| ||||||||||||
 | | | ||||||||||
|
An explanatory note about theology of church planting might be helpful for understanding our vision statement. The paragraphs on this page focus on church planting rather than church strenghtening.
Good theology lies at the foundation of healthy church planting. This is because missional church planting is primarily a theological task and only secondarily an anthropological or sociological task. Pauline church founding is best understood as the New Testament fulfillment of the Great Commission: Jesus commanded his disciples to make disciples, so Paul went and founded churches. This is the primary New Testament model of obeying the Great Commission. Thus church planting is the missiological and ecclesiological essence of the Great Commission.
It has often been said that church planting is the best method of fulfilling the Great Commission. This is partly true in that church planting and the Great Commission are integrally related as stated above. But it is not a fully accurate statement if by it one means that church planting is one option for fulfilling the Great Commission. Such a position makes church planting optional. However, the New Testament does not provide evidence that church founding was an optional missional commitment. Therefore if our mission ministry is to follow New Testament missional principles, we should not construe church planting as a discretionary missional activity. Church founding is a compulsory missional activity because it is the New Testament essence of the Great Commission.
Perhaps because of its cultural emphasis upon individualism, the West has anachronistically marginalized the church in discussions of discipleship. However, this should not place church planting on the peripheral edges of mission. Rather, the local church is central to discipleship, evangelism, and mission. The recovery of church planting for mission is a theological task.
This kind of theological thinking about church planting is necessary because (1) theology of mission is primarily practiced in North America as though it were housed within the disciplines of anthropology and sociology; (2) current theology from the evangelical left is broadening soteriological parameters toward an inclusivism which undermines the motivation for mission and for church planting; (3) evangelical mission is, at best, uninterested in theology, or at worst, suspicious of theology; (4) recent theological publications which have undercut the importance of missional church planting are being ignored by missionary church planters and mission leaders; (5) many missionaries and pastors tend to be highly pragmatic in their approach to ministry.
So a fresh and rigorous look at the theological basis of church planting is needed. There is a need to bridge the gap between mission and theology so that theology becomes the basis for healthy missional church planting and for mission in general. Dale's ministry of researching and writing on church planting theology is intended to make a contribution toward recovering theology for church planting.
