Who Needs the Holy Spirit to Plant a Church?

I’m in a conundrum. I live in the church planting world enmeshed in assessments, church planting training, high accountability for planters to hit their numeric marks, demographic research, web design, etc, etc, etc.  Sometimes in the quietness of the night I wonder how much I need the Holy Spirit to plant churches. Somehow we assume God’s call on a potential church planter’s life means they have the skill set of a certain profile that we’ve artificially created and if they assess low then we question out loud to them whether they were indeed called.  But I have a sneaky suspicion many prominent biblical characters would be assessed right out of being used by God …

• Abraham was probably an idol worshipper when God called him
• Moses couldn’t be used by God because he murdered a dude and then ran away into the desert
• Hosea was married to a hooker and there’s no way any church planting agency would let him make the cut!
• John the Baptist was the precursor to the hippie movement of the 1970’s with his organic clothing, diet of bugs and organic honey, and he lived as a nomad in the desert.  We’d question his sanity.
• Paul was an accomplice in a murder

We can  be so fixated on finding guys with the right skills set and heck, we’ll balk if they don’t have the “right” DISC or Myers Briggs personality profile.  With all of this then why do we need the Holy Spirit?  We wonder why God doesn’t “show up” more and maybe we’ve basically said to Him, “God, we’re good to go.  We got this one covered so you can keep working over in China.  We got your back here in the U.S.”

It seems like a pattern throughout Scripture is that God uses the broken and humble rather than the elite and the talented.  I believe He still does things that confounds the wisdom of the world which too often we’re in the latter category.  Maybe the best place to start in church planting is this … (1) brokenness over our own sin, (2) brokenness over a hurting and dying world, (3) and a tenacious dependence upon God and His indwelling Spirit who guides, leads, and still does miracles today.

Demographic Profiling

Sometimes I wonder about the way we plant churches and how we “target” people.  Before we get any further into this I’m the first to admit that I do this as well. I’ve heard all sorts of arguments for and against any notion of demographic profiling.  We call this target groups, focus groups, target audience, and all the other terms we’ve picked up from the marketing world.  Is this wrong?  Maybe the question is … can we even not do this?

The reality is that if you use a website for your church you’re already narrowing your demographic profile and excluding those who don’t have computers.  When you start speaking a certain language you automatically include as well as exclude.  If you use English then you’re “discriminating” against all non-English speakers in your city. Your music styles are exclusive whether it’s Sinatra-esque or a style like the Black-Eyed Peas. Your dress is exclusive.  The way you communicate truth is exclusive.  Regardless of what you do by the very things you do or avoid doing you’re going to include some and exclude others.  I’m not too sure if there’s any way around this.

But does there have to be any way around it?  Is it really that wrong?  You wouldn’t expect a church meeting in a Burmese rural village to look, feel, and be the same as a church in Manhattan … would you?  Probably not.  Maybe we need to realize that while yes the church universal IS incredibly ethnically and culturally diverse it doesn’t mean that every local body needs to be that way.  Right or wrong?  Is it possible?  Should it be normative?  What should we do with this?

Who’s Your City? (and the Impact on Church Planting)

Of all of the books I’ve read by Richard Florida this has by far been the most compelling.  The others were great disseminators of facts, charts, and other statistics but this seemed a bit more focused on the application of it all. I believe that the implications of where Florida is going with this book is pretty staggering especially if his message would ever to become more mainstream.  Whether you’re a city lover, have a keen interest in our economy, or an arm-chair social scientist seeking to understand global trends then this book with give you much to ponder.

