Developing Church Planting Teams

Reference: Grigg, V. (2005). Cry of the Urban Poor. GA, USA: Authentic Media in partnership with World Vision.

THERE ARE FOUR PHASES in planting a church where the development of a leadership team is essential. If the initial thrust into the community is done by a team in training, this will lead to the further development of the pioneering team as well as to the development of an eldership and diaconal team In the emerging church. The church planter, meanwhile, needs to be part of a wider team with other church planters from different areas.

Calling to discipleship

Jesus was our model team leader par excellence. He was a warm, personable preacher who drew many to him in those first weeks—some in search of meaning in life, some because they had been healed. Some he chose through prophetic insight—“You are Simon, you shall be called the Rock,” or, “From now on you will be catching men,” or “Be­hold, a man without guile.”

There were different aspects to Jesus’ call. He called people first to himself, then he called them to discipleship (today, we would say “training”). His call was to forsake an economic lifestyle and become part of a new economic body. His call was also to a ministry, to activism, to doing. It was not to a static Bible school or mere instruction.

Out of a broad base of 72 committed disciples (Luke 6:13), in a night of prayer, the Lord revealed to him twelve proven men to be part of his special team. Teams are formed from such prophetic insight, vision, and immediacy with God. Do not recruit people unless God gives them to you, as the Father gave the team to Jesus into his responsi­bility to keep (John 17).

There is another principle here of developing a broad ministry first. Then you can define the team, the task, and the training with clarity. Build from one ministry to the next. The nucleus of Jesus’ disciples came from John’s ministry. Paul’s team came first from Jerusalem (Barnabas and Silas), then from each of the churches he planted.

Hear God and do the symbolic

Gideon gives us another insight into forming a team or an army. He heard God and obeyed. This obedience became a legend in Israel because it was so symbolic. We need not be afraid of becoming a rallying point nor of proclaiming a cause.

To a large extent, members of a team also select them­selves. Those who are faithful remain through the difficult times. Those who are available and can give the time select themselves. Those who are teachable keep seeking to be taught, just as the first disciples of Jesus inquired, Teacher, where do you live?” Those willing to pay the price survive through adversity, unlike the rich young ruler, who “went away sorrowful.” Above all, look for those who love the Lord, for such love is what will cause a man or woman to suffer the indignities of pouring out their souls for others through decades of ministry.

Leroy Eims advises leaders to “keep the team small and hard.”¹ A small cadre of committed people is better than a large group of half-committed people. For it is the least committed who determines the team’s decisions, not the leader. And how the leader handles the weakest determines how the team members behave to each other. There is also the matter of the span of control—the number of people one leader can effectively handle. For a church planter who also works in a secular job it is about six. For a full-time worker it may be up to twelve.

Building committed discipleship

How did Jesus maintain the commitment of his team? Immediately after selecting his disciples, he took them up to a hillside and defined for them the value system of his ministry in the Sermon on the Mount.

Group time spent in clarifying goals, roles, and the ex­tent and limits of commitment is valuable for building the team’s relationships. Am I committed for life? For four years? What are the limits of my love and commitment to my people? Is my commitment to them, or just to my minis­try? Jesus laid down his life for his sheep. Will I do the same for my team?

That commitment may mean, at times, laying down our ministry for the sake of our people. It may mean losing our reputation to defend our people.

Second, Jesus led his disciples through a series of experiences. There was total immersion with them in ministry, action and reflection. There was also a time of sitting back and sending them out.

Maintenance of commitment of warriors comes through leadership in battle. “A band of men whom God had touched” (1 Samuel 10:26; 14:52). These were men who loved a good fight. Nothing keeps a team together as much as seeing the leader involved in spiritual warfare.

They saw him heal with compassion, watched him handle a little orphan girl, saw him pick up an old woman off the street, and bend over and care for an old, dying man. They saw his indignity at the temple of Kali, as the worshippers sacrificed a goat. They caught him at prayer for the city. They saw his sorrow when he could find no church among the poor of the bustees of Calcutta.

They were there when he was washing feet, and as he worked on character issues of pride and envy.

In just the same way, Timothy watched how Paul handled his administrative chores through Silas. Jesus also worked at and expected a deep emotional loyalty. “Simon, Simon, Satan has desired thee, but I have prayed for thee,” is followed after Peter’s denial with the haunting conversa­tion, “Simon, do you love me?”

Paul said the same, without pride, “Follow me as I follow Christ” (2 Tim 1:13). He didn’t minister as a professional. He loved people deeply and sought their love in return. Listen to his cry: “Open your hearts to us!” (2 Cor 6:13).

Transferring leadership

Towards the end of his ministry, Jesus continued to teach about relationships. In his final prayer it is evident that he believes the kingdom will stand or fall on the unity of his disciple-team.

