Emily Stone says that coming out of the General Assembly, we’ve been blowing off steam here on MissionalCOG. I’d have to agree. Some of the main culprits can be found creating fodder for reformation critics who have begun gathering intel for the 2010 General Assembly in this thread.
So, let’s shift gears and help these church leaders get serious and move forward with a serious topic and a question for you. What are the biggest opportunities you see available for the COG to take advantage of? I’d like to hear your thoughts.
I believe the greatest single opportunity for the COG lies in Church Planting. I believe there are two primary sources of capital available in the COG for significant Gospel Advancement. They are:
- Proper stewardship of the EHM funds. For the next two years, there are at least $26 million dollars designated for church planting and in emergency, small church assistance. By faithfully stewarding those resources and by designating a lofty $50,000 per church (requiring matching funds from the church planter), 520 churches could be started. Assuming an average attendance of 75 people, 39,000 people could come into the COG. If each person was only giving $15 per week, $60,840,000 would come into those same churches to continue advancing the Gospel over two years.
- Designation of all defunct church property sales to be used as church plant funding. In Florida, there are currently in the neighborhood of 18 of such properties for sale. Based on that same ratio (25:1) across the USA COG, there are 240 church properties available for sale. If each property is valued at only $300,000 each, there is $72 million dollars in church planting resources available immediately. Using the same required matching funds as in opportunity #1, there is in the neighborhood of $144 million available for church planting in through defunct properties. 1,440 more churches could be started. Based on the same assumptions as above, 108,000 people could be reached, which would in turn produce another $168,480,000 in Kingdom resources coming into those churches.
TOTAL OPPORTUNITY LOST OVER THE COURSE OF TWO YEARS BY FAILING TO ACT ON THESE TWO OPPORTUNITIES:
- 1,960 churches will be lost.
- 147,000 people are missing from church.
- $229,320,000 goes uncaptured and does not function as fuel for advancing the Gospel.
That’s my take on the greatest missional opportunity facing the COG. Should we act on such opportunities, we would have to obsess over church planter recruitment, training, and deployment.
Finally, when I submitted this proposal for property sales and church planting to the Executive Council in April 2008, I received 10 emails from Executive Council members and a phone call from the Presiding Bishop stating that this was an exceptional item. I resubmitted this proposal at the General Assembly which will bring it back to the Executive Council for consideration the next time they meet.
What’s your take on this opportunity?
What do you see as the hurdles to seeing something like this realized?
What steps could we take to realize something so powerful be moved upon?
What are some of the great opportunities you see available for the COG to take advantage of?
Filed under: church of god
Travis, I think you’re right on here… You know where I am with church planting, and that I’ve decided to stay COG.. Honestly, I could go elsewhere and get more money and better support… So to back up what you’re proposing, we need some planter support…
1. Recruitment… How do we find new planters? I’d suggest a big push at Lee in the school of Religion. I know a ton of graduates who became disenchanted, and aren’t pursuing ministry at all. Let’s get them plugged in before they unplug themselves. Let’s push it in MIP. Let’s get some churches off the mega-church model and onto the multi-site model…
2. Training… We need to find creative ways to motivate and train church planters. WA Davis (before he passed away in VA) began a good model to look at. The state hired a consultant, Daniel Allen to jump start the planting initiative in that state. They supported the effort with money, training, workshops, assessments, etc… His contract ended, and he’s doing other stuff, so I’m not sure what VA is doing to continue the plan.
3. Education… I’d love to see a church planting emphasis at Lee… Does the seminary do anything like this?
4. Support..
a. Money — Let’s allow churches to mother a church plant. Let’s allow them to use the required missions giving (currently 2 1/2% and dropping) to be used to support their daughter church…
b. Mentoring — let’s setup some hybrid mentoring support… local and face to face blended with something online… message boards, video conferencing, etc…
c. People — if there are other well-stocked (don’t you love that term?) COG’s in an area, and there’s a new plant, let’s send members to be on the launch team.. No more competition between COG’s… Let’s work together for the kingdom…
d. Recognition — let’s consider planters missionaries… I like the term they used a GA… Cultural Engineers, or something like that… Give them a missions project number and allow them to visit other COG’s to raise funds.. Just like we do with Missions Reps and Missionaries on furlogh… Let’s not just allow planters to visit our churches. Let’s welcome it..
e. Cooperative Opportunities — Are there any ways we can plant COG’s and partner with organizations like ARC, Acts 29, and ELI and it still be viable (affordable)?
