Future of Church Planting

Drew Goodmanson has given Five Trends for the Future of Church Planting.

1.  A move from denominationalism is going to radically alter church planting. Local smaller churches will partner together to plant churches.  Larger churches will follow in Redeemer's footsteps and be more concerned with planting gospel-centered churches, than churches of their own denomination. Already, our church in San Diego  has leaders as well as partners from multiple denominations.

2. Church planting networks will merge, collaborate and partner to more effectively plant churches.  For example, Todd Wilson, behind the 2006 National New Church Conference  started a Church Planting Network, whose aim is to, "help champion an explosive expansion of new reproducing churches through an alliance of collaborative church planting networks."  He has already seen this shift begin in a couple networks.  Even next years New Church Conference states the goal of, "helping church plant leaders to the next level of collaboration.  Together we can experience exponential growth of new churches in our generation."  At last years conference, Bob Roberts of Glocalnet gave an impassioned plea to the leaders of many of the church planting networks in this regard at a dinner for church planting networks and sponsors of the conference.

3. In America, churches will be planted at a faster rate in the next twenty years than we have witnessed before.  God, Technology (see #5 re: video venue), technique (mutli-site) and theological urgency will drive this.  More and more of the pastors will come from the laity.  In this same period, established churches clinging to methods will die at a faster rate than ever before.

4. Philosophy/worldview, world events and a renewed focus on kingdom/gospel/mercy ministries will contribute to a revival in America.  First, in America postmodernism (particularly the view of truth being relative) will be replaced as people are confronted with radical and extreme views.  Second, the increase in chaos in the world and a shift in our economy will drive people away from worldview complacency.  Lastly, expressions of mercy and a greater gospel cooperation (1 & 2) will create a greater witness of the church. Those who hold to the gospel and focus on gospel ecumenism will thrive; liberal churches will lose their identity trying to be relevant.

5.  More churches will be planted without the role of a preaching pastor. Many church plant organizations will promote the use of 'best of' or license videos from top preachers across America.  Already there have been churches who have licensed Willow Creek material for tens of thousands (I heard $50k) a year.  Others will simply pick series that they believe will draw the biggest crowd.  There already is one church plant that has grown to over 600 within a couple months using this method.  (Someone could probably make some good money by contacting all the 'big name' pastors and create a company that licenses their work to churches.)

Comments

[Kipp Wilson]

I love all of them (though I'm not sure what is dataset is, so I can't say whether they are accurate predictions), except #5. I have to question whether watching a "video talking head" is going to be the wave of the future. I suspect it may in some cases, but I also suspect (or perhaps just hope) that people will rebel against the impersonal nature of the mega-church (and, by extension, video preachers).

I like to tell the story of my Intro to Psych course at the University of Minnesota. The U of M is one of the largest campuses in the U.S., with one of the largest enrollments. The Psych 1001 class was held in an auditorium, and had a higher enrollment than the population of my hometown. There were several professors, but they were never there personally--it was all video lecture. I realized early on that the class notes I bought at the bookstore were far more detailed than anything I would take in class, so with those and the textbook, I just stopped going to class. I ended up with an "A" for the course.

I wonder if more churches will be demanding just the opposite of video preachers: interactive sermons. Not a discussion group, but an interactive environment that allows them to ask questions during the sermon. I sure hope so.

[D. Goodmanson]

Steve, you are quick! You may have posted this faster than I did. (I made a couple of new edits/additions on my site.)

Kipp, my data set is either conversations (1, 2, 5) experience (SD Reader, etc.) for 3 and watching the news for 4. I won't claim it's the most scientific method out there.

[Steve McCoy]

Thanks Drew. I just re-copied and pasted it here so it should be the latest version. I also trackbacked.

Yeah, soon as I saw it on Bloglines I read it, liked it and posted it. My goal is to beat Cawley to the punch. :)

[stepchild]

We're seeing these trends in Western Europe as well. It's like the Land Run out here as megachurches and Church Planting Networks rush to set up new networks and franchises throughout Europe. Of course, local church planters have no problem alligning with several different networks.