Overall the book confronts the notion that place or geography is dead.  With such books on the market like The World is Flat by Thomas Friedman, which he argues that because of globalization it has a flattening effect that diminishes geography, Florida’s work stands in stark contrast.  As a matter of fact, Who’s Your City argues for quite the opposite of Friedman’s work on various levels. According to Florida the three most crucial questions adults face in life are; (1) What are you going to do? (job, career), (2) With who? (spouse, partner), and (3) Where? (geography, place)  Accordingly these are the three biggest decisions that will affect your life more than almost anything else.  Wow, that is a lot to soak in. “Finding a place that best fits us isn’t easy – as nothing that’s truly important in life is – but it can be done.” (291)

Building off his prior research and books Florida shows how geography does indeed matter as the creative class tends to cluster around one another.  High-tech firms exist in proximity with one another which strengthens their draw in the same way a McDonalds has no problem being directly across the street from a Burger King.  Where are these creative types clustering?  Again, based upon the 3 T’s, it is where other Talent collects, where technology companies are in abundance or at least there’s opportunities available, and in cities and regions that are very open and tolerant not only to differing sexual orientations but to diverse ethnic groups as well. “Like people, places have varying abilities to welcome and absorb newcomers – particularly those who are different from its current residents.” (301)

Again, in contrast to Friedman’s book Who’s Your City reveals to the reader that world is spikey and not flat.  Based upon economic output, the number of scientist or patents per capita, the world is best looked at through the lens of mega-regions. For example, instead of looking at Seattle as a single city it is best understood in the larger context in the mega-region, called Cascadia, which starts in Vancouver BC, encompasses Seattle, and goes all of the way down to Portland.

Place is still important.  As a matter of fact, it is very important and one the biggest life decisions we face that will literally affect and influence generations of our children and grandchildren. Deciding where to plant a church is crucial and not one to be taken lightly.  There’s nothing wrong with being intuitive as well as methodical in your decision of where to start a new church.  Not just by picking a region that’s a fit, but the part of city as well knowing that each city and each part of the city houses its own personality.  Where you plant a church is a big decision!

Cities and the Creative Class

I was working on a book review for this so I thought I might as well pass this along …

Building off of The Rise of the Creative Class this book forms a bit of a sequel (or actually Florida calls it a prequel) as it builds on and expands the information found in Florida’s research on the creative class. Central to the book’s message is a deeper look at the 3 T’s found in the previous book. For summary purposes they are (1) Talent, (2) Technology, and (3) Tolerance. Cities with robust economies in today’s world have a good mix of those three key components. “My view of creativity and cities revolves around a simple formula, the 3 T’s of economic growth: technology, talent, and tolerance.” (4)

A crucial point made throughout the book is that people, not products or raw materials are central to economic growth.  Therefore, cities who position themselves by attracting and keeping the brightest and the best have a bright future. Many times as cities seek to revitalize and reinvent themselves they get caught up in trying to attract companies or major sports venues.  Florida reveals that this isn’t the best way to use a city’s resources but instead to trek down a more counterintuitive path.  Instead of attracting companies or building sports arenas cities ought to focus on attracting those who’re part of the creative class.  If this happens then companies will actually follow and in the end the economy will prosper. The creative class is not attracted to big ticket items per se, but an overall active lifestyle with plenty of amenities to keep them engaged.

This preference for high-amenity places is related to the nature of knowledge-work careers. Jobs in high-technology fields are stressful and require long hours. Lifestyle amenities are seen as sources of stress relief … But the amenities these creative workers desire differ from traditional amenities. The amenity package of the industrial economy tended to focus on cultural amenities (the symphony, opera, theater, ballet, etc) and on big-ticket items like national chain restaurants, nightspots, and major league sports venues. There is mountain evidence that, while still important, these types of amenities are taking a backseat to more casual, open, inclusive, and participative activities. (84)

This book is chalked full of statistics from his extensive research that seeks to prove that point among many others.

The implications for the shaping of cities are pretty staggering to say the least. This approach runs in a different direction to the many attempts by cities to revitalize, reinvent, and rebrand themselves. In my short time watching this among several cities I’ve noticed how divergent the paths are.  Some cities seeks to pour millions of dollars into big ticket items like sports stadiums, museums, and theaters thinking that it’ll help bolster their city and economy as they try to attract more young talent.  But according to Florida that’s not necessarily the key.  Somehow cities need to embed in their DNA a high level of tolerance and freedom for people to be who they want to be thus removing the lid on creativity.  It seems that the most creative hotspots in the U.S. are also the most tolerant whether that be of differing sexual orientations to freedom in political views.

