ministry

Why Church Planting

Why plant a church? Why plant a church in the Bible Belt? Why plant a church when there are already so many churches? Do we really need more churches?

In this post, I want to explain the thinking behind church planting that helped to convince me of its ongoing need today in America.

Misunderstandings

For some time, I was convinced of the importance of church planting in global missions, but, probably like you, I wasn’t sure how it made sense in the United States because we have so many churches already.

But the problem was I did not understand the thinking and strategy behind church planting.

Here is how I first thought that church planting worked:

You have an area.
It is filled with people (the gray dots), but no churches. So what do you do?
You plant a church (the white cross).
The church begins to grow and do its work.
Mission Complete.

Now, you move on to another area and plant another church.

But there were at least THREE problems with the way I was thinking.

Problem 1: Diminishing Outreach of Growing Churches

As any church grows, it will struggle to keep reaching its area (precisely because it is growing).

I know that sounds counterintuitive, but this is true of any growing church. As a church grows, the center gets stronger, which is a good and natural thing, but the outer edges of its reach slow and weaken (Keller, 2002). Certainly, it will keep reaching out and making converts, but its efficiency and pace will diminish.

And the problem is, as you can see on diagram 2, there are still people who have not been reached. No single church, no matter how big it is, can reach every person in an area (Keller, 2012).

Problem 2: Population Complexity

In Diagram 1, I represented people with gray dots, but it’s not that simple.

The reality is there are all kinds of different peoples and stories and cultures in an area. One missiologist (Stetzer, 2014) has remarked that we tend to think of American culture as a pancake (i.e., that we’re all the same), but in reality, American culture is more like a waffle, with many different pockets of culture.

So, for example, in my context, even though our city is fairly small and homogenous, we recognize different regions (East, West, North, South) and different neighborhoods within those regions. And with each of these pockets, comes a set of known stereotypes.

Again, the point here is that no single church, no matter how good it is, will be able to connect to or reach all of these different kinds of people in an area.

Problem 3: Church Decline and Population Growth

In that original diagram I showed you, the variables were static, 30 gray dots and one church. But that’s not accurate. Two things are happening all the time: Churches are closing, and the population is growing.

Let me give you a few stats here:

Every year 3500-4000 churches close (Stetzer, 2006, p. 13).
In 1900, there were 28 churches for every 10k Americans. In 2004, 11 for every 10k.
From 1991 to 2004, the number of unchurched adults doubled in the U.S. (Barna quoted in Malphurs, 2004).
Side note: Are these number accurate? Probably not. The numbers are probably worse (Malphurs, 2004, p. 36) because in America going to church is still considered a good thing, so people lie about their attendance.
There are now 120 million secular folks in U.S. (Stetzer, 2006).

What do these numbers mean? They mean…

The U.S. is now the largest mission field in the Western Hemisphere (Stetzer, 2006).
The U.S. is now the fifth largest mission field in the world (Stetzer, 2006), out of 196.

So, what must the Church do? How do we address…

The diminishing outreach of growing churches?
Population complexity?
Churches decline and population growth?

We plant new churches!

New Churches

“A city needs all kinds of churches reaching all kinds of people” (Keller, 2012, p. 20).

Not only is church planting is reflective God’s character and consistent with the New Testament mode, but, if we drill down into the studies and stats, we see that this strategy addresses these three problems best.

So, how does church planting solve Problem 1, the problem of diminishing outreach for growing churches?

Church Planting reaches NEW People.

Missiologist Peter Wagner has famously observed:

“The single most effective evangelistic methodology under heaven is planting new churches” (quoted in Malphurs, 2004).

And as Ed Stetzer notes, studies consistently affirm this:

“On a per-capita basis, new churches win more people to Christ than established churches” (Stetzer, 2006, p. 7).

I will not get into the various reasons new churches reach more unchurched people (See also, Beynon, 2011, p. 17 on smaller churches working better. Also, Stetzer and Bird, 2010), but the point is simply that they do. And this point is not contested. So, if you want to keep reaching unbelievers, plant a church.

How about Problem 2, the problem of Population Complexity. How does church planting address the challenge of population complexity?

Church Planting Reaches DIFFERENT People.

Studies consistently show that church plants are better at reaching (Keller, 2002; Malphurs, 2004; Stetzer, 2006):

New generations.
New residents.
New people groups.

Why? Not because the existing churches are doing a bad job or don’t care. Not at all. But simply because more churches means more opportunities and more points of cultural connection.

Pastor and church planter, Tim Keller (2012) writes, “One church, no matter how big, will never be able to serve the needs of such a diverse city. Only a movement of hundreds of churches, small and large, can penetrate literally every neighborhood and people group in the city” (p. 362).

And finally, how does church planting address Problem 3, the problem of church decline and population growth? Well, this may seem pretty obvious, but…

Church Planting Reaches MORE People.

I guess this is pretty obvious, but just to say it plainly: You’re not going to disciple more people with less churches. You’re not going to reach a growing population with a shrinking church base.

