A movement killer is something that exists in the common life of the organization itself--the culture, thinking, and practices--that in effect blocks the inherent potential for growth contained in the system. In systems theory, all living systems are geared for growth and flourishing. They have everything in them needed to maintain life and reproduce healthily. The "killer" therefore is something now resident in the system that is in effect blocking the innate capacity to flourish.Read More
by Doug Paul A few years ago, I wrote a short article called "The Alexander Syndrome" that’s been coming back to my mind a lot lately. In fact...I'm not sure I've ever been more convinced about an argument than I am about this one.
This was the basic premise: At the age of 30, Alexander the Great looked upon his Kingdom and wept, for there were no more worlds to conquer (do yourself a favor and never watch Oliver Stone's film of this. Do yourself an even bigger favor...don't watch the 3 times longer director's cut. You'll thank me later). Back to the point...Using that as the dominant metaphor, in the last 20 years of evangelical culture, we were constantly inundated with stories of 'wildly successful churches', helmed by pastors who are almost surprisingly young (late 20s to early 30s). These stories have slowly seeped their way into the subconscious of many young pastors (myself included), and there is an unspoken pressure that says, “By the time you’re 30, you need to have done something ridiculously significant and made your mark on the world.” As a millennial myself, I feel this deep in my bones, as it is riven into the American mythos as well.
What this can inevitably lead to is a frenetic, stressed way of living for many of these young pastors who find themselves not measuring up and constantly “behind” the curve (at least in their minds).
There are two things in particular that have brought this to mind:
- In the last year, it feels like we might seen more evangelical poster-boys 'fall from grace' than in the last 10 combined. When this is the "curve" people are grading their success on...it screws with the curve. (to say the least)
- A little while ago, Elizabeth and I had the privilege of having 16 people over our house who have all been faithfully serving in local church ministry for 30+ years (some in a full-time capacity, some not). What struck me was not just that they survived, but how energized they are by where we are as a church (East End Fellowship) and where we are going. They've come out on the other side of their roaring 20's, raised kids who love Jesus, and are serving in urban ministry in their 60's, and still have marriages that flourish. And they still ready to go at it. It's astonishing, quite frankly.
So here's what I've been thinking about lately:
What if the most fruitful ministry years are really supposed to be when you’re between the ages of 50-70?
For quite some time, there has been a paradigm that has said a senior leader’s most significant time of ministry would be between the ages of 35-45.
You've probably heard this before.
In a traditional church setting, often the senior leader’s most important contribution is the teaching they give on Sunday morning. Furthermore, within a particular model, a speaker can usually attract people who are 10 years older and 10 years younger. The ages of 35-45 would mean you’re attracting people who are newly married (pre-kids) all the way to empty nesters whose kids have recently gone to college. That means you get couples from their 20s to their late 50s AND all of their kids.
At least that’s the thought.
Now for me, my thoughts have always been fixated on the idea of movements of God. I don’t have anything against traditional church models at all. We see so much of their fruitfulness every day and I've served in several churches that are an incredible expression of God's mission and his enduring faithfulness. But I think most of us would agree that while there are aspects of the Kingdom in the New Testament that have some organized elements (worship gatherings, patterns and practices, etc), many things tended to be far more movemental in their properties than institutional in nature. Ultimately, this led to disciples who made disciples who made disciples who made disciples.
And what did that lead to? A LOT of disciples. Which, through the amazing power of God, has me writing this article and you reading it. We are the beneficiaries of the movemental properties of the New Testament Church.
Now I’ve had the opportunity to study sustainable, meaningful movements. I’ve also had the opportunity to work alongside a few folks God has used to catalyze movements of discipleship and mission (the most significant ones led by people most of us have never heard of).
And here is my question: Can you really lead a meaningful Kingdom movement before the age of 50? You could maybe plant seeds for it. But in terms of leading one, growing one, sustaining one...I wonder if you have to be 50 and older.
Because I wonder if the accrued wisdom needed to lead a multiplying Kingdom expression is simply not possible for someone who is younger. For instance, at least in my opinion, I'm not sure Paul was really contributing to a sustainable Kingdom movement in training and sending out his team until the beginning of Acts 19 in Ephesus. At that point in his life, Paul is probably well over 50. Furthermore, I'm more convinced than ever that Paul saw more sustained breakthrough as a broken down, old man in a prison cell, writing letters and warring in prayer for the young pastors he'd invested so much of his life into. The seeds have been planted, the ground had been watered and the Lord was making the thing grow.
