Selecting a Church Planting Model That Works

TOM A. STEFFEN

Unlike a decade ago, a plethora of church planting models now exists from which church planters can select New models continue to roll off the presses. While the multiplication of models provide valuable new insights into the ambiguous task of church planting, they also create a new dilemma. How can church planters select or design a church planting model that matches a specific people group? This article critiques six church planting models, probes how the church planter's personal philosophy and vision impacts such selection, and provides a two-dimensional model to show how to wade through the options and craft an effective church planting model for a specific people group.

W hen we left for the Philippines in 1971 to plant churches among the Ifugao, no published church planting models existed of which I was aware. It would take almost another decade to pass

before Hesselgrave (1980) would unveil his now well-known ten-step model. We were on our own to develop a model that would fit our audience.

In rethinking the experiences of a number of my mission agency's church planters, I came to realize that most of us were unacquainted with much that goes into the process of planting and developing churches. (Many of us, however, had had experience in church splits.) No one suggested to us during our training that we design a strategy, or encouraged us to develop models that could help propel our vision of indigenously run churches to completion.

Tom A. Steffen was a missionary in the Philippines for 15 years. Presently he is Professor of Intercultural Studies at the School of Intercultural Studies, Biola University, La Mirada, California, and Senior Consultant with the Center for Organizational and Ministry Development, La Habra, California.

Missiology: An International Review, Vol XXII, No. 3, July 1994

362 Tom A. Steffen

Today it is a whole different story. A plethora of models designed by experienced church planters now exists from which one can choose. Books espousing a particular model continue to roll off the presses (Faircloth 1991; Logan 1989; Neighbour 1990).

While this explosion of models is helpful to church planters, it can also cause confusion. How does a church planter know which model will work best among a particular people? Is there a specific model or synthesis of models that will best accomplish the team's vision statement? What should one be looking for when selecting a model for a specific people?

In this article I will review a broad perspective of the church planting models being used currently and probe several of the key underlying factors that have an impact on the selection of a cross-cultural church planting model, namely, the church planters comprising the team, their vision statement, and the target audience. I will then propose a two-dimensional model for evaluating the comprehensiveness and effectiveness of a church planting model. The article concludes with one of my former students applying the components to a church planting model I developed in the Philippines.

Church Planting Models Proliferate The proliferation of church planting models continues. In this section I

will evaluate the contributions and limitations of six models that represent a broad perspective of approaches to church planting. (I use the term "model" as the pattern for procedures to follow. In relation to church planting, it answers the question of how a team will implement its strategy.)

Hesselgrave (1980) designed "The Pauline Cycle," a step-by-step church planting model applicable in the United States as well as abroad. He addresses ten headings in the model from a theological, scientific, and practical perspective: (1) missionaries commissioned, (2) audience contacted, (3) gospel communicated, (4) hearers converted, (5) believers congregated, (6) faith confirmed, (7) leaders consecrated, (8) believers commended, (9) relationships continued, and (10) sending churches convened.

Hesselgrave provides church planters a theological-based church plant­ing model that is applicable for all types of cross-cultural church planting. Church planters will find the model easy to follow and its comprehensiveness (from "missionaries commissioned,, to "sending churches convened") quite adequate. Some of the model's major weaknesses include the lack of concrete examples to illustrate the model; little, if any, emphasis given to a team approach; few tools for cultural exegesis; and a vision statement (driving force behind the model) that fails to emphasize ongoing church planting. The model's sequence in relation to empowering nationals is suspect. For example, leadership selection and training begins in the seventh cycle. In reality, this begins the moment church planters enter an area. How Christian workers handle daily events initially, such as language and culture acquisi­tion, evangelism and/or community development, depicts graphically to both parties the expected role behaviors of leaders and followers. Nevertheless, Hesselgrave's ground breaking model can prove advantageous to those

Selecting a Church Planting Model That Works 363

seeking a theologically sound, broad-based church planting model that can be easily adapted for specific contexts. This text should be required reading for all cross-cultural church planters.

Patterson (1978; 1981), a Conservative Baptist, ministered among semi-literate peasants in Honduras where he saw over one hundred churches planted. From the human perspective, he accomplished this by forming a Bible institute that combines education, evangelism, and implementing Christ's commands. Patterson's distinctives for the institute include the following "rules": (1) Only mature men are enrolled; (2) The total number of students in a class is kept small (maximum of five) to ensure discussion rather than lecture; (3) Lessons are designed according to the needs experienced by the student in his or her arena of ministry; (4) Curriculum is designed in comic book format; (5) Application of the lesson is immediate; and (6) Debriefing with the teacher follows application. Patterson believes theory and practice must always be combined.

