Two models of church planting stand out as being at perhaps the opposite end of the spectrum. And of course there are many nuances, many additional possibilities where styles and models are mixed and matched.

One model of church planting is the “network” approach where planters are equipped, sometimes apprenticed, assessed, coached and likely financially supported.

Another model may be termed the “apostolic planter” approach where a church planter goes out without a great deal of support but with a burden to land a church, and does just that, potentially catering a team along the way. In many ways this approach is modelled (perhaps unintentionally) on the ministry of the Apostle Paul.

So, which model can be said to be best? Here are some thoughts.

The Network Approach.

The network approach provides far greater safety for the church planter and also for those that he or she will lead. Churches planted and supported as part of a network are likely to have a far greater survivability rate with factors such as the following providing significant benefits:

• Assessment, Equipping and Coaching: Formal assessment, equipping and coaching helps to prevent unwise mistakes and helps ensure the planter is actually ready for the toll that leading a church plant takes, receiving encouragement, prayer and wise counsel along the way.
• Administrative and Governance Assistance: Let’s be honest, these aren’t strong points for most planters, but they need to be done well. In fact, there is incredible danger when they aren’t! When a network can provide assistance in these areas, particularly early on in the life of the church, it’s an incredible blessing!
• Financial Resourcing: Access to financial assistance can also be a tremendous blessing. It can help a church plant with having wages and expenses funded at least partially, and at least for a time. But external finding is not without possible drawbacks. A danger is to operate beyond means with an over reliance on external funding. A further danger is that the church planter may become full-time when a better model in some situations may be to be bi-vocational.
• Accountability: Accountability to others is something that we all need. There have been too many train wrecks involving church leaders in recent times where there has been little accountability. A healthly accountability structure can operate like Moses’ elders in Numbers 11 where Moses didn’t have to bare the weight purely on his own shoulders.

A potential drawback of the network approach is that innovation and creativity may in some cases be stifled, particularly if a cookie cutter approach to planting is implemented.

The Apostolic Planter Approach

The lone apostolic planter is an entrepreneurial pioneer who will likely go into unreached or difficult territories to establish faith communities from scratch.

The planter may be highly entrepreneurial, planting in a way that is different to the norm to reach people in their target area. Such plants often rely heavily on evangelism and the making of disciples to gather people to their church plant.

There are drawbacks to this approach. Many of these church plants are not sustainable in the long term, with survivability rates being low compared to the network approach. In addition there are high burnout and loneliness rates amongst the planters.

Frequently the church will lack the finances and support to healthily grow and be sustained in the future.

Many churches that were planted in Australia in years gone by were planted along the apostolic planter model. My wife Sharon and I planted along these lines in the 90’s; and somehow survived. For us, the network model and the sophistication and support that it brings was not available. I wish it had been!

Today there is also a hybrid model that is common. It’s a way of planting a church that taps into the resources of church planting ministries and funding sources to provide many of the network approach benefits whilst still maintaining the freedom and innovation of the apostolic planter model.

There is no doubt that in the past God has used exceptional apostolic planters and that he continues to do so in the present. Such people however are rare; incredibly rare.

If the goal is to plant one excellent church, an exceptional apostolic planter may be enough. But if the goal is to see a denomination or movement plant hundreds of churches over decades, the evidence points overwhelmingly toward building a network that becomes a multiplication system.

The multiplication system should still identify, develop and release apostolic pioneers. But it should not depend on finding such people who would likely be incredibly rare. Instead, it should make church planting an expected outcome of healthy disciple making and leadership development.

Healthy movements don’t replace apostolic leaders with systems. They build systems that consistently discover, develop, support and multiply apostolic leaders. As a consequence, the focus shifts from individual champions to reproducible pathways.

Such healthy systems will intentionally develop:

• disciple-making pathways
• leadership pipelines
• assessment processes
• coaching
• apprenticeships
• sending cultures
• multiplication expectations
• financial support mechanisms, and
• ongoing learning communities

The result will be that church planting becomes normal rather than exceptional.

So, what’s the best model of planting a church? Perhaps it’s one that will discover and raise apostolic planters and surround them with the support and systems to see not just a church planted, but a multiplication movement birthed.

Exponential Australia will be conducting a Multiplication Movement Learning Community in Melbourne on 21 and 22 October 2026. The Learning Community will be aimed at helping Denominations and Networks move towards being multiplication movements. The Learning Community will be particularly appropriate for leaders within denominations and networks and their key team members. Email me at tim@exponential.org.au if you would like more information