Covenant Thinklings: Scheduled for Retirement?
ORGANIC CHURCH PLANTING
American Center for Theological Studies
Joseph Holbrook
February 3, 2003
Table of Contents:
Table of Contents: 2
Organic Church Planting. 3
The Need For Planting New Churches. 4
The Need For Planting A New Kind Of Church. 5
The Starting Place. 6
Organic Church Planting. 8
Transfer growth or new conversion growth?. 8
Why Organic?. 8
Do we ‘go’ to church or are we to ‘be’ the church?. 10
Biblical examples establishing the church in social networks. 10
Historical examples of establishing the church in social networks. 10
Church Planting in Mexico. 11
Discipling a Tribe in Colombia. 11
Muslim Followers of Isa. 12
The Individualization Of The Gospel Message. 13
Cross-Cultural Church Planting. 14
Church Planting0 15
Church Planting1 15
Church Planting2 16
Church Planting3 16
Two Strategically Important Target Groups. 17
Church Planting Among Hispanics. 17
Church Planting Among Millennials. 18
Reproducing Churches. 20
The Goal is Reproduction, Not Growth. 20
Make Church Life Simpler 20
The Digitization Of The Church. 20
Steps for Effective Church Planting. 22
The Phase before the Phases – Preparation. 22
Mountain One – Gathering. 32
Mountain Two – Mutual Commitment 37
Mountain Three – Reproduction. 39
Conclusion. 44
Bibliography. 46
Organic Church Planting
The great commission given to the followers of Jesus is to go into all the earth, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the father, son and Holy Spirit, teaching them all that Christ has commanded us. What has Christ commanded us? He has commanded us to love and serve one another, to encourage and care for one another. The activity of making disciples and teaching them to love and serve one another leads to the church, the assembling or gathering together of committed followers of Jesus.
Church planting is the activity of the Holy Spirit through apostolic workers as they persuade men and women to become followers of Jesus and to gather together with other followers of Jesus for mutual service, encouragement and edification.
The Holy Spirit has provided us with a divine example of organic church planting in the relationship between Jesus and his disciples. We can also find principles of cross-cultural church planting through the example of the Saul of Tarsus and his apostolic team in the later half of the book of Acts. The more closely we follow the biblical pattern given us through Jesus and the twelve, with Paul’s apostolic band, the more likely it is that we will see the same quality of results that we see in the New Testament, as well as the same enduring nature of “fruit which remains” (John 15:16).
Most church planting methods during the last decades of the 20th century were focused on transfer growth rather than new conversion growth. New styles of ministry were developed in order to attract Christian dropouts from dead or dying churches. Sunday morning worship services were updated into the technological age of sound systems, overhead projectors and electric keyboards and then later to multi-media presentations with PowerPoint sermons and gourmet coffee hospitality. Dress became more casual and preaching styles more conversational as churches scrambled to compete to meet the “felt needs” of a dwindling number of Christian consumers.
As we enter into a new millennium, there is a general dissatisfaction with the kind of Christianity produced by contemporary churches in the West. The pastoral failure rate has never been higher. Despite the proliferation (and blessing!) of seeker and purpose-driven mega churches, overall church attendance from January 1997 through June 1998 dropped by 4%. This translates to 8 million Christians who stopped attending Christian services of any kind over an 18 month period.[1] As the Christian Church steadily loses influence not only among secular society, but even among Christians in the U.S. many people are coming to the conviction that the church must change in substance as well as style. The changes that the church will experience in the early decades of the 21st. century will go far beyond methods, style and strategies, to the heart of what defines the church; relationships and structure.
The Need For Planting New Churches
Like any living organism, every local church has a natural life cycle. Unless a church is able to reproduce itself in every new generation, it will go through a natural life cycle and die in one generation.
Right now in the U.S., there are approximately 340,000 churches. Three fourths of these churches are slowing dying and one fourth is growing[2]. Almost all of the increases of the 25% that are growing are transfers from the 75% that are diminishing.
Over the last twenty years, more than 3500 churches have closed their doors annually.[3] That translates to about ten churches shutting down every day. Only half as many are currently being started. Planting new churches in the U.S. is essential. If there is not a major focus on effective church planting, Christian faith in the U.S. may quickly become as culturally marginal as it is in Europe.
C. Peter Wagner has said that church planting is the most effective form of evangelism. Extensive research by Christian Schwarz of over a thousand churches in thirty-two nations shows that smaller and newer congregations are far more effective in evangelism than large churches. According to Schwarz, numerous churches far excel a single mega-church in evangelistic fruitfulness; “If instead of a single church with 2,856 in worship we had 56 churches, each with 51 worshippers, these churches would, statistically, win 1,792 new people within five years—16 times the number the mega church would win. Thus we can conclude that the evangelistic effectiveness of mini-churches is statistically 1,600 percent greater than that of mega churches.”[4]
If our prime directive is to make “disciples of the nations,” by persuading the unbelieving to trust and follow Christ, we must consider church planting as a mandate. If the church in the United States desires once again to be “salt and light” to U.S. culture, a sustained church planting movement must be launched. It must be the kind of church planting movement that easily and rapidly reproduces itself. If such a movement is to have a major impact on our society, it must not be “resource intensive” requiring multiple 10’s or 100’s of thousands of dollars and highly trained specialists to succeed. The term “organic” church planting communicates the image of something that spontaneously multiplies under natural conditions.
If the church in the U.S. is to continue to flourish in the future, we must also place an urgent priority on church planting among young adults. If the statistics are alarming about the pace of new church planting compared to dead and closing churches, the explosion of youth culture and the relative absence of a Christian influence is even more alarming. No where is the need for new churches more acute than among the millennial and Gen-X generations.
The Need For Planting A New Kind Of Church
Not only do we need new churches in the U.S., we also need a new kind of church. Just planting more of the same kind of churches is not the answer. The “American church model”[5] has failed to be effective salt and light in our generation. Barna’s research has shown that there is statistically little difference between those who call themselves “Christians” and those who do not claim faith, in virtually every area of moral behavior that can be measured.[6] George Gallup concludes in his study on spirituality that, “faith in America is broad but not deep,” [7] and that “born again citizens are as likely as their counterparts to believe in astrology, consult astrology charts and to have consulted a fortune-teller.”[8]
In the last two decades of the 20th century, we have been blessed with a variety of creative approaches to church life such as seeker churches, cell churches, purpose-driven churches, G12 churches and mega churches. Despite this growing diversity of forms and styles of worship, church goers are voting with their feet in massive numbers and opting out of participation in church life as we know it. At the same time, those who continue to attend Christian services show little or no difference in their lifestyle from those who avoid affiliation with Christian churches. Not only are new churches needed, but a new kind of church is desperately needed.
There is a need for churches that are organized around relationships rather than meetings. We need churches that are life-oriented rather than program-oriented; organic rather than organizational, spontaneous rather than highly structured. We need churches that produce committed disciples rather than meeting facilities and institutional programs; churches that focus more on sending than gathering.
Pastors in record numbers are burning-out, dropping out or falling out. My wife just last month attended a women’s Prayer Summit in Miami. There were 22 pastor’s wives participating. Almost every one of the wives said that their husbands were discouraged and thinking about quitting the ministry. The American church model is no longer workable, and is quickly losing its leadership base.
In my opinion the most pressing need in United States is not bigger churches, more seeker churches or more purpose-driven churches. I say that with the deepest respect for the valuable contribution that spiritual pioneers like Bill Hybels, Rick Warren, Cesar Castellanos, Ralph Neighbors and Dr. Paul Yunggi Chou have made to church life at the end of the 20th century. The research both Barna and Gallup show us that we need more “disciple-making” churches that effectively form men and women into highly committed followers of Jesus rather than simple church attenders or even lay workers in church programs.
We need churches that really do change people’s lives. Churches where people actually do encounter God and experience His active, transforming presence. Churches where people are challenged with scripture and held accountable for their moral behavior. Churches where people learn to serve and love one another. It my opinion, the formation of one single highly committed follower of Christ has a far more powerful effect on our society than gathering ten or a hundred “seekers” into a church meeting.
Not only do we need “disciple-making” churches; we need disciple-making churches that effectively reproduce themselves. Often, churches that focus on forming quality discipleship in believers do not seem to grow or reproduce. They turn inward and focus on perfectionism, always raising the standards of excellence but never reaching outward to those outside the circle of grace.
How can we build disciple-making churches that rapidly and naturally reproduce themselves?
The Starting Place
In the New Testament we are not commanded to “go and plant churches.” The great commission is that we go and proclaim the good news (Mark 16:15), make disciples and to teach them the commands of Christ (Matthew 28:18) and be a Spirit-filled witness to the resurrection of Christ (Acts 1:8).
If we make planting churches our starting point, we will end up with the wrong result. The starting point must be “preaching the gospel of the kingdom,” and “making disciples.” If we effectively proclaim the gospel of the kingdom to social networks and disciple them to Jesus, churches can naturally be formed.
If our starting point is church planting, rather than kingdom proclamation and discipling, our focus will be on getting people to a meeting. Our priorities may become developing a good worship band, organizing a Sunday School program or effective advertising. However, if we focus on preaching the kingdom and making disciples, our first focus will be on getting people to follow Jesus and apply His principles in their lives.
Jesus never tried to plant a church. Instead he focused on training twelve men; teaching them to love and serve one another and sending them two by two to share the good news of the kingdom and heal the sick.
Church planting strategy must be built around the great commission; "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age" (Matthew 28:19-20).
Paul never went into a city just to plant a new church and get people going to a meeting. He preached the kingdom and discipled the new believers. He then either baptized them, or had some of the new leaders baptize them and taught them to begin gathering together to love and encourage one another as they shared the kingdom and discipled others. The primary focus was not on the meeting, but on sharing the news of Jesus’ kingdom and making disciples. As the number of disciples grew in a city, they met from house to house for fellowship, prayer, teaching and mutual encouragement. The primary spiritual energy of the Pauline churches continued, however, to move through their social networks in the marketplace, in the streets, in the schools and in their homes as they shared the news of Jesus’ kingdom and called people to become followers of Jesus.
The result was the establishment of a church in the city. The primary focus was never on attending a weekly meeting but a lifestyle of love and obedience to Jesus!
Organic Church Planting
Biblical church planting is not focused on getting people to commit to attendance to a weekly meeting. Nor is it focused on attracting disaffected Christians from other weekly meetings. Biblical church planting is focused on penetrating unredeemed social and family networks with the good news of the kingdom and calling people out of darkness into loving obedience to Jesus and into a committed relationship with other “Jesus” followers.
Transfer growth or new conversion growth?
Church planting that aims to draw “Christians” from other churches into a new church through nicer facilities, more contemporary music, better Bible exposition or excellent programming meeting “felt needs” is a more like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic than New Testament style church planting. One may successfully gather Christians together and call it a new church, but the overall church in a city or nation may suffer. Christians are moved around into different configurations and denominational brands, but the kingdom of God may not be advanced!
The purpose of church planting is not to provide a pastor with an income; the purpose of church planting is to find and convert lost people into committed followers of Christ and disciple them into a kingdom lifestyle that will be an attractive light to others in their same demographic social network. For that reason, in this paper, I am only dealing with church planting that focuses primarily on conversion growth.
Churches that are started with methods or strategies that seek to facilitate transfer growth from other churches rarely or never become effectively evangelizing churches and rarely reproduce themselves. On the other hand, churches that are started through effective and biblical (and relational) evangelism will likely reproduce and become effective in reaching out to secular people.
Why Organic?
I have chosen the word, “organic” to describe a process that is not driven organizationally and operates through natural, God-given principles. Something that is natural, or organic may be compared to a living organism and should obey the laws of the creation mandate in Genesis chapter one to reproduce after its kind, when the soil and conditions are right.
