About me

  • I am a Doctor of Theology (Th.D.) student at Duke Divinity School. My areas of concentration are "The Practice of Leading Christian Communities and Institutions" and "New Testament."

    Biography

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Search

  • Google

The 200 Blogs I Subscribe To

June 26, 2009

Bonhoeffer’s non-religious, concrete, worldly ecclesiology: Making sense of Letters and Papers from Prison in light of the rest of Bonhoeffer’s work

Here is the term paper I wrote for my Theology of Dietrich Bonhoeffer course with Stanley Hauerwas

It is entitled: "Bonhoeffer’s non-religious, concrete, worldly ecclesiology: Making sense of Letters and Papers from Prison in light of the rest of Bonhoeffer’s work"

I thought it was worth posting this after seeing R. O. Flyer's questions in his post The Shadow of Tegel Haunts Me which I try to address in the paper.

Download Bonhoeffer Ecclesiology Paper Word 2003

Download Bonhoeffer Ecclesiology Paper PDF

See also:

June 18, 2009

Learning the Craft of Pastoring: Six Practices for Cultivating Excellence in Pastoral Ministry term paper

I have posted below the paper I wrote for a reading course I did with Ken Carder on the Theology of Pastoral Ministry based on his two courses in which I was his teaching assistant. 

See Ken Carder: Introduction to Christian Ministry books (Fall 2008)

and Ken Carder's course The Local Church in Mission to God's World books (Spring 2009)

I had asked for feedback June 1 on which direction to go: Would welcome your advice on my Theology of Pastoral Ministry paper

I wrote it June 1-17, 2009. 

It is 51 pages and 18,000 words.  With the 2 appendixes and bibliography it is 65 pages and 22,000 words.

This was my 12th and last course to finish for the Th.D. (Doctor of Theology) program at Duke Divinity School.  Yeah!

In some ways, this represents a synthesis of many of the things I have learned thus far in the Th.D. program.  Someday some of this will be a book but I have lots of other things to work on right now: pass my German and Spanish language exams, then do preliminary exams, then dissertation proposal and then dissertation. See My Th.D. program progress update The book will have to wait. 

So on the one hand, I feel like this is good stuff that could help people.  On the other hand, this is a paper I wrote in about two weeks and it could use lots of refining and editing.  Because the topic--what is pastoral ministry about--is so gigantic, I treat all of the issues and theologians in eclectic fashion--sampling a bit here and a bit there.   It is much more responsible scholarship to dig deep into one thinker like I have done in most my previous term papers: The Ecclesiology of John Howard Yoder paper and  The Missional Ecclesiology of Rowan Williams, both of which I posted; and a number of papers I haven't posted: missional ecclesial practices in Apostle Paul, the ecclesiology of Matthew and Paul compared, Dietrich Bonhoeffer's ecclesiology, church and world in Alasdair MacIntyre and Nathan Kerr, ecclesiology of Miroslav Volf, and preaching in Karl Barth.  In this paper, I consciously and unconsciously draw on a lot of that but try to put something forward more constructive. 

As always, I am happy to receive feedback in the comments (or by email).  I will take it into account as my views continue to evolve. There is much I still need to learn. 

Here is the paper:

Download Theology of Pastoral Ministry Paper Word 2003

Download Theology of Pastoral Ministry Paper PDF

I have pasted below the table of contents and introduction.



Duke Divinity School

Learning the Craft of Pastoring:

Six Practices for Cultivating Excellence in Pastoral Ministry

submitted to

Ken Carder in partial fulfillment of

CHURCMIN 399: THEOLOGY OF PASTORAL MINISTRY

by

Andy Rowell

June 17, 2009

Contents

Introduction: Why we need to understand pastoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

   

The six practices that form the craft of pastoring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4

   

1. Becoming a neighbor to the suffering: learning about human suffering from artists, social-scientists and the sufferer . . . . . .

7

   

2. Becoming a master pastor observer: learning about different styles of pastoring from sociology, historical exemplars, fictional and real life exemplars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16

   

3. Becoming a student of the body of Christ: learning about the function of the church leader in the New Testament. . . . . . . . . . . .

23

   

4. Becoming an equipper for holy living: learning about the marks of the church from historical theology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

36

   

5. Becoming a believer in the missionary nature of the church: learning about the church’s purpose through biblical theology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

41

   

6. Becoming a lover of the missionary God: learning about the triune god from prayer, Scripture, and systematic theology. . .

45

   

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

50

   

Appendix A: Bonhoeffer and Barth both moving toward the center from the realist and idealist poles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

52

   

Appendix B: The discipline of “practical theology” is also attempting to do this integrative work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

56

   

Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

59


Introduction: Why we need to understand pastoring

Is pastoral ministry a troubled profession, perhaps even one in crisis? Or is the profession a deeply satisfying calling to which it is worth giving one’s life? Jackson Carroll, who oversaw a national recent survey of pastors, concludes,

Most of America’s pastoral leaders—represented by the sample that we surveyed—are deeply committed to their calling to ordained ministry. If they consider a change, it is more likely that they would pursue their call in another church-related occupation rather than dropping out. They are likewise generally satisfied with most aspect of their work. In short, they echo Eugene Peterson’s comment with which we opened this chapter.[1]

Peterson reflects,

I’ve loved being a pastor, almost every minute of it. It’s a difficult life because it’s a demanding life. But the rewards are enormous—the rewards of being on the front line of seeing the gospel worked out in people’s lives. I remain convinced that if you are called to it, being a pastor is the best life there is. But any life can be the best life if you're called to it.[2]

Pastoring is difficult but for many pastors it is deeply rewarding.