This wasn't sexy work. This wasn't work that many people saw. But it was Paul bearing the most Kingdom fruit of his life.
Through a lot of brokenness, substantial failure and a smidgen of success, I've learned that at the end of the day, Kingdom work has very little do with IQ, smarts, and charismatic gifting. The best strategy and powerful preaching and even hard work is needed, but still incredibly limited. (In fact, I hear that if it can be explained by my own human effort, it's not really Jesus: "Apart from me, you can do nothing.)
The most powerful Kingdom leadership comes from the wisdom of trying at something for more than 30 years, and all the failure that this entails, and all the way that life in the Spirit for this long a time grows someone. This kind of wisdom and leadership come from people whom the Lord has taken through the crucible of long term, sustained faithfulness and all the pain that comes with it, and all the sanctification this produces.
Our culture and our young leaders may gravitate towards overnight success and people finding it at a young age, but these things aren’t reproducible. And sometimes I think God is just gracious that way. Plus...even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then.
I’m starting to find certain things incredibly reproducible, and every day, my ability to do them grows…often most powerfully in the midst of my own mis-steps and failure. I expect that will lead to a lot of gained wisdom in the next 20-40 years, right?
I certainly hope so, or my posture as a disciples of Jesus (a learner and the humility that should come with that posture) is all a sham.
I say this as someone who is 35. And to be honest? For me, I find this liberating.
Increasingly, the pressure to perform, achieve, and prove my meager existence outside of Christ wanes. What it does is allow me to simply listen to what God is asking me to do and to constantly reflect on what I’m learning as I respond to what he’s saying…in both success and failure, knowing that the more experience and reflection I have, the more capacity I have to lead faithfully in the future.
This isn’t me trying to skirt responsibility but to process the nature of human development and growth as I’m observing things around me. Can God use someone who is 30 to catalyze and lead a movement of God? Of course he can. He's God and I'm not. But do I think that's his normal pattern as he's concerned more for my character? Probably not.
By: Neil Cole I have been a published author and pioneer of organic church movements for 20 years (yeah, I’m officially old). The term “organic” has come to mean many things in church world over those years. Often it has been hijacked from my original ideas and mutated to mean something less than healthy. It has become as suspicious as the same label used on food packaging at the grocery store.
I’m not the first to use organic ideas to describe the church (that would be Jesus and Paul). As the person who published the book Organic Church ten years ago let me set the record straight on what “organic church” means.
1. Organic Church is not just a house church. Many people assume that is what I mean when I use the word, and I assure you it is not. I’m not against house churches but I’m also not against organized churches. Organic is not a descriptor of one kind of model, it is a description of a necessary quality for all churches. In fact, I often say every church is organic or it is not the church. Organic simply means it is alive and natural. It can also mean being void of artificial ingredients. As such, organic is more a quality of the church rather than the type of church. Some churches can be partly organic and partly inorganic. Our goal should be 100% organic. A house church can be completely inorganic, and a mega church can be very organic. So I would suggest we stop using organic to describe one model of church. That said, you cannot do church organically and skip intimate relationships with one another in a spiritual family. Actually one can argue that you cannot be a follower of Christ and skip that. Just because a church meets in a house doesn’t make it organic, but one that never brings life into the home is less than organic.
2. Organic Church is a way of relating to God, one another, and the world. In our movement the DNA is the key component of organic church. Our life giving code is within each disciple (a result of internalizing and activating/obeying the gospel) and is the most important part of being organic. The DNA is Divine Truth (relating to God––The great commandment), Nurturing Relationships (relating to one another––the second greatest command) and Apostolic Mission (relating to the world––the great commission). Again, these are qualities every church should aspire to have. This DNA should be found healthy and whole within the smallest unit of church life––the disciple in relation to other disciples. Any church void of the whole DNA is unhealthy, and no amount of better musicians, buildings, programs, staff or sermons can make up for it’s absence.
