OUR GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO EMPLOY “BUSINISTRY” IN THE CHURCH

The Stakes Are High

A recent report commissioned by the Pinetops  Foundation, titled The Great Opportunity, found  that between now and 2050 over 40 million youth  (Millennials and Gen Z) in America who were raised in  Christian homes are likely to disaffiliate from the faith  of their parents. However, if the church can help them  engage with Christ at rates from just two decades ago,  over 20 million will come to know a life with Jesus. To  put it in perspective, that is more than the combined  total of every revival and Billy Graham crusade in US  history! We are literally at the brink of the greatest  opportunity for evangelism and discipleship in  US history and, based on the age at which youth  determine their religious beliefs, the window of  opportunity for Millennials is closing quickly.1 

One of the five most catalytic strategies the report  recommends is to find a way to triple church planting,  promoting it as the single most effective method  for reaching the unchurched. This goal is entirely  attainable, but it will take much more than pastors  and planters to address this challenge. It will take  redemptive stewardship, or what Stan Dobbs refers to  as “Businistry.”

Do We Really Need More Church Plants?

The data strongly suggests yes. Currently about 4,000  Christian churches are planted annually in America.  That may sound like a big number, but it is only about  a quarter of the number of churches planted per capita  in the 1800s. With the current church closure rate at  about 3,700 per year, 4,000 plants are not enough to keep up with population growth or immigration; the  number of church closures is forecasted to increase to  5,500 per year within the next decade. Keep in mind  that only about 68% of the aforementioned church  plants succeed and the need to double or ideally triple,  our current rate of church plants to 11,200 for the next  30 years becomes apparent.2

Don’t Church Plants Cannibalize Existing  Churches?

The simple answer is no. Consider the following statistics: 

  • The average well-trained, and equipped church  plant will grow to an average of 250 weekly  participants within four years. Of those, 42% (or  almost half of the congregation) will be comprised  of previously unchurched or unaffiliated people. 
  • The average church 10 years of age and over has an  89:1 ratio of congregants to conversions. Churches  3 to 9 years of age have a 7:1 ratio. And, churches  under 3 years of age have an astounding 3:1 ratio  of congregants to conversions.3 There is something  systemic in the inherent life cycle of a church that,  unless it is replanted, will eventually turn inward— prioritizing programs and churched people over  evangelism.4
  • The relationship between the number of churches  to churchgoers is exponential, not linear: 

– If there is one church for every 10,000 residents,  then ~1% of the population will attend. 

– If there is one church for every 1,000 residents,  then ~15-20% of the population will attend.

– If there is one church for every 500 residents,  then ~40% of the population will attend.5 

Put differently, the more churches someone sees, the  more relevant and inviting the prospect of entering  one becomes. The greater the supply, the greater the  demand. Case in point, Starbucks.

So Why Aren’t We Planting More Churches?

The problem is that the average cost of a middle-class  church plant in the US ranges from $250K–$500K  which, when multiplied by the 11,200 church plants  we ideally need, equates to roughly $2.8–$5.6 billion  annually. While we serve a mighty God with limitless  resources, the status quo is not a practical annual  fundraising expectation for church planting. We need  to dramatically lower the barriers of entry for planting  new churches and, in many cases, reconsider how we  operate church entirely. 

The church needs Kingdom-minded leaders to  innovate and solve these challenges. We need to  sacralize our business practices and leverage the  massive trust of human capital we have sitting in the  pews to start thinking of stewardship as something far  beyond tithing. Perhaps one way we could start leading  the charge is with our most visible, underutilized, and  sacred place: the church building itself. But first, please  humor me with a brief etymology in order to lay the  theological backdrop.

What Is a Church?

The word “church” comes from the Gothic (or  Germanic) word kirika, which became kirche in  modern German, meaning “house of the Lord” or a  ritual gathering place. But the original Greek word for  church was “ekklesia,” which was a simple gathering or  assembly of people for a specific purpose. My point, or  rather Andy Stanley’s point, is that Jesus’ church was  never meant to be a location or a building. It has and  always will be a people.6

The implications of this are huge. Churches don’t  just have to meet in buildings with steeples. They could  meet in offices, hotels, event centers, movie theaters,  and coffee shops. While traditional church goers love  a 9 and 11 AM Sunday morning service, what if we  gathered at other times instead? What if Jesus could be  found in community gatherings seven days a week? 

There is much I would like to unpack about how  this opens up the opportunity for us to support the  church in all of her forms, be it mega, multi-site, or  micro, but for the purpose of this paper I want to focus  specifically on one idea for a pivot to the traditional  model.

Is the Current Model Really Broken?

