Over the past few years church planting (CP) has come to the forefront of many conversations.  In the last year we have been very intentional in personally meeting or speaking with leaders from many of the national CP networks.  On a weekly basis we have dialogued with planters that are about to launch, those who recently launched, and those already in healthy, sustainable churches.  Sadly, we have also had the occasion to listen to those who, for various reasons, were closing their doors.  Hungry for empirical data, we have also attended conferences and read numerous books and blog articles, all while continuing to be engaged in my own church’s weekly pastoral training for church planters.

In all of these encounters we couldn’t help but notice some of the church planting “buzz words” being used to describe the types of churches and networks involved in the planting process.  Listed below are a few of the more common terms along with a general understanding of what those terms mean.

Supporting Church – Recently we listened to a pastor at a CP conference make this statement, “Our church set a goal of planting 50 churches in three years and we actually did it in two years.”  SAY WHAT? On the surface some might applaud their ability to exceed original expectations, but is that statement really painting a complete picture.  Was he inferring that his church identified men that met the qualifications of a pastor, observed these men for an appropriate period of time and confirmed their calling?  Are we to assume his church organized these same men and trained them in theological and practical matters to prepare them for what lies ahead as a pastor, preacher and shepherd?  Did this pastor mean that his church further supported these planting pastors with a significant investment including key launch team members from his congregation, further establishing the missional DNA of his own congregation?

A “supporting church”, may or may not send a group of members to assist autonomous church plants, but much of their efforts are confined  to partnering with church planters (rarely members of their own church) that are already pursuing an existing plan.  These churches find their niche primarily in coming alongside these planting pastors with coaching, mentoring and financial support.

Closely related are many of CP networks that function with a similar approach.  Although the network might operate primarily out of one specific church, the planters they support do not come primarily from that same church.  Church planters from across the country seek out these types of networks for training, accountability, relationship and financial support.  These types of networks then are considered “supporting networks.”

To be clear, supporting churches are a good thing.  We actually need more of both supporting churches and supporting networks.  These churches and networks understand that the work of the Holy Spirit is seen in planting churches.  They also understand that new church plants grow faster and are inherently more evangelistic than older churches.

Sending Church – I (Steve) had the privilege of serving at a church that once sent forty six of its members to an un-evangelized Muslim country.  Recognizing the need to plant churches throughout the world, these church members were “sent” for the specific purpose of planting churches in two different cities.  This same church routinely sent a number of its members to plant local churches as well.  Every 4 to 5 years a pastor from our church gathered a team from within the existing congregation, trained and equipped them and then they were launched into an area that needed a church.

Today, many of these “sending churches” are beginning to redefine ministry success that until recently was defined by regional mega-churches. Instead of measuring success by seating capacity these churches measure success by the number of members that have been trained, equipped and sent out from their congregation.  These pastors are now indicating they would rather plant 10, 20 or even 50 churches in their lifetime rather than build one regional megachurch.  This was confirmed through a recent conversation I had with a pastor at one of these sending church’s where he described to me what happens in their new member’s class.  He said, “During our new members class we welcome everyone and then we begin casting vision of our end goal for them. We share with them in this meeting that we are going to begin training them so that they can leave with one of our church plants to help us reach our “Jerusalem” (local communities). Planting churches, we believe, is the best way to do this.”

Multiplying Church – As defined by the North American Mission Board (NAMB), these types of churches are not the norm and represent an incredibly small percentage of the churches in North America.  NAMB provides three distinct traits that provide a healthy framework for what constitutes a multiplying church:

  • Discover – Much like a professional sports franchise these churches have a “farm system” established that constantly seeks to identify men who have the aptitude and desire to plant a church.  As men are identified a relationship is formed and together they walk through the meaning and implications of being “called to pastor”.  Through an established process these churches observe a man’s ministry and home, look for evidences of grace on his life and confirm his pastoral calling.  Multiplying churches are interested in formal development and discipleship, not simply sending young men off to seminary as a means to an end.
  • Develop – Through formal training often referred to as residency programs, ministry equipping centers or pastoral training schools, these churches are preparing men through the ministry of the local church.  Though certainly not opposed to the formal theological training offered through seminaries, these churches provide specialized programs by combining important theological training within specific geographical or cultural contexts.  This combination equips pastoral candidates to apply the practical aspects of their training in a more focused manner.  In addition, many of these churches are benefitting from increased opportunities for “long distance learning”.  With the help of technology and the web, distance learning students can access Undergraduate and/or Graduate course credit from almost any seminary, without the need to physically relocate.  The overall process of these pastoral development programs can take anywhere from 1 – 3 years depending on the host church.
  • Deploy – While church sustained planting pastors still exist, the bi-vocational model of planting is gaining ground as a favored model for multiplying churches due to its viability and sustainability.  For many churches the effort and time necessary to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars just to plant one church can be an unmanageable hurdle.  Since the 1st century, and still being performed today in countries all over the world, millions of bi-vocational church plants have been established.  In addition to deploying pastors, these churches are also sending large numbers of their members in support of their church planting efforts .  Like the churches described in the book of Acts these churches are sending their very best people whether it’s across town, to another state, or to countries on the other side of the world.

Why is it important to define these terms and delineate the differences between them?  First, it is important for any organization, be it ecclesiastical or otherwise, to understand its purpose.  Defining these terms may help a church or network better identify how it is they are called to assist in church planting efforts.  The second reason is actually a two-fold concern involving statistics.  CP marketing materials are filled with percentages and success rates.  In more recent years various agencies have made bold claims as to the number of churches that they have planted.  This begs the question – exactly who is it that counts the plant? Is it the planter himself, the sending church, the supporting church or the denominational association?  If we’re not careful it would be easy to grossly overestimate the actual number of plants since all of these entities are eager to report on the success of their involvement. We found in some instances that multiple churches and networks all claimed one church as their plant. There isn’t a problem with this except only one church is planted, not seven.

This leads to the other factor we must consider.  What constitutes a successful plant?  Many have touted numbers that would make the apostle Paul himself blush with embarrassment, but with closer inspection we discover that while many churches are planted a much lower number are truly viable after the critical 1 – 3 year period.  The reality for both concerns is that statistics are only as good as the control data gathered to produce them.

We must be careful not to fall into the same trap as the experts whose role it is to report on jobs in the United States.  One report shows 100,000 new jobs created over a certain period of time but neglects to also note that during that same time there may have been an equal number of jobs lost due to downsizing or businesses closing their doors.  We, too, must consider the net result of our efforts and be mindful of the reports that show the number of churches per our population decreasing.  Planting a new church is a good thing, but few would agree that success is measured simply by starting something.  Races are measured by the results at the finish line.  Businesses are measured by shareholder return on investment.  The church can be no different.  We must clearly define our role, correctly reflect our level of involvement and establish accurate criteria for measuring success.  We must work together to ensure that our church planting endeavors finish well.

Steve Wright and Scott Crawford help provide leadership for the SendSFL church planting network with other pastors and ministry leaders from First Baptist Church West Palm Beach.