Finally, after his death and after Pentecost, the team be­came fully functional. As we transfer leadership, we may expect a loss of some leaders in the team, as there is a re­forming of relationships. We can also expect some changes in the exercise of power and authority, and the effective emergence of the newly selected leader.

Since it is the body of Christ that manifests his life, it is always more effective to initiate a church through a team than through an isolated couple. It is difficult, however, to find people willing to relocate into the slums.

To place a large missionary team into a squatter area is also counter-productive in terms of their acculturation and acceptance into the community. Generally it would appear wisest not to place more than two couples into any given community.

Should a team develop during the initial phases of the work, it is important that within a year to eighteen months the majority withdraw, leaving perhaps one couple and a women’s worker. This enables the emerging leadership from the community to grow freely and allows indigenous pat­terns to emerge.

To develop five churches in different communities is to develop a base sufficient for healthy growth into a movement. A single church can be isolated, with young converts unable to find husbands or wives, and there may be little modelling of alternative approaches. Five churches, on the other hand, balance each other. They also provide a broad enough base for a leadership training program that develops key leaders from each of the churches. Clearly, these squatter areas would ideally be within a bus ride of each other in the city.

In setting up several different missions, I have experimented with different approaches to using foreign teams coming into cities. In ministry among the poor it is essential that the workers be part of a team. It is best if the church planters are located in several different communities with specialized workers assigned to assist them.
 

Teams in non-Western cultures

Tribal and peasant patterns of team formation and operation are totally different from the Western team concept. This is the major factor when mission societies lose national leadership. The societies often think they are operating efficiently, but have never asked about the cultural concepts of group decision-making.

In tribal societies, members of a team would say, “We decide together.” The leader expresses the consensus of the group. We are one in feelings and being. We all carry re­sponsibility for the whole of the operation, even while hav­ing divided responsibilities. We help each other in them, deciding by consensus with others. There can be no evalua­tion of one another, for that would violate our group iden­tity. Always at the end of an activity we affirm that we did well, for always we must affirm the group and each one’s role in the group.

In Western societies, the leader adjudicates between in­dividualistic objectives, balancing out those various goals. We are one in that area of our work where there are shared goals. Otherwise, responsibility is divided, and delegated by the leader to individual decision-makers. We evaluate, criti­cize and judge our performance and each other. We main­tain our individuality at all costs. Conflict in establishing the limits of that individuality is accepted as necessary behavior for smooth functioning. Efficiency takes precedence over consensus.

In the West, teams form and reform for various objectives. They are together for a work goal—a cog in a larger machine.

 In the non-Western world, groups form as lifelong social commitments. This is often consolidated by marriages where other members of the group are chosen as godpar­ents. Thus it becomes necessary to move a whole group through to the next level of ministry, bending down and picking up the weakest, holding back the fastest, but main­taining group solidarity.

I’ve often been fascinated watching Bible schools in an Asian context. To the missionaries running them, the goals are being accomplished—namely, they are producing pas­tors to fill organizational roles in the emerging churches. To the national people, the structures and organization is difficult thing to bear, a yoke that doesn’t fit well. Mean­while, within the context of a foreign structure, they are busy creating their own network of relationships—a net­work that will link them within this imported organization for the rest of their lives, despite its lack of acculturation.

Westerners must learn atmospheric thinking as opposed to structural thinking, relational thinking rather than goal-orientation, and group orientation versus a team-of-individuals-pulling-together orientation.

Leadership and authority

1.  Loyalty

Loyalty to the leader and to each other is essential for members of a team. For this reason it is good to grow your own disciples. It is difficult to teach an old dog new trick, so avoid “old dogs.” You can’t expect the same degree of loyalty from somebody who has already been discipled. He has other loyalties.

David could have averted civil war by dealing with the disloyalty of Absalom when it first came to his ears. But he thought, “It could not be. Surely my own son would not be disloyal.” We need to be careful to keep relation­ships open and to expect loyalty from team members.

2.  Know basis and limits of authority

You need also to know the basis of our authority. Are you prophetic? Your authority comes largely from the depth of your knowledge of God in revelation. Are you administrative? Your authority comes from your role in the structure. If you are prophetic, you cannot just as­sume authority in the administrative realm. Do not usurp authority outside the area which either God or the people have given you.

King David in the desert could have killed his adversary, Saul, God’s anointed. He didn’t. I can imagine the talk in the Israelite camp after that event. “He said, ‘I will not touch the Lord’s anointed.”’ “He said WHAT?” “Why would he say that?”

And when David became King, no man would lift his hand against him because they knew that God had ap­pointed him. He had not appointed himself. He had not usurped authority.

3.  A sea of changing authority

Good church-planting means a continuous emergence of new leaders and roles. Every year there has to be a re-structuring of relationships, of the nature of the team, of roles, etc. As the ministry and vision grow, more people own it. Change of ownership of a vision and a ministry means changes in power relationships. “Who will be the greatest?” is a constant question in the minds of disciples.