My follow-up question in my own thinking revolves around this … where is the church? How is the church tapping into all of this that is taking place in our cities?  What does church planting look like in and among the creative class?

Manny Ramirez and the World of Church Planting

Ok, admittedly I’m not the biggest baseball fan. I’m a college football homer.  However, I’m a sports fan and listen to ESPN radio religiously.  With that I love are the personalities of athletes that transcends their own sports … Lebron, Kobe, Brady, Favre, and of course Manny.  While finishing up his drug suspension of 50 games Manny Ramirez is getting back into the swing of things by playing a short stint for the Albuquerque Isotopes who are the AAA team of the Dodgers.

This was an interest of me because of several reasons: (1) Manny is fun to watch and follow and no one seems to really care that he was suspended for steroids, (2) I love Albuquerque tons, and (3) there was quite the media blitz taking place there because Manny is in town.  They sold something like an extra 20,000 tickets because of him … in Albuquerque, AAA baseball, and all because of Manny.  Gotta love it!  This would be like Kobe suiting up and playing a few games with Eastern New Mexico University, or Tom Brady playing a game in the Canadian Football League, or Beyonce singing at a high school talent show in Fargo, North Dakota.

There’s a buzz with Manny in town.  Everyone knows it and kids are wearing Manny wigs to the game.  How does this connect with church planting?  Of course we could talk about creating hype in worship gatherings like driving tanks onto stage, parachuting into your sermon time, or interviewing celebrities as part of your message.  But it’s much more than that.

What is your community passionate about?  What are they rallying behind?  It could be anywhere from organic farming to a local sports team, a lifestyle, an institution, or whatever.  Find it, find out, crack the code, and somehow use that to gain traction for the advancement of the Gospel.  This calls for creatively engaging your community OUTSIDE of your worship gathering times, it calls for you to thoroughly exegete your context, and the fashion ways your people can engage others with the Gospel.

What Else Can Starbucks Teach Us?

So what, I am a Starbucks homer.  While I prefer local coffee shops many times when I’m traveling I end up settling for Starbucks since I at least know what I’m going to get.  With local coffee shops it’s a crap shoot and you wonder if your drink will be good or not.  I won’t tolerate subpar lattes. I had my favorites in Tucson (Caffe Luce and Road Runner) and so far here in Illinois I’ve found the Coffee Hound but I’m still hunting for more …

But what can Starbucks teach us who’re part of the church? What does Starbucks have that we could learn from?  Let’s take a look.

1. Multi-ethnic – I know, you’re probably thinking that is not true based upon where your Starbucks is located in your part of the city, but it is true. But let me take you to a Starbucks in south Tucson and most of the customers are Hispanic, let’s pop over to south central LA and for 2 hours I was the only Caucasian at the Starbucks in an African American neighborhood, or lets go over Lions Gate Bridge to North Vancouver and most of the customers were Asian.  What is it about Starbucks that appeals to all?  Same store, same drinks, but different customer base in each setting.  Maybe instead of each local church focusing on being multi-ethnic maybe they’d be best to simply reflect their immediate neighborhood like Starbucks does?

2. Mult-generational – I think the church is the only grouping or organization that gets overly wrapped up in generations.  At Starbucks?  I see young and old, little kids to 65 year olds with tats and ear rings.  There’s no generational distinctive.  Why does the church get so preoccupied with generations?  Young church.  Next Generation church. Senior adults church or ministry. Youth ministry.  Why can’t the church be all inclusive like the neighborhood Starbucks?  How does Starbucks have such a wide appeal that hits all?  Is it the music? I mean in a week’s time you’ll hear anywhere from Sinatra to brand new up and coming kickin’ bands but no one seems to notice nor even fuss about it.  Why does the church fuss so much about music?