Patterson's central thesis calls for obedience to Christ's basic commands, of which he has isolated seven: (1) repentance from sin, (2) baptism, (3) practical love, (4) communion, (5) prayer, (6) giving, and (7) witnessing. He supports this thesis from the following verses: James 1:22, John 14:15, and Matthew 28:18-20.

Patterson's model, developed after conflict with denominational policies, provides church planters a number of key insights. First, he emphasizes obedience to Christ's commands; true learning of biblical truth results in appropriate action. He further argues that Scripture has an inherent sim­plicity that church planters must keep preeminent in their teaching content and curriculum design. He further insists that all teaching relate to the current needs and activities of the audience. Lastly, he advocates a leadership training model through extension education that produces reproducing churches.

Patterson (1978) tries to simplify his obedience-oriented model for the common person. Yet it seems that simplicity for multiplication's sake may sometimes be substituted for contextualization. For example, he challenges mature "student-workers" to multiply themselves in others, but does not address how this works in a society controlled by the caudillo (strong man). Those utilizing this model will want to ask how this will work in their specific audience. They may also want to question the lack of use of the Old Testament in evangelism and discipleship, and the seeming absence of a holistic gospel. As with Hesselgrave's model, there is no mention of a team approach. Despite these negatives, church planters will find in Patterson's model a proven way to multiply indigenous leaders and churches.

As the title indicates, Beyond Church Growth, Logan (1989) attempts to move readers beyond increasing the size of their respective churches to the planting of new ones. To accomplish this, the author discusses ten principles: vision, effective leadership, cultural relevance, celebrative worship, disciple making, cell groups, leadership development, mobilization of believers, appropriate programming, and reproductive church planting. Each principle concludes with action steps that help the Christian worker implement the

364 Tom A. Steffen

ideas highlighted in the chapter. The author claims: "When appropriately applied to specific situations, these ten principles have proven equally applicable across urban/rural, ethnic, cross-cultural, or socioeconomic boundaries" (Logan 1989:20).

Logan's model emerged as he planted a baby boomer church in southern California and assisted in the birth of six daughter churches. For those working outside the baby boomer or baby buster context, much more effort will be required to make the ten principles relative. (Most of the illustrations come from the meta-church model.) For those working among people with social structures that relate well to cell-group multiplication, modifications will be minimal. For those who do not, major modifications will be necessary.

Church planters will have to look elsewhere for extensive principles for exegeting a culture, planting a church, discussions addressing an exit-strat­egy, prophetic critiques of social injustice, and tools for analyzing a culture. Key to making the insightful principles offered by Logan relative for any target people group will be an in-depth understanding of a people's worldview, social structure, leadership and followership styles, decision-mak­ing patterns, and learning styles.

Logan's broad brushed, systemic model, however, will help all church planters develop a comprehensive strategy that will place great emphasis on the spiritual domain (prayer and warfare), women and children, and ongoing multiplication. Logan's willingness to expose his own mistakes brings realism to the model and hope for church planters struggling through the ambiguous process of birthing new communities of faith.

In Where Do We Go From Here? A Guidebook for the Cell Group Church, Neighbour (1990) develops the most comprehensive, cell-based model that exits today. This model assumes that spiritual growth develops best in one's oikos, i.e., "people we relate to on a regular basis the personal community which exists for us all" (1990:82, 114). In such a setting each person is mentored to develop his or her spiritual gifts, becomes accountable for and to others, proclaims Christ to friends in a safe environment, and learns to obey the voice of the Holy Spirit.

Neighbour's model flies in the face of traditional church approaches which encourage "large group" structures, such as, the megachurch, praise churches, or restoration churches. Neighbour advocates "small group" structure in that Jesus "shaped the church to meet in homes' (1990:42). Neighbour assumes that community develops best in small, intimate groups meeting in homes, as evidenced not only in the early church, but currently in such places as Thailand, Japan, Korea, Africa, Australia, and England.

