CHRISTIAN DISCIPLESHIP.pdf

Wiest 1

CHAPTER 1

NATURE OF THE PROJECT

Overview of the Chapter

Chapter 1 provides the framework for studying the most common characteristics of

effective pioneer leaders in the largest denominations of the Global Wesleyan Alliance and the

largest microchurch networks in the United States. This chapter shares a rationale for gathering

this information for the purpose of creating a simple resource for pastors and leaders to identify

Personal Introduction

In 2003, I packed up my earthly possessions and made the 13-hour drive to the growing

metropolis of Dallas, TX. My wife was pregnant with our first child, neither of us had ever lived

outside the Midwest, and as our U-Haul finally pulled into the driveway of our new home, I felt a

wave of anxiety sweep over me. This would be the beginning of a new adventure in church

planting. In 2006, we officially launched Horizons Church, a growing community of faith on the

north side of Dallas, TX, and in 2010, we moved across the country again to start a new church

in Des Moines, IA. Our second church plant was named Radiant Church, and we prayed God

would help us bring the light of Christ into the darkness of a community known for

methamphetamine addiction, broken homes, and spiritual darkness. It has been nearly twenty

Wiest 2

years since I received that initial call to plant churches, and I continue to be compelled to reach

the growing harvest of North America.

The same year we moved to Dallas, TX I received my ordination as a pastor in The

Wesleyan Church. The night was memorable as the presiding officer shared a compelling

commission to “Preach the gospel, reach the lost, and make disciples.” My wife and I knelt at the

altar while the elders and leaders of the church laid hands on us and prayed. Before we stood, I

was presented with a large study Bible and a small wooden cross hand-crafted by a persecuted

paradigm-shifting moments. The biggest of these came in 2015. Almost a dozen years of church

planting had taken its toll, and an unhealthy focus on church growth often kept me awake at

night. The pace of ministry and how I carried the load eventually proved unsustainable, and I

nearly burned out. Fortunately, my District Superintendent offered me a three-month sabbatical

as an opportunity for rest and healing and to reassess my call and philosophy of ministry. The

time away saved my ministry, reaffirmed my apostolic calling, and challenged me with a new

definition of ministry effectiveness.

I had always defined an effective church planter as a full-time, vocational minister with

the necessary education, training, and gifts to launch a growing church that would become self-

sustaining, self-governing, and self-replicating. The model of church planting I championed

Wiest 3

included gathering a large crowd through outreach and marketing activities, all while quickly

moving toward weekend worship services. I coached dozens of planters through this launch-

large model but, over time, recognized that while it was effective in producing worship services,

gathering people, and providing great programming, it did not often translate to equipping or

mobilizing more workers for ministry. I also noticed that very few of these churches ever

multiplied.

Toward the end of my sabbatical, I was preparing to re-engage ministry and wrestling

disciple-making for planting new churches. I resonated with a quote by Neil Cole, the founder of

Church Multiplication Associates. He said, “We must lower the bar of how we do church and

raise the bar of what it means to be a disciple if we want to reach this world with the good news”

(27). The mission of intentional disciple-making and empowering the entire body of Christ for

ministry seemed an essential and effective method for reaching the growing North American

harvest. Perhaps I had unintentionally overlooked an incredible army of women and men

available to make disciples by focusing exclusively on those with the resources and leadership to

launch large worship services.

A new question began to gnaw at me. What might it look like to focus the church's efforts

on mobilizing disciple-makers and then encourage those people to form smaller church

Wiest 4

gatherings? After all, to repeat the often-used quote, “It’s not so much the case that God has a

mission for his church as that God has a church for his mission” (Wright 62). The natural result

of effective disciple making ought to be the formation of new churches.

I took the next few years to focus more deeply and intentionally on researching and

implementing strategies for making disciples. If disciple-making was the mission, people needed

practical tools to make and multiply disciples. I focused my efforts in that direction. My

conviction was that disciple-making ought to be the foundation for any church-planting

ways to engage and reach a group of people uncomfortable or unfamiliar with the established

church” (Wiest and Love 16). If God has called the entire body of Christ to engage in the

mission of disciple-making, then pioneer leaders are a subset of that group. They are women and

men passionate about reaching and discipling a specific group of people outside the context of

the established church.

The strategic focus statement of The Wesleyan Church is often repeated by

denominational and district leaders in my tribe. It encourages the body of Christ to “Celebrate

every time a disciple makes a disciple and the church multiples itself until there is a transforming

presence in every ZIP code” (Kimball). I love this short statement and the implied progression of

the vision. Disciple-making is the critical engine for multiplication, and only a strong wave of

Wiest 5

disciple-making can provide the raw materials for starting new congregations and multiplying

churches. However, a crucial group of people stands in the gap in the progression from disciple-

making to church planting. They are pioneer leaders, the linchpin for unlocking a new paradigm

of ministry focused less on professional clergy and more on the priesthood of all believers.

The attributes of these pioneers are studied in this research to identify their ministry

effectiveness and how they reach and gather people in their sphere of influence. I am convinced

these everyday missionaries are the missing link between disciple-making and church planting,

in the West is failing” (16). Statistics appear to back up this claim.

At the beginning of the 1990s, only five percent of Americans had no religious affiliation

(Nadeem). They were primarily atheists and demographically young, white, and liberal. The

prediction that atheism would follow modernity in the West did not hold true for the United

States. The sexual revolution of the 60s, the anxiety of the 70s, and even the greed of the 80s

created no change in the uptick of atheists and agnostics. The religious Nones remained an

obscure and somewhat overlooked group. However, as the decade of the 1990s continued,

something significant began to happen. The connection between American identity and faith

snapped, and religious non-affiliation in the U.S. started to rise. In only thirty years, the number

of Americans without religious affiliation moved from five percent to over thirty percent. Today,

Wiest 6

the Cooperative Congressional Election Survey (CCES), a much larger sample size, has the

number of Nones at 31.3 percent of the population (Davis, Graham, and Burge 23). These figures

are before COVID-19, the tumultuous election of 2020, and the continued culture war that

appears to be ripping the country at the seams. Davis, Graham, and Burge conducted a recent

study that found nearly 40 million people have left the established church in the last 25 years (3).

The old models of church growth and church planting as an extension of gathering

seekers around an event or worship service are waning in effectiveness. The challenges of

effectively? These are the questions this project hopes to answer.

To further the development of a simple resource for mobilizing a growing wave of

pioneer leaders, the research was guided by the following three questions.

Wiest 7

Research Question #1

1. How would you evaluate the effectiveness of the pioneer projects?

Research Question #2

2. What are the most common characteristics of effective pioneer leaders?

Research Question #3

3. How were the pioneer leaders identified and mobilized?

Rationale for the Project

The second reason this project is necessary is to equip the body of Christ to live out its

identity as the priesthood of all believers. The Wesleyan tradition has a long and fruitful history

of laity at the forefront of intentional disciple-making and pioneering new initiatives from the

time of John Wesley to the early American Methodist movement. Unfortunately, church planters

are often viewed as the special operatives of the Christian faith because the dominant models of

church planting often require high gifts of leadership and a high degree of training.

This project desires to activate the broader body of Christ and identify a much larger

group of pioneer leaders. In Numbers 11:16-17, God distributed the burden of leadership among

seventy of Israel’s leaders. Similarly, the example of Jesus in the Gospels demonstrated twelve

disciples mobilized and seventy-two other workers listed in Luke 10. These leaders were

Wiest 8

volunteers, men and women committed to the mission of Jesus and taking a portion of their time

and designating it for God’s purposes.

Finally, the United States is becoming an increasingly post-Christian society where fewer

people are seeking spiritual answers through the established church. A growing suspicion of the

institutional church and fear of organized religion persists. More workers for the harvest are

needed, but the harvesting methods must change. A new missiology is needed. One that is less

focused on establishing an attractional, “industrial-complex form of church” (Woodward 24) and

reach those outside of the established church.

Microchurch – An extended spiritual family often small, volunteer-led, and informal.

Global Wesleyan Alliance – A community of fifteen Wesleyan-Arminian holiness

denominations. These organizations “Strengthen the prophetic voice and amplify the missional

fruitfulness of its members as they demonstrate the transforming message of scriptural holiness”

(Global Wesleyan Alliance - About US).

Essential ecclesiology – The essential attributes of a biblical, functioning church. This

phrase is often used to evaluate the transition from a pioneer project to one that bears the marks

of a church.

Wiest 9

Post-Christian West – The loss of the importance of the Christian worldview in the

Western world in favor of alternative worldviews, most often secularism. A post-Christian is a

person living in a nominally Christian society who has either turned away from the faith or been

brought up without reference.

Delimitations

This study focused on pioneer projects in the largest denominations of the Global

Wesleyan Alliance and the largest microchurch networks in the United States. The top four

but with enough time to gauge long-term effectiveness.

The following conditions represented prerequisites to qualify for this research. First, the

pioneer engaged a specific, identifiable group with little or no connection to an established

church. Second, the efforts of each pioneer resulted in the profession of faith of at least one new

convert. Third, the pioneer committed to intentional disciple-making and spiritual development.

Fourth, the pioneer project resulted in a regular gathering of at least ten people. Finally, the

denominational or network leaders who provided oversight described the pioneer as effective.

This final point provided a measure of accountability and subjective analysis of each pioneer.

Most of these pioneer leaders were also co-vocational. These five factors provided a strong pool

of pioneer leaders for further research.

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW FOR THE PROJECT

Overview of the Chapter

In examining the relevant sources, mobilizing effective pioneer leaders is crucial to the

practical literature under review. The categories used in the literature review mirror the four

sources of the Wesleyan quadrilateral. Wesley believed that Scripture, illuminated by tradition,

established by reason, and then confirmed with empirical and experiential knowledge, revealed

around the mission of God, Israel, Jesus, and the Church, as revealed in the Old and New

Testament. These four categories provide a missional hermeneutic of the Bible (Wright 62) and a

method of summarizing the biblical material. The biblical material is then grouped into

theological themes and foundations highlighting the importance of mobilizing pioneer leaders.

The four theological themes highlighted are the Missio Dei, the empowerment and leading of the

Holy Spirit, the priesthood of all believers, and a discussion on minimal or essential

ecclesiology.

The second section of this chapter explores how the biblical and theological themes find

expression in church history and, more specifically, in the Wesleyan tradition. The sixteenth-

century Reformation provided a rediscovery of the priesthood of all believers, but it was not until

John Wesley and the early eighteenth century that this theme took root on a much larger scale

and to a much greater degree. The literature review traces the tradition of mobilizing pioneering

lay leaders through British and early American Methodism, and emphasizes the historical

practice of John Wesley, Francis Asbury, and the many pioneering women and men who

participated in the movement.