Teams need to cope with such change. Know that the basis of your authority will constantly be changing. You need to make sure that a base for authority remains, so that you can affirm that authority when it is under question. But at the same time, you must exercise it humbly, and with gentleness, when needed. Jesus’ ser­vant role made him open to disrespect. But he knew and explained his role and authority, “You call me teacher and Lord, and it is true, for so I am.”

Personally, I am so dense that I need to have an outside board of three or four people to fall back on in times of dispute, complex issues or personnel problems.

4.  Winning hearts

You must also earn leadership through servanthood, and through being Just. People need to be in a situation that makes sense. Leadership is earned through brokenness and confession, through loving speech and a listening ear.

5. Changing styles

There are also changes in leadership style needed from season to season in ministry. The follow-up phase is one of loose authority. As people enter training and character formation phases, there is a tightening of the authority relationship, but as they move more and more into leadership, it becomes a relationship of co-laborers.

Problems experienced in teams
1.  Anti-authoritarianism vs. strong leadership

Western anti-authoritarian values sometimes come into conflict with the necessity of strong leadership to hold Westerners together. James 3:17 tells us of leadership that is without uncertainty, but open to reason. Once decisions are made, there are no changes. This area of the culture needs direct confrontation.

2.  Individualism

The best workers, particularly evangelists and prophets, do not always fit into a close team. Work with them off to the side of your team. Don’t bend or break them—just love them—and relate their work to the overall ministry of your team primarily on their terms.

3.  In-group time vs. ministry outreach time

Keep the team small—but not so small that you as a leader have to carry all the stress. Be careful in the se­lection of team members. Maintain a balance between your external ministry and your internal, personal min­istry to the team. You, as a church planter, need to keep on the cutting edge. Each new person brought in has to be socialized. Hence it is better to form the team all at once, rather than to be constantly including new mem­bers.

4.  Light and darkness

Non-Christians may not give you a lot of pain in life. But sometimes insiders do. Judas gave Jesus plenty of pain. After a honeymoon period of delight in newfound friends, there often comes among new believers a growing collision of darkness in our personalities. In a team, we cannot run away from each other. That is our choice. The closeness of relationships intensifies unre­solved conflicts. Recognize this as being natural. Main­tain patterns of confession and prayer. Keep affirming commitments to love. Be patient and forbearing with each other.

Role of the church planter at each phase

As the church planter, you are initially the worker who must do everything, drawing your team into each aspect of the ministry by modeling patterns that are appropriate. You then may delegate aspects of the work. As this occurs, you must keep the laborers laboring, by developing consistent rhythms and patterns of work, by being available when there are bottlenecks or blockages to the ongoing work or personal growth of the worker, and by planned periods of relaxation and team fellowship.

In developing the organization called Servants to Asia’s Urban Poor, we established the practice of taking a day out of the slums every two weeks for rest, prayer and worship, relaxing together and training. This has developed into a pattern of team fellowship meetings every two weeks. I would normally integrate this with a six-week’ rhythm of more extensive time apart, to maintain team relationships and to give the emotional relaxation and support that en­ables a continuing commitment to the hard work involved in ministry.

At different phases of the ministry, the Spirit of God seems to bless different aspects of the church planter’s gifts.

 But each leader will find particular blessing in those areas of particular giftedness, and will learn to depend on others for those areas that God has not, in his grace, given special gifts.

The church planter’s role has to be at times apostolic. This apostolic gift, it appears, may develop from any of the other leadership gifts. The apostle is one with a mission, who lays foundations upon which others build. He breaks open new territory, and establishes new churches or orga­nizations. He may maintain authority over these structures, as Paul did. But he will exercise it with great humility, as also Paul did.

Part of the church planter’s role is prophetic. He has to hear from God what God is doing in a community—about the nature of the spiritual battle for a community. Like the Old Testament prophets, he has to call the people to war. In order to enable emerging leaders to function, he needs to seek revelation from God as to their spiritual gifts and min­istries, and often through the prophetic word from God he releases them into these gifts, knowing the appropriate times for such ministry.

Clearly, the church planter must sometimes exercise pastoral and evangelistic gifts. An evangelist will plant churches through evangelizing as far and as fast as possi­ble to reach the lost, depending largely on others to give long-term pastoral leadership. A pastor will plant a church by recruiting a team, teaching and pastoring them so they evangelize, and then teaching and pastoring the new con­verts to maturity. A prophet will see the spiritual battle and God’s strategy for an area, calling the church to battle, and as people obey the call, enabling a leader to fight to victory.

In building the initial pioneering team, and later in building an eldership team, the church planter needs to look for people who between them have all of these gifts. 

Notes
1. Quoted in a paper on ‘Teams and Teamwork,” by Waldron Scott, Navigators, 1973.

© Viv Grigg & Urban Leadership Foundationand other materials © by various contributors & Urban Leadership Foundation,  for The Encarnacao Training Commission.  Last modified: July 2010