These are just a few suggestions… But I like where we’re going with this..
I think that the biggest opportunity is embodied in Fidencio Burgueno’s promise to plant 1,000 churches.
My experience with Fidencio is that, when he says something will be done, you can count on it.
The growth of our Hispanic churches hasn’t gotten much press on this blog, but the success of this effort will change the face of the Church of God in every sense of the word.
While I agree that new church plants can and will help our church grow, I believe we need to find ways to help older stalled or declining church’s to grow again.
It may mean changing names like some business’s do or changing styles. But I believe we need to come up with a way to breathe new life into old churches as well.
Scott, I agree with you that REPLANTING should get some emphasis as well. The only problem is ousting pastors. Many of these are nice guys.. No AB wants to get rid of a nice guy…
But if it could be done by reinvigorating the pastor, or replacing him, then that church should be able to go back to mission status and get the same treatment I mentioned above.
Secondly, you’d have to set some strict standards on what it means to be stalled or declining. A church can stall for 10 years at 800 people. Do we oust that pastor along with the one who took a church from 80 people to 10?
An unfortunate truth is we in the COG to date, tend to approach Church Planting and even broader Church Growth the way we approach Discipleship among our congregaations.
We tend to love to provide numbers of starts, don’t discuss those gone or closed in months afterward. We love to have campaigns and pushes to rally support, but consistency in our committment and drive is lacking. We think quick fixes, high impact Revival meetins’ will make everyone get up to speed with their process of discipleship, and all it takes is a church planting seminar and somehow the community will just arrive at the doorsteps of our mission churches.
We, the COG, don’t have a good track record at discipleship, and planning for the long haul in the lives of the individuals we win into the kingdom, and by that same token, we don’t look at the investment in Church Planting and community winning with a long term approach.
We must as an organization, as a family determine this really is important to us, and then put our actions as well as our money behind it.
Brother Johnson is much well versed in this area than I, as I have never been a church planter. But one area that must be connected, or it will be the weak link that makes it all fall apart is returning, BUT IN A NEW WAY, to the strength of Districts and District Pastors.
When I came into this great church, Districts helped one another, the DO was someone every preacher could talk to, and depend on. And if a small church, planted or long term existing, was struggling, the whole district came to aid. We had district evangelistic efforts, and saw ouselves as part of a larger church, just with different locations.
Borther Bowers makes a good point about local churches supporting with folks committing to helping new and struggling works. But let’s be realistic. Look at your average COG. Only 20% of that congregation is reaching out, and that 20% is worn thin being the back-bone of their own church. How will we get volunteers?
This denomination will not be any stronger than the ones who fund, attend, and are the majority of its constituency….the lay people, not the preachers. And until our church as a whole, truly find the burden for Church Planting, and reaping the harvest….no financial equation will ever work.
Not that this is a simplistic response, but until we can push our plate away, and lose sleep over a world that is dying without Jesus….until we are broken over communities that need to hear the gospel, until more of our existing churches get focused on souls being discipled again, I’m afraid we may just be throwing money at programs and projects, and very little ministry.
Todd,
This is a “chicken or the egg” argument. While I understand the desire and need to do discipleship and re-training in existing churches, the truth is that it’s much easier to do discipleship in a start-up situation.
Established churches consist of people who are well established in their routines, habits, and mentalities. Although we should not forsake the discipleship of all members, we must take advantage of the opportunites available with new Christians. And statistically, the best way to gain new Christians is through planting new churches.
Trav,
I wholeheartedly agree with you on the issue of church planting. Not only must we emphasize church planting – but we must emphasize planting the types of churches that will reach into the coming postmodern culture. Yes *sigh* this may mean having to put the red-back’s in the book room. I would love to see the younger generation of pastors – coming out of Lee and elsewhere – be given the responsibility of planting these new churches.
Also, to Don – there is a huge opportunity that we MUST not miss in the hispanic community. My church has been working with a church plant in Piedras Negras, Mexico. There is a great opportunity in this part of the world for the COG to see real growth.
