I don’t normally do this, but this a post that I’m refreshing and respringing. There has been a wide reaction over, twitter, Facebook, and Google+ and so I thought I’d give it a second round here. Comments have been left in tact.
My Wife and I, along with band of highly motivated indigenous and itinerant gospel laborers, plant churches here in the Andes Mountains Cloud Forest Region of Ecuador. Our direct goal is not to “plant churches” per se, but to Make Disciples and to guide the local gatherings as they may form. We do this work primarily amongst the poor. We could not do what we do without outside support. Some would suggest that a church is not “planted” until they are financially self-sustainable. The criteria for what constitutes a church plant are numerous and diverse. We will not consider those here. Instead, I’d like to focus on the single aspect of financial sustainability of church plants. Consider this quote:
“Church planting cannot be the final objective of mission, only the beginning. A church full of life and love, working for the good of the community in which God has placed it, is the proper end of mission. Transformational development that does not work toward such a church is neither sustainable nor Christian.”*
And also, few questions:
Should financial self-sustainability be a criteria for a church plant?
Isn’t interdependency amongst many parts of the body more biblical than the self-sustainability of one?
What is the proper course of action for a church plant that can not sustain itself?
You can join us by supporting the work. Click HERE for more information.
For a related post, and crucial to this conversation, see:
The Church Planting Question that could Change Everything!
*Bryant L. Myers (2011-11-09). Walking With The Poor: Principles and Practices of Transformational Development (Revised and Expanded Edition) (Kindle Locations 2210-2212). Orbis Books. Kindle Edition.
Missionary in the Andes Mountains Cloud Forest Region of Ecuador. My last name, "Labrador," is the word that's used for "Vine Worker" in the Spanish Bible, and it's OK with me. 
Peter on 'We Don't Need No Education' ~ The Apostle Paul
David Woods on Sabbath & Mission Part II
Rob Kampen on Sabbath & Mission Part II
Miguel,
You ask some great questions, that I think some may answer too quickly. I think people who are in these conditions like yourself and others should provide some insight for those who don’t live in extreme poverty conditions.
I come with my own biases and experiences and speak from them. I’m also speaking off the cuff a bit, so it is more discussion mode for me.
Even thought I have spent most of my life (not all) in the U.S., a radically individualistic society, I have found the interdependence and communal way of life in other places refreshingly biblical and think that most of us in the States tend not only to think individualistically about ourselves but also in regard to the church or churches that we serve. I don’t think “independence” ought to be the goal, but interdependence. This is why Paul seems to ask some churches to help others churches that are in need.
When it comes to reaching the universities and college campuses in the US, some of the most effective ministries making disciples include IVCF, Cru, Navigators, GCM and others. Most of the ministry taking place in these places are not sustainable in themselves, thus people raise support to minister in this unique spaces. And they raise a lot of support for this. In my estimation, this is a good practice and it requires the interdependency of the church.
I personally believe that every church in a country with great wealth ought to be walking along side of churches in the majority world, carefully, wisely and supportively (Walking with the Poor, Myers). I’ve written a bit on my thoughts on development here: http://jrwoodward.net/2010/02/shalom-makers-development-in-the-way-of-christ-a-more-humane-way-series/
Those are some initial thoughts.
JR,
Thanks for the compliment and comment. You’re right, there is a bit a shallow thinking in this arena, and interdependence and communal is “refreshingly biblical.”
I’m hoping to have more dialogue here on this blog regarding church planting amongst the poor, but will certainly visit the link you’ve cited above.
Appreciate your time brother.
Hi Brothers
I saw this blog published at @missionaries in twitter and called my attention the ”Planting Churches” sentence. It is great and encourage me to see we are church in movement. By now I can say im not very knowledged person, in fact some of what you were sharing seems a bit cunfusing to me related to waht is biblical or not. In intended to know more and more and know Gods will at any end.
What i have seen is that the planting churches concept has been growing and have seen a few different examples of this movement. Im getting to understand that Gods will is taking form in this places but diferently. In Ecuador im not quite sure how it goes. In Venezuela we are used to have a centered church no matter de denomination, people are used to go to church some especific place. Growing fat we have become a place knowed by many for being very insider. I mean with all the political stats and social here many people is litteraly losing their salvation and a cause can be such a insider church.
