The following interview with Pastors Brian Coombs and Kenneth Smith of the Syracuse Reformed Presbyterian Church elicits their response to having attended the “Church Planting Boot Camp,” a class taught by Professor Steve Childers at Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando, Fla. The Syracuse RPC has maintained a satellite church as a means of extending the gospel and planting another church. Pastor Coombs leads that ministry.

How did you get involved in this class? Was this through the Home Mission Board?

Smith: Yes. I was surprised that someone in my generation would be asked, but I was encouraged to go, both for my own growth and to assess the course and its helpfulness. So, I attended the course in the summer of 2000.

Coombs: I attended a Home Mission Board (HMB) sponsored Church Planters Conference with Steve Childers in 2000 along with other RP church planting pastors and wives. Dean Smith of the HMB also wanted me later to attend the Boot Camp, which is a vacuum-packed version of it. I was able to attend last summer.

What has been your exposure to Steve Childers and his approach to church planting?

Smith: Steve Childers was a new name to me, I had not been aware of him or his approach to church planting. I had heard the best of him from others, though, and it was a positive experience to hear a thoroughly Reformed pastor speaking forth on these matters.

One thing became apparent before we were very far into the course: Steve Childers had been discipled as a young Christian and grasped what was involved in seeing a person grow from spiritual infancy to mature, ministering service. His manner reflected his sense of humor and Christian joy.

Did you have to make preparation for the Boot Camp?

Smith: We received quite a reading list to give us background. Some of these books I had already read, such as The Purpose Driven Church by Rick Warren and Outgrowing the Ingrown Church by C. John Miller. Probably the book that most caught my attention was Natural Church Development by Christian Schwarz. We took the class as auditors, so the reading was optional.

Coombs: Upon completion, the HMB wanted the attendees to read the dozen­or-so books and present a review of both the Boot Camp and the books.

Before getting into the details, how did you respond? Were you positive about it when the course had finished? Are you now?

Coombs: Before attending, my thoughts were to the effect of being cautious, but desirous to learn. Most of my hearing of “church growth” has been in negative terms–that “church growth guys” are only about statistics and man-made pragmatisms—so I admit a degree of bias was present. Yet upon completion, I can say that I was helped very much by what I heard, and continue to be.

Smith: My response was and is positive. Much of what I heard from Childers came more as reinforcement rather than new material. I had expected that. But that’s one of the good things about such exposure to conferences and seminars. You meet others in the body of Christ and the variety of experiences enriches one’s life and outlook, to say nothing of the good received from the course itself.

Let’s get into the substance of what was involved. What happened; what did you do there?

Coombs: Steve Childers presented his material in what I would call an interactive lecture style. He set the context by expounding the relevance of the opening petitions of the Lord’s Prayer as a proper context for church planting. The main features, as far as content, could be summarized as church planting vision, philosophy, core values, strategies, and methodologies. Though there was openness to observe the ideas and approaches of the Church at large, they were discussed and assessed in a Reformed context.

Smith: We went to class all morning and afternoon for four and one-half days! We got right into the subject in the meaty syllabus which kept us on track, but on occasion we worked out a practical problem on site, sometimes in a small group. We worked hard!

If you were to note the particular things that were new, what were they?

Coombs: Church planting vocabulary! There were lots of terms that summarize church planting ideas, phenomena, and the like. This was not bad, just new. Also, the value of having a clear, well-organized depiction of the church and its life-ministry was new. I had always thought of this as “getting bogged down in administration.” But now I see its value—for me and the congregation. Still, one must be cautious not to get bogged down in it.

Smith: The book Natural Church Development I mentioned earlier was new. Brian will say more about this; but I found this book put in very useful terms the basic principle that healthy churches grow. In the decade before Y2K, our Synod adopted an emphasis: “the health, growth, and multiplication of congregations.” Schwarz’s thesis builds on eight components in a healthy church. I brought this home with me! Another special thing to me was the emphasis on the revitalization of established churches. Childers had a guest lecture, Ken Priddy, with him that week, and he focused on how to help an established church recapture its verve and vitality in the Lord. Of course, I immediately thought of Synod’s Committee on Revitalization and have shared with them many of the things from these two excellent sources.