But of course there is more to pastoring than finding job satisfaction. We also want God to be satisfied with what we are doing. Perhaps we are most aware of this while trying to communicate God’s Word to the people of God. Karl Barth felt this keenly as a pastor and as a theologian. At age 28, on September 4, 1914, he wrote to his friend and fellow pastor 26-year-old Eduard Thurneysen,

Here are two sermons from me; they are simply the last two. You will look at them not as though they were finished products but only as experiments. We are really all of us experimenting now, each in his own way and every Sunday in a different way, in order to become to some degree masters of the limitless problem.[3]

If preaching is a limitless problem—trying to convey the God of the universe to a sinful and holy group of human beings in twenty minutes, then the pastoral task as a whole is even more overwhelming. If we just had to deliver one sermon a week, that would be difficult, but pastoral ministry has never been characterized as simply that.

The 24 or 30 course sequence in the Masters of Divinity (M.Div.) degree attempts to cover the necessary ground but students often have difficulty seeing how it all fits together to form a holistic pastoral ministry. “Why do I need to know this?” is not just asked in junior high math classes.

After entering the pastorate, many new pastors are overwhelmed by the tidal wave of demands and discouraged that their own expectations seem so frequently thwarted by bureaucracy, tradition—in short, other people. Their questions are often desperate, “How do I sort through the chaos to find what is most important? How do I know if I am doing a good job?”

Eventually pastors, if they hang in there, settle into a routine. This is of course a relief compared to the chaos of the first year in ministry. But Will Willimon worries that it is often then that settling into a routine turns into complacency and mediocrity.

In a small, rural church, alone, with total responsibility in your shoulders, in the weekly treadmill of sermons and pastoral care, if you are not careful there is too little time to read and reflect, too little time to prepare your first sermons, so you develop bad habits of flying by the seat of your pants, taking short cuts, and borrowing from others what ought to be developed in the workshop of your own soul. Ministry has a way of coming at you, of jerking you around from here to there, so you need to take charge of your time, prioritize your work, and be sure that you don’t neglect the absolute essentials while you are doing the merely important. If you don’t define your ministry on the basis of your theological commitments, the parish has a way of defining your ministry on the basis of their selfish preoccupations and that is why so many clergy are so harried and tired today. Mind your habits.[4]

Wanting to continue to grow in skill and wisdom, pastors are increasingly returning to school in Doctor of Ministry (D.Min.) programs which shore up one aspect of pastoring. But without a broader framework, these programs may simply ossify pastors in their ways. I often hear pastors say, “I’m a preacher, not an administrator.” Their D.Min.degree in preaching reinforces their desire to focus on just one aspect of pastoring. Meanwhile that pastor’s congregation needs a leader willing to learn enough about administration and care for the poor so that they can at least delegate and oversee those areas adequately. Their congregation members complain that even in meetings, “the pastor is in preaching mode” or “using their preacher’s voice.” Meanwhile, the pastor’s preaching is becoming increasingly ineffective as they see it as their primary focus.

Similar negative consequences result when pastors conclude, “I’m a pioneer, not a maintainer” or “I’m an evangelist, not a theologian.” A string of broken congregations often lie in the wake of this “self-aware” pastor who trumpets, “I know what I’m good at and I know what I’m not.” Admitting that I am only one part of the body of Christ is indeed important but this realization should inspire me to appreciate and learn from the other parts of the body. Fascinatingly, Paul does not say, “Once a foot, always a foot.” Rather, he encourages mobility and growth. “Now eagerly desire the greater gifts” (1 Cor 12:31). Yes, “we have different gifts” (Rom 12:6) and we are to exercise them diligently (Rom 12:8), but there are no biblical grounds for specialization in one area and total neglect in the rest.

I argue in this paper that pastoring consists of six areas. The pastor seeking excellence ought to cultivate their abilities in all six areas. Pastors never arrive at excellence. The church is a sign, instrument, foretaste, and herald of the reign of God. We point, we never arrive. We become better signs, instruments, forestastes, and heralds. We grow closer to excellence but pastoring is an art, a craft—consisting of a series of demanding practices. We can never cease learning.

But a comforting thought is that we can do it with others. We can learn with and from others.

And an even more comforting thought is that we do this work with God. The church is God’s idea. The Spirit of God empowers the work. One can never get over the stunning designation—the church is the body of Christ.

Seminarian, take heart. New pastor, press on. Veteran pastor, continue to sharpen up. These are the six practices of our work.


[1] Jackson W. Carroll, God’s Potters: Pastoral Leadership and the Shaping of Congregations (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006), 185.

