does apply, doesn’t it!
mark
Thanks for the conversation starter Mark. I joined the debate on your previous post about believing and belonging and appreciate the opportunity here to expand on my thoughts. First, I actually advocate an open group that has a season in which the group is closed to new membership. However, whether the group is open or closed we all hold each other accountable every single week to engage with our lost friends and family members. The closed group period still lines up with Philippians 2:3-4 perfectly (as does the open period) because you are intentionally making an investment in one another.
Thanks for the conversation starter Mark. I joined the debate on your previous post about believing and belonging and appreciate the opportunity here to expand on my thoughts. First, I actually advocate an open group that has a season in which the group is closed to new membership. However, whether the group is open or closed we all hold each other accountable every single week to engage with our lost friends and family members. The closed group period still lines up with Philippians 2:3-4 perfectly (as does the open period) because you are intentionally making an investment in one another.
Good clarification Nathan. “Open” doesn’t mean “Open 24 Hours.” Nothing wrong with groups having seasons where they’re not open to new members. First 6 weeks, when caring for a hurting or struggling member, working through a particularly intense study are all instances where it might make sense to be closed to new members.
mark
Good clarification Nathan. “Open” doesn’t mean “Open 24 Hours.” Nothing wrong with groups having seasons where they’re not open to new members. First 6 weeks, when caring for a hurting or struggling member, working through a particularly intense study are all instances where it might make sense to be closed to new members.
mark
I think the answer to the question of whether groups should be open or closed resides in purpose. Jesus Christ went so far as to make his group “invitation only”. No doubt during his 3.5 years of ministry many people wanted to become a member of his “small group”, but Jesus recognized His purposes would be met with a specific twelve set of flawed men. The result is HIStory, if you please. This is simply an example of Nathan’s comment about “… simply a time in which the group members have a chance to deepen their commitment.”
Thanks for jumping in here Scott! You make a very valid point. There are certainly types of discipling experiences (and other instances that were mentioned above) where members are chosen and it’s not open to just anyone. As I mentioned, proponents of both camps have their arguments in place. The purpose of my article was to challenge systems that prioritize the needs of the insider at the expense of those still on the outside. I’ve always loved the Bill Hybels’ message exploring the actions of the four lepers found in 2 Kings 6-7. Locked out of the city under siege, they wander over to the enemy camp. Discovering it abandoned and everything they need to survive in abundance, they are morally compelled to share what they’ve found with the starving people still within the walls. Are there times where it makes sense to restrict membership to a certain few? Absolutely. Is it far more common for groups to be closed to new members simply to look out for their own interests? Without question.
You do make a great point, Scott. Thanks for sharing with all of us.
mark
Just an observation — using the illustration of the Titanic and Lifeboat 14 seems to label small groups primarily as an evangelistic endeavor. It also seems to imply that a decision to “close” a small group is a decision to exclude people from becoming Chrsitians.
While I do think that small groups and evangelism go well together, I see groups as being primarily connected with discipleship and spiritual formation. That being the case, there are other options for people who want to be in a small group — if they bump up against a group that is closed, there should be another group within the church that is open. Or the church could start a new group.
In other words, I don’t think there is a limit to the number of lifeboats (small groups) that a church should be able to create and deploy within its community. And to continue the analogy, there really is only a certain amount of space within each lifeboat. My wife and I close our small group during each multi-session course we undertake because we would rather not have people coming in during the middle and feel out of place. We also have a cap on the number of people that join our group because we have a smaller house and our physical space is limited.
Mark, I know this clashes a bit with your Crowd-to-Core ideas (which I like very much), but maybe there are different guidelines and boundaries between groups that focus more on evangelism and groups that focus more on discipleship?
What kind of group did Jesus have, open or closed?
Josh
http://biblestudynow.com/
Thanks for jumping in here, Sam! You make some good points…and in some churches what you’re talking about is true. When there are too many unconnected people, they do start new groups However, there are many churches that simply say, “We’re sorry, but you’ll need to wait until the next semester.” When they do that they are clearly choosing whose needs to prioritize.
Further, while there are definitely real life circumstances that make closing a group temporarily justifiable (or at least, seem reasonable), I believe you’re thinking too narrowly to equate the Titanic/Lifeboat 14 metaphor to evangelism. If the optimum environment for life-change is a small group, and you’re willing to say to an unconnected person, “wish we could include you…but we’re full,” you’re really saying, “I know the water is cold, but another boat will come along soon.” While at Fellowship of The Woodlands, I used to say to our small group leaders, “Next time you walk through the lobby, realize that 1 out of every 2 people you bump into are in the water. And it’s 28 degrees. Make room in your lifeboat. Make more boats. Just don’t row away.
mark
See my comments to Scott Lowrie below. We’re actually not talking about groups with specific missions (i.e., leadership development/discipleship in the case of Jesus and the 12).
mark
I’m just trying to figure out how it was water and below freezing?
Actually in all seriousness, I LOVE this discussion! My husband and I have led small groups for 20+ years and it always frustrates me when I encounter a long-term “us four- no more” mentality. Operative word there…. long.
For a season of six months to a year of pivotal discipleship, I see the value in a very small group of 3-4 people. (Greg Ogden-esque mentality, or a standard spiritual multiplication model.) REAL life transformation takes places in groups of that size… I’ve seen it firsthand numerous times. But if you’re going to lead that type of group, couldn’t you also potentially lead another group that WOULD be open to new people? Or consider coaching/ training new leaders who are going to launch new groups?
Thanks for jumping in here Stephanie! There certainly are specialized types of groups (discipleship groups, elder teams, etc.) and seasons within the life of a group (for example when a marriage is in crisis) when it makes sense to be closed to new members. I addressed these realities in my follow-up post: http://www.markhowelllive.com/open-groups-closed-groups-specialized-groups/
Oh, and salt water freezes at a much lower temperature ; )
mark
I love the conversation Mark & Rick, thanks for initiating. I wish open groups worked for allowing new people into GroupLife, but they have not in my experience. We are on a semester based group system and have mostly open groups, but despite availability & encouragement people don’t jump into groups mid-semester very often. As a result, we’ve started a 4 week growth-track process that gives them a gap-filler till the next semester starts. (plus it gets them through membership, spiritual gifts class, & helps build new friendships to boot.)
Thanks for jumping in here Herschel! The semester system does a good job of providing frequent and regular on-ramps for new to grouplife members and attendees. In my experience, the open group philosophy has more to do with establishing an invitational culture than with seeing a steady flow of new group members.
Like your thinking about the gap-filler strategy. In addition, you may want to evaluate your semester topic menu and make sure that some of what you’re studying is “crowd’s edge” friendly. That might have something to do with the infrequency that your open groups aren’t regularly adding new people. Friends, family, neighbors, and co-workers (who don’t yet attend your church) are great addition candidates when the topic is right.
mark
great post. I would be interest to know what warnings can there be for open group.
Thanks for jumping in here Faye! Interesting question, too! One thing I always emphasize is that there is no problem-free system or solution. Instead, wise leaders simply choose the set of problems they’d rather have. That said, open groups have problems, too. For instance, when a group is open to new members, every prospective member brings with them a personality that may or may not easily mesh with the others in the group. Another way to think about it is that adding a new member changes the chemistry of the group.
While the open group philosophy comes with a set of problems, I’d still take that set any day. Be sure you read my follow-up post for more information: http://www.markhowelllive.com/open-groups-closed-groups-specialized-groups/
And thanks again for your question!
mark