While the model assumes that all people wish to meet in homes, this will not always be the case. In areas of the world where persecution of believers can be a problem, such as China or the former Soviet Union, the home tends to become a natural clandestine meeting center. For others not experiencing persecution, such as the Ifugao of the Philippines, meetings held outside the home take precedence over meetings held in homes. Nor should the burden placed on the host be overlooked. Getting a home ready for guests and cleaning up after them are no small tasks. Church planters

Selecting a Church Planting Model That Works 365

will want to ask: Where does the target people group meet for religious purposes? Who hosts the meeting? Who goes to the meeting? How many gather?

Several observations can be made about the cell group model. It will most likely work better in urban settings than rural in that the social structure of those living in the cities tends to fit the cell group model better. The model often calls for a strong leader to orchestrate all the meetings (cell, congrega­tion [regional], celebration [citywide] and to set the teaching agenda. (This fits well with Logan's baby boomer model and the Lone Ranger approach to church planting commonly used in the United States.) Egalitarian communities will have difficulty with this model. Use of power will have to be monitored to avoid abuse. One wonders with such a heavy focus placed on reaching one's oikos how world Christians will be produced. No one can argue with the numerical growth produced through the cell group model. Finding the right fit with a people group will determine to a great extent the continual success of the cell group model.

Faircloth (1991), a former engineer, provides church planters a tool that should help alleviate some of the inherent ambiguity so profound in church planting. (Ambiguity is cited as a major reason why frustrated church planters opt for other ministries with more predictable results [Kayser 1992].) Using the Program Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT) the author charts 45 events that must transpire to produce a "mature adult church, able to reproduce itself." While some will find the 18-by-24-inch accompanying chart intimidating and possibly stilted, others will find it helpful in that they will be able to locate where they are in the process, and where they must go to complete the plant.

While much of the book is a rehash of Hesselgrave (1980) and Wagner (1971), and provides few tools for those working cross-culturally, the model does make two significant contributions to church planters. The first is found in its design—a back-to-front model. The final goal determines all events that must precede it. The model assumes the ambiguity of church planting can be conquered. The second has to do with the final goal. For Faircloth, planting a church does not go far enough; the planted church must be capable of reproducing itself.

The last model I have selected is Mcllwain's multi-volume series entitled Building on Firm Foundations (1987,1988,1989,1992). In this series the author focuses on a comprehensive teaching program for evangelism and disciple-ship that is derived from his church planting experiences among the Palawano people of the Philippines.

Mcllwain followed up the work of previous missionaries who believed they had left behind numerous believers. As he taught the Palawanos basic fundamentals of the Christian life, a lack of response to biblical truth resulted. Mcllwain soon discovered he was teaching Christian principles to non-Christians. As he realized what was happening, he stopped addressing his audience as believers and began teaching from Genesis through the ascension of Christ, emphasizing the holiness of God, and the separation of all people from God because of sin. When the Palawanos grasped these

366 Tom A. Steffen

truths, he proceeded to reveal the reconciliatory work of Jesus Christ. In time, a number of Palawanos responded positively to the gospel.

Mcllwain's experience among the Palawanos led him to design a teaching strategy that sets a solid foundation for the gospel, and then proceeds to cover the entire Bible. He calls this model the Chronological Teaching Approach, dividing it into seven phases: (1) Genesis through the ascension for nonbelievers, emphasizing their separation from a Holy God and the solution provided through Christ; (2) Genesis through the ascension for believers, emphasizing their security in Christ; (3) a brief survey of Acts to serve as an introduction to the epistles; (4) a brief overview of each of the epistles and Revelation; (5) Genesis through the ascension for mature believers; (6) Acts for mature believers; and (7) Romans through Revelation for mature believers.

Mcllwain's major thesis is found in the title of the series, Building on Firm Foundations: healthy churches result from a correct understanding of the gospel; a church built on an unclear gospel will not stand. Two other significant theses include the following: (1) Scripture should be taught chronologically and panoramically because this is God's method of teaching (progressive revelation), and (2) the New Testament can not be understood in isolation from the Old Testament.

The content and methodology of any evangelistic approach plays a major role in the type of churches planted. When contextualized, one of the best models that exists today for providing a firm foundation for the gospel and an overview of the Bible is Mcllwain's Chronological Teaching Ap­proach. The model differentiates between felt needs and the gospel, a distinction necessary in my mind to keep the focus of the message on Christ's efforts to restore our broken relationship with God. This is pertinent especially today in our pluralistic society when even some evangelicals espouse universalism. The model addresses clearly the limitations of the anthropological theory of functionalism. It focuses primarily on common­alties while tending to neglect contradiction and confrontation; it recognizes that conversion is a process as well as a point. It communicates well with concrete relational thinkers (approximately 70 percent of the world [Barrett 1991:24-25]) due to the story format, providing the big picture before introducing isolated parts and calling for constant repetition. Finally, it builds on the evangelistic foundation in a way that provides a comprehensive understanding of the entire Bible for believers in a relatively short period of time. A major weakness in Mcllwain's model, however, is its shallow sensitivity to local cultures; it tends more toward program than people (Steffen 1992b).

