Thread by @Bezner

Lately I've been trying to ponder and circumvent the way (predominantly evangelical) church economics unintentionally hinder our effectiveness. Below are some observations. Would love any suggestions you may come up with.

I am on the board of an organization that works to start new churches in the city of Houston. I love the organization and believe it is one of the best things going in my city. Over the last five or so years, we have started several dozen churches. But, a problem arose.

We began to notice that it was very difficult to start new churches in economically depressed areas of the city. This is not because people didn't believe in the mission. Quite the opposite. It was because there was not enough funding in the neighborhood to support it.

We were able to work around this problem, because our organization is made up of multiple churches. We are able to pool our resources and fund the church independent of what the potential neighborhood might be able to support. So far, so good. BUT

And by the way, no, we aren't gentrifying these neighborhoods with these churches. In case you were wondering.

The larger question began to really bother me as a funding model for church, in general.

If there isn't enough money in the area, the church can't start.

Similarly, in existing churches, we are always thinking about how to balance being prophetic with provision.

In other words, it's one thing to stand in the pulpit and speak the truth. It's something very different to live with the economic fallout of that decision to speak the truth. (I've done both over the years, fwiw.)

But the tension remains.

I coach new pastors/planters to speak the truth of God, unafraid of the repercussions. And I believe that. But this is the reality:

We are asking pastors to prophesy to the very ones upon who they are depending for financial provision.

In the American context, this means that people can leave, head to the church down the street, and give to someone less "in your face."

As a result, we unintentionally incentivize those in my profession to keep it pretty vanilla.

Honestly, we may not even consciously realize it is what we are doing. But it is a reality I know many planters and pastors of smaller churches painfully feel.

I happen to pastor a church that is large enough where I am able to absorb some folks leaving over matters like this. But that wasn't always the case.

And I can remember standing in the pulpit, sweating, and then speaking the truth, trusting God.

Last week I heard of a church plant that had to close its doors for this very reason. The pastor attempted to preach a "third way" on a hot button issue and people on both sides left the church. His "third way" was simply an exposition of Romans 12, btw.

Still had to close.

At any rate, it's a tricky reality, and I haven't been able to fully figure out how to circumvent it for those I coach and we plant. The vast majority of the pastors I know still stand and speak the truth. But they also know of the potential financial fallout.

Possible solutions:

1. All pastors are bi-vocational. Makes sense in smaller settings. Tough for larger congregations.

2. Some sort of economic consortium so that funding is spread about. This allows funding for smaller congregations.

3. Denominational distribution of funds.

4. House church networks, or similar.

5. Other.

These are some of the things I've been thinking through as I'm working to help some of the church plants and pastors of smaller congregations in my area and circle.

Your thoughts are welcome and appreciated.

I've got to solve dinner and hang with the fam for a bit. I'm closing up and I'll return to your brilliant ideas in a few hours.

Thanks for thinking through this with me.

Grace and peace.