The third and final section of the chapter addresses the rationale for pioneer leadership

based on the current religious trends in North America and the need for a new type of leader to

have our being” (Acts 17:28). The biblical narrative emphasizes the pioneering work of God by

illustrating his creative and redemptive purposes. This history culminates in the life, death, and

resurrection of Jesus and then expands to include the early Church and the ultimate redemption

of the universe. In the penultimate chapter of Revelation, the author writes, “He who was seated

on the throne said, “I am making everything new!” (Rev. 21:5). The grand trajectory of Scripture

is often presented as a four-part narrative that includes creation, the fall, redemption, and future

hope. In each of these movements, God is intimately involved. His grand mission of redemption

is expressed through Israel, Jesus, and the Church, and this summary of Scripture will provide an

overview of those significant themes while highlighting a few pioneer leaders he mobilized in

the process.

The Mission of God and the Nation of Israel

The pioneers in Scripture are many, but the first pioneer is God. In the beginning, God

created the heavens and the earth (Gen. 1:3) ex nihilo. After Adam and Eve fell into sin and

rebellion, he was the one who initiated a plan for redemption. Immediately following the Fall, a

prophetic statement was given in Genesis 3:15, “And I will put enmity between you and the

woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his

heel.” This prophecy would ultimately be fulfilled through Jesus Christ, “the pioneer and

centuries for them to undertake “missions” in our sense of the word, to the nations” (502). The

calling to go and make disciples of the nations is absent in the Old Testament. Israel was not a

missionary people in the sense of being sent out to cross geographical and cultural boundaries

with the message of salvation to the nations. In fact, the only “missionary” in the Old Testament

is God revealing himself through his people (S. B. Addison 9). A handful of exceptions reveal

where God works outside the sphere of his covenant people, but the center of the Old Testament

is the story of Israel.

The story of Israel began with Abram pioneering a new work as he was called to “Go

from your country, your people, and your father’s household to the land I will show you” (Gen.

12:1). The call of Abram was to multiply descendants with the promise that he would build a

great nation by which “all people would be blessed” (v. 3). Yahweh's presence in Israel was to be

a light that would draw both individuals and the nations to himself (S. B. Addison 10). The

formation of this new nation began in the incubator of Egypt with the Israelites enslaved for over

four hundred years. In the fullness of time, God raised up another pioneer named Moses to return

to Egypt and deliver his people. He led them to Sinai, where they received the law and a new

form of worship through the construction of the Tabernacle.

Howard A. Snyder notes God’s preference for a dynamic, pilgrim people and laments the

of his habitation with his people, for the tabernacle emphasizes God as dynamic, not as

incompatible with the idea of a pilgrim people. There is a certain incongruity to the

Wineskins 60).

While this may be true, the Israelites were not to be a perpetually wandering people. The

promised land was their destination, and the conquering of foreign nations in Joshua set up a

tension found throughout the pages of the Old Testament. While God desires to bless the nations

and has a saving purpose for all people, his clear preference in the Old Testament is for Israel.

He works to establish his people in the land of promise and then works to draw all nations back

expressed during the pinnacle of the reign of King Solomon. It was a time of peace in Israel,

where wisdom was disseminated, and dozens of kings and queens traveled to Israel to learn of

Yahweh. The mission of God was unfolding and expressed in Solomon’s prayer at the temple's

dedication as he prayed, “All the peoples of the earth may know your name and fear you” (1

Kings 8:43).

The mission of God through the nation of Israel was to create a faithful people who

identified with him in worship and served him through obedience to the law. The blessing that

would follow would then result in blessing others as they were drawn to Israel. However, there

The Old Testament story of Israel ends with a glimmer of hope as the walls are rebuilt

and the temple is reconstructed. The pioneer God is planning something new. The Old Testament

regularly speaks of God doing new things. David spoke of God putting “a new song in my

mouth” (Ps. 40:3). Isaiah wrote, “The former things have come to pass, and new things I now

declare” (Isa. 42:9), and again, “Behold, I am doing a new thing.” Ezekiel wrote that God would

one day give his people “a new heart and put a new spirit within them” (Ezek. 11:19), and Isaiah

prophesied of “a new heaven and a new earth” (Isa. 65:17). However, many of those promises

would not be fully revealed until the New Testament.

While the mission of God through the nation of Israel certainly had stories of pioneer

leaders, people like Noah, Abram, Moses, Joshua, Gideon, Deborah, Nehemiah, and others, the

task for the nation was not expansion but attraction. Michael Moynagh and Philip Harold write,

“Ancient Israel saw its missional task as attracting the nations, but the first Christians went on

mission toward the nations” (Church for Every Context 4). Indeed, the centripetal nature of

Israel’s mission would soon give way to the birth of Jesus and the kingdom's expansion in

Jerusalem, Judea, and Samaria, and even to the ends of the earth (Acts 1:8). God was preparing

to do something new. Rather than attracting the nations to Jerusalem and a physical temple, Jesus

would draw all people to himself by his death and resurrection. He would then provide the Holy

firstborn from among the dead so that in everything he might have supremacy” (Col. 1:17).

The birth of Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament vision for a Messiah and the starting point

for a new type of pioneer leadership. Jesus came to fulfill the mission of God by bringing

redemption to all people and launching a new missionary movement that would one day reach

the four corners of the earth. Jesus is rightly described as “the pioneer and perfecter of our faith”

(Heb. 12:1-2), the “pioneer of our salvation” (Heb. 2:10) and the one “whom we acknowledge as

our apostle” (Heb. 3:1). The word apostle refers to someone who is sent, and because of God’s

great love for the world he “sent His one and only Son” (John 3:16), “to bring salvation to the

ends of the earth” (Acts 13:47).

Jesus had a unique understanding of his mission and ministry, which flowed from his

relationship and intimacy with the Father. The first aspect of his public ministry carried the clear

realization that he was sent to the lost sheep of Israel (Matt. 15:24). The blessing of Israel to the

nations would be fulfilled through a Messiah. In the Gospel of Luke, after a night of prayer,

Jesus chose twelve disciples and designated them as apostles (6:13), the symbolic fulfillment of

the twelve tribes of Israel. These twelve were later sent back to the lost sheep of Israel in

Matthew 10:5-6 to proclaim their impending judgment and call them back to repentance. “The

story, the seventy led and managed what was already gathered. However, in the New Testament

story in Luke 10, the seventy are empowered to take new ground and pioneer something new.

The Twelve warned the tribes of Israel of impending judgment and the seventy received training

in short-term ministry for their ultimate mission to the whole world. In the mobilization of the

seventy, a new centrifugal movement was underway, the second aspect of his public ministry.

While the immediate focus of Jesus was on the people of Israel, his ultimate concern was

the entire world. The turning point of focus was his impending death and resurrection. The

apostle John records Jesus saying, “And I when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all

people to myself” (12:32). The disciples hoped for the kingdom of God to come in power during

the life and ministry of Jesus to see Israel restored in all its glory. However, as his death

approached, Jesus began to speak of a greater mission. The true nature of his strategy began to

emerge as his investment in the Twelve and Seventy would later evolve into a remnant of one-

hundred twenty who would appear on the day of Pentecost to proclaim the gospel to the nations.

The sacrifice of Jesus opened the way for a clear call to go to the nations. Only after the

resurrection does the title of apostle appear to take on a particular overtone of a missionary to all

people. The death and resurrection of Jesus and the subsequent coming of the Holy Spirit seem

to be preconditions for the more excellent pioneering ministry to begin. Forty-one times in the

The eleven disciples received the Great Commission on a hillside in Galilee (Matt.

28:16), but this great sending was mandated for many more. Dann Spader believes this was the

gathering of 500 referenced in 1 Corinthians 15:6 (35). Regardless of who was in attendance that

day, making disciples is for every follower of Jesus. After establishing his authority and

Lordship over all things, Jesus stated, “Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in

the name of the Father, and of the Son and the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything

I have commanded you” (Matt. 28:18-20). Being a disciple meant living as a sent one. Acts 1:8

reiterated this universal calling as the disciples were to be witnesses of Jesus “in Jerusalem, in all

Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”

What began as a mission through the nation of Israel reached its fulfillment in Christ and

was soon magnified through the Church. Johannes Blauw writes, “In the Old Testament, we have

witnessed a progressive reduction of God's dealing with humankind” (91). Indeed, the move in

the Old Testament seems to move from all of humanity, to the nation of Israel, to a smaller

remnant, and finally, the Messiah. The author continues, “In Jesus, that reduction reaches its

final stage and then begins to expand God's salvation purposes as the narrative moves from

Messiah to disciples, a new Israel, and a gospel designed for the world” (91). In John 16:7, Jesus

A progression in the Gospels moves from Jesus to the earliest disciples, the Twelve, the

seventy-two, and then the one hundred twenty who gather in the upper room after they “returned

to Jerusalem with great joy” (Luke 24:52). Ten days later, the Spirit of God descended and they

“were filled with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:4), immediately serving as witnesses to the nations and

“declaring the wonders of God” (Acts 2:8) in the native tongues of those gathered from around

the region. On the Day of Pentecost, “about three thousand were added to their number” (Acts

2:41). The mission of God through the movement called the Church would continue to expand. It

was a mission recorded by Luke in the Acts of the Apostles, a book that some have fittingly

called the Acts of the Holy Spirit (Bruce 30). Rather than pioneer leaders and the broader Church

engaging in mission and asking God for his blessing, the early followers of Jesus waited for the

coming of the Holy Spirit before living out the Great Commission. The sending of apostles is

linked with the reception of the Holy Spirit in John 20:21-22 and Acts 1:8 (Hedlund 191).

The immediate result of the Spirit at the Pentecost event was the proclamation of “the

wonders of God” (Acts 2:11) to a large group of people representing the various nations of the

known world. “Nothing could have demonstrated this more clearly than the multi-racial, multi-

national, multi-lingual nature of the kingdom of Christ. Ever since the early church fathers,

commentators have seen the blessing of Pentecost as a deliberate and dramatic reversal of the

The story of the early Church in Acts aligns with the missional categories of Acts 1:8 in

concentric circles of expansion from Jerusalem (Acts 1-7) to Judea and Samaria (Acts 8-11) and

even to the ends of the earth (Acts 12-28) (Stott 39). The centrifugal nature of the new mission is

explicit. While Acts 2 represents the first wave of missionaries worldwide, Acts 8:1 inaugurates

the second. Luke comments, “On that day, a great persecution broke out against the church in

Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria.” The gospel

fanned out again across Judea and Samaria as faithful pioneers, missionary-minded disciples

“preached the word wherever they went” (Acts 8:4).

The Greek verb ἀποστέλλω (apostelló) is used seventy-nine times in the New Testament

and means “to send” (Treier and Elwell 70). An apostle is sent with a commission, and the

Theological Roots of Pneumatology

The theological foundations for pioneer ministry also include understanding the person

and work of the Holy Spirit and his role in mission. The Spirit of God was the one who “hovered

over the waters” (Gen. 1:3) in creation and breathed life into existence. The Hebrew word חוּרַ

(ruach) is defined as the very breath of God, a concept repeated in John 20:21 when Jesus

breathed on his disciples and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit.” Indeed, the Holy Spirit brings life,

newness, and freshness to the mission of God. Collins writes, “Freshness is the hallmark of the

relationship with God. Pioneers do not take God to the people but instead assume that the

pioneering Spirit is already moving in the hearts of men and women, preparing them for the

gospel message. The beginning of this literature review mentioned the pioneering work of the

Father and Son. In the same way, “God the Spirit is a pioneer, and His pioneering Spirit is

calling us to the fields” (Beck and Acevedo 26).

