What’s the Real Difference Between a Traditional Church Plant and a Multi-Site Satellite Campu
- Posted by: Todd
- Posted on: Mon, December 20, 2004
- Viewed 180
- (64) comments so far
"Johnson Ferry Baptist Church has a great reputation, and we're transferring the core mission, the values of that institution, to this campus," said Terry Nelson, head pastor of the new Johnson Ferry @ Cedarcrest.
The 23-year-old church is counting on its trusted name. Such branding is used to sell everything from hamburgers to computers, so, why not use a brand name to sell salvation?
The spinoff church will draw people from west Cobb and east Paulding counties and will initially hold services at Shelton Elementary School on Cedarcrest Road in Paulding County.
Services at Johnson Ferry @ Cedarcrest will be a mix of live music, live prayer and videotaped sermons delivered by Bryant Wright, the senior pastor at Johnson Ferry for 23 years, who is known for his "right from the heart" 60-second radio homilies.
The mix of live worship and videotaped sermon has been used at Johnson Ferry, Wright said.
Midmorning services are held simultaneously in the chapel and the church gym. One week, Wright delivers the sermon live in the chapel. The next week he speaks in the gym while those in the main sanctuary see a video version.
Such spiritual franchises, Wright said, "are definitely a trend across the country, especially among larger churches of all denominations."
North Point Community Church of Alpharetta has a branch in Buckhead, where the Rev. Andy Stanley appears via 3-D video image. North Point also has started a congregation in Dothan, Ala., and plans another in Forsyth County.
A 2000 Hartford Seminary study of 153 megachurches (there are an estimated 850 nationwide) found that 22 percent had satellite churches. Being a branch of a big church, as opposed to an independent start-up, has several advantages, Nelson said.
Church members know what to expect. "There are no unpleasant surprises," Nelson said.
The worldly expenses of running a church ? rendering unto the power company what is the power company's ? are covered by the established church.
"You can pour your passion and your energy into the ministry instead of worrying if you'll survive," Nelson said.
Until a a Cedarcrest campus is built, Sunday services are being held in the school gym.
The church paid to have heating and air conditioning installed in the gym, an expense beyond the reach of a typical start-up operation, Nelson said.
The staff of the new church is holding practice services in preparation for the Jan. 16 official first service. Equipment loaded into four trailers and a 26-foot cargo truck transforms the school gym into a worship center in about 45 minutes. About 120 people have been attending the practice services.
The services will be a bit more casual than those of the mother church, Nelson said.
"We'll never be in a coat and tie over there," he said.
Is this really any different of an idea than what we're used to in the past with the traditional church plant model for church growth?
Montpelier Baptist Church was a church plant of First Baptist Church of Stryker, OH (a church about 20 miles away). MBC was started because one local church cared about the spiritual well-being of people from another local community. Fortunately, I lived in that other community. 
What's the difference between what Johnson Ferry is doing in January and what First Baptist Church did 35 years ago? There are only two things that intially come to mind:
1. The name of the church
2. Technology
I know many are reluctant to take the multi-site movement seriously. I know that many think that multi-site churches somehow should not exist ("Why are they making their kingdom larger rather than just starting an entirely new church?" "Multi-sites are just another way to make mega-church pastors more popular and feed their own ego"). But in many ways, multi-sites make sense from a start-up standpoint... they take a local church's strengths (their values, vision, and mission) in their own community and duplicate this to a nearby community. Everyone is on the same page because they come from a mother church. And the financial pressure that many church plants find themselves under can be better leveraged by being more closely connected to the mother church.
Just as First Baptist saw spiritual fruit through their efforts 35 years ago, so will Johnson Ferry during 2005. Lives will be reached. Souls will be saved because God's people are once again reaching out.
For those who are opposed or look down on the multi-site approach, I would ask you to consider what the differences really are from the ways that we are already using and willingly 'accept'.
That should be enough to get the wheels rolling this morning... what do you think?
Todd
I was saved almost 30 years ago in a small church plant in Montpelier, OH. Today the evangelical church world is being rocked by a new type of church plant. The ‘multi-site church’ movement is gaining strength every week in America. Clint Williams of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution recently wrote an interesting article on another church that is opening a new church via a multi-site, satellite campus approach. Take a few minutes to read this article and consider some of the questions and ideas that I took from this article…
-----
Comments
if you want a Globally Recognized Avatar (the images next to your profile) get them here. Once you sign up, they will displayed on any website that supports them.