What things were reinforced that you already knew?

Coombs: That my concern and emphasis as a pastor (whether church planting or not) should not be artificial mechanics, but the spiritual health of Christ’s people; that that which is healthy will reproduce. A congregation that is spiritually healthy will be a growing, multiplying congregation. As a church planting pastor, I find this a major comfort. I don’t need to run after the latest fad to see growth, but to be faithful with the God-ordained means whereby He fosters spiritual health. And growth will come. This was confirmed, though obtusely, in Christian Schwarz’s Natural Church Development (course book). I think he calls it a “growth automatism” or the “biotic potential”—if you want some church growth terms.

Smith: I was reminded first of the importance of vision and expectation. If we are to live by faith, then we should expect to reach others by faith. Second, the Great Commission of Christ involves teaching new believers to observe what He commanded. That requires person-to-person ministry. Third, our own walk with Christ cultivating our union with Him becomes the source of power in effective ministry. I could name more, but these stand out.

Did you find these things relevant to the denomination and to your ministry in particular? In what ways?

Coombs: Most definitely. As far as the denomination, I’m still getting acquainted (after nine years). From my perspective, God is showing us the usefulness of such things, and there has been renewal, growth, and fruitfulness in many churches, especially those whose pastors have been involved with HMB training opportunities. As far as my own ministry, I’ve revisited the doctrine of union with Christ in my preaching (Romans 6–8). Christ is the source of all spiritual health, and if my congregation is to be healthy unto fruitfulness—fruitfulness in both quality and quantity they need to know and experience what it means to be in union and communion with the Lord.

Smith: I have already mentioned getting in touch with the Committee on Revitalization. At another time, I may write an article on the primacy of proclaiming the gospel, a deep need in Reformed churches. One explicit result in our congregation here on South Salina Street was to organize an extended Revitalization Workshop in which some 20 members wrestled with our reason for existence as a church. The result was a new statement of vision, mission, and goals, and now we are pursuing implementation.

Here’s another way to put it: what has happened in your ministry that has changed since you attended this training experience?

Coombs: Steve Childers challenged us with the words of a new convert, “So what’s next?” These have spurred me to state possibilities, goals, and expectations regarding the development and contribution of the members. I’ve begun contemplating the basic components of our congregational life—vision, mission, goals, strategies, etc. I’d like to put in visual form the functional life-ministry of our particular congregation, as it is now and as it can be developed. Then, I’d like to bring these ideas to the congregation for discussion with the hope that God would strengthen our commitment and functioning as a body.

Do you have any negatives about this exposure?

Coombs: The only negative is the amount of data I had to process and how it fit with my usual schedule. Truthfully, I’m still processing it. In the case at hand, not all things are lawful, but, much of it is profitable. I wish Steve Childers’ class had been part of my seminary training before I got into the work of church planting.

Smith: Like Brian, I have no serious criticisms. I also found it a challenge to try to absorb in one week the kind of practical material that would normally be learned experientially over months and years, but that’s just a hazard we accept. The course was very well taught.

Can you give a summary statement about how you now respond to this kind of help by the Home Mission Board?

Smith: I commend the board for this positive support and exposure. To leave one’s environment even for a week to think and pray with others about our task is like the disciples being given time with Jesus to reflect on their ministry. My experience for that week in Orlando included the evenings to talk with the other RPs taking the course and to reflect on what we were hearing and how it applied. I thank the Home Mission Board for the opportunity!

Coombs: Thanks to the HMB for giving me the opportunity for this type of training. It was refreshing. Our pastors, in benefiting from this kind of training, can in turn bring much benefit to our denomination.