3. Socially-Conscious – Starbucks is socially conscious and the largest purchaser of fair trade coffee.  They also have numerous other initiatives they’re involved in on the home front in the stores like the Ethos Water.  There are untold stories of how they’re helping locals in villages where they buy coffee.  People see this and respect Starbucks that much more.  They also provide people “entry level” ways to get involved.  How hard is it to buy an Ethos bottle of water?  It’s easy, small, simple, and anyone can get involved in issues beyond their home city.  How can the church learn from this?  How do we get beyond the guilt we induce on people in our fundraising and make it fun, simple, and easy?

There are things all around us that can teach us so much if we simply stop, look, and listen.  Starbucks is a good example of ways we can influence culture.

Early Christians in the City

We know that we can trace God’s ideas of how one is to live in a city back into the Old Testament.  We come across such passages as Jeremiah 29 where God tells the exiled Jews in Babylon to seek the welfare, prosperity, and peace of the city.  I’m sure to the Jew who’s family was slaughtered and home city was razed that this may have been a hard pill to swallow.  Also, we know that the story of Jonah was not really about a giant fish or even the prophet per se but about the amazing miracle of an entire city full of violent people repenting and turning to God.  God’s heart is for the city.

Fast forward to the New Testament and the theme picks up without missing a beat as Christians were found in every major city of the Roman Empire.  What were they to do?  Run? Withdraw?  Create an us vs. them mentality?

How then should the Christians in 1 Peter spend their days on earth? It is clear that as spiritual ’sojourners’ and ‘alien residents’ they must withdraw from the self-indulgent lifestyle of their contemporaries (2:11) and seek the welfare of the society in which they live. They were instructed to spend their days in this earthly city seeking the blessing of its inhabitants (2:11ff). (Bruce Winter, Seek the Welfare of the City).

So much of the New Testament epistles is written against the backdrop of the some of the largest cities in the world at that time.  Indeed the early Christians were urban. These new followers of Jesus were to live out their faith in the politeia from where we get our word “politics.”  But that term had a much wider meaning than simply how we define politics today.  Instead it encompasses one’s “public life.” “The term referred to the whole of life in the public domain of a city, in contrast to private existence in a household.” (Winters)

As we live out our faith in the politeia it means involving ourselves in the city … caring for it, seeking its welfare, making it a better place, and so on.  For some reason, largely because of our eschatology, we tend to withdraw from the city and not seek its welfare or peace.  Sure, we’ll do “spiritual” things like try to get people to become Christians but I’m afraid we’ve failed to realize that our responsibility is MUCH larger than that.  Seeking our city’s welfare is MUCH larger than “getting people” saved …

What Makes a City Great?

Since ancient times philosophers have wrestled with the question of what makes a city great.  That’s a great question to think about, isn’t it?  What does make a city great?  Is it natural surroundings like an ocean, mountains, or grassy plains?  Is it the built environment with a state of the art skyline with creative and efficient architecture and design?  Does it include affordable housing for all who live there?  Is there a functioning and easy-to-access public transportation? Is it great public schools whether it’s the inner city or the suburbs?  Is it a diverse conglomeration of people living peaceably and joyfully in proximity with one another upholding cultural uniqueness yet respecting each anothers’?

It’s not that easy of a question to answer is it?  This question was debated during Herodotus’ time in ancient Greece. Three critical factors were believed to lead to the overall health of a city; (1) the sacredness of place, (2) the ability to provide security and project power, and (3) the animating role of commerce.  Take one away and the whole thing seems to crumble.  What was true in ancient Greece is still true today.