When Jimmy Smith was overseer of Florida my church worked through the state office to give a 2 1/2% above our regular to help replant a church in South Florida. In one year we gave almost $10k to that replant. We were working off the model of World Missions. When they have missionaries in the country they visit the churches that support them. I had the pastor of this replant at my church on several occasions to show what was being done with the money that was being sent to him on a monthly basis. When Jimmy left it all stopped. I still believe that it is a good model and it is not that costly to a local church. Try it you will like it!
Brandon you are right about W.A. Davis. When he was in California he produced a manuel for planting churches. I have a full copy of it. It is the same one used by Mt. Olive in Cleveland. It is very good material. Oliver McMahan also contributed to it as well. When Raymond Crowley was overseer of Florida I served on a church planting commission. We were just getting going good when his time was up and the next overseer let it die. There is so much that has been researched and is available but it it scaddered all over everywhere. I agree with you that both Lee and the School of Theology should be emphasising church planting.
I also believe in church planting and agree that there is still a great many untapped communities and people groups that should be priority one for the COG. But, I think Todd is on to something important in regards to existing churches. The kneejerk reaction is to hold the pastor to account for the lack of growth (numerically, since that is all we can really measure) but I would like to offer a different point of view.
I pastor a church that is 51 years old. At its zenith in the early 1980’s it was averaging around 200 in attendance. When I was appointed in 2004 it was averaging about 45 with no youth ministry, no worship leader and an median age over 50. I have interviewed a dozen worship leaders and youth ministers but none were willing to come for part-time salary we can afford. (a salary by the way that will come from my own pocket). But the real heartbreak is that there is tremendous opportunity here.
The building is large and paid for, the neighborhood is desirable and affordable for families and the members are willing to do whatever it takes to grow. There is no resistance to change, in fact there is a hunger for it, but without a team of builders we can only grow so much. I am glad to say that we have added several families since I’ve been here but only enough to maintain the balance with those who haved moved on for various reasons. It is true that ultimately I am the one accountable but I can’t help but feel that if there were some type of program to help churches rebuild by sending (and paying) music and youth ministers to churches that demonstrate the potential for growth we could see a great renewing in our estabished works without the “start-up” costs associated with new plants.
Just one pastor’s point of view.
James and Todd,
Great thoughts. Consider this:
A pastor in James position, leading a debt free congregation of 45 or so people, with a significant asset (the building), is actually in the position of church planter or “re-planter.”
Rather than looking for Cleveland to send resources or people, look to the church planting launch team of 45 and the asset that is in hand (maybe millions of dollars). Get out from under a mindset that the situation is static and that you are the “governor” of a building.
Instead, see yourself with unending opportunity with every resource you need to move into aggressive pursuit of mission. Some options are:
The problem in turning around a situation like that is one of permission. You’ve got to get it from your state administrative bishop if you want to do something aggressive like property sales/purchases. You aren’t going to get that permission with a simple ask. It is likely going to be a long process with lots of hard work and exceptional presentation. Underlying that, you have to be utterly committed to that process and that church even if that commitment is at times one-sided (churches in those positions are rarely able to even compensate a pastor even slightly).
Those are couple things I would look at. In looking at that, it isn’t an either/or. It is a both/and. We’ve got to be doing both. A blazing focus on church planting doesn’t preclude church revitalization at all. If you’ve got a pastor with the “want-to” and the opportunity, it can be done.
Questions;
What about emergency or do feel that we should not use EHM funds for that.
Also Just a thought witht the idea of church planting maybe we should offer scholarships to students attending lee who would committ to two years of church planting out of lee. This might encourage church plants. My father was a church planter and even though I serve as a youth director I still see the absolute importance of church planting.
Chad,
The Minutes stipulate that there are two appropriate expenditures from the EHM fund:
SCHOLARSHIPS?
I would keep things simple. Simple is good. Our problem is not a lack of planters. We’re losing our planters to other organizations like ARC, Acts 29, Vineyard, AG, etc… Our problem is releasing resources designated for church planting into church planting. If we do that, we’ll answer their objections and we’ll see our church planters activated in ministry and staying in the COG at a higher rate.
We’ve got to address the real issue. Dancing around it isn’t going to get us to our preferred destination.
