[This paper is part of the Introduction to Christian Leadership class offered to upcoming home group leaders in Xenos]

Nobody knows how house churches multiplied within a city in New Testament times, but they must have done so. This is because no church buildings or references to church buildings have been found dating from the apostolic period, or post-apostolic period. This is in contrast to the period from the late second century onward, when church buildings are mentioned frequently.

Instead, we find frequent references to house churches, usually in conjunction with public space (like the schoolroom of Tyrannus, Acts 19:9). The natural limitation on group size imposed by meeting in houses is conducive to several features of church life envisioned in the New Testament. Staying in homes would dictate that Home Churches remain relatively small, which would facilitate body life and real community. As they grew, they must have been divided and new churches planted, resulting in situations like that in Corinth, where Paul refers to the group as one "church in Corinth," but also as "the churches" apparently referring to various house churches in the city.

Our strategies therefore, should create options that will have the desired effect-- adding healthy, growing home churches, while respecting any restrictions imposed by sound ministry ethics.

Following are several strategies used for successful house church planting in the past. Remember that each of the existing models was created at some time in the past by home church leaders, so we see no reason why home church leaders today can't devise new methods, as long as we work together and communicate our plans.

Today, Xenos requires a senior leader be named for new home churches. Your sphere leader will help you decide who this should be for both groups.

II. The conventional method.

1. Definition and Theory

a) In this method, the leadership, teachers, and workers of the home church are divided as evenly as possible, hopefully along existing lines of influence in the home church. For instance, if you have two couples leading together, each couple takes their disciples and related friends, groups, ministry houses, and guests, and adds new leadership as needed before parting ways.

b) This model promotes equality between the groups in terms of experience. The conventional model seems to also offer a sense of continuity to the people in that they have some of the same leaders to look to, and usually they have their friends with them as well. The results have, so far, been good. To date, the conventional model remains the most successful model in use.

2. Preparation

a) Unless they are careful, the home church leaders could suffer major disruption of their long-standing relationships when planting this way. After working together with a team for years, separating from them could be difficult for some leaders. In-depth relationships and spiritual community support are just as important for leaders as for non-leaders. Further, while suffering for the sake of the gospel is reasonable and biblical, we don't want leaders to become aversive to further church planting attempts, or to lose effectiveness because of depression.

To avoid such hazards, leaders in a conventional church plant should plan ahead carefully. The leaders need to build deeply into relationships with others (usually their disciples) who will accompany them in the new church, because they won't have their former fellow-leaders with them any more. If we build ministry spheres, and whole cell groups are sent out together, people should already have good relationships in the new group.

(1) Normally, both sides would recognize new home church leaders only when they are ready to plant (although they would have been "sitting in" leaders' meetings for some time). Both new teams should already be looking forward to possible future planting plans.

(2) We prefer to delay recognizing new Home church leaders until time for the plant in order to keep the focus on home church planting. Exceptions would include spouses, where one spouse is a leader and the other is not, or a clear need for more home church leaders in the current home church.

3. Transition

a) After the leaders decide how they will plant the group, go over your plans with the rest of the home church members to make sure they agree to go to the side you envision for them. In the case of those not in a cell group, you may need to discuss their options one-on-one. Be sure everyone decides which side they will attend before the actual plant to avoid a lopsided division or "church-tasting." A taste-test approach could amount to a popularity contest, which would be unedifying.

We think people should be taught that an important basis for deciding where to go is where they can be used by God the most--that is, where they are needed. Other criteria could include relational history and ministry investment. Remember, however, we can't replicate churches and at the same time stay with everything and everyone with whom we have invested. In cases where ministry spheres are clearly defined everyone will know where they belong and little needs to be said. Normally, the church plant should be known to all for months in advance, if not a year or more. But we should never try to compel people to go to a particular home church against their will.

III. The Mission Planting Model

1. Definition

a. In the Mission Church model, the leaders of the original home church stay together, while sending out an all-new leadership team with their own home church.

b. In theory this model has much to commend it, because the new leaders get the opportunity to take the next step in ministry maturity-- taking responsibility for their own home church. This is an opportunity and a challenge that sometimes results in unexpected progress in the lives of the new leaders. This experience sometimes bears out the theory that some people won't learn to swim until the water gets too deep for wading.

