Lessons from a "failed church plant"

This article was originally posted by Mike Edwards on his blog partofthestory: I am interested to hear some of your thoughts...

In August of 2006, I opened up to the Gospel of John 12:24-26 in front of a small group of believers in my home. I read the following words: Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit.

Little did I know I wasn’t just explaining a text, but I was foretelling the future of the group. I described how we could make all of the plans we wanted, but if God had in it for our small group at the time to die in order to give birth to something else we hadn’t even imagined yet, that must be ok. Less than 2 years later, after several changes and adaptations, we indeed had to come to the conclusion that a death had occurred, but hopefully not without giving the hope of life.

I won’t go into great detail, but what I will offer here is a brief list of some of the key reasons I believe our ‘church plant’ failed (emphasis on the ‘our’ and ‘church plant’). I do this to both warn potential church planters who may read this and to share what we’ve (and by we, I mean ME) learned in the process that will strengthen us for kingdom work now and in the future. These are very brief and I’m happy to talk more via email or the comments.

• Plant GOSPEL identities, not programs or services: The reason I put ‘failed church plant’ in quotes is because I do not believe we actually set out to plant a church ( and as if the work of God ever fails). We set out, like most church planters, to actually plant a service or some type of program that we hope one day will help us to graduate to being or launching a real church. Nothing could be further from the truth. All we can do is plant the gospel AS the church (and embody the identities it gives us as learners, family and missionaries) and only God can grow that church.

• Plant TOGETHER, not alone: Jesus led his ministry with others. Paul was always accompanied and helped in ministry by other faithful men. Setting out to plant or lead an apostolic ministry by yourself is suicidal. Outside of making sure we understand and apply the gospel faithfully, this is the greatest practical lesson I have learned and the mistake I want to avoid in the future. Planter–you need a committed team; even if it’s a small one. Further, you should have a solid group of believers that can encourage and commission you to the work.

• Be faithful, not cool–It is popular in many church planting circles today to plant a cool, hip church in the name of relevance. You get extra bonus points for being uber-sexy if you plant “in the city” as well. While we most certainly must embody the truth of the gospel in every context, we must remember that faithfulness is to be prized and the truth is always relevant.

• Be humbled, not overconfident: You can have the best laid plans and the best looking proposals, but without true gospel humility, you are destined for a fall. It’s just that simple. By all means, we should make responsible plans to shepherd people and do the work we’re called to, but structure must always submit to the Spirit.

• Live it as a family FIRST, don’t use your church as a crutch: If the church, as God’s people, are to be learners, family of God, and missionaries, your family should be able to demonstrate how they are growing more in the Word, how your marriage and parenting is grace centered and how you are loving your neighbor as yourself in word and deed. You can’t hide behind your church plant for long.

• Don’t go after people, pursue the God who will raise them up: By this I mean that there is a great temptation to recruit ‘the right people’ to your church plant or to re-arrange vision and values based on wanting to keep the people we like rather than to trust that God will bring the right people into your community, even if they’re not the people you would choose first. Remember that he chooses the simple and foolish things to confound the wise and glorify Himself. Christian community is not synonymous with Christian affinity.

Listen up

Church isn't boring because we're not showing enough film clips, or because we play an organ instead of guitar. It's boring because we neuter it of its importance. Too often we treat our spiritual lives like the round of golf used to open George Barna's Revolution. At the end of my life, I want my friends and family to remember me as someone who battled for the Gospel, who tried to mortify sin in my life, who found hard for life, and who contended earnestly for the faith. Not just a nice guy who occasionally noticed the splendor of the mountains God created, while otherwise just trying to enjoy myself, manage my schedule, and work on my short game.


from "Why We Love the Church" by DeYoung and Kluck

Satan gets us to focus on charitable works?

From a sermon by Steven Cole:

I just read K. P. Yohannan’s powerful book, Revolution in
World Missions [gfa books]. He grew up in India and didn’t wear
shoes before he was 17 (p. 55). He has preached the gospel all
across India. He is not oblivious to India’s oppressive poverty. But
he strongly contends against getting distracted with meeting physical
needs, but ignoring the spiritual needs. He says that India has
seen 150 years of schools and hospitals brought to them by British
missionaries, but it has not had any noticeable effect on either their
churches or society (p. 103, 110).

Yohannan says that it is one of Satan’s lies that people will not
listen to the gospel unless we offer them something else first (p.2
109). He has sat on the streets of Bombay with beggars who are
about to die. He has told them that he does not have material
goods to give them, but he has come to offer them eternal life, and
he has seen many respond.

He says (p. 111), There is nothing wrong with charitable acts—but they are not
to be confused with preaching the Gospel. Feeding programs
can save a man dying from hunger. Medical aid can prolong
life and fight disease. Housing projects can make this temporary
life more comfortable—but only the Gospel of Jesus
Christ can save a soul from a life of sin and an eternity in hell!

Thus our emphasis should always be first and foremost on
evangelism and discipleship. Social concern is a result of the gospel.
We must not put the cart before the horse (pp. 106, 99).

What in the World is the Missional Church?

Wow, wow, wow, wow.