[...] This entire site Copyright 1997-2008 Don C. Warrington. All rights reserved. Appearances of certain advertisements on this site do not constitute an endorsement. One Thousand New Hispanic Churches in the U.S.21 August 2008, me @ 15:40Recently, I commented on MissionalCOG that the greatest opportunity for the Church of God was the planting of …. [...]
As the planter of a COG “strategic” church plant that has started in the last year, this is obviously an area that is dear to my heart. I agree that church planting is a huge opportunity as a denomination. Given all of the statistics that have came out related to its importance, I think we would be crazy to not get more creative in how to accomplish it. Some of you guys have thrown out some great ideas especially regarding the funding. This is clearly one of the biggest challenges faced by a church planter.
I am quickly approaching the 50/50 split of COG investment and personal investment/finances raised. I think that is a good idea that Travis presented here because it is a different “game” when you got skin in it.
I remember the day that we cashed out 12 years worth of retirement savings so we could continue on this amazing journey. It was certainly a rubber meeting the road experience. Did God call me to this and if He did is He able to take care of me better than my 401K?
Making a significant investment confirmed in me that this wasn’t a change in career paths or living out the calling I got from my mama. It confirmed in me the awesome opportunity that God had blessed me with and that in order to live in it I had to be willing to make some sacrifices.
Related to funding: Plant vs. replant. I have heard both sides debated. Which is harder… making something out of nothing or battling the past before moving into the future? Here is my take, for whatever it is worth. I know a few successful re-planters. One of the things that I see as an advantage to replanting is being able to leverage property. I know this isn’t the situation for everybody but having some equity, even if the building doesn’t at all reflect your ministry “style”, is huge.
Nathan,
I love you, bro…really proud of who you are and what God is doing in Weston through you. Thanks for the great comments (your first I think).
Well you hit on a subject near and dear to me so I couldn’t hold back any longer. It was all I could do not to write a book on the importance of assessment and coaching.
Brother Johnson – I think all these strategic ideas are great, and are a great governance to ensure we make the right decsions and wise ones to provide the infrastructure to accommodate ministry and growth. But I would submit, these are all programatic ideas that should be there to support the church plant or replant.
The only way to grow a church, is for sheep to give birth to sheep. Shephards don’t give birth to sheep, they just lead, feed, and protect. Keep the flock healthy, and they will give birth to sheep. We have discipleship issues. And for me, it’s not an egg or chicken argument.
Just as the allocation of resources at general headquarters isn’t the whole answer if the root of trust and belief in our leadership isn’t there, the same as doing programs and allocating dollars to grow a congregation numericallly isn’t going to do anything if we don’t have people in our denom from top to bottom who really are hungry for souls to be born and then discipled in the kingdom.
I know this is ole timey theology here, but Jesus said if I be lifted up, then he’d draw them in….and that doesn’t cost a dime. Congruently…no matter how well we steward our resources and make appropriate decisions regarding church plant, structure, etc., if the people don’t have a burden for souls, we’ll just be an organization that spends money wisely, not a lifeline to those headed for hell.
We must remember a key ingredient for the re-plant: willingness to change. If we think that we can do things the way we always have and yet still impact the culture for Christ, we are seriously mistaken.
Also, Trav – the right sizw your building comment is so true. It makes a bigger impact than most of us realize.
Thanks guys for all the great comments but just remember, “God cannot bless what you are not doing.” As we look at such scriptures as Matthew Ch. 20 there is always plenty of work to do and there are rewards. However, we must formulate a plan and then work the plan. If we wait until every little detail is in place we will never start or get anything done. I applaud all of you and the great work you are doing. God still reigns!
Todd,
I agree that we have discipleship issues in the “church” but I don’t think that is a denominational issue. This is a shepherd and sheep issue. I am fairly new to this deal and haven’t seen a lot of the program material distributed from headquarters. But in talking with many pastors what works in North Carolina doesn’t work in California and what works in California won’t work in Montana, etc.
So I don’t think that a corporate designed discipleship program fixes what is certainly a problem. The solution for that is in our personal confession that I, as a leader in my church; have not effectively been raising other servant leaders. Then figuring what is the most effective way to do this in our communities because it is different than mine. I agree with your old school theology that God will draw them to Himself but it is the lifting up part that is different.