I'm okay with church plants that don't have "Preaching Pastors." Yes, teaching needs to happen, and pastoral care is vital, but house churches can do really well picking and choosing from the many different podcasts and video sermons that are available.

Licensing fees? No thanks. Until churches are willing to plant new churches without having their name/brand/identity all over them, it's just corporate imperialism.

[Kipp Wilson]

Maybe it's just me. I was shoehorned into attending Willow Creek's Leadership Summit (at a satellite location in Canada). My school dumped a huge chunk of change for us to go to a local church and sit in an auditorium watching a bunch of people in Chicago on a huge screen. Oh my was my attitude rotten!

They didn't even have a shofar.

Doesn't video preaching feed into the "spectator mentality" of most churchgoers? I suppose it doesn't have to, as long as the church is keenly aware of that temptation and consciously working against it.

[Ali]

Must say the video teaching idea concerns me, also. At least if the preacher is part of your church, you can compare his life with his words and see the sermon lived as well as spoken. And where does developing the preaching/teaching gifts of those in the church come in?

But hey, I'm not American, so as long as such trends stay over there...:)

[Kipp Wilson]

I'll see what we can do for you. Glad to take one for the (worldwide) team.

[Tim Etherington]

What does this do the existing churches? Does it matter? Does it feed American consumerism when it comes to "finding" a church?

[stepchild]

I think that existing congregational churches are going to have to make some dramatic changes in the near future in order to be the church for young believers. New church plants can't be treated as franchises. The members of these groups aren't making any kind of committment to the guys preaching the sermons they're downloading. To them, it doesn't matter if his life is right with God. They listen to Driscoll for a while and then go on to Piper with a documentary series in between. The leadership of these new churches take responsibility to be discerning about what they study, and to find what their people need. The gifted teachers within the group help explain and apply the Truth found in the iPreacher's sermon.

For us, this actually proves to be more, not less, interactive. As a group, we critique what we hear, and we all get involved in searching for the next preacher or study series.

So we don't have individuals shopping for a new church- we have churches shopping for the spiritual food that they eat together.

[danny]

hit the nail on the head!
with this type of explosion comes the challenge of purity concerning the gospel of God, in His grace. i went to a new england cp gig, alot of excitement in cp, alot of buzz and zeal...but it seemed to me that God Himself, was conspicious by His absence there...secondary it seemed, as the central and supreme reality and joy in this whole cp enterprise. Piper speaks directly to this sort of thing in his 1998 ETS address...free copy for the asking, just shoot me an e with your address.
woe to any who plant a church based on merit!
check out Luther on Galatians for refreshment of soul in the gospel of grace in Jesus Christ...seems like few have this one on their desk!
good post bro!
danny

[Ali]

Stepchild, I can see how that would work well. I'm all for group involvement in discernment and application of teaching and I'm all for guest speakers (which is what iPreaching essentially is). But wouldn't it be great if the effort the leadership make finding teaching their people need was an effort to find it in the Bible? What's to stop interactive searching, discerning and applying centred around the Bible rather than an iPreacher's sermon? Then this sentence of yours:

The gifted teachers within the group help explain and apply the Truth found in the iPreacher's sermon.

would look like this:

The gifted teachers within the group help explain and apply the Truth found in the Bible.

It may not be as high quality teaching (depending how you define quality) but you've got teachers developing their gifts using the authoritative source and modelling using the Bible as the main meal. (And yes, still using helps to study the Bible). At the very least, you will still have something to learn when the power goes out!

(By the way, my comments about keeping the trend over in America was a joke - I know how sensitive you American's are ;)).

[Alan Hirsch]

Hey Steve

Good stuff. I think this is right-on. Actually, its one of the reasons why I and my beloved Debra, are coming over to the US for a stint there. I feel that God is going to do something elemental in the US in the next 10 years. We believe God has called us to be a part of it all.