The Spirit of God now hovers over the darkness of society and goes ahead of his people

in ministry. “Integral to the understanding of earliest Christianity as a fresh expression is the

recognition that mission was not conceived as taking the spirit into new territory, so much as

following where the Spirit was leading the way” (Collins 99). God’s relational love is seen in

Genesis 3:9 when he asks, “Where are you?” His love also pursues people through the Spirit of

God, even preceding conscious awareness. “God’s prevenient grace is calling us, wooing us,

meeting us in the mess, never giving up” (Beck and Acevedo 94). The Spirit seeks to wake

people up to the realization that they need salvation and “brings us to repentance and the front

porch of God’s house” (Watson 33).

The Spirit of God not only prepares the way and initiates, but he also convicts and

directs. Much of pioneer ministry is based on the calling of the Spirit and walking in obedience.

Bishop Graham Cray emphasized this vital task when he stated, “I’m going to give you the key

join the Missio Dei and are empowered by the Spirit of God, lives are transformed. David J.

Bosch writes, “The classical doctrine of the Missio Dei as God the Father sending the Son, and

God the Father and the Son sending the Spirit was expanded to include yet another ‘movement’-

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit sending the church into the world” (390). Ordinary men and women

fueled the expansion of the early church in Acts, and every historical renewal movement

recovers a healthy concept of the priesthood of all believers. The Apostle Peter built on this idea

after reflecting on the early church movement and the mobilization of pioneers far and wide. He

writes, “You are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood offering spiritual

sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. 2:4-5). He continues by calling the

church a “royal priesthood” and a “holy nation” (1 Pet. 2:9-10).

Snyder writes, “The clergy-laity dichotomy is one of the principal obstacles to the church

effectively being God’s agent of the Kingdom today because it creates a false idea that only

‘holy men,’ namely, ordained ministers, are qualified and responsible for leadership and

significant ministry” (Community of the King 95). Mobilizing pioneers comes with the

knowledge that everyone is called to ministry. A widespread myth in the church regards calling

as a secondary experience that happens to only a few privileged Christians. Many people

“believe [that] God takes the spiritual elite and entrusts them with the ministry, and for everyone

Christian workers. The biblical review proves that Jesus and the early apostles entrusted ministry

to hundreds and thousands of pioneers and many more unnamed disciple-makers who spread the

gospel worldwide. One author forecasts, “The time of the professional ministry is over—the time

of the missionary pastor has come” (Beck and Acevedo 162).

Pioneer leaders are “missionary disciples called to find creative ways to engage and reach

a group of people uncomfortable or unfamiliar with the established church” (Wiest and Love 10).

As the power of the Spirit sends them, he will breathe new life into a group of people or

community. When the priesthood of all believers is put into action and people are mobilized to

make disciples, missional churches will undoubtedly form, and pioneers will need to wrestle

with their essential ecclesiology. The idea of a minimal or essential ecclesiology is expressed in

the phrase, “We must lower the bar of how we do church and raise the bar of what it means to be

a disciple” (Cole 58). An essential ecclesiology is not a license to underachieve or downgrade the

church, but rather a formula for understanding when a gathering of believers transformed by the

Holy Spirit becomes a church.

Theological Roots of Ecclesiology

The church is described in many ways in the pages of Scripture. It is the people of God,

the body of Christ, the bride of Christ, a city on a hill, salt, and light. Peter writes, “But you are a

Christ-followers” (105). The early church adopted the word ecclesia from Greek culture and used

it to describe their newly forming faith communities. While other Greek words exist such as

koinonia, which emphasized the close fellowship of believers, or laos, which describes the

people of God and from where the word laity is derived, ecclesia is the most common usage for

the word church. In English, it is often translated as “called-out-ones” and provides a helpful

framework for the church.

First is the word called. Those who are called have surrendered to the Lordship of Christ

and are following Jesus. Simply put, they are disciples of Christ. Worship is ultimately about

surrender, not merely singing or reciting a specific liturgy. It is the devotion of the community to

Jesus as Lord, offering themselves as living sacrifices that live and are sent. The church must be

gathered around the resurrected Christ.

Second is the word out. The church not only gathers around the authority of Christ but is

also sent out to those unaware of his love and grace. Mission is about making disciples and

engaging with those who do not know Jesus. The Missio Dei is the starting point, and the church

is the vehicle for accomplishing the Great Commission. Mission is not something added to the

church—it is the core of the church. In his landmark book, The Forgotten Ways, Alan Hirsch

essential ecclesiology of many movements, “The church is a worshipping community on

mission” (Sanders 28). Submission to Christ and engagement in his mission forms a community

of faith that becomes the church. While defining the church as a worshipping community on

mission may appear truncated to many, it provides a starting point for further elaboration and

expression.

Instead of taking the Greek word ecclesia as a starting definition, another common

approach is to consider the Council of Constantinople and the expression of the Nicene Creed in

325 A.D. describing the church as “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church” (United States

Conference of Catholic Bishops). This doctrine focuses on the oneness and unity of the church. It

also speaks to the sanctity of the church and her holiness. The word catholic speaks to the

universality of the church worldwide, and finally the word apostolic. Apostolic in the Catholic

tradition refers to apostolic succession, but the Protestant belief is that the church is “built on the

foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the Chief Cornerstone”

(Eph. 2:20). The word apostolic describes the mission that must accompany any definition of the

church. Thus, in the same way the word ecclesia focuses on community, worship, and mission as

church practices, this historic creed points to the marks of a church that make it unique.

In addition to the three (called, out, ones) or four (one, holy, catholic, apostolic) marks of

These four relationships are “upward, inward, outward, and ofward” (Collins, Fresh Expressions

of Church 17). The upward relationship is the connection to God in worship and participation in

the trinitarian community of Father, Son, and Spirit. The inward relationship is that of

discipleship and fellowship within community. The outward relationship is that of loving service

to the world through mission, ministry, and evangelism; the ofward relationship is that of

identifying and participating with the universal body of believers. Collins goes on to write,

“There is an upward reach toward God, an outward reach to people beyond our circle, an inward

commitment to discipleship and fellowship, and a clear understanding that the church is part of

the universal church and part of a deep, historical stream” (6).

Both practices and relationships are essential to consider. Paying attention to the practices

that promote healthy relationships is vital. If relationships are the essence of the church, practices

are the good of the church (Moynagh and Harold, Church in Every Context 109). Indeed, perhaps

in relational language, the church is a place where people love God, love one another, and are

sent on mission to make disciples.

This theological foundation for pioneer leadership seeks to tie pioneers to the Missio Dei,

empowered by the Spirit, ministering as the priesthood of all believers, and forming gatherings

The review of the biblical foundations ended with Acts 28, a story that prepares the

reader for the world’s future expansion of the Gospel. In the same way, this review of the

theological foundation points to an unfolding story that is yet to be written. The mission is left

unfinished and will be picked up again in an examination of the history of the Christian

movement, specifically through the work of John Wesley, who carried this work forward by

famously stating, “The world is my parish” (John Wesley: Journal of John Wesley - Christian

Classics Ethereal Library). Scripture has been the starting point, but now the review looks at the

Wesleyan tradition, a story of not only the twenty-first century but also the early eighteenth and

nineteenth centuries when a wave of pioneer leaders stormed the countryside in the emerging

Wesleyan movement.

The biblical and theological foundations are essential to this review because they provide

Scriptural bases from which to build an understanding of the mission of God and how to

mobilize pioneer leaders to advance his kingdom. Using the Wesleyan quadrilateral as a

framework, the next lens of authority is that of tradition and developing a historical overview.

An exhaustive look at church history and the deployment of pioneer leaders over the centuries is

not possible in the scope of this work. This dissertation seeks to develop pioneer leaders from the

collapsed to a degree never before known in any Christian country” (Bevins 19). The Church of

England was experiencing a rapid decline in attendance, and an epidemic of spiritual laxity and

widespread immorality, even among the clergy. In this world, John Wesley was born in 1703. As

a six-year-old boy, John was the last to be snatched from the flames of his burning home. For the

rest of his life, he regarded himself as “a brand plucked from the fire” (A. S. Wood 30). He

believed he had been saved for a purpose.

His father served as a parish priest in the Church of England. When he entered his late

teen years, John chose to study at Oxford and later moved to the American colony of Georgia as

a missionary before returning to England, humbled by his lack of spiritual fruit in the colonies.

Despite his religious devotion, he also had no personal experience of saving grace through faith

in Christ. He witnessed the deep conviction of the Moravians on his journey home across the

Atlantic. Because of an engaging friendship with Peter Boehler, he began to pursue an assurance

of faith.

While Wesley’s early years had many formative experiences, 1738-40 were the most

significant. First, he had his famous “heart-warming experience” (A. S. Wood 59) at Aldersgate

on May 24th, 1738, where he came to an assurance of faith and new confidence in his walk with

God. Second, he witnessed the power of the Holy Spirit at a Fetter Lane society prayer meeting

parish, or even a religious society in London, but rather the widespread proclamation of the

gospel (E. Thompson 56). The whole context of Wesley’s famous quote mentioned earlier is as

follows, “A dispensation of the Gospel is committed to me, and woe is me if I preach not the

Gospel … I look upon all the world as my parish … and my bounden duty to declare, unto all

that are willing to hear, the glad tidings of salvation” (John Wesley: Journal of John Wesley -

Christian Classics Ethereal Library). Two or three days later came an urgent request from

George Whitefield inviting Wesley to Bristol, England, to take over his evangelistic work.

Whitefield had drawn huge crowds by preaching outdoors and gathering as many as

30,000 people at some of his events. Though reluctant to do so, Wesley finally submitted to the

practice. He writes, “I could never reconcile myself at first to this strange way of preaching in

the fields of which he set me an example, having been all my life so tenacious of every point

relating to decency and order, that I should have through the saving of souls almost a sin if it had

not been done in a church” (E. Thompson 27).

Beck and Acevedo state, “Wesley’s Aldersgate experience of assurance added to his

Fetter Lane encounter with the Holy Spirit ultimately laid the tracks for discovering a new

strategy for pioneer ministry at Bristol” (88). While Wesley began his ministry with a desire to

reform the Church of England, the old wineskins quickly proved unable to contain the new wine

and proclaimed in the highways the glad tidings of salvation” (Beck and Acevedo xx). Wesley

crossed the proverbial Rubicon in field preaching, and his great apostolic and evangelistic

ministry began to take shape (E. Thompson 58).

The Wesleyan movement began in a field with people willing to be vile, and field

preaching became the front door of the movement. Toward the latter years of his life, when

directing other itinerant preachers, Wesley was quoted in the conference minutes:

“Q.6. Where should we endeavor to preach most? A.1. Where there is the greatest

unlawful? A. We conceive not. We do not know that it is contrary to any law either of

call is to save that which is lost. Now, we cannot expect them to seek us. Therefore, we

highways and hedges, to compel them to come in” (Richey 15-16).

