deep thoughts
As luck would have it, I was racking my brain for a blog topic this morning when an email from my new friend Kevin Brimner popped into my inbox. Kevin is the Spiritual Formation Pastor at Owensboro Christian Church, and we met at this year’s NACC planning meetings in Louisville.
Owensboro is looking to revolutionize its approach to discipleship, and, like many churches, is grappling with how. Kevin wrote:
What about our culture and/or temperaments tend to make us think programs equate to discipleship? And while programs seem to be necessary for movement, how has anyone effectively used mentoring on a large scale with great success (if that’s at all possible on a large scale?)
There are many who would feel great having a spiritual formation process spelled out that we can guide everyone to, which is great and much needed instead of aimlessly trying to hit the target. And a part of me is one of that “many.” But another part is wanting so much more than a program can even begin to touch. I guess I’m looking for more of a sure thing or guarantee; that in 12 months we will be able to point to a clear picture of life-change as a direct result of the programs. Clearly there has to be room for the Spirit to work.
Okay, so that’s where I’m at or not at depending on the glass being half full or empty. Loving the work because it’s tied to a cause.
I’m not a Biblical scholar, but I see his point: neither Jesus nor the early church we try so hard to emulate had step-by-step programs to help people grow into true disciples. It was more relational and organic, to use two of the buzzwords. But those buzzwords, by definition, also mean a less organized and less quantifiable process. We don’t like unorganized and unmeasurable in America, especially in our large corporations or the megachurches modeled after them.
But what should we measure? We all know that many churches, of all sizes, are full of people who attend services but know little about their faith, rarely give money or time to the mission, and still require spiritual milk. So do these areas become the starting point? Have we meaningfully grown from wide to deep if a certain percentage pass a Bible knowledge quiz, begin tithing, join a small group, or find a place to serve? Isn’t it possible to do all those things and still remain spiritually immature? Then how do we evaluate maturity, and what are some basic steps–programs, even–to get people moving that direction?
Let’s tackle this one together. Leave a comment with your thoughts, and I’ll see if Kevin will drop by here and continue the dialogue. I don’t have the answers, but I do know these questions are some of the central ones facing our growing churches.
10 Comments »
Leave a comment
Jennifer Taylor
My Other Sites
Twittering @seejenwrite- seejenwrite: Looking forward to hearing @susanisaacs and @donmilleris tonite. Flexing my fingers in preparation for copious note-taking.
- seejenwrite: Buying tix for trip to Orlando in January!
- seejenwrite: Here are my thoughts about the Twilight craze, from earlier this year: http://ow.ly/E3Vc
- seejenwrite: @FlowerDust See you there!
If relational and organic were the ways of the early church, then why must we complicate things? I know large churches that have the same staff to attendance ratio as my small congregation but they say they cannot personally care for and mentor their congregations. Why not? What in the world are we doing if we are not personally helping people follow Christ? I do not mean to pick on large congregations (they just happen to be the biggest target); small churches have the same problems.
What if all ministers, regardless of their title or area of specialty, constantly made disciples as Jesus did? Of course this would require all ministers to possess enough spiritually maturity to disciple as Jesus did. Is this perhaps part of the problem? (Ouch.) I am a firm believer that if the team is not winning, then you change the coaching situation. If our people are not growing then perhaps we need to look at our leadership and ask some difficult questions.
For me, you’ve caught me at a time when I have just completed a 72 hour experience with other Christian seekers. I think the transformational experience and knowledge of God’s love and His ways (that we experienced together at a Walk to Emmaus) is the first step for individuals to experience the thankfulness and THEN have the energy to pass the Good News on – that, I think, is the energy that runs the engine of the church fellowship. And I disagree (kindly) with Matt about leadership (although they can encourage the flock – but was Moses a failure because the Israelites grumbled for 40 yrs?)…I saw the body being energized this weekend, and not a hierarchy of leaders. If only 10% of church populations are actively involved (a statistic I’ve heard)and are the “worker bees”, then the rest of the body needs to be energized and renewed. But the trick is the timing – Emmaus believes that each person comes when they are ready to address their need. So, would it be that the leadership highlights the need, the “starvation” that is going on and offer these opportunities to the body? Hmmmm…thanks so much for the trail of thoughts!
What if we were to change our emphasis of spiritual formation from diving deeper into our walk with Christ to walking daily?
Relationships meander through seasons. Some of those season cannot be described as deep but they are a significant part of the journey. We mostly accept this and journey with others through all kinds of seasonal relational change.