Lifting up means honoring God but I think it also means sharing and showing God in a way that people would be attracted to Him, because sadly we are often times all they have to look at. No I am not talking about watering the message or being seeker sensitive. But the image of “God” that people have in my demographic (South Florida) is different from yours in Tennessee. So in order to disciple them to follow Christ we have to figure out what are their misconceptions of Christ (which often stems from our misrepresentation) and find an effective way to correct it.
So what that says to me is we need different “packages” to deliver the same message. I believe one very effective way is through church planting, simply because each church represents a different “package”. Every planter has a different personality. My personality helps to alter some people’s image of what a Christ-follower looks like and yours does the same for other people. So the more “packages” we can put out there in a market that is church starved helps facilitate the potential for discipleship. That is something a denomination can play a huge role in.
Brother Griffison,
I think you misunderstood me, so let me clarify. I’m not talking about a program from Cleveland about Discipleship, so please no that. Actually I’m not talking about any program at all about Discipleship. I detest programs, hate them.
Here’s the simplist point I want to make. And I make it on a denominational level, as this forum (if I assume correctly) for themost part addresses issues from a denominational aspect of our family. Not denom as a governmental entity, but as a collective group of people under one banner.
Brother Johnson has made some wonderful structural recommendations. Wonderful advice that we should implement that would make us better stewards of the harvest and better equip us for reaching souls.
And yes, within our family we call the COG, we have some churches that are really reaching lives and changing them for Christ. But they are the exception, and not the rule of our thousands of USA churches. When we look at our denominational family as a whole, the COG (not headquarters in Cleveland, but the membership of this church) as a majority does not have the burden for souls we should, and I say WE.
What good is having a good strategy of planting a church, if behind it, we don’t have a real burden for souls as a collective denom family? And to me, from what I’ve seen over the years in ministry, we don’t have that burden for souls we THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST in America used to have.
When Sheep want to see Sheep born into the kingdom, and really have a buden, they’ll not only birth them in, but disciple them. Not into the image of Christ you or I portray, but the image of Christ seen in His Word.
And once you have that burden in our church (denom) over all?????? Everyone will want to see money appropriately spent on buildings, and everyone will want to make the right decisions regarding locatios and stewardship of resources….and everyone will be in unity about seeing more than programs…but seeing ministry.
We can grow tons of churches with good administration and programs and wise decisions about money, but we want grow the kingdom of God without discipling people and having a burden for souls.
I think too many on here, because it’s mainly preachers, assume everone shares the burden for souls we do…and that’s just not true. And our denom isn’t made up of preachers….is made up of lay people, who are very content.
Not to sound preachy, but changing our programs will not turn aournd the negative growth in our denom or local churches. They can be great tools, and God is concerned with the “hows” of what we do.
But we need a change of heart in the Church of God overall in America….and it starts in every local church. We need a Revival that changes us…..once our hearts as a whole are changed, church growth will be a priority and we’ll be good stewards about it.
When’s the last time we were in a regular service, and the order of service was interrupted by our members running to the altar because the burden for the lost was so strong?
When’s the last time that we couldn’t lock our building up because people wouldn’t leave the altar because they were interceeding for the lost of our neighborhood?
When’s the last time our members told us there wasn’t enough visitation going on in neglected parts of our community and they wanted to go visit or do a block party in that neighborhood?
When’s the last time our members came asking for classes to teach them how to share their testimony and witness to others?
When’s the last time our members begged us to send money to a church plant somewhere? or help a smaller struggling church?
Though some may be able to answer, just last week or month…..across our denomination, this isn’t happening like it should if we really care about the lost, and isn’t that what this whole thing of planting churches is supposed to be about? Grabbing them out of the clutches of hell?
Brethren, we can get our methodology all in line and right, but until we have a Revival of Burden in our church family, from the pew to the pulpit, and to Cleveland, we’ll be getting out business of the Kingdom right and be any closer to the King. God has been breaking me over recent weeks, and this is my heart….God break my heart for the loss, then I’ll do the right things regarding reaching them.
Maybe I am a simple minded Holiness preacher. Maybe I am backward or something. But I don’t want to read the latest book on reaching the post modern culture, or how to light my building just the right way, or the coolest pamphlet on techniques….I truly believe, if God does a work in the heart of this little preacher…then my heart will be made flesh toward the hurting around me, and God will show me how to be his hands, voice, and heart to the world….and I’ll know exactly through His grace, wisdom and word how to do it.