On the other hand, be sure the new leaders actually have the ministry power to do the job. To date, the mission model has been problematic, resulting in a somewhat higher proportion of failures, so try to be sure the new leaders are ready. Your home group sphere leader and the elders must agree that your mission church is sufficiently experienced and trained to make success plausible.

Also, the new church should plan on remaining in a mentoring relationship with the parent church for a period of months (3 to 6 months or more is typical). The parent church, in consultation with their oversight leaders, should decide when they are no longer needed. One method for insuring adequate supervision is to alternate between separate home church leaders meetings and joint home church leaders' meetings for a period of time after the plant. Finally, if the mission church looks shakey, sphere leaders may call on the planting church to "warrant" the new plant. If it later fails, the sending church would be obligated to receive them back, so planting a failing church is a major waste of time and effort.

2. Preparation

a. The size of the mission church should be adequate. In most cases, this means the actual attendance at the new church (rather than the list of members) should usually be in the upper teens or higher if a student or singles' group, and over twelve if middle-aged. In general, small churches are vulnerable to demoralization during times when a proportion of their membership are missing for vacations etc. or some members are lost. People may feel like the extremely small size of the group signals failure, and may lose confidence. Let the mission group have the larger numbers. The experienced side is far less likely to fail, and therefore can be smaller.

An exception to this would be cases where ad-hoc Bible studies have been started by members in the sending church, and growth has justified planting them off as a new home church. Such groups may be quite small.

b. The new (mission) leaders should already have their own cell groups before the planting attempt occurs, and the people in those cells should have demonstrated real life-changing growth before the planting attempt. This is the best proof of readiness on the part of the new leaders. Be sure each cell group has "top-end" and "low-end" potential (i.e. potential future leaders, and potential outreach to new people).

c. Try to build a "church within a church," in the sense that all of the functions of home church life and growth are evident within the sphere of the new leaders before the planting attempt. In this way the leadership can determine that the new leaders are sufficiently mature and experienced in Christian work to succeed in their own home church. Also, the new home church will already have a structural and relational basis for carrying on its ministry with a minimum of disruption.

3. Leaders' Meeting Experience.

a. The new leadership should have been sitting in on leader's meetings for at least a period of months learning how to lead a home church, how to think about ministry, and how to relate to other leaders.

b. In addition, try having the new team meet with each other separate from the old leaders periodically. This enables them to get used to taking initiative and working with each other without help. They should evaluate their own ministry sphere, and determine what action to take in various ministry situations. Then, they can report to the old leaders on their conclusions. This should provide an opportunity for a fairly realistic look at the ministry dynamic in the mission church before actually taking the risk involved in planting.

When the new leaders report on their ministry decisions they should also explain their thinking. In cases where judgment is involved, encourage the new leaders to implement their own decisions, and note the outcome. The older leaders should only overrule the new leaders' judgment in cases where they see clear evidence that serious damage might result. Until we can trust the ministry judgment of the new leaders, we can't really have confidence in their ability to lead a new church.

Note: These measures are also good for conventional home churches

4. Teacher/Discussion Leader Preparation.

a. At least two good teachers must have been raised up among the new Mission Church leaders. Here again, we see the need for planning. These teachers should have taught several times each in the Parent home church with consistency before planting.

5. Building Composition

a. Adequate evangelistic and discipleship potential must be sent out with the new leaders. Their sphere of ministry should show ability to attract and win new people, and to counsel, teach, and disciple the old.

b. Potential upcoming leaders should be present in both churches. The ideal is to have potential leaders present in each cell. These should be known and agreed on by all.

c. The new home church should also take some fringe people, but should not be saddled with too many problem people. The assumption is that the parent home church leaders will be able to rebuild even after suffering heavy personnel loss. Normally, the formation and respecting of ministry spheres will automatically lead to these results.