The evangelistic ethos of the movement was best described in one of Wesley’s primary rules for

his pioneer leaders, “You have nothing to do but to save souls. Therefore, spend and be spent in

this work and go always, not only to those that want you but to those that want you most”

(Coleman 18). This missionary spirit afforded the early Methodists a unique position that would

ultimately result in the transformation of England. Wesley saw the mobilization of pioneers as a

return to New Testament practice.

Methodist preachers were to consider themselves “as extraordinary messengers” not

Converted at age fifteen, Asbury was called to the ministry two years later and rose in the

ranks of the Wesleyan movement as a local preacher, eventually becoming an itinerant preacher

in Wesley’s British Methodism. He joined 103 other pioneer leaders on 41 circuits in England,

Scotland, and Ireland. While the Methodist movement in the British Isles rapidly expanded, the

lack of a missionary presence in America ultimately drew his attention.

In August 1771, John Wesley pleaded for more preachers to journey to America at an

annual conference in Bristol, England. Asbury was one of two adventurous pioneers chosen to

cross the Atlantic and join the work already begun in the colonies. When Asbury first arrived in

Philadelphia that same year at the age of twenty-six, missionaries from England only numbered

four. American Methodism remained a small handful of societies and preaching houses from

New York to northern Maryland (Andrews 38).

The events that unfolded over the next fifty years represent nothing short of a

multiplication movement. Between 1771 and 1830, American Methodists achieved a virtual

miracle of growth, rising from just a few members to more than 500,000. When historians

consider the larger Methodist influence in America, projections rise as high as 6,000,000 people

associated with the movement (Addison, Movements 87). In the same way, by 1798, British

changed American popular religion and culture more than any of his contemporaries as he

ordained upwards of three thousand preachers to the ministry in his lifetime and was more

widely recognized face-to-face than nearly any person of his generation, including such national

figures as Thomas Jefferson and George Washington (Wigger, American Saint 3).

Several factors contributed to Francis Asbury’s success, but his missionary impulse and

apostolic leadership stand front and center. The mission of the movement was evident. These

pioneers were called in the spirit of Wesley to spread “scriptural holiness across the land”

(Hempton 58), and they found themselves tied into a system of organizing principles that held

the movement together. The entire ecclesiastical superstructure of Methodism, its itinerant and

local preachers, its societies, classes, and bands, and its eventual love feasts, camp meetings,

hymns, and publications were all designed to promote and spread scriptural holiness.

Asbury’s leadership and example inspired an army of pioneer leaders that followed his

commitment to the movement and became a kind of Protestant missionary order. The conflict of

the Revolutionary War created increasing tensions with the Anglican Church, and soon, Asbury

would need to contextualize the new movement and separate American Methodism from its

British parents. With the signing of the Treaty of Paris to end the war and with Wesley’s

prominent historian, Gordon Wood, called the era that emerged after the Revolutionary War's

end in 1783, “the time of greatest religious chaos and originality in American history” (64).

Warfare had disrupted local congregations, dealt a harsh blow to the Episcopal church, and

attacked the ties between the state and church in New England. On the social front, scores of

families began migrating to the frontier and borrowed heavily to finance new land purchases.

This resulted in unparalleled debt and a growing increase in alcoholism, violence, and

crime, and the ongoing blight of slavery remained a glaring contradiction to the values of

democracy. For many religious leaders, the democratic impulse of post-Revolutionary America

created an enormous threat. Still, Asbury viewed the upheaval of the war and the shift in culture

as an opportunity. Rather than fighting this democratic impulse, he embraced the pioneering

spirit of the age and launched an apostolic ministry.

When the itinerants of the movement met together in the 1790 Conference, Asbury

explained his plan for Methodism and boldly proclaimed the pioneer spirit of the movement:

“Our grand plan, in all its parts, leads to an itinerant ministry. Our bishops are traveling

bishops. All the different orders that compose our conferences are employed in the

traveling line, and our local preachers are, to some degree, traveling preachers.

Everything is kept moving as far as possible, and we will be bold to say that, next to the

grace of God, there is nothing like this for keeping the whole body alive from the center

to the circumference and for the continual extension of that circumference on every

people were traveling, a wave of young, passionate, populist preachers felt determined to bring a

greater focus on evangelism and innovation.

American Methodist Pioneers

The circuit-riding pioneers became the heroes of the movement. Most had no formal

education but possessed a deep intelligence and quick wit. Their language, earthy humor, biting

sarcasm, and commonsense reasoning appealed to the uneducated and average person. They

were successful apostles and evangelists primarily because they were recruited from among the

people they were trying to reach. The average pioneer was not a Yale or Harvard graduate but a

leader from among the people. Wesley is often quoted as promoting plain truth for plain people.

American Methodism was a cultural transformation from below, not a political or ecclesiastical

program imposed on the masses from above. The Methodist movement relentlessly recruited

like-minded and passionate young itinerants. Asbury acknowledged the pressure to expand the

organization from the center to the periphery. It required “a well-disciplined army” (Hatch 86).

They did not value tradition and formal education like leaders in other denominations.

They explicitly taught that divine insight was reserved for the poor and humble rather than the

proud and learned. This idea resonated well with the uprising of the Revolution, a war that

ultimately threw off the authoritarian shackles of England and connected with the desires of

their faith offered ordinary Americans the opportunity to seize control of their spiritual destinies

in much the same way that many were striving to determine their social and economic futures.

Perseverance was among the highest virtues in this new republic and society; on this score,

Asbury and his pioneers had few equals. They relentlessly pushed themselves to their physical

breaking point.

When Asbury held the famous Christmas Conference in 1784, 61 itinerant pioneers were

in attendance. Twenty-five years later, that number swelled to over 1,500 (Wigger, Taking

Heaven by Storm 33). It was a group that held exclusive claim to the reins of the church’s

government, and they were the only members of the annual conferences allowed to vote (Hatch

87). This symbolized a bias toward the edges of the movement. Asbury’s system did not allow

for halfhearted participation. If a preacher chose to settle down and locate in one area as a local

preacher spending his time shepherding a group of classes and society, they forfeited the right to

full membership in the fraternity of pioneers, otherwise known as the Methodist Connection.

Characteristics of Pioneers

Understanding the expectations for pioneers requires remembering that the culture

developed under Wesley in England. Wesley had strict instructions for his young pioneers, and

required much of them. First, they were expected to cultivate an inner spiritual life of intense

else, preachers were to preach the gospel and save souls. Wesley regularly admonished his

preachers to do more field preaching and always to be punctual.

Pioneers needed to be able to adapt and be flexible. Nathan Hatch describes the itinerant-

based machine that Asbury set in motion as “a military mission of short-term agents” (57).

Pioneers often received their appointments at the annual conference for only a year or two. The

traveling preacher's sacrifice in giving up free choice was no small demand. However, the

attitude of most was exemplified by one pioneer, “no one is worthy of the name of a traveling

preacher that does not cheerfully go anywhere he can, for the general good of the entire

movement. Better many individuals suffer, then the work at large should” (Wigger, American

Saint 215).

Asbury feared that individual choice would result in crowded circuits among the wealthy

and neglected circuits among the poor. Until 1800, full-time itinerants were only paid $64 per

year. In contrast, most Congregational ministers made almost seven times that amount, had

lifetime appointments, and a large majority ministered their entire career in only one church

(Wigger, Taking Heaven by Storm 49). Indeed, the early Methodist preachers were quite

different than their counterparts in the established churches.

Methodist pioneers rode their circuits believing that bringing the lost to Christ was the

movement of God on which the Methodist system thrived. The harsh conditions also created a

bond with other pioneers as quarterly meetings, camp meetings, and annual conferences tied the

connection together through a vast correspondence network.

The typical pioneer was in his twenties or thirties and unmarried. Marriage was often

seen as a threat to the network as it became the leading reason itinerants would settle down as

local preachers. The intense schedule and low pay of itinerants made it challenging to provide for

a wife and kids. Their life consisted of traveling a two to four-week circuit on horseback that was

often two hundred to four hundred miles in circumference. They would often preach twenty-five

to thirty preaching appointments per round and check in on the leaders of the numerous classes

and societies on their circuit (Wigger, Taking Heaven by Storm 35). The itinerant system worked

well for reaching post-revolutionary America’s rapidly expanding population. Asbury concluded

that sending preachers where they would have the most significant impact, rather than leaving

them where they were most comfortable, was crucial to the success of the Methodist system.

While pioneers had an assigned specific circuit, the culture of Methodism demanded

individual initiative. They were expected to canvass neighborhoods, evangelize the region, and

proclaim the gospel to all who would listen. They were radically innovative in reaching and

organizing people meeting in homes, courthouses, schoolhouses, barns, or even the open woods.

of them taken right from the shop or the farm, and yet they have gathered congregations

their plain, pointed, and simple but warm and animated mode of preaching has always

have the people, except what the Methodists can save” (Wigger, Taking Heaven by Storm

awakening souls. Francis Asbury once urged one of his preachers to “feel for the power, feel for

the power, brother.” Nothing would have been more unthinkable to a pioneer than the

dispassionate reading of a prepared sermon as most preaching was extemporaneously given

without the aid of notes (Wigger, Taking Heaven by Storm 77-79). The fundamental impulse of

all preaching was to save souls, and they relentlessly spread their message as widely as possible.

While there were bishops and presiding elders who superintended the movement, the

boots on the ground were the pioneers. While there was a deep sense of authority and chain of

command within the Methodist system, it was thoroughly democratic at the grassroots. The

primary responsibility of the episcopacy was to preserve the itinerancy. The itinerants or

pioneers oversaw and then expanded the societies in any one region, often led by local preachers,

the lay men and women that obeyed the commands of Christ to make disciples and became the

sinews that tied the movement together along with their class meetings and, to a lesser degree,

bands. While pioneers found themselves on the leading edge of the movement, the local

preachers were settled in a fixed location. Itinerants were the pioneers, and local preachers were

the settlers.

One final note should be mentioned in the evolution of pioneer leadership unique to the

American context. While Wesley innovated with field preaching and the mobilization of lay

socializing, culminating in what was commonly called a love feast. However, at the turn of the

nineteenth century, these quarterly meetings and love feasts gave shape to the camp meeting. In

1801, the first camp meeting evolved to accommodate the growing number of people and to

lodge them on the grounds or in the woods rather than in fixed shelters (Richey 60).

In the early nineteenth century, the popularity of those first camp meetings shaped an

annual event, often an extension of the quarterly meeting in the summer or fall and in

conjunction with the annual conference. By 1811, only ten years later, American Methodists

were conducting 400-500 camp meetings annually (Wigger, Taking Heaven by Storm 97).

Initially designed as a gathering place to embrace the scattered population of the frontier, camp

meetings quickly became associated with Methodist evangelization, held in every part of

Methodist territory.

Asbury took great delight in the rousing success of the American camp meeting.