Many, if not most 20th century methods of church planting could be described as organizational rather than organic. Each denominational group or network of churches has their own formula for successful church planting. Generally, successful church planting in the American church model, requires a large amount of start-up capital ($250,000 according to one source), full-time, trained staff (i.e. a church planter, a senior pastor and a secretary) and an advertising budget, not to mentioned a qualified worship director and children’s ministries director. It is no wonder that the average church finds reproducing itself in a daughter church a daunting task!
Obviously, if a church planter envisions starting a dynamic, growing mega church, there is a greater need for capital resources, both in finances and qualified people in the early stages of the start-up. Only large denominations, already existing mega churches or highly focused church networks are likely to be able to gather sufficient resources for this kind of church planting. Independent, entrepreneurial church planters and smaller, congregational type churches are unlikely to have sufficient resources for this kind of church planting.
What to do? We have already seen the desperate need for new churches, as well as the evidence that we need for a new kind of church. Some would argue that there is a clear scriptural mandate that every church should have the capacity to reproduce itself, if it is a truly living organism, part of the body of Christ. How can a typical American congregation with 95 people in attendance reproduce itself? How can a young, bi-vocational church planter without denominational backing, plant a viable, reproducing church that makes disciples?
The answer that we are proposing in this paper is what we call “organic church planting.” It is church planting in its most simple and basic form. It relies on using natural, creation principles for growth and multiplication, rather than an organizational paradigm. The goal of organic church planting is not to build an organizational structure nor is it to gather a large number of seekers in a worship service. The goal of organic church planting is to recognize and penetrate receptive social networks with the good news of Jesus’ rule and to produce highly committed followers of Jesus within these social networks, who will gather together in Jesus’ name to love and serve one another and to be light and a living witness to the rest of their social network.
In organic church planting, worship services, music styles, meeting facilities are all determined by the needs and cultural customs of the targeted social network. Organic church planting among some Gen-x and millennial generation groups of young people may require meeting informally in coffee houses, worshipping with spontaneous debates and discussions, with music that varies wildly from one group of young adults to another. Organic church planting among Muslims may require prayer five times a day with a heavy use of poetry and spirited conversations in Middle Eastern coffee shops.
One Rhode Island church planter from a Baptist background,[9] found that the most effective way to plant churches in the highly secular and intensely ethnic culture of New England was to begin with evangelistic Bible studies in the homes of people who were influencers of social networks. Using the home of the person with social influence as a base of proclamation, the entire network was often quickly brought into fellowship with Christ.
This same church planter ran into major difficulties when he tried to incorporate these newly evangelized social networks into the local church. They tended to resist bonding relationally to the local church social network and tried to preserve their own “natural” social network. Often these family or social sub-structures disintegrated or caused church splits in the local church. The long-term solution that he finally discovered was to establish a new “church” in the social network itself, often the same home where the Bible study originated, rather than try to bring the new believers into an already existing church family.
Do we ‘go’ to church or are we to ‘be’ the church?
This brings up the question, are we to invite people to “go to church” or are we invite them to follow Jesus and teach them how to “be the church?” I tend to think that the latter option is closer to the pattern of Jesus and the apostolic band of the New Testament.
As a pastor in Miami for ten years, my constant frustration was how to help new people bond relationally into the church family. Church growth research has demonstrated that if a new visitor fails to establish several significant friendships in a new church within a few months of beginning to attend, they will move on to another church, looking for a social network where they can fit in. Most Christians move from church to church, not because of doctrine or even ministry programs, but because they are looking for significant friendships. God has built us to be primarily relational.
Why not evangelize entire networks of friendship and keep them intact? Rather than trying to incorporate isolated individuals into existing churches, why not take the church into unbelieving social networks and teach them how to love Jesus and follow him together with their friends? Is this not what often happened in the New Testament?
Biblical examples establishing the church in social networks
The Samaritan social network was penetrated by the gospel of Jesus in Acts 8 by the preaching of Phillip. Peter and John followed Philip as a “team” and most likely established the Samaritan churches within their own social network.
The great missionary church in Antioch was established when some believing Jews began to talk to receptive Greeks. The church in Antioch was established within these Greek-speaking social networks. (Acts 11:20)
The church in Philippi was established primarily through two social networks, the extended family of Lydia (Acts 16:15) and the family of the Philippian jailor (Acts 16:31 & 32). In neither case were they invited to a meeting in a neutral location; both extended family networks came to faith in the home of the chief influencer, the “man or woman of peace” (Luke 10:6).
Historical examples of establishing the church in social networks
George F. Hunter, in his book, The Celtic Way Of Evangelism,[10] explores this issue of penetrating social networks with the gospel of the kingdom through community witness. He shows historically how the Irish church, beginning with St. Patrick, discipled entire tribal and ethnic groups by planting the church (monastic communities) in the midst of their social networks. The Irish church repeated this process of “discipling nations” for several centuries, not only in Ireland, but in Northern England and among the Germanic tribes of Europe. A unique feature of the organic church planting practiced by the Irish was the establishment of a corporate witness through a community of followers of Jesus, aggressively reaching out to the surrounding society through acts of service and Biblical hospitality. The barbarians proved unable to resist the power of friendship and community to overcome their spiritual darkness. This form of culturally transforming church planting was self-sustaining over several centuries and easily lent itself to reproduction.
Church Planting in Mexico
One of Donald McGravran’s first books on church growth was called “Church Growth in Mexico.”[11] McGravran studies closely several contrasting examples of church planting and evangelism in Mexico in the 40’s and 50’s. One group, using typical evangelical methods, concentrated on evangelizing receptive individuals and baptizing them into fellowship with an evangelical church as soon as possible. In most cases, these individuals were already marginalized from their society and their act of baptism cause further alienation from their extended families. The churches formed by this mission tended to be made of individuals who had been rejected by their social networks and therefore had no influence for the gospel with their families and friends. The churches planted by this mission were few and weak. They continued to be dependent upon the support of the mother mission and never reproduced themselves effectively.
Another mission agency chose a different approach. They decided to honor the role of heads of households and the elders of the villages or town mayor. They respectfully approached the leaders of the various social networks and asked for permission to share the gospel. If a dependant teen or wife expressed further interest in hearing more of the gospel, they were sent home to get permission from the father of the family. No individuals were allowed to receive baptism until the entire family group or village had a chance to hear the message and discuss it corporately. Often, entire families came to Christ and even in some cases, whole villages began to follow Jesus. This mission was able to build strong, reproducing churches that quickly became self-supporting, self-governing and self-reproducing. The parent mission was able in a short time to turn over full responsibility for discipling their own people group to the indigenous churches and move on to target a new unreached people group.
Discipling a Tribe in Colombia
Another example of what we are referring to as organic church planting took place in the jungles of Colombia among the Motilone Indian tribe through a young man named Bruce Olson.
Olson felt that God had called him to the Indians in Colombia. He launched out as a 17-year-old boy to take the gospel to them without any training or preparation. Through a series of incidents, he was able to live among them for several years and learn their language.
In his book, Bruchco[12], Olson tells about how he finally experienced a break through with one young Motilone Indian named “Bobby.” After several years of language and cultural learning and working hard to gain trust with the tribe, Bobby befriended Olson. Several more years went by as Olson invested time in building trust in his relationship with Bobby. Finally, an opportunity came for Olson to share the good news with Bobby using metaphors and images drawn from Motilone folklore. God opened Bobby’s heart to receive the gospel.
Interestingly enough, it was not Olson, but Bobby who articulated the gospel to the rest of the Motilone tribe, again using Motilone folklore and art forms. Several times a year, the Motilone tribe would hold tribal “song fests,” in which various Motilone men would climb up into hammocks slung 25 or 30 feet off of the ground. The men would then begin to begin to compete with one another by “singing” stories and poetry. The one who could sing the longest (normally six or seven hours) and the best story won.
After Bobby placed his trust in Jesus, at the very next song fest he began to sing the story of how Jesus came looking for the Motilone Indians and died. The whole village gathered to listen in rapt attention. Bobby sang the gospel for ten hours straight. The entire village came to faith in Christ.
Rather than “planting a church,” Bruce Olson planted a kingdom seed in one Indian man which eventually bore fruit in the entire tribe. Rather than fabricating a new social network made up of socially isolated converts to cultural Christianity, Olson succeeded in penetrating the entire tribal culture with the gospel of the kingdom. The elders of the tribe, became the elders of the “ekklesia.” The shamans or Witch doctors became the medical care givers of a Christian community. The Motilones did not arrange any special worship meetings; they simply continued to meet normally in their communal huts, but they began to gather around presence of Christ.
Bruce Olson’s work among the Motilone Indians is a good example of organic church planting. Rather than creating an “artificial” social structure composed of individual, marginalized Motilone Indians who had been extracted out of the Motilone culture into a hybrid church culture with the Westernizing cultural influence of forms of worship, meeting places and ecclesiology; the Motilone tribe as a whole came to faith in Jesus. The already existing cultural forms and leadership structures were simply sanctified put under the influence of Christ. To put it simply, Olson took the “church” into the Motilone culture and taught them to be the church rather than inviting them to go to church.
Muslim Followers of Isa
Another current example (and somewhat controversial) of this kind of organic church planting is what is called “C4” and “C5”[13] church planting among Muslims in countries where it is illegal for a Muslim to convert to Christianity. This approach to church planting introduces Muslims to “Isa” (the Arabic name for Jesus) and calls them to put their trust in Isa and follow him without leaving their cultural forms, social network or even their cultural identity as Muslims. They continue to pray five times a day in the mosque, they just change the focus of their prayers and worship to Isa, the son of Allah.
This organic form of church planting is much closer to the spirit of New Testament church planting. The command was not to “go and plant churches” but to go and make disciples of the nations. Christian missionaries penetrated Barbarian tribal groups and established the church within existing social structures, thereby transforming the same social structures. Why should we try to make Muslims into Christians? Why not take the rule of Jesus into Muslim cultures and allow Him to transform them?
The Individualization Of The Gospel Message
With the advent of modernism with its twin emphasis on rationalism and individualism, the gospel message has become increasingly focused on the individual to the exclusion of the corporate. “Come to Jesus and make a personal decision for Christ and receive him as your personal savior.”
Although it is a fact that Jesus died for individual salvation, the Biblical call to repentance included a much more corporate emphasis that we see today. Although there are a few instances of individual conversions in the New Testament (The Ethiopian Eunuch for example) the greater emphasis is on the conversion of people groups (the Samaritans) and familial networks (Oikos). A good example is Paul and Silas’s response to the Philippian Jailor’s request for personal salvation; "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you shall be saved, you and your household" (Acts 16:31).
This “Modern” view of the scriptures has led to an unbalanced emphasis on salvation and the individual decision to receive Jesus as one’s personal savior. While individual salvation is a wonderful reality of scripture, among Evangelicals the familial and corporate aspects of salvation tend to be overlooked. An unfortunate by-product of this over emphasis on individualism has been churches that are composed of free floating individual “consumer” Christians rather than redeemed and transformed social networks being discipled for Christ.
Postmodernism is no more “Christian” than Modernism. Whereas Modernism enthroned reason and the individual as gods, Postmodernism is a return to paganism. Postmodern thinking reacts against Modernism by declaring that there is no objective truth, or absolute right or wrong. Postmodernism believes that reason can never be objective but rather is influenced (or determined) by our social context. All of reality is viewed through the subjective lenses of family, tribe and culture. Postmodernism values relationships, tolerance and experience above reason, truth and the individual. The arrival of Postmodernism is not all bad news for Christianity, however.