IV. "Three for Two" Home Church Planting.

1. Definition and Theory

a. In some cases, you can cooperate with another home church to produce a new home church. This is the so-called "Three for Two" planting attempt. This is to be distinguished from a reorganization, which may involve more than one church, but does not result in an actual gain in numbers of home churches. We have also seen 4 for 3 or 5 for 4 arrangements, especially when opening up a new geographical area or special field (age group, special affinities, etc.).

b. In most situations, a "three for two" planting attempt is the result of an inequity in growth, either at the upper, or lower end. In other words, a home church may have grown in terms of numbers without having raised up adequate leadership (excessive low-end growth) or has developed leaders without having grown very much in numbers (excessive high-end growth). Both of these situations are problematic.

I) In the case of the "low-end only" church, why has the church increased in numbers but not in leaders? Has there been an activistic focus that might result in a superficial understanding of community and maturity (i.e. evangelism is the only thing that matters)? If so, such a group needs to grow up into the fullness of Christ, and build real depth, or they will always need to depend on others to supply their leadership. The leadership, in consultation with their supervision, need to determine whether it might be better to wait in a no-growth situation, using the crowding as incentive to complete the work of discipleship.

ii) In the case of the "top-end only" church, a different question arises. Namely, if the leaders are so mature and numerous, why is no one interested in listening to their message? Are there moral or ideological problems (such as an unbalanced tribalism or search theology) which will make them ill-suited to lead a group of new Christians? Is their concept of maturity limited to a "Bible club" mentality? Generally, if a home church needs more members, the first place to seek them is in the world, not from another church!

These are the painful questions that have to be asked and resolved in the case of a "three for two" church planting arrangement. In cases where they can be resolved, the "three for two" model has proven to be a successful model, answering many of the needs for sharing resources. Upper level leaders, like the elders, Pastoral, Student Ministries, or Adult Ministries staffers should get involved in making this judgment.

2. Procedure

a. The elders or other overseers should be approached first with a proposal, or with a request for help. The home church leaders must demonstrate 1) real need or opportunity, 2) that the people they propose to send include good workers and members, and 3) that only a reasonable number of marginally involved people are being sent to join the new group.

b. Your sphere leader will undertake a search for a suitable home church before that home church's leaders are approached. This is to prevent friction between home churches as well as wasted time. It is not our policy to have home churches canvassing the fellowship for "three for two" arrangements, as this would waste much time, and cause unnecessary stress on the part of home church leaders. Besides, one home church is rarely in a position to assess what is happening in another, still less the overall needs of the fellowship.

c. If the supervisory staff find a possible home church partner, the initiating home church leaders or sphere leader should approach the other home church leaders only in confidential discussion. They should carefully avoid the appearance of applying pressure to the other leaders by agitating the members of the other home church. If the proposed partner church is interested, negotiations can begin.

d. The elders or supervisory staff should be informed of the outcome of the negotiations. When everyone agrees, the workers and members of the home churches should be approached. All who join the planting attempt must agree freely to go. Leaders should avoid compelling or pressuring people to go on the planting attempt. We may plead and persuade, but not pressure.

e. Before the plant, make sure the people from both sides who will be in the new group meet with each other socially and in other ways, so the first meeting of the new church is not the first time they meet each other. Try to build community before going out.

V. Deciding on A Church Planting Model

1. Who makes the decision about which model to follow?

a. This decision is made by the original home church leaders in consultation with the elders or staff supervisors. The elder's policy is to extend freedom of choice to home church leaders in this area, provided that reasonable requirements for survival of both new churches are present. Also, the option being chosen should not cause excessive delays in planting.

b. First, determine whether the original leaders want to continue working together. If one or more leaders prefer the challenge of starting a new home church with their own disciples, they are allowed to, given the same provisions as above (including approval from the sphere leaders). Even in cases where the leaders of a given home church are unable to agree, this basic right of the worker to stay with his/her work remains with few exceptions.

c. It should be obvious that if you intend to plant a Mission Church, or a "three for two" home church, the new leaders must also be willing to play their part. However, the decision for how to plant should be made by the home church leaders and supervisory staff, not by potential leaders or members. It would definitely be erroneous to put the decision up for a vote in the home church, because the result would be confusion and dissension. Instead, the leaders should arrive at a solid defensible position, and then present it to the opinion leaders in the group, and finally to the whole church with full persuasion.