Im currently working with some others at planting churches in aprtments, Preaching people the salvation, baptising them and teaching them to share gospel on their neighborhood. I mean we are getting this church and moved to their own houses. This are small groups sharing the bible in partments some of them in the same building you can se this link of waht God is doing https://www.facebook.com/MpCristo?ref=ts or look for menca para cristo in facebook. Sorry for my writing, still have to practice and if is to long. But I really want to see and know more of this kind of work, so if you have anything to share of experiences might be helpfull THANKS in advanced. ITS A FACT WE ALL NEED COVERING SPIRITUALLY, AND ECONOMICS OF BIGGER CHURCHES. Keep in touch and God bless you!!
A church is a local, autonomous body. This places it not under the authority of another church. If a church requires the funding from an external sources in order to remain viable, I’m not sure that I would consider it a church (the exception would be those churches who need short term assistance in the case of a natural or “man-caused” disaster). I would consider such a body a “mission” being support by a church (or churches) and under that direct authority of that church (or churches). The members of the mission would, then, also be functional members of the supporting/governing local church.
Dependency, not interdependency, is the dangerous foot in the door for a church that remains dependent on outside resources to maintain their ministry. Does the body look to God for their help, or depend on that highly resourced outside group? Do they find God “enough” even in their weakness, or hold back unless outside resources come? What does it say about their ability to be used by God if outside funders suggest they can’t make it on their own?
One of the questions I ask when a congregation says they can’t do the ministry without help is this: are you using a model of ministry that is appropriate for your context? Too often a Western model of church (full time trained pastor, building, etc) is seen as necessary, when, for example, God is able to work through “lay” pastors who meet in homes. The need for money is to reproduce a model that doesn’t fit in the context.
From what I’ve been told, repeatedly, the expansion of the church worldwide is primarily through movements that are grassroots and distant from Western models of ministry that require much money and expensive training.
This is not at all to diminish Western missions efforts. There’s plenty of work to be done in areas where the church is not established. But let’s be cautious not to promote a model of ministry that requires funds and resources beyond what the local community can support.
Within a “go to church” or local membership model, sustainability can still be a question.
Of course, those who have been made saints in Christ are themselves the functioning church/ekklesia, and are (literally & spiritually) sustained by God. We know this to be by faith-trust, and without faith we are not pleasing God in any event.
To the poor, have we also become poor?
As a leader of the global house church multiplication movement (HCMM) who also advocates for “Insider Movements,” I believe the New Testament (NT) shows that Jesus, his disciples and the early church multiplied “simple churches” organically (oftentimes coerced by the Holy Spirit, coz they didn’t know better!) across the Roman Empire & beyond (like Thomas spreading God’s kingdom to India). (Note: CHURCH is composed of all those belong to the Kingdom, who follow King Jesus).
Each NT church (per city/polis) was an autonomous body, not under the authority of another church. No NT church needed the funding from external sources, except short-term aid in case of disasters (= interdependency happens then!).
Dependency is a most dangerous foot in the door for any church that depends on outside resources to sustain their ministry. Does the body look to God for their help, or depend on a resource-rich outside group? Do they find God “enough” even in their weakness, or hold back unless outside resources come?
If a church says they can’t do ministry without help, they are most probably using a model of ministry that is inappropriate in their context – most probably an imported “tradition of the elders” elsewhere. Too often a Western/Christendom/denominational model of church (full-time trained pastor, building, etc) is seen as necessary, when, for example, God is able to work through “lay pastors” (better called “disciple-makers”) who meet in homes or offices. External funding & materials are supplied to reproduce models that do not fit in the context!
History also shows us that the expansion of the church worldwide has primarily been through movements that are simple and organic/”natural” (ordinary believers gossiping Jesus to their relatives, friends and neighbors), hardly through Christendom/denominational models of church and ministry that require much money and expensive training!
If we’re really serious in finishing the Great Commission, let’s make sure that the models of churches ministry will indeed be biblical and strategic – not requiring funds and resources beyond what the local community can support! Let’s learn from the best practices of church multiplication movements in China, India, Indonesia, Iran, etc., and nowadays almost everywhere in the margins of Christendom!