Although Postmodernism has been blamed for many of society’s current ills, it is a clear move away from the extreme individualism of Modernity and places a higher value on the “context” of social relationships. Postmodernism understands that the way an individual perceives and responds to reality cannot be separated from the worldview of his culture. In order to effectively call the coming generation of postmodern barbarians to follow Jesus, 20th century church planting simply will not work. The wave of the future will of necessity be organic church planting.
Cross-Cultural Church Planting
This leads us to examine the issues involved in cross cultural church planting. Most current potential church planters are from the 20th century. Many, if not all, have had their thinking formed by a modernist/Christian worldview. Increasingly however, our target population is composed of postmodern pagans from millennial generation. Cross-cultural church planting assumes both cultural and language barriers. The church planter must study and absorb the target group’s culture and language in order to be effective.
Most, if not all, church planting in the 21st century will be cross-cultural. Current church planters are time travelers from the past – from the 20th century. In order to plant churches in contemporary culture, we will have to adopt the perspective of cross-cultural missionaries. Nearly all church planting in the 21st century will require crossing at least one cultural barrier, the sacred/secular barrier; and most church planting in the U.S. will be across two or three ethnic, linguistic or generational barriers.
Ralph Winter has developed the E1 to E3 paradigm for understanding differing levels of cross-cultural evangelism[14]. Since in this paper, we are focusing exclusively on church planting through new conversion growth rather than transfer growth, we will adapt Winter’s evangelism across cultural barriers paradigm to church planting. Instead of using the terminology E1 or E3, we use CP1 and CP3 to represent church planting across one to three cultural barriers.
Church Planting0
CP0 is church planting across no cultural barriers. This kind of church planting existed in the 19th century and early part of the 20th century when ethnic churches were started among European immigrants who had a Christian worldview and accepted the Bible as an authoritative source. Much of the Methodist and Baptist church planting in 19th and 20th centuries were of this nature.
After the Second World War, one Southern Baptist church planter started several southern Baptist churches in Chicago by simply standing in a grocery aisle near the grits. Any young couple that he saw buying grits, he approached and introduced himself as a Southern Baptist minister starting a new church. In 90% of the cases, they were young, Baptist couples who had moved north looking for work. This is CP0, church planting without cultural barriers. ???
In 1981, I moved with a team of people from a small city in the central Ohio to the capital city, Columbus, to plant a church. We focused our efforts at outreach on newly, Spirit-filled Christians from Roman Catholicism and mainline Protestant denominations as well as individual Christians who were floating without a specific church commitment. Over a five-year period, we grew from roughly 20 people to 120. During these same five years, we only had one couple added through new conversion. This church planting effort could be characterized as CP0. There were no significant cultural barriers between our church planting team and our target group. Not even the sacred/secular barrier. In pluralistic, post-Christian America, CP0 no longer exists as a viable option.
Church Planting1
CP1 is evangelism across one cultural barrier. This happens when we set out to plant a church among people of our own culture and language group. If I were to attempt to plant a church in Knoxville among “unchurched” white, Anglo-Saxon, baby-boomers; I would need to engage evangelism at the level of CP1. Unless one is planting a church through transfer growth (which by the way, accounts for most church planting efforts in the U.S.) the cultural barrier to cross is the barrier between church people and secular people.
This secular/sacred cultural barrier is much more real than most of us think. Much of the “seeker friendly” philosophy of ministry in the U.S. has been an attempt to recognize this cultural barrier and to contextualize the forms and methods of ministry around the needs of secular people. Others have taken radically different approaches to evangelizing and planting churches among secular people that emphasize moving away from the performance/crowd approach to a more relational and organic paradigm. Whatever approach we take, we must recognize that the secular/sacred cultural barrier is as real as racial and linguistic barriers and requires an intentional strategy to overcome it.
Church Planting2
CP2 is the kind of cross-cultural evangelism that is necessary to plant churches among people groups who are two cultural barriers removed from the church planter. Examples of this might include an Anglo planting a church among “English speaking” Hispanics; a white person from the middle-class planting a church among Afro-Americans in the inner city or a baby boomer planting a church among Gen-X or millennials. In each case there is the “secular/sacred” barrier, plus a racial, generational or socio-economic barrier but not necessarily a language barrier, although the English spoken by each of these groups may represent very different dialects.
In both CP1, as well as CP2, concentrated study of the cultural norms, worldview and social dynamics of the target culture will be necessary. In CP1, we must study the secular mindset and learn how to communicate the gospel of the kingdom effectively to post-Christian, post-modern people. In CP2, we must study the culture of our target group, and as much as possible equip ourselves to redemptively enter in to that culture as a participant, in addition to understanding and relating to the secular perspective.
This is no small task. It is much easier for us to adopt a missionary mentality when we are engaging Spanish speaking agricultural workers or Russian immigrants than it is to discern the cross-cultural contours of secularism. It is much easier for us to respect the cultural differences of a Chinese exchange student, than it is to study and understand the cultural differences of our teenage children. Nevertheless, if we are to plant churches in the 21st. century, it will be essential for us to learn to approach every church plant in the U.S. with cross-cultural tools and a missionary mindset.
The vast majority of our church planting efforts in the future will represent both CP1 and CP2 types of cross-cultural endeavors. This is where the bulk of our time and attention must go if we are to continue to reproduce faithfully for the Lord. We must move away from CP0 thinking and move deliberately to CP1 and CP2 thinking. In order to do this, we will need to call upon the expertise of experienced cross-cultural church planters.
Church Planting3
There are growing opportunities for CP3 church planting in the U.S as well. CP3 is evangelism that requires crossing three cultural barriers: 1. secular/sacred, 2. racial/socio-economic or national and 3. linguistic. There is a significant difference between evangelism of bi-lingual Hispanics versus recent immigrants who speak only Spanish. While it would be possible to do CP2 work among second generation Hispanics, to effectively reach the recent immigrants from Latin America that are flooding into our nations, the church planter will need to work on the basis of CP3 by becoming proficient in Spanish.
The same principle is true for multitudes of ethnic and national groups that are establishing themselves in the U.S. God has graciously given us an unparalleled opportunity for preaching the gospel of the kingdom to the nations right here in within the borders of the United States. There are few people groups in the world that are not represented in some fashion in the U.S.
Two Strategically Important Target Groups
There are two strategically important target groups for planting churches in the future; Hispanics and young adults. The greatest way to influence the future of the United States with the kingdom of God is to target these two groups for aggressive, cross-cultural church planting.
Church Planting Among Hispanics
Hispanics are the fastest growing ethnic group in the U.S. The Hispanic population has grown from seven million in 1990, to over thirty million in 2000. Hispanics are now 11% of the U.S. population and have surpassed the Afro-American minority as a percentage of the population.[15] According to a recent article in the Miami Herald, in 2002 there were more Hispanic babies being born in California than Anglo babies.
It is predicted that the Hispanic population in the U.S. will continue to grow rapidly, through immigration as well as higher birth rates. At the present rate, by the middle of the 21st century, Hispanics will number over 74 million people and will be 24% of the US population. In 2050, the Anglo portion of the population will drop to below 49%, thus leaving us without a “majority” ethnic group for the first time in history. We will be a nation of minorities and the Hispanics will be the second largest minority behind Anglos.
Hispanics will form 33% of the U.S. population by 2100; one out of every three adults. Due to the constant flow of new immigration from Latin America, Spanish will increasingly be used in the U.S. as an unofficial second language. English and Spanish will continue to be mixed and is already forming a new vernacular called “Spanglish.”
In addition to being a key demographic influence for the future of U.S. society, Hispanics are unusually receptive to the gospel, particularly recent immigrants. Most Hispanics come from highly religious societies where the Institution of the Catholic Church has lost some credibility but the people in general continue to have a religious mindset as opposed to a secular worldview. Donald McGravran and others have shown that this condition is optimal for effective harvest conditions. Also, church growth researchers have shown that people groups that are in transition, as is the case with immigrants, are most highly receptive to religious conversion.
What would happen if the church would focus a major effort of “saturation church planting” on Hispanics immigrating into the United States? By just reaching and discipling 10% of the Hispanic immigrant community in the U.S., the church could exercise a decisive influence on one of the most influential demographic groups in our society for the future.
With these demographic trends, the church must give serious thought and prayer to aggressive church planting among Hispanics.
Church Planting Among Millennials
A second key demographic target group that bears consideration for church planting is composed of young adults born since 1982. This generational group is commonly referred to as the “Millennial” generation, since the first wave of Millennials began to graduate from High School in the year 2000. “Approximately 40% of the world’s population is 19-years old or younger. The number of children and youth alive today exceeds the entire world’s population of 1950.”[16]
Most studies indicate that radically different approaches to evangelism, discipleship and church life will be necessary to effectively reach the current crop of young adults. At the same time, the evidence is that these young people, while not particularly interested in attending church, are interested knowing more about Jesus and are favorably disposed toward service and good works. Every indication is that the millennial generation, more than Generation X, will be an activist generation.
What kind of faith do Millennials respond to? As Lamar Boshman shows in his book, Future Worship,[17] Millennials are the first generation to grow up using the Internet, computers and interactive video games from childhood. Unlike Baby Boomers who grew up watching TV, Millennials are not content to passively watch electronic media, but expect to be able to interact with it. While Millennials share Gen-X’s skepticism toward large institutions and choreographed worship presentations, they desire intimate interactivity and authenticity in relationships. Because of the increasing number of single parent families, Millennials are also looking for family, spiritual fathers, and people who will keep their promises.
All of this indicates that Millennials will be very responsive to church planting efforts that emphasize, relationships, community, small group gatherings and interactive accountability and encouragement. It is vitally important that we do not try to make Millennials “go to church,” but teach them how to “be the church” in their own social structures.
Most of the literature on church planting methods and church growth strategies in the U.S., have been designed for reaching the Baby Boomer generation, which is now between 38 and 56 years of age. However, we know that statistically, most people receive Christ before they are 18. This may explain why the predominate methods of church planting do not lead to new conversions but are more designed to maximize transfer growth from other churches.
Wayne Gretsky was asked once about his secret for success as an All-Star hockey player. He responded by saying that he never skates to where the puck is, but he skates to where the puck is going. As the Church, can we ask God to show us where He is going? Can we show up where God is already at work in a new generation, or will we continue to try to harvest a generation that has already heard the message and made its decision for or against Christ?
For those of us who are interested in church planting, why not begin planting churches among Millennials? Many of today’s contemporary churches were started thirty years ago by young people in their mid twenties. Why not do it again? Why not ask God for a new, “Jesus-People” movement for a new generation?
Reproducing Churches
The Goal is Reproduction, Not Growth
The primary goal of organic church life should be reproduction rather than growth. Every organism in the natural world has certain growth limitations. An orange tree has a much greater growth potential than a tomato plant. An oak tree has a greater growth potential than an orange tree. However, each one has a nearly unlimited potential for reproduction.[18]
The goal of our churches should be to reproduce. Some churches may grow to 200, 800 or even 10,000, depending on the call of God and the leadership that is given to the church. Others may never grow larger than 50. Every church, however, has a responsibility to reproduce. In fact, smaller churches may be able to reproduce much faster than large churches, just as radishes may reproduce faster than apple trees.[19]
Make Church Life Simpler
Churches can facilitate reproduction of new churches, by making church life simpler. The more complex a system is, the more difficult it is to reproduce. Simple systems can be reproduced more easily.[20] Elephants are complex systems that take two and one half years to reproduce. Viruses are simple systems that reproduce rapidly. Perhaps if we stop trying to build elephant churches and become virus churches, we could extend the gospel more rapidly and effectively to the nations.
If every new church must have a Sunday school program, a talented worship team and a gifted, full-time pastor, with professionally choreographed, Sunday morning worship services, church planting becomes more complex and daunting. If, however, we define a church as a place where two or three gather in His name (Matthew 18:20), or as where we gather and each one has something to contribute (1Corinthians 14:26), or as an assembly where we “encourage one another” to love and good deeds (Hebrews 10:24-26), church planting can become much simpler and more attainable.