VI. New Home Church Leadership Composition

1. When we plant home churches in Xenos, we are planting a team. Thinking in terms of teams means studying things like the personality composition of the leaders of both home churches. Studies of home church growth have shown that some balance in the composition of personality types in a leadership band is preferable. Also, some compositions should be avoided if possible, because they tend to cause problems for growth and quality of fellowship.

2. Types of composition to avoid.

a. The most common problem in home church leader composition is the all-passive leadership. In this context, "passive" means that a person is, comparatively speaking, less directive in his/her ministry style, and more fearful of confronting others. They are also less apt to be abusive or forceful when they do confront than their more aggressive brethren.

On the negative side, the passive leader will tend to be less willing to initiate new projects or methods. They may be less strategic in their output because they tend to react to situations, rather than proactively creating new situations. Such leaders may find it hard to motivate people because people generally feel motivated more by innovative and aggressive personalities. But leaders with passive tendencies can overcome all these problems with experience and growth. They may also be too soft on issues of sin, whether of commission or omission.

On the positive side, these kind of leaders often project more warmth, and sometimes (though not always) more stability than the aggressive type. They may be better able to project grace and kindness in their relationships. They are definitely more apt to reflect before acting, and therefore can serve as a needed restraint in situations where the more aggressive leader is inclined to "lunge."

i) When an entire leadership group is composed only of this type, they face the dangers of apathy, indecisiveness and boredom in the leaders as well as the members. To solve this problem, no answer is as effective as introducing one or more aggressive leaders into the home church. Repeatedly, passive leaders are the ones who restrain aggressive ones from wrongful action. At the same time, they depend on the aggressive leaders to demand action, and to provide the stimulation that is so important for excitement and good evangelism. This passive/aggressive duality may be related to the "transactional/transformational" leadership duality found commonly in leadership literature of the past two decades. Be sure to distinguish between positive aggression and aggression that is only exercised in a negative way (i.e. a problem-oriented outlook). Positive aggression involves initiation of ideas for solving problems, and agitation for action. Those who are aggressive only when expressing recriminations or demanding personal rights are not reflecting a helpful leadership style.

b. The all-aggressive leadership is much less common, but no less problematic than the all-passive. In the few cases where leader groups have been composed of all, or mostly aggressive leaders, the results have been very poor. These home churches have manifested a lack of patience toward the members of the home church. At the same time, they have a tendency to change direction abruptly and erratically at times.

i) Be aware of the tendency to reject or belittle leaders of the opposite type. Study shows that diversity is important in a leadership group. Leaders should realize that any feelings of condescension toward other types of leaders are usually a very immature expectation that everyone "be like me," not to mention a lack of humble recognition that "I need others to balance my extremism and oppose my self-indulgence." Leaders should expend effort to appreciate the value of other types of people in the local church.

3. Other factors that need to be checked for balance are:

a. Subjective vs. objective leaders. Church leadership composed of all subjective or all objective leaders have a poor record in our fellowship. The all-emotional leadership is to be avoided because of the danger of hysteria or panic. All cognitive teams tend to be too boring to hold a group's interest.

b. Male vs. female strength. Try to get an aggressive passive balance in both sexes, even though this may lay outside your control. Complete balance between men and woman is never possible, but relative balance is a plus.

d. Leaders who are "stay at home" or are depth-oriented (tribalistic) in their relating, vs. those who tend to enjoy outreach and new relationships (diffuse). If a home church is made up of all depth-oriented leaders, the group will tend to become ingrown, and to many, suffocating. If the leadership is all outreach and stimulation oriented, the group might become shallow, activistic, and ill-suited to personal growth or discipleship.

e. Leaders and members strong in evangelism, vs. those strong in pastoring and discipleship. Hopefully both new home churches have those strong in high and low end work.

f. Note; Many of these factors will automatically be balanced if the aggressive-passive balance is present.

