From Plant to Parish: Chartering Canyon Missional Community within ECO

Introduction and Thesis

Canyon Missional Community (CMC) is a church plant located in Canyon, TX, approximately twenty minutes south of Amarillo, TX. Roughly three years ago, First Presbyterian Church of Amarillo sent Pastor Kim Talley and a team of elders and deacons to plant a church near the West Texas A&M campus. Thus, CMC is thoroughly concerned with reaching students with the Gospel of Christ, yet it is not a campus ministry. Instead, it is a “Christ-centered, Biblically-based, intergenerational community that makes disciples who make disciples.”¹ In an effort to better accomplish this evangelistic and edifying mission of making and maturing disciples, CMC has partnered with Novo, “a band of creative missionaries sent to multiply movements of the [G]ospel and mobilize the church for that mission around the world.”² They achieve this through three cohorts: Awaken, Equip, and Mobilize.³

I began interning at CMC a few months ago in a developmentally oriented role that combines service and research to fulfill the requirements of my practicum at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (MBTS).⁴ Having experienced the ministries of CMC, Novo, and ECO firsthand, I strive to write from a place of awareness. Yet, I also recognize that I have much to learn, so I write humbly with counsel and caution, hoping that my work will edify CMC and contribute to its mission and vision. Thus, I was tasked by Pastor Talley to investigate the process of establishing a chartered church within ECO, culminating in this ministry proposal. I pray it will be helpful.

As a missional community, CMC’s ministry extends past its walls into the surrounding campus of WTAMU and the city of Canyon. It embodies a parish-like vision, where a particular church cares for and reaches beyond its own congregants to those around it (Luke 10:1-12). While the word ‘parish’ is outdated and impractical in our context, “the notion of parish contributes some helpful fodder for the imagination as we consider the local church. In the first place, it can be an effective mission strategy for leaders of a local church to focus a significant amount of attention on the neighborhood that surrounds the church.”⁵ Because ECO fundamentally agrees with CMC’s mission strategy, and vice versa, CMC should begin the transition from plant to parish. Such an endeavor would bring CMC under proper accountability and structure, while simultaneously enhancing its mission and outreach efforts to make disciples and build them up in the faith (Eph. 4:12-13).

Thesis

This proposal argues that CMC should pursue chartered status with ECO to embody Biblical and Presbyterian ecclesiology through proper polity, accountable leadership, covenantal membership, and parish-like mission.

Ecclesiological Foundations

The Church is Apostolic

Because Christ is “all, and in all” and “the Alpha and Omega,” it is only right to begin with Him (Col. 3:11; Rev. 1:8; 21:6; 22:13). In Matthew 16:18-19, Jesus declares the foundation of His Church: “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”⁶ As Presbyterians, it is understood that this rock is not Peter, but rather Christ, and confession of Him, for the Scripture exclaims, “Behold, I am the one who has laid as a foundation in Zion, a stone, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone, of a sure foundation: ‘Whoever believes will not be in haste’” (Isa. 28:16). Christ is the sure and steady rock on which the Church stands. As Edmund Clowney says, “the church is apostolic because it is built upon the apostolic foundation. Changing the expression, but not the sense, Paul spoke of laying one foundation, Jesus Christ. Other teachers might build on that foundation… but they can lay no other foundation. The Apostle’s task was to build on the foundation laid by Jesus himself.”⁷ Building on this, Michael Horton writes, “The apostles heard Christ directly, and their proclamation and writings were ‘breathed out’ by the Spirit (2 Tim. 3:16), whereas we now, illumined by the Spirit, hear Christ through the word of the prophets and apostles, through the mouth of pastors and teachers.”⁸

Because Christ gave the keys of the kingdom to His Apostles, the Church as a whole is apostolic in nature, and the leaders of local churches possess the authority to bind and loose as a derivative of Christ’s supremacy.⁹ Exercising this supremacy, He not only equipped His Church through administering the keys of the kingdom, but He also empowered them through the Holy Spirit and the official gifts or roles:

And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love. (Eph. 4:11-16)