Church Planters Impact Model Selection Church planting models tend to reflect the history, goals, and aspirations

of those who develop them. One could say the same of the models church planters select—they tend to reflect the history, goals, and aspirations of those who select them. Church planters who prefer to take a more controlling role throughout the church plant will select a model that reflects such a

Selecting a Church Planting Model That Works 367

philosophy, e.g., Mcllwain's model. Those who seek to phase out, i.e., gradually turn the ministry over to nationals, or take a subordinate role under nationals, will select models that support such aspirations, e.g., Patterson's model. Models and church planters tend to find themselves intricately intertwined.

The type of church planters selected to launch new church plants determines largely the type of churches produced. Nationality, ethnic backgrounds, personalities, leadership styles, followership styles, work styles, philosophies of ministry, skills, and gifts all impact the models selected and the types of churches produced. As noted above, those overseeing cell groups tend to be strong leaders as do Lone Ranger church planters in the United States. Other models may require team players. Mission agencies and churches, therefore, should not underestimate the importance of spending significant effort selecting the personnel who will represent them. (See Graham [1987] for the use of assessment centers in selecting church planters.) In that church planting is systemic, the type of church planters recruited will also play a significant role in the type of churches planted and developed.

A vision statement—a statement of long-term direction—sets direction and impetus for the church planting model selected. (See Figure 1.) Such a statement answers the key question of where the team is headed. It paints in broad strokes a finished portrait of what the planted church should look like when the job is complete. The long-term goal sets the direction for short-term, day-to-day activities. Its value lies in seeing the plan in its entirety before dividing it into parts or specifying how the team should disperse its personnel and its financial resources. Faircloth's model comes through strong here as his long-term goal of planting reproducing churches sets the agenda for all previous short-term events.

Vision Statement

Model

Planning

Resources _ 1 I

People Finances

Training Implementation

Figure 1. The Vision Statement as the Driving Force

368 Tom A. Steffen

The vision statement highlights the type of training necessary for church planters so they can implement and sustain their work, and avoid false guilt when they cannot give their full attention to every worthy project. For example, church planters targeting baby boomers will require training that provides an in-depth knowledge of that generation. While they may allocate a certain percentage of their resources (personnel and finances) to other noble ministries such as inner-city youth, the homeless, or the elderly, a greater percentage, without guilt, should be directed to the baby boomer generation God has called them to reach. Finally, the team's vision statement will make it easier to pass the baton to nationals because the completed picture becomes easily recognizable by both parties (Steffen 1991). The vision statement provides the driving force behind the church planting model selected. (For helpful discussions on vision statements, see Tregoe, et a l , 1989 and Kouzes and Posner 1990.)

Target People Impact Model Selection There are three basic philosophies behind selecting a church planting

model. Some prefer to single out a model that reflects their gifts, skills, and cultural backgrounds, and then find a people group that matches it. Logan's model exemplifies this. Others prefer to select a popular model advocated by a church planter specialist and implement it among the target audience. Still others prefer to chose to conduct an environmental scan of a particular people group and craft a model to fit them, as Patterson has done. Cross-cultural church planters usually find themselves in the second or third categories.

While the second category should prove helpful for cross-cultural church planters (and what church plant is not cross-cultural to some degree?), category three, crafting a model to fit the target audience, is imperative. Until church planters have an in-depth understanding of a people group, selecting other than a generic church planting model can prove ineffective. In that all models have strengths and weaknesses, wise church planters will conduct a thorough investigation of the host people so they can select or design a model that reflects the audience's worldview, as well as its personal philosophy. (See Steffen 1992a for a preevangelism study approach that integrates language, culture, and church planting.) Even then, church planters recog­nize that future adjustments will be necessary as new cultural insights come to light. For Hesselgrave's 10-step model, Logan's 10 principles, Neighbour's cell groups, Faircloth's 45 events, or Mcllwain's seven phases to be effective among a specific people group, initial adaptation will be necessary, as well as continual crafting.