The Digitization Of The Church
In his book, Future Worship, LaMar Boshman shows how the dominant forms of communication media have influenced forms of worship over the millennia. From the oral tradition of the early church to the print media of the reformation, from the electronic media of the last half of the twentieth century to the current interactive cyber culture, church life and worship have adapted to new forms of communication. With the advent of digital media, Boshman predicts the digitization of the church.
Digitization tends to decentralization, fluidity, spontaneity, instantaneous communication, and individualization. Digitization breaks down reality into ‘bytes’ of information and allows them to flow around the world and be reconstituted almost instantly. If digitization means breaking reality down into ‘bytes’, how does one break the church down into its simplest form?
Digitization of the church will lead to the age of the rapidly mobile and radically spontaneous and adaptable ‘micro-church.’ This may lead to a return to New Testament Christianity with 21st century flavor. When one tries to imagine the qualities of a ‘digitized’ church, the church of Pentecost comes to mind. They met from house to house breaking bread and devoting themselves to only three things, 1) fellowship, 2) the apostle’s teaching, 3) and prayer. Even when persecution arose and ‘scattered’ the believers, the Jerusalem mega-church broke into ‘bytes’ or cells and flowed out into the surrounding area (Judea, Samaria and the ends of the earth), reconstituting themselves into new, reconfigured churches wherever they went. Witness the church in Antioch!
What is the smallest unit of the church? What is the most elemental and essential component of the church? If you start taking away things that are non-essential, at what point does taking away one more thing cause a church to no longer be a church? In other words, what are the absolutely essential elements of church life?
Answering these questions will be important as we enter into a new age of digital media in a Post-modern, Post-Christian culture. We will need to discover the basic ‘mustard seed’ of the church.
Kingdom Sowing
Akin to the idea of making church life simpler and digitization is the concept of kingdom sowing as opposed to church planting. Church planting has come to imply not only the initial stages of gathering new believers and teaching them all that Jesus has commanded us, but all of the organizational and logistical steps that are necessary to produce a fully organized, program-based church. Although that is not how we are defining the term ‘church planting’ here, another term has been invented by Stuart Caldwell to describe the minimal process of sowing kingdom seeds and allowing kingdom life to be self-organizing.
Caldwell, in a recent article in the International Journal of Frontier Missions[21], uses the example of Jesus’ ministry in Samaria to illustrate the simplicity of kingdom sowing and makes an application for mission work among Muslims. The basic idea of kingdom sowing is to plant the elemental seed of the good news regarding Jesus the Messiah with a minimum of structural accompaniment and to allow the target culture to develop the structures that surround the living word.
Steps for Effective Church Planting
What are the practical steps we must take to begin planting churches? More specifically, how do we go about planting churches organically?
In the following page we have outlined a three-part model of church planting that has been successfully implemented in Rhode Island and is used by Frontiers for training missionary church planters to the Muslim world. I am indebted to Dick Scoggins, of the Rhode Island Fellowship of Church Planters for most of these concepts.
These three phases can be pictured as three barriers or mountains to climb and cross over. Each mountain has its own goals, challenges and requires unique strategies to successfully over come them.
1. Gathering 2. Commitment 3. Multiplication
The Phase before the Phases – Preparation
One thing I have learned in over 21 years of planting churches, is that the beginning is as important, if not more important, than any other part of the church planting process. The kingdom of God is like a mustard seed. Church planting requires seed planting, and the eventual fruit will be determined by the genetic code that is in the seed. If there is evangelism and mission present in the beginning of a new church, evangelism and mission will continue to be a priority as the church matures. If these things are not present in the beginning, it will be very difficult to add later.
Charles Simpson has said that when a seed is planted, the mature fruit will be the same as the initial seed—just more of it![22] Therefore it is imperative that the prospective church planter give much thought and prayer to how to begin. A good beginning goes a long way toward an abundant harvest.
There are four primary elements involved in the preparation stage that must be considered; 1) The formation of a team, 2. a concerted effort of prayer, 3) the selection of a target group, and 4) the development of an appropriate strategic plan.
Formation of a Church Planting Team
Church planting is a team activity not an individual sport. It is not for superstars but for team players. The church needs to develop its theology of teamwork, beginning with the Trinity and creation.
In the New Testament it is abundantly clear that churches were never planted by the singular activity of an individual apostle. There is no Biblical record of Paul the apostle starting a church without a team. When Paul and Barnabas separated due to irreconcilable conflict, Paul immediately sought out another team member, Silas, to replace Barnabas. Then, early in his second missionary journey, he recruited a third team member, Timothy, to serve as an apprentice.
There seems to be a spiritual significance to the numbers “two or three” in scripture. Jesus said that wherever “two or three” gather in his name, he would manifest his presence in their midst. The writer of Ecclesiastes said that two are better than one, and a “three stranded cord is not easily broken.” Jesus frequently took Peter, James and John into special situations with him for additional leadership training. Biblically, a church planting team seems to require at least two members, but preferably three.
Other examples of church planting teams in the New Testament would include Peter’s trip to Cornelius’ house in Acts 10. This was a rare occasion when John was not with Peter. Rather than going alone to the gentile’s house, Peter is accompanied by “some of the brethren from Joppa…”(Acts 10:23).
Philip the evangelist operated alone, without a team, in his evangelism in Samaria. Although multitudes gave attention to his message and many were baptized as believers in Jesus, the churches in Samaria were probably not fully established until the rest of the team, Peter and John, arrived on the scene.
Now when the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent them Peter and John, who came down and prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Spirit. For He had not yet fallen upon any of them; they had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus (Acts 8:14-16).
Philip went from Samaria to the desert of Gaza and evangelized the Ethiopian Eunuch. Although church tradition indicates that the Eunuch may have been instrumental in the founding of the Egyptian Coptic church, we do not know the details. We cannot conclude from extra-biblical sources that individuals can start churches.
Some may point to Jesus and the twelve as an example of an individual who planted a church. If anyone would have the right to break the pattern and plant a church as an individual rather than as a team, it would be the Son of God. However, Jesus came to be our primordial pattern. Did Jesus plant a church without a team?
The church was activated and energized on the day of Pentecost by the arrival of another divine team member, the Holy Spirit. Jesus had told them that it was better for him to go away so that the Father could send the Holy Spirit. The argument can be made that the original church was formed by the teamwork between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, each one doing their part in relationship with the other two.
It can also be argued that in selecting the twelve and mentoring them, Jesus was not planting a church, but forming the church planting team (or a school for church planters!) He was not starting a church, but training twelve church planters.
Why is there not one single example in the New Testament of a church being planted by a lone church planter? And what does this mean for modern day church planters?
The New Testament teaching on the nature of the church is very different from today’s American business model of church life, in which the pastor is the CEO and operates with a board of directors. The New Testament model tends to metaphors such as community, body, or family. Although there can be helpful concepts in the American business environment that can provide insights for leadership and teamwork issues, we must be very careful about drawing our models from the current entrepreneurial culture rather than from the New Testament.
To produce churches that reflect the diversity and unity of the New Testament community, and in which leadership is exercised by a collegial pastoral team, it is essential that the seed of the church be a micro-community. Only church planting teams can produce churches that work as a team. Only the community found in a team can reproduce community in the church.
A singular church planter will always produce a church with a singular pastor. Even in the case where there is a strong, charismatic church planter, with a support “team” assisting him in the church planting effort, a church will be produced that requires a strong, charismatic pastor with a leadership “team” that functions as a support team.
The church planting teams of the New Testament; Peter and John (Acts 8:14), Barnabas and Saul (Acts 13:2), Paul, Silas, Timothy and Titus (1 Th. 2:6) were not composed of one apostle leading other supporting “helps” gifts. They were composed of multiple apostles working together with a team leader and potentially several apprentice apostles. These teams were capable of sharp disagreement (Acts 15:39) and consensus decision making (Acts 15:10). These kinds of apostolic teams not only produced new churches, they also reproduced multiple apostolic teams.[23] More importantly, perhaps, is that they produced churches that were spiritual communities with collegial leadership.
It is common knowledge among mission agencies that the number one reason for failure of new missionary couples and their premature return from the mission field is the inability to deal with conflict with their fellow missionaries.
Building an effective team of church planters that will be able to engage conflict, build trust and arrive at a common vision and common strategic plan will be by far the hardest and most important step in the entire church planting process. This will make or break the entire success of the church planting effort. This is why Jesus spent entire night in intensive prayer before carefully selecting the twelve men that the Father gave him to train as future church planters who would reproduce multiple teams and go to the ends of the earth.
Prayer
The reason that we focused first on the development of the team before prayer is that ideally, the whole team will be involved in the prayer. However, this is not a linear, sequential process. Prayer must precede, saturate and follow every step of the process. The church planter must pray before he selects his team (Luke 6:12-13). The team must pray before they select a target group (Acts 16:6-10). The team will pray as they develop their strategic plan (John 5:19). They will again pray when they inevitably find themselves obligated to alter their plan (Acts 16:9-10). Prayer must be the pervasive atmosphere that saturates the entire church planting process.
One of the primary reasons that the church seems to be exploding in growth around the world, but at the same time declining in the U.S. is this issue of prayer, or the lack of it. Believers in the developing world understand the absolute necessity of prayer. The church in the U.S., however, is much more focused on models and methods than on prayer. This is a ‘man’ centered approach to church life rather than God-centered. To actively engage in fervent, persevering prayer requires faith in the supernatural intervention of God in human affairs in a way that Westerner rationalism find difficult to embrace.
Nevertheless, the Biblical record shows that the early church was continually devoted to prayer. This was the deposit that Jesus had left in his disciples through the example of his life.
§ These all with one mind were continually devoting themselves to prayer, along with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers (Acts 1:14).
§ And they were continually devoting themselves to the apostles' teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer (Acts 2:42).
The first church planting in history was both preceded and followed by continual devotion to prayer. Cultural breakthroughs of the gospel to new people groups were nearly always accompanied by prayer (Acts 4:31, 8:15, 10:2, 16:13, 16).
Paul came to a deep appreciation of the value of prayer in his years of planting churches and suffering persecution:
§ I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened... (Ephesians 1:18).
§ ...I pray that your love may abound...( Philippians 1:9).
§ I want the men in every place to pray...( 1Timothy 2:8).
§ I pray that the fellowship of your faith may become effective ... (Philemon 1:6).
§ I pray that in all respects you may prosper and be in good health(3Joh1:2)
§ With all prayer and petition pray at all times in the Spirit, and with this in view, be on the alert with all perseverance and petition for all the saints, (19) and pray on my behalf, ... (Eph. 6:18).
§ we have not ceased to pray for you and to ask that you may be filled (Col 1:9).
§ pray without ceasing (1Thessalonians 5:17).
§ Brethren, pray for us...( 1Thessalonians 5:25).
§ Finally, brethren, pray for us... (2Thessalonians 3:1).
§ Pray for us...( Hebrews 13:18).
In our own experience of planting churches, we have found a direct link between the level of intensity, frequency and specific focus of prayer and the results in the church planting effort. With each church that we have planted, we have increased the intensity and strategic detail of our prayers with a corresponding result in the church planting outcome.
In our church planting effort in Miami in 1990, we prayed daily for six months before beginning our new church. Besides praying for our target neighborhood, we prayed specifically for divine appointments. We eventually had a series of divine appointments that led to the founding of our church and later to the opening of a new work in Cuba.
A good example of a church planting type prayer is found in the fourth chapter of the letter to the Colossians:
Devote yourselves to prayer, keeping alert in it with an attitude of thanksgiving; (3) praying at the same time for us as well, that God may open up to us a door for the word, so that we may speak forth the mystery of Christ, for which I have also been imprisoned (Colossians 4:2-3).
