(Josh King is lead pastor of Sachse’s First Baptist Church in Sachse, TX, and a contributor to Looks Like Reign: A Commentary on Theology, Culture and the Gospel. We are grateful to have this excellent guest post today!)
“NationsBeGlad Desiring God Int’l It’s easier to birth a baby than to raise the dead – plant new churches, don’t focus on dying churches. @edstetzer #dgnc”
I am a big fan of Dr. Ed Stetzer and would love to be at the Desiring God National Conference. Because I am not there I cannot fully know the context behind this specific tweet. This obviously hampers my ability to speak in detail to what is actually being quoted in the above tweet. However, the sentiment in the quoted tweet is disturbing to me, which is a bit unusual. I have read almost everything produced by Dr. Stetzer and the DG website is a constant resource to and for me, so to take issue with something emanating from one or the other of them is a bit unusual for me.
When I came to the church I am currently at, I found myself regularly struggling with this perspective from my friends and colleagues. Many of them told me not to go to the little church with financial problems and what seemed like a fair amount of sickness and poor church health. In spite of that, God was clearly leading and my wife and I were glad to follow His leadership.
So, with an admitted sensitivity in favor of the existing church, here are a few points where I feel the attitude of ignoring what appears to be dying churches, in favor of starting something new may fall short of God’s best.
- The example of Christ. Jesus was in the business of raising people from the dead. Pursuing Christ’s example demands that we equally commit ourselves to restoration and revival with the same fervor that we commit ourselves to new work(s).
- The church is worth fighting for. God establishes the church in a community and as servants of God we should care about what he cares about. The local church is his plan for reaching the world, not to mention his bride. It seems counter-intuitive to simply give up on her.
- Resources are limited. Both planting and revitalizing require resources but established churches many times already have buildings and staff. To simply write off those resources may lead us to a position of being poor stewards of what God has entrusted to us.
- God is the life giver. Often the reason is it easier to plant rather than to revitalize stems from the planter’s arrogance and unwillingness to love the sheep, not to mention a man-centered, pragmatic approach to church “success”. When you plant you get to call the shots. You do not have to care for the sheep the previous guy wounded. Church restoration is not easy, but the people of God are worth it. When we understand that “Paul plants, Apollos waters but God gives the increase” than we will find ourselves committed to the hard tasks, even if the reward seems improbable.
Hear me, I do not want to fabricate a distinction between planters and ‘pastors’. Both are necessary and both should be celebrated, and in many ways both are entwined in the same person. However, I do hope that we can expose this unnecessary rejection of hurting churches in the pursuit of what we may perceive to, in fact, be an easier path.
One friend recently asked me why I would want to pastor a First Baptist Church, particularly because ‘they have deacons.’ My response was something along the lines of ‘the Spirit led me’. From the outside looking in it may be easy to assume that this church was dying, in fact many had already declared it dead. However, since coming, I know that God has been at work. There has been a new life and our influence in the community has gone from almost non-existent to a constant force. I understand that voices that promote church planting are not necessarily against revitalization, and I appreciate that, but I think we need to take it a step further and remember that God is passionate about restoration and renewal, just as he is passionate about new works. It is my conviction that it takes a strong man to plant a church and it takes a man with true grit to fight for the dying ones. No one said either was supposed to be easy.
Josh, thanks for sharing this with us. Powerful.
You made some insightful observations, since I have been going through the process of trying to lead the reinvigoration of a plateaued established church. Sometimes I want to just go somewhere and start a church where I won’t have to deal with the traditions and difficulties I encounter.
But there are several hundred people who worship here and they should not be abandoned just to make my ministry easier.
This post was high quality, but it also spoke to me where I am and to the struggles I am going through.
Amen! Brother. Right on! People do not see the value of being the spark that brings a dying church back to life. It is, surely, as I read somewhere many years ago, the hardest task of all. We really need a group/organization/movement/ call it whatever you please to focus upon this issue and the requisite factors involved in its resolution, e.g., prayer, preaching, biblical excitement (the teachings, the truths of the Book are the most moving, thrilling, dynamic, electric, galvanic, stirring, compelling, motivating, stimulating of all). I once saw the power of the Scriptures come into a home, utterly transforming it, changing the people in it, and that change lasting in their lives for over half of a century.
One of the things that helps is realizing that we don’t necessarily have to turn our traditional churches into clones of the trendy, culturally relevant church plants around us. They reach a lot of people, but not everyone. Every city (especially non-trendy ones like Sioux City) need established churches to reach the types that are not drawn to the newer plants.
Both/and not either/or
Great word!
We seem to always be in competition.
IMB verses the NAMB….
pastoring verses planting….
traditional verses contemporary….
calvinist verses whosoever will….
the list goes on
When ALL are needed to reach the lost and make disciples. It will be a great day of rejoicing in heaven when we finally realize we are on the same team to make a difference for Christ.
Thanks for taking the time to share some great insights.
Yep.
Josh,
I’d encourage you not to start a blog post at SBCVoices with a paraphrased Stetzer quote that does not include the context and does not give the exact quote. It always amuses me that I have to respond to tweets that someone else said since I say so many things that are really controversial. Grin.
Instead, I’d read the multiple books I’ve written on church revitalization, the multiple times I’ve spoken on it, and the churches I’ve led through revitalization.
Your post is great… the beginning of your post, well, not so much. 😉
Ed
Ed, you are always held in high esteem here, even by us non-trendy, old fogeys.
Dr. James,
Absoluetly – The Scriptures are at the core of succesful revitalization and planting.
SBC,
I am sure you can agree that these false divisions can be frustrating at times.
Ed,
I am not sure I understand your comment. I think we may have the same ‘foe’. Twitter does not allow for context, as far as the exact quote there is no way for me to know that.
The point of my post was the sentiment expressed in that given tweet. Anyone who would doubt your commitment to revitalization is misguided at best. However, there is clearly an attitude of division between most planters and established church pastors. That is all I hoped to address.
The fact that your name and DG is on the tweet requires a response, especially if it was misquoted. At least I think so.
As I said – I am a big fan of Dr. Ed Stetzer.
Peace,
JWK
I think anyone would have to admit that the good Dr. Stetzer has been one of the most powerful forces shaping our denomination. I think for the better.
There certainly are headaches in working with the established church… but there’s also a lot of joys.
I’ve been preaching through Acts on Sunday mornings–and granted it was the “birth” stage of the church, and we do have plenty of places with truly dead/false churches–but not once did the early church send Paul and Barnabas or whoever into cities/towns that an established church to plant a new church… planting always happened where the Gospel had not reached and church did not exist. Strengthening the existing churches was their priority.
Now granted even as “big” as a city like Ephesus was for her time, they did not have mega-cities into the millions like we have today. So in our culture we might have a “city” with mini-cities inside that need church plants…
…but why do we feel the need to plant new churches in a general geographical area where a church already exists? Why not “revitalize” or partner with existing churches to better reach their communities and help the communities overcome any negative feelings they have about the church that’s been there forever?