We met six times over two years for two to three days each time. Each time we met for two to three days and tackled a topic related to applying church planting movement principles: vision for church planting movements, growing church planting leaders, selecting church planters, coaching church planters, churches planting churches.

I ran the program in Australia and New Zealand, Britain and Europe. Hundreds of participants in thirty teams from fifteen nations were involved. The results were mixed.

Here’s what I learned through the experience about introducing change aimed at fueling church planting.

You can’t change people

You can create a first class learning environment with state of the art presentations and carefully crafted material, but you can’t change people. You can’t motive people. In fact, for some of the teams, who re required by their leadership to attend, you can do damage and strengthen their resistance to change.

The 85/15 rule

Around 85% of leaders and teams that sign up for training are not ready to implement. There are too many other distracting agendas. Too much resistance or indifference to change.

The 15/85 rule

Fifteen percent of leaders and teams are ready for action. Train thirty teams and you’ll find four or five who are ripe. You might regard that as a depressing ratio. Not so. The 15% will end up planting more new churches than the 85% combined. They are gold worth panning for.

Look for the early adopters

How to spot the 15%? Look for leaders and teams who throw caution to the wind and immediately begin implementing what they are learning. They aren’t interested in abstract ideas they are desperate to do something.

Who is in the harvest?

The program was good. We got the content and the learning environment right. But I made one mistake. We took too long before challenging teams to do what Jesus did and get out among lost people. Nothing else comes near the power of seeing lives changed by the gospel.

It’s the leaders and teams who are at the coalface who catch God’s heart, who learn his ways, who inspire others to step out in faith.

The project got me thinking about Movements.

Every now and again I get a request for a copy. Usually someone has heard Alan Hirsch referring to it.

One day I’ll rework it and turn it into a book.

Meanwhile if you want to read the dissertation here it is.

Before you print “Apostle” below your name on the business card, you had better read the job description.

Paul was at different times in differing roles, sometimes simultaneously: cross-cultural missionary traveling from region to region, evangelist in a city, pastor of a local congregation, counselor, coordinator of the affairs of churches in an interregional framework (the bishop or superintendent of today), leader of a missionary team, teacher of co-workers, teacher of new converts, theologian, author of theological writings, author of hymns (perhaps), and leather worker who needed to earn money. A missionary who explores new territory without any existing models, who is ready to value co-workers more than self, who is prepared to carry the cross daily not the “head of department” or an “office boss.”

A missionary tackles the task at hand, using every opportunity for preaching the good news of Jesus Christ, and striving to nurture new believers in any way necessary.

Eckhard Schnabel

OK, none of us come close. Let’s make the list simpler and realistic. What does an apostle do?

An apostle takes the gospel to people who haven’t heard it. An apostle forms new communities of disciples. An apostle keeps returning until those communities are viable. An apostle moves on to new unreached fields, multiplying disciples and churches.

If you do that, you’re an apostle (the missionary/missional kind not the writing scripture kind). But don’t put it on your business card. Let the fruit of your ministry speak.

We may say “every believer is a missionary” but our behaviour proves otherwise. So how do you motivate people?

You don’t. You can’t.

There is only a small percentage of people ready and willing to take up the challenge of reaching a lost world. Your job is to find them, get them started, keep them encouraged, help them multiply.

They may be new believers or existing believers.

How do you find them? You train everyone and anyone who is willing to learn and then look for faithfulness and fruitfulness.

What about the Majority? Stop trying to change them. It’s not working. They won’t try anything unless they can see what God does through the Early Adopters.

That means if you are serious about change, all you need to do is influence 15-20% of people and their example will bring others on board. The catch is they have to be the right people, and you may be surprised who they turn out to be. Remember what Jesus did.

Want to learn more? Here’s a book that will help.

“Start with Why: How Great Leaders Inspire Everyone to Take Action” (Simon Sinek)

A question from Ray:

Hi Steve

I’m starting to get a feel for the extent and potential for church planting movements (CPMs).

Do you have any suggestions on how to excite an existing church and transition them into a church planting church?

Ray

My answer:

Hi Ray

Thanks for the question. It’s an important one. The good news is I think that after twenty years of championing CPMs, I’m beginning to learn something about how to help existing believers and churches transition.