In this prayer, Paul was asking the Colossian believers to focus themselves on prayer, and to particularly pray for God to open doors for Paul and his team to share the word! Prayer can open relational doors.
This is especially essential for church planting. All church planting depends on open doors into people’s hearts. If there is no open door, there is no church planting. From Colossians 4:2-3, we can pray with confidence for God to open doors open for the word.
Choosing A Target Group
The third step in the preparation process is the selection of a target group. The importance of having a clear focus on a specific demographic group cannot be over-emphasized. Selecting a receptive target group for proclamation, evangelization and church planting can lead to tremendous success and rapid growth. On the other hand, choosing a resistant target group may lead to many years of hard work with little visible results. Choosing no target group at all is a recipe for failure or very limited results.
Although he came to redeem all of humanity, Jesus was very aware of the specific people that the Father had commissioned him to reach. But He answered and said, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Matthew 15:24). When certain Greeks came to Philip and asked to see Jesus in John 12:20, the master immediately turns his thoughts to the seed which goes into the ground and dies. He then began to talk with the disciples about his death. He understood that the only way he could reach the Greeks is through the cross. "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself" (John 12:32). His specific target group was the Jews, but his heart is toward all men. It was left to Saul of Tarsus to be given the specific commission to reach the Gentiles.
Even as the Father directed the Son to go only to the Jews, the Father sent the apostle Paul away from the Jews to the Greek-speaking Gentiles.
· But the Lord said to him, "Go, for he is a chosen instrument of Mine, to bear My name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel; (Acts 9:15).
· "And He said to me, 'Go! For I will send you far away to the Gentiles.'" (Acts 22:21).
· To me, the very least of all saints, this grace was given, to preach to the Gentiles the unfathomable riches of Christ, (Ephesians 3:8).
Although in every city, Paul always went first to the synagogue and preached to the Jews, only a handful responded to his message. The greatest response consistently came from the God-fearing Gentile seekers who attended the Jewish Synagogues. Paul himself states in Ephesians 3:8 that “grace” was given him to preach to the Gentiles. In seeking out a target group for church planting, it is vitally important to find the right group. There will be grace to preach to the specific people to whom God has sent us. Conversely, if we try to preach to people to whom we have not been sent, grace may be lacking.
There are many historical examples of this principle of selecting the right target group. One of the most dramatic is found in the history of the mission to Burma.
Adoniram Judson was one of the first American missionaries. He originally thought to go to India, but the outbreak of the war between the U.S. and Great Britain in 1812 dramatically altered his plans. The first boat leaving India was headed for Burma and Judson did not have time to be selective. He became a missionary to Buddhist ruling class of Burma for over 50 years. In his entire career in Burma, he only won a handful of marginalized Burmese to faith in Christ. He was fruitful in his work as a translator, however, translating the Bible into Burmese.
In Eternity in Their Hearts, Don Richardson tells the story of Judson’s discouraging efforts to evangelize Burma and the later breakthrough of the gospel to the tribal peoples.
“...Alas, Judson found little response. Often he struggled against an almost overpowering feeling of discouragement. Only after seven years of preaching did Judson find his first convert among the Buddhist Burmese!
All unknown to Judson, Karen people were passing daily by his home. Often they were singing, as the custom was, hymns to Y’wa—the true God. If only Judson could have learned their language too, he would have been startled by the content of those hymns! And he almost certainly would have found more response to the gospel among the humble Karen people than his fondest dreams could anticipate. All unaware of the awesome potential of the Karen, an often disconsolate Judson turned increasingly to the task of translating the Bible into Burmese, since he had so few converts to occupy his time with counseling.
As it turned out, Judson’s translation of the Bible into Burmese became foundational for all that his later-arriving colleagues were to accomplish among Burma’s many minority peoples. If Judson himself had been caught up in a Karen-type response, he might have never found time to complete the translation!”[24]
In a dramatically fascinating story, later co-workers of Adoniram Judson found open doors for the proclamation of the gospel to four tribal groups in Burma; the Karen, Kachin, Lahu, and Wa peoples. These tribal groups were not Buddhists--they had traditions of the one true creator God, and they were waiting prophetically for the coming of His Holy book. In less than 50 years, literally hundreds of thousands of these people came to faith in the Son of God through the efforts of the missionaries who followed Adoniram Judson to Burma. Finding the right target group is important.
Another reason why selecting a target group is important is the issue of social cohesion. When church planters do not have a specific target group in mind, the tendency is to receive anyone who shows interest. Many times, the individuals who are most receptive are already marginalized in their own social network and are therefore receptive to anyone who will accept them into a new group.
Church planting done on this basis can result in a church that is a synthetic “hodge-podge” of needy people who have no social network of their own. This kind of church will often be condemned to fruitlessness and unable to reproduce itself, as its members have no social connections outside of the church. On the other hand, a church can be planted with two or three different social-economic groupings in the same church, leading to unnecessary complications and conflicts and often hindering the growth of the church.
This has been one of the greatest weaknesses in my own church planting experience. Because I have a ‘missionary’ gift[25] as one of the top three gifts in my spiritual ‘gift mix,’ and because I had not been trained in the importance of identifying a specific target group, my early church planting endeavors tended to accumulate several different social-economic groupings within the same church planting endeavor. This worked fine as long as I remained in the primary leadership role, but became problematic as soon as I moved on and turned over the pastoral role to someone else, most often someone without a cross-cultural missionary gift!
In our first church planting effort in Columbus, Ohio, I assembled a “blue collar” church planting team to plant a church in a “white collar” target group. Along the way, I moved into a black, inner city neighborhood and through some divine appointments evangelized some white “country” people. When we moved away to our next assignment, we left behind a church made up of four distinct (and to some extent incompatible) social-economic and racial groupings. Eventually three of the social groups left and the church took on the social-economic characteristics of the dominant group.
Although we tried to focus on a specific target group several years later in Miami, we ended up repeating the same errors. Our primary target group initially was recent Colombian immigrants. However, we were desperate for visible results and quick growth and so we welcomed anyone and everyone regardless of their social background. Because our original church planting team was mostly mid-western Anglos, we attracted numerous Anglos and English-speaking Hispanics as well as Colombians.
Again, the problem arose when the time came for my exit out of the pastoral role. My missionary gift and bi-lingual ability was the glue holding together three distinct social groups that were not cohesive. It would have been better if from the beginning we had planned to develop three smaller congregations that were more socially homogeneous.
To be clear, a target group does not have to be made up of socially prosperous or stable people. We are not advocating avoiding people in need. I am suggesting that every church planter should have a clear people group as a target. The disenfranchised are often the most socially cohesive and responsive to the good news of the kingdom. A friend of a friend is starting a church in Colorado Springs called “The Scum of the Earth Church.” It is exploding with growth. By far the greatest church growth in Spain has been among the socially despised Gypsy population, many of whom are drug addicts.
Billy Graham once said, “If you aim at nothing, you may hit it.” I would also add, if you aim at everything, you will never know if you are hitting anything. It is vital in the development of a church planting plan to identify a primary target group.
Choosing an appropriate strategy
After developing a team, saturating the vision in prayer and selecting the appropriate target group, the next step in preparation is to develop a church planting strategy. What will be the best way to reach this particular target group? What are their unique needs and aspirations? What would be culturally appropriate forms of gathering and worshiping for them? How can the message of the kingdom be best communicated to them?
Church planting strategies may vary greatly. There can be as much diversity among strategies and methods as there are among people groups to be reached. One Southern Baptist church planter moved to Chicago shortly after World War II and started over 30 Baptist congregations by standing in “grits” aisle of the grocery store and handing out invitations to anyone who showed interest in the grits! A Korean woman started a church in a high rise in Korea by riding up and down the elevators assisting women with their 0grocery bags.[26] The Holy Spirit loves creativity and diversity.
There are certain principles of scripture, however, that should be observed during the process of developing a strategy. The strategy one uses to plant a church must be consistent with the long term results you desire. One kind of strategy is necessary to grow a mega-church; an entirely different kind of strategy is needed to develop rapidly reproducing house churches.
There seems to be some scriptural evidence that Paul gradually adjusted his church planting strategy as he gained experience. Early in his career he tended to blast into town and start a church in anywhere to a few weeks or a couple of months. He established elders within the first couple of years. During his second and third mission trips, Paul tended to look for regional urban centers where he could settle in and develop a church planting base over a period of time. He also seemed to be more cautious about installing elders.
His basic evangelistic strategy was to make initial contact through visiting the local synagogue. This insured that his team would meet people who were serious about God and familiar with the Old Testament scriptures. Most of their original core of converts would include both some Jews and numerous Greek speaking ‘God seekers’ who attended the synagogue but had not yet converted to Judaism.
Paul’s comments in First Corinthians give us the impression that he was careful not to become too involved pastorally in the life of the new church. For example, he points out to the Corinthians that he personally did not baptize more than a handful of the early converts. Paul always had an exit strategy that discouraged the new believers from over dependence on him as the church planter and encouraged mutual “one-another” care among the new believers. This may explain how he could often leave a new church after a few months without appointing elders.
Paul focused on evangelizing natural social networks, eventually establishing groups in households. Lydia and her household, as well as the household of the Philippian jailor became the core of the new church in Philippi. By evangelizing social networks, his new churches were highly cohesive and probably already had some natural leadership inherent within them.
A second part of Paul’s strategy was leadership development. Paul focused on developing two kinds of leadership – pastoral leadership for the local church and mobile apostolic workers for the harvest. In 1Timothy 3, Paul communicates to Timothy the desired profile for a local pastoral leader. The spiritual supervisors (bishops) did not replace the emphasis on ‘one-another’ mutuality, but became facilitators of every-member ministry, and visual teaching models of the value of strong family leadership.
We know that Paul also aggressively developed apostolic co-workers. Everywhere he planted new churches, there soon followed lists of young men from those same cities traveling with him. This pattern began with Timothy. Paul arrived in Galatia on his second mission trip, shortly after the crisis with the Judaizers. When Paul arrived on the scene in Acts 16:1, the scriptures tell us that Timothy “...was well spoken of by the brethren who were in Lystra and Iconium” Acts 16:2.”
As Gene Edwards points out, rather than appoint this gifted young man as the ‘senior pastor’ of the church in Iconium or Lystra, Paul invites Timothy onto his apostolic church planting team as an apprentice church planter![27] Paul was far more concerned about developing quality leadership for planting new churches than developing leadership for maintaining already established churches. He skimmed off the top the best of their leadership and took young Timothy with him.
We also see young men traveling with him from Thessalonica, Berea, Corinth, Ephesus and Asia. “And he was accompanied by Sopater of Berea, the son of Pyrrhus; and by Aristarchus and Secundus of the Thessalonians; and Gaius of Derbe, and Timothy; and Tychicus and Trophimus of Asia” (Acts 20:4). These were undoubtedly some of the best leaders from the local churches that Paul had planted. Rather than allow them to settle into church maintenance, Paul trained them and deployed them into an aggressive church planting team.
Paul’s particular church planting strategy did not necessarily lead to growing a mega-church, but it did lead to a rapidly expanding church planting movement. Once you know your target group and the long term results that you are looking for, it is vitally important to develop an appropriate strategy for church planting.
Mountain One – Gathering
Once the basic preparation has been accomplished in the areas of prayer, team building, selecting a target group and developing a strategy, the actual work of gathering new believers and seekers begins. This is where networking and evangelism is paramount.
Organic church planting requires ‘organic’ evangelism. What is organic evangelism? It is sharing the gospel in a natural way through social relationships. The term organic implies working according to natural laws in ways that lead to spontaneous growth and multiplication.
