Jim and Casper Went To Church...Day 5

Same situation.

Same old ground rules. Scroll down to day 1's entry to get up to speed. One more entry on this topic after today's...

...but for today:

Casper mentioned at one of the earlier visits to a church that what he actually liked most about that church was that they provided plenty of tables and other areas to visit where you could discuss the sermon you heard that day. Maybe grab a cup of coffee and chat about ideas together.

So, later in the book, they visit a church that actually incorporates this idea into their services in a way. The teaching pastor had the congregation read the passage together at tables and discuss it, and they'd gather together in 10 minutes for feedback. Here's the interaction between Jim and Casper:

Jim: Don't you think this makes it feel like it's a classroom?
Casper: Well, yeah, but isn't that the point of church? To teach people? I mean, at so many churches we've visited, verses from the Bible are reat at the congregation: Here are the words, you listen. But here, the Bible is being used as a congregation starter, to get people talking with each other. And I think it's only in these kinds of discussions--whether they're one-on-one or in small groups--where you can really connect or learn anything at all.
Jim: So you're saying that at a megachurch, it's impossible to connect with God? It seems like you're saying that the larger a church grows, the more difficult it is to keep people connected, and not only to God but to each other.
Casper: I hate to simplify it like that, but yes. Think about it: How do schools sell themselves? By class size. The lower the student/teacher ratio is, the smaller the class size, the better the education. You get more interaction with "the expert" and more interaction with your classmates. Why do churches do just the opposite? Why is a church deemed successful by its size rather than its ability to truly teach its people?

So, what this spurs in my mind, as the pastor responsible for discipleship at a larger church, do you agree with the idea? If not, why not? And if so, what are some ways to be "large" and "small" at the same time? Or is that even a good idea?

Like I said, I've got one more entry on this topic tomorrow...but I like the provocation of this book and could teach a semester-long class on it if I wanted. Hope you're feeling the same...