» Good looking models

Good looking models

When I can’t sleep I like to mark papers. Marked one the other night. The student was wrestling with his call to church planting. The whole paper was about analyzing various church planting models and case studies in order to select the right one.

The equation? Right model = success.

A well written paper. Unfortunately it was the wrong question. Anyone can construct a good model. On paper.

THE critical issue is the planter. No exceptions. It’s leadership. Character and skills. Heart and hands.

After that make sure you’ve chosen the right community and/or ministry focus group. Then find some great team members and come up with the best model you can as a starting point.

How can you find out if you’re an effective church planter? There’s some helpful resources out there. newchurches.com has some listed. Our most effective tool has been the behavioral interview process developed by Bob Logan and Charles Ridley at CoachNet.

Don’t make the decision to plant a church without a strong sense of call that has been validated by godly wisdom. No matter what mark you get for your essay.

2 Responses to “Good looking models” »»

  1. Comment by Scott Ringo | 06/04/05 at 4:03 am

    Agreed. I believe on of the most critical character traits is SERVANT. The capacity to serve, regarless. Models are tough. Tom Sine while here at Regent in VA Bch at the Futurists Roundtable gave some very key characteristics of the emerging church plants that are successful.
    Focused on Wholelife discipleship
    More experiencial
    Contextualized- no cookie cutter model for church. Each plant is unique.

    I love that last one. Model discipleship, experiment and make it unique. Love it, just love it.

    Glad to see your online.

    Scott
    http://www.emerge.typepad.com

  2. Comment by Lachlan Heasman | 06/28/05 at 9:06 am

    It always surprises me that the church only seems to put forward a trait based leadership model. Maybe we should read a little wider than our own publications, there’s quite a few different theories on leadership and what makes a good leader apart from being born to it.

    Steve you did well by not using the language of the new church in your post. Scott – on the other hand – needs to find a way to express himself without any of the following: – “Wholelife discipleship” is this being a christian? – “experiencial” is this doing christian stuff? – “Contextualized” is this being yourself?
    I am only guessing at these definitions, but this kind of language makes it difficult for me to understand what you are trying to say. Or perhaps I should say “disuse of obverscational language for transference of meaning”

Leave a Reply »»

Google
  Web   SteveAddison.net
Subscribe with My Yahoo! Subscribe in NewsGator Online Subscribe with Bloglines