[2] Carroll, God’s Potters, 159. David Wood, “Eugene Peterson on Pastoral Ministry” ChrCent 119, no. 6 (March 13-20, 2002): 18. Cf. 18-25.

[3] Karl Barth and Eduard Thurneysen, Revolutionary Theology in the Making: Barth-Thurneysen Correspondence, 1914-1925 (trans. James D. Smart; Richmond, Va.: John Knox Press, 1964), 26.

[4] William H. Willimon, “Between Two Worlds” in From Midterms to Ministry: Practical Theologians on Pastoral Beginnings (ed. Allan Hugh Cole; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), 284. Cf. 274-286.

April 10, 2009

Ben Witherington on Frank Viola's Pagan Christianity and Reimagining Church

Below I have listed the links to Ben Witherington’s 14 part series on Frank Viola’s books Pagan Christianity?: Exploring the Roots of Our Church Practices and Reimagining Church: Pursuing the Dream of Organic Christianity.   Witherington, an Asbury Theological Seminary New Testament professor, a United Methodist, and a prolific commentary writer defends a more traditional and sacramental understanding of the church against the charges by Viola that most churches have drifted far from the New Testament understanding of the church.  Viola argues for a more "organic" model of church that meets in homes--similar to "house churches." 

Witherington and Viola (together with Jon Zens who engages in lengthy rebuttals in the comments to Witherington's earlier posts) address a number of interesting issues: paid pastors vs. lay leadership; church buildings vs. homes; solo leadership vs. shared leadership; worship services vs. edifying meetings; hierarchy vs. equality in the Trinity; serious vs. joyful Lord's Supper; preaching vs. participation; God-centered vs. human-centered; reverent vs. informal.  Almost all of the discussion is exchanging quick comments about biblical texts which is refreshing (Eph 4:11, 1 Cor 14:26; Matt 16:18; Heb 10:-24-25).  It is very long but very casual and informal and pointed and blunt not stuffy.  It took place last summer but it is still a fascinating exchange.  The posts get friendlier later as Witherington and Viola get to know one another and Witherington likes Reimagining Church better than Pagan Christianity. 

Usually I see New Testament scholars defending a more flexible early church structure over against the systematic theologians who defend structures that developed later.  Here you have a New Testament scholar and United Methodist arguing from the biblical text for the legitimacy of later development.  If one pictures a large spectrum between low church and high church,  this is really an argument between low church (Quaker, house church, Anabaptist, baptist, free church, Mennonite, charismatic, Pentecostal) on the one end defended by Viola and Zens against high church (Roman Catholic, Episcopal, Methodist, Presbyterian) on the other end defended by Witherington. 

I have sketched some of this low vs. high church spectrum at my post: 60 Theologians on an Ecclesiological Spectrum

I also have a Working bibliography of biblical studies books on ecclesiology 

Witherington occasionally refers to his own books: Conflict and Community in Corinth: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians and Making a Meal of It: Rethinking the Theology of the Lord's Supper.  He also has books on baptism and women in ministry and various Christian traditions and commentaries on almost every book of the New Testament. 

Note as well that Frank Viola has a new book out called From Eternity to Here.


Ben Witherington 14 blog posts on Frank Viola's Pagan Christianity and Reimagining Church


1. Monday, June 30, 2008 PAGAN CHRISTIANTY: by George Barna and Frank Viola

2. Tuesday, July 01, 2008 PAGAN CHRISTIANITY—REVIEW PART TWO

3. Wednesday, July 02, 2008 PAGAN CHRISTIANITY—REVIEW PART THREE

4. Thursday, July 03, 2008 PAGAN CHRISTIANITY—REVIEW PART FOUR

5. Tuesday, July 08, 2008 Pagan Christianity--- Postlude

6. Saturday, July 12, 2008 Howard Snyder's Review of 'Pagan Christianity'

7. Friday, September 05, 2008 Frank Viola's Reimagining Church-- Part One

8. Saturday, September 06, 2008 Frank Viola's Reimagining Church-- Part Two

9. Sunday, September 07, 2008 Frank Viola's Reimagining Church-- Part Three

10. Monday, September 08, 2008 Reimagining Church--Part Four

11. Friday, September 12, 2008 Reimagining Church-- A Frank Response Part One [Frank Viola responds]

12. Friday, September 12, 2008 Reimagining Church-- A Frank Response Part Two [Frank Viola responds]

13. Friday, September 12, 2008 EPILOGUE TO A FRANK DISCUSSION

14. Tuesday, September 16, 2008 A FRANK CODA [Frank Viola responds]

January 09, 2009

What does Hauerwas's course have to do with church leadership?

I am taking Stanley's Hauerwas's course "Happiness, the Life of Virtue, and Happiness" this semester.  If you are curious why I would take a course like this when the name of my blog is "Church Leadership Conversations," I can sketch some of the points of connection that I see already. 

