Church Planting #8

Some Final Considerations in Church Planting
 Tim Johnson

            In this final article about church planting, we will consider two important questions, as follows: 1). who should attempt it?  2). should it be left to the professionals?  The first is an obvious consideration because most of our Canadian congregations are smaller in size. The second is a choice being pressed on our brotherhood today. Both need to be weighed.
Who should attempt to plant a new congregation?
            In earlier articles we examined the merits of one congregation planting another, as compared to a lone evangelist planting one. Both methods have advantages in appropriate situations. But here we will consider the congregational/team method. Can every congregation successfully plant another? Does a group’s size and maturity affect the outcome?
            Perhaps the apostles wondered how effective they could be when Jesus said, “..and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth” (Acts 1:8b). All of them were expected to preach the gospel. In turn, new Christians were taught that they must also share the good news. It’s a brotherhood-wide responsibility. However, not all will be smooth at it, and not all will do it in the same way or use the same method. But everybody can play a part in taking the gospel to the lost. Church planting is similar. There’s something that every congregation can do to help start new groups. Whatever we choose to do, it needs to be done proportionately to size, with wisdom and in unity.
            A larger congregation may be capable of financing and spinning off a sizeable team to plant a new congregation. It’s more difficult for a smaller congregation that doesn’t have the same level of finances or manpower to donate to a new work. They may still be capable of doing it, just on a smaller scale. Our church history in Canada has many fine examples of smaller congregations successfully reproducing themselves by capitalizing on some of their families who had to move into another area. They simply began meeting in their new surroundings and planting the seed as they went. This can be done wisely today by smaller congregations who know the communities in their areas and can help plant another group. Care must be taken to make sure the planting church doesn’t exceed the 15-25% congregational limit of manpower sent out. As noted in previous articles, exceeding this number would hurt the sending group too much. So a small congregation can only send a small team to plant a new group.
            There are other methods smaller congregations can use, such as teaming up with another congregation to plant a third in a community about which they are both concerned. The advantage of this kind of partnering would be a smaller drain on finances and manpower for both congregations.
            All congregations can prepare for the future. Planting a new group can be a goal. Every congregation can work to arrange itself to  meet the goal. They can evaluate and choose a target community, and save up funds to get ready. The 1½-year old south Edmonton congregation is already saving money toward a new church planting. It’s not time to plant yet, but the goal is there. Some congregations may struggle with internal troubles that prevent a unified effort to plant another group. Their goal can be to work out their affairs so that they can. There’s something we can all do toward church planting. Most of all, we can pray that God will use us to fulfill this great challenge.
Should it be left to the professionals?
            There are interdenominational organizations today that specialize in the work of church planting. Used as a model, our brethren have developed similar organizations claiming to have the expertise and resources to help our congregations reproduce themselves. Some of these are connected with brotherhood universities, and I’m aware of one that is not. They do not claim to be the church, but are separate organizations claiming to help the church do its evangelistic work. Often these groups say that the church is neither equipped nor interested in planting new congregations. One organization teaches that the brotherhood does not plant quickly enough to keep ahead of the number of our congregations closing their doors. Whether they are right or wrong depends on research and one’s judgment. The real question that should be asked is the one we are contemplating: should the work of planting new congregations be left to the professionals? Many issues need to be considered.
            First, how do these organizations function? Typically, they urge the church to send them men and their families for testing, evaluation, training, guidance and ongoing encouragement. Certainly an amount of testing and training is wise. Some organizations insist that financial support is to be sent to them alone, and it will be administered solely by them. Much like missionary societies of the past, they assume the financial controls, make decisions who they will support and terminate the support if the church planter does not produce according to the organization’s standards and time-table. The goals and work of the organization are financed by monthly support from participating congregations, a percentage of the weekly collections from the churches it plants, and sometimes large lump-sum donations are expected of cooperating churches. These details may vary with different church-planting organizations, but most are similar.
            Second, is this system of church planting as efficient as it claims to be? One wonders, when so much money is needed to support the organization itself, in addition to the work it claims to do. Wouldn’t it be more cost-effective for each congregation to spend its resources directly on its own evangelistic work?
            Third, is it fair? By what standards does such an organization approve an evangelist? Is his personality the key? Must he show the ability to hustle-and-bustle? Is he proficient in marketing? Unfortunately I’ve known one excellent evangelist who was evaluated and dismissed as a good candidate, ultimately discouraging him. He went on to do great work in a foreign country without the organization’s involvement. One wonders if men like the apostle Paul, criticized for his “unimpressive personal presence” and “his speech contemptible” (2 Cor.10:10), would be accepted by an organization? Is this fair?
            Fourth, and most importantly, do such church-planting organizations violate congregational autonomy? The true test of this Biblical principle is whether the organization seeks to control congregations in some way. After hearing one organization’s claim that the church is not doing its job, and that they can do better directing and managing the church’s funds, evaluating and hiring preachers and directing the work of church-planting, it would seem that a degree of control is being exercised. We do ourselves a service to remember the past agonies of the brotherhood over similar organizations that eventually sought control.
            I believe there is no organization better equipped to plant new congregations than the church itself. It has the various talents needed, it can raise and efficiently manage the funding required, it has the wisdom and skill to evaluate the best locations and make up the teams and it possesses the ability to encourage and help a new work to be a success. Let’s commit ourselves to the world’s most important work, and do it well here in Canada.