The Church is Unified, Ordered, Covenantal, and Sacramental

Ephesians 4:11-16 demonstrates three ecclesiological principles: 1. The ordering or structuring of the church, 2. The covenantal nature of the Church, and 3. The edification of the saints. In essence, Christ deliberately gives the keys of the kingdom to His apostles. He provides a structured system in the offices, all in an effort and a promise that the body He represents before God, as the better covenantal administrator, is built up in love. Hebrews 8:6 says, “But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises.” Thus, the Church’s ordered life and authority flow not from mere structure but from a better covenant—one in which Christ represents His Bride before God, sits at His right Hand, reigns through the structure He established, and sends His Spirit to comfort and help (John 14:16; 15:26). Furthermore, as Horton posits, “such graces [the varying gifts given by Christ (Eph. 4:7)] are not qualities… sacramentally infused into ministers so that they might be elevated ontologically above the laity. They are simply gifts for particular offices. As Christ has promised, he has not left us ‘orphans’ (John 14:18 NASB), but promises to be present by the Spirit through the ministry of the Word.”¹⁰ Ultimately, “For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit” (1 Cor. 12:12-13).

This covenant and Spirit-equipped focus roots polity in terms of identity rather than pragmatism. The Church orders itself because that is the system its Head has determined and has given the Spirit to fulfill. It practices the sacraments—the Lord’s Supper and Baptism—because it participates in the life, death, burial, resurrection, and ascension of Christ. For this reason, the Apostle Paul writes, “The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread” (1 Cor. 10:16-17). In reference to these verses, John Calvin argues, “But Papists could not say this, that the cup of blessing is a participation in the blood of Christ, for the supper that they observe is mutilated and torn: if indeed we can give the name of the Supper to that strange ceremony which is a patchwork of various human contrivances, and scarcely retains the slightest vestige of the institution of our Lord.”¹¹ In other words, while the Papists, according to Calvin, rely on human contrivances, Protestants participate through Christ’s identity and institution. Furthermore, the breaking of a singular piece of bread demonstrates participation in Christ alone as a single, unified Body.¹²

Covenant faithfulness and unity are manifested in the sacraments, and out of them flow life, even overflowing outward in mission for the salvation of souls (Acts 2:42-43). Truly, the Apostles’ teaching, rooted in Christ, and the breaking of bread, participatory in Christ, caused the early church to grow rapidly (Acts 2:47). Those early Christians could not help but be awestruck by the demonstration of Christ’s Gospel through Word and sacrament. Because these things—the preaching of the Word and the administration of the sacraments for the edification of the saints—are essential elements of the Christian life, identity in Christ, and mission, they must be administered faithfully under ordered, accountable leadership (1 Cor. 11:27-29; 1 Tim. 4:16; 2 Tim. 2:15; Jam. 3:1). This accountability and leadership, established both as an imperative and a blessing in Scripture, is best embodied in Presbyterian polity.

Reformed Polity and Accountability

While Ephesians 4:11-16 briefly outlines the ordering of the church in terms of “apostles, prophets, evangelists, and shepherd/teachers,” Scripture expounds much more fully on the subject of polity. The offices of the church today—elder, deacon, and member—have inherited the functions and gifts of the offices of the early, apostolic church, so that the church today is structured by these three offices.¹³ The foundational offices (APEST), in Scripture, help establish and equip the ongoing special and general offices of ministry (Eph. 2:20; 4:11-13). From the foundational offices flow the special offices (1 Tim. 3; Tit. 1) and the general office (1 Pet. 2:9), ensuring that the church remains grounded on the apostolic foundation of Christ—ordered, edified, and equipped for ongoing ministry until Christ returns.

Because the special and general offices of ministry are established by the foundation offices, it is proper that the Church’s leadership today reflects the character and integrity of the apostolic church. Presbyterian polity faithfully preserves this order and accountability, embodying the biblical system of oversight in the New Testament (Acts 6:1-7; Acts 14:23; 15:1-6; 20:17-28; Tit. 1:5). In ECO’s Polity, the Synod writes,

It is incumbent upon all members of the body of Christ to participate in the work of building one another up in Christ and be deployed for His work in the world. To that end, excellent leadership is critical in the Church today, and that is not limited to ordained leaders. God calls some individuals to exercise specific formal leadership, which is modeled after the mind of Christ. The Church should strive to develop strong leaders in every area of life and ministry who lead in the way of Jesus.¹⁴

Furthermore, this accountability and system of governance is manifested in graded councils: the Session, Presbytery, and Synod. The Westminster Confession of Faith argues,

The Lord Jesus, as king and head of his church, has appointed a government within it in the hand of church officers, distinct from the civil magistrate.