  1. How do Christians converse with outsiders?  It may be helpful to explain the goodness of the Christian life (think Mother Teresa) and then move from there to showing how the Christian faith best explains the virtuous life.  Perhaps pastors are smart to do evangelism by explaining 3 ways to have a better marriage or  three ways to manage your money better.  I think of The Marriage Course which is offered by the Alpha course founders at Holy Trinity Brompton in London, UK or Willow Creek's Good $ense course.
  2. The question Aristotle is asking has to do with how people are formed.  Pastors ask the same thing: how do we make better disciples of Jesus?  I think of USC philosopher and evangelical Dallas Willard's three book series on spiritual formation: Spirit of the Disciplines, Divine Conspiracy and Renovation of the Heart and Willard's partnership with Richard Foster and his Celebration of Discipline book and Renovare movement.  (For more about Willard, see the bottom of this post).  Another way of saying it is this: Aristotle is concerned with polis (city-state) and Christians are concerned with building a strong healthy church.  But this raises, "what role does human effort play in developing spiritual maturity vs. what God does?"  This is the question that Christians ask when trying to use Aristotle's insights: see Hauerwas and Pinches, Herdt, Wells, Aquinas and Augustine below. It is around these questions where "political theology" and "ecclesiology" and "church leadership" and "spiritual formation" and "discipleship" and "preaching" and "Christian education" and "pastoring" intersect. 

This is not surprising but I will say it anyway.  I am convinced that a community of Christians trying to orient their lives by the Scriptures is absolutely central.  Though there is a lot of complex discussion in these books, none of it will reverse that and that is what most of my readers are already dedicating their lives to.  In a way, this philosophy, history, and theology merely help us to ask better questions about how this is done.  


About the course:
We had our first class yesterday.   There are 60 in the course.  Hauerwas lectures for 1 to 1 1/2 hours and then we go to discussion groups ("precepts" in Duke Divinity School jargon) led by teaching assistants ("preceptors") who are Ph.D / Th.D. students not taking the course.  The thirteen Ph.D. and Th.D. students in the course meet with Hauerwas himself.  Of that group, 7 are Th.D. students from Duke Divinity School including me, two political science and one philosophy Ph.D students from Duke Graduate School, one theology Ph.D. from Sweden, one theology Ph.D. student from University of Leuven in the Netherlands, and one theology student from Duke University's Department of Religion.  The required books are below.


Books for Stanley Hauerwas Course: Happiness, the Life of Virtue, and Friendship

This is probably the most talked about book at Duke Divinity School.  We are supposed to read it for the first class.  I already read this for the Th.D. seminar during the Fall of 2007.  If you are confused why this would be an important book to read at seminary, you might be helped by this comment by Hauerwas, "In a way, MacIntyre is engaged in something we might in other contexts call Christian apologetics" (Christians Among the Virtues, 40). 

There are a number of different translations but this one looks the best to me.  The Irwin translation is the one Hauerwas uses and is in the bookstore but it is a 1999 translation and I read better things about the 2002 Sachs translation.  A book like this shares many of the difficulties of translating the New Testament--textual criticism, consistency, word choice, readability vs. "accuracy", etc.

Nicomachean Ethics by Aristotle (Translator: Terence Irwin)

This one only the doctoral students are supposed to read. 

This is the "textbook" for the course.  It is a new book and tries to reflect Christianly on the use of the virtues. 


Wells is the Dean of Duke Chapel and wrote his dissertation on Hauerwas.  Wells is a great preacher. 


This book by blogger Nate Kerr is available at Wipf and Stock at a 40% discount if you enter the coupon code:  “KERR40”.  That puts the book at about $16.80, which is a significantly lower price.
Great theology blogger Ben Myers calls it the best theology book of 2008 though he is biased as Kerr is his friend.  Hauerwas recommended it to me yesterday for my interests in ecclesiology and mission.  Hauerwas's blurb reads,

A rare gift—a critic from whom you learn. Though I do not agree with all of his criticisms of my work, Kerr--drawing imaginatively and creatively on the work of Troeltsch and Barth-- has rightly framed the questions central to my and Yoder’s project. We are in his dept for having done so. In this book, Kerr not only establishes himself as one of the most able readers of my and Yoder’s work, but he is clearly a theologian in his own right. We will have much to learn from him in the future.
Stanley Hauerwas, Gilbert T. Rowe Professor of Theological Ethics, Duke Divinity School, Durham, NC

See also the "Symposium" on the book at the the church and postmodern culture: conversation
blog.

Note:
I have put a number of links to audio teaching by Stanley Hauerwas at my blog post here.

More about Dallas Willard:

Do Stanley Hauerwas and Dallas Willard ever cite one another?  Not that I can find so far.  I have looked through Willard's books except Renovation of the Heart. Here is Dallas Willard's faculty page at USC's School of Philosophy. Hauerwas and Willard are on the same page to a great degree.  It is too bad that there is not more cross-polination.

Dallas Willard Trilogy

See also the book by Jim Spiegel, my former professor and colleague at Taylor University on the virtues.  Spiegel also has a website and blog.

