It’s not unusual for conventional, established churches to eventually dedicate about 85-90% of their budgets toward their staff and facilities. With looming financial obligations like these, it’s easy to imagine the critical hurdles that have to be addressed when a congregation decides to embrace a church-planting movement. In the previous two posts, we discussed how small congregations, and the utilization of austere, minimalist facilities can go a long way to navigating the fiscal challenges of a newly-planted church, but there is an additional feature of Station 4 Church which not only addresses the financial burdens of starting a new church, but also presents a multitude of other significant benefits – covocational ministry.
WHAT IS COVOCATIONAL MINISTRY? The beginning of many churches usually includes a church-planter who was employed in the local marketplace while ministering to a recently-formed congregation. Traditionally, the idea of a planter/pastor working in the local marketplace was viewed through a lens of ‘bifurcation’, in which the pastor/planter’s life was divided into two distinct compartments – their ‘secular vocation’ in the marketplace and their ‘sacred vocation’ in the church. Their ‘secular vocation’ was seen strictly as a temporary start-up concept, and was a totally divergent pursuit, incompatible and void of meaningful, complementary overlap with their ‘sacred vocation’. Thus, such a practice was termed to be bivocational, and the pastor/planter would only pursue a bivocational strategy out of necessity until the new church eventually raised the resources to offer a fully-compensated employment opportunity. Unlike a bivocational approach, a covocational strategy views pastoral/planting ministry through a more inclusive and holistic vocational lens. Covocational ministry seeks to recognize an overarching correlation, correspondence, convergence and connection between work in the church and work in the local marketplace. Covocational ministry isn’t seen as a ‘necessary evil’ that must be endured until a fully-compensated position is available at the church; rather, it is an intentional paradigm that embraces and leverages the unique advantages of a pastor/planter that holds a job in the community. Recognizing and fostering a covocational harmony between the church and marketplace creates an array of benefits and advantages for the planter/pastor, the church and the broader community (see the next blog post: '12 Benefits of a Covocational Strategy') A co-vocational strategy is not meant for a fully-compensated planter/pastor to simply add a ‘side-hustle’ or try to ‘double up’ on compensation. Full-time compensation and a sustainable wage from a church brings an inherent expectation for planters/pastors to honor that full-time working arrangement, and provide the corresponding commitment and effort to the church. It can be fairly easy to dismiss the idea of a covocational strategy because it is so rare in our place and time, but a fully-compensated ministry is a fairly modern expectation in church history that exists primarily in our Western world. Rapidly increasing interest for covocational ministry is being raised, particularly in church-planting circles today, and scriptural inspiration for exploring this type of ministry is abundant. Though we may not often notice, one of the greatest church-planting initiatives of all time took place largely within the paradigm of covocational ministry. Even with the incredible burden of travelling, preaching, discipleship and overseeing the formation of many new congregations, Paul set out to establish churches throughout the known world as a tradesman - a leathersmith (Acts 18:1-3; Phil.4:14-16). Paul’s aim with his covocational ministry was not only to prevent himself from being a financial burden (2Thes.3:8), but he also hoped his refusal to be compensated would build relatability and credibility among believers and unbelievers alike, providing him with unique opportunities to minister the gospel (1Cor.9:12). In fact, as Paul gathered with his beloved Ephesian elders for the final time, his very last words ring out as an inspiration to consider a co-vocational, church-planting strategy: I never wanted anyone’s silver, gold or clothes. You yourselves know that I have worked with these hands of mine to provide everything that my companions and I have needed. In everything I showed you that by working hard in this manner, you must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He Himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’ (Acts 20:33-35) Covocational church-planting not only allows for a unique stewardship of resources that could help address the financial challenges of starting several new churches, but it could also be used to significantly increase the availability of resources for benevolent needs inside the congregation and missional initiatives in the community. With the minimal financial obligations that accompany small congregations, modest facilities and covocational ministries, the considerable amount of a budget that would traditionally be allocated for employees and buildings, suddenly becomes available for implementing compassion projects among the members of the church and pursuing a litany of evangelistic, out-reach initiatives. There are a striking number of benefits that stem from a covocational ministry which extend far beyond the financial advantages (see the next blog post: ‘12 Benefits of Covocational Strategy’), but there are also challenges that must be addressed. A covocational ministry is one in which a church leader simultaneously amalgamates two vocational worlds, and the main challenge of such a strategy ought to be immediately obvious - TIME. Everyone is given the same amount of hours, and it’s rarely enough for us to get done what needs to get done on a good day; however, a time-strapped, covocational ministry can be accommodated in a few different ways. It can often be overlooked, but simply by virtue of being a small congregation, one of the greatest benefits to a covocational minister is that a smaller church obviously demands less time and work. Smaller congregations naturally exist without a lot of the administrative and programmatic machinery of larger churches, and if a small congregation shifts from a lot of formal programs to more informal, relational endeavors, much of the day-to-day oversight and managerial demands can be alleviated for a covocational pastor/planter. At Station 4 Church, covocational ministry is greatly aided by the recognition that every individual member not only has an opportunity to serve and ‘work for the church’, but they have a privilege and responsibility to do so. Unlike in the Old Testament, there is no longer a separate, priestly class solely designated to work in the temple on behalf of God’s people, and to which ministerial tasks must inherently be reserved. Recognizing and encouraging this reality greatly aids a covocational ministry because it dissuades an attitude of ‘pew-sitting’ and cultivates a prevailing ethos that every believer in a congregation has more than permission, they have an obligation to invest in the life of the church and work in important aspects of ministry. Every congregant bears a responsibility and accountability for the vitality of their church. A covocational church leader faces similar time demands as the rest of the congregation, and is essentially ‘in the same boat’ as everyone else. Therefore, an impulse to expect the ‘paid person’ to pick up all the slack, is not validated, and appropriate expectations are understandably extended by a congregation to someone working covocationally that wouldn’t otherwise be extended to a leader being fully-compensated. Similarly, smaller congregations have no back pews, there is nowhere to comfortably sit back and watch others do it all, so there is an inherent motivation that constantly compels people from a place of observation to a place of participation. In this light, one of the most important aspects for Station 4 Church to successfully address the challenge of covocational ministry is the ongoing training and development of the congregation to take on a range of ministry objectives.