4. Timing-- When the home church is already at a size that calls for a planting attempt soon, we have to weigh the dangers of poor leadership composition against those of overcrowding, zero growth, and demoralization if we wait until we are able to provide leaders of both types. We are always right to wait for planting if leaders lack biblical character qualities.

5. Balance not to be understood as preference. Realize that we are not suggesting that one type of temperament is better than another-- just the opposite! We are arguing that all types are needed, and that problems arise when this fact is ignored or denied. This is exactly the thrust of I Cor. 12. Diversity is the pattern God intends for the church, and leadership teams benefit from it as well.

VII. Time Needed to Plant a Church

1. We doubt that very many can be adequate home church leaders in the modern western setting when less than three years old in the Lord. In rare cases, we are prepared to bring in one team member who may be as young as two years in the Lord (e.g. a spouse of an older believer). Most Christians will need over four years of rapid spiritual growth and learning before they will be ready.

a. This position does not square well with the example of Paul, who apparently regularly installed leaders who were younger than three years, and sometimes less than two years. However, Paul may have been drawing from a base of mature believing Jews and God-fearing Gentiles. These would have been middle-aged men and women who knew the Bible and who had enjoyed a personal relationship with God for many years before meeting Christ. Even though they would have to learn an entirely new way of doing things, these believers would have probably grown rapidly. The same is sometimes true today when true Christians transfer in from other churches.

Another limiting factor in our culture is the sophistication of fortifications raised up against the knowledge of Christ in the modern west. For instance, western people are literate and better educated, and this fact dictates that modern home church leaders be capable of a more sophisticated level of persuasion. Missionaries report on the other hand, that in many tribal cultures they successfully appoint leaders of house churches at a much earlier stage of growth than would be practical in the west. Also, the failure of family in the west and widespread drug use and sexual immorality are factors that leave young people often needing more time to grow before leading. On the other hand, a good background, or former spiritual growth in another church could shorten the time needed to be ready.

b. Based on these factors, we suggest the period from beginning a new home church to the next planting attempt will usually need to be two years, sometimes longer. An exception would be college-aged home churches, where we find experienced leaders may often plant after less than two years. Set a goal in your church to plant again in 2 years or in 3 if this is the first time your team has lead a home church. Student home churches should plan on 2 years, or more for their first church.

VIII. Other Considerations

1. Consider the time of year when planning home church planting attempt. Certain times of the year are better than others. The most questionable times are late November and December, and spring. The best times are late summer/early fall and early winter after the holidays. Consult the past history of your own group to discover if your group doesn't fit these norms.

2. Your group supervisors (and through them, the elders) should be informed if you are planning a church plant. You need to get an outside perspective on your plan for the sake of objectivity, and the elders reserve the authority to veto planting plans if necessary. Your plan will need to be reviewed at several levels in our organization, so don't wait too long.

3. Some of the proposed new home church leaders may be objectionable to the fellowship at the time planned. Make sure they qualify well in advance of the proposed date for planting. Leaders requires the character requirements for a deacon in I Tim. 3.

4. Marriages and likely marriages will have to be considered, especially if they involve leaders. The elders will resist plans to establish only one spouse as a servant team member, or home church leader, because of the very poor record of such arrangements in the past.

IX. Execution

The object of a plan of execution is to move from one meeting to two meetings in a way that is edifying and motivating. With adequate preparation, you can usually avoid any of the likely problems, and make planting a time of high excitement and vision.