For the better government and further edification of the church, there ought to be such assemblies as are commonly called synods or councils: and it belongs to the overseers and other rulers of the particular churches, by virtue of their office, and the power which Christ has given them for edification, and not for destruction, to appoint such assemblies; and to convene together in them, as often as they shall judge it expedient for the good of the church.¹⁵

These assemblies serve various purposes, safeguarding churches and groups of churches from theological error and enhancing their ministry capabilities.¹⁶

In summary, Presbyterian polity exists for order, accountability, and mission, enabling congregations to fulfill their callings, being built on the apostolic foundation of Christ. Having established these ecclesiological principles, this proposal turns to their application in the context of CMC.

Proposal

To preserve the Canyon Missional Community as unified, holy, catholic, and apostolic, as manifested in the right preaching of the Word, the administration of the sacraments, and proper church discipline in a covenantal community, chartering within ECO is a necessary step in fulfilling our calling, mission, and vision. Yet, it is not essential in this sense that it is required, but in the sense that chartering is a logical conclusion given the ecclesiological foundations outlined above. ECO’s Director of Church Planting, Luke Parker, agrees with this sentiment: “ECO doesn’t require church plants to become chartered churches. However, no organization remains a ‘start-up’ forever.”¹⁷ While chartering is not an official requirement in the church plant process, such an establishment would bring CMC under more profound convictions and accountability, allow it to cast votes in the presbytery, and enhance its mission and outreach endeavors.

The following sections will outline the thresholds that such an endeavor must meet, the structure and processes it must embody, and provide practical steps for achieving official chartering status within ECO.

Chartering Thresholds

Parker provides three main thresholds for chartered status: “self-governing, self-sustaining financially, [and] self-propagating in terms of the great commission.”¹⁸ CMC has mostly achieved these thresholds, or is making efficient progress towards them. First, CMC has an established board that governs the congregation. While this board does not fully fulfill the requirements of self-governance, it is a step in the right direction. Second, while CMC initially depended on financial assistance from First Presbyterian Church, it achieved self-sustenance in July of 2025. Third, embracing Novo’s mission strategies, CMC is self-propagating in the Great Commission. They depend on no one else for evangelistic opportunities, having equipped their congregation to preach the Good News and make disciples in the area of Canyon, TX, and beyond.

As demonstrated above, the only threshold that is yet to be fully met is that of self-governance. Thus, the congregation must gather to elect elders, formalizing the leadership structure of the congregation in accordance with ECO’s requirements and as prescribed by Scripture. Here are the stipulations and requirements:

Every congregation is governed by its session. The session consists of the elders duly elected by and from the covenant partners of the congregation, along with the congregation’s installed pastors, associate pastors and in accordance with the congregation’s own rule assistant pastors who have been elected by the congregation. Also, by its own rule, the congregation shall determine the number of elders, their length of service, and the ordering of the session. The minimum number shall be three active elders plus the moderator.¹⁹

While not yet an official session, as the board has yet to be commissioned by the Presbytery, this establishment will allow CMC to commune with the Ministry Partnership Team (MPT) of the Texas Presbytery, who will oversee the chartering process under the rule of the ECO Constitution, the MPT Manual, and the Synod Planting Manual.²⁰ The latter’s section on Chartering, reiterating Parker, provides more thresholds: “1. Have a pattern of relatively stable attendance over time; 2. Have clear lines of accountability for staff and finances; 3. Be developing a covenant partner process; 4. Be nearly sustainable in terms of income and expenses; and 5. Have clear ‘elder’ processes in place.”²¹ Thus, in addition, CMC must at least begin establishing a covenant partner process. Once all these thresholds have been met, or at the very least started to be worked toward, they can initiate the process of chartering.