Moira MacLean on Mon, December 20, 2004
Todd:
“Methodology and Theology are not the same thing.” True, but they had better be VERY closely identified, and the latter had better drive the former. Otherwise, methodology will be driven by something else entirely, and that opens up a whole host of very disturbing possibilities.
Todd Rhoades on Mon, December 20, 2004
Absolutely, Moira. But I think we have trouble distinguishing the two (methodology and theology). That was my only point. Our theology should never change, although our methodology can be in a constant state of change over time.
Todd
Chris on Mon, December 20, 2004
It seems to me the most frequent articles and reviews of this site is focused on church branding/mega church/tech toys for church . . .
The article states “Such branding is used to sell everything from hamburgers to computers, so, why not use a brand name to sell salvation?” This epitomizes the coverage of this sites blogs. How can we make church more professional. We CAN NOT SELL SALVATION! If I can talk you into it then someone else can talk you out of it.
I can not renew your heart! I can not transform you from the kingdom of darkness to hte kingdom of the Son of His Love! No amount of branding can either. If you take time to examine biblical church growth you find that God is always associated with growth. I Cor 3, Acts 2:37-39, 40-47, Matt 16 (Jesus will build His church).
We just need slick packaging, good marketing, brand recognition and then we will have a “successful church.” That is mostly what I take from the choice of articles. It saddens me greatly.
The thrust of this artilce though is (again) multi site. Why can these churches not invesst the money (and reputation) to start actual independant church plants? Hire a pastor, fund it and utilize the “Famous” pastor for occasional speaking. Control the church until such time as the vision is instilled and direction set. Then let them fly and do it again in another location. I don’t question Bryant as an EGO guy, I just question the mentality of we can make it successful based on a person (other than Christ) or a packaging/name etc.
I am out of time. Lord Bless you all. I don’t mean to rant, but after reviewing the past months articles there seems to be a pattern that could use breaking!
Love in CHrist
Todd Rhoades on Mon, December 20, 2004
Chris,
“If you take time to examine biblical church growth you find that God is always associated with growth.”
Again, I would say we’re somehow confusing ‘methodology’ and ‘theology’. Why would you automatically conclude or illude to the idea that God is NOT associated with things like ‘multi-site’ church growth and evangelism?
“We just need slick packaging, good marketing, brand recognition and then we will have a “successful church.” That is mostly what I take from the choice of articles. It saddens me greatly.”
What I’m trying to do here in this to try to stretch everyone out of our comfort zone… beyond what we’re currently doing. That doesn’t mean I endorse everything or think everything is the best new thing since sliced bread. And it doesn’t mean you have to be large or ‘slick’ to have a successful church.
Most of the articles and things I choose to highlight here at the blog are from churches and fellowships that are successful. (I know that’s a bad word for some) By successful, I mean that they are making a real difference in their communities by changing lives. That doesn’t mean that it will work for you in your situation. You are called to do only what God has called you to do.
But here’s my main point… (and probably the deep root of why I’m so passionate about what I’m trying to do here at the blog)…
There are over 300,000 churches in the United States. Why are we not doing a better job in reaching our country for Christ? Church as we know it (and has been talked about here in this blog) simply isn’t cutting it in 90% of America. Can most of us agree on that point? And it seems that a large part of the 90% have nothing but ill to say about the 10% who are making a dent (for some reason). I’m not saying that critics of multi-sites are part of the problem (please don’t read that into this). You can be God honoring and multiplying using any number of ‘methodologies’. Multi-sites can be used (even if temporarily) to bring people into the Kingdom. And God can be a part of the movement. (I think He is!)
Oh… interesting note… the traditional church plant I was saved under (that got this conversation started) dissolved about 10 years ago because of legalism. I’m sure glad it existed for a short time though! God used that church to reach me! http://www.mondaymorninginsight.com/images/smileys/smile.gif
Todd
Ricky Roubique on Mon, December 20, 2004
Carol said:
“What I see is a proliferation of large churches built around the “personality” of the charismatic and gifted senior teaching pastor. The multi-site church is a prime example of this extension.”