Four years ago, the City of San Diego forced my church  out of our building because the zoning changed and  we had not previously secured a permit. I volunteered  to help my church find a new location, having worked  and invested in commercial real estate for the last 15  years. It was the hardest assignment of my career. From  zoning to parking to ceiling heights to floor plans,  church facilities are highly specialized and expensive.  As a result, attractive facilities are very difficult to come  by and rarely meet the budget, which makes finding  the right facility a huge hurdle for churches of all sizes.  The church-in-a-box model is not sustainable either.  The lack of permanence and hours of set-up and tear  down every Sunday take a toll on the volunteers, which  is why this model has a limited shelf life. Occupying a  facility is just the beginning of the problem. Consider  the following statistics:

  • The average church building is only fully utilized  about 5% of the week. 
  • Over 90% of most church budgets are geared  towards a Sunday experience.7
  • Totaling the cost of buildings, programs, and  salaries, we spend approximately $1.5 million for  every baptism in the US.8With stewardship like this, it is no surprise that  roughly 80% of the churches in America are in plateau  or decline. Sadly, this isn’t just an American problem,  nor is this a model that will get any easier in the future.9 Currently, 69% of all charitable donations come from  people above the age of 49, and studies anticipate  church income falling by 60–70% over the next 30  years based on the Millennial generation’s giving  history.10 11 12 How can we expect Christians to shed  the consumeristic, country club church mindset when  everything about the Sunday experience is structured  that way? I’m convinced that this is part of what is  turning off our youth. However, what if we could  change church to make a statement that it is not a  building, it is a people? We need to balance our “come  and see” approach with the “go and be” approach  in Matthew 28:19.13 Jesus went to public gathering  places like wells, markets, synagogues, and forums to  meet people where they were. As Daniel Cook says,  “we need to become fishers of men and not keepers  of aquariums.”14 My friends, we need a new model.  Perhaps a lot of new models.

A “Businistry” Idea

The two biggest line items in a church budget are  staff and real estate, which comprise roughly 97% of  most church budgets.15 What if we could substantially  reduce those while meeting the practical needs of the  surrounding community and increasing the amount  of people that set foot inside the church? What if we  lowered the real estate barriers of entry for church  planters to the extent that we could open the door for  far more pastors to be bi-vocational? What if multiple  churches could share the same building and not only  reduce their costs of occupancy but use that cost  savings to collaborate and reach their local community  together? I think there is an incredible opportunity  to live out John 13:35 and John 17:23 through the way we utilize our real estate. Can you imagine what  would happen if multiple monoethnic churches shared  a building and intentionally found ways for their  ministries to strategically address the needs of their  non-Christian communities? What edification would  take place as our cultures and theology intertwined?  What if these churches were held to a standard of  ministering “through” their congregation as opposed  to ministering “to” their congregation?16 How many  millennials and Gen Zers would be inspired by the  relevance of the church and become part of the 42% of  the congregants in these church plants? 

These are questions that have consumed the last  nine months of my life. While this plan is in the early  stages of development, there is a way to subsidize  the costs of the facility with preschools, coffee shops,  coworking, events, sports, hotels, and many other uses  that the surrounding community would be drawn  to utilize throughout the week. This in turn would  create “people flow,” which creates opportunity for  divine collisions and community with people who  might not otherwise set foot inside a church building.  Daniel Cook Architect, Mission Based Solutions, and  Lionheart Academy are a few of the groups pioneering  some of these concepts. They are doing great work  figuring out not only how to unlock church buildings  seven days a week but also how to create sustainable  business models that redeem church facilities to  their highest and best use for the Kingdom. But we  need many more people involved. We need Christian  investors and professionals willing to collaborate with  the church using their businistry gifting to their fullest  potential in order to curate radical new models of  redemptive social enterprise. The stakes are high and  the great opportunity of businistry awaits us.

 

________________________



1 The Great Opportunity (www.greatopportunity.org) (Pinetops Foundation). 2 Ibid. 

3 Bob Logan, training material for The Church Multiplication Center. 

4 William Mallick, Kenneth Priddy, and Steven Ogne, training material from Fresh Start: A Missional Road Map For Restarting Ministry (2016). 

5 Timothy Keller, “Center Church” (Redeemer City to City, 2012). 

6 Andy Stanley, Deep and Wide, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2016). 

7 Daniel Cook, 10 Tsunamis Impacting Ministries: How do we survive what’s coming? (Ogden, UT Building God’s Way Services, 2015). 

8 David Barrett and Todd Johnson, World Christian Trends (Pasadena, CA William Carey Library, 2001). 

9 Mark Clifton, Reclaiming Glory (2016). 

10 Cook, op. cit. 

11 Clifton, op. cit. 

12 Carol Fleck, “The Boomers Most Generous at Charitable Giving” (AARP Money Talk, August 8, 2013). 13 Clifton, op. cit. 

14 Cook, op. cit. 

15 Ibid. 

16 Mallick, et. al., op. cit.