How to Be Good in a World Gone Bad by James S. Spiegel (Paperback - Feb 25, 2005)

December 16, 2008

The research behind my post at Out of Ur: Missional vs. Attractional: Debating the Research

See the post I coauthored with the editors of Leadership Journal at the Out of Ur blog:

Missional vs. Attractional: Debating the Research
What do the numbers say? It depends who you ask.

by Url Scaramanga & Andy Rowell

Summary:

In the comments of a recent post, Scot McKnight, David Fitch, Dan Kimball and Alan Hirsch argued about what the church stats say.  They called for evidence.  So in this post, I lay out some quantitative data that is relevant to the discussion.  (See my Following Dan Kimball's Missional vs. Megachurch conversation to get caught up on the chronology of the discussion).  The evidence I present is not decisive for "either side" but it sheds light on what we know and don't know.  My point is merely that we need to be careful about making broad claims about where the church is growing and declining.  I agree that we need to be reasonably informed about sociology but that our direction comes from theology. 

 

Here are the footnotes that they edited out:

Scott Thumma and Dave Travis, Beyond Megachurch Myths: What We Can Learn from America's Largest Churches (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2007), 124-125.

Stanley Presser and Mark Chaves, "Is Religious Service Attendance Declining?" Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 46 (2007): 417.

Rodney Stark, What Americans Really Believe (Waco: Baylor, 2008), 14.

Scott Thumma and Dave Travis, Beyond Megachurch Myths: What We Can Learn from America's Largest Churches (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2007), 8-9.

Notes about interpreting David Olson's The American Church in Crisis statistics:

As I have noted before, David Olson's research is principally based on statistics from 20 or so denominations.  It tells us something but not necessarily about all churches in the U.S.

The quote in the article from Olson was not suggested by me but by the Leadership Journal editors.  It is from the following piece:

Rebecca Barnes and Lindy Lowry, "The American Church in Crisis", Outreach magazine, May/June 2006.

The claims by Olson are also made in his book:

David T. Olson, The American Church in Crisis: Groundbreaking Research Based on a National Database of over 200,000 Churches (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008).  

Olson tallies together headcounts from denominations and based on that argues that the attendance number is fairly stable but the American population is growing.  First, I do not think his numbers adequately represent independent churches and smaller denominations.  Second, I know of no other researcher who depends on headcounts as Olson does with so little clarification about establishing a comprehensive methodology.  

D. Michael Lindsay, assistant professor of sociology at Rice University, notes in response to Olson's research:

"Counting heads to estimate weekly worship service attendance is far less reliable than estimates based on survey responses . . . For researchers to generalize head counts to the entire adult population, they must be conducted as an exhaustive consensus or a representative sample."

D. Michael Lindsay, "Gallup's Research Remains More Reliable Than Counting Heads," Rev. Magazine (Mar/Apr 2008): 59.

It should be said that I appreciate Olson's research for what it does tell us and I used it in my previous post "Megachurch Misinformation" at Out of Ur.  For example, one can look at the church planting statistics from 10 denominations.  These stats do not tell us about church planting in America comprehensively but give a nice snapshot. 

Additional notes about young adults:

I do not mean in the Out of Ur post to paint a rosy picture of American Christianity.  As Andy Crouch notes in the comments, there is no room for complacency.

Robert Wuthnow points out that frequent church attendance among young adults is down from 31 percent in the 1970s to 25 percent more recently. 

Wuthnow writes,

Specifically, 6 percent of younger adults [age 21-45] in the recent period [1998, 2000, 2002 GSS] claim that they attend religious services more than once a week, compared with 7 percent in the earlier period [1972-1976], and 14 percent in the in the recent period claim they attend every week down from 19 percent previously.  At the other extreme, 20 percent say they never attend, compared with only 14 percent earlier.  How should we think about these changes?  On the one hand, it is important not to exaggerate their significance.  In many ways, younger adults at the start of the twenty-first century are like younger adults in the early 1970s.  If we count as 'regular' attenders, those who participate nearly every week or more often, only a quarter (25 percent) of younger adults can be considered regular attenders now, and fewer than a third (31 percent) were in the early 1970s.  The majority of younger adults either attend religious service rarely, or if they attend more than that, are hardly regular enough to be the core of any congregation.  On the other hand, the fact that regular attenders now characterize only 25 percent of younger adults, whereas this proportion was 31 percent in the 1970s represents a decline that cannot easily be dismissed.

Robert Wuthnow, After the Baby Boomers: How Twenty- and Thirty-Somethings Are Shaping the Future of American Religion (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007), 52-53.

Conclusion:

I love all kinds of churches.  All need to be continually evaluated by good theology. 

As I said in my earlier post Megachurch Misinformation

All of us want "more and better disciples of Jesus" (a phrase I first heard from Brian McLaren). In the Church of England, they are talking about a "mixed economy" of "fresh expressions" of church being a good thing--in other words different churches will reach different people. I am hopeful about both missional and megachurch expressions of church.

Related:

See also my posts:

Weekly U.S.A. Church Attendance: The Sociologists Weigh In

and

Following Dan Kimball's Missional vs. Megachurch conversation

and my posts in the Sociology category

December 06, 2008

60 Theologians on an Ecclesiological Spectrum

What is a church?  Allow me in this post to introduce you to three phrases:

esse notae ecclesiae (essential marks of the church)

bene notae ecclesiae (good marks of the church)

plene notae ecclesiae (full marks of the church)

My thesis is that there are substantive differences along the ecclesiological spectrum regarding the first category--the esse notae ecclesiae (essential marks of the church) but that there is ecumenical potential--that is their possibility for broad consensus--around the second and third categories.

