Networks have grown in prominence over the last decade. Actually, few national networks are more than a decade old. However, it is not a secret that they are growing in participation and in influence.
This has not been free of controversy. Many in denominations are concerned and some are critical at the rise of networks. They have some valid concerns: networks often have less racial and economic diversity, they tend to be often less involved in global missions, and they are often driven by one methodology.
However, churches are not asking for permission before they connect with such networks. They simply are. As we explained in Breaking the Missional Code:
[Many groups] have started exploring new ways of doing ministry in partnership. Groups like Acts 29, GlocalNet, Xpansion, Stadia, Redeemer's Church Multiplication Alliance, Fellowship Associates (and many others) were unknown or nonexistent five to ten years ago...
Networks have become a major part of church life in North America. Denominations are still struggling to relate to such networks, but churches are clearly not. In addition to partnering with our denomination, we are both involved in such networks.Most of these networks have a particular plan or focus. Some networks specifically plant churches for a certain group or denomination. For example, Stadia and The Orchard Group both plant Independent Christian churches. However, most are transdenominational--working with churches in and out of other denominations.
Acts 29 explains it this way: "Acts 29 is a trans-denominational peer-to-peer network of missional church planting churches. . . . Acts 29 churches assist called and qualified pastors as they pursue their church planting dreams through assessment, coaching, training, funding, and friendship by connecting them with like-minded people."
GlocalNet describes their purpose this way: "GlocalNet is a network of churches worldwide who have the vision of being a part of one of the first global church-planting movements in history! Our purpose is to form clusters of churches in cities around the globe that will transform the world. GlocalNet churches/clusters are committed to 3 strategic objectives:
• Starting multiplying churches
• Transforming local communities
• Impacting the world through nation building.
Back in 2006 we wrote:
These early networks will open a floodgate of church alliances. Churches will begin to pool resources to plant and support churches based on affinity (and then, perhaps, beyond such affinities). We are aware of fourteen networks that are presently forming.
Wow. That was actually written in 2005 (to be published in 2006) and now I have a list of 70 networks on my computer.
Simply put, churches are choosing to network, cooperate, and do missions in a new way. They are not asking for permission to do it; they are just doing it. As a result, these churches are having a higher involvement in transformational mission than ever before.
As these networks grow and gain influence, denominations are trying to discern how best to relate to trans-denominational networks... For many, these alliances are seen as a threat. However, it is hard to dismiss networks through which more and more churches are finding a meaningful outlet for mission involvement. These churches are more involved in missions than ever before--although not in a traditional manner and not through the preexisting system, whether international or North American.
Obviously, that leads to the question of how denominations an networks fit together.
Posted on December 2, 2008 at 8:17 PM ~ 6 Comments
Tagged with: a29, acts29, cooperation, denominations, glocalnet, networks, sbc, stadia
You are welcome (and encouraged) to comment below, but be sure your comment relates to the post. Feel free to discuss the topic, but do not denigrate individuals. Comments are moderated and usually appear within 15 minutes of being posted. Regrettably, Ed cannot personally respond to most comments and questions.
Leave a Comment
6 Comments
12/03/08 @ 1:39 PM
Dr. Stetzer,
in our networking experience here in Buffalo NY, we have actually even seen some of the different churches show more loyalty and allegiance to the local network of churches than shown to their own denominations because the churches who have committed to work together in this region are getting to know each other in the "trenches" and finding places of true unity in what should be biblically prioritized.
12/03/08 @ 6:34 PM
Excellent post Ed.
Such an important trend, that we need to be paying attention to.
I think this new trend has a lot to do with the new tribalism that Seth Godin talks about in his book "Tribes" the new - often young- leaders are gathering in these networks (tribes) with other like-minded people who share their passion and heart for God's people and ministry. Of course the new web tools makes theses tribes accelerate in both its size and interaction (and cross-pollination).
Also, I think it has to do with the new kind of Church leader that's emerging- the next-gen leader- The challenge is that Next-gen leader's approach is different- they don’t (as a general rule) play into the more traditional idealism of waiting their turn, brown-nosing their way to the top, or not voicing their opinion because they haven’t “arrived? yet.(see brad lomenik interview at tony morgan's blog) .
In these networks these new leaders are not talked down to - rather they're an integral part of the conversation and sharing leadership insights.
Sometimes Denominations are like the old web 1.0 platform, where it's more one-sided, you have the denominational big shots - they're the 'sage on the stage'. Talking down sometimes even at others.
Networks, on the other hand are more web 2.0 - it's interactive, everyone's equal, there's 'no sage on the stage' only those who start conversations and ask good questions.
I hate to think of it this way - but I think this distinction is seen clearly in Albert Mohler's blog vs. Craig Groeschel's blog.
Mohler does not allow comments on his blog. It's a one-sided conversation.
Whereas, over at swerve, Groeschel, leads the conversation, and everyone comments, and he interacts with their remarks and insights. He starts the conversation and then participates with everyone else, no one-sided conversation there. Only mutual learning and sharing.
As we all know - web 1.0 is now . . . irrelevant.
Cheers,
210 Leadership:
Latest Post: “GOD PLEASE RID ME OF MY UNBELIEF? : The Confession of an Unbelieving Christian . . ."
12/03/08 @ 8:59 PM
Benjii,
I am not surprised. I think churches on common mission will have stronger partnership.
I am not a big fan of blogs without comments. I guess those are not really blogs, they are commentaries. But, I do know it is a lot more work to blog and be a part of the conversation.
Ed
12/03/08 @ 10:10 PM
Ed,
for an interesting case about how networks and denominations might relate in the future, you should look into how the Missouri Baptist Convention (SBC) booted out the Acts 29 Network. you probably already know about that, though.
There were many issues involved there, but I certainly think the denominational folks (older generation) saw the network as a threat in some sort of "turf war."
I've liked this series so far. keep up the good work.
12/04/08 @ 1:38 PM
Interesting stuff. I've just been reading about groups vs. networks via George Siemans. While there is room for both, as each serves different purposes, it seems to me that networks are the way to go in terms of the wild frontier of church planting.
Our little church is networking with any church who names Jesus Lord, seeks to obey him and proclaim his gospel. Could care less about what they call themselves or their particular "theology branding."
Oh, I do wish folks would quit saying this is a young person's game. I'm 58 and been at this ministry thing for 35 years.
Also, I blog but don't allow comments because I get tired of picking off the porn sites who spider their way into my comment sections. I'd love to have comments otherwise.
Peace, Ed. Loving Comeback Churches!
12/04/08 @ 1:58 PM
Unfortunately, because of financial considerations, governmental reporting, and leadership direction/control, it is very difficult for organizations of any size to co-exist outside of project by project basis without one getting offended or the other feeling the need to exert control and individual leadership. Until some of those things go away, and denominations begin to see the important role they can play in other ways, it's going to be tough to convince them to release creative direction to other organizations in large parts...
…here is a research questions: make a list of duplicated ministries and stated goals, both between major independent ministries and denominations…and find the redundancies… for networking to be effective, the goal has to be bigger than the organization, thereby taking the leaderships eyes off of themselves and putting on the goal… and being able to increase efficiency significantly would increase partnering…but really, none of the organizations themselves are going to do the research – they are focused on their own goals, which is good.
…just some thoughts…
..linked this article to http://www.newchurchreport.com to share it with others...thanks!
..linked this article to http://www.newchurchreport.com to share it with others...thanks!