Don’t try to change/excite/motivate/convince anyone. It will only lead to frustration for you and the people you are trying to get on board. You may even add to their resistance.

A far more effective strategy is to follow Jesus’ example. You get out among people, share the gospel, make disciples, form communities. As you do, you share the stories of what God is up to. You offer training and look for obedient and fruitful people.

Typically only 10-15% of people are ready and willing to dive in and get involved. They’re the people you’re looking for. You want to train them in how to share their faith and make disciples and get them doing it immediately.

Meanwhile the majority of people need to hear the stories of lives changed and disciples made. Give them permission to come on board at their own pace. You want them to know what is going on, and to be encouraged, and be praying. The more you pressure them, the less open to change they will be.

It’s much wiser to cast vision, then pilot and experiment with early adopters, rather than imposing a new model of church and ministry on existing believers.

On the podcast I’ve interviewed, Dave Lawton, Tim Scheuer and Jeff Sundell. Each of them have done a great job of leading by example and inviting existing believers to get involved without alienating those who are not ready.

Perhaps 5% of people will oppose any attempt to reach lost people. Rebuke them gently and pray for their souls. Most people will get excited if you communicate well and give them the freedom to buy in at their level. 10-15% are ready to do something now. Go find them.

Steve

Most denominational systems don’t know what to do with someone like Glenn. This is what I’d do with him. . .

First, I would leave him in his current role for a very long time. Let him lock in the change and raise up the leaders who will take this emerging movement into the next generation.

Next I’d give him the best. I’d identify the next wave of pioneering leaders and send them to Western Australia to plant reproducing churches under Glenn’s leadership.

Once they’ve done that, they’re ready to return to their home state and do it again.

I’d find leaders in other regions who are silly enough to do what Glenn has done, and teachable enough to chase Glenn for coaching. I’d let them grow through the experience of implementing change and locking it in.

Finally, I wouldn’t make Glenn the exception. I’d set the bar at the same height for everyone. I’d expect every district to multiply disciples and churches. I’d look for godly, determined, and teachable leaders who will make it happen, or die trying.

The thing to remember is that it is not talent or luck that separates guys like Glenn from everybody else. He’s just an ordinary guy, doing his job.

One hundred and ten people turned up for an Adventist church planting summit in Western Australia recently. Up from forty-five the year before.

Two new churches have already been started since the summit. They’re not just starting individual churches, whole networks of new churches are popping up. Among indigenous people, immigrants and Aussie battlers. Another among university students and young adults. There’s a third expanding network of house churches.
Since 2003 we have started forty three new churches, twenty-five of them in the last two years. That’s an increase from 50 to 93 in six years.

In 2003 the denomination was growing at 1% per annum. Now they increase by 2.5% each year. The target is 10%. They have no problem with existing churches, but their clear bias is for reproducing churches of all shapes and sizes.

Most of the rest of the church in Australia is on the decline. So why do the West Australian Adventist stand out as an exception? I’ve been tracking with Adventists in Western Australia for last five years. Here’s what they are teaching me about fueling church planting movements within existing denominations:

1. Leadership makes a difference

I can’t go past the influence of the state President. There’s no razzmatazz about Glenn Townend. He’s godly, committed to the gospel, determined and gracious. He knows how to steer a course, and take others with him. He can outlast the few who resist change. He’s the sort of guy people want to follow.

2. Shared ownership

Five years ago when Glenn walked into a training event I was running, he walked in with a team. Other leaders had people with them, but Glenn had a team. Young men and women and the young at heart who had signed up for action. Glenn is not the one man band. He knows how spot good people and give them a job to do that fits their strengths. I’m thinking of Warrick Long, his business manager. Warrick knows how to build robust systems around a vision. I’m thinking of Phil Brown, his coach/trainer of church planters, he knows how get alongside the early pioneers. I’m thinking of Peter Roennfeldt who drops in every now and again as the movement’s “Gandalf”.

3. Conservative and radical

Glen is conservative, he’s not out to impose his agenda on existing churches. He’s out to win them to a kingdom vision. He’s also radical. He promotes all kinds of innovative ways to reach people with the gospel and multiply disciples and churches.