All Christians believe that a church should be "one holy catholic and apostolic" as the Nicene Creed says.  All Christians believe a community needs a few "essential marks of the church" (esse notae ecclesiae) to be "a church."  Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox require structural identification with what they perceive to be "the Church" that traces its identity back to the apostles through apostolic succession.  The Reformers are famous for calling for two marks: "the Gospel is rightly taught and the Sacraments are rightly administered."  Others suggest "a church" is any group that gathers in the name of Jesus:  "For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them" (Matthew 18:20).  

I have made a list below of lots of theologians and I have guessed where they might fall on the ecclesiological spectrum.  The ones at the top would have more formal requirements for what constitutes "a church."  The ones at the bottom would consider a community to be "a church" with relatively few formal requirements. 

All believe that their version of formal requirements and flexibility best conform to the New Testament parameters.  The ones at the bottom of the list with fewer formal requirements might say that their churches are actually "stricter" in some respects.  Thus, I labeled the list "high church" to "low church" not "very strict" to "less strict."

Though these theologians would disagree strongly about what is essential, they would all agree that "a church" should grow closer to what it is supposed to be--developing more bene notae ecclesiae (good marks of the church) and they all aspire to have the plene notae ecclesiae (the full marks of the church).  Perhaps the latter two areas are where we can find the most ecumenical consensus. 

In my papers on the missional ecclesiologies of Anglican and current Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams and the the Mennonite ethicist (1927-1997) John Howard Yoder, I reflect on the central practices in their ecclesiologies.  For Williams, these are esse notae ecclesiae (essential marks).  Yoder's five practices in Body Politics are bene notae ecclesiae (good marks of the church).

The four practices I draw from Williams are these:

(1) moral discernment oriented by martyrdom (drawn mostly from his book Why Study the Past?)

(2) participation in the sacraments

(3) standing under the authority of Scripture

(4) communicating the Good News drawn from a letter. 

For the latter three practices see, Williams's “Archbishop of Canterbury's Advent Letter,” The Anglican Communion Official Website (14 December 2007). 

Williams hoped that the Anglican Communion would rally around these constitutive practices--esse notae

On the other hand, John Howard Yoder describes well the thriving church--bene notae.
(1) Binding and Loosing / reconciling dialogue
(2) Disciples Break Bread Together / Eucharist
(3) Baptism and the New Humanity / Baptism
(4) The Fullness of Christ / Multiplicity of gifts
(5) The Rule of Paul / Open meeting

Yoder does not intend to be comprehensive in his list--he calls these "sample" practices--and therefore, even though they are inspiring, they do not constitute a full ecclesiological foundation (as I argue in my paper).

If you are interested in this topic, you will want to read Miroslav Volf's book After Our Likeness: The Church As the Image of the Trinity. Volf engages Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) and John Zizioulas--both of whom are near the top of the list--over the issue of esse notae.  Volf argues that a community of people is "a church" if they "gather in the name of Jesus" and he adds a few more esse notae.  Thus, he is pretty close to the bottom of the list.  He is arguing that being "at the bottom of the list"--having a free church theology--can be theologically legitimate.

Therefore, as we think about ecclesiological differences with others, I think it is worth reflecting on not only our differences as evident on the spectrum below, but also about the possibility of common purposes in the bene and plene notae.

 

Disclaimer: I have not read books by all of these people and do not know all of their ecclesiologies that well.  I was just trying to sketch out what I was thinking.  I thought my readers could help me fix the list.

I have put a little bit more about notae (marks) below the list.


60 Theologians on an Ecclesiological Spectrum (from high church to low church)

High church: significant formal requirement for what constitutes "a church"