Selecting effective church planting models calls for taking into consid­eration not only the church planter's philosophy and vision statement, but also the beliefs and behaviors of the target audience. To ignore any of these entities or to neglect to review the model's effectiveness over time can result in a model that hinders the reproduction of multiplying churches.

Selecting a Church Planting Model That Works 369

Evaluating Comprehensiveness What components should a comprehensive church planting model include?

Five are identified in Table 1. These components and the "effectiveness" components below can be used to evaluate the six models discussed earlier.

Table 1. Evaluating a Church Planting Model's Comprehensiveness

Biblical Incarnational Holistic

a.Word(OT/NT) b. Holy Spirit c. prayer d. accurate gospel

a. language acquistion a. felt needs b. culture acquistion b. spiritual needs c. team relationships

with each other d. team relationships

with host community

Empowers Reproduces

a. church planter a. evangelism role changes b. discipleship

b. national role c. leadership changes d. organized church

c. long-term vision e. reproducing church d. phase-out oriented f. social concerns

Foremost, a comprehensive church planting model will find itself rooted deeply in biblical principles. To evaluate this, one could ask: Does the model promote the translation, study, and application of both Testaments of the Bible? Does it emphasize dependence upon the Holy Spirit and prayer? Does it take into account the past and present battles being fought between God and Satan? Does it present an accurate account of the gospel message?

Modeling the character of Christ should also be a prerequisite for the model. For example, Jesus "did not cling to His prerogatives as God's equal, but stripped himself of all privilege" (Philippians 2:6-7, Phillips) to reveal the Father's purpose to the world. Similarly, Christian workers should incarnate Christ's character in ways that will reveal the Father's plan to the host people. In part, this includes learning the language, understanding the culture, and building solid relationships outside the team as well as within it. As Bavinck astutely observes: The team becomes the "living introduction to the message" (1960:89).

A third component would include strategies that address both the spiritual and the physical needs of the audience. This means that the model will address the whole person, that is, life on this earth as well as life after death. It should incorporate the great commandment (Matthew 22:34-40) as well as the great commission (Matthew 28:19-20) so that both social and spiritual concerns are addressed.

370 Tom A. Steffen

The empowering of nationals in all areas of ministry should also be included as a major component. Before responsible phase-out can become a reality, team members will have to release their own power to national counterparts. This power exchange should result in churches led by respon­sible nationals. For this to happen, however, role changes become necessary for team members (learners, evangelists, teachers, resident advisors, itinerant advisors, absent advisors) and nationals (accompanists, participants, leaders, trainers [Steffen 1992a; 1993]). This component helps ensure that the overall goal is reached—maximizing the body of Christ by developing responsible national believers and phasing out of the respective ministries. While some team members may receive invitations to continue specific ministries, careful reflection should be given to ensure that dependency does not result.

The final component moves beyond empowering nationals to ensuring that a church planting vision that raises God's visibility in a community continues long after the Christian workers depart. To accomplish this, immediate reproduction of all stages of a church's life should take place: social concerns, evangelism, discipleship, leadership development, church organization, and the planting of new churches among people like them­selves and cross-culturally (Steffen 1991). All of this, of course, must be economically feasible for the target people or worked out judiciously through a partnership agreement.

Evaluating Effectiveness Some church planting models are more effective in rural than in urban

settings. Some work better among the upper class than among the lower class. Some induce better results among those living in more permanent settings than among nomadic or semi-nomadic people. Some are more effective than others among a particular ethnic group. Some produce better results among the youth than among an older generation. Outside factors play a significant role in the effectiveness of any church planting model.

Eveiy church planting model brings its own strengths and weaknesses to the church planting arena. The historical background of a particular people and their present situation will impact the effectiveness of any model. Church planting among Somalians dying of hunger will look much different than church planting among the upper class in Singapore. The same is true of the assumptions that drive the model. While the assumptions may produce the desired results among some people groups, they may not fare as well among others.

Effective models will attempt to address a people's ethnicity, history, present worldview(s), socio-economic class, learning style, and gender pref­erence. They will also try to accommodate the lowest skill level of the community of believers so that reproduction of all ministries becomes feasible for the majority. How then can one assess the effectiveness of a particular model for a particular people and class level?