Studies show (Stetzer, 2006, p. 5) for a denomination to grow and offset declining churches, it needs to plant at the rate of 3% of its total churches PER YEAR(!).

Studies show (Greear, 2015) that to keep up with population growth we need to DOUBLE the rate of churches being planted right now. That’s 7,200 new churches PER YEAR(!).

So Plant a Church

So, if you want to have an impact in a community, plant a church.

If you wish to make more and better disciples, plant a church.

If you wish to see the gospel penetrate new and different people groups, keep planting churches.

If you wish to see the gospel anchored in new generations, plant a church.

If you wish to reaching a growing, diversifying population, keep planting churches.

A city needs all kinds of churches reaching all kinds of people.

References

Beynon, G. (2011). Planting for the Gospel: A hands-on guide to church planting. Christian Focus.

Greear, J. D. (2015). Gaining By Losing: Why the Future Belongs to Churches that Send. Zondervan.

Keller, T. (2002). Why Plant Churches. Retrieved from http://download.redeemer.com/pdf/learn/resources/Why_Plant_Churches-Keller.pdf

Keller, T. (2012). Center Church: Doing Balanced, Gospel-Centered Ministry in Your City. Zondervan.

Malphurs, A., & Aldrich, J. (2004). Planting Growing Churches for the 21st Century: A Comprehensive Guide for New Churches and Those Desiring Renewal (3 edition). Baker Books.

Stetzer, E. (2006). Planting Missional Churches. B&H Academic.

Stetzer, E. (2014). 5 Reasons Established Churches Should Plant Churches. The Exchange | A Blog by Ed Stetzer. https://www.christianitytoday.com/edstetzer/2014/june/5-reasons-established-churches-should-plant-churches.html

Stetzer, E., & Bird, W. (2010). Viral Churches: Helping Church Planters Become Movement Makers. Jossey-Bass.

Small Call

By Derek Leave a Comment

What does a call to ministry look like?

Most of the call stories that get repeated are grand stories.

One famous example is the call of Martin Luther. It involves a literal lightening bolt knocking him to the ground and an immediate commitment to become a monk.

Now that is a call story!

But must all call stories be so big?

Many folks in ministry have only a small call story.

There never was a thunderbolt or a burning bush. Just a shut door here and an opportunity there. A sprinkle of inclination and a drop of encouragement. A dash of desire and the occasional nudge.

Those small call stories don’t make it into books. They are too long and complicated for that. Lightning bolts are far more interesting. But unfortunately, as a result, many small-call folks question their call to ministry because every story they know does not compare to their own.

For that reason, I was so thankful to come across the small call story of Timothy Keller. Keller is a pastor in New York City. His ministry, his sermons, and his books have all made a significant contribution to the church. Surely a New York Times bestseller and a sought-out conference speaker would have a real thunderbolt call story, right? Thankfully, for all us small-call people, the answer is no.

In an interview with Timothy George at Beeson Divinity School, Keller was asked about his call to ministry. Here is what he said:

Well, as soon as I got converted, I just enjoyed the Christian fellowship. I enjoyed the reading. I enjoyed leading the meetings. I enjoyed leading Bible studies. I enjoyed the Christian work so much that that’s where I began to say well maybe I’d like to do this. So, in a sense, as just a Christian on campus in a Christian fellowship, that’s really where I began to get a sense of it. I don’t think I thought through the call thing very much until a little later, and I went off to Gordon-Conwell seminary, the minute I got out of Bucknell. When I was there, I sensed this is what I want to do and that happened pretty early. I had my first church in Hopewell, Virginia when I was still 24. I was the only pastor of a church, not a big church but a church, after I graduated from Gordon-Conwell. So I just moved right on through. I don’t remember struggling with a call. I just felt like this is I think what I’d like to do. That’s all.

“That’s all.” No miraculous event. Just a series of little moments.

I love it.

So, if you are a small-call person, I hope you will be encouraged. God speaks with flashes of lightning, but he also speaks in quiet breezes. And sometimes we only see his leading when we look back.

So what about you? Did you have a small call or a grand moment? We’d love to hear your story. Comment below.

Imperfect Leaders

By Derek 4 Comments

Every leader I know, past and present, comes with flaws and failures (myself included, of course).

Leaders from past generations have blindspots that make us blush now. Leaders from our day have their own peculiar shortcomings, too.

So, how should we think of imperfect leaders? Should we follow them?

Do certain imperfections require us to dismiss them altogether? Or, can we retain some leaders as heroes worthy of emulation? If so, who and by what standard?

And what about those of us who have leadership roles now? Knowing that we will only ever be imperfect leaders, what would a realistic ideal look like for us?

The Book of Kings suggests an answer to these questions by giving us a helpful category for evaluating leaders and leadership: good-hearted but imperfect.