What if it were the same with our walk with Christ? What if we measured daily instead of deeper?
I’m not proposing that deeper is bad. But I am wondering if we would take the pressure off the experience with Christ becoming more and more deep maybe we would naturally and organically walk daily and sometimes find ourselves deeper.
As long as we are disagreeing (kindly), then I disagree with the leap of logic that infers my statement about leadership, when applied to Moses, concludes that he was a failure. Moses was a great example of the kind of personal and relational discipleship I believe in. One has to look no further than the book of Joshua to see how effective Moses was in his legacy. Before that, the Israelites followed him for forty years of wandering. He must have been an incredible leader. A little grumbling doesn’t negate that.
I hope I am mistaken when my cynical side detects a bit of disdain for the “hierarchy of leaders.” Church leadership is ordained by God. It is a practical way that God dispenses grace to the Church. Let me put my previous statement another way. If 90% of the class is flunking, then the teacher needs to rethink his/her strategy.
another meandering…
What about us enjoys programmed development for spiritual formation and at the same time distains these programs?
Maybe it’s our love/hate relationship with accomplishment. Programmed based growth patterns allow an organization (and sometimes individuals) to measure accomplishments that match the missional goals of the organization. And thus, allows us to feel successful…or not.
One problem may be that we are at the same time “sickened” by the prospect that our relationship with Christ is based on accomplishment (e.g. if we know the answers to the Bible quiz). It seems to me that the best relationships are not based on accomplishment but on developing a sense of connection, belonging, community, hope, and…most of all presence.
What if we began to measure our spiritual formation by presence? Are we present with God today…this moment? What if it’s about living whole? Living with a mixture of life that embraces being alive and enchanted with what we would normally separate in dualistic ways.
What if everything we do…everything we are…forms our spirituality in a relational way with the Christ?
What if we attempted to measure the growth and quality of a friendship, marriage, or other family relationship? How would we do that? If we could answer those questions, then I think we could apply them to our relationship with God. I feel like I have been verbose on this issue already, so I’ll just throw the question out there. Maybe Jennifer or Kevin have some thoughts about it.
I love the discussion, and even the (kind) disagreement. Whether we’re talking about Jesus, Paul, or even Moses, I keep coming back to the “discipleship delegation” inherent in each scenario. Jesus equipped his disciples to go and disciple others; the early church leaders chose seven others to entrust with responsibilities, leading to a time when “the number of disciples in Jerusalem increased rapidly” (Acts 6:7); Moses chose people to help him after his father-in-law pointed out the light.
So I’m not sure it has to be an either/or. Matt, I agree that our leaders have responsibility from God to model discipleship corporately and one on one–and probably could be doing a better job at it. But there’s simply no way they can get to everyone, and in the “priesthood of all believers” we hold so dear, we wouldn’t want them to, would we? That truly would lead to a hierarchy.
On the measurement issue, I feel connected to my friends and family if we’re talking often and about substantial things, if we spend some amount of time together in person, if we are free of conflict (either from having worked through it or not having it in the first place), that kind of thing. So if I’m talking regularly to God about the big and small stuff, spending time with him, and working through conflicts (because of my own sinfulness)–is that the metric?
I think so Jennifer. Other factors I would use to measure a relationship include (but are not limited to): the length of the relationship, the personal knowledge we have of each other, the influence they have on my life, my desire to go to that person when I am in need, and the amount of time I spend with them. I’m sure there are more.
You are right; I would not want to personally disciple the entirety of even my small congregation. There are some that I am incapable of mentoring (because they disciple me), and there are some that others are more qualified to mentor (because of gender, age, spiritual gifts, or life-circumstance issues). Still, I have no problem personally overseeing the spiritual lives of a small and diverse group of people.
When I used the word “ministers” I used it in the broadest sense – not just staff, but including all of the servant-leaders of the church. I believe all church leaders (staff, elders, deacons/ministry-team-leaders, etc.) should be involved in helping people follow Christ.
If those “ministers” are mature and qualified to mentor others – great. If not, then I have a job to do. That is why I always come back to the responsibility of the leadership. If the buck doesn’t stop here, then where does it stop? Look at me, being verbose again. It is just that you hit on a topic that I speak about regularly and recreationally with my best friend.
[...] I recently blogged about the issues involved in encouraging and “measuring” discipleship in the local [...]
Pingback by monvee « Write About Now | January 27, 2009 |
[...] we saved ‘em. How do we disciple [...]
Pingback by happy blogiversery « Write About Now | April 19, 2009 |