Wise team members will investigate a number of church planting models before arbitrarily selecting the latest publicized model. Just because a particular model is promoted by an experienced church planting specialist

Selecting a Church Planting Model That Works 371

in seminars or publications does not guarantee its success in a given team's milieu. Before choosing a particular model, or combining features of several models, it would be advantageous for Christian workers to ask themselves: What is the model's historical context? What key features does it offer? What basic assumptions drive the model? What are its strengths and weaknesses? In what types of communities is it most likely to succeed? (See Table 2.) Consideration of these and similar questions is especially helpful for teams desiring to select or design a situational-specific model.

A point system could be developed for evaluating the comprehensiveness and effectiveness of any church planting model. Assigning 10 points to each of the 10 categories (describing the model's history in the first column of the effectiveness model receives no points) would bring the total for a perfect model fit to 100 points.

100 - 95 Use the model! 94-90 Use with minimal adjustments. 89 - 80 Use with major adjustments. 79 - 0 Be very selective and keep looking!

The 10-point evaluation scale based on the church planter's satisfaction with the model could be broken downs as follows:

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Completely Very Moderately Minimally Totally satisfied satisfied satisfied satisfied dissatisfied

Table 2. Evaluating a Church Planting Model's Effectiveness

Model Key Features Assumptions Strengths Weaknesses Adaptability

Illustrating from the models critiqued above, I would give Hesselgrave a 10 for "adaptability," seven for "holism," and six for "weaknesses" because, among other things, of the lack of a vision statement that drives the model

372 Tom A. Steffen

to ongoing church multiplication. Patterson receives a 10 for "reproduces," five for "holism," and six for "biblical" in that he bypasses the Old Testament. I would give Logan a 10 for "key features" based primarily on his emphasis on the spiritual health of the church. Neighbour would receive a nine for "strengths," one reason being his focus on oikos. I would give him an eight on "assumptions" primarily because of his claim that all people wish to meet in homes. Faircloth would receive a 10 for "key features," primarily based on his back-to-front model. Mcllwain would receive a 10 for "biblical" and "strengths" primarily due to his inclusion of both Testaments, and the emphasis placed on providing a firm foundation for the gospel. I would give him a five on "adaptability" in that the model tends to be more program-oriented than people-oriented. As should be evident from this brief exercise, each of the models, due to individual strengths and weaknesses, must be modified for each specific people group if it is to prove effective over time. We are now ready for a more complete application of the components.

Applying the Components Gary Hoag, a career missionary with the Evangelical Free Church and

my former student, plans to facilitate the planting of churches in the 35 Inuit villages of the Canadian Arctic. In between studies, Hoag has spent several summers and made other trips among the Inuit to learn the language and culture and to help plant two churches. The five-stage church planting model I developed in the Philippines and modified over time served as the basis for these plants. Using the 10 components discussed above, Hoag scored the fit of the model to his philosophy of church planting, its comprehensiveness, and its appropriateness for the Inuit, as follows:

Biblical-10; Incarnational-10; Holistic-8; Empowers-10; Reproduces-10=48 Key Features-10; Assumptions-9; Strengths-9; Weaknesses-8; Adaptability-10=46

Total 94

See Tables 3 and 4 for an analysis of the model. Hoag's analysis of my model should help his team continue to develop

an effective, situation-specific model for the Inuit. Such a study enables team members to discover the historical context in which the model emerged— that is, no Philippine national churches (from my agency) were controlled exclusively by nationals even though this remained the agency's stated objective for over 20 years. It will also alert them to some of the designer's basic assumptions:

Selecting a Church Planting Model That Works 373

Table 3. Comprehensiveness of a Philippine Model for a Canadian Context

Stage Biblical Incarnational Holistic

Preentry

Preevangelism

1. Preparation & plans committed to God. Proverbs 19:2, 16:3; Joshua 18:8

2. Understand the times and know what God wants done. 1 Chronicles 12:32

Evangelism 3. Clear presentation of the gospel at appropriate time and setting. Acts 26:28-29

Postevangelism 4. Leadership and followership estab­lished immediately. 1 Peter 4:1-2

Phase-out . Ready to move on to regions where Word is unheard. Mark 1:38; Romans 15:23

1. Historical, anthropolog­ical and linguistic study of the people along with Bible study. STUDENT

2. Team formation, learning aspects of language and culture and building relationships. LEARNER

3. Understand their world-view then acting as the incarnational bridge for the gospel. EVANGELISTS

4. Working alongside them < and developing leaders from start. TEACHER/ RESIDENT ADVISOR

5. Advising them, visiting them and encouraging them. ITINERANT ADVISOR /ABSENT ADVISOR

1. Identifies the Great Commandment and the Great Commission.

2. Seeks to understand felt needs prior to ministry—living out the Great Commandment.

3. Clearly presents spiritual need-carries out the Great Commission. Recognizes and encourages their culturally relevant response of con­version & growth. Commits them to follow the Great Commission and Great Command­ment in their context

Stage Empowers Reproduces

Preentry 1. Team members are equipped with church planting tools which are easily transferable.

