Rethinking Belonging: An Interaction with The Search to Belong by Joseph Myers
By M. Scott Boren
Review Date: 06/01/04
In my research of the various trends in small group theories and practices, something with which I find difficult to remain updated because of the many different resources that are coming out in the church world, I find that books and conferences usually fit into one of three categories. First, there are those that repeat the same message in a novel or interesting way. Secondly, there are the resources that say the same things in the same ways. Most of what is hitting the market today fall into one of these categories. They are valuable resources because they call new churches to the vision of building community through small groups.
Every now and then, I will come across a book or a speaker who is saying something prophetic, something that challenges the small group stream of thought, something that makes pastors re-evaluate what they are doing. Randy Frazee, Larry Crabb, and Steve Sjogren are three prophetic voices that pastors should heed. I pray that my upcoming book, 10 Commandments to Authentic Biblical Community fits into this category.
One book that has an important message for those seeking to develop cell groups is Joseph Myers' book The Search to Belong. Myers has an important, maybe even crucial message that cell churches, G-12 churches, churches of small groups, and Meta-churches should heed. At the same time, the reading this book also has the potential of leading people down paths that might prove unproductive. While the basic thesis held by Myers is powerful, his polemical language comes across as reactionary and in the end is unhelpful. Because his thesis is so important, I feel that it deserves more than a book review. It deserves a concept explication and application.
Myers confesses his frustration with the small group theorists who promised the development of intimate community within small groups. He found that most churches who shot for 100% small group involvement were only getting 30-35% participation. He also found that level of intimacy was falling quite short of the promised goals. His frustrations led him on a search to understand how people belong. He found that belonging does not occur on just one level, that of a small group. It actually occurs on four levels. This basic premise is the powerful point that could produce the tipping point for many churches that will facilitate the expansion of small group growth beyond the 35% barrier. In Malcolm Gladwell's book, The Tipping Point, he proposes that a tipping point is that magical moment when an idea, product, or pattern of behavior takes off, crosses a threshold, and spreads spontaneously.
When small groups are expected to carry the entire load of building community and belonging, it places too much pressure upon those groups. The leaders feel that they must attain a level of intimacy with many small group member might feel uncomfortable. Myers broadens our definition of community and belonging so that we can see how small groups fit into that picture rather than seeing them as the complete picture.
First there is public belonging. People connect on the public level when they identify with a broad movement. Such identification does not require great participation; it only necessitates association with that movement. For instance, an individual might belong publicly to a national association to which he pays annual dues but does not attend any official meetings. He is a member in good standing and supports the goals of that association, but he has not invested time and energy into the accomplishment of the goals of it. Many people belong to the church on the public level. They identify with the movement of the church through periodic attendance and by the paying of some offering, but they are little more than members. They don't contribute to the vision.
The second level of belonging is called the social level. Connecting on this level occurs in a slightly smaller groupings than those of the public level. These are neighbor relationships. Myers states, “A neighbor is someone you know well enough to as for (or provide) small favors” (143). We need people in our lives with whom we can share small talk. Deep intimate or personal conversations are not the only kind of spiritual conversations that God blesses. We are designed with a deep need to share life with neighbors.
At the same time, God made us to be known by others. Such knowing happens in the third and fourth levels. On the third level, people connect in the personal space. This is where people share private thoughts, personal dreams, and feelings to a smaller group of ten or twelve. Here people experience a degree of transparency, but not naked transparency. Such groups become close friends, but there is no pressure applied to open absolutely everything up to the group.
The final level is called the intimate space. This is the realm of life usually only shared with two or three other people. Here the walls come down and we become “known” to another.
The vision for cell groups has emphasized two groups, the cell and the celebration. On the surface, it looks as though this model only connects people on two levels, the public and the personal. As Myers rightly concludes, “It is not healthy to promote only small groups as the most valid way to find community. Doing so is far too limiting” (76). But the reality is that the most effective small group churches in the world do not require this of their groups. They don't place all the pressure upon their small groups to address the need for community. It is just that the cell and the celebration are the primary “visible” groupings. Therefore, books and conferences that explain the model emphasize the visible components. Myers has pointed out what many have missed as a crucial to the effectiveness of these churches, social connections and intimate connections.
The most effective cell group churches in the world have developed a place for people to connect socially. These places are mid-sized group meetings that range from 50 to 150 people. The Groups of 12 model holds network gatherings once per month that connect people socially. These networks are comprised of people within the G-12 network of a staff pastor. Therefore, the pastor overseeing the women's network would hold a monthly women's meeting. The same would be the case for the men, youth and other networks. As a church groups with groups, there would be more than one person overseeing women's groups. This would mean that a large church would hold multiple women's network meetings every month, so as to maintain the ability to connect people socially at this level.
Pantego Bible Church in Ft. Worth, Texas is another example of a church that connects people socially. In this model, groups of 50 to 75 people gather every week on Sunday morning during the Sunday school hour. At this level people from different small groups connect with one another as neighbors. Many of these people will have been in previous groups together. Therefore, when groups that multiply have a place to connect socially they don't feel the same kind of loss as those groups that don't have such a venue.
In addition, the most effective cell groups systems realize that the cell group is not the place for naked intimacy. The cell group is not the place to reveal one's deepest secrets. I was leading a group where a man shared with a couple of us his struggle with homosexuality. He did not reveal this with the rest of the group for two reasons. First, he was not ready to share his struggle that openly and he did not need to. Second, the group was not ready for him to share such a secret that openly. Some of the members of that group did not have the maturity to handle his struggle.
Many churches facilitate intimate connections through the use of accountability partners. Some churches provide mentors for new or immature Christians where they can share this intimate struggles. Ralph Neighbour has addressed this issue in his book Mentoring Another Christian. Another common pattern is to help group members form prayer triads. Neil Cole has written about this in detail.
