Now Barnabas wanted to take with them John called Mark. But Paul thought best not to take with them one who had withdrawn from them in Pamphylia and had not gone with them to the work. And there arose a sharp disagreement, so that they separated from each other. Barnabas took Mark with him and sailed away to Cyprus, . . .
– Acts 15:37–39 –

In my computer files, I have a folder titled “New Covenant Baptist.” And within its contents, I have a handful of articles, agendas, and ideas dating back to April and May 2015. In those uncertain months, I gathered with a handful of earnest Christians who had just decided to leave the church where I pastored.

For nearly six years I served as the senior pastor of a church in small town Indiana. But for reasons I have shared elsewhere, my doctrinal convictions did not find a happy home in that assembly of the saints. Moreover, as I look back, there were elements of my ministerial passions that did not make my service a good fit. Almost a decade later, I am grateful for the time I spent at that church, and for the relationships the emerged from that season. All the same, I recognize that their new pastor is a much better fit.

This is how ministry goes and how churches grow.

Just as God planted a garden in Eden, so he plants churches all over the world, and in these churches, he guards and grows his saints. Sometimes, those branches abide in Christ and in a specific local church for generations. But sometimes, he uproots the Christian and grafts him or her into another garden (i.e., another local church). This is true for members, as well as pastors. And it is all part of God’s wise plan to mature his saints.

When Sharp Disagreements Lead to Church Plants

At the same time, this seasonal change is not always as easy as seeds blown on the wind,  finding fertile soil, and beginning to bear fruit. No, as the story of Paul and Barnabas illustrates (Acts 15:36–41), there are often painful separations that divide genuine believers. And in 2015, that is what happened. And in response, a handful of earnest Christians began to meet and pray and talk about the need for starting a new church—one that, in their mind, would be better and more biblical.

At that time, those of earnest Christian were looking for a church that could not be found in the town we lived. And so we began asking the Lord if we should start a new church, and along the way we asked other questions, too. Are there churches in our area that preach the gospel? That practice biblical membership? That have a plurality of elders? Are there churches that would help us plant, or, would this be a solitary effort? And most importantly, what are we, under God, hoping to create? And, what makes this church different?

Looking at my notes, we didn’t ask two critical questions: How would this church impact other local churches? And how might our recent departure from another church misshape the planting of this church? More on that below.

More introspectively and missionally, we sought to take an honest look at what was motivating us. And so we discussed things like sources of influence, books/ministries that shaped our thoughts, and the priorities that would shape this church. In short, we began to consider the possibility of covenanting together to plant a church in, what we believed at the time, was an area bereft of faithful churches. Whether our assessment was correct or not, the Lord clearly had other intentions, and within a couple months, we did not start a new church.

Nevertheless, I believe there are at least four lessons that can be learned from our consideration of starting a church at a time. When pain fueled our passion for a new church, it caused us to miss a number of critical aspects of church planting. And so, I share those here for those considering a church plant that comes on the heels of a sharp disagreement.

Four Words to Dissatisfied Church Planters

First, a church planted with hurting people will hurt people.

The axiom “hurt people hurt people” is fundamentally true. It is true for pastors who have been hurt by a harsh church, and it is equally true for members who have been hurt by harsh pastors. Yet, in such instances when fellowship in the church breaks down, it is tempting to think that a greener pasture will be found if a church set up to avoid all the previous problems. Yet, such a reactionary model of church planting is poised to create a deeply, idiosyncratic church, as I will argue below.

Yet, before getting to the problems of planting a church from frustration, we should realize that church planting requires an inordinate amount of energy, sacrifice, service, and cooperation. It will stretch the most spiritually healthy leaders. And for those who just departed from a spiritually tense church situation, the situation does not look any better. Even more, as needs arise in the young church, it is very possible that hurt people will be forced to rely on leaders, helpers, or others that shouldn’t lead. Or, those who are willing to take on the task of starting a church will do too much and will further their own hurt.

Ultimately, the reason I stepped off the church planting bandwagon was because I listened to my wife. More than me, she perceived the pain we had experienced in our church. And accordingly, I led our family to sit under the teaching of another pastor, which we did in the summer of 2015. We needed to be a part of an established church, and not start our own. In short, order the Lord healed our wounds, and led us to a church with likeminded brothers and sisters in Northern Virginia. That move is a story unto itself.

I suspect there are counterexamples to my experience. God delights to raise dead things to life; he gives grace to the hurting; and he helps those who cannot help themselves. But if someone, or a group of someones, seeks to move immediately from a position of hurt in a local church to position of leading a church plant, I would urge caution. Hurting people will hurt people.