3. Organic Church is about the true life source and the development of that life within a church.Perhaps the most distinguishing mark of what is organic is the source of life and consequently how it grows, develops and reproduces. So much of churchianity is growth being perpetuated from an external source. This is the inorganic approach and is in fact a counterfeit gospel where we try to make people and churches grow with motivation from the outside. When we use guilt, shame and fear to coerce behavior we are being inorganic. When we try to entice people with glitzy entertainment and “motivational” talks, we are delving into less than organic practices. When dollars are required to bring growth inorganic church is the result.
As my mentor George Patterson described, such methods are like trying to make a corn stalk grow faster by grabbing it and pulling on it. Foolishness. We all know that the growth comes from within the plant as cells reproduce. Our life must come from Christ within and grow out because of the internalized good news. Anything else is futile. Christ in you is the hope of glory––and nothing else is.
Combining inorganic practices with organic ones simply nullifies the true with the false. You cannot add just a little poison to a casserole and expect it to be healthy just because all the other ingredients are natural. As I often say, “If the death, resurrection and indwelling of Jesus Christ is not enough to motivate you, a sermon and a song isn’t going to be enough.”
It is the life within that causes health, growth and reproduction. Every dollar spent in inorganic practices is an investment in the opposite of life and produces something less than real. Every type of church can release true life rather than suffocate it with inorganic methods. Movements have potential for release when we organize around life instead of thinking that we get life by organizing. It is life that produces healthy organization. Organization never produces life––but it can kill it.
I am now a part of a team launching new movements from a few established churches. It is called 100Movements. I am honored to be working alongside a team of exceptionally gifted and godly people, including Alan Hirsch, Will Mancini, Dave Rhodes, Jessie Cruikshank and Eric Pfeiffer.
One of the six areas we work to bring health to an existing church is in the area of organic systems, which we call Multiplication Organizing. In order to release movements we must begin to allow the true life of Christ to burn bright within us. Organization must be built around life, and never the other way around. Good organization never produces life, but good life can produce healthy organization. Your own body is full of systems that make it structured and working properly. All those structures began with a single cell containing your DNA…then multiplying. Church can learn much from this form of organizing.
One symptom of being inorganic is if the organization and programs of the church take precedence over the simple obedience of God’s people outside the church. If the life of the disciple is only about promoting the organization of the church everything is backwards. The life in the disciple should be more important than the organization of the church. If everything is about growing an organization than you probably have to pull a few inorganic weeds from your midst. In an organic church, the organization is to help the disciple produce and reproduce the life of the gospel in others. It doesn’t really work the other way around.
By: Alan Hirsch Over the last 2 years, I have been delighted to work with a unique group of movement-minded practitioners and thinkers about the next chapter of the missional conversation. Will Mancini, Dave Rhodes, Neil Cole, and myself have been dreaming and designing the process for well over a year now. (Jessie Cruikshank, Nick Boring, and Jeremiah Aja have more recently joined the team). The outcome of those gatherings is a brand new non-profit consultative training organization named 100 Movements. 100M will be totally geared towards recruiting, training, coaching one hundred “ninja churches” and helping them to transition into becoming fully fledged, reproducing, spiritually vibrant, apostolic movements that operate squarely on the six elements of mDNA outlined in my centerpiece work, The Forgotten Ways.
To help you understand how we visualize the problem we face and the solution we think we need to appropriate, here is the key visual we use to describe and frame the whole 100M process….
The process towards the renewal of apostolic movement …
- Starts with the realization that the institutional imagination that dominates our thinking has brought us to this critical moment. The prevailing forms, derived as they are from the European experience, are Inextricably bound up with the history and hegemony of Christendom modes of thinking. In this paradigm (for that is what it is…a paradigm) Constantine is still effectively the emperor of our imaginations—he is still telling us how to think about ourselves as church. The face is unhappy here because he has come to the sobering realization that what has brought us to this point simply does not have the wherewithal to guide the church into the 21st Century. It’s the end of the road for the Constantinian church and the journey to learning starts with seeing the problem in its starkest terms (ch.1 and 2)
- The second phrase involves “dethroning Constantine” and beginning to reimagining the church as missional movement. This is a fundamental paradigm shift that changes they way we frame or understand what was previously familiar. This means embracing the belief that somehow the future of the church is bound up with recovering its innate movement ethos and living into it. This is not a silver bullet; rather it provides us with a silver imagination, and (re)imagination is where it all starts.
