Different Types of Ministry Networks

Aug 24, 2009 0 Comments

What kind of network is your church a part of?

I started this blog a month ago and have learned a lot about networking as a result of this project. At first, I imagined there to be only one kind of network: churches teaming up together because they are down the street from one another. But I have found that to be far from the truth.

Many types of networks exist. And it’s possible for one church to be part of many networks. These four kinds networks are different kinds of ways for churches and ministries to connect with one another.

Geographically-based Networks

In my mind, networks based on location are the simplest networks to start. Churches and ministries work together because they are close to one another. The Teens for Christ network is an example of a location-based network.

Pros

Effective and focused ministry to one particular area
Close vicinity offers a more intimate connection
Easier to share resources
Churches do not lose their independence: these networks are typically confederations

Cons

Tend to be small and decentralized (no command structure)
Typically have no budget (only the collective budgets of the ministries involved)
Typically no staff, just volunteers

Objective-based Networks

These networks center around a mission statement, an objective, a goal. This goal could be addressing the needs of homeless youth in urban centers in Central America. The network could include many different types of ministries and churches from all over the world. For example, the Viva Network is a world-wide network working with children at risk.

Pros

Wide range of ministries involved
Many ministries involved means more resources available
Typically have a staff that raises its own financial support
Churches involved do not lose their independence

Cons

Members of the network may be detached from one another
Relationships and support hard to raise and maintain over large distances
Little commitment because there is little accountability

Belief-based Networks

Belief-based networks are connected because of their specific creed. The most apparent example of this is a centralized denomination, such as the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod or the Roman Catholic Church. On a smaller level, the different sites of a multi-site church are networked in the same way (such as Mars Hill Church in Seattle).

Pros

A firm and uniform stance on doctrine
Are typically financially well off
Strengthened by a history/meta-narrative

Cons

Lots of politics to navigate
Sometimes will not work with churches and ministries with different or conflicting beliefs
The hierarchy can make universal decisions that individual churches do not agree with (like the recent decision in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America to allow gay and lesbian clergy)

Hybrid Networks

Many networks may not fit into one particular description, rather they will fit into many. For example, the Lutheran Inner-City Network Coalition is a Lutheran organization working specifically with people in inner-city Houston.

These hybrid networks have added benefits (as well as extra baggage). While LINC garners support from Lutheran churches in Texas, how will they connect with Methodists or Presbyterians? At the same time, LINC has a focused target group, a focused location, and a specific source of support from the Lutheran churches in the area. Balancing these pros and cons is a constant game.

Hybrid networks present many opportunities because they borrow from the strengths of different types of networks. The best kind of network is a hybrid network that draws out the benefits and minimizes the disadvantages.

The best kind of network will…

Balance the individual freedoms of churches and their accountability to the network itself. Leadership should be organic, bottom-up, not top-down.
Balance relationships and objectives (read more about balancing friendship and business). Networks should have clear goals in mind without sacrificing the relational aspect of networks.
Network with other networks. Ultimately, I think the Body of Christ needs to be a network of networks.