Second, a church planted with frustrated people will lay an un-level foundation.

 I mentioned this above, but let me explain it fully. When our group began to meet to discuss the kind of church we would plant, we looked to the Word of God to make decisions. We were disgusted by the way that Scripture, or at least our interpretation of Scripture, did not receive pride of place in the church meetings we were in. And so, with an absolutely clean slate, we created something of wish list for the church.

Now, that wish list included things like a confessional heritage and doctrinal statements that have stood the test of time. So, it wasn’t like we were creating a church from scratch. But we were clearly looking to plant a church that wasn’t like the last one. Even more, we sought to create something that was different than anything else around. In other words, we were not looking to stand in solidarity with other churches, but in distinction from other churches.

Hindsight being 20/20, I can see how our frustration with the last church would have made laying a level foundation difficult. In the best of times, church plants will be planted with the idiosyncrasies. But, in times of frustration, those idiosyncrasies are magnified. I can think of another church that began with a handful of families who left because of egalitarian impulses taking place in their church. And what was the result? An overemphasis on male-dominated leadership.

To take that illustration in the other direction: If a group left because they felt that male leadership was too strong in their previous church, it would not be surprising that an openness to females leading, teaching, or directing the church would result in an egalitarian ethos, if not female elders. Similarly, if members were frustrated with the liberal drift of their church, their resulting church plant would likely codify a highly-regulated doctrinal statement.

In our culture today, such a doctrinal statement is good and needed. Yet, every doctrinal statement must be adorned. And it is likely, that if a church begins in direct opposition to wokeness, it will soon manufacture a very tight-fitting garment of righteousness.

At any time, churches will pull in response to circumstances, personalities, crises, and other local situations—both seen and unforeseen. And faithful churches will always have to be corrected by the Word of God, in order to avoid the two ditches of legalism and lawlessness. But this threat is amplified when a church begins in frustration, reacting to the things it did not like previously.

To make it clear, this is not to say that such a church is not a genuine church. If it preaches the true gospel and rightly administers the ordinances, it is a church. And wonderfully, just as a premature and sickly baby can grow up to be a healthy adult, so many churches that begin poorly are now faithful outposts of the kingdom. Nevertheless, it would be wise to avoid planting a church if frustrations are animating the foundation.

Third, a church planted with independent people will end up competing with other churches.

To put differently, if a church is not sent out by another, the chances are very high that the church will position itself in competition with others. In Acts 13, we find the pattern of Paul and Barnabas being sent out by the church at Antioch. Equally, when they go out and preach the gospel, they plant churches with the converts who were then baptized in Jesus’s name. Eventually, they would strengthen these churches by appointing elders (Acts 14:23). Such is the God-given pattern of church planting—churches plant churches.

That said, a church is not created by a church. A church comes into existence when believers assemble themselves in Jesus’s name. Therefore, if there is no church in a given location, and 2–3 Christians find themselves there, they can organize themselves into a church. They don’t need to get permission from another church, as if there is some type of apostolic validation process. Rather, as the Word creates new life, the Spirit can assemble that life into a church. And other churches that believe the Bible should recognize those churches as a true church. That’s the doctrine.

Yet, this doctrine of church planting needs to be paired with a doctrine of church association. In the New Testament, churches are never in competition with one another and always exist to help one another. When the church in Jerusalem suffered physically and financially, Paul took up an offering to send them provisions. Likewise, in 2–3 John we learn how churches are to receive others and send out “missionaries” who go out for the sake of the name (3 John 8). In this way, churches should be the greatest supporters of other churches.

Yet, in moments when churches split and new churches are founded by departing members, such inter-congregational fellowship is difficult. One of the things my wife observed in 2015 was the toll it would take on our family to start another church in the same town. Every week, we’d run into members from our previous church at the grocery, the park, or the gas station. And what would we say? Would we invite them to church? Or would we ask them how their church was going?

This is the sorrow that comes when members leave. The communion that was once the center of all conversation, communication, and life is now a painful reminder of what used to be. Even more, when the departure is not well moderated and a new church is created to house former members, it produces a competitive spirit, not to mention suspicion. In other words, it memorializes a church split.

In a world where unbelievers surround us, new churches are always needed. And healthy churches should always be looking for ways to plant churches. Yet, when churches are planted without being sent out, or when a group of members decide to leave and start their own New Harmony Baptist, Harmony Baptist is injured and so is the regional witness of Christ’s saints.

Indeed, when members leave to begin their own church, it will naturally put that church at odds with the other. And it will be equally tempting to draw others to join them from the last church too. After all, if the condition of that previous church was so troublesome, it would be seen by the new church as a net improvement for any member of that previous church to leave and join the new one.

