M-Moments: Immature, Not Unhealthy - A Better Way to Talk About the Church

Let us rejoice and be glad and give the glory to Him, for the marriage of the Lamb has come and His bride has made herself ready.”
—Revelation 19:7

There’s a conversation I hear often on the mission field. Everyone has had experiences with churches in their area of ministry. It usually begins well enough, but then at some point, someone describes a local church as being “unhealthy.” I understand what they mean. I understand their heart. But that word always makes me wince.

“Unhealthy” is one of those adjectives that doesn’t stand well on its own. Imagine someone leaning over at your wedding reception and saying, “I can’t quite put my finger on it… but she just looks unhealthy.” Or worse, hearing someone whisper to their kids, “Stay away from her… she’s unhealthy.”

It’s a loaded word.

Now, please don’t misunderstand me. Church health matters. Deeply. It should never be overlooked. But if we’re going to use the word, we need to do so carefully. Declaring a church to be unhealthy is often prejudicial, with lasting effects. And in many cases, it might not even be an accurate assessment. Let me explain.

The Human Analogy

Health is a word we usually associate with living beings, like people. While it’s often subjective, we generally describe someone as healthy if they are free from disease. I’ve spent considerable time connected to the medical world: caring for the sick, supporting my wife, who’s been in healthcare for decades, and raising a medically fragile son. I’ve seen firsthand that poor health needs attention, and when that care is appropriately given, it results in life.

But here’s the point: “healthy” is always linked to context. A healthy baby still needs help with feeding and diapers. A healthy toddler will still throw tantrums. A healthy teen might ask awkward questions or act irresponsibly. Health and age are not the same. It’s entirely possible to be immature but healthy. And it’s possible to be mature… but unhealthy. No one in the medical field struggles to understand that. So why do we have such a hard time applying that same logic to the church?

A Western Lens

Part of the challenge comes from the "age" of our local churches in the West. Many have been around for over a century. Their walls are decorated with photos of founding pastors, early construction projects, and families who have been part of the church for generations. Even church plants often trace their origins back to legacy congregations with long histories.

So, we naturally assume that if the church has existed for a long time, it should be mature by now. When it doesn’t act like it, we assume something’s wrong. We start by looking for signs of disease, such as poor theology or complacency in evangelism and missions. That’s when we use the term “unhealthy.” And in our context, maybe that makes sense.

Maturity Must Be Part of the Diagnosis

Even in the West, I think we overlook the issue of maturity too quickly. As a pastor, I often encountered members who had been believers for decades but remained in the early stages of spiritual growth. One of my primary responsibilities was to help them progress, push through their stagnation, and develop into mature followers of Christ. That’s the pathway I outlined in my book Strategically Planted.

Here’s what I’ve learned: a church can’t rise above the spiritual maturity of its people. If the members are spiritually young, like in a church plant or a replant, then we should expect the church to act in ways that reflect her age. And that can still be healthy.

Similarly, a longstanding church might bring in a new pastor who connects with a new generation of young believers. That church, in turn, goes through its own kind of rebirth, with a season of adolescence. It’s not sick. It’s not diseased. It’s just growing.

Of course, any church at any age can come under spiritual attack. Satan is a prowling lion (1 Peter 5:8). He devours what he can. And yes, false teaching, false teachers, and spiritual abuse can all invade the body.

But we must be careful not to confuse immaturity with infection... or declare the spiritually weary as merely unhealthy.

In the West, when a church shows signs of decline, we often act quickly to intervene… especially if it’s part of our own network or denomination. But what if it’s not? What if it’s outside our tradition? We tend to isolate ourselves. We may even label it “unhealthy.” And then we move on.

The Global Conversation

But what about when we apply that mindset to the Global South? What happens when Western Christians enter the vibrant mission fields of Africa, Asia, and Latin America? In that context, we see something different. Entire movements consist of churches that are not only young in age... but also in their formation.

Let’s consider Africa as an example.

In 1910, there were roughly between 8 and 12 million Christians on the continent. They were mainly concentrated in the Horn of Africa, among groups often called “Coptic.” Just over a hundred years later, that number has surged. Today, estimates range from 650 to 750 million. That’s not just growth; it’s one of the biggest revivals in the history of the Christian faith!

And yet, criticism arrives quickly. There’s too much focus on the Holy Spirit. There’s too much syncretism. There’s too much prosperity teaching. I’ve heard it repeatedly: “Africa has an unhealthy church.”

But then I think about my own heritage, my evangelical Protestant tradition. If I trace it back, it took us nearly two thousand years to develop the theological and missional clarity we now accept as normal.

The early church debated for centuries over who Christ was. It was only with the Council of Constantinople in 381 and the Council of Chalcedon in 451 that the church confirmed Jesus’ full humanity and divinity.

It wasn’t until 1517, when Martin Luther challenged the Western church, that the doctrine of salvation by faith alone was reclaimed.

And it wasn’t until William Carey and the modern missions movement in 1792 that the Western church truly began to embrace her global task.

Two thousand years. That’s how long it took.

So why are we insisting that Africa reach that goal in a hundred years?

Conclusion: Let Africa Grow Up

Africa is still in its early years. Many of her churches are only in their third or fourth generation. My grandparents were born before most African denominations even existed.

Can we not give her the space to grow? Can we not walk with her, pray for her, support her… without sitting in judgment?

The good news is, she is growing… and fast. African theologians are already leading the way, calling out the remnants of syncretism, shifting their churches from a Spirit-only focus to a more holistic, Christ-centered gospel. They’re asking tough questions, writing profound theology, training their leaders, and setting the course for the global church of tomorrow.

What took the West 2,000 years, Africa might achieve in 200.

And yes, the Global North still has a role to play. African leaders continue to respect the missionary work that brought the gospel to their continent. They want us to walk alongside them. But they no longer see us as parents or physicians. That responsibility has passed, and rightly so.

We are now like an extended family. We are co-laborers. We are invited guests. We can share insights and encouragement, but the responsibility to grow, mature, and thrive belongs to the African church.

And let us remember what Scripture has already told us: “The marriage of the Lamb has come, and His bride has made herself ready” (Revelation 19:7). The Church, worldwide, across generations and cultures, is the Bride. She is not a project to manage, nor a patient to diagnose. She is cherished. And she is in preparation.

She is growing… not in our image, but in His. The process of maturity is already happening, not because we criticize her, but because Christ is shaping her. He will one day present her radiant, without blemish or wrinkle.

Our part is not to hurry the process, but to walk with patience and faith, trusting that the same Spirit working in us is at work in her.