Step-By-Step Guide

The first step in the chartering process is to contact the national office to discuss the next steps. This has already been done, as evidenced by the interview with Luke Parker. The Synod Planting Manual then gives an overview of the process in three main phases: Request, Review, and Rejoice. In the request phase, the plant contacts the Presbytery and schedules a meeting with the MPT. The MPT will then facilitate a checklist of items to send to the plant. The MPT checklist may:

• Request an additional point of contact if they feel the congregation’s voice is too dependent upon one individual.
• Request a 2-3 year financial record.
• Ask attendance questions of the planter.
• Request a description of the covenant partner process.
• Request a description of the elder training process.
• Have a conversation with the board of the plant (nascent elders).
• Ask questions about baptisms and evangelism.
• Ask questions about leadership development and sending capacity.²²

The MPT will then assess and review all the information provided by the plant, evaluating the contents, the visit with the plant, and the overall readiness of the plant to charter. Once the review is completed, the MPT will then either congratulate the plant or encourage them to take further steps and implement the necessary changes if the review’s contents are unsatisfactory.

Finally, once the verdict is received, and “a church plant has been approved for chartering, it marks a significant and joyful milestone—a testament to God’s faithfulness, the sacrifice and labor of His people, and the advancing of His Kingdom.”²³ It is then customary for the now chartered church to have a celebration service alongside members from the Presbytery. In this celebratory meeting, leadership is honored, Connectionalism is addressed and explained, and an optional collection for future ministry and planting is offered. At this point, the church plant has evolved into a parish and is now fully chartered and commissioned within ECO.

Addressing Concerns

Some may worry that chartering within ECO could have a negative impact on the congregation. For instance, they may be concerned that the structure of Presbyterianism interferes with missional flexibility, or even that Novo influence is suppressed due to different, yet minor, theological differences. This need not be a significant concern, for while CMC desires to do things “decently and orderly” (1 Cor. 14:40) according to ECO’s polity, they also expect to be led by the Spirit in all things, just as Novo has influenced within the plant. As long as the theological differences are not contrary to fundamental elements of the Christian Faith, they are acceptable to the strategy and philosophy of CMC. With the Gospel central, these two systems, one flexible and one structured, are not antithetical to each other but rather complementary to one another. As previously discussed, structure invigorates mission. Likewise, the Spirit demands order. Our desire, therefore, is not to replace flexibility with structure, but to marry the two in such a way that our Gospel declaration is enhanced, for the Spirit both illumines and ordains structure. Truly, the church worships in “spirit and truth,” so charismatic tendencies and structured church government can truly go hand in hand (John 4:24). In fact, they must go hand in hand to create a comprehensive, ordered, and Spirit-empowered philosophy of ministry that will successfully promulgate the Gospel, make disciples, and build them up to maturity in Christ.

Conclusion

While there may be honest and legitimate concerns with the possibility of CMC chartering within ECO, or even CMC’s partnership with Novo, I hope that this proposal serves as an introduction to a time of reflection and vision-casting for the congregation. My goal has been to raise awareness of this possibility, encouraging all of you, and learning from the experience myself. I hope this proposal prompts us to discuss our future. For this reason, I have included a link to a Google Drive with various articles and resources from CMC, ECO, and Novo in the bibliography as a tool for future study, conversation, and corporate reflection.

In conclusion, CMC should consider chartering within ECO because the Church is called to Biblical polity, ordered leadership, covenantal identity and membership, and parish-like mission. While still maintaining our partnership with Novo and the strategies we have learned from them, we can partner with ECO in a deeper, more connected way that will invigorate our ministry for many years to come. Thus, let us go from plant to parish.

Bibliography

Calvin, John. Calvin’s Commentaries. Translated by William Pringle and others. 22 vols. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2003-2005.

Clowney, Edmund P. The Church. Contours of Christian Theology. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1995.

ECO Synod, ed. Constitution: Essential Tenets, Polity, Rules of Discipline. Irving, TX: ECO, 2024.

———. ECO Confessional Standards. Irving, TX: ECO, 2020.

———. The Church: Theology and Resources. Irving, TX: ECO, 2022.