[Ken Sorrell]

Steve,

Really interesting post! I'm glad to hear folks talking of a movement of planting new churches. It is an element that has been missing from the U.S. church for many years. I could comment on all your points but will refrain from doing so, however, I can't let point 5 go without saying something.

It appears to me that point 5 is a self-contradicting position. New churches will be planted without a preaching pastor, but they cannot exist or grow unless a "preadching pastor" on video is part of the church. On the surface, this feels more like "franchise" church rather than New Testament church. Will new church plants be able to afford the licensing fees to get the "top" pastors on video? This process may already be happening but I will be surprised if it turns out to be a successful methodology since the health of the churh's teaching will be dependent on outside sources.

Thanks for the post. It is interesting to read and hear what is happening back in the U.S. related to church planting.

[Tim Etherington]

Ken, I think you hit what was bugging me about this.

Preaching is a verbal event. I includes an interaction between the preacher, the congregation and the Holy Spirit. I think something is lost when a video is played. The preacher can't see the faces of those he's preaching to and so he doesn't get the hints that they're getting it or not. The Holy Spirit, of course, can be present and working in the congregation but...but he can't redirect the preacher to say something he wasn't planning on or not say something he was.

That has happened to me when I preach and often someone will say how that really helped or convicted them.

Sure, churches can be planted without a preacher, I've seen it in Asia. But that isn't their first, best choice. They'd rather have a pastor. I can't understand why, here in the US where we are rich in theological resources and training opportunities, we would intentionally forgo a preaching pastor and instead listen to an iPod or watch TV. Those preachers don't know the congregation. The flesh and blood pastor knows that one person needs to hear this message and another is not going to like this so he'd better say it a certain way and...

I think you get the idea.

I'm all for church planting, but this seems like it is getting ahead of God in a country that really has no reason to.

[Steve McCoy]

Tim, generally agree with you. I don't know what Drew's thoughts are on this, but whatever our thoughts are I think his projections of church planting are accurate as far as I can tell.

[stepchild]

Okay, so this thread is probably dead, but I'm still interested- maybe someone else might be.

It seems like some of you(Tim, Ken, Ali) are having a hard time with churches that have non-preaching pastors. Is that right?

Let's say I plant a church (house church, whatever) that has several gifted members. There are members gifted in leadership/pastoral care, teaching, encouragement, etc. -but no gifted "preachers." Would it be a bad thing if the group decided to use media for the "preaching" aspect of their time together? Sure, there would be discussion and application and study of the scriptures, but the group uses a podcast or video as a guide for conversation and study. Would you guys not like this sort of set-up?

The thing is, lots of new church plants don't have trained/gifted/able "preachers." Some of them don't have (m)any mature believers yet. It seems to me that watching a good preacher's podcast doesn't necessarily mean that the group somehow become a subsidiary of said preacher's megachurch, or even have to imply that the church plant is lacking in some way.

Maybe it's just me?

[Ali]

Sure, if there weren't people with the giftings, yes, using videos et al would be a definite option. But, regarding your list, I'm not convinced that teaching and preaching are that different - I'd encourage a teacher to speak!

Depending on the size and type of church there are other options besides videos. If it's small, a Bible study with interactive teaching/learning is an option. Also, give people a go at it - some really good preachers started off as absolutely shocking preachers. If the church is bigger, I would assume that there would be someone with a preaching gift there - it would be a matter of identifying them. But regardless, pray. God can raise up preachers. I think having a preacher in your church is God's best, and consistently using videos, while you can get benefit from them, should only be a temporary measure. Who knows, perhaps there is someone with a burden to preach but who doesn't because videos etc. are making it easy for him not to, or maybe even intimidated!

I don't believe using videos, podcasts etc necessarily creates franchises, though it has that potential. And I'm not condemning videos out of hand, but believe real live - even "poorer quality" - preachers to be God's best.

[Tim Etherington]

I'm with you step. As I mentioned in my second post, I've seen this in some contexts in Asia. But it isn't the best or ideal situation. It may be happening but it isn't the best.

One of the things that can slow church planting in the US is the amount of time it takes to "formally train" a man to be a pastor. I find it frustrating and I'm a seminary student who is looking to church planting!

