The Sad Decline Of Acts 29

‘The Reformed Resurgence’, ‘New Calvinism’ or ‘Young, Restless, and Reformed’ - whatever you want to call it - was a significant movement within evangelicalism from the early 2000s to the mid-2010s. It championed a soteriology  (matters related to salvation) of ‘grace through faith in Jesus Christ’. Many prominent American evangelicals were connected with the movement: John MacArthur, R.C. Sproul, Albert Mohler, D.A. Carson, Tim Keller, Mark Dever, John Piper, and Ligon Duncan. This Reformed Resurgence, though comprising only 5-10% of American evangelicalism, had a massive impact on starting new institutions, publications, churches, and ministries, particularly in the USA. Organizations such as The Gospel Coalition, Together for the Gospel, and Redeemer City to City all started out of this Reformed Resurgence. It was even featured in Time Magazine in 2009 as one of the major ideas changing the world. 

Further to its theology of salvation, another major emphasis of this movement was cultural engagement. As Aaron Renn has pointed out, this strategy was typical during the ‘neutral world’ era, from the mid-1990s until the mid-2010s, in which being a believer was considered neither a positive moral good by the outside world as it had been prior to that, nor the negative moral stain it is viewed as by many today. The cultural engagement strategy  differentiated itself from the cultural warriors of the religious right by seeking to engage urban contexts with the gospel. As such, for those involved in the Reformed Resurgence, “cultural warrior” and “fundamentalist” were terms of derision. Instead, those who took part in such a strategy sought rather to ingratiate themselves with the left-leaning cultures of such urban areas, with a hope that doing so would lead to evangelistic opportunities. 

Acts 29, a church-planting network, was one of the notable ministries that emerged from the Reformed Resurgence. It was founded in 2000 by a partnership between Pastor David Nicholas of Spanish River Church (PCA) and Pastor Mark Driscoll. The mission of church planting was not just a strategy; it was a passionate commitment to reach unbelievers. Starting new churches was not primarily done in service of the faithful worship of God in particular times and places but instead viewed as an evangelistic strategy. And it  was not just one evangelistic strategy; it was commonly promoted as the pinnacle of evangelistic strategies. Acts 29 was a testament to the fervor and dedication of the Reformed Resurgence in this regard. 

Acts 29 was born out of the waters of the emergent church controversy where thinkers such as Tony Jones and Doug Pagitt were reimagining doctrine and practice to reach the lost. While Acts 29 was not emergent, and decidedly so, it was “missional,” a word coined by missiologists. While not seeker-sensitive in the traditional sense, the missional church movement often borrowed many concepts from the seeker-sensitive movement regarding ecclesiology, which often became subsumed by mission. The most important thing about the church in both the seeker-sensitive and missional movements was reaching the lost, which was often accompanied by the default assumption that ‘the lost’ were those to the left of center on social and political issues.. 

For young leaders in the Reformed Resurgence eager to reach the lost, Acts 29 was the place to go. Figures such as Matt Chandler, Mark Driscoll, and Darrin Patrick headlined the network, speaking at conferences and writing books. Many young men were drawn to this group of brothers who seemed to have a great deal of camaraderie, were serious about doctrine, and were not “fundamentalists.” A particular draw for many church planters was the brotherhood, which sometimes resembled a frat party more than a network of churches, and at high point, Acts 29 listed nearly 800 churches worldwide. As then-president, Mark Driscoll emphasized the network's numeral growth and, increasingly, baptisms, which made sense given that the primary focus of these churches was evangelism. 

After Driscoll’s ousting in 2014 under controversial circumstances, the network pivoted. Seeking to distance themselves from his rough around-the-edges approach, and seeking to become more relationally sensitive, the network emphasized new “distinctives” such as pursuing humility and holiness, being a racially diverse and global community, and relational collaboration. The hope was that with the exit of Driscoll and Mars Hill Church, which at one point was funding most of the budget for the network, they could salvage the good that remained and continue moving forward in the mission. 

Unfortunately, that didn’t happen.  The present state of Acts 29 is far from its former glory. Employees dispute the following claim, but there have been estimates going around that the network has lost 57% of its churches. Regardless of how accurate that exact statistic is, the decline has been marked, and the loss of energy from what was one of the preeminent church-planting networks in the Western world has been palpable. The question that arises is: what led to such a downturn?

As someone who was a church planter and pastor within the network, there are several things that come to mind. 

First, they failed to account for the dangers of accommodating doctrinal fidelity to evangelistic fervor. When truth becomes subservient to reaching the lost, compromise always follows. Rather than taking stock of this liability and maturing, the Acts 29 Network remains steadfastly committed to the same tired tropes of the mid-2000s regarding cultural engagement. They desire to be known for their winsome posture, but only so far as that winsomeness harmonizes with the latest degeneracy of the left. As such, they have engaged in a new type of culture war: warring against the cultural warriors. 

Second, Acts 29 does not provide a process for handling dissent and disagreement. There is no real accountability because Acts 29 is a network of churches with a self-perpetuating board. The churches who partner with Acts 29 as an entity have no recourse for any wrongs. The only process for removing a church is the power that resides within the board to do so. Rather than having robust conversations amongst competing perspectives on pressing cultural matters, they have rather gone hard-left before shrinking back from further discussion viewing the new woke perspective as a neutral stance. 

That brings me to my third point: Acts 29 compromised on wokeness. Eric Mason, author of “Woke Church” and former Acts 29 board member, seemed to view it as his mission to bring wokeness into Acts 29. Unfortunately, because of its commitment to cultural engagement, which means de facto neutrality on pressing cultural and political matters, Acts 29 had no category for keeping wokeness out of the network. To this day, it fails to recognize that faddish worldly ideologies have hollowed out its supposed doctrinal fidelity. Their suggested reading lists still contain works by communists and theological liberals. 

Fourth, they reduced their network to brand management. Because of their hardline commitment to the cultural engagement strategy, the network was reduced to reputation among cultural elites rather than truth. At the Acts 29 North American Conference 2022, the network's president, Brian Howard, emphasized this in his keynote speech. After highlighting the loyalty different fan bases show to their respective sports teams, he donned an Acts 29 branded hat, calling pastors in Acts 29 to display loyalty to the Acts 29 brand. 

When a Christian organization places doctrinal fidelity beneath “saving the lost,” when it has no process for dissent and disagreement, embraces wokeness, and reduces the mission to brand management, the organization will decline. There can be no Christian health such an organization. Time will tell what the future holds for networks like Acts 29, which remain doggedly committed to a ‘neutrality’ in the public square. 

But I do not believe it can be successful. Not only is there no neutral territory that does not fall under the Lordship of Christ, but we live in an age when it is particularly necessary for the church to speak the truth clearly.Christians, churches, and para-church organizations need new tactics for engaging a lost world, and for many, that will require the kind of courage demonstrated by our forefathers in the faith. As John Calvin said, “A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God's truth is attacked and yet would remain silent.” Let us not be found cowards as the truth is attacked in our day.