There is no evidence in the New Testament that believers had to be exhorted or trained to evangelize. In fact, there is very little mention of evangelism per se, in the New Testament. The gospel moved through relational networks as people spontaneously and naturally shared their faith with family and friends.
We have already observed that organic church planting should be rooted in new conversions. Planting a new church using strategies to attract already existing Christians from other churches does not qualify as a valid form of church planting by our definition. An organic church should preferably be built on the foundation of the conversion of a social network to faith in Christ. As we examine the ‘gathering’ phase of church planting, let’s look at some New Testament guides to organic evangelism.
Seeking Divine Appointments
Divine Appointments were common in the New Testament. Jesus had divine appointments with Zaccheus, Legion and the Samaritan woman by the well. Philip had a divine appointment with the Ethiopian Eunuch, Peter with Cornelius and Paul had divine appointments with Lydia and the Philippian jailor. Often, these divine appointments led to the conversion of an “oikos” or a social network or household.
The influence of John Wimber and the Vineyard Christian churches have led to a deeper appreciation for divine initiative in evangelism. In Wimber’s book, Power Evangelism, he emphasizes the role of healing, divine appointments and the exercise of the gift of word of knowledge in leading people into a relationship with Jesus. Wimber attributes the difficulty we have in the Western world with modern rationalism.[28]
In our own experience in Miami, our church planting team spent six months of daily prayer for divine appointments in the early stages as we were networking and seeking opportunities to share Christ. As a result, we had several divine appointments with people who later became key members of our new church. In one case, a divine appointment that my daughter had with the Colombian owner of a beauty salon led to the addition of nearly 20 people to our church and opened the door eventually to ministry in Cuba. When we allow God to set up our appointments, they are usually fruitful! He is able and willing to put us in the right place at the right time with the right person.
Recognizing The “Son Of Peace” – Matthew 10
When Jesus commissioned the disciples and sent them out two-by-two with the message of the kingdom of God, he have them very specific instructions. He told them that in whatever city they entered, to look for a worthy (axios - of weight, of worth) household to enter. They were to greet the household with peace and if the household was ‘worthy’ to let the peace remain. They were to stay in that household and minister the good news rather than going from door-to-door (Matthew 10:5-14).
"And whatever house you enter, first say, 'Peace be to this house.' (6) "And if a man of peace is there, your peace will rest upon him; but if not, it will return to you. (7) "And stay in that house, eating and drinking what they give you; for the laborer is worthy of his wages. Do not keep moving from house to house” (Luke 10:5-7).
A son or daughter of peace (uíós eirhnhs) is a person of weight and influence. Someone who has influence over a social network or extended family. Jesus clearly instructed his disciples to seek out the influencers of social opinion, heads of households and to share the gospel of peace with their entire network (oikos). If they receive the message of peace, the disciples were to stay there and stay focused on ministering the good news of the kingdom to every person in the network; healing, forgiveness, deliverance and wholeness. If they did not receive the message of peace, the worker was to move on to another social network.
When Peter had the divine appointment had the divine appointment with Cornelius in Acts 10, not only did Cornelius choose to follow Jesus, his whole family network (including soldiers and servants) accepted baptism and entered the faith. The Ethiopian Eunuch was to whom Philip preached the gospel was undoubtedly a man of peace, with influence in the Ethiopian government.
In each city, Paul sought out men and women of peace, and concentrated his evangelism on their social networks and extended families. You can see evidence of the existence of extensive social and familial networks in his greetings and goodbyes in passages such as Romans 16:1-24. The best example of Paul’s establishing churches by evangelizing a man or woman of peace is found in Acts 16. Because there was no synagogue in the city, Paul and his team went to the river to find a place of prayer. There was a business woman there named Lydia who’s heart was opened to follow Christ. Verse 16 tells us that she and her household were baptized, and that she urged the apostles to enter her household (oikos) and stay. The church in Philippi, which was one of the most faithful in supporting Paul’s ministry, began in the extended social network of a influential business woman, a daughter of peace!.
Within a few days, another social network was penetrated and brought to faith in Christ in the same city. The man of peace in this instance was the Philippian jailor. The “divine appointment” came about as a result of a public disturbance when Paul rebuked a spirit of divination and cast it out of a slave girl. After Paul and Silas had been beaten and put in prison, they began to worship God and sing. The resulting earthquake not only opened the jail’s doors, but it also opened the doors to the jailor’s heart.
And after he brought them out, he said, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" (31) And they said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you shall be saved, you and your household."(32) And they spoke the word of the Lord to him together with all who were in his house. (33) And he took them that very hour of the night and washed their wounds, and immediately he was baptized, he and all his household. (34) And he brought them into his house and set food before them, and rejoiced greatly, having believed in God with his whole household (Acts 16:30-34).
The jailor wanted to know how to be saved. Paul responded by emphasizing that his whole family could be saved. The jailor and his whole household (oikos) were baptized. The jailor brought them into his house. The church in Philippi was solidly established in two social networks, probably meeting in both of the homes. In each case, the entire social network was opened up to the gospel by a son or daughter of peace.
Go Into The Home
In both examples we looked at in Acts 16, Paul immediately went into the home of the man or woman of peace. This was in agreement with Jesus’ instructions that the disciples should go into the home of the man of peace.
The home is the center of the most basic social unit. God’s heart has always been for families and God desires to grow His own family. God promised Abraham that through him, all the families of the earth would be blessed (Genesis 12:3, 28:14). God’s first choice for leadership structures for Israel was through heads of households and families. In the New Testament, the church is called the household of God (1Timothy 3:5, 15, 1Peter 4:17).
Jesus’ plan for evangelizing the earth was that the disciples should go from city to city, entering into the homes of men and women of peace (Matthew 10:12-14, Mark 6:10, Luke 9:4, 10:5-7). The words house or home are mentioned over 125 times in the gospels alone! The church of Jesus took root, flourished and grew throughout the Roman empire for 300 years in homes. The first church building was built after Constantine made Christianity the official state religion.
In more recent history, China became a communist nation in 1948, closing down all of the church buildings, killing the pastors and driving out the missionaries. The church in China exploded in growth.
It seems clear from both the scriptures as well as church history that there is something significant about the household in God’s economy. Once the gospel has entered into a house of a man or woman of peace, it has entered into a social network. The kingdom of God is designed to work like yeast, gradually spreading from person to person in an extended family or social network like leaven.
The church of the twentieth century has turned Jesus’ strategy for extending the kingdom on its head. Instead of going into houses with the gospel, the church message has been “come and worship with us.” People talk about “going to church” instead of following Jesus. In many churches, there are so many programs and activities on the church campus, that there is no time for believers to gather from house to house.
This culture of ‘going to church’ in buildings that are designated for ‘church’ activities militates against the extension of the gospel through family networks. Instead, individuals are evangelized out of their family network and are grafted into a new, synthetic social network centered around the church campus and a Sunday morning worship service. These individual Christians often are marginalized from their natural family and friendship ties and then must receive specialized training in impersonal methods of evangelism.
Jesus’ instructions to the disciples are still valid for us today; in whatever city we go to, we are to go into a home—the heart of a social network—of a man or woman with influence and we are to stay there, preaching and teaching the gospel of the kingdom as long as that social network is receptive to our message. We are to make disciples of them, teaching them all that Jesus has commanded us and baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Then, we move on to other houses and other cities.
Evangelize The Entire Oikos
The gathering phase is not complete until the entire family or social network have become followers of Jesus. The goal is not only to reach the head of the household, but the wife, the children, the children’s friends, the uncle, aunt, cousin, neighbors and best friends. This is another reason why it is important to center the activity in the home of the man of peace. All of the members of his social network will feel comfortable going to his home to hear about the gospel in a way they may not feel comfortable going to a stranger’s home or a church building. It is important for the church planting team to ‘stay’ in this household until every member of the oikos has had a chance to hear and respond to the gospel.
The goal is to bring the whole social or family network into committed faith in Jesus. If the whole family chooses to follow Jesus, then there will be a deeper level of accountability and mutual commitment. The one-anothers of scripture take on a greater significance. The issue of church discipline also takes on greater seriousness when one’s church is also one’s natural family. A wayward individual may be inclined to leave one church for another in order to avoid church discipline for moral failure, but such an individual may have a harder time ducking accountability if the disciplining church is also his natural family or close friends.
In Christianity Rediscovered[29], a Catholic priest followed this organic approach to evangelizing the Masai tribes in East Africa. In most cases when the tribal headman and elders made a decision to follow Jesus after a year of hearing the presentation of the gospel, all of the rest of the members of the tribe, including women and children followed without hesitation.
Instead of inviting the Masai tribal people to go to church, Father Donovan invited them to follow Jesus and become the church. Moral transgressors among Masai followers of Jesus would not be able to leave their churches without leaving their tribe.
Could this be what Jesus actually had in mind when he said, "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations (ethnos), baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, (20) teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age" (Matthew 28:19-20).
Prepare Them to Reproduce
One final element is important in the gathering phase. It is vital that the new believers understand from the beginning that they have a responsibility to reproduce. New believers should reproduce themselves in other new believers. A new church should reproduce itself in another new church. One social network should have a vision to reach another social network. This concept of reproduction and multiplication should be sown into the foundation of the new group.
Robert Logan tells the story of a Conservative Baptist missionary in Africa who planted 80 new churches in the last five years of his missionary career using many of the church planting principles that we presenting in this paper. After he retired and left the field, these new African churches planted 80 more churches in the next valley over. Authentic Christian churches will find a way to reproduce.[30]
Mountain Two – Mutual Commitment
After making contact with a man of peace, and gathering his social network around Christ in his home, the next challenge is to lead the gathered seekers/new converts into mutual commitment to follow Christ. It is not enough that they commit themselves to follow Jesus; they must also commit themselves to one another!
This is one of the most overlooked areas of church life in the modern, American church. The orientation of most church attending believers is that of a consumer. They select the church that has the most to offer in terms of ministries and excellence in programming. The consumer paradigm of the modern church is far from the spirit of New Testament Christianity. Jesus gave to his disciples a new commandment that they were to “love one another” as he had loved them.
What is the line of demarcation between a home bible study and an ekklesia, a gathering of believers? The answer, I believe, is mutual commitment. In order for the gathering of seekers to become a New Testament congregation, they must understand and practice the high demands of covenant and the imperative of ‘one-another’ community in the context of God’s kingdom.
In an age of seeker sensitive mega-churches, and consumer-driven programming, how does one go about producing this deep level of mutual commitment among believers? Following are several suggestions.
Covenant, one another care and mutual commitment.
The Biblical concept of covenant is not a popular topic for Bible teaching today – perhaps because it is so foreign to our current Western culture of litigation. Nevertheless, the theme of covenant runs through the entire record of redemptive history and the warp and woof of the scriptures. What does it mean to enter into a covenant with God? What does it mean to be a covenantal people? What are our mutual responsibilities to one-another under the provisions of the New Covenant signed and sealed in the blood of Jesus?
The Rhode Island Fellowship of Church Planters have developed an inductive study of the issues around covenant and the one-anther’s of the New Testament for precisely this purpose. After gathering a group of seekers in the home of a son of peace, they first introduce them to Jesus through an inductive study of one of the gospels. When the majority of the oikos have come to faith in Jesus, the church planting team starts them through a study of covenant in the Old Testament and one-another commitment of the New Testament.[31] At the end of several months of guided discussion around issues of mutual care and commitment, the church planters lead the new group into a project of writing a “covenant” based on the scriptures. They commit to love one another, walk in the light with one another, serve, exhort, teach one another and to bear one another’s burdens. They also commit to rebuke and correct one another in area of moral sin that are specifically spelled out in the scriptures. Once they have all agreed on the contents of their mutual commitment to one another, they write it out and sign their names to it and are all baptized together and a new church is born.
