Subj: [BuildHisChurches] Experience vs. Study   Date: 7/7/05 9:20:18 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: PanYVino2000@cs.com Reply-to: BuildHisChurches@yahoogroups.com To: BuildHisChurches@yahoogroups.com Received from Internet: click here for more information

Hello All,
Recently I had a discussion with someone who feels that experience is the best credential for teaching church planting and growth.   It's an interesting theory which I would like to address.  Before I do so, however, I would like to explain that when I refer to "teaching church planting and church growth", or to "new church development", I am referring to the workshop on Basic Church Planting.  Build His Churches Mission does not offer coaching relationships at this time, and so this discussion does not include mentoring or coaching of church planters, which we may offer in the future.  In addition, please keep in mind that we are not teaching pastoring a congregation, but building one.  Church planting and development are predominantly missional activities that 90% of the time take place outside the church building among the unchurched.   

If I had started a church successfully, grown it into a mega-church, and then multiplied that one church into many others just like it, I would not be a good teacher of new church development (based solely on that experience).  Why?   Because I would be teaching you from the perspective of one person, speaking out of one unique set of experiences.   This would be a model-driven approach to church planting.   My students would be expected to "do as I did", and achieve the same results.  In addition, I would be teaching from convictions (and successes) that were the result of my own unique psychological make-up and personality.  Unfortunately, success in new church development doesn't work that way.  For one, there is no way to predict that the model would work as well for someone who did not have the same convictions or the personality which led to the success.  There are also too many variables.  Were these churches all predominantly city churches?  Were they all of one particular denomination?  Were they all in one state?  One country?  And, how did these many factors affect the outcome?  As a teacher, how would I know that what worked for me would work for everyone?  Every church planter is faced with a unique situation and has unique needs. That is why one cannot take a model-driven approach to teaching church planting, which is what takes place when one teaches from personal experience without taking into consideration the vast amount of research and the books that have been written by new church development professionals.

At BHCM, we take a principles-driven approach to teaching church planting.  We teach the principles that lead to success in any type of church plant...from the smallest cell to the largest mega-church, from high-church to low-church, from one end of the globe to another.  This is not knowledge that can be gained by personal experience alone.  It requires a great deal of study.  Not the study involved in experimenting with starting a church, growing it, and then extracting a set of principles which apply only to that situation and that church.  It is a study based upon the writings, lectures, and teaching of many, many experienced church planters.  It is research of the topic geared toward forming a set of principles which are common to all successful church plants.  Furthermore, the field of church development has been so vastly studied in the past decade, and so much research done on the topic, that it is not necessary to go out and conduct original research.  The principles can be interpreted from the current existing research.  We can study the subject using the experience of many successful developers of new churches today, in our postmodern world.

Christian Schwartz's book, Natural Church Development, was based upon a study of 1,000 successful churches in 32 countries and six continents.  The churches were of all different sizes, and all different Christian denominations, including Catholic churches.  To my knowledge, all trustworthy groups that teach church planting avail themselves of this research.  They also use the research of many other leading writers and lecturers on church growth.  What they teach is global and learned from the wide variety of experience of others, rather than narrow and learned from the limited personal experience of one person.  To overlook the writings and teachings of people who have been successful at the art one wishes to teach, and instead teach solely from one's own experience, is egotistical, to say the least.

As naive as it is, the notion that one should teach new church development primarily from one's own personal experience is one that needs to be addressed.  For that reason I'm circulating this on the BHCM e-group, and will place it on the website as well.  I realize that there is much more to be said on the topic, but we do need to set our priorities.  My time is limited, and, as you all know, my study of church growth principles is on-going.  It will never end because we do not live in a stagnant world. God revelation is on-going, and so are the writings of many learned theologians and church developers out there.  My time is best spent in study so that I can carry on my ministry of helping to build His churches to the best of my ability, to your greater benefit, and to the glory of God.

May God bless you and your ministry.

Peace,
Senia

As Wagner aptly illustrated, the theme of Philippians can best be summed up by the following phrase, "Live your life together in a manner worthy of the Gospel". This could only be accomplished if the early Christians had the correct image of Jesus. From the beginning, the early Christians placed Jesus on the "God" side of existence, as opposed to the angels or other "deities" side of existence. Jesus was seen as resident within the identity of God. Since Philippi was a Roman colony with Caesar as the divine head of Rome, the belief in the divinity of Jesus placed the Christians in conflict with Rome. Rather than addressing Philippi as a Roman colony, Paul’s letter to the Philippians addresses them as a community of God. The question is, how are they to live with one another? Paul exhorts the Philippians to stand firm, relating together in the Gospel. The terminology used in the original Greek suggests the idea of contending together, as if in an arena. It is the notion of competing jointly against an adversary.

Darrell Guder continued the theme set by Wagner in his convocation lectures, developing the theme of holding corporate witness. This is the community living a life worthy of its calling. In 1 Th 2:11,12, we read: "For you know that we dealt with each of you as a father deals with his own children, encouraging, comforting and urging you to live lives worthy of God, who calls you into his kingdom and glory." In the Greek, the word used for living connotes more of a walk. It is a very comprehensive walk that defines who you are and how you live. Phil 1:27 has the same quality: "Whatever happens, conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ. Then, whether I come and see you or only hear about you in my absence, I will know that you stand firm in one spirit, contending as one man for the faith of the gospel." Paul stresses this over and over in his letters to the churches. Note Eph 4:1: "As a prisoner for the Lord, then, I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received."