0 Comments
Just like the church is not defined by its facilities, neither can it be defined by size. In a culture of ‘bigger is better’, conventional thought often equates larger congregations with success… and this in turn dictates the need for sizable buildings and extensive facilities.
The traditional image of a larger congregation is not an illegitimate expectation. One of the primary objectives of the church is to pursue increase, and more people coming to Christ summarily leads to a larger church. The undeniable truth is that when lost people are saved they are added to the global family of God, and the church increases in size. However, an increase in the number of believers doesn’t necessarily demand that a single congregation and its facilities must become increasingly larger and more complex. God’s ‘universal’ church has always been manifested through many distinct communities of faith, local bodies in which individual congregations can practically exercise and celebrate their essential functions. There may be potential situations in which a ‘mega-church’ vision could be a viable course for a congregation to pursue, but such a vision certainly isn’t mandatory, and it could very well create a litany of challenges that could be better addressed with a vision for starting multiple, smaller congregations. From a biblical perspective, there is a lot of freedom when it comes to the size of local churches, as long as those communities of faith are able to satisfactorily meet a minimum set of requirements such as: - worship - prayer - proclamation of God’s Word - disciple-making - practical service (for those inside and outside the church) - giving - baptism - fellowship - the Lord’s Table - recognized leadership - autonomous governance - commitment to that specific body In many ways, some of these ‘ecclesiological minimums’ can be realized and administered much more effectively in smaller congregations than they can in larger ones. The advantages of smaller congregations are many of the same benefits experienced in the Small Group Ministries of larger churches: 1. Smaller congregations offer a less intimidating context in which a believer’s gifts and strengths can be nurtured and exercised; a setting that more readily creates participants instead of spectators. 2. Smaller congregations provide the intensely-relational context necessary for meaningful and effective fellowship, accountability, mentoring, and discipleship; 3. Smaller congregations are practically conducive for creating the close, intimate, co-dependent, interactive realities of the cooperative ‘body’ and a communal ‘household’ that the scriptures speaks of. Close, communal belonging is not only an appealing concept and goal for the church, it is a rare touch-point with the world around us, and is highly sought after by believer and unbeliever alike. But belonging to a familial community is not the only concept that appeals to the un-churched community around us. More so than at any other time in recent history, our culture highly respects authenticity. As hostile as our world can be to gospel truths, it also holds great antipathy toward blatant hypocrisy. To be frank, this is also increasingly true of a believing community that has grown weary and skeptical of the manicured veneer we are tempted to polish up and present to one another Sunday mornings. A smaller, more relational form of church provides the ideal environment in which believers feel safe to engage in genuinely consequential time with one another; a setting in which one can find opportunities to be appropriately transparent, candidly share common struggles, laugh together, weep together… be truly open and experience practical unity with one another. The traditional, larger expressions of church, in which the entire body can put on their collective ‘best faces’ for an hour on Sunday morning can unintentionally lead to shallow or even fake interactions. Conceivably, the pursuit of authenticity through unconventionally small and highly-relational congregations can facilitate disciple-making efforts in ways that larger, traditional forms of church might struggle. Along with community and authenticity, a small, less institutionalized and more relational expression of church lends itself to another touch-point with the world around us – hospitality. As an essential means through which relationships can be established and nurtured, an ecclesial context that cultivates hospitality becomes paramount in the relationship-building efforts essential in discipleship, mentoring and evangelism. In fact, hospitality is such an important concept within the life of the church that Paul lists it as one of the qualifications for eldership, and it is not much of a stretch to understand, when spiritual leaders are committed to exercising hospitality, they would naturally be inclined to cultivate an expression of church that inherently promotes hospitality as a vital means for ministering to both the believing and unbelieving community of which they are a part. If church cannot be understood in terms of its facilities, nor defined by its size, but simply by an assembly of believers gathered to observe a minimum set of biblical criteria, then perhaps small, relational congregations assembled in modest facilities, can be a viable and even effective expression for local churches today. When we hear someone speaking of ‘the church’, it’s the association of a building and accompanying amenities, to which we most often connect the term. We all know what is meant when we are told to ‘meet at the church’, but biblically speaking, the church is not a place; it is not a building or a facility.
