Comparing Five Church Planting Models

Church planting is one of the most effective ways to reach nonbelievers with the gospel. As we noted in Part 1 and Part 2 of this series, they tend to be more nimble and more outward-focused. Planting a church can also jump-start renewal in sending churches that have been stuck in maintenance mode.

• Planting is not one-size-fits-all. Multiple models can work, but each has unique pros and cons. Below are five pathways to consider as you explore church planting.

Five Potential Pathways To Church Planting

1. Parachute (No Local Connection)

• In the past, planters often relocated and started from scratch — raising support, building a local team, and forming the connections needed to reach a new community.
• Today, this is less common because of the high risk of failure. Many also question whether it is good stewardship to fund a planter for many years as they build a network from the ground up. And even when it “works,” the ministry can be less contextually sensitive, as it is being led by an outsider.

2. Mother-Daughter (Sponsored Plant)

• A sending church provides people, funding, and short-term oversight to launch a new church nearby, with the goal of becoming a healthy, self-sufficient, independent congregation.
• Because these churches are located geographically close (but not too close) to the mother church, they can begin with a committed core group and a leader who understands the local context well. Even so, the path to full self-sufficiency can be daunting and requires clear milestones, timelines, and governance agreements.

3. Multisite (Satellite Campus)

• In recent years, the multisite approach has become popular. The new campus retains all of the DNA of the main campus (branding, ministry philosophy, etc.), allowing it to launch with strong name recognition right from the start. It also has access to the resources of the main campus (finances, HR staff, media, etc.), making ministry lean and efficient.
• While each new campus typically has its own campus pastor, there is flexibility around other staffing. For example, preaching may be done via a video link or delivered by a rotating teaching team. The satellite campus could eventually grow to the point of having a robust staff of its own, but it could still thrive while on the path there, thanks to the tight link with the main campus.

4. Replant / Restart /Adoption / Merger

• The number of churches closing their doors each year is rising. However, the end of one congregation’s ministry does not have to be the end of the story. The church’s facility and assets can be entrusted to another church that is ready to plant.
• The Center for Church Renewal offers the Renewal Legacy Project for churches seeking to discern if it is time to end their journey well. We offer assessments, coaching, and practical assistance to help congregations complete their journey well so their legacy can bless others and a new gospel witness can take root.

5. Microchurch / House-church / Fresh Expressions

• A new model some churches are trying embraces smaller, decentralized gatherings that meet in homes or “third spaces.” They may never become self-sufficient or offer a complete slate of ministries, but that is not the goal. Through their link to the planting church, they still have access to many programs and shared oversight.
• The low cost and high flexibility of this approach is attractive, but managing a large number of small gatherings can be difficult. Training the necessary number of leaders and exercising appropriate theological oversight can be challenging.

A hybrid approach that combines aspects of these models is also possible. The question is: Which fits your context best? Even though your church may not have church planting on its radar (yet), this may be the right time to begin dreaming and preparing for the future. In Part 4 next week, we’ll talk about steps any and every church can take toward church planting!