Again, there could be counterexamples here. It is possible that the independent church is entirely committed to evangelizing the lost, and not pursuing former members. Yet, if that is true, then the reason for planting the church must be strongly separated from the reason for leaving the last church. And that would be an ongoing challenge for the church plant.

Again, this is the dynamic that makes me most glad that I did not try to plant a new church in 2015. The temptation to pridefully compete with my previous church would have been too much. For all the right reasons for planting a new church, the origins of that church would have always been associated with a fracture in the body of Christ. This is not to say that God cannot use such a fracture to grow his people, but it should be recognized that this pathway is not best.

To repeat, the New Testament pattern of church planting begins with churches that prayerfully send out evangelists to preach the gospel and plant other churches. Evangelism, therefore, is at the heart of church planting. Church planting that aims to make a church that is better than the last one has its eyes on the wrong thing. And this is why church plants are best conceived when they are birthed in the prayerful labors of a mother church.

As 2 John 13 speaks of local churches as sisters, it would be good to ensure that those sisters are not in competition. Yet, to begin a church independent of others and with many of the members of the former church will unavoidable produce tension between churches. And for that reason, if at all possible, it should be avoided.

Fourth, and finally, a church planted from impassioned people will be hard-pressed to be humble.

What I did not see in myself in 2015, I can see today. Namely, in trying to start a new church, I thought of myself more highly than I ought. While I thought I was being purely motivated by spiritual interests, I can see now that there were equal parts passion (a desire to serve God) and pride (confidence in myself to plant a church).

In any church plant, it takes a lot of work, energy, and drive. And if the power of that drive is not supplied by the Spirit, it will be supplied by human effort, not to mention man-made ingenuity. And this is where pride comes in. For churches can be planted by humble dependence on God, or they can be planted with prideful confidence in one’s gifts. And sometimes it is difficult to tell the difference, especially when seeking to leave another church.

By contrast, when a church sends out a church planter, the sending church has both vetted the planter(s) and given their prayerful approval them. In this way, the confidence that the church plant is a work of the Lord does not come from the person planting, but from the church sending. When a group of individuals rely on themselves, however, their resources, gifts, and goals are furnished by themselves. At all times, mixed motive for ministry are common, and the Lord has to humble all of his saints, but this is doubly the case, when a church is planted by solitary self-effort, or drawn up in the wake of a sharp disagreement. In such a situation, pride will be present, even if it takes years to see them.

This is what I could not see in 2015. But today, I see it clearly. And I am thankful that church plant I sought to lead came to nothing. God protected those families who were thinking about planting a new church in the wake of a sharp disagreement, and he protected the relationship of churches in that small community. Do I think that a church plant is still needed there? Yes, probably. But it wasn’t for that group of faithful-but-disgruntled Christians to pursue.

Church Planting: A Post Mortem

I share these four reflections out of care and concern for others who might be tempted to plant a church today, and to do so with motives that are equal parts honorable and dishonorable. To those who are seeking to move immediately from a sharp disagreement to setting up a new church, be reminded: Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.

There may very well be a situation where a new church is needed, but how one plants a church is critical. A house built on a faulty foundation can stand for years, but it can also invite unforeseen troubles, sometime years down the line. Therefore, from the vantage point of almost ten years, I share my story as a cautionary tale for those seeking to start a new church.

To be candid, my story is only one example. And God can do with others what he wills. But for all of us who might consider planting a church, it is best to return to Scripture and ask: What does the Bible say? What is the pattern for church planting? And what does it mean to pursue ministry with humility, not pride? For indeed, pride has ruined many faithful ministries (see Uzziah in 2 Chronicles 26), and so have motivations driven by hurt, frustration, ambition, or unchecked self-reliance.

In 2015 God opposed our pride, without our awareness that we had any, and he quickly shut down our plans. As I look back, that was a great grace. And I thank God for the way he opposed our pride, when we did not suspect any.

It is no light thing to plant a church at any time. But how much more, if those planting the church are impassioned by hurt, anger, or self-confidence that they can do it better. In the moment, those passions may not be discernible, because those passions are wrapped up in the excitement of planting New Harmony Baptist. But beware, the heart is a fickle thing, and often we cannot see our ambitions.

On that note, let me end with a benediction.

May the Lord oppose the proud so that he can give grace to the humble. May he also protect those who are tempted to move directly from a sharp disagreement to a new church. And may he raise up healthy churches who can shepherd those with ministry passions, to put them on a good path to humble service that avoids the error of impassioned church planting. 

Soli Deo Gloria, ds

Photo by Ian Schneider on Unsplash