  1. Council of Trent
  2. Thomas Aquinas
  3. Pope Benedict XVI - Roman Catholic
  4. Henri de Lubac - RC
  5. William T. Cavanaugh - author of Torture and Eucharist
  6. Vincent J. Miller - Roman Catholic and author of Consuming Religion
  7. Pope John Paul II - RC
  8. Hans Urs von Balthasar
  9. Hans Küng - RC
  10. John Zizoulas - Eastern Orthodox
  11. Augustine
  12. Martin Luther
  13. John Calvin
  14. John Milbank - Anglo-Catholic
  15. John Wesley
  16. Oliver O'Donovan - Anglican
  17. N.T Wright - Anglican
  18. Dietrich Bonhoeffer - Lutheran
  19. Stanley Hauerwas - United Methodist
  20. Rowan Williams - Anglican
  21. Craig Van Gelder - Lutheran
  22. Patrick Keifert - Lutheran
  23. Søren Kierkegaard - Reformed
  24. Eugene Peterson - PCUSA
  25. Lesslie Newbigin - Reformed
  26. Karl Barth - Reformed
  27. Mark Driscoll - conservative Reformed
  28. Jürgen Moltmann - Reformed
  29. T.F. Torrance - Reformed
  30. Walter Brueggemann - Reformed
  31. Tim Keller - PCA
  32. Darrell Guder - Reformed
  33. John Piper - Reformed Baptist
  34. Reinhold Niebuhr - Congregational
  35. H. Richard Niebuhr - Congregational
  36. David Bosch - Reformed
  37. Wolfhart Pannenberg
  38. Richard Hays - UM
  39. Len Sweet - United Methodist
  40. James Dunn - UM
  41. Miroslav Volf - Episcopal and Pentecostal, author of After Our Likeness
  42. Scot McKnight - Evangelical Covenant
  43. Andrew Jones - Tall Skinny Kiwi
  44. Stan Grenz - Baptist
  45. Rick Warren - SBC
  46. Ed Stetzer - SBC
  47. Dan Kimball
  48. Menno Simons
  49. John Howard Yoder - Mennonite
  50. FF Bruce - Plymouth Brethren
  51. Bill Hybels - evangelical
  52. Andy Stanley - evangelical
  53. Rob Bell - evangelical
  54. David Fitch - author of The Great Giveaway
  55. Tony Jones
  56. Doug Pagitt
  57. Ryan Bolger - author of Emerging Churches
  58. Eddie Gibbs
  59. John Wimber - Vineyard founder
  60. Peter Rollins
  61. Alan Hirsch and Michael Frost - authors of The Shaping of Things to Come.
  62. Frank Viola - author of Reimaging Church
  63. Donald McGavran and Peter C. Wagner - founders of the "Church Growth Movement."
  64. George Barna - author of Revolution
  65. George Fox - Quaker, Society of Friends

Low church: fewer formal marks of what is needed to be called "a church"

The language of notae (marks) which I have used here is used differently by different theologians.  Some believe "a church" has certain beliefs, others believe a church has certain traits, others believe a church has a certain structure, others believe it has certain practices.   

The notae ecclesiae can be traced at least back to the Lutheran Church’s Augsburg Confession (1530) written by Philipp Melanchthon and Martin Luther.

The Church is the congregation of saints, in which the Gospel is rightly taught and the Sacraments are rightly administered. And to the true unity of the Church it is enough to agree concerning the doctrine of the Gospel and the administration of the Sacraments.[1]

A revised version of the Augsburg Confession called the Variata, was later signed by John Calvin in 1540. Calvin’s words in The Institutes of the Christian Religion (1536, 1559) are quite similar to the Lutheran document.

The marks of the church and our application of them to judgment: Hence the form of the Church appears and stands forth conspicuous to our view. Wherever we see the word of God sincerely preached and heard, wherever we see the sacraments administered according to the institution of Christ, there we cannot have any doubt that the Church of God has some existence.[2]

Both name the proper preaching of the word and the proper administration of the sacraments as the crucial characteristics of a church.

John Howard Yoder develops four additional marks suggested by Menno Simons in the 1540’s: (1) holy living, (2) brotherly love, (3) unreserved testimony, and (4) suffering.[3]

 


[1] The Augsburg Confession, article 7 (The Book of Concord). Cited 9 July 2008. Online: http://www.bookofconcord.org/augsburgconfession.html#article7

[2] John Calvin, The Institutes of the Christian Religion (ed. John T. McNeill; trans. Ford Lewis Battles; 2 vols.; LCC; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960), IV, 1, 9. Cited 9 July 2008. Online: http://www.reformed.org/books/institutes/books/book4/bk4ch01.html#nine.htm

[3] John Howard Yoder, “A People in the World,” The Royal Priesthood, 77-89.

Following Dan Kimball's Missional vs. Megachurch conversation

Dan Kimball provoked a response with his post at Christianity Today's Leadership Journal blog.  Here is some of the response in chronological order.  You can put in the comments any posts I have missed but put "reaction" comments on one of the other blogs as I intend this post just to be an index.

December 2, 2008

Dan Kimball's Missional Misgivings

Small, indigenous churches are getting lots of attention, but where's the fruit?

Dan is a pastor and author of Emerging Church and They Like Jesus, But Not the Church

Brother Maynard of Winnipeg, Manitoba responded to Dan's article at:

Missional Misgivings, or Missional Misunderstandings?


December 4, 2008

Megachurch Misinformation

Mega or missional? The stats say both are doing well.

by Andy Rowell

See also at my blog:

The research behind my Out of Ur post: Megachurch Misinformation

David Fitch, a pastor and professor at Northern Seminary, responded to Dan's original article at:

THREE QUESTIONS FOR THE ATTRACTIONAL PRACTICIONERS WHO QUESTION THE FRUIT OF MISSIONAL: A Response to Dan Kimball

Erika Haub, a Fuller Seminary grad and lives in LA, also responded:

“The church that came to me”

Julie Clawson, a Wheaton College grad and coordinator of the Emerging Women blog, also responded

Missional Effectiveness

Dan Kimball responded in the comments of the original article:

Comments 31 and 34

and Dan wrote the same comment and clarification at Brother Maynard and David Fitch's blog.