Describing the “overwhelming power” of a four-day meeting twenty miles northeast of New

York, he estimated that 3,000 persons and one hundred preachers attended the sessions four

times a day (Andrews 227-28). While the pioneer itinerants had previously focused on spreading

the gospel from one community to another and preaching to smaller groups, the camp meeting

Indeed, camp meetings moved one step beyond the radical field preaching of Wesley and

Whitefield and allowed the congregation to participate in the action. Those who led the meetings

were often pioneers and local preachers. While many inside and outside the movement

complained that the meetings often pushed the edges of emotionalism, Asbury’s promotion of

camp meetings persisted. He vowed in 1807 that he would battle all earth and hell to defend

camp meetings and would sooner suffer death than give them up (Wigger, American Saint 323).

While the quarterly meetings were initially instituted for business matters and

administrative functions of the church and a place to provide the sacraments of baptism and the

Lord’s Supper, the camp meeting became the place for revival and passion. Indeed, the pioneer

leaders and other preachers attending these camp meetings were powerful personalities who

continuing throughout the 1980s. Smith writes, “The marriage between the religious and political

right … disgusted liberal Democrats, especially those with weak connections to the Church. It

also shocked the conscience of moderates, who preferred a wide berth between their faith and

politics” (D. Thompson).

Smith said that young liberals and loosely affiliated Christians possibly first registered

their aversion to the Christian right in the early 1990s, after a decade of observing its influential

role in conservative politics. This pattern pushed many marginal believers to disaffiliate from

significant forty percent!

Figure 2:2. Religious Realignment.

This massive realignment has created policy changes in both parties; seeing the increase

in religiously unaffiliated among Liberals, Conservatives have tried to co-opt Christianity as

representative of the Republican Party. Whether intentional or not, this alliance often further

alienates Liberals from Christianity. In addition, as the Democratic party becomes increasingly

unaffiliated with religion, their politics become a form of religion. While undoubtedly seen

among Conservatives, this is more pronounced among Liberals. In my neighborhood, I have seen

a growing trend of yard signs that begin with “In This House We Believe” and continue with

Internet Consumption

I remember my first year of college, walking across campus to the library to access the

internet. The year was 1995, and Netscape Navigator was the browser of choice, with nearly ten

million users. Home internet was virtually non-existent then, and I still remember the sound of

the computer connecting online a few years later. However, by 2000, nearly fifty percent of

households had home internet; shortly after that, almost every household in the United States had

access to the World Wide Web. In 2007, Apple released its iPhone, a technology that soon

changed the social fabric of society.

These new technologies changed the gathering of information, and ideas and values

previously transmitted through family, community, and the local church were now accessible

online. Today, the internet provides an onslaught of 24/7 news cycles, open access to

pornography, waves of on-demand entertainment, and mind-numbing distractions with apps and

social media. The advent of the internet, especially tied to smartphones, has created a selfish,

self-obsessed consumerism that appears challenging to break. It has also made niche groups

proliferate and reorganized how people connect and spread information.

Before smartphones and the internet, society was organized around larger cultural norms.

David Kinnaman and Mark Matlock write, “Through screens’ ubiquitous presence, Babylon's

these three major themes (political division, postmodern confusion, and internet consumption)

and has created confusion, division, and a culture tied to a digital Babylon through smartphones

and other technology. Still, a further rationale for pioneering awaits.

Nothing in Particulars

While the pace of religious disaffiliation continues, the Nones are by no means a

monolithic group. The CCES survey puts the number of Nones at 31.3 percent of the population,

and they are often subdivided into three primary groups; atheist, agnostic, and “nothing in

particular.” Atheists make up about five percent of the U.S. population. Studies have shown that

in the last ten years, the percentage of atheists that have switched affiliation to Christianity is less

than 0.7 percent (119). This does not mean abandoning outreach to this group, but it does mean

the likelihood of immediate fruit is slim. Agnostics comprise another five percent of the U.S.

population and are no less difficult to convert as only 3.6 percent have switched affiliation in the

past decade.

A group of religiously unaffiliated, often referred to as “nothing in particular,” represents

twenty percent of the U.S. population and is growing. This subcategory of the Nones denotes the

fastest-growing mission field in the United States. The 2020 census revealed that of the 258

million adults in the United States over 18 years of age, 51 million identify in this way (Census

exploring the Christian faith. He writes, “The data indicates that one in six of them will return to

the Christian tradition over four years” (119). The point is that while the religiously unaffiliated

continue to rise, the “nothing in particulars” should be the pioneers’ primary focus. They are

persuadable while also living in the confluence of political division, postmodern confusion, and

internet consumption. Because of their biases and the influence of these factors, reaching them

through traditional church programming or attracting them to an established church through

dynamic worship and preaching will be challenging. They are not seeking spiritual answers from

the Church. The strategy for reaching this group will require pioneering new works for this new

frontier.

If the Nones were treated like a religious group, they would be the second-largest religion

in the United States. North America can be described as a post-Christian nation where a secular,

postmodern, and increasingly political society has become the new mission field. A digital

Babylon is ubiquitously associated with the rise of social media and smartphones. The Church

has lost its privilege, with a dramatic increase in the number of people who have either

disaffiliated from Christianity or have never been substantially influenced by the Christian faith.

The United States has 180 million people who now have no connection to a local church, making

known. Hirsch believes those percentages are growing. Statistics back up his argument. Eighty

percent of all churches in America are in plateau or decline. Of the 350,000 churches in the

United States, less than one percent are growing by conversion (Moran 16). Instead, most

numerical increase is due to reshuffling parishioners from one church to another. Individual

churches may be growing, but overall growth is slowing. In addition to the rise of the Nones,

diversity is growing in the United States, resulting from an increase in immigrants and refugees,

and creating new pockets of people in nearly every community. These individuals are bringing

their native religions with them as society is increasingly a melting pot of world religions and

cultures.

Consequently, Moynagh and Harold wrote, “A new culture has emerged in the United

States, and the Christian story has lost its central place” (Church for Every Context 116). This

new culture can accurately be described as post-Christian, with an assumption that the profound

social changes of secularization and postmodernism are moving the Church toward its ultimate

demise. The standard view is that terminal decline is inevitable in the face of the widening gulf

between the Church and society. These dire predictions are becoming more commonplace. But

people of faith should remain hopeful. Throughout history, God has brought light out of darkness

The earlier research clearly indicates that fewer people are willing to attend established churches,

and the group called “nothing in particulars” is a case in point. Michael Adam Beck writes, “The

inherited church was planted in a different ecosystem” (21). He says, “The church in the United

States has been through a series of seismic sandstorms … and we have failed to adapt … while

the world has been moving at blazing 5G speeds, we have been stuck on rotary telephones. The

old Christendom algorithm of the Church in the West is failing” (xxxv).

Churches that rely on conditions in their community and society to be favorable to

Christianity are what Snyder calls “demand side” churches (Hunter 106), known for creating

religious services and experiences to cater to a religious marketplace. Demand side churches are

becoming fewer in number. The attractional ministry model is a demand-side model that worked

well in a culture of Christendom. However, this societal form is passing into irrelevance as the

confusion of postmodernism, political division, internet consumption, and distrust in the

institutional church continues to grow.

Snyder contrasts these with “supply side” churches that continually take the initiative to

go to the people and populations. They are proactive rather than reactive. These churches are not

established due to the “demand” of the people but rather the opportunity or “supply” of the

harvest. They mobilize pioneer leaders. Rather than relying on the gifts of the clergy, these

With the changes taking place, the Church must increasingly adopt a missionary posture

and be compelled by pastors and lay leaders willing to do whatever it takes to reach people with

the gospel. In an earlier book, I wrote, “We can no longer stay home waiting for people to flow

into our church buildings on Sunday mornings. Instead, we must see ourselves as sent and reach

our networks, neighborhoods, and third places, where the so-called nones and dones, the

unchurched and dechurched increasingly gather” (Wiest and Love 21). Jesus looked at the first-

century situation and said in Luke 10:2, “The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few.” In

the same way, the twenty-first century begs for more workers. The harvest remains plentiful, but

the harvesting methods must change.

The operating system and posture of the Church must change as well. Rather than

ministering from a sense of power or maintaining old attractional strategies, the church's new

stance ought to be one of humility, mobilizing pioneers to be salt and light in their world. These

emerging societal and cultural changes have created a rationale for a new type of leadership and

practical methods to release a new wave of pioneer leaders.

The Experience of Pioneering

The changing religious landscape in the United States provides a rationale for more

as the church-growth movement began to gain steam. The experimentation of simple business

practices applied to church structure and systems eventually created a programmatic church-

growth playbook. Many of the leaders of this new movement were highly evangelistic and found

incredible fruit in attracting people to worship services programmed for those seeking spiritual

things from the church. By employing the homogenous unit principle, a concept first developed

by Donald McGavern for global missions, churches were encouraged to target specific groups of

people by customizing worship services that would appeal to those groups. In this structure, the

pastoral staff often did the heavy lifting, and encouraged church members to invest in people and

then invite them to worship services where incredible communicators and worship leaders could

draw the net.

A handful of growing megachurches and early pioneers of this approach began to codify

its principles and then attach them to networks like the Willow Creek Association or Purpose-

Driven Churches. These networks then spawned conferences, keynote speakers, and a growing

number of ambassadors that reinforced their ideas across the church landscape. The church-

growth, leadership-driven, programmatic model of the church began to be equated with church

health. Although initially a white, suburban phenomenon, other demographics and communities

saw its success and often employed a simple plug-and-play mentality with its principles rather

church-growth model increasingly left large swaths of people behind. Cracks began forming in

the foundation as people came to Christ but were not discipled or sent on mission. A new

conversation emerged in the late 1990s and early 2000s as the internet gained traction and

postmodern thought took root. The “emerging church” movement tried to reconcile postmodern

ideas with Christianity and, although short-lived, provided momentum in a new direction. The

emerging conversation revolved around the term “missional,” and by the mid-2000s began to

experiment with new expressions of the church. Soon, conferences like Verge and Exponential

gained influence and replaced the “emerging church movement.” Thought leaders printed

resources like The Forgotten Ways, Organic Church, and The Tangible Kingdom and began to

offer alternatives to the dominant leadership-driven, programmatic approach. A new type of

leadership was proposed to bridge the growing disconnect between culture and the church, and

denominations and networks began to emphasize church planting as one way to combat the

decline of established churches and to reach new groups of people.

This new emphasis on missional ministry and church planting was often expressed as a

version of the church-growth operating system, albeit designed to reach new groups of people.

Large churches began experimenting with starting new campuses and planting churches with

full-time ministers and teams. However, the cracks in the church-growth ministry model began

missional renewal and to imagine a new way forward in ministry. One of these organizations was

a ministry called Fresh Expressions that emerged out of the Anglican Church in England and

found a home in the United States, focusing on mobilizing more pioneer leaders for ministry.

Fresh Expressions, while focused on church renewal or “remissioning,” has helped shape much

of the current conversation around pioneering and raising up pioneers for ministry. With roots in

the Anglican Church, a fresh expression is defined as “Any venture that works mainly with non-

churchgoers and aims to become church” (Collins, Fresh Expressions of Church 5).