1. Lack of understanding-- The members don't understand the reasons for, or the importance of, church planting.

a. You should tackle this problem well in advance through a process of careful instruction. It's often a good idea to begin pointed instruction in cell groups months before the planting attempt. Even though you may have taught on it earlier, you probably have new members in the group who missed the earlier instruction. You should also take the initiative in the home church meeting to lead the attitude of the home church in the right direction a few weeks before planting. By taking initiative early, you can avoid complaints and unedifying remarks from members who don't understand. Ideally, the group has seen planting as its goal since the time of the last plant.

b. Point out that the home church's prayers to God (that he would grant growth) have been answered. Comment that, "We are excited to realize that the job we embarked on three (?) years ago has finally been completed!" Argue that the most exciting part of home church growth is now at hand--an opportunity for new workers to step forward and fulfill their role in the Body of Christ.

c. You may want to denounce an antigrowth mentality that would seek its own comfort and let others remain lost by not planting.

d. Explain the various components of the planting effort, remembering how foreign some aspects might seem to those who are not accustomed to growth through home church replication. We should explain that, "In this fellowship, we use the strategy of home church planting, in much the same way as the New Testament Church did, and it has had striking success..."

e. Explain the advance of the church in light of the biblical concept of spiritual warfare. Point out the high stakes in the war.

3. Disturbing supportive relationships.

a. If you have built clear ministry spheres, this problem should be at a minimum. However, even the best planning cannot avoid all disruption in the relational area. Point out these three facts to those who are having a problem in this area.

i) First, the two home churches are not moving to separate cities, so they will be able to see friends from the other side as often as desired. Weekly they will see them in Central Teaching, as well as classes and other activities.

ii) The adjustment will be easier than they think. Those who have been involved in church planting are able to point out that they were expecting to be depressed etc., but found that the new situation was fine after only a short time. Note the tendency of some to inflate the danger involved in change, and find ways to counter such inflation in love.

iii) Thirdly, we should point out that it is reasonable and appropriate to suffering loss for the sake of the gospel. If Paul had never left some friends, we probably would not be believers today, etc.

4. Unfamiliarity with the new meeting place and/or the suddenly small home church meetings.

a. Simply warn people in cell groups, worker's meeting and/or home church that the smaller meetings will call for a higher level of involvement. The leadership should also mention the different feeling once the smaller groups are formed, and call for feedback on it. People will usually correct their own view as they talk about it.

5. Sluggish outreach.

a. The amount of outreach in each of the new home churches may be reduced after division for the simple reason that there are only half as many people actively witnessing. At the same time, new groups often experience a higher level of motivation immediately after a planting attempt. Also, habits in the area of follow-up may be slack because the larger group others could take care of follow up relying on key people who will not be around after the plant. Try to have the new home church hit the ground running, and be sure early opportunities for follow-up are not wasted. Otherwise, the church will find itself in the position of being without good outreach and bridges.

b. Cell group leaders should urge cell group members to pray for continued action in the new home church. Having first-timers at the first meeting of the new home church would be good for morale. Watch for signs of fatigue and encourage your members not to falter just before the finish line.

c. Both partner groups in a plant should continue to pray for the other group, and leaders should keep their members informed about progress in their sister church.

d. Some home churches use the last meeting of the combined home church as a special night to review past blessings, to give thanks to God, and to create motivation for further outreach. This is the so-called "Harvest Meeting."

i) A good way to do this is to combine a short talk by a teacher with several testimonies from members. New Christians should share how they were reached by someone in the home church (this stresses the importance of human agency). The teacher should point out that the home wants to plant a new group so others can be reached and grow. Another effective type of testimony is a worker or leader who did little or nothing until the last home church division, but who decided at that time to step up.

ii) The teacher might then briefly review the harvest of the whole home church family of which this one is a part. For example: "This home church began eleven years ago with fewer than thirty people. Now, there are nine home churches with over 400 people involved. Over 2/3 of the 370 new people are people converted through the home church! If we do no more than continue at the same rate, in eleven years from now this home church family will have 133 home churches with 5,320 people and over 3000 new Christians!"

iii) Home church leaders should generously praise the members for the tremendous job they did in the previous home church.

iv) Stress the necessity of every member of the Body contributing their shares if this goal is to be reached (Eph. 4:15,16). The home church leaders should communicate that they really believe in the idea of a replicating church planting movement and that they cannot make it without the workers.

v) Remind them that Satan prefers this time for attack. Point out the most likely areas where vigilance is needed.

vi) Point out that the church planting attempt includes risks, and may fail. Point out that if it does fail, you will reunite and try again. (see below on failure)