- Then it involves us recognizing that all the potentials of movement are actually latent within the church. In other words, the seeds of our future are already contained in the womb of the present. Another way of saying this is that the macrocosm is already contained in the microcosm. The potential for the whole is already contained in the smallest unit. We don’t have to import the answers; we simply have to realize that Jesus has already given us everything we need to get the job done. But we are also going to have to remove all the many “movement killers”, the residual elements of Christendom thinking that that are laced through our theology, thinking, and practices, that effectively suppress or diminish the church’s innate capacities for movement. This requires determination and vision. I am sure it can be done, but not without effort to redesign the system as movement.
- The fourth element in the diagram is the fully birthed apostolic movement. The diagram shows that movements are incredible fertile cultures that can generate and maintain all kinds of innovative, incarnationally contextualized, forms of church. Movements can contain multiple models, are innately reproducible, and can deliver wide impact. Note therefore that existing form of church is also is very much part of the movement, but now it is not the only form. Its monopoly is broken.
100M proper will only be starting in 2017. The reason for this is that we have to build the system that can deliver long term, deep change, process. But if you think that your church is ready for the journey described above, please register interest at 100Movements.com.
If you want to to be one of the first 100 churches in our starter track called Leap Year–which starts in late Spring of 2016–you can download our Leap Year flyer, view our Good Faith Agreement (below), or contact us for more information. For Will Mancini’s take on the value of 100M and Leap Year, read his post here.
By: Alan Hirsch The great Christian revolutions came not by the discovery of something that was not known before. They happen when someone takes radically something that was always there. ~ H. Richard Niebuhr
Foreword from Beyond the Local Church: How Apostolic Movements can Change the World, by Sam Metcalfe & Alan Hirsch.
One of the more stimulating books I have read in recent years was by Joshua Cooper Ramo an called The Age of the Unthinkable.. The “unthinkable” in Ramo’s view is akin to a kind of future/culture shock we experience as we enter into the previously uncharted waters of the 21st Century. This is largely due to massive economic, political, environmental, and social factors, shifts. Our age is highly unstable and at the edge of seismic change. And yet we are entering into this revolutionary age armed with a mindset formed and suited for centuries past. The central warning of this book highlights how and why an obsolete picture of the world only serves to exacerbate, and not resolve, the serious global problems we face.
All of us know and feel that this to be true. The best Christian leaders have come to the awareness that the various organizations and ecclesiologies formulated in entirely different sets of circumstances are not going to help us successfully negotiate this entirely unchartered terrain. In other words, traditional formulations of the church got us to this point in time cannot be assumed to get us beyond the current impasse and decline. Revolutions produce a whole new cast of historical champions. Our world requires radical rethinking. “In a revolutionary era of surprise and innovation, you need to learn to think and act like a revolutionary” or end up as a victim of the revolution. We are going to have to reach a lot deeper into the spiritual resources inherent in Jesus’ church if we are going to adapt and thrive in the 21st Century.
As a global missionary leader, Sam Metcalf knows this. He senses that we are ill prepared for the paradigmatic challenges of the oncoming century. But in order to propose a way forward, Sam knows that he has to expose the reductionist ecclesiology implied in the inherited Western understandings of the church. He aims squarely at the reduction of Jesus’ ecclesia to the merely local and to its leadership to the merely pastoral. He is spot on here.
The divorce of the local church from the missionary church is a systemic disaster to be sure. At the very roots of the 20th Century, Roland Allen, the remarkable missionary to China no less, predicted that with the birth of the so-called parachurch and the missionary societies that we would “end up with a mission-less church and a church-less mission.” This rupture on the NT ecclesiology introduced an element of deep dysfunction into both the local church and the so resultant parachurches.
I have long believed that if we understood ecclesia properly and began to re-appropriate its various levels of meaning, then many of the problems we now face can be resolved. For instance, our more concrete, overly localized, fairly institutionalized paradigm of church must be redefined in the much broader, more fluid meaning used in the Bible.
In my book The Permanent Revolution, I discern four ascending levels in which the word ecclesia is used in the New Testament (figure below):
- The NT writers use the term to describe the people who met in the various places of their city—primarily the home (called an oikos in the Greek), but also in riverbanks, markets, and other places as well. For example, Paul addresses the ecclesia that happens to meet in so-and-so’s house. This is the most local, and basic, reference of the term.