At the same time, other networks like the Tampa Underground and Kansas City

Underground emerged in the mid to late 2010s to rethink a new church paradigm built around a

decentralized ministry model. This new microchurch approach reacted to the dominant model

lay leaders, the overwhelming majority are volunteers or earn only a partial salary. Pioneers are

often bi-vocational and turn interests, hobbies, and even their vocations into forms of church. In

this way, anyone with apostolic gifts, enough influence, and leadership capacity to gather people

can pioneer something new. Beck writes, “Every minister becomes a church planter of sorts.

Every clergyperson becomes a mini bishop in the larger ecosystem” (52).

The Wesleyan quadrilateral anchored this literature review by organizing the content

around four primary sources of authority (Scripture, tradition, reason, and experience). The first

leadership. Finally, the last section in this chapter explored the experience and characteristics of

pioneers in the United States, sharing a few traits recognized in emerging pioneers.

Research Design Literature

The next step in this project developed a few tools for determining any common

characteristics of effective pioneer leaders based on biblical, theological, historical, and practical

data. A fifteen-question tool was created to answer the three research questions and begin to

identify any common characteristics. These questions are grouped in such a way as to hear from

pioneers, sponsors, and people connected with their ministry. Tim Sensing writes, “For

qualitative research, three angles of vision are considered the saturation point to support the

criteria of trustworthiness” (76).

In addition to the questionnaire, a survey better identified any leadership gifts based on

the APEST typology and any personality characteristics using Myers-Briggs. In interpreting the

questionnaire and survey, the data can be read through a literal, interpretive, and reflexive

reading (Sensing 233)—beginning with the literal reading of the answers without assuming

specific characteristics of pioneers. The starting point organizes the literal words and phrases into

dozens of categories before consolidating them under larger headings. Rather than assuming the

characteristics in the literature review, the various data points spoke for themselves and are

the research questions. The focus groups also provided clarity on any disagreements from the

questionnaire.

Summary of Literature

This review begins by exploring the biblical foundations underscoring the pioneering

spirit of God's mission and work. It asserts that God, by nature, embodies pioneering from

creation to new creation. A vibrant tapestry is woven through the threads of creation, fall,

redemption, and future hope initiated by God and found in the biblical narrative through the

nation of Israel and into the New Testament, where Jesus is described as the pioneer of faith. He

spearheads an unparalleled missionary movement through his Great Commission and the

indwelling power of the Spirit. Apostles like Paul are unique in charting new territory and

equipping others for the mission as the biblical text culminates with the book of Acts, a

compelling vision poised to radiate outward, engulfing the entire world as ordinary believers are

commissioned and sent.

Theologically, the classic doctrine of the Missio Dei asserts that mission is an inherent

attribute of God and shifts the focus from the Church to God's divine mission. This perspective

has transformative implications for the Church, emphasizing that the Church exists by mission

and is an integral part of its identity. Furthermore, the theological review explores the priesthood

Asbury superintended nothing less than one of history's most significant pioneering movements

as they mobilized field preachers, circuit riders, and other everyday missionaries. The biblical,

theological, and historical review provided a rationale for going back to the first century and

perhaps early Methodism to chart a path forward. This leads to the practical considerations that

should be considered for the twenty-first century.

In Wesley’s words, the Wesleyan revival rediscovered the pure apostolic doctrines and

practices of the early church and should be contextualized today. The rationale for more pioneers

is evident from the literature review. The last thirty years has seen a growing number of

unchurched and dechurched individuals, with current strategies no longer working, thus

requiring mobilization of more pioneers for the new frontier.

The following chapter presents the research methodology employed to arrive at a better

understanding of the characteristics of effective pioneer leaders. It reviews the nature and

purpose of the project, the three research questions, and the ministry context of the participants.

The following section also describes the participants, the selection process, the instrumentation

used to address each research question, and the reliability and viability of the project’s design.

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY FOR THE PROJECT

Overview of the Chapter

The review of relevant literature through the lens of Scripture, tradition, reason, and

experience provided a rationale for mobilizing pioneer leaders and a foundation for further

research. The next step is to study the most common characteristics of effective pioneer leaders.

This chapter describes the research methodology used in this project. The first section revisits the

The religious landscape of North America is rapidly changing, with a dramatic increase

in people characterized as having no religious affiliation. The Church no longer has priority in a

culture increasingly described as post-Christian. Pastors and leaders must reorient themselves

around a new ministry model to reach those unfamiliar and uncomfortable with the established

Church. In decades past, many pastors and leaders have prioritized growing worship gatherings

by attracting people to church programs and ministries. In the future, mobilizing disciple-makers

to go and make disciples will become essential. The disciple-making process should begin in the

harvest field rather than the worship center.

However, this research focuses on a specific type of disciple maker, one who is more

apostolic. This project refers to these individuals as pioneer leaders, “everyday missionaries

called to find creative ways to engage and reach a group of people uncomfortable or unfamiliar

with the established church” (Wiest and Love 16). The gathered church is full of pioneer leaders

who must be mobilized for ministry. Recruitment of these men and women exclusively to fill

leadership positions inside the established church would be unfortunate.

The purpose of this research was to study the most common characteristics of effective

pioneer leaders in the largest denominations of the Global Wesleyan Alliance and the most

influential microchurch networks in the United States in order to develop a resource for

identifying and mobilizing pioneer leaders in churches across the country to therefore reach the

leading these projects. Finally, the third question addressed the existing practices of identifying

and mobilizing these pioneer leaders to create a new resource.

RQ #1. How would you evaluate the effectiveness of the pioneer projects?

To qualify for this study, pioneers engaged a group of people with little or no connection

to an established church. This engagement needed to result in a regular gathering of ten or more

people, a process for disciple-making and spiritual formation, and a profession of faith from at

least one new convert. Finally, the overseeing denominational or network leader needed to

describe the pioneer as an effective leader. These five criteria were vital for sharing a baseline

for further conversations on effectiveness.

This study began by recruiting thirty pioneers and then dividing them into six researcher-

designed focus groups of 4-7 pioneers each. The groups are labeled “Effective Pioneer Leaders”

(EPL) and numbered according to their specific group (EPL-1, EPL-2, etc.). To answer this first

research question, a semi-structured interview process provided a conversational style and

offered five questions. The last two questions of the EPL session addressed RQ #1 by asking,

“How do you measure the effectiveness of your project?” and, “What steps do you hope to take

in the future?” In addition to the group interviews, the Questionnaire for pioneer leaders and

Mike Breen and 3DM, consisted of eighty questions and provided an opportunity to understand

each pioneer's spiritual gifts better. The results of this survey provided an objective answer to the

base and phase gifts of each pioneer as listed in Ephesians 4:11- 13 (apostle, prophet, evangelist,

shepherd, teacher). These gifts are traditionally referred to as APEST gifts. The second survey

was a Myers-Briggs personality assessment provided at 16personalities.com to better understand

each pioneer's personality profile.

In addition, a qualitative Questionnaire allowed pioneers to share their qualitative

descriptions of common characteristics. Questions #5- #11 applied to this research question.

Finally, the third question in the EPL group interviews was, “What do you believe are a few of

the most important characteristics of an effective pioneer leader, and why?”

RQ #3. How were the pioneer leaders identified and mobilized?

The final research question provided current methods to identify and mobilize pioneer

leaders. Pioneers answered this question on the Questionnaire in questions #1- #4 and question

#12. In addition, the first question of the EPL group interviews was, “Briefly describe your

ministry, and be sure to include how you were first called to reach this group of people.” The

second question was, “Did anyone encourage or mobilize you in this effort? What were the first

few steps you took to reach this group of people?”

greatly impacted attendance in worship services, small group gatherings, and overall

participation in the church. While the bulk of the research was conducted in 2022 and 2023,

almost two years after the pandemic, a lingering effect may have impacted the overall ministry

dynamics and nature of this research. The research methodology should be read and interpreted

with this reality in mind.

In addition, many pioneer leaders who participated in this research were co-vocational

lay leaders from denominations in the Global Wesleyan Alliance. These denominations share a

congregational church polity, and while many pioneers had autonomy to start something new,

several pioneers interviewed were extension ministries under the authority of an established

church governing board. This dynamic created potential challenges with authority structures,

allocation of finances, communication, and vision. The following research should consider these

tensions, especially as they were exacerbated by many of the issues mentioned earlier. While

many leading microchurch networks did not have this dynamic, the challenges to mobilizing

pioneers remain.

Criteria for Selection

Pioneers who participated in this study met five criteria to measure their effectiveness.

needed to be described by their denominational or network leader as very effective in their

ministry context. These five criteria provided a strong contingent of pioneer leaders for further

analysis and helped narrow the pool of participants.

Selected pioneers came from thirty projects that represented the largest denominations in

the Global Wesleyan Alliance (Nazarene, Church of God Anderson, Wesleyan, and Free

Methodist) and two of the most influential local microchurch networks in the United States

(Tampa Underground, Kansas City Underground). The selection of these denominations came as

a result of their commitment to congregational polity, theological affinity, biblical authority,

historical connection to the Wesleyan holiness movement, and my previous relationship with

each as an ordained pastor in The Wesleyan Church. The two microchurch networks qualified

for the study based on data from Exponential, a church-planting organization in the United States

and a leading influence in the microchurch movement. A description of the participants is found

in the next section.

The selected sample incorporated what Sensing describes as maximum variation

sampling or “selecting people who represent a broad range of perspectives, increasing the

inclusivity of your project” (97). In addition to the five criteria, pioneers represented a broad

range in age, gender, marital status, ethnicity, and background . It is understood that “if divergent

The selection of pioneers was an intentional process focused on maximum variation

sampling. The participants represented twenty-one male pioneers (seventy percent) and nine

female pioneers (thirty percent). Ethnically, ten participants (thirty-three percent) are of non-

white descent in an attempt to align the research with a more significant measure of diversity. In

addition, Millennials are also well represented in this research as they now comprise the largest

generation in the United States at seventy-two million. The study selected fifteen Millennials

(fifty percent).

During the project, relationship building began with the church-planting directors and

leaders in each of the largest denominations in the Global Wesleyan Alliance and the leaders of

the most influential microchurch networks in the United States. These sponsoring leaders

The final question on each Zoom interview allowed the pioneers to immediately navigate

the online platform and complete the survey and questionnaire. By integrating the surveys and

questionnaires into the Zoom call, pioneers responded in a timely manner. The combination of

group interviews, surveys, and questionnaires utilized a mixed methods approach. Denzin and

Lincoln noted that in a mixed methods qualitative project, I might include “A qualitative

component whereby you interview a certain subset of survey respondents based on purposeful

criteria” (44). In this case, combining questionnaires, surveys, and group interviews provided a

The various tools aligned with each of the three research questions. After collecting the

provide initial results of the common vocational giftings of effective pioneer leaders. The second

step compared the questionnaires completed by pioneers with their interview answers. This

provided a more accurate picture of pioneers’ common characteristics, and any conflicting data

was coded accordingly. A more precise picture emerged by taking the answers of the online

questionnaire with the focus groups, and any congruence reinforced those answers.

The next step provided coding and categorization of the questionnaire responses for the

research. Key themes and words provided a color-coded pattern to note consistent perceptions

among the participants. Focusing on categories and trends provided a better filter for interpreting

the focus groups. With the foundation of categories listed, the fourth step was to read through the

transcriptions and notes of the focus groups to note themes that emerged from the conversations

and to compare those themes with the questionnaire, adding to and reinforcing the written

material.