So, what is it that we do because of God’s grace? God’s call makes it possible to live in community in a totally different way. Our loving way of being community and our good works then, become a witness to our salvation. And, what does this worthy living look like? Two components of this which Paul stresses are that we are not intimidated by our adversaries…we are not held back in our witness to the glory of Christ; and, we do not obstruct the unity we have in Christ for selfish reasons. The good of the community is subordinated to the desires of the individual. These two points are of paramount importance in our definition of the missional church.

Dr. Louise Lawson Johnson, who taught the morning elective, Equipping the Saints: Becoming a Missional Church in Local Congregations, was excellent. In order to become a missional congregation, Dr. Johnson tells us that we must consider five different words: Who, what, where, why, and when. Who refers to our missional identity. It is who we are. What refers to our missional engagement. That is what we do. Where has to do with our missional character. That is how we do what we do. Why has to do with our missional motivation. That is why we do what we do. Finally, when has to do with the time when we’re ready to go out and do the things that are done by a missional church.

Dr. Johnson presented four models of church. First there is the church as chaplain to the culture. In this model, the society is expected to share the ethical and moral values of the church. The church is the basic reinforcer and teacher of patriotism and good citizenship. Clergy of the church are expected to officiate at public functions. Church buildings are used as clubhouses for the community. There is a wide gap between clergy and laity. There is not much emphasis upon either evangelism or missions. This is the "we go to church" kind of church.

The next model of church is the church as voluntary association of individuals. In t his kind of church, the individual is primary, with the role of the society and community as secondary. Faith is both personal and private. Individual rights and privileges are valued highly. The church is viewed as a voluntary association…membership is a choice. Pastors are professionals who are ecclessial counterparts to the corporate CEO. The faith of the individual is more important than that of the community. Evangelism is viewed as a means of increasing membership. Missions are for overseas, but if done at home, they have a social flavor. This is the "we belong to the church" kind of church.

The next model of church is that of the church as a supplier of religious goods and services. Modern day mega-churches fall into this category. The understanding of the church is based upon business principles. The church competes in the ecclessial marketplace for its members. It therefore uses the principles, techniques and methods of business in order to succeed. Potential members are seen as "customers" and worship becomes programmed entertainment. Pastors become sales representatives who measure their success by how many people they are attracting. This becomes the top priority. Evangelism becomes marketing to promote and sell church memberships. This is the "we shop for a church" kind of church.

The fourth model of church is the church as an equipped people sent on a mission. This is a church where the Bible is central to all teaching, preaching and identity. The members affirm that God is at the helm of the ship of life. Ministry positions are filled on the basis of God-given spiritual gifts. The community keeps its values and lifestyle despite the culture around them. There is affirmation of the ministry of all believers. Each member works at his or her own spiritual growth. Christianity is a consistent lifestyle for all members. Evangelism is used for disciple making rather than gaining members. Mission is considered the main purpose for the church. This is the "we are the church" kind of church.

At the heart of what the church must be is the Great Commission:

In Dawson’s own words, "If the church takes its cue from the Great Commission, then we must understand ourselves as a community of disciples authorized, called, commissioned and empowered by the risen Christ to make disciples of all nations." The plan she presents for this is triple-fold:

1. A People Called – Recovering our Vocational Identity. The congregation needs to be brought to the point of identifying their individual spiritual resources. This is gift-oriented ministry. The first step in discipling is to help people identify their God-given spiritual gifts and how they may use them for the expansion of the Kingdom.
2. A People Equipped – Rediscovering our Resources. It is not enough to know who we are as a congregation, and to have identified our spiritual gifts. Both those steps must result in a sending forth of people in the congregation into the community to reach others for Christ. This requires that we constantly remind people of their missional identity and purpose.
3. A People Sent: Recognizing our Purpose. The people must be guided into recovering their identity as ekklesia, a people united in their common call by God. This requires instruction in Bible so that the people may root and ground their identity in the Biblical narratives. In our culture today, it also requires instruction on what it means to be a community of faith in a postmodern context.

1. The church must move from a focus on programming as the "main activity" of the church to an emphasis on disciple making as the main activity. We need to guide our committees to envision themselves as ministry teams, spending more time in contact with members of the church. They must come to see themselves as a group called by God, based upon their spiritual gifts, to accomplish the work of the church.
2. There must be a shift from committees as administrative bodies to committees as ministry teams. The ministry of all believers must be emphasized. Every member of the congregation is called to act as a minister by caring for and serving others. Since all members of the congregation have at least one spiritual gift, the church loses when we rely too heavily upon clergy and thus let the spiritual gifts of our membership go to waste. Ministry and leadership must be shared by all the membership.
3. There must be a shift from being clergy dominated to being lay oriented. It is not the job of the church to grow itself. The recruitment mentality is based upon an internal focus, which is the welfare of the institution. The mission/ministry mindset focuses in a different direction. Its focus is outward – toward what the church must do for people both inside and outside of the church community.
4. The recruitment mentality must be replaced by mission/ministy mindedness. We must steer the congregation away from activities that meet the desires and wishes of the congregation, and toward the programs, which they (both individuals and the entire church) need in order to develop and grow spiritually.