- Then the NT writers talk of an ecclesia in a particular city, knowing that there might in fact be many house churches scattered throughout the area. In fact, most of the letters are addressed to churches at this level. So here we have the regional application of the term—a citywide ecclesia that is in fact made up of many ecclesias.
- The next level up is that it is used to denote the movement across a larger geopolitical region—in this case, the Roman Empire, or Asia. Here the word is used to identify the Jesus movement in the various parts of the world known in the apostles’ time. We still use it to refer to a historical phenomenon.
- The final, and perhaps the symbolic, level is where the apostles can address the people of God as the church of Jesus Christ. This refers to of course, the universal invisible church, that is, the body of Christ on earth. This is the more theological, metaphorical meaning of the term as the redeemed new covenant people of God.
The confining of the church to the simply local has had disastrous consequences for our capacity to imagining the church as a transformative movement that can reach across vast geographic regions and penetrate numerous cultures. The local church as we know it can barely reach past its own internal programming, let alone transform whole cultures and societies. And yet I believe that is what the church is designed by Jesus to do. We have to expand our understanding of the church to that of a burgeoning apostolic movement, not reduce it to a one-dimensional religious institution. This is the church that is equal to the challenge of the 21st Century.
Drawing upon Ralph winter’s categories, best thinking in terms of missional leadership, and years of experience, Sam develops a coherent and strategically useful typology of missional leadership along with the associated missional organization.
But in Beyond the Local Church Sam not only suggests new ways of organizing, he also highlights the importance of expanding our also severely diminished understanding of ministry beyond that of the shepherd and teacher to include the generative ministries of the apostle (missional), prophetic, and evangelistic envisaged in Eph.4:1-16 (APEST). I have always felt the urgency and sheer strategic value of this neglected aspect of biblical ecclesiology and have written about it in almost every book I have published. Most recently, and in the most consistent and thorough form, I have written about it with Tim Catchim in The Permanent Revolution. I am completely convinced that we need is to first and foremost reconceive the church as missional, or better apostolic, movement. Once we embrace this more biblical paradigm of church, we will then begin to think and act like the movement we are designed to be. But if we are to re-embrace the movement form (and I can see no viable Plan B for the church in the West) then we are going to have to likewise (re)embrace the very forms of ministry that can generate, sustain, and develop missional movement. And we can do no better than recover the world changing dynamics latent in the APEST typology.
Having affirmed the legitimacy of all five APEST ministries, Sam does tend to highlight the strategic importance of the apostolic mode in particular. I have to say that while none is more important that the other, I still agree with him in this because I believe it is the apostolic that holds most promise for a revitalization of the church-as-missional-movement. By its very nature, apostolic ministry is inextricably related to the possibility and practice of apostolic movement. Because of this we must do our utmost to understand this historically marginalized ministry and find our way to relegitimize it. If we fail in this, I fear we will never get to the kind of transformative movement that we see in the pages of the NT itself. Sam has added to the needed dialogue by adding his leadership experience and intellectual heft to the conversation. I, for one, am grateful.
All in all this is a very welcome contribution to the area of missional structures and leadership based on the thoroughly biblical APEST ministry typology that we see operative throughout the book of Acts and the early church. I hope and trust this book will help the reader (re)discover the sheer potency laced throughout a genuinely missional understanding of the church. One feels Sam’s love of God, the Bible, as well as the history and the mission of the Church throughout. I trust that having read this book, and followed its counsel, that we will find ourselves more faithful to the particular work of God in our generation.
Alan Hirsch Author of numerous books on missional Christianity and founder of Forge Mission Training Network and Future Travelers.
 Joshua Cooper Ramo, The Age of the Unthinkable: Why the New World Disorder Constantly Surprises Us and What We Can Do About It (New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2009).
 See Alan Hirsch and Michael Frost, The Faith of Leap: Embracing a Theology of Adventure and Risk (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2013), 153-4.
 Alan Hirsch and Tim Catchim, The Permanent Revolution: Developing Apostolic Imagination and Practice for the 21st Century Church (San Francisco: Wiley, 2014) xxxv-xxxvii.
By: Neal Cole I believe that a mega church can be organic and missional…but not start multiplying spontaneously. Addition can certainly be possible for a healthy mega church and addition is far better than subtraction or division–which we all seem so gifted at. A mega church is far better at addition than the micro church, so if the choice is addition via mega church or not adding in a house church I would choose the mega church. But I would rather see multiplication than addition, which is far easier to find in the micro church than the mega church. This is the reason I am so invested in the micro church.
