I am about to enter into two intensive weeks of summer classes. Next week, I plan to be teaching Church Planting Models, followed by Church Multiplication Strategies. Since my models class is on my mind at the moment, I have decided to do a couple of posts on the topic.
We live in an age of model mania–a time when the “right” model is king. Now, while I do believe that church planters are beginning to think more and more about contextualization, many still believe the “correct” model still reigns. I mean who has not attended the conference (or read the book) of John Doe the church planter (I just realized his initials are “J. D.”), who was able to begin with 0 people and in one weekend planted a church with 40,000 new believers? It may have worked for him, but that does not mean that the model that came from his context is to be prescribed to all.
From time-to-time, I am asked, “What model do you think I should use in church planting?” Whenever I hear this question, I become very concerned. Such a question does not reveal the thinking of a missionary, but rather the thought that I (or someone else) can predict what will be the most effective expression of the church among a people group or population segment that I am yet to meet.
A model is a form or expression of the church that is shaped by: 1) the cultures of the missionary team; 2) the cultures of the new believers; and 3) the biblical parameters necessary for a church to be a church.
In my book, Discovering Church Planting, I wrote that models are God-given guides to assist us in our church planting endeavors. They are very important and needed in global church planting. Though they are great blessings they can become a bane to Kingdom expansion, unless properly understood, examined, and gleaned for appropriate elements to be contextualized to one’s people group or population segment. Models have much to teach us, but must be held lightly, especially before we enter the mission field.
No one model is the “answer” to all the problems facing church planters. There is no model that is the “missing link” to global evangelization. Beware of any missionaries who advocate that they have the model that will work effectively anywhere in the world. Remember, models are not to be equated with principles.
I appreciate Neil Cole’s wisdom when he wrote, “it is imperative that you create structure only when necessary. Life should dictate structure, not the other way around. We often say to church planters, ‘Do not organize “it” until you have an “it” to organize.’ In other words, do not begin with a structure and an organization. Begin with life and let the structure emerge naturally, driven by the needs and demands of the life” (Organic Church, 126).
The good news for missionaries is that the biblical parameters for healthy local churches are wide enough to include expressions from all the cultures of all the peoples of the world. We don’t bring the models to the peoples. We learn from models, and prayerfully discern what the Spirit would have us to contextualize in our fields.
In my next post, I plan to address how we should learn from (and discern) models before we enter the field.
Just like it is important to know church history and historical theology, it is helpful to know the variety of models that are being used and have been used elsewhere for what they can contribute to our well of knowledge for developing the most appropriate Biblical expression of the church among a given people group at a given time in history.
As one involved in church planting on the mission field however, I am concerned and saddened by some missionaries who seem to hold to a strict CPM (think Garrison & 10 universal principles) or Frank Viola type house church model to the degree that they give off a palpable disdain for anyone or anything that smacks of “traditional church” (a term which is often a convenient straw man term for anything that doesn’t agree with their model).
I have nothing against churches meeting in houses or having a simple organization in the early stages of their life but I am opposed to the uncharitable attitudes of some, that almost deny that God’s grace is working in, or blessing any church planting model other than their own.
I would be interested to hear what you think are the biblical parameters for a church to be considered a church.
Allen,
Thanks for the comment. I address this in a couple of my books. But for the sake of space and time:
A local church is a group of Kingdom Citizens living according to the Kingdom Ethic in covenant relationship with God and each other.
They consist of a regenerate Body of baptized believers who self-identify as the local expression of the Body of Christ and have covenanted together to live out the Kingdom Ethic (found in the Scriptures that tells how they are to live in relation to God, one another, and those outside of the Kingdom). Sorry for the brevity.
Send me an email, if you have additional questions or need clarification: jpayne@sbts.edu
Take care,
J. D.