In 1 Kings 15, we meet King Asa of Judah. We are told this about Asa:

“[11] And Asa did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, as David his father had done. [12] He put away the male cult prostitutes out of the land and removed all the idols that his fathers had made. [13] He also removed Maacah his mother from being queen mother because she had made an abominable image for Asherah. And Asa cut down her image and burned it at the brook Kidron. [14] But the high places were not taken away.” (1 Kings 15:11-14a)

Asa was a good King. Verses 11-13 speak summarily of his good deeds. He brought much positive reform to Judah. But verse 14 brings that list of accomplishments to a stop. Asa was an imperfect leader. He did not remove the “high places” where so often worship was misdirected from the Lord to false gods (e.g., 1 Kings 11:7). The reformation Asa brought was thorough but not perfect (see also 1 Kings 22:46). So how should we assess his leadership? How should we consider his final legacy?

We are told in 1 Kings 15:14b how we should remember King Asa: “Nevertheless, the heart of Asa was wholly true to the LORD all his days.” What an instructive obituary!

Asa was not perfect, but it could be said of him that his heart was wholly true to the Lord. Therefore, it is possible to be imperfect and yet faithful. It is possible, at some anchor point in our soul, to be true to the Lord while at times erring and failing in the winds and the waves of daily life.

With this observation I do not mean to commend or excuse flaws and failures, but it is encouraging to me to remember that falling short of detailed perfection, in this life, is not total failure.

Asa’s epitaph also provides us with a rubric by which we can evaluate imperfect leaders of church history. They may have left intact “high places” in their generation, and yet, we can consider the direction and horizon of their hearts. Some will pass the test, and we will see hearts wholly true to the Lord, while others may not. Regardless, Asa reminds us imperfect leaders can still be commendable.

So where does this reflection leave us? I believe it leaves us adjusting our sights a bit. We will not accomplish as much as we would like. We will not execute our charge perfectly…not by a long shot. But we can determine to tend our souls well and have hearts wholly true to the Lord. And one day may others say of us, “Sure, they had their issues, but boy, did they love the Lord!”

Leadership Development in a Nutshell

By Derek Leave a Comment

A major part of any ministry (or work environment) is leadership development. This task can feel quite overwhelming. We wonder where we should start and how we should proceed.

But I recently found a simple description of leadership development that helped clear away the clutter in my mind. This definition boils down leadership development to specific terms and stages I can get my head around. I hope you will find it helpful, too.

Ed Stetzer and Warren Bird (2010) cite this summary of leadership development from Jon Ferguson:

I do. You watch. We talk.
I do. You help. We talk.
You do. I help. We talk.
You do. I watch. We talk.
You do. Someone else watches.
The cycle now repeats for both people.

That’s it. Plain and simple.

What do you think?

Stetzer, E., & Bird, W. (2010). Viral Churches: Helping Church Planters Become Movement Makers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

For How Long

By Derek Leave a Comment

I once asked a sound engineer how loud the volume can get before it damages your hearing.

He gave me an answer I did not expect.

He answered with a question: For how long?

For how long?

I had never considered time to be a factor, but it is. Damaging your hearing is a matter of decibel level and length of exposure. Volume plus time.

What does this have to do with anything?

That simple point made me think about all the times I forgot to ask the “for how long” question in my life. I tend to think in terms of volume, not duration, and this myopia is problematic.

I often think, “Yeah, I could work that much” or “I could run that fast” or “I could carry that load” or “I can be that busy.” But I forget to ask the critical question: For how long?

The answer to this question is so important because it is the difference between the contented feeling of being poured out and the angry dryness of being burned out.

So, this question “For how long?” is one that I mean to ask from now on.

What about you? How might this question change your commitments and schedule?

The Key to Good Style

By Derek 3 Comments

I have so enjoyed Steven Pinker’s The Sense of Style.

If you are writing books or sermons, blogs or lesson plans, you will greatly benefit from his thoughts on good communication.

One particularly poignant section captures the secret to good style in a simple metaphor. Pinker writes:

The guiding metaphor of classic style is seeing the world. The writer can see something that the reader has not yet noticed, and he orients the reader’s gaze so that she can see it for herself. The purpose of writing is presentation, and its motive is distinterested truth. It succeeds when it aligns language with the truth, the proof of success being clarity and simplicity. The truth can be known, and is not the same as the language that reveals it; prose is a window onto the world. The writer knows the truth before putting it into words; he is not using the occasion of writing to sort out what he thinks. Nor does the writer of classic prose have to argue for the truth; he just needs to present it. That is because the reader is competent and can recognize the truth when she sees it, as long as she is given an unobstructed view. The writer and the reader are equals, and the process of directing the reader’s gaze takes the form of a conversation. (p. 29)

I love the imagery Pinker provides. A good writer simply leads the reader to the window and shows him something hitherto unseen.

Come with me. Do you see that tree? Good. Now, go up to the third branch from the bottom. Look to the end of that branch and you will notice a little red bird. That is a cardinal.

This kind of plain, conversational leading is good communication in a nutshell.

Pinker, S. (2014). The Sense of Style: The Thinking Person’s Guide to Writing in the 21st Century. New York, New York: Viking.