In the 6th century BC, ancient Athenian society used a formal assembly of its citizens to participate in vital public matters, such as the declaration of war and the election of certain officials. This assembly was open to all Athenians who qualified for citizenship, and participation in this gathering was understood to be an imperative civic duty, potentially resulting in a penalty for those who failed to participate. This important and essential gathering of citizens was called the ‘ekklesia’, and it is this term that Christ Himself appropriates when it first appears in the bible (Mt.16:18). Scripturally, ‘ekklesia’ retains the essence of its original meaning when referring to the church. The church is not a designated location, neither is it a material structure of wood and stone. The church is a spiritual entity, a living organism of flesh and blood; it’s a congregation of living stones, an assembly of regenerate citizenry gathered together for essential, corporate endeavors (1Cor. 6:19-20). Churches understandably need some type of space in which to gather for worship; they need some facility in which to assemble and carry out their essential functions. Within the cultural context of our day, this normally means the acquisition of a prominent building dedicated to this use, and this certainly offers some obvious advantages. However, we ought to be careful to retain the important distinction between worshipers and worship centers; between the church and the physical space in which the church gathers. A commitment to planting churches can benefit greatly from understanding this clear distinction. It would be incredibly challenging to develop a sustainable strategy for starting multiple churches, solely with the plan of having to acquire prominent, dedicated buildings. However, if Station 4 Church is not at all defined by the type, size or style of the facility in which it gathers, then we can embrace a freedom to commence, and even thrive, without the expectation of having to secure traditional, dedicated centers of worship. Without the confines of requiring a conventional 'church building', a whole slew of unusual possibilities becomes not only viable, but quite effectual to accommodate the gathering of the Lord's people. As anyone who has raised boys, or for that matter, any teacher, coach, youth leader, or quite frankly, anyone who’s ever spent even the least amount of time around boys, can tell you - they’re often not ‘normal’. That’s essentially what we mean every time we shake our heads, sigh with exasperation and resign ourselves to say, “Well... I guess boys will be boys.” Social conventions, cultural standards and traditional constraints all dictate a level of normalcy that we’ve rightly come to expect in our civilized society… and boys tend to run roughshod over all of it – some boys more than others.
I must confess that my personal approach to offering parental guidance to our eldest son has, at times, and much to the ire of my wife, devolved into an irritated rebuke, “Come on, Buddy! Please, for once just try to be normal!” Setting my parental inadequacies aside for the moment, my concern for our son’s ‘normalcy’ is not completely unwarranted. Currently, 'Funky Worm' sits atop his Spotify play list; he thinks differently, he views the world from a different perspective and he has a general approach to life that makes him just a little… well... not normal – and I can absolutely sympathize! Whenever I express my frustration at our son’s ‘abnormality’ my wife is quick to look at me with the same exasperated face I just gave our son and impart the admonishment, “Come on Buddy! Please for once just try reading a book on parenting!” And then she succinctly gets to the heart of the matter, “Where do you think our son gets it?!?” A significant part of my concern for fostering ‘normalcy’ in our kids stems from the fact that I know I am actually not quite normal, and I know it can be a challenge to go through life as a bit of a square peg in a round hole. Our son comes by it honestly, but in my defense, so do I – normalcy just isn’t in the blood. After all, what was to be expected when a missionary's kid marries a pastor's kid and they move to the middle-of-nowhere Yukon to start their family? My normalcy was hooped from day one. But I have come to realize that God can and does use the abnormal. John the Baptist is part of Jesus’ family, but there is no getting around it, John the Baptist is all kinds of not normal. In fact, John is about as abnormal as you’d expect a home-schooled, locust-eating, camel-hide wearing cousin from the out-back to be. John operated well outside all of the priestly-led, temple-centric, Jerusalem-fixed, liturgical norms of his religious day, and if God commenced the Messianic advent with someone as odd as a lone, brutish, desert-dweller with an unrestrained, river-dunking ministry, then I believe God can, and is, still using abnormal people and abnormal ministries to advance His kingdom today. And that's good, because Station 4 Church is not your 'normal' church. In an era of 'mega' and 'bigger-is-better', where the success of a church is often equated with larger facilities, bigger budgets, a roster of compensated employees, and a buffet of programming, Station 4 is a simple, co-vocational church - a more 'organic' and 'stripped-down' expression of church without any paid staff. We are a modest 'gospel outpost' looking to disciple those around us as we follow Christ and walk through this life together as a tight-knit community of faith. |