One of the most insightful observations made by Myers is the fact that people cannot be forced to connect. Some churches have made the mistake of assigning people to groups and expecting them to experience not only personal belonging but also intimate connections. Myers writes, “So often our small group models encourage forced belonging. We surmise that putting people into groups will alleviate the emptiness so prevalent in our fast-paced culture” (68).
People seek spontaneous connections. One person cannot force connection with another. Friendships arise unexpectantly. Ten people meeting weekly in a small group will not necessarily connect on a personal level. Some may only connect on a social level for a period of months before they enter into the personal space. Some will never go there just because of the make up of the group.
Groups will move into personal belonging much more quickly and easily when they are given the freedom to relate spontaneously. People desire the freedom to connect with people they want to connect with. This is one of the reasons developing a social space is so important. Myers writes. “In social space we provide we provide the information that helps others decide whether they connect with us. We get just enough information to decide to keep this person in this space or move them to another space” (143).
At the same time, we must be honest about people's attitude toward small groups and relationships. Most people today are individualists who enter into relationships contractually. They develop friendships with people because they find them personally beneficial. When those benefits decrease below the level of personal cost, then the friendship proves unneeded. In order for people to connect at any of the four spaces, they must see people as more than an easy in, easy out trade-ins. The church must teach people about commitment to one another. It must teach them to learn to love people who are different. Jesus gathered twelve men together that would never relate in the natural. Then he said, that the key to their discipleship was loving one another. Sometimes it is the person we would not choose to relate to who is exactly the person that God uses to demonstrate what true love is.
In many books, authors use a tactic of overstatement to highlight a problem and present a solution to this problem. The book seems to incite emotional reactions from the reader that are distracting. The tactic of inciting emotions is a good one when it is founded upon facts. But for instance, he has found that only 30% of the church members of the best small group systems in North America are actually in small groups. First of all, this is only partly true. There are many churches that have a much higher percentage, some even with over 100% in groups. His reactions to the small group proponents seem to lead him down some reactionary suggestions, suggestions that can be misleading if the reader does not process his thoughts thoroughly.
For instance, while Myers states that he is in favor of small groups, he also posits a challenge to small group proponents in the form of three questions:
• Does everyone need to be in a small group to experience significant, healthy community?
• Do small groups help or hinder a person's search to belong?
• Are small groups honestly the most significant way a person can grow in relationship to others and to God? (60)
At times, the book reads as though the author is challenging the development of small groups in the church. With surface readings, it is easy to misinterpret what the author means because he overstates the problem with small groups. He assumes that all the literature on small groups fails to address these four levels of belonging. I have already addressed the fact that this is not the case. The book would have been much more helpful if it did not come across as if he is the only one to come up with this idea.
I also feel that the book overstates the solution. He writes, “Historically, churches have promoted personal and intimate as the preferred spaces to belong. But if a person belongs to God in a public or social way, is it up to us to ‘correct' it? Is it wrong to help people grow their public relationship without requiring them to grow it ‘closer' in a different space?” (109). Such a statement sounds like he is prescribing a de-emphasis on small groups. Instead, he is just saying that small groups don't do everything. He is prescribing a harmony among all four spaces.
At the same time, I found that the problem does not just lie in polemical language for the purpose of stirring emotion. The author's observation that only 30% of the members of churches with the best small groups systems actually attend groups caused him to ask if small groups are necessary for everyone. The back cover of the book reads, “Let's face it—small groups work for some, while others find all the fulfillment they need in public worship.” Not only is this conclusion based upon incomplete data, it is also based upon an assumption that the church's job is to give people what they want. The job of the shepherd of the flock is to lead the sheep. Myers counters, “People search for spontaneous community. Permit people to lead themselves. God does. We can learn from him” (84). Such a statement is misleading. As I read my Bible, I find that God is the one leading. He gives us free choice to follow; He does not force us to do His will. But every story about a biblical character where he led himself is a story of failure. In his desire to steer clear of forcing people into groups, it seems that he is encouraging a style of leadership that only calls pastors to give people what they want. I agree that people should not be forced to connect. At the same time, it is no sin for leaders to invite people into the vision of deeper levels of community. This is leadership. Everyone needs personal and intimate connections and if they don't find them in the church, they will either find them somewhere else or just continue living alone in their private pain. I am not sure whether or not Meyers would agree with my interpretation of what he states. I am only dealing with the obvious (at least to me) meaning of various sentences that seem to mislead. It is easy to get stuck on these clear overstatements and miss the more subtle meaning that is the strength of the book.
In addition, the author's prescription for the finding that churches can only get 30% of their people in small groups is to help people connect on the four levels. This is part of the answer, but it is far from the complete solution. In the churches I work with that have similar problems, I find that they have failed to develop an effective coaching system, they have not hired the proper staffing to support the groups, and/or they keep their people so busy in committee meetings and many other “good” ministries that they don't have time for relationships. These are just three other common root issues that a church must recognize, along with others that I don't have the space to address.
As I have worked through The Search To Belong multiple times, I was challenged to rethink the foundational components of effective cell group systems. While I believe his ultimate questioning of the basic need that everyone has for the kind of belonging that can happen in cell groups and his failure to recognize that there are small group models that address his concerns, I do find his four spaces of connection a helpful rubric for advancing the church as it seeks to develop community. Pastors, small group champions, and cell group vision teams would be wise to recognize the fact that small groups are not the only place where people need connections. For some churches that have stalled small group systems, this might very well prove to be a key component that would take groups into a new day of fruitfulness. More than anything, when a church recognizes these four levels of belonging, it can facilitate a more healthy way of living for disconnected people, who find themselves friendless even though they have lots of acquaintances, alone even though they have lots to do.
END