From on of your posts earlier this year… maybe last year… REPlanting is one of our greatest opportunities. We have lots of churches that have ceased being productive, with an asset that would enable someone with more of a planter’s mentality to come into the same community and move that church into a new location, with new ministry and a new face. That can’t be done overnight, but if there is a good plan with support from leadership, it can. Leadership adopting that concept in advance is critical. It is a waste when a church that is mostly dead (my name is Enigo Montoya… you killed my father… prepare to die
sits on hundreds of thousands of dollars, and even millions of dollars in assets.
I personally think this to be a better opportunity than planting because we have so many of churches that fall into this category, and so few churches that can mother a church plant, and so little training and support for planters… not to mention almost zero funding.
okay, I have got to proof read myself better….I type like I talk.
Second to last paragraph should read: Brethren, we can get our methodology all in line and right, but until we have a Revival of Burden within our church family, from the pew to the pulpit, and even Cleveland….we’ll be getting our Business of the Kingdom right, and NOT be any closer to the King. God has been breaking me over recent weeks, and this is my heart….God break my heart for the LOST, then I’ll do the right things regarding the reaching of them.
Steve….
I like the REPlanting model, especially how you’ve been doing it… But there’s a another wrench to throw into the mix — the current pastor….
Who wants to be the AB to tell a guy who’s struggling to make ends meet to pastor 10 people “Hey.. You’re not cutting it.. You’re out, and we’re putting in Johnny Exhorter. He’s gonna replant this thing and do what you couldn’t do.”
That’s a tough call for a leader… It’s not so bad when a church has no pastor, but then you still have to find a replanter.. You may have the capital assets there, but sometimes it’s easier to create momentum from nothing than it is to reverse negative momentum… It can be done, but it takes a special skill set that is even more unique than a church planter.
I think it was Peter Wagner who said it’s always easier to have a baby than it is to raise the dead! (My wife says only a man would make that statement).
The fact is that it takes much more output of energy, manhours & finance per soul saved to reach people through turning around an existing church as it does to plant a new congregation.
I have the utmost respect for those whom God has called to revitalize declining churches – they are doing something that I could never do – but church planting is essential if we are to follow a strategy for bringing any kind of sizable harvest into the Church of God.
Also, when growth occurs in an existing church it almost always brings more of the same kind of people into the church as are already there. Like attracts like. This means that a strategy that neglects church planting will mean that as a movement we continue to major on the dwindling demographic that is already dominant in our churches. New church plants enable us to reach out into new, untapped and growing demographics.
Hi Travis,
Not trying to dance around any issue. That was just a thought.
Thanks.
Todd,
You lost me at “we have some churches that are really reaching lives and changing them for Christ. But they are the exception, and not the rule of our thousands of USA churches. When we look at our denominational family as a whole, the COG (not headquarters in Cleveland, but the membership of this church) as a majority does not have the burden for souls we should”.
I am a CoG/PK and have myself been preaching for 20 years. I have met thousands of ministers and laypersons in my life and I can’t think of any who didn’t want to see souls saved. It is common to think that others do not match our own personal level of passion unless they are as vocal and demonstrative as we are. Kind of like the worship leader who upbrades (how do you like that old school word) the congregation for not being loud enough or the preacher who says they’re not getting his sermon because they aren’t jumping to their feet every 30 seconds to applaud.
I have noticed in several posts on this and other issues a strong bias that the “traditional” church is a synonym for a dead church. I protest, I dissent, I disagree! (bonus points if you know the source). 1 Cor. 12 says that God sets each member in the body to please himself and that those that appear less seemly are often given the greater honor. I get that planting is the sexy ministry of the moment and I pray that God will raise up a generation of planters to reach this generation. But I think we are making a mistake if we think that just getting them in is all that it takes to be successful. There are many pastors (and I am one) who are called not to plant, but to water, to cultivate, to protect from harm and to see the harvest safely delivered into eternity.
I know the bias on MissionalCoG is towards planting churches and maybe that means I don’t belong here, but my calling is most definitely one of revitalizing existing works and shepherding souls through life’s storms. On a previous issue Tony Scott talked about the need for innovators and adaptors in the CoG. Well I believe there is a clear need for both planters and revitalizers in the mission of Christ. The same Jesus that said “Go ye Therefore” also said “Feed my sheep”.