Exactly!
I can tell you what happens when organizations are built personality, they crumble! How is that representative of the Body of Christ?
No where in Scripture do you see any of the churches built around the gifts of a SINGLE person. Instead, the church is edified when EVERYONE brings their giftings to the table and eveyone is seen as equal to each other.
The multi-site “movement” is one that will, like all the other fads that breeze through American Christendom, resemble more of a convenience store chain than the organism the Church was created to be.
Ricky Roubique on Mon, December 20, 2004
Todd said:
“I’ve been in multi-site churches that are being tremendously effective in reaching their communities for Christ. And I have a hard time criticizing that. I have not seen the egomaniac pastor that everyone illudes to. And I haven’t seen the ‘we’re expanding to continue to promote ourselves’ that many others accuse.”
Todd, you must run in small circles! Most of the organizations that I know of (and I have quite a few pastor friends who are doing this or looking into doing this) are conducted with good intentions (i.e., to win the lost) but are done so in a “cart before the ox” method of operating. By that I mean until we realize that the Early Church multiplied at a much faster pace than Christianity today because there were no superstar preachers thinking and believing that they are the only ones who can reach people or who have “the” message, but EVERYONE in the Body of Christ simply lived their sermons through their lives, in their neighborhoods.
Today, the best that can be said of these organizations is that they are just that: organizations that, like any store or business, are bringing a product to them. As I stated, I don’t fault those who have a real concern for reaching the lost, but I do fault the methods of the world that we believe we must adopt in order to do so.
You believe that the Church is progressing. Fine. I don’t. I believe that by the veracity of these various fads that these organizations are scampering after, the Church is REgressing by losing its identity as a supernatural organism that speads through contact.
You further said:
“As for the ego of the pastor… most of us just don’t know. (Ricky, it sounds to me like you’ve had a rough go of it and been burned… and it sounds like you’re around the NorthPointe area from what I can gather). But some of the comments here about what people say about ego pastors seems out of line if you don’t know for sure. I mean… consider the charge… some here have charged that certain multi-site churches are starting new campuses (churches) only to build the ego of the superpastor. If this is true, and there is no regard or concern whatsoever for the lost, I would be number one to criticize it. But honestly, I just don’t see that the ego pastor is the drive behind the multi-site movement.”
No, I’m not from NorthPointe but Louisiana where a large charismatic organization has been built around the charisma (no pun intended) of a single man.
And this guy has tried countless fads to increase membership (as well as his radio/TV “outreach”) from G12, cells, FAITH (a Baptist outreach), prayer groups, etc., etc., etc., all appearing “successful” at first, only to end up shifting the “vision” to another fad that keeps coming down the pike instead of just encouraging and releasing God’s people to do what they’ve been gifted to do.
Ricky Roubique on Mon, December 20, 2004
Todd asks:
“What may seem hype to you may be the same thing that draws someone else to Christ? What say you?”
I say “Are we really drawing them to Christ or to a man and his organization?”
Building into the mentality of a convert a dependency upon the ministry of a particular preacher or person is not helping the convert but hurting him by setting up him/her up to become a disciple of that preacher or person instead of Christ.
Again, are we really reaching them for Christ?
Harry Miller on Mon, December 20, 2004
Man looks on the outward appearance. God looks at the heart.
Ricky Roubique on Mon, December 20, 2004
Chris said:
“We just need slick packaging, good marketing, brand recognition and then we will have a “successful church.” That is mostly what I take from the choice of articles. It saddens me greatly.”
Myself, as well.
The mere fact that these organizations feel that they need to try this latest fad speaks volumes as to their previous failures in reaching and making DISCIPLES of Christ.
I find it ironic that every couple of years a “new and improved” way of “doing church” is introduced to gullible, power-hungry pastors for the purpose of “reaching people.”
Jesus gave His disciples one word: “Go.” And they changed the world. I’m afraid that the more complicated and structured we become, the less effective we become. Why? Because we are buying into worldly schemes of business (i.e., “expansion = influence”) instead of just letting the Spirit lead us into the truth and us living that truth out in public, as the first believers did, to great effect.
