What COVID-19 Taught Rural Churches

By Jim Estep

State by state, county by county, the COVID-19 pandemic led to limitations, shelter-in-place orders, and essentially a shutdown of “normal.” In rural congregations—which are often smaller, singular in focus (worship), and fairly stable in ministry programming—this became an impetus for reflection, reevaluation, renewal, and a reenvisioning of ministries across the country.

Theology of the Church

We all know the church is made up of people—it’s not the building or the worship service—but our everyday theology would say otherwise. Whether we like it or not, our default theology turns church into a place or time. (“We are going to church.” “What time does church start?”) If this is what church is, what happened when COVID-19 called for sheltering in place and limiting corporate gatherings? Many believers in rural congregations contend that health and government officials shut down the church. Actually, the officials locked the church building, but they didn’t shut down the church.

We all need to do some fresh theological reflection on what it really means to be the church and to do church. Our experience during those difficult weeks and months demonstrated that the church is wherever or however the people gather, whether in a virtual gathering, on a streaming Facebook feed, or in a parking lot. We are focused now on the assembly of the faithful, which is perhaps a more biblical understanding of church as ekklesia, the assembly.

Missional vs. Attractional

At the advent of the 21^st century, two dominant models of church emerged. The attractional model of ministry says, “Come join us! We have excellent opportunities and programs.” It is the model the majority of churches in North America have used, particularly in rural areas. It is a centralized approach to such ministries as evangelism, discipleship, and worship . . . usually at the church building.

The missional model, by contrast, says, “Go, minister where you are.” Essentially, it is a decentralized model of doing ministry wherever God places the believer(s). Which model was more effective during the COVID-19 pandemic? The missional churches fared far better, while the attractional churches were challenged to become more missional! Many attractional rural ministries experienced the stresses and strains of social distancing and restrictions on gathering, but the missional churches did not encounter as many restrictions on ministry. Rather than the church “gathered,” the missional church was “deployed” during this time. People worshipped in their homes and served in their communities. Could we perhaps retain the missional elements we learned during the pandemic, thereby building a missional element on top of the attractional model, or will most rural churches go back to church-as-usual?

Self-Awareness of Opportunities

Rural congregations often consider themselves immune from cultural trends, and they often ignore contemporary ministry inclinations. But no congregation (rural or otherwise) was immune to the impact of COVID-19. We all became self-aware of our real ministry capacities and capabilities.

COVID-19 provided great impetus for the church to break with status quo and innovate their ministries. One meme read, “Just like that, all pastors are televangelists.” Even if our congregation had a streaming worship service, we began to seek out better ways of presenting our worship on the internet. Churches became very self-aware of opportunities that had otherwise been overlooked or dismissed under more normal circumstances. For example, congregations have provided instructions for routine practices that were previously assumed, such as taking Communion.

We all make use of technology, even if it’s just a sound system or recorded music, but lack of a digital or social media presence became devastatingly obvious to many congregations, especially those who denied or even objected to its use. Imagine the impact on tithing to congregations that had no online app for giving.

Perpetual Practices

It is amazing how churches, especially rural ones, have risen to meet the spiritual challenge of the pandemic. Here is a list of innovations that became common during COVID-19:

• Daily “3 p.m. Bible Studies” with the pastor
• Morning and evening devotions and prayers via video chat platforms
• Elders, staff, and other leaders continuing to meet using virtual meeting platforms
• Calling members to check in with them, using a rubric to guide the conversation, and making note of any needs that could be met by the church
• Daily “Pastor’s Thought” and church updates via social media
• Small groups gathering midweek via Google Hangouts and Zoom
• Family ministers using streaming video to share lessons with youth
• “Church in a box,” wherein the church staff resourced the church to have worship in their homes or in small gatherings
• Drive-in worship services, with cars honking their “amens” and raising hands with hazard lights

The pandemic was the catalyst for all these new ministry endeavors. Question . . . why would we stop them when the pandemic ends? COVID-19 exposed some unseen opportunities that can now be continued. Effective ministry is reaching people in ways never before considered. Why would we go back to status quo having learned so many new good practices? As Central Christian College of the Bible president David Fincher said at the pandemic’s peak, “Don’t be afraid to nurture the seeds you’ve planted over the past few weeks.”

Jim Estep serves as vice president of academics with Central Christian College of the Bible, Moberly, Missouri, and as event director with e2: effective elders.