Preevangelism 2. Includes an outline to evaluate and encourage progress in learning language, culture and church planting.

Evangelism 3. Presents Biblical Theology, not Systematic Theology. Whole to part rather than part to whole.

Postevangelism 4. Immediate inclusion of nationals in all areas of ministry, especially leadership and curriculum.

Phase-out 5. Releases, but also helps them to continue to grow by being available for advice.

1. Trained to set goals and plan strategically toward future reproduction.

2. Your example is what they will follow and your experience with them is what they will rely on.

3. They can share the gospel in more relevant ways than you can.

4. "Trail Talks" build in a burden to repeat this cycle themselves, letting them work out the details.

5. Phase-out reproduction will be "natural" for them as they reach out likewise.

374 Tom A. Steffen

Table 4. Effectiveness of a Philippine Model for a Canadian Context

Stage Key Factors Assumptions Strengths

Preentry 1. Understand the 1. importance of team­work, missiology, and role changes that lead to phase-out.

Preevangelism 2. Build solid relation- 2. ships while learning language and adapting to the cul­ture. Earn the right to be heard.

Evangelism 3. Discover their under- 3. standing of all the components of the gospel message, and appropriate time and place to communicate it.

Postevangelism 4. Empower nationals to 4. become immediately involved in community development, evan­gelism, discipleship, leadership develop­ment, organizing the church and new church planting.

Phase-out 5. Calls for leaving a 5. geographical area, but not severing relationships.

Preparation in study and experience a prerequisite to effective cross-cultural ministry. Solid relationships must be built and maintained through language and culture study and personal interaction.

Syncretism can be minimized through a message that incorpo­rates contradiction as well as contextualization.

God, through the power of the Holy Spirit, expects all believers to grow to their fullest potential.

Most cross-cultural church planting is pilgrim in character.

1. Phase-out orienta­tion from the start states the goal to shoot for and the process to reach it.

2. Outline empha­sizing the key responsibilities while evaluating and encouraging all progress.

3. Calls for a relevant gospel that chal­lenges their world-view, and includes a solid foundational background.

4. Mentoring nationals immediately in the Word and ministry so they can reproduce them­selves in all areas.

. A well-described goal makes it easily recognizable by nationals and expatriates.

Stage Weaknesses Adaptability to the Arctic

Preentry 1. Advice for type of training and experience too general.

Preevangelism 2. Calls for much study prior to verbal ministry which may be interpreted negatively.

Evangelism 3. Focus on long-term church planting, not short-term witness.

Postevangelism 4. Could be a tendency to place novices in places of responsibility.

Phase-out 5. Planned departure could be interpreted as neglect or abandonment.

1. Comprehensive phase-out plan could give a goal to strive for and the guidance to get there.

2. Outline of language, culture, and church planting studies will provide our team "a method to our madness."

3. The gospel will be presented with more cultural clarity to avoid syncretism.

4. "Tundra Talks" - Immediate mentoring and encouraging a vision for new church planting (CP1, CP2, CP3).

5. Left to thrive in Baffin, Nunavik and Keewatin and to strive toward Christ-likeness as Inuit.

Selecting a Church Planting Model That Works 375

(a) God desires all believers to grow to their fullest potential, (b) the Holy Spirit is equally capable of leading national believers, (c) empowering others for ministry does not reduce one's own power but rather multiplies it for everyone, (d) mistakes will be made, (e) most cross-cultural church planting should result in phase-out, (f) church planting requires a learner mentality from beginning to end, (g) long-term planning toward a stated goal can provide practical guidelines for short-term activities, (h) responsible phase-out depends on solid relationships being developed and maintained with national believers, (i) responsible phase-out requires constant realignment of roles for both expatriates and nationals, and (j) church planting is systemic (i.e., recruitment, selection, and training impact the type of churches produced).

Hoag's analysis will also assist the Inuit church planters in determining which aspects of the model to retain, which to remove, which to modify, and what additions to make. The effort made in the initial analysis, and continual updates, should result in the development of a much more effective church planting model for the Inuit people than one selected randomly by the team.