Henry Brinker on Mon, December 20, 2004
This is a great discussion on the multi-site churches. I have been planning to begin something similar in Detroit as part of a new church planting mission to GLBT and friends in four different counties to start out. I believe we need to be innovative and use the resources God has given us more wisely. I am really excited about the possibilities for reaching more people for Christ - who presently do not have a church home. Whether everyone agrees or not - this is a great discussion and has given me more inspiration in going forward with my plans in 2005.
Bernie Dehler on Mon, December 20, 2004
Todd wrote:
“ I have not seen the egomaniac pastor that everyone illudes to.”
The Bible talks about people with “false humility.” They may even be deceived themselves. Think about it—if their ego or pride was upfront, they would lose it all; they’d be an obvious hypocrite. We simply can’t judge a person’s heart. But the actions of a Mega-super Pastor, I think, are obvious. He is obviously building himself up, rather than a team of peers.
As for the Mormons, it’s easier for them to start a new church with fewer people because of their false teaching on tithing (which brings in a lot of money to build their multi-million $$$ temples). For them, they follow it as if under the law. They don’t understand that tithing has been replaced for the Christian. We now follow a practice called “stewardship,” where 100% of us (time, treasure, and talent) belongs to God, not just 10%. Many Protestants Pastors, out of ignorance or greed, also still teach 10% tithing. Read this scholarly article (from Author & Teacher Steve Gregg) as a sample of correct teaching about tithing (or no need for it) for today’s Christian:
http://www.freegoodnews.com/tithe_gregg.htm
...Bernie
http://www.FreeGoodNews.com
Bernie Dehler on Mon, December 20, 2004
Another thing about mega superstar Pastors, like Rick Warrens. Does anyone know what he does with all the royalties he made off of his very popular book? If he has sold millions, he must have a lot of money from royalties. If he really wanted to build the Kingdom of God, couldn’t he make that book much cheaper (almost free?) to get it into the hands of even more people? Why won’t he disclose the financial information? If he had a parachurch organization, he would be required to reveal it, but he is exempt because he’s a Pastor of the Church (Churches are exempt from reporting taxes).
It used to be that people were ministering for God. Somewhere down the road, ministry became an occupation, and an industry grew up (buy our Christian music CD, buy our Christianbook, etc.). We justified their fleecing of the flock because they offered us a Biblically sound product. Even Franklin Graham (Samaritan’s Purse), gets paid a super handsome salary ($300K) for doing a noble work, that many have done for free (before it was a celebrity-thing to do). (See http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm/bay/search.summary/orgid/4423.htm to check Franklin’s salary). Most sickening of all, is the Christian leaders who see no problem with this kind of pay… and there are much worse…
...Bernie
http://www.FreeGoodNews.com
Ivan on Tue, December 21, 2004
Bernie makes an excellent point about Warren.
Todd Rhoades on Tue, December 21, 2004
Ahhhh… I think Bernie and Ivan have hit on something major here. It seems to be a sore point that’s come up before.
Hate to play devil’s advocate (again)… but the subject is “multi-site churches” and we’ve gotten (as somehow I knew we would) to large church pastors and how much money they make. My question… so what?
There were many of God’s people in the Bible that were downright filthy rich. Probably a lot richer by today’s standards than Rick Warren. What about David, Solomon, Job… just to name three. There were all people that God blessed unbelieveably. They were swimming in money at the same time they were pillars in their community and for God. And they all recognized where all the money came from (it of course came from God).
So why require a financial statement from Rick Warren?
Greg on Tue, December 21, 2004
Bernie, I have heard Rick Warren talk about this issue a couple of times, most recently at the Exponential 04 conference in Atlanta. He told us that, due to the success of his book, he and his wife were faced with something they never expected—wealth.
He said they made a decision to keep their present lifestyle—same house, same car (a Ford Taurus—instead of elevating it to reflect their new income.
They decided to pay their church back everything it had given them in salary since the beginning. Now, Warren receives no salary for his work at the church.
They also decided to live on 10% of what they make, and give 90% of it away.
I know it’s easy to take shots at guys who have been very successful, but I have a lot of respect for the decision that Warren has made.
Page 3 of 5 pages < 1 2 3 4 5 >
Post a Comment