That is all I can say in response to this lecture by Jonathan Leeman (Capital Hill Baptist and Nine Marks Ministries) on the missional church. Go here and click on Jonathan Leeman's talk "What in the World is the Missional Church."

In this talk Leeman critiques the "missional movement" calling to task such evangelical leaders as Tim Keller, Mark Driscoll, and, yes, even Ed Stetzer. He acknowledges his respect for them and how much he has learned from them, yet, as he says, they are not Jesus and so are able to receive some criticism. He also talks of what we can learn from missional leaders and here is where I found myself in need of repenting.

Good, good stuff.

If you find that the history stuff at the beginning bogs you down, skip to about a third of the way through where he begins his response. But then go back, the whole thing is worth listening to.

As I listened I found myself, at times, reflecting on the minutes of past Baptist Associational meetings that I have read and how when pastors got together back in the 17 and 1800's in America, they did it to wrestle with theological issues and to support each other in rightly dividing the word of truth. I found myself lamenting the fact that we don't do that today.

Talks such Jonathan's by Southern Baptists such as him are much needed. May there be more in the future.

BTW- It would do my heart good to know that somebody is actually reading these posts-even better yet, if someone else would post some things. If this website has proven to be of no help, let me know, and we'll just shut her down.

-Doug

Church Planter's Library

"Between the Times" a blog run by several profs. at Southeastern Seminary is beginning a brief series on The Church Planter's Library. Check it out.

Multi-site campuses redux

From today's 9 Marks Blog comes this post from Jonathan Leeman. As I've noted before, I'm not a big fan of multi-site campuses and Leeman gives yet another reason why we should pause before jumping in. Good stuff.
-Doug


You won't believe it, but I found a page torn out of a church history book written one hundred years from now--in the year 2109. It comments on the present multi-campus "church" phenomenon. Here's what the page reads:

...the principle difference being caused by developments in technology. In the first millennium of the church’s existence, a heterodox bishop could corrupt the churches within his ambit in decades, maybe years. Even then his influence over other congregations was indirect, occurring through its leaders. In the twenty-first century, however, the bishops of so-called multi-campus churches could exert greater influence over entire congregations instantaneously via video-feed. No longer did the multi-campus pastor have to persuade the leaders of other congregations over years. He could project his own face before numerous assemblies week after week, and do untold damage in seconds.

Few anticipated how quickly these pragmatic, seemingly inconsequential shifts of polity would corrupt the churches throughout an entire nation. Ninety-six percent of evangelical Christians in America belonged to approximately one hundred multi-campus “churches” by 2030—the franchises swallowing up the mom-and-pop shops. Some of these franchises were originally orthodox. Yet many of them were not, which meant that the wolves now had a mechanism for multiplying their influence exponentially. Furthermore, the orthodox bishops were often replaced within a generation or two by less orthodox successors, in a way that unorthodox bishops are seldom, if ever, replaced by faithful men, simply by virtue of the kinds of trees the unorthodox pastor plants. The cumulative trajectory was downward, then, away from orthodoxy.

Gone were the days of the “ordinary pastor,” the man whose skills were not extraordinary, but sufficient to guide a ship with a hundred eternal souls safely through stormy waters to the distant shores. His sermons weren’t made for television. His music wasn’t good enough for the recording studio. Therefore, churches, feeling themselves entitled to professional excellence in all things, politely dismissed him, tore down the old buildings, built high-tech stadiums, and gave the league all-stars seven-year, multi-million dollar contracts.

Unawares, the leaders of the orthodoxy were all too happy to heed the siren call of pragmatism, believing the new mediums simply enlarged the reach of their orthodox pulpits. They failed to see how the medium would affect their message. Their congregations—plural—could no longer know them, and they could no longer know their congregations. Life and doctrine became separated, thus distorting the doctrine. Not only that, bigness was no longer the exception, but the norm, meaning that everyone became oblivious to the dangers peculiar to size.

A century which began with several bright stars—a proliferation of good literature, biblical preachers of the first order, even what some called a Reformed Revolution—ended darkly. Indeed, some of the century's best preachers, driven by the very desire to propagate the good message in their day, helped to undermine that message for the next generation by following the strategies of the marketplace. No one expected the devil to once more usher in the corruptions of the ancient Roman church through such a peripheral matter like church polity, even though he had done it before. (He always does his best work in the places where people forget to look.) Only now he did in decades what earlier he had taken centuries to accomplish. By the middle of the twenty-first century, the devastation was…

Are Preachers Glorified Satanists Rather Than Crucified Followers?

Russell Moore delivered a very convicting chapel address at Southern Seminary entitled: "The Devil Votes Christian Values, Why We Are Tempted to Be Glorified Satanists Rather Than Crucified Followers." A student and I listened to it together tonight and he shouted out "Amen!" more than once and we both agreed it was a very much needed message. It led to my own self-reflection and we talked for quite awhile about the pitfalls of ministry and how temptations to pride and envy are the water we swim in. Anyway, this would make for a great conversation starter among your leaders or among ourselves. Even if you do it on your own, you ought to give it a listen.

Listen here.