Your comments about size are insightful. Essentially, decentralized organizations function through a currency of kinship rather than authoritarianism, which means they must remain small. It’s basically a tribal form of organization. It’s just not possible to govern relationally with more than a couple dozen people because that’s about the extent of anyone’s kinship circle. Consequently, genuine starfish organizations like those profiled in the book are typically networks of highly autonomous small groups. The house church movement in a variety of iterations is the best example in the church. Outside the church I’d say A.A. is the best example.

As far as book… I can’t really say that I ever read a book about church planting – or one that greatly influenced me to become a church planter. =/ I just basically fell into church planting group four years ago on a whim – and then ended up being one of three “leaders” left standing. At which point, I “became” the associate pastor along with my wife, who was also one of the three, supporting the third member of our group, who “became” the senior pastor. In other words, we all are “accidental” pastors / church planters. =P

That said, I have a feeling that my wife and I are going to become “real” church planters sometime in the future as we “caught” the passion for the local church. It wasn’t so much something we read as it was something we caught from our mentors, mission works overseas, and life in general. =)

Decentralization of leadership is an interesting thought. Personally it appeals to my intuitive and introverted leadership style (i.e. I’m not naturally the up-front vision casting Patton-like pastor). I want to work with a plurality of leaders with different gifts.

I wonder if we need to discern what kind of church we have before discerning whether decentralized or centralized leadership is needed. A lot of church planting teams are filled with highly-motivated, skilled, and disciple-seasoned members where decentralized leadership works great. What about established churches or younger churches who have to be lead through change and require more hands-on direction? If we go the route of centralized leadership are we simply going the route of greatest efficiency? Pfftt! (sound of brain exploding)

Thanks Jason for another thought-provoking post!

in terms of leadership – if it is earned and not entitled…that takes me back to some of the roots of the Vineyard and Wimber looking at leadership being ‘gifting’-based, or ‘ministry-based’. i think the Church in general has run far afield from that perspective, perhaps mis-understanding it, let alone the relational and communal aspects of discerning it…as you know, i have been contemplating the significance of this perspective (‘everyone gets to play’-esque)from james d.g. dunn, which brings leadership and authority back to the Spirit of Christ:

“As E. Kasemann has rightly insisted, so far as the Pauline community is concerned, authority resides in or belongs to the act of ministry itself – it resides neither in the person nor in an office, but in the particular charisma itself. Moreover, the concomitant responsibility to evaluate that charisma is laid upon all. Now this fact is true of all ministry, of all charismata, in the Pauline vision of community.”

“Sometimes a man can meet his destiny on the road he took to avoid it.”

That’s my church-planting story in a nutshell. Funny how the Spirit moves you.

Thanks for the comments Ray!

First of all, I’m happy for you, Jason. Second, your question regarding the book that has most influenced me. I can’t remember the title but how vividly I recall the key phrase: “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave – just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” Oh yeah, I remember the book–it’s Matthew 20: 25 – 28.

North American church models have drunk deep of the church-as-a-business model. Is it any surprise that we find the church a lifeless organization instead of a life-giving organism? The most decentralized model I can think of is the picture of a grain of wheat falling into the ground, into death, and eventually re-emerging full of life. I believe church planters/leaders exist to encourage and release others into their destiny, a destiny imagined deep in the Father’s heart. Good luck to you!