The reason for signing their names to a mutual commitment is because that is the way we seal a covenant in our Western culture. In a Middle Eastern context, it might be more appropriate to seal the commitment with a covenant meal.
Jesus promised his disciples that where two or three are gathered in his name, that he will be there in their midst. He also said, just as he was initiating the New Covenant in his blood, "A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another” (John 13:34).
Does an “organic” church have to have a building? A Sunday morning service? What about a full-time pastor? If the answer is yes, then many churches in China and the Muslim world will not qualify as bona-fide churches. However, if we define a church as a social network that corporately commits to following Jesus by meeting together as a spiritual family and caring for one another together, then teaching mutual commitment becomes a very important part of the church planting process.
Church discipline
The whole area of church discipline has become an impossible ideal for most churches. If a pastor tries to follow the scriptural injunctions for bringing discipline on a wayward member involved in moral sin, the offending member simply leaves the church and goes to another church, preferably a large mega-church where they can hide in anonymity. This should be our clue that something is not right with the American church model.
Church discipline takes on an entirely different significance when the church is a small, closely-knit family. A member who falls into moral sin must consider carefully before turning his back on close friends and possibly even family members and walking away. On the other hand, it may not be easy for friends and family members to demand accountability of the unrepentant fellow believer, unless they have been carefully taught the requirements of scripture in such passages as Galatians 6:1, 1Corinthians 5:11-13, Matthew 18:15-17 and Ephesians 5:21.
Mountain Three – Reproduction
Every healthy, living organism has the capacity to reproduce itself. Multiplication is built into the nature of creation and appears in the Genesis mandate of Genesis 1:28.
And God blessed them; and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky, and over every living thing that moves on the earth." (Genesis 1:28).
Somehow in the American church model we have the mistaken idea that growth or size is the issue. Bigger is better. The truth is, if the church of Jesus Christ is a living organism, multiplication is the issue. Every Christian should reproduce himself. Every leader should reproduce himself in other leaders. Every cell group should multiply into more cell groups. And every church should multiply into additional churches.
An oak tree, a coconut palm, a tomato plant and radishes all have different size potentials. An oak tree can grow bigger than the others, but it takes a lifetime. A coconut palm can reach maturity in just a few years; a tomato plant can never expect to reach the size of a coconut palm and much less the oak tree. A radish is ready to eat in six or seven weeks, much faster than the tomato plant. What do all of these living organisms have in common? Not size. They all are vastly different in their potential capacity for growth as well as the speed at which they produce fruit. The one thing they can all do however is reproduce.
Unfortunately we have developed an expectation that every church should grow big. Nothing could be further from the truth. Every church should reproduce! A large church should reproduce another large church. A small church should reproduce another small church. There is no reason that a house church cannot reproduce itself into several other house churches.
People resist change. We like to keep things the way they were. Any organic church must eventually reproduce or die. The concept of reproduction must be sown from the beginning in order to help reduce the natural tendency to resist change in the people. From the very beginning of the gathering phase, the new believers must be told of the imperative need to reproduce themselves in others. Through the commitment phase, this idea must be cultivated and watered. After the mutual commitment of the people to one-another and to Christ is affirmed, the time for reproduce has arrived. This is the last mountain to cross for the young church to become a legitimate expression of Christ’s body on earth. They must now reproduce themselves in a new church.
Church Planting Team Exits
In order to effectively reproduce, the church planting team must at this time exit from the new church and allow local leadership to emerge. This is vital for numerous reasons. If the cp team does not withdraw, the people will gradually become dependant upon the cp leadership and become spectators. This in turn makes it far more difficult for indigenous leaders to be trained, equipped and released to lead the new church. Finally, if the new church becomes overly dependent on the cp leadership, this prevents the church planters from moving on to form new groups and effectively removes them from extension of the gospel and causes them to be ‘stuck’ in a pastoral maintenance mode.
Paul never allowed this to happen in his church planting endeavors in Acts. Whether due to adverse circumstances or to intentional strategy, Paul and his team did not often stay in a new church plant more than a few months. Toward the end of his ministry, he was able to stay for 18 months in Corinth and nearly three years in Ephesus. By today’s standards, these would be very short tenures for a church planter. Biblical evidence supports the idea that he did not ‘shepherd’ the church in Ephesus as much as he formed a church planting school and base of operations in the school of Tyrannus, from which he sent teams to plant the other six churches of Asia Minor mentioned in the Revelation of John.
Jesus understood that there comes a time when the best thing to do for your disciple is to go away. "But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper shall not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you” (John 16:7).
Perhaps a major reason that many church planters do not want to withdraw from their new church is financial. Depending on the denominational structure (or lack thereof) for many church planters, there is no way to support their families apart from the tithes and offerings of the local church. Another possible reason is fear that the local church will not stand on its own, without the leadership of the church planter.
Whatever the reason, there are many frustrated church planters functioning as pastors of local churches, and many frustrated local shepherds and elders who cannot be released into their gifting and call because the church planter is still in control of the church. Watchman Nee pointed out the danger of this problem in 1936 in a series of talks to his young disciples and co-workers.[32] Not much has changed in seventy years!
New Church Begins Meeting With Its Own Leadership
It is crucial that the new church begin to meet at this stage with its own leadership. If there are no clear leaders designated (as seems to have been the case in most of the churches planted by Paul on his first and second missionary journeys) there needs to be faith the church will be able to stand under the care and leadership of the Holy Spirit and that in time, qualified leaders will emerge from the brotherhood of new believers.
Although the church planting team withdraws from the weekly meetings, they should not abandon the new church. They will begin to discern potential pastoral leaders and meet privately with them, one-on-one, for coaching, training and encouragement. If the church begins to struggle, the believers can request that the church planting team temporarily return to assist them.
Obviously, with this kind of multiplication strategy, it is vitally important that in the gathering and commitment stages the cp leaders consciously model a style of leadership that can be easily reproduced without extensive professional training. For example the church planter may lead guided Bible ‘discussions’ through the inductive method of asking questions, rather than expository preaching. The simpler the meetings of the new church are kept during the gathering and commitment phases, the easier it will be for some of the new believers to step up into leadership roles during the multiplication phase. Obviously, the kind of ‘organic’ church planting we are talking about will not work effectively for planting mega-churches or even highly complex program-based churches of 150 to 400 in attendance. Even most ‘cell-based’ churches require a fairly sophisticated amount of centralized administration. One of the major advantages of organic churches, is the potential for rapid multiplication by utilizing rather unsophisticated and relatively untrained local leaders.
George Patterson was a missionary church planter in Honduras for many years. He popularized an approach to leadership training called Leadership Training through Obedience-Oriented Discipleship.
A story is told about a church Patterson planted in a primitive area of the jungles of Honduras. Patterson has taught them extensively about the vital necessity of sharing their faith with others. When he returned to visit the new church a month later, he was disappointed to find that they had not made any new converts. When he asked them why they were not sharing their faith, they replied, “Because we do not have a Land Rover and a film projector.” The next time he came to visit them; he was riding a horse and had a bag full of Spanish Bibles. He had decided not to use any tools that where not also available to them!
It is very important that the church planting team intentionally model for the new believers forms, methods and style of ministry that potential leaders can easily emulate without extensive training.
Church Planters Privately Disciple Potential Leaders
One of the primary goals during the reproducing stage is the training and equipping of new leaders. Even while the new church is gathering for prayer and fellowship in the absence of the church planting team, the church planters will be meeting behind the scenes with potential key leaders. The objective is to allow the church to begin bonding with the local leaders, and at the same time pursue leadership training with these same new leaders through personal, one-on-one training.
This is the pattern that Jesus followed. He focused on a few disciples as a greater priority than the mass ministry to the multitudes. He spent time coaching and teaching the twelve behind the scenes.
By meeting privately with the new leaders, the church planters can assess problems that may arise and coach the leaders on ways to handle the problems. There can be on-going training in the scriptures as well as leadership and people skills. Through this approach, the church planters can also model ‘pastoral’ care for the local leaders. Finally, relationship and trust is deepened between the local leaders and the church planters, allowing the local leaders to remain open and transparent and making the church planting team accessible to the local church.
During this process of mentoring local leaders, the church planters will also be looking for potential future church planters or for another man of peace who may lead to new social networks to be evangelized.
New Church ‘Sends’ Several Members Into New Oikos
As the new church continues to develop under its own indigenous leadership with the low profile assistance of the church planting team in the background, the time will arrive for the church to consider sending out some of their own members to help begin a new church. This should ideally be done with care not to violate existing social networks.
Rather than splitting or dividing the church arbitrarily, which almost always damages a group, it is better to look for a natural opportunity to ‘bud’ off a new group, to use Dick Scoggin’s term. ‘Budding off’ means to find one to three members of the group (out of nine to twelve) that are also connected to another social network that has not yet been reached for the gospel. These members are then prayed over by the rest of the group and commissioned to begin to sow themselves into the new social network with the prayers and support of the church and the strategic guidance of the church planting team. There may be a period of time that the core group for the new house church continues to meet with the sending house church for care and prayer, while at the same time meeting with the target social group for evangelism.
The CP Team assists the church to reproduce itself in a new house church
Eventually, however, as the target oikos begins to respond to the gospel, the members who were sent out will begin meeting primarily with the new house church under the direction of the church planting team. The new house church is climbing over mountain number one, the gathering phase and will require hands-on involvement of the church planters as the members of the oikos are persuaded to commit to follow Christ and to commit to one another.
Once the new church successfully commits to Christ and to one another, the original house church has now successfully reproduced itself. There may yet be the potential for the original group to reproduce once again, if some of its members are strongly connected to other social groups or have been highly successful in relational evangelism. The pattern can be repeated until the cluster of new churches run out of relational bridges or contacts.
Ideally, a cluster of house churches is now formed in a geographic area or in a specific cultural/ethnic group. This cluster of house churches can have the option of continuing to meet in a larger context on a monthly or quarterly basis for worship and celebration. This would be a type of extended ‘family reunion.’
A Cluster Of House Churches Is Formed Under The Leadership Of Several Bi-Vocational Elders
As the original house church multiplies itself into a cluster of house churches in the same sub-culture or geographic area, the church planting team gradually diminishes its public role and concentrates exclusively on leadership development. The church planting team’s goal at this point is to discern potential elders and to train and equip them to help care for the flock.
A cluster of four or five house churches might have an eldership team of three elders rotating through the house churches and providing pastoral leadership for the house churches. Deacons can be recruited and trained to help lead the house churches with the assistance of the elders. There is also the possibility of gifted leaders in the areas of teaching, evangelism or prophecy being recognized to rotate among the churches.
It is important that the emerging cluster of house churches maintains an interdependent relationship with the church planting team for the sake of mission as well as to have access to outside help in the case of moral or theological problems arising in the churches. It is through the church planting team that the house church cluster can relate to other clusters of churches as well as churches in other nations.
The CP Team Begins To Pray For A New Target Group
Once such as cluster of churches runs out of natural social connections for new evangelism, it may require the assistance or participation of the church planting team to start the entire process over again in a new social strata or sub-culture. Apostolic evangelism is quite different than local church evangelism. While the local church is responsible for modeling the gospel of the kingdom to its own community (tribe or people group) it is most often through apostolic evangelism that cultural barriers are penetrated and overcome and that new doors are opened into new groups for the planting of new churches.
Once the cluster of house churches have been given into the charge of an eldership team, the church planters will begin meeting for prayer to discern future fields of labor for additional church planting. They may seek God for wisdom for selecting a new target group or geographic area in order to start the entire process over. A team of church planters are uniquely qualified to violently storm the gates of heaven and find an open door for planting the church through prayer, divine appointments and aggressive evangelism in ways that are not natural for the local churches.