The answers on the focused groups and the answers on the questionnaires provided

comparison and contrast. Q1 and Q2 of the focus groups correlated with Q1-Q4 and Q12 of the

questionnaire. Q3 of the focus groups correlated with Q5-11 of the questionnaire, and Q4 of the

focus groups correlated with Q13-Q15. This allowed the noting of similarities in a more casual

interview with peer accountability and compared it to the confidentiality of a questionnaire. An

agreement among the participants and sponsors as to the common characteristics of effective

pioneer leaders.

CHAPTER 4

Overview of the Chapter

Pioneer leaders are needed now more than ever. The traditional method of creating

worship services and various events to draw seekers into a relationship with Christ is losing

effectiveness. The time is coming when more churches will need to mobilize their pioneer

leaders for ministry. This leads to the primary question of this research project to find the

quantitative and qualitative data collected from surveys, questionnaires, focus groups, and open-

ended questions. Finally, this chapter identifies five significant findings gathered from the data.

The participants in this study represent the largest denominations in the Global Wesleyan

Alliance (Nazarene, Church of God Anderson, Wesleyan, Free Methodist) and the most

influential local microchurch networks in the United States (Tampa Underground, Kansas City

Underground). The denominations selected are based on their commitment to congregational

polity, theological affinity, biblical authority, and historical connection to the Wesleyan holiness

movement. The microchurch networks are selected based on data from Exponential. Church-

planting directors, denominational leaders, and network leaders selected fifty pioneer leaders to

represent this project. These individuals were contacted and thirty of them aligned with the

requirements for this study. A diverse pool of candidates emerged and a limited number of

participants raised the quality of the projects and provided more accurate data for the research.

The selection of pioneers was an intentional process focused on maximum variation

sampling. Twenty-one pioneers were male (seventy percent) and nine were female (thirty

percent). I would have preferred a similar number of males and females in the research but

received only the names of nine females. Ethnically, ten participants (thirty-three percent) were

Figure 4:1. Demographic Makeup of Participants.

RQ #1. How would you evaluate the effectiveness of the pioneer projects?

This first research question measured effectiveness. To qualify for this study, pioneers

engaged a group of people with little or no connection to an established church. This engagement

needed to result in a regular gathering of ten or more people, a disciple-making process, and a

profession of faith from at least one new convert. It is also significant to note that

denominational or network leaders needed to describe the project as effective. This was the most

crucial criterion and shared a baseline for further conversations on effectiveness.

I asked three qualitative questions on the questionnaire below to answer this first research

question. In addition to the questionnaire, I also had semi-structured interviews through focus

groups to add a more conversational nature to these questions and gathered, categorized, and

compiled the answers to the questionnaire and semi-structured interviews.

The first question was, “How do you measure the effectiveness of your project?” One

measurement emerged far above the others. This measure of effectiveness was “disciples making

disciples.” One individual stated, “One of our greatest successes this year is that we are on our

expressed this desire by using phrases such as “train more disciple-makers,” “multiply more

leaders,” “establish a training center,” “develop emerging leaders,” and many other responses.

The answers to this second question reinforced the idea that effective pioneer leaders see their

blueprint for effectiveness as multiplication through training and mobilizing more leaders and

not merely gathering a larger crowd of people to build their projects. The total number and

variety of responses can be seen in Figure 4:3.

Figure 4:3. What Future Steps Do You Hope to Take to Build on This Project?

The final question, “In what areas do you need more coaching and training?” discovered

any places of tension for the projects and whether coaching might push them to even greater

levels of effectiveness. The overwhelming answers to this question were“fundraising” and

“leadership development.” This underscored the tension many of these projects faced with

limited time and resources. Pioneering new works often require significant outside funding, and

developing leaders is time-intensive. While vocational pastors led a few of the pioneer projects ,

Figure 4:4. In What Areas Do You Need More Coaching and Training?

RQ #2. What are the common characteristics of effective pioneer leaders?

This second question measured the characteristics of effective pioneers and was the most

significant section due to its impact on the research. The characteristics under consideration can

be organized into five key areas: 1) spiritual gifts (APEST), 2) personality traits (Myers-Briggs),

3) character traits, 4) spiritual practices, and 5) life experience or testimony. The research began

by looking at spiritual gifts and personality traits.

The first quantitative tool was a vocational survey to better understand each pioneer's

spiritual gifts. While Scripture has many categories and lists of spiritual gifts, this assessment

objectively answered each pioneer’s base (primary gifting) and phase (secondary gifting)

apostle (thirty-three percent), with teacher, prophet, and shepherd accounting for approximately

ten percent of the remaining gifts. Evangelists (thirty-three percent) also led the way in the phase

giftings, with apostles (twenty-six percent) in second place, and then shepherds (sixteen percent),

teachers (sixteen percent), and prophets (seven percent) rounding out the final three.

Figure 4:5. APEST Base and Phase Gifting.

The two greatest combinations of giftedness among pioneers were apostle/evangelist (6)

and evangelist/apostle (5), proving these two gifts most prevalent in effective pioneer leaders.

Apostolic gifting was expected to be the most dominant gift in a group of pioneer leaders.

Instead, the highest mark in both base and phase gifting was evangelist.

The second quantitative assessment was a Myers-Briggs personality assessment, initially

Each participant discovered their Myers-Briggs personality type using an online

assessment of sixty questions at 16personalities.com. The first set of questions determined

whether pioneers preferred to focus on their outer world or inner world. This is categorized as

extraversion (E) or introversion (I). The data showed that of the thirty pioneers, almost seventy-

five percent scored in favor of extraversion (22) to introversion (8). The second set of questions

discovered how people process information and whether they prefer basic, sensory information

or interpret and add meaning to their surroundings. The first preference for immediate sensory

Eighty percent of pioneers scored in favor of feeling (24) over thinking (6). Finally, as people

structure their lives and meaning, some prefer to have plans for the future decided in advance,

and others prefer to stay open to new information and options. This is called judging (J) or

perceiving (P). The score of this final set of types was relatively even, with a fifty-three percent

score for judging (16) and forty-seven percent for perceiving (14).

The results of the Myers-Briggs personality types can be found in the chart below. Three

of the top four types were intuitive feelers (NF), and the top two personality types, ENFP (8) and

ENFJ (6), added extroversion into the mix and accounted for fifty percent of all pioneers.

process and if anything in the pioneer’s testimony or previous experience pushed them in that

direction.

Pioneers answered this question in the Questionnaire #1- #4 and #12 and in two focus

group interview questions that factored into the data. These research questions discerned the

genesis of the pioneer’s calling and the first question asked, “Do you have a calling to reach this

group of people?” While calling might seem critical for pioneering, three individuals expressed

they did not have a specific calling to pioneer. Instead, they felt their work obediently responded

Figure 4:15. Who encouraged you to get started in pioneering?

people in their target audience. The question asked, “What were the first few steps you took to

reach this group of people?” This question probed how pioneers initially took action to begin

their new ministry. While each of these actions are important and likely employed by every

pioneer, the order was important to understand. Most pioneers emphasized building relationships

through meals, and the second highest category was through listening and surveys. Prayer

walking, making disciples, and finding ministry partners rounded out the responses for this

section of questions.

Figure 4:17. What were 3-4 pivotal moments in your spiritual journey?

relationships. This cannot be understated. Finally, effective pioneers prioritize seeking out

Christian community and accountability which allows them to persevere under challenging

circumstances. The notion of the lone individual blazing a new trail is not the emerging picture

of effectiveness.

Effective pioneers have good people skills, are emotionally intelligent, and prioritize

accountability and Christian community. In addition to these characteristics, the following five

statements round out the most important learnings from the study.

1. Pioneers are often evangelistic in giftedness (Figure 4:5).

CHAPTER 5

Overview of the Chapter

The previous chapter described the study's participants and quantitative and qualitative

data collected from surveys, questionnaires, focus groups, and open-ended questions. Then, it

summarized the research with five key findings. These findings paint an emerging picture of an

effective pioneer leader and will serve to identify and mobilize more pioneers for ministry. As

This chapter identifies five significant findings from the research. Then, it expounds on

each with personal observations and how each result connects to the literature review and the

biblical framework of the project. The chapter then addresses a few limitations of the research

study and unexpected observations. The purpose of this research was to develop a resource for

identifying and mobilizing pioneer leaders. The final section of this chapter shares a few

recommendations for creating this type of resource.

Effective Pioneers are often Evangelistic in Giftedness

Pioneers blaze new trails and carve new pathways into the frontier. This is true both for

eighteenth-century American pioneers, who expanded westward to settle new lands, and twenty-

first century ministry leaders, who engage new groups of people with the gospel. Pioneer leaders

are willing to go first. This impulse to extend the gospel is often found in highly apostolic

people. Paul, perhaps the most well-known of the apostles, famously declared his desire to

proclaim the gospel wherever it was unknown. He explained his rationale in Romans 15:13, “So

I would not be building on someone else’s foundation.” This desire to reach new people with the

gospel by building a new foundation is a crucial difference between apostles and evangelists.

While apostles and evangelists both desire to share the gospel with the lost, evangelists are often

creating new faith communities outside the established church. Thus, pioneer leaders would

seem to be more apostolic in giftedness.

During the research phase, which tabulated the initial APEST scores of each pioneer, the

number of evangelistic pioneers surprisingly exceeded those who were apostolic in both base and

phase gifting. The final tabulation had thirty-six percent of all effective pioneers as evangelistic,

while only thirty-three percent as apostolic. Teachers, prophets, and shepherds accounted for

only ten percent of all pioneers. The large number of evangelistic pioneers begs further research,

but there might be a few explanations.

Perhaps those gifted as evangelists recognize the growing challenge of recruiting lost

people to established churches. Effective evangelism is not translating into regular church

attendance, and may be causing evangelists to acknowledge the necessity of pioneering

something new. Launching a new expression of ministry may be the only strategy for reaching

lost people and keeping them connected to the Church. This will naturally result in more

evangelistic leaders picking up the mantle of pioneering to launch new outreach ministries,

microchurches, and other expressions of the gospel. While building a new foundation may not

come easily to this group, it will become necessary as the distrust between the institutional

church and culture continues to grow. Pastors and leaders will need to rethink how they engage

circles from Jerusalem, to Judea and Samaria, and then to the ends of the earth. The centrifugal

nature of the new mission carried out through an apostolic gift, often combined with a strong

evangelistic thrust.

Peter’s first sermon was highly evangelistic, and after baptizing over 3,000 people on the

Day of Pentecost, he established the Church of Jerusalem. Evangelists like Philip left the city to

reach new people with the gospel; after Saul’s persecution in Acts 8, “The apostles stayed in

Jerusalem and the generality of believers took up the evangelistic task” (Stott 146). Apostolic

and evangelistic work often go together in establishing new churches. The apostles are often the

tip of the spear in establishing the church, but evangelists are required for its growth. In

Ephesians 4:11, Paul writes, “So God gave some to be apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors,

and teachers … ”

Paul’s initial strategy for expanding the church and preaching the gospel began with the

established synagogues and Jewish community. He desired to convince the Jewish people of

their need for the gospel to transform the existing religious structure and attract more people.