And I think the formal seminary might be part of the blessing and the problem. Formal seminaries provide excellent eduction to men who will handle the Word. That's important and necessary. But they are somewhat removed from the local congregation where real ministry happens.

I really like Sovereign Grace Ministry's approach where a pastor in an existing church recognizes the gifts and calling of a member. He takes that person under his care and mentors him. At some point it is decided that he needs more training and is sent by the local congregation to SGM's Pastor's College. When he returns he is sent to plant a church.

Another problem I've seen is that men graduating from seminary often carry student loan debt and therefore a church plant isn't really viable for them. They need to be paid well enough to live and to pay the debt therefore they look for positions in larger, established churches.

So again, seminary is the blessing and the problem. But to say that we don't need a preaching pastor doesn't strike me as the answer. It is a bandaid but not a cure.

Ali is on to something very important there. Instaed of just using the video, spend time praying that God would send or raise up a man to be the lead teacher and preacher for the congregation. Jesus is the head of the church and he appoints undershepherds as a blessing to His body.

[Tim Etherington]

Another thought occured to me while I was in Intro to Church Planting class today.

This desire to have a church without a preaching pastor, is it driven by a biblical theology or pragmatism?

[stepchild]

Tim,
I'm not sure that the idea of a "Preaching Pastor" is a biblical one. I'm not saying it's bad, I just think it's something we've created as we've developed Professional Ministry.

I think that we've got lots of pastors who are poor "speakers" and lots of gifted speakers who aren't necessarily good shepherds. The two don't always have to go together.

I guess I'm distinguishing between preaching and teaching. A sermon (preaching) is a type of teaching, but it's typically one-sided and usually propositional or narrative. Teaching, on the other hand, can be more personal and interactive. Don't most of your churches have a sermon and then some separate type of Bible study/teaching?

[Kipp Wilson]

Step:

Then why even bother with a formal sermon? Our church plant has what I call an "interactive sermon," which borders on a Bible study.

Others:

Nobody has mentioned yet that part of the definition of an elder (i.e., church leader) is that he is "able to teach." I know this may be different from the traditional sermon, but "to teach" in Scripture usually has the connotation of authoritative instruction (not just pooling of ignorance). If you don't have anyone who is able to say, "This is what the text means," with at least some authority/confidence, do you really have any elders? And if you have no elders, do you really have a church?

I know that ecclesiology is a big part of the emerging conversation, but it seems to me that Paul did not plant churches without appointing elders at the same time.

[stepchild]

Kipp,
I guess that's a good question. I'm not sure "sermons" are necessary. A sermon podcast (or text, or video) can be unifying, though, when you have several different house churches meeting at different times. Not to mention that the use of media can expose us to preachers who are experts in different areas and speakers that come from different backgrounds.

Pocasts can be used to facilitate modern-day discipleship and training (like letters circulated from church to church). We can have direct influence on churches that we can't visit as regularly.

I agree that elders are key to church planting, and to church in general. In the case of simple church planting, we've seen that role played out more on the city-wide church level than the local, small group church of eight people.

[Tim Etherington]

Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching. - 1Ti 5:17

I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus...: preach the word; - 2Ti 4:1-2

Kipp, I think the first quote answers the issue of whether an elder should only teach or teach and preach. There are some who are able to teach but those who labor in preaching are worthy of double honor. In context that means paying them to do that work. In modern parlance, that would be the pastor.

step, the idea of a preaching pastor is very Biblical. That is what Paul sent Timothy to Ephesus to do. To pastor and appoint elder and part of Timothy's charge is a very clear, very strong command to preach the word.

Again, if a plant doesn't have a pastor who can preach, that is understandable but not desirable. The church should pray that God would send or (better) that he would raise a man up to fulfill that role from amongst them.

We shouldn't make a church plant into a personality cult where the charisma of the church planter is what makes the church plant work (not a problem with me!!) but lets not throw the preacher out with the the bath water.