Conclusion
We have seen that in the United States, we are passing through a time of epochal change, not only as a society, but also in the church. Every day, more churches are closing than are being planted. Many churches are growing, but often at the expenses of smaller, declining churches. There is a great need for a new wave of church planting, especially among the exploding immigrant populations such as Hispanics. Due to our rapidly evolving culture, there is also a need to re-plant the church among a younger generation who may not be able to feel at home among churches structured by and for baby boomers.
Not only is there an urgent need for planting more churches, there is a compelling case for planting new kinds of churches. The issue as much qualitative as quantitative. Even with the 350,000 churches that now exist in the United States, we are losing ground. We are not effectively discipling our own adherents, much less our nation. As the church begins to adapt itself to the newly emerging communication media, the church needs to learn how to effectively make followers of Jesus. As the church is digitized, she must also make disciples.
Church planting in the United States in the twenty-first century has become inherently cross-cultural. Most, if not all current church planting efforts will need to borrow from the tools of misiology to discern appropriate target groups and strategies to contextualize the good news for new generations, secular people and immigrant groups in the U.S. Church planting must become truly evangelistic in nature rather than using strategies that amount to little more than musical ‘churches’ or that re-enforce consumer Christianity.
‘Organic’ church planting is a term we are using to describe church planting that does not utilize transfer growth but focuses on reaching and discipling social networks for Jesus. The emphasis in not on buildings or large Sunday assemblies, but on building relationships. The emphasis is not on the ‘worship service’ but on two or three gathering in His name in a mutual commitment to follow Jesus. The emphasis is not on ‘going’ to church, but taking the gospel to every tribe, nation, family and social network and teaching them how to ‘be’ the church in their context. The emphasis is not on building a tower to heaven to gather people to ourselves but spreading out through the earth with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord.
And they said, "Come, let us build for ourselves a city, and a tower whose top will reach into heaven, and let us make for ourselves a name; lest we be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth." (Genesis 11:4).
Organic church planting is focused primarily on human relationships and social structures and attempts to work naturally through these relationships and social networks to influence peoples toward Jesus, rather than gathering individuals together into an artificial social structure called the ‘church’ through the effective use of programs and ministries.
In some cases (perhaps in many) an organic church planted by using the approach we are proposing in this paper, may not look like what we have come to think of as the ‘church’ at all. It may look more like a gathering of good friends around Jesus in their own natural social environment.
Organic church planting should be imminently adaptable and flexible. It should be fluid enough to work in any social network, from Muslims to Millennials, from Hispanics to Hell’s Angels.
We have outlined several practical steps toward planting an organic church, drawing from the experience and philosophy of ministry of Rhode Island Fellowship of Church Planters and Dick Scoggins, a church planter and coach with Frontiers. After a careful period of preparation through prayer, team building and the development of a target group and appropriate strategy, the organic church planting team will have three major mountains to cross in the process of launching the new church; gathering, committing and reproducing.
It is my fervent hope and prayer that the concepts expressed within this paper, plus my own twenty years of experience in ‘trail by error’ church planting can inspire a few young men and women to give themselves and the years of their lives to the task of reaching their generation for Jesus through church planting. My prayer is that they can learn from my mistakes and the mistakes of many others. My prayer is that they can find God’s grace to plant ‘organic’ churches that will really ‘be’ the church, that will really make disciples and will really transform, not only individuals, but entire social networks for Jesus.
Organic means that there is death as well as life. When something is organic and it falls to the ground and dies, it either produces the seed for new and more abundant fruitfulness, or it nourishes the emerging new life. There is much that is dying in the contemporary church. Rather than trying to preserve the past, or keep the church on life-support, with honor for that which has gone before, let us allow the seed to fall into the ground and die, trusting in the savior to raise it up again in new life.
"Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains by itself alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit” (John 12:24).
And He was saying, "The kingdom of God is like a man who casts seed upon the soil; (27) and goes to bed at night and gets up by day, and the seed sprouts up and grows-- how, he himself does not know. (28) "The soil produces crops by itself; first the blade, then the head, then the mature grain in the head. (29) "But when the crop permits, he immediately puts in the sickle, because the harvest has come" (Mark 4:26-29).
I planted, Apollos watered, but God was causing the growth. (7) So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but God who causes the growth (1Corinthians 3:6-7).
Those who sow in tears shall reap with joyful shouting. (6) He who goes to and fro weeping, carrying his bag of seed, Shall indeed come again with a shout of joy, bringing his sheaves with him. (Psalm 126:5-6).
Bibliography
Barna, George, The Second Coming Of The Church (Word Publishing, Nashville: 1998)
Barna, George, Evangelism That Works (Ventura, CA: Regal Books, 1996)
Benjamin, Dick, The Church Planters Handbook (Christian Equippers Int., South Lake Tahoe, CA: 1988)
Bruce, A.B. The Training of the Twelve, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdman’s Publishing, 1970)
Boshman, LaMar, Future Worship (Ventura, CA, Renew Books: 1999)
Chaney, Charles L., Church Planting at the end of the twentieth century (Tyndale House Publishers, Wheaton, IL: 1982)
Cho, Dr. Paul Yonggi, Successful Home Cell Groups (South Plainfield, NJ, Bridge: 1981)
Coleman, Robert E. The Master Plan of Evangelism (Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H Revel, 1986)
Donovan, Vincent J., Christianity Rediscovered (Maryknoll, NY, Orbis Books, 1978)
Edwards, Gene Rethinking Elders (Seedsowers, Sargent, CA: 1998)
Ellis, Roger, Radical Church Planting (Crossway Books, Cambridge: 1992)
Gallup, George, Jr. The Next American Spirituality (Cook, Colorado Springs, CO: 2000)
Green, Michael, Evangelism in the Early Church (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1971)
Hunter III, George G., The Celtic Way of Evangelism (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2000)
Hull, Bill, The Disciple Making Church (Grand Rapids MI: Fleming H Revel, 1990)
Krieder, Larry, House Church Networks (Ephrata, PA: House to House, 2001)
Ladd, George Eldon A Theology of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1970)
Livingstone, Greg, Planting Churches in Muslim Cities (Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, MI: 1993)
Massey, Joshua, International Journal of Frontier Missions (Vol 17 #1 Spring 2000)
McGravran, Donald, Understanding Church Growth (Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, MI: 1970)
Nee, Watchman, The Normal Christian Church Life, (Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1980)
Olson, Bruce, Bruchco (Creation House: 1989)
Neighbor, Ralph Jr. Where Do We Go From Here? (Houston, TX: Touch Publications, 1990)
Petersen, Jim Church Without Walls, (Colorado Springs, CO: NAVPRES, 1992)
Ramos, Jorge, La Otra Cara de America (Editorial Grijalbo, Miguel Hurtado, Mexico, DF 2000)
Richardson, Don, Eternity In Their Hearts (Ventura, CA, Regal Books: 1981)
Schaller, Lyle E., 44 Questions for Church Planters (Abingdon Press, Nashville, TN: 1991)
Schwarz, Christian A. Natural Church Development (Carol Stream, IL, ChurchSmart, 1996)
Small, Doug Revival and Restoration. (Kannapolis, NC, Alive Ministries: 2000)
Smith, Chuck, Jr., The End Of The World As We Know It (Waterbrook Press, Colorado Springs, CO: 2001)
Stephens, Kenneth Discipleship Evangelism (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1978)
Sweet, Leonard, Post-Modern Pilgrims (Broadman and Holman, Nashville, TN: 2000)
Wagner, C. Peter, The New Apostolic Churches (Regal Books, Ventura, CA: 1998)
Wimber, John Power Evangelism (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1986)
Winter, Ralph, Let The Earth Hear His Voice (presented at Lausanne Congress)
[1] Leonard Sweet, Post-Modern Pilgrims (Broadman and Holman, Nashville, TN: 2000) p. 39
[2] Doug Small, Revival and Restoration. (Kannapolis, NC, Alive Ministries: 2000) p. 14
[3] Ibid, p.14
[4] Christian Schwarz, Natural Church Development (Carol Stream, IL, ChurchSmart: 1996) p. 46
[5] Phrase coined by Dr. Dow Robinson in lectures on New Testament church life. 1995
[6] George Barna, The Second Coming Of The Church (Word Publishing, Nashville: 1998) p. 6
[7] George Gallup, Jr. The Next American Spirituality (Cook, Colorado Springs, CO: 2000) p. 128
[8] Ibid, p. 131
[9] The Rhode Island Fellowship of Church Planters. http://www.fcpt.org/fcpt/
[10] George F. Hunter, The Celtic Way of Evangelism (Abingdon Press, Nashville, TN: 2000)
[11] Donald McGravran, Church Growth In Mexico (W.M. B. Eerdmans Publishing: 1963)
[12] Bruce Olson, Bruchco (Creation House: 1989)
[13] Joshua Massey International Journal of Frontier Missions (Vol 17 #1 Spring 2000)
[14] Ralph Winter, Let The Earth Hear His Voice (presented at Lousanne Congrees) p. 229 and Donald McGravran, Understanding Church Growth (Eerdmans Publishing, Grand Rapids, MI: 1970) p. 63
[15] Jorge Ramos, La Otra Cara de America (Editorial Grijalbo, Miguel Hurtado, Mexico, DF 2000)
[16] Gallup, p. 113
[17] LaMar Boshman Future Worship (Ventura, CA, Renew Books: 1999)
[18] Schwarz, Natural Church Development p. 69
[19] Ibid: p. 47
[20] Dick Scoggins, shared in a church planting conference in McComb, MS, May 2001. Audio tapes can be ordered from Dr. Michael McCarty, 738 Virginia Ave. Mccomb, MS 39648 – E-mail: mccsr1@telepak.net
[21] Stuart Caldwell, International Journal of Frontier Missions, (Vol. 17:1 Spring 2002)
[22] Charles Simpson, shared in a message on the nature of the church at the CSM conference in Gatlinburg, TN in May of 2001.
[23] A careful study of Paul’s 2nd and 3rd missionary journeys by Dick Scoggins leads him to the conclusion that under the general umbrella of Paul’s apostolic team of 10 or 15 people, there were several sub teams with the possibility of Luke and Titus working in Philippi, Silas and Timothy in Thessalonica and Berea, and later Corinth, and Aquilla and Pricilla and eventually Apollos, working with Paul in Ephesus. Later with the school of Tyrannus, one possible explanation of the rapid appearance of the churches in Colossae and Laodecia and the other churches mentioned in Revelations without direct visits from Paul is the probability that Paul recruited, trained, equipped and sent multiple teams from Ephesus into the surrounding area to establish churches.
[24] Don Richardson Eternity In Their Hearts (Ventura, CA, Regal Books: 1981) p. 92
[25] As defined in the Wagner-Hautz Spiritual Gifts Inventory, (Fuller Institute for Church Growth:
[26] Dr. Paul Yonggi Cho, Successful Home Cell Groups (South Plainfield, NJ, Bridge Publishing: 1981) p.62
[27] Gene Edwards Rethinking Elders (Seedsowers, Sargent, CA: 1998) p. 50
[28] John Wimber, Power Evangelism (Harper and Row, New York, NY: 1986) p. 70
[29] Vincent J. Donovan, Christianity Rediscovered (Maryknoll, NY, Orbis Books, 1978)
[30] Robert Logan How To Implement A Regional Church Planting Vision (Charles E. Fuller Institue:1990) Tape 1.
[31] B6, - Covenanting Together, available on-line at http://www.fcpt.org/fcpt/resources_booklets.php.
[32] Watchman Nee, The Normal Christian Church Life, (Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1980)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Interesting blog site!
ReplyDeleteI think you would appreciate mine too.
Been relational housechurching and planting for 30 years now.
My blog is about Jesus, church, and life in general.
http://notesfromthebridge.wordpress.com
Christopher "Captain " Kirk