This strategy was met with continued frustration:

“But when Silas and Timothy arrived from Macedonia, Paul was occupied with the word,

testifying to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ. And when they opposed and reviled him,

innocent. From now on, I will go to the Gentiles” (Acts 18:5-6)

In this passage, Paul's declaration, “From now on I will go to the Gentiles,” clearly marks

a decisive shift in his ministry focus. It also signifies a shift happening today as many gifted

evangelists find it increasingly challenging to integrate new believers into established churches.

Like Paul, many evangelists recognize a need to share the gospel and start new faith

communities outside the established church. The old wineskins simply fail to contain the new

wine. Luke 5:37 states, “And no one puts new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the new wine

will burst the skins, and it will be spilled, and the skins will be destroyed.” In the past, the new

wine of the gospel could not be contained in the old Jewish structure of the synagogue. This is

administered to effective pioneer leaders, nearly fifty percent scored as either ENFPs or ENFJs.

These were the two most popular personality types by far and are described by the official

Myers-Briggs website as “warm, empathetic, enthusiastic, responsive to praise, finding potential

in others, spontaneous, and catalytic.” These words were also used in the research to describe

pioneers.

While these two types contain the letters ENF, NF was the highest two-letter combination

in effective pioneers. Sixty-three percent of effective pioneers scored as intuitive feelers. The

website 16personalities.com describes this type as “diplomats,” with high marks in empathy. The

enacting pragmatic rather than passion-driven plans. Diplomats can be tempted to ignore day-to-

day tasks in favor of their big dreams and ideas (“Personality Types”). Diplomats are visionaries

led by a higher sense of purpose. Eighty-five percent believe it is important to make a lasting

impact on other people, and they are driven to make a difference.

Diplomats feel that they are constantly striving toward ideals and expectations they will

never meet. Seventy-nine percent of “diplomats” say they consciously compare themselves with

others, either “often” or “very often;” when diplomats find freedom from those comparisons,

they often pioneer more effectively. The ENFJ and ENFP personality types often excel in the

following career paths: non-profit coordinators, entrepreneurs, social workers, fitness instructors,

consultants, event planners, entertainers, and recruiters.

exhibit an unwavering passion in their devotion to God. David writes in Psalm 63:1, “O God,

you are my God; earnestly I seek you; my soul thirsts for you.” The Apostle Paul's unrelenting

passion for spreading the gospel is a model for Christians. In Romans 1:16, he states, “I am not

ashamed of the gospel because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who

believes.” Paul's tireless commitment to sharing the message of Christ reflects the transformative

potential of passionate faith.

Effective pioneers have an optimism grounded in faith, hope, and calling. The faith of

Effective Pioneers are often Ministering in their Indigenous Context

reputation.” While there are certain spiritual gifts (evangelistic, apostolic), personality traits

(extrovert, intuitive, feelers), and characteristics (humility, brokenness, optimism, passion) that

The effectiveness of a pioneer often directly correlated to their level of ministry

incarnation. One pioneer reaching workers at Disney World (called cast members) wrote, “I'm a

cast member and work on the inside. Nothing else equips me better than this.” Another pioneer,

explaining her unique equipping to reach her neighbors, wrote, “I’ve been living in my

neighborhood a long time,” and then added a smiley face to her response. Incarnational ministry

is a requirement for effective pioneers, and when pioneers are removed from their indigenous

context to start something in another community, their effectiveness decreases. The calling of a

some unique gifting. This does not minimize the earlier findings from the research on spiritual

gifts, personality, and characteristics, but it does reinforce the importance of pioneers remaining

true to their indigenous context. When calling is divorced from incarnational ministry or pioneers

move out of their areas of deepest influence to pursue a pioneer project elsewhere, their

effectiveness will be limited.

Incarnational ministry is rooted in God becoming flesh in the person of Jesus Christ and

walking with humanity. John 1:14 says, “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among

us.” The Message translation offers the phrase “moved into the neighborhood,” and when

ministers take an incarnational approach, they enter the lives and contexts of the people they are

serving. This identification allows pioneers to better understand the needs, challenges, and

aspirations of those they minister to, fostering genuine connections and trust.

Mark 2:15- 17 reads, “While Jesus was having dinner at Levi’s house, many tax

collectors and sinners were eating with him and his disciples, for there were many who followed

him.” Jesus immersed himself in the context he served and provided a clear example of

incarnational ministry. He lived among the people, ate with them, and was often called “a friend

of sinners” (Matt. 11:19).

ministry.

Ordinary men and women fueled the expansion of the early church in Acts, and nearly

every historical renewal movement has recovered a healthy concept of the priesthood of all

believers (Beck and Acevedo 11). However, pioneer leaders, a subset of that group with strong

evangelistic and apostolic impulses, are called to reach a specific group of people. Most of these

pioneers are lay leaders in local churches, often overlooked because they do not desire to be

licensed or ordained in ministry. They already have a vocation and incarnational influence in

their specific geographic or demographic area. They also have the capacity for significant

ministry.

The ministry implication of this study is that pioneers need to be identified, trained, and

elevated to equal status with those in full-time vocational ministry. Snyder writes, “The clergy-

laity dichotomy is one of the principal obstacles to the church effectively being God's agent of

the Kingdom today” (The Problem of Wineskins 73). Pioneers need to be identified and

mobilized, and in a later section, under Recommendations, a few suggestions are given.

In crafting this research project, I originally planned to discover seventy effective

vocational. In hindsight, I wonder if the research would have looked different depending on an

exclusive focus on either one group or the other. While most of the interviewed pioneers were

co-vocational, this was not a limiting factor. A final limitation of this study had to do with time

constraints. I had initially intended to interview pioneers in a one-on-one Zoom format, but

because of scheduling issues and the time investment required for conducting thirty interviews, I

settled on a group format. I expedited the process by combining four to seven pioneers in each

Zoom interview.

Unexpected Observations

Many findings in this study confirmed my understanding of pioneer leaders. Effective

pioneers have a clear sense of calling, a persevering and determined spirit, prioritize time in

prayer, have a deep love for people, and are passionate and optimistic. These were expected.

However, three unexpected observations emerged from the research, each with profound

implications for how pioneer leaders are identified and mobilized.

The study's first and perhaps most unexpected observation was the numerous pioneers

gifted as evangelists. I had assumed a much higher percentage of participants would have

identified as apostles, but this was not the case. I have detailed possible reasons and ministry

implications in my previous section. A second unexpected observation was the revelation that

impacted the effectiveness of this project?” the second highest set of answers fell under the

heading of Christian community. Effective pioneers are intentional about building community

and accountability into their rhythms. This point seems to contradict the assumption that pioneers

are lone rangers. Instead, the most effective pioneers surround themselves with good people and

lean into corporate worship, fasting, accountability, and testimony. The most effective pioneers

understand that they can not do it alone and need others to flourish.

Recommendations

The results of this study ought to be distilled to create a rubric for 1) identifying pioneer

leaders in local churches and 2) training them to reach new groups of people with the gospel. The

first step is to identify pioneers possessing the characteristics that have emerged from this study.

Identifying Pioneers

The composite picture of an effective pioneer is a person with a burden for a specific

group of people, often a demographic or geographic group in proximity to them. The most

effective pioneers are incarnational in their approach and best equipped to reach those they

already know. They are evangelistic or apostolic and desire to see lost people come to Jesus.

These individuals might be neighbors, friends, co-workers, or associates, but they have a calling

that must be clarified and acted upon in obedience.

often passionate about what they believe. This optimism and passion allow effective pioneers to

persevere when others do not. This appears to be the emerging picture of an effective pioneer,

and a resource should be created to help identify pioneers and provide pastors and leaders with a

clear understanding of who they are and how they might be mobilized. Once identified, these

pioneers will also need to be trained in principles of ministry effectiveness.

Training Pioneers

The results of this study have provided new areas of training to explore for pioneer

leaders. When asked in Figure 4:4, “What areas do you need more coaching and training?” most

pioneers acknowledged their struggles with fundraising, a challenge that will only increase over

time. Figure 4:2 also noted that disciples making disciples was listed as a critical measure of

effectiveness and an area that should be prioritized in training. Pioneers also indicated in Figure

4:3 the need for multiplying their influence and training more leaders. It should be distinguished

that the most effective pioneer leaders also have solid people skills and high marks in emotional

intelligence. This should also be prioritized as part of ongoing training.

I recommended that training be developed that focuses on the inner life, emotional health,

and intelligence of the pioneer, the skills necessary for building relationships, making disciples,

training new leaders, and developing new strategies for reaching new people. A rubric is needed

Coleman and I met twenty years earlier as a graduate student at Wheaton College. He was a

visiting professor then, and I always admired his passion and enthusiasm for disciple-making and

raising up leaders.

Dr. Coleman arrived at our class at Asbury in a wheelchair. It was a bittersweet visit. He

was celebrating his 90th birthday but also lamenting that his wife had recently passed away. His

fervor remained. With tears in his eyes, he gave a passionate plea to the class to spread the

gospel, make disciples, and plant new churches. That night, I strolled through the campus

cemetery across from where I was staying, only to find his wife’s grave. While reflecting on the

day's events, God confirmed in my heart it was time to step out in faith and give myself to

mobilizing more disciple-makers and pioneer leaders.

When I arrived home, I shared the news with my wife, and we prayed together about

launching a new non-profit ministry to accomplish this vision. I resigned from my local church

with eager anticipation and began to make plans for this new ministry. Unexpectedly, our

youngest daughter, Grace, was diagnosed with leukemia one week later. We spent the next

month in a hospital as our daughter battled cancer and a deadly sepsis diagnosis that almost took

her life. God was faithful, and she made it through those initial weeks of treatment. She lost her

hair in late December, but by March 2020, she was recovering well, and our new ministry was

Navigating COVID-19, the launch of a new ministry, and my daughter’s battle with cancer left

me little capacity, and this research project was put on hold through the end of 2021. Our family

needed time and space to recalibrate our lives.

By 2022, the fog had lifted. Masks had disappeared, churches had reopened, our ministry

was gaining traction, and our beautiful little girl was three months removed from being declared

cancer-free. I re-engaged this research project, which has finally neared completion by God's

grace. However, as I write this final postscript, I cannot shake the fact that our world has

substantially changed since my first on-campus intensive in 2019. The events of the last five

years have served to accelerate the cultural shifts already underway. The ministry models and

maps of a former era are less effective today, and the challenge of raising up workers remains.

Luke 10:2 states, “The harvest is ripe, but the workers are few.” More pioneer leaders are needed

to step out in faith, innovate, and reach those who are unfamiliar and uncomfortable with the

established church. This could be an incredible opportunity.

The disciples had their heads down while traveling through Samaria, and Jesus

admonished them in John 4:35, “Open your eyes, the fields are white unto harvest.” No doubt a

few of the disciples were puzzled by this statement. They needed fresh eyes to see the

opportunities around them. The same is true today. The fields are white unto harvest, but the