Horton, Michael S. People and Place: A Covenant Ecclesiology. Covenant Theology 4. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2008. Logos Bible Software.

Lancour, Logan, ed. CMC Chartering and Mission Resources. A Google Drive folder containing public and internal CMC, ECO, and Novo resources. Accessed October 8, 2025. [Internal link withheld from the public site — see the Fix-List.]

Parker, Luke, ECO Director of Church Planting. Interview by author, email thread, September 26, 2025.

---

Footnotes

1. CMC’s mission statement. ↩

2. Novo is a Latin phrase that means ‘to make new.’ Novo Mission Inc., “Make New,” Novo, accessed October 9, 2025, https://novo.org/ ↩

3. Novo is far more charismatic than ECO is. This is not a negative, but it does present some complications that will be explored in subsequent sections of this proposal. See, Novo Mission Inc., “Mission,” Novo, accessed October 9, 2025, https://novo.org/ ↩

4. MBTS’s mission statement is to be ‘for the church.’ Thus, this is a fitting assignment, and I could not be more joyful and eager to write about it. See, Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, “Why Midwestern Seminary?,” accessed October 9, 2025, https://www.mbts.edu/why/. ↩

5. Eric O. Jacobsen, “Churches, Building, and Neighborhoods,” in The Church, ed. ECO Synod, A Covenant Order of Evangelical Presbyterians (Irving, TX: ECO, 2022), 70. ↩

6. Unless otherwise specified, all Scripture references in this proposal are to the English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2016). ↩

7. Edmund P. Clowney, The Church, Contours of Christian Theology (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1995), 74. ↩

8. Michael S. Horton, People and Place: A Covenant Ecclesiology, First edition (Louisville, KY; London: Westminster John Knox Press, 2008), 233. ↩

9. The other marks of the Church—unity, holiness, and catholicity—are rooted in apostolicity, for apostolicity is simply the teaching, prayers, and demands of Christ passed down through generations. See, Logan Lancour, “What Constitutes a True Church?,” a paper submitted for MN 5450 Applied Ecclesiology Practicum, Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, August 2025. ↩

10. Horton, 235. ↩

11. John Calvin, Commentary on the Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians, in Calvin’s Commentaries, vol. 20, I & II Corinthians, trans. Rev. John Pringle (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2005), 335-336. ↩

12. Ibid., 336. ↩

13. “The offices of the church [are] fivefold (APEST: Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Shepherds, and teachers; cf. Eph. 4:11), yet gifts of apostleship and prophecy have ceased [in accordance with the way they were originally given], evangelism has been absorbed into the general and special offices of ministry [elder, deacon, and member], and the role of a shepherd-teacher is expressed in the office of elder/overseer.” In Logan Lancour, “Church Offices: Qualifications, Responsibilities, and Authority,” a paper submitted for MN 5450 Applied Ecclesiology Practicum, Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, September 2025. These antithetical views—the continuation vs. the cessation of APEST—will undoubtedly provoke some controversy between the more conservative ECO and the more charismatic, apostolic Novo. See also, Sam Metcalf, To the Ends of the Earth: What are Movements of the Good News? (Anaheim, CA: Novo, 2019), 19-20. ↩

14. ECO Synod, ed., “Polity,” in Constitution: Essential Tenets, Polity, Rules of Discipline (Irving, TX: ECO, 2024), 18. ↩

15. The Westminster Confession of Faith, “Chapter XXXII: Of Church Censures” and “Chapter XXXIII: Of Synods and Councils,” in ECO Confessional Standards, ed. ECO Synod (Irving, TX: ECO, 2020), 68. ↩

16. For an in depth analysis of these purposes and responsibilities, see, ECO Synod, “Polity,” 16-17. ↩

17. Luke Parker, ECO Director of Church Planting, interview by author, email thread, September 26, 2025. ↩

18. Ibid. ↩

19. ECO Synod, “Polity,” 16. ↩

20. Luke Parker, interview by author. ↩

21. ECO Synod, “Chartering,” in the Synod Planting Manual (Irving, TX: ECO, 2025). ↩

22. Ibid. ↩

23. ECO Synod, “Chartering.” ↩