6. New Leadership-- Consider verbally recognizing the new leaders at this time. A short discussion of the theology of leadership can be included either when the announcement is first made, or at the last meeting of the combined home church.

a. Give a suitable presentation on the nature of leadership aimed to teach new people why aspiring to home church leadership is a good thing. Texts such as Mk. 10:40-44 and John 10:1-15 are very suitable here. Young believers will hopefully conclude that they too are called to serve and later be recognized as leaders. Call on members to show respect for the new leaders just as they did for the old ones. Paul consistently did this (I Cor.16:15-16 & parallels). Some groups lay hands on the new leaders and pray for them at this time.

Regardless of how much we prepare, home church planting always contains the risk of failure. This is a reasonable risk, and if you handle it in a godly way, failure will do little or no harm.

1. Attitudes

a. The first thing to realize is that failure is not the end of the world. Any time Christian workers go out to work, they must realize that failure is a distinct possibility. However, the grace of God enables us to face failure with courage and humility. Anyone who is too ego-involved or legalistic to risk having to admit failure is ill-suited to Christian work.

b. If our members have a naive mentality in this area we should speak to it early on. Some young Christians may expect nothing but success in Christian work. But why should we expect no failure in Christian work, when there is virtually no other area of life or work where we would expect to have no failure? For too long, workers in Xenos Fellowship have experienced nothing but success. In a more realistic scenario, it will sometimes be necessary to try ministry projects like church planting more than once before achieving success.

c. Discontinuing an unfruitful group should be viewed as a good way to renew morale and gain confidence through reorganization and retooling. It is sometimes the shortest path to fruitfulness.

d. In cases of failure, the leadership should point out certain truths to the work force of both home churches: Namely, that God has not been unfaithful, nor has anything unusual or catastrophic occurred. Instead, they need to understand that a Christian ministry project was attempted and it failed. Anyone who has ever tried to witness and had their message rejected should be able to understand failure in ministry. We have no promise in Scripture of perpetual success, only eventual victory. Further, the home church will now be called on to bend to the task of ministry and eventually to try again!

i) The immature may have certain negative tendencies that need to be countered by the mature. Failure could lead to a sense of guilt and failure that is unacceptable to the ego-involved and the legalistic mentality. Therefore, they will seek ways of shifting the burden of blame and guilt off self, and onto others. Leaders will often discover feelings of hate and recriminations at such a time, and should be prepared to counsel and teach the young a true attitude of Christian grace. Don't underestimate the extent of temptation in this area and hence relax vigilance, giving opportunity to the devil. The leaders of failed home churches are particularly vulnerable to accusation at this time.

2. Recovery

a. The fact that a failure has occurred should be determined by the elders in consultation with the staff overseers. We should never jump to the conclusion that a church has failed when it is only being tested and sifted. Such temporary reversals are to be expected as a normal feature of Christian work. Unless we teach members to expect this beforehand, the work force of struggling home churches will tend to lose their composure during times of adversity. Avoid hysteria.

b. In this fellowship, we have a safety net of other home churches to fall back on in time of distress. Recombination of home churches has proven to be an effective answer to the problem of failed home churches.

i) When failure occurs, the sending, or sister, home church is usually responsible to help the failed church through recombination or other acceptable means.

ii) In most situations, the leaders will need to step down from leadership (but not from the Servant Team) at the time of recombination. This is necessary in order to prevent proliferation of leaders without proliferation of home churches. It will also help in the efficiency of the newly constituted home church. Every leader should be willing to forsake the title of home church leader if necessary for the benefit of the home church.

iii) In many cases, leadership may call for recombination with a home church other than the sister or sending home church in order to better serve the strategic needs of the moment and/or to avoid problems. This is especially likely if the plant happened many years earlier.

The multiplication of home churches poses a mortal threat to the kingdom of Satan. No one knows this better than the enemy himself. Yet, in spite of the most vicious counterattacks, the church should be able to continue to advance if careful planning and sound theory animate their actions.

Return to Introduction to Christian Leadership