Why is this? Because simple things with no cost can multiply far easier than complex entities with a large price tag. That is just the plain truth of it. The larger and more expensive your church is the less likely you will multiply. Addition becomes easier with the momentum of church growth, but multiplication becomes harder.
Some of my mega church friends may not like this fact, but it is hard to argue with. So is there a solution? Yes, I believe there is, but it involves openness to starting something very different than the mother church.
In our book Church Transfusion Phil Helfer and I write about how a mega church can grandparent movements by giving birth to a form of church that can radically reproduce. So in that sense a mega church can indeed be part of catalyzing movements, but they must reproduce something very different. This has a tendency to violate the culture of many mega churches, but is nevertheless possible. Perceived success can be the greatest hindrance to movement in mega church world. What merits success (numerical growth via attractional ministry) in mega church world works directly counter to a multiplication movement. Logos and egos are the enemies of real movements, but are often central to a mega church. If a mega church can realize this, and start a different kind of church, it can grandparent movements. That is a tall order, but I believe it is possible, and some are doing it.
All that said, the reality is that many house churches do not multiply spontaneously either. You see the issue is not a church problem but a disciple making problem. As long as we view church as something important for us rather than seeing ourselves as important for the world we will not reproduce, in a home or a cathedral.
Too many of us pragmatic Western Christian leaders want a practical solution that will ensure success. This drives us to adopt models and methods for what only faith can produce. E.M. Bounds once said, “Men are looking for better methods, God is looking for better men.”
By: Will Mancini Over the last 2 years, I have been delighted to work with a unique group of movement-minded practitioners and thinkers about the next chapter of the missional conversation. The outcome of those gatherings is a brand new non-profit consultative training organization named 100 Movements.
The big idea of 100 Movements is to shift from conversation to competency; from paradigm to practice. It is building on Leadership Network's and Exponential’s multisite learning community and programs like Future Travelers where the basic ideas of the missional reorientation were explored from the view point of the megachurch and early expressions of the multisite form of multiplication.
The conclusion of many is that multisite church expressions have not become multiplication movements. We are still figuring out what real movement and rapid church multiplication looks like in the North American context. Research’s Warren Bird and Ed Stetzer attest to this in their book, Viral Church. In response, Todd Wilson, the leader of the Exponential conference, is dedicating an e-book and the 2016 conference theme to the “Becoming a Level Five Multiplying Church". Everyone agrees that we have a long way to go to really embed the “forgotten ways” into tangible results in our “leading churches.” In fact, Exponential will unveil a provocative assessment and show that our most celebrated churches are operating as an “addition only” model that will be dubbed as “level 3” (and hopefully on their way to “level 5.”) In the end, no one argues that less than 0.5% of churches in North America are multiplying.
What is happening with 100 Movements (100M)?
Dave Rhodes, the former national team leader of 3dM and I have worked with Alan Hirsch and Neil Cole to design a developmental pathway around six movement competencies. My role is helping to build the toolbox and understand deep process change in existing churches. Dave is an amazing toolmaker, trainer and coach himself. Alan and Neil have written more on the subject than anyone over several decades. We are building the 6 Movement Competencies from the apostolic genius model from Alan’s seminal work, “The Forgotten Ways.” Neil Cole has perhaps led a multiplication movement more than any single practitioner in the United States. To top off the design team, we invited Jessie Cruikshank, a Harvard trained learning expert to help us. I think God has assembled an amazing team.
Why Am I Blogging About 100M?
The foundational Movement Competency is “Identity Declaring” — that is each church will articulate it’s radical minimum standard for disciple-making and its’ “Jesus is Lord” conviction. We will be using Church Younique’s Vision Frame and Auxano’s Vision Framing Process to deliver tools and training for this competency. But the thing I am most excited about is that 100M is designed for break-thru practice with leadership teams, not just more conferences, speakers, books and collaborative hang outs.
Your Invited – How to Take a Next Step
If you are interest in more information, grab this digital brochure: 100_Movements_Introduction.
Finally, if you want to sign-up to be one of the first 100 churches in our starter track called, Leap Year, which starts in late Spring of 2016, you can download, fill in and send back our Good Faith Agreement.
See more at: willmancini.com