Portable Church vs. Building

Does having a building make a difference when establishing a church?  A recent article by a well-known church planter posed that very question.  To say the least, his comments left me a bit confused…To wit:

If you are truly trying to reach unchurched people with everything that is in you, it doesn’t matter if you have a building or not. Unchurched people do NOT care about buildings, they care about the fact that they had their lives changed.

In a perfect world, these types of observations make sense.  In mine, they do not.  We’ve met in a school for 18 months now after having met in a building (a very small one) that we sold in order to grow.  In my experience, I’ve met with families who’ve told me it DOES make a difference.  Yes they crave life change but they also crave security and once they see you have a building, it tends to legitimitize what you are doing.  Another quote:

I’ve heard the argument that people burn out being portabe. The truth is that church planters burn out being portable and therefore their people follow the leadership and they burn out on being portable. If your people are burning out on being portable than you have a vision issue. When people understand the vision and buy into the vision, they don’t mind being portable as long as the vision is being fulfilled.

What can I say here other than this statement is just not true.  For this person to make such a blanket statement assumes much from the many church planters I’ve cried tears with to see their vision blossom into reality.  Can we burn out?  Surely but it doesn’t have to be a vision issue.  Sometimes, people just get tired of the endless setup and teardown routine that takes hours!  Some of the churches I see in the blogging world build extensive sets and make huge productions out of their stage presence, including the church whose pastor wrote this.  I’m not knocking it nor am I against it but if the statement I quoted earlier is true; that unchurched people only care if their lives are being changed, then the extravagance at which many go through to make an impression is merely show because the unchurched don’t care about such things…It’s only window dressing.  They only care about their lives being changed right?  Do you see how this contradicts itself?

The second part of his comment, that the pastor may have a vision issue, does have some merit but it’s not true in all cases.  Many times, volunteers just wear out.  I know from experience it’s hard to keep going when there’s no end in sight.  Yes, the vision of changed lives is beautiful and meaningful but if it’s all you have…Many of your best volunteers will still burn out.  It’s not a vision issue with the pastor…It’s the reality that people arrive hours before the service, are wore out just sitting and trying to enjoy worship knowing that in an hour or so (a few more if you’re having two services) they will be at it again putting it all away.  It can sometimes be overwhelming to even the most blessed leader…Just ask Moses!  One final thought:

I will even venture to say that those who were NOT growing before moving into a building that started growing after moving into a building are simply experiencing “church hopper” growth. Those that were growing before moving into a building will continue to grow in a building but they would have grown no matter what.

I would venture to say there is some truth in that statement but a mission church inside a school (or movie theater, etc.) attracts far more church hoppers than those in a building.  Why do I says that?  Because I’ve seen more folks try to get in on the “ground floor” of new church startups figuring they can grow with the work.  Once they see the commitment and amount of work required for such an endeavor, they will either stay for a season and move on or they will just leave immediately.  Well known church planter and author Steve Sjogren calls these people “scaffolding people” because they are there in the early construction stages of a church but just as actual scaffolding goes down once the building is being completed, so these people leave as the church grows.

His article concludes with a rundown of some very successful (by the world’s standards) church plants that are portable.  I’m not saying these aren’t solid churches but I’ve not been in any of them so it’s unfair for me to say.  What I will say is that just because the handful of churches he mentions are large in size, doesn’t necessarily make them healthy and even if they are, it’s not a sign that they have it figured out and the struggling church of less than 100 that’s portable doesn’t.  That was the impression this article left on me.  That may not have been the author’s intention but it was how I perceived it.

More to come later…..