I have a deep respect for those like Travis and Nathan who sacrifice all to plant new works but I also realize that a few years down the road when Trav and Nate are onto their second or third plant those churches are going to need someone like me to come and build on top of their work. In fact what we really need is to realize that both types of ministry are biblical and compatible. Paul needed Barnabus, Peter needed John, we must get rid of this incredibly destructive idea that one pastor fits all. Every church should have a team of ministers who fill all the roles necessary for growth, vitality and missional integrity.
Again, my point is not that planting should not be the focus, but that there is no need to marginalize, diminish or demonize those who callings are more pastoral than evangelistic, nor those “traditional” churches that have served and continue to serve as foundations for generations of believers to safely enter into the kingdom. It’s not how you start but how you finish that counts.
Please don’t stop talking on this subject. I am at the point of re-planting and selling our current location with the AB’s approval. Building a NEW team, because the old team thought everything was good, (though dysfunctional), has been the hardest part. I didn’t see myself as a re-planter, but that is where God is taking me. Where are the resources? Where can I go and see like-minded works going on?
Talk to me,
Tim
Tim,
Beg, borrow, and steal to get to places like churchplanters.com conference in Cumming, GA, National New Church Conference in Orlando, FL, ARC events, and other gatherings where this stuff is discussed. I cannot emphasize enough, coaching environments.
Talk to other pastors that are ahead of you on that journey. You can look at what we’ve done wrong and are getting right. If you’re selling property, take your time, do your homework, and have a solid plan.
Sim Wilson sold our property for us. I’ve worked with some exceptional executives from Harley Davidson to Novartis companies. Sim is pure excellence. He is a fierce negotiator. He knows this business. He got us top dollar for our property- twice as much as some realtors told us we’d get. He stuck it out with us for over two years. And, he knows the COG. His dad is a former Overseer. He knows how to work with our system.
When you start talking about property sales, look hard at it though. It might not be the best route. I believe it was for us. But, it has been tough. When we closed on our property, we had $8 in the bank. The decision to sell it and the process we went through caused us to have to pay cash for the delivery of 2 of our babies since the church was unable to come close to handling our insurance. There are some other stories there as well…bottom line is- it’s a big decision. If you pull the trigger, expect it to be a tough road.
Brother Alldredge – Please realize, I’m about as traditional and Classical Pentecostal is it gets. Believe me, I’m an old time Holiness kind of guy, and have some of the most conservative beliefs and convictions as anyone. I do believe the traditional churches have a very special place within our denom, because if they don’t, then that means I don’t have a place in it.
You’re totally misunderstanding me. On average, our congregations don’t have the burden for souls that they used to. I too have been in many congregations, and honestly….I don’t hear people crying out over the lost like we used to. Now, those that really have a vision in the local church seems to be a few, I remember the days when it was the whole church almost. When pastors could call for people to come canvast the community to visit homes and 80% of the congregation would show up to go witnessing.
I can remember when we’d have a request for folks to fast and pray for lost souls, or ask for people to lead discipleship classes for new converts, and you would have to turn people away because you had too many volunteers…..now that isn’t true on the majority.
I see tons of people saying they want their churches to grow, but most of them seem to want to grow through transfer growth. When I see new converts come into our church, very few people seem to have a burden to disciple them, and assist them in growing in the Lord, and so many are gone within 6 months. And I see this at so many of our churches. Surely I can’t be the only one that sees this trend among the laity.
Travis,
Thanks for the info! Our church is equity rich because of our location but mortgage oppressed(this was inherited). I’ve been able to cover 1/2 of the mortgage by bringing in a Spanish speaking group and coordinating our activities. I’m also looking at exchanging our times at the church to another group in order to cover the balance and associated expenses, and add positive cash flow. If that works we will be moving faster on an alternate temp location.
I followed one of your suggested links and heard Mark Driscoll’s lecture on being the Man, and others on the importance of developing leadership. I thank God that this part is presently coming together nicely. The new leadership team is not tied to the past of this congregation and this is already proving to be a blessing from God.
Keep me in your prayer!
Tim