As I said, we need to begin with a theology of the church and build from there. While I'm not sure we will always end up with a church that looks like many of our established churches, but I'm not convinced that it, if it comes from a Biblical theology, will exclude the role of a preaching pastor.

[Kipp Wilson]

Just two quick observations about 1 Tim. 5:17:

1. The word "preach" isn't in the Greek. Literally it reads, "...especially those toiling in word and instruction." Now, I don't have a problem necessarily with translating "word" here as "preaching" (cf. Acts 6:4), but I think it may be limiting the meaning too much...at least too much to be firm in requiring a church to have a "preaching" pastor. Having said that, I would agree that the charge in 1 Tim. 4 is much more substantial regarding the issue. I just want to be careful not to read a modern-day understanding of "preaching" (which is quite restricted in meaning) into the Greek word "kerusso." It could be a one-for-one correspondence, yeah; I'm just not sure yet.

2. While I will accept that definition of "double honor" in this passage (in light of v.18), it is worth noting that he demands that ALL the elders are to be considered for this double honor. So given the choice between hiring a full-time pastor or paying all the elders (including the preaching one(s)) an "honorarium wage," which should we go for first?

That's probably off topic for this thread, but it's something I've been wondering about in our church plant.

[Robert]

Thanks so much for the link to the Church Planting Network. I work for a church planting organization that has had the network focus for over 12 years; now it seems everyone is doing it. Praise God.

[Tim Etherington]

Hey Kipp, I agree with what you've said. You're right, kerusso isn't there but I think the meaning is the same. And as you've said, there isn't a one to one correspondence between preaching and kerusso. Doctrine by word study is often faulty.

Further, there are other instances where preaching is part of the life of the church. I'm not sure if this thread is still alive. It if is and you want to see them, let me know and I'll list some examples.

You make an interesting point about paying your elders. In Reformed Baptist churches along the line of ARBCA, pastors are elders and elders are pastors and in many/most of those kinds of churches all the elders are supported. I'm not sure that I agree that that is the Biblical injunction, but it is an interesting arrangement.

Can I just say that this thread is immensely helpful to me as I have to write a 15 page Theology of Church Planting for a church planting class this term. This thread has helped me work on and think through some issues related to that.

Thank you everyone!!

[Ken Sorrell]

stepchild,

I've been preparing for our region's next Strategy Coordinator Training and just read your question from 8/30.

No, I do not have a problem with a new church start not having a "preaching" pastor. What struck me about the post is the inference that new churches would be planted without preaching pastors but that they would have "preaching" pastors via video or Podcasts, etc. I saw no difference between live and on tape in addressing the "need" for preaching.

I do not believe this position functionally or positionally is necessary to be church. My personal preference tends to lean more towards a teacher / facilitator leading the church through an interactive Bible Study. However, the practicality of this once a church grows past 50 in attendance becomes more limited. Thus, we now move to small groups and wonder what to do in large group.

I'm still trying to figure out when we decided that the time that the body of Christ gathers for worship should be focused upon evangelism. Anyway, if you or others are interested I'm about to start a series of posts on my blog that deals with how we are training missionaries and national partners i how to plant multiplying churches. You probaly already know most of what we will cover, but I'm hoping to generate similar discussions as we have read here.

Thanks again Steve for the post.

[Andre Bay]

Hello Joe!

I'm a first time user of blogs, so please forgive me if I'm not leaving my comments where it should be!

I'm also a Reformed Missionary and since 1993 worked in Russia, England and South Africa. It's been my passion to see good Biblical Churches planted. Churches that believe and live according to the glorious doctrines of God's sovereignty or "Sovereign Grace" as it's sometimes called. But, to my dissapointment, it seems that Reformed Churches in general are still very much lacking zeal or passion when it comes to planting churches. Here is my question: "Why is it that Reformed Churches are not so passionate when it comes to planting new churches?" I don't accept the old answer that it's because of our Reformed doctrine! This doctrines should push us to the forefront of establishing new churches accross the world to glorify Christ! So, let me know your comments!

Andre