Keep sharing your stories of 2009 breakthroughs in yesterday's post, but let's also look forward. Here are some reasons you should be involved in church planting in 2010. For that, we turn to OnMission Magazine.
Carol is the irrepressible editor of OnMission Magazine. She always does a good job putting together a fine magazine. For some odd reason, she lowered her standards and included an article I wrote.
I believe that the current economic and cultural situation is an opportunity for churches to partner together to plant other churches. I have excerpted the article below by including the whole list but only filling in part of the explanations. Check the site for the whole article.
Here are 10 reasons to partner for church planting sooner rather than later.
1. The current economy is a perfect opportunity.
The current recession will force people to make hard decisions about where they place their values. It is not unprecedented to discover many anecdotal reports that say people are more open to church during such times. According to a recent Texas Tech study, economic growth and evangelical church growth are counter-cyclical. As the economy goes down, church attendance goes up...
The consequential reason for this is simple: when our money and possessions disappear, we are forced to face our spiritual crises. Just as the prodigal son "came to his senses" after he'd squandered it all (Luke 15:17), the prodigals of our nation are primed to face their spiritual needs since they can no longer mask the need with their material wants...
2. Plants do better when local people are sent out.
3. Churches get healthier as and after they plant another church.
Although counterintuitive, sending out people for church planting support not only benefits the church planted but it benefits the church planting church. In a Leadership Network study, "The State of Church Planting in the United States," we revealed
Significantly, all surveyed churches have experienced growth in their own attendance as they faithfully continued to pursue outreach and mission
as the priority for their existence.
And according to the research conducted by Jeff Farmer in his Ph.D. dissertation, "Church Planting Sponsorship: A Statistical Analysis of Sponsoring A Church Plant as a Means of Revitalization of the Sponsor Church," a "mother church" ends up in better condition six months after it plants a church than it was previous.
4. Shared DNA is better than solo DNA.
5. Planters who partner benefit from increased accountability.
6. Partnerships lessen the financial and resource burdens.
7. People in the community need to reach their community.
8. You can take advantage of more effective exposure.
9. It creates a vivid witness.
10. It is ultimately Kingdom-minded.
Partnering isn't only a witness to the lost world; it is a testament to the universal reign of Jesus. By setting aside our own preferences and ambitions, we create a new story for people to consider. When we submit to each other and honor each other in loving cooperation, we do much more for the spread of the kingdom than when we cultivate our own private enterprises. Many times, church planting, even inadvertently, becomes about planting our own flag rather than flying the banner of the kingdom of heaven. When we work at having "all things in common" in church planting partnerships, we find ourselves more faithful to the presence of the kingdom.
Conclusion
When you survey the current realities in America, one would conclude these are not the best of times to consider church planting. Yet a survey of history would verify God does His greatest work during difficult times. People are looking for new realities beyond money and personal assets. As churches hear from God, work together, and plant new churches in their local communities, we present a timely picture of God's activity in the community. So, I think it is a great time for your church to partner with others to plant churches together.
You can read the whole article here.
Posted on November 13, 2009 at 5:00 AM ~ 4 Comments
Tagged with:
I pastored five Churches and ran a Christian radio station in Nashville for 10 years retiring in 2002. Most of this time I taught an adult S.S. class at Two Rivers Baptist Church in Nashville. I know a S.S. class is a different thing than a Church, but we have done some incredible things that might be of help even in Church planting, or missions.
1. At Christmas time we buy animals through Samaritan's purse or World vision for people in third world countries. A chicken gives eggs and eventually becomes a good meal, and etc.
2. Birthday cards by the ton are sent each month to the attenders.
3. When a special financial need arises the "kitty" is tapped and that need is meant.
4. A prayer sheet goes out every Thursday and is prayed for everyday of the week by the class.
5. 50 minutes is given to Bible study - a book of the Bible mind you.
6. A potluck is held after class in the classroom the fifth Sunday of the month for incredible fellowship.
7. There is freedom to discuss, ask questions, or make comments w/o intimidation.
8. There is a genuine compassion and feeling for each other.
Can you tell that I love the Bible Searchers Class?
Yea, this is so true. I never thought about the economic times driving people to face their spiritual issues, which effect all others... My friend Jason Hampton (main planter) and I just heard you speak at the Acts 29 Boot Camp in Louisville, and we're looking to plant in Indianapolis. Do you have any contacts or potential partners in the area that you could hook us up with?
Another thing to consider in this time is the merging of churches. There are often two or three churches under the same umbrella that work independently within a small radius. Instead, they should be joining forces and working together.
I recently candidated for a church that had fifteen people. I declined their invitation and explained my reasoning to the district superintendent as this:
This church of fifteen people own a building and a parsonage, are willing to offer a fair weekly salary, plus pay taxes and utilities on the parsonage. It was really amazing for the size of the congregation.
But there is another church, linked with the same organization, a little more than fifteen minutes away. Five minutes from the second church is a population center of 7000; the first church is further from that population, and sits near a small pop of less than 100. Both churches have buildings and can pay a salary. But the second is closer, better equipped, and already making an impact on the main population center. It would be better to ask the congregation of 15 to join the other, deposit their hearts of tithing and love and fellowship, and further the Kingdom through one work, rather than competing with it and trying to resuscitate a work that they may be able to do without.
Another example is that of two churches, only five minutes apart. They are both part of the same well-known denomination. They even have the same pastor. One service is at 9:00 a.m. on Sunday, the other at 10:30. Both refuse to join their groups of ten to fifteen so that they can reduce overhead (again, two buildings) and increase effectiveness.
I'm not sure why merges are so unpopular. The superintendent mentioned in the first example applauded my insight into the situation, but said that it was an unlikely course in the near future. I wonder what we're afraid of.
What of intentional community, Ed? Can the concepts of the intentional community, vis a vis the Jesus People USA, to name one well-known example (where i have a couple of years' experience); and the Catholic Worker movement as another, be married to this newish hot-topic of the missional community?
It seems to me that in this time of economic hardship that our whole national (if not the global) society is suffering under, that the time is ripe to reconsider how we've adapted to the world by living our mostly separate lives within our insular, nuclear homes and families?
I've quoted the following content from your excellent article, on the magazine's site. And thank you for beginning to facilitate a critically important conversation.
I believe the connection, between your point, below, and mine will be self evident.
....6. Partnerships lessen the financial and resource burdens.
One of the most obvious needs of a new church is money and resources. Often these jugular issues are left to chance. When a planter partners with a church or a planting team, the financial burden and the workload is distributed more evenly. Working with multiple partners also increases the financial network to draw from in order to fund the church plant. It’s not good for the pocketbook or the physical health for man to plant alone.