4. Money isn’t everything

These guys are not throwing big dollars at church planting. They spend their money carefully, investing it in activities that build momentum and capacity, rather than propping up dependent church plants.

5. Multiple streams

A number of leaders have emerged who have multiplied new churches. Glenn has resisted the denominational tendency to centralize and control. He’s encouraged diversity around a single purpose.

If these West Australians can make a difference, why are they the exception?

Never mind the manoeuvres, just go straight at ‘em.

Horatio Nelson

Nelson was of the opinion that in war no captain can do very wrong if he places his ship alongside that of the enemy.

According to Edgar Vincent, his method for evolving plans was not analytical. He despised “pen and ink men”. He relied on imagination and intuition to produce ideas, then rigorously tested those ideas against the experience and insights of those whose judgement he trusted.

Movement leaders don’t worry about the fancy manoeuvres, and the pen and ink, they just sail “straight at ‘em”.

Hi Steve,

I’m reading your book at the moment and I get the impression that you are against theological education. What do you think?

I will say that when I studied Church History at Bible College I found it boring. Thanks for making Church History interesting.

Liz

Here’s my response.

Hi Liz

Thanks. I’ve always believed that Church History is not just the history of theology but the story of the people who made history.

I’ve spent 17yrs in higher education (part time). Economics/Politics, Theology, Doctor of Min. I LOVE study. I enjoyed Greek!

I just don’t think we should exclude 99% of the world’s population from leadership in the church because they will never complete formal theological education.

What they need is life-long, on-the-job training, which engages head, heart and hands—knowledge, character and skills.

I also think theological education is a socialization process that creates a professional clergy and undermines the rapid expansion of the church. Movements “democratize” the faith.

With few exceptions theological education is a secularizing force, even for the biblically orthodox.

I like what Roland Allan said, “Most heresies result from the speculations of learned men.”

Having said that, we must have teachers in the body of Christ and in every missionary movement that are theologically trained. We need Pauls and Lukes who were both active in evangelism and church planting and at the same time sharp theologically. But most churches in the NT were not planted by our equivalent of “ordained” clergy.

I think it’s reasonable to assume that after Peter left Cornelius (Acts 10), that it was the new believer, Cornelius, who became the “pastor” of the new church that met in his home. At that stage Peter didn’t even have a copy of the New Testament to leave behind.

I’m trying to have it both ways. But in the West, the pendulum needs to swing away from formal theological training as THE road to leadership. The mandate is clear: we are to make disciples of Jesus and teach them to obey what he commanded. Movements take both knowledge and obedience seriously.

Thanks for the question. I might turn it into a blog post. . .

Steve

I recently encountered a group of denominational leaders who held views on biblical authority and sexual ethics that were diametrically opposed to the vast majority of their members and churches.

How is such a situation sustainable? Easily.

Most of the members are unaware of the views shared by their denomination’s leadership. The conspiracy of silence is maintained in the interest of “harmony”.

Key evangelicals within the denomination simply get on with their ministries in the local churches. Those same churches keep the denomination afloat financially. They live in a parallel universe preferring to ignore an unpleasant reality, hoping it will not get worse. But it does.

Here we have a snapshot of a denomination in the advanced stages of decline.

The belief systems that destroy dynamic movements from within are like viruses.

A virus is a small infectious agent that can only survive inside a host. We aren’t sure if viruses are a form of life, or organic structures that interact with living organisms. A virus has no sense of its “self”. No identity. It lives by invasion and occupation. It cannot reproduce outside a host cell.

Every human organism contains “opportunistic infections.” The presence of a pathogen is not enough to cause infection. There must also be a lack in the immune system of the host.

The job of the immune system is to preserve an organism’s integrity against invasion.

A dynamic movement must maintain a clear sense of its identity, even at the cost of “harmony.” You don’t reason with a virus. You don’t form a consensus. You take a stand. You define who you are.

The role of movement leaders is to protect the integrity of the movement. Confronted with the threat of a virus, empathy will result in destruction.

Conversely, if a leader in any relational system is both self-defined and non-anxious, that leader has the best possible chance of restoring health to the system. This strategy works in families, churches, movements and even nations.

Thanks to the late Edwin Friedman for stimulating my thinking on this topic.

“A Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix” (Edwin H. Friedman)