I think there’s a big difference between a church that just can’t pay it’s bills because of some issue of health – wrong location, overextended expenses, lack of generosity, consumer/entertainment paradigm, etc – and what you’re describing where you’ve got apostolic leaders such as yourself choosing to rely on outside funding as you raise up local leaders and expressions (which presumably do have some hope of being sustainable in themselves – just maybe not of ever supporting you). That just sounds a lot like Paul to me. Seems like part of being called to be a leader in certain contexts is being willing to pay your own way for a while. Likewise, being a leader in a wealthy context means you’d do well to look for ways to resource people doing good work in a poorer context. I think Paul sets precedents for both in his ministry (1 thess
Should financial self-sustainability be a criteria for a church plant?
If a church is the body of Christ making disciples to fulfill the Great Commission, it can be as small as two persons – Mat 18:20 For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them.” A CHURCH OF THIS SIZE HAS NO EXPENSES, so it is financially self-sustainable.
A church cannot become too small to pay the bills until it incurs those bills and other financial obligations. When a church is too small to pay a salary, God raises up voluntary leadership from among the members. In the cell type church, that leadership is already in place if a cell church decides to become multiple house churches.
Property – a “holy place” – is not the goal of a church, but can be helpful in disciple making. The poorer the neighborhood, the cheaper the property. People can rent instead of purchase. Churches can meet in public parks and restaurants and other settings – even share space with other churches – at a cost that is well within their means no matter how poor they are.
Expensive buildings can create a situation where the church exists to maintain the building – and, instantly, you now have a temple institutional church as energy is diverted away from disciple making.
So, I wonder, what are the expenses that would make a church not sustainable?
Isn’t interdependency amongst many parts of the body more biblical than the self-sustainability of one?
I think what we find in the New Testament are church planters aka apostles aka missionaries who plant networks of small churches while simultaneously training indigenous leadership. Paul repeatedly states that the church plants do not pay the expenses of these church planters – they work for their own needs OR are supported by other churches that are established and send them to the mission field. The missionary is not fed by the mission field, therefore resources remain available locally until a church is financially able to send missionaries of its own.
The argument against this position is in Matthew 10, where the mission field should sustain the missionary – the missionary is to bring no resources to the mission field. This forces missionaries to keep moving and focus work where and only where God is rewarding it with local fruitfulness.
So it would seem to me that interdependency is about the sending of missionary apostles, but not about paying the bills for a mission field congregation. If they pay their own bills, it could be that they would scale what they attempt to what they could afford and thereby be consistently sustainable.
What is the proper course of action for a church plant that can not sustain itself?
It seems to me that the purpose of a church is to fulfill the Great Commission. Matthew 28:20 would result in leaders trained by what Jesus taught to be able to care for the spiritual needs of a church of any size. If leaders are not developed, then this training is not being successfully done.
Churches, like babies, begin with a single cell which multiplies. As long as leaders rise up, cells will multiply, because cells make disciples and disciple makers. When a network of cells reaches a certain size, it could decide to hire a pastor and procure a building so that it can minister in ways that fit the size of the growing body of Christ. If the cell function of making disciples and disciple makers continues, the number of persons in cells will grow, new cells will be born and more funds will be available.
If a church has hired a pastor and can no longer pay that salary, or a church has procured a building and can no longer pay that expense, then it can either close up or move back down to functioning as a network of cells. What I assume typically happens is that the evangelism practiced in the cell stops happening as the people are distracted with the busyness of becoming an institutional church where it becomes the pastor’s job to evangelize and disciple rather than the joyful task of every member.
Being one who works along side a church planter cross culturally in Latin America, this is a great question.
I believe that a church should be working among it’s community. A church should be a blessing to it’s community. Rather than strive to the “best in the community,” I think we should strive to be the “best for the community.”
In working among the poor, I don’t know if that will ever led to self-sustainability.
Most leaders I know personally in this area are either tentmaking, have a financial support team, or a combination of the two.
As a general observation, the locals are tentmaking, while the North American’s have financial supporters, in part because the culture of giving to support missionaries has matured longer in North america and it seems to be in Latin America.