I think among we evangelicals we have a myopic view of history, society, and our future.  We somehow think that if we can just “get people saved” then all of our societal woes will instantaneously be fixed.  I’m sorry but all you need to do is sit in a church business meeting, a committee meeting, or a congregational meeting and you’ll quickly realize that that is not true.  If we can’t lead our churches then how can we lead our cities?  I’m afraid our theological schema doesn’t provide much space for a theology of a city where we look at cities holistically.  A view that says that people’s ministries outside the church being involved in city life (whether vocationally or not) is possibly even more important than what they contribute to a church body.  Am I wrong?  While yes many of our gifts are given to build up the body but many are also given to expand the body …

What do we need to do to enlarge our thinking of the city and our involvement within?  How do we make our cities great?

Does Community Trump Evangelism?

Somehow we’ve lost touch with the world.  I can’t remember how many books I’ve read on community in the church.  They’ve all began to melt together in one big pot of goo. Community is big.  We live in such a transient fractured society that one of our deepest longings is truly to connect with people on levels that are deeper than merely surface acquaintances. But does it have to trump evangelism?

We’ve all heard of groups who’re dedicated to neo-monastic living or focusing on communal spirituality or rediscovering ancient practices of spiritual formation and I’m 100% for that. Since we are a frantic fractured people there is something appealing about reconnecting with earlier church writers who’s practice of spiritual formation is very foreign to us in our contemporary/modern setting.  There was something more holistic in their practices that saw everything as spiritual and being an anchorless culture it is good to grab onto something ancient and meaningful. But does it have to trump evangelism?

One of the tensions I feel when I hang out with these kinds of groups is how evangelism is done.  I’m not talking about the cold turkey stuff where you go door to door or yell at people on a street corner, but simple relational evangelism.  Most of what I hear is how they’re doing community and growing deeper in their love for God and one another … but my question is … what about those outside your group?  Is it like gathering once a week to share in exquisite chocolates imported in from Switzerland but never bother sharing it with those outside your group?  Is this chocolate simply yours or what do you think about sharing some with your neighbors?  Maybe you’d find they have a sweet tooth for this kind of chocolate and are drawn into your group?

I know there’s a tension.  There are groups so focused on evangelism that its almost like all they’re doing is birthing orphans because there’s nothing about getting them connected with a spiritual family.  Then there’s groups so focused on all of the nuances of they’re group that for some reason the Good News never seems to leave their group.  Where do you find balance?

Planting at the U

There’s something definitely appealing about planting a church on or around a large university campus.  I have to say that these places are some of my favorites to be around because of the energy and limitless potential found within.  As I walk around or sit in coffee shops I wonder which engineering student is going to do something amazing, which MBA student will make their first million by 30, or which law student will get into sports law, become an agent, and represent pro athletes?  See the potential?  Well, what about the church?  What about new church plants?

No one denies that these 4-5 years in college are some of the most influential of your life.  Often times decisions made in this time period will set the trajectory for the rest of your life. According to creative-class-guru-economist Richard Florida the 3 most important decisions in your life are … What are you going to do (job)? With who (spouse)? And where?  Your time in college shapes and influences those 3 decisions tremendously.

What about spiritually? While students are wrestling with those 3 questions what if we infused church planting / discipleship into their DNA? I know we’ve had campus ministries for decades now and one of the struggles is that, like youth ministry in high school, it’s hard for college students to connect with a church and stay connected.  Many involved in campus ministry may be super active spiritually but struggle to connect with a local church. Why do we assume that all of the sudden after 4 years when they move on they’ll seamlessly integrate into a local church?  I’d define church anywhere ranging from an upstart church plant, to a typical house church, and all of the hybrids in between.

That’s where church planting on campus is so key. It integrates students into the church / a church from the beginning.  How cool would it be that their exposure to following Jesus in the context of a local church like this is so profound and simple that when they go on as engineers, MBA-types, or lawyers that they’d be able to replicate what they experienced?  Instead of trying to graft into an existing church maybe it’d make more sense for them to simply plant?

Imagine what’d happen after 1-2 decades of this kind of thinking on our major college campuses?  Wow …