Conclusion The continual proliferation of church planting models calls for some

means of analysis so church planters can select or design an effective model for a particular people group. When we add to this the fact that no one model exists that will be equally effective among all peoples, it becomes obvious that church planters need a tool that will help identify a context-specific model.

In this article I have proposed a two-dimensional model to assist church planters in identifying and/or designing context-specific models. The first dimension pans the model's comprehensiveness. Does the church planting model find its bases rooted solidly in biblical principles? Follow Jesus' incarnational example? Address both physical and spiritual needs? Em­power nationals for ministry immediately? Promote God's reign through the immediate reproduction of every aspect of the church planting process? The second dimension evaluates the church planting model's effectiveness for a particular people. This is accomplished by exploring the model's history, identifying its key features, delving into its basic assumptions, identifying its strengths and weaknesses, and assessing its adaptability to the target audience. Such a sweeping analysis should provide church planters with a much more effective church planting model for a particular people group than one arbitrarily selected or designed.

References Cited Barrett, David B.

1991 "Annual Statistical Table on Global Mission: 1991.̂ International Bulletin of Missionary Research 15(l):24-25.

Bavinck, J. H. 1960 An Introduction to the Science of Missions. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House.

Faircloth, Samuel D. 1991 Church Planting for Reproduction. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House.

376 Tom A. Steffen

Graham, Thomas M. 1987 "How to Select the Best Church Planters." Evangelical Missions Quarterly

23(l):70-79. Hesselgrave, David J.

1980 Planting Churches Cross-Culturally: A Guide for Home and Foreign Missions. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House.

Hoag, Gary 1992 "A Critical Critique of Steffen's Comprehensive Phase-out Model." Unpub­

lished paper, Biola University, La Mirada, CA. Kayser, John G.

1992 "The Effects of Field Problems and Stressors on Missionary Attrition with Reference to Missionary Training." Paper presented at the 44th Annual Meeting, Evangelical Missiological Society, 19-21 November, San Francisco, CA

Kouzes, James M., and Barry Z. Posner 1990 The Leadership Challenge: How to Get Extraordinary Things Done in Organiza­

tions. San Francisco, CA: Jossy-Bass Publishers. Logan, Robert E.

1989 Beyond Church Growth: Action Plans for Developing a Dynamic Church. Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell Company.

Mcllwain, Trevor 1987 Building on Firm Foundations: Guidelines for Evangelism and Teaching Believers,

Vol. 1. Sanford, FL: New Tribes Mission. 1988 Building on Firm Foundations: Guidelines for Evangelism and Teaching Believers,

Vol. 2-3. Sanford, FL: New Tribes Mission. 1989 Building on Firm Foundations: Guidelines for Evangelism and Teach ing Believers,

Vol. 4-6. Sanford, FL: New Tribes Mission. 1992 Firm Foundations: Creation to Chrìst Sanford, FL: New Tribes Mission.

Neighbour, Ralph W. 1990 Where Do We Go From Here? A Guidebook for the Cell Group Church. Houston,

TX: Touch Ministries. Patterson, George

1978 Obedience-Oriented Education. Portland, OR: Imprenta Misionera. 1981 Church Planting Through Obedience Oriented Teaching. South Pasadena, CA:

William Carey Library. Phillips, J. B.

1960 The New Testament in Modern English. London, UK: Geoffrey Bles. Steffen, Tom Α.

1991 "Phasing Out Your Work: Make It a Plan, Not a Crisis." Evangelical Missions Quarterly 27(3):280-285.

1992a "Passing the Baton: Church Planting That Empowers Nationals." Unpub­lished manuscript.

1992b "A Narrative Approach to Communicating the Gospel." Paper presented at the 44th Annual Meeting, Evangelical Missiological Society, 19-21 November, San Francisco, CA

1993 Planned Phase-out: A Checklist for Cross-Cultural Church Planters. San Fran­cisco, CA: Austin & Winfìeld.

Tregoe, Benjamin B., John W. Zimmerman, Ronald A Smith, and Peter M. Tobia 1989 Vision in Action: Putting a Winning Strategy to Work. New York: Simon &

Schuster. Wagner, C. Peter

1971 Frontiers in Missionary Strategy. Chicago, IL: Moody Press.

^ s

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling, reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However, for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article. Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available, or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association (ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American Theological Library Association.