what should church planters report?
My church planting coach asked a few of us to comment on some of the ways we measure our effectiveness as church planters.
Many questions in the past have geared around numbers, such as baptisms, conversions, gospel presentations, but I think we need to think through a lot of these former measurements.
I tend to think the questions asked of the church planters should be more specific to the church planting task itself.
Maybe questions like what books have you read or are reading about church planting are effecting the way you church plant (accountability to read). Or perhaps questions about the individuals community itself, such as where are the common places in your neighbourhood that people gather and how are you gathering there with them (accountability to study the community)? Or what is the spiritual climate of your neighbourhood, what religions/non-relgions are present? Or what have you learned from spending time in the community centre? Or maybe what do the people in your community like to do, or how do they communicate? What are the greatest needs in your neighbourhood (homelessness, drugs, single mothers)?
Does that make sense?
It’s my opinion that many church planters do not understand their contexts enough when they plant, which is why so many churches look the same. Because despite how much prayer and knowledge of God they have, they really need to understand their people.
Just a few thoughts.
We do need a broader scope than baptisms, conversions, and gospel presentations when we evaluate effectiveness. I like where you’re heading, but everything you’ve listed seems preparatory. If you stuck with the original three, that would be like answering with how many evangelism training courses you’ve taken, instead of how many you’ve evangelized. I’d say it’s worthwhile to keep the three you’re already accountable for, and add to it questions like “How many places/subcultures are you, as the church, incarnating Christ in the world?” and “In what ways are you changing the community where you are sent?” Questions like these would necessitate the kind of cultural exegesis you see a need for.
Are there things we can learn from a ministry in Quebec use these marks as indications of community transformation;
1. An increasing number of churches actively involved in spiritual transformation of their city regions.
2. The people of God animated by a passionate spirituality involved in concrete acts of reconciliation and justice for the welfare of the city.
3. Leaders desirous to see the people of God use their gifts(in partnership with other churches) to demonstrate the Good News in all aspects of the city.
4. Equality (equity) in economics, social policy, language acquisition possibilities, infrastructure, housing, public transportation and education.
5. Happy and well-developed children and youth, living in peace with themselves and others, guided by good spiritual values that enrich their life and allow them to reach their full potential and the welfare of the city.
6. The decline in the rate of suicide.
7. Healthy adults, great marriages, vibrant families (AIDS prevention decreasing number of people contracting the virus)
8. Multiple institutional opportunities for the most vulnerable to reconnect joyfully with city that cares for all its populations.
9. City / Regions as places where violence is in decline.
10. A decline of sexual abuse against women and children
11. Beautiful cities and regions as artistic expressions and the heritage of the community are more deeply valued.
12. Reduction of pollution for a better more wholesome environment.
all great points!
Kyle … just read this quickly, but it makes sense, a lot of sense. I would change or add one thing to the “many church planters do not understand their contexts enough when they plant, which is why so many churches look the same” comment … I’d say our former tendency/dependency to rely on formulas, packages, etc instead of understanding our contexts is why so many church plants not only look the same, but fail. My experience with a large church planting denomination in Canada, and a ‘so-called perfect’ church planting demographic in the USA points me to this … which is the same as my argument on ALPHA … the ‘recipe’ that works at sea level does not work ( exactly the same ) at 7000 ft altitude. Not only do we have to understand the community contexts, we have to understand the church planter ( gifts, passions, background ) and maybe even do a better match on that as well.
OK, off to get some real coffee to start 2008 off right …
dlc