December 5, 2008

Tim Keller, pastor Church of the Redeemer in NYC with 4017 attendance according to the Hartford megachurch database and author of the #1 bestselling apologetics book at Amazon.com The Reason for God, then also commented at David Fitch's blog. 

Jonny Baker over in London, UK also noted the exchange.

when did christianity become a popularity contest?

a rant from julie clawson on missional effectiveness

The Out of Ur posted a video and noted that its most recent issue issue of Leadership Journal Fall 2008 was all about the missional conversation. 

Defining "Missional"

Michael Frost clarifies and increasingly unclear word.

Scot McKnight, professor at North Park puts in his take at his blog:

Weekly Meanderings

Len Hjalmarson - NextReformation notes the the discussion.

Missional vs Mega.. again

Brother Maynard responded again:

The Missional/Attractional Divide: Dan Kimball Unpolarized


December 6, 2008

I posted 60 Theologians on an Ecclesiological Spectrum


December 8, 2008

David Fitch and Tim Keller posted additional comments at Fitch's blog

Out of Ur posted: Tim Keller Weighs in on Missional Debate

Fitch posted a new post: The Attractional/Missional Debate Won't Stop: Three Take-Aways

Bill Kinnon: Keller on Fitch on Kimball on Missional Growth?

Meanwhile, Len Hjalmarson reviewed ReJesus by Alan Hirsch and Michael Frost.  Hirsch responded in the comments a dialogue commenced. 

Jamie Arpin-Ricci: Interview With Michael Frost about ReJesus: A Wild Messiah for a Missional Church

December 11

Alan Hirsch Responds to Kimball's "Missional Misgivings"

David Fitch, Scot McKnight, Alan Hirsch and Dan Kimball all left comments

December 12

Defining Missional
The word is everywhere, but where did it come from and what does it really mean?
Alan Hirsch | posted 12/12/2008

From the fall issue of Leadership Journal

Brian Russell

and Jonny Baker

note the article.

Andrew Jones adds his comments at:

Missional and Alan Hirsch

Neil Cole series with lots of comments by Dan Kimball

Misguided Misgivings 1: A Response to Dan Kimball’s Editorial comments

Misguided Misgivings 2: The Walmart Effect

Misguided Misgivings 3: Bigger isn’t Better

Misguided Misgivings 4: Do the math

Misguided Misgivings 5: A cost too high

Misguided Misgivings 6: Here is some fruit...

December 16

Out of Ur: Missional vs. Attractional: Debating the Research - a post by Andy Rowell and the editors of Leadership Journal

See also my post:

The research behind my post at Out of Ur: Missional vs. Attractional: Debating the Research

Here I clarify some of the research that gets discussed in the Out of Ur post.  

December 17

Brad Brisco at the Missional Church Network

Lesslie Newbigin and the GOCN


December 04, 2008

The research behind my Out of Ur post: Megachurch Misinformation

See my post today at Leadership Journal's Out of Ur blog:

Megachurch Misinformation: Mega or missional? The stats say both are doing well.

Here are few page numbers in the article that got edited out:

Mark Chaves, "All Creatures Great and Small: Megachurches in Context," Review of Religious Research (2006) 47:329.

Rodney Stark and Roger Finke, Acts of Faith: Explaining the Human Side of Religion (2000), 155. 

David Olson, The American Church in Crisis, (2008),146, 149, 150. 


Update: See my index to follow the whole discussion:

Following Dan Kimball's Missional vs. Megachurch conversation


November 24, 2008

Guder, Hays and Barth on the missionary nature of the local church

"The reason Christians are formed into communities is because of God's work to make a people to serve him as Christ's witnesses.  The congregation is either a missional community--as Newbigin defines it, 'the hermeneutic of the gospel' (The Gospel in a Pluralist Society, 222ff.)--or it is ultimately a caricature of the people of God that it is called to be."
Darrell L. Guder, The Continuing Conversion of the Church (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 136.

"If we ask, 'What is God doing in the world in the interval between resurrection and parousia?' the answer must be given, for Paul, primarily in ecclesial terms: God is at work through the Spirit to create communities that prefigure and embody the reconciliation and healing of the world."
Richard B. Hays, "Ecclesiology and Ethics in 1 Corinthians,"  Ex Auditu 10 (1994): 32.  Cf. 31-43.

"As an apostolic Church the Church can never in any respect be an end in itself, but, following the existence of the apostles, it exists only as it exercises the ministry of a herald."
Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics  4/1 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1956), 724.  


Working bibliography of recent church and missiology books:


Working bibliography of classic church and missiology books:

I have closed comments because this post is getting lots of spam for some reason.  Feel free to leave your comment on a nearby post and I will add it to this one.

November 23, 2008

Working bibliography of biblical studies books on ecclesiology

I have prepared a working bibliography of biblical studies books on ecclesiology.  Below I have also reviewed Longenecker's compiliation which is quite good.  Elsewhere, I have reviewed Barrett's book

Update: See also the input from different people on Chris Tilling's post asking for suggestions on this topic

Working bibliography of biblical studies books on ecclesiology


Book review: Community Formation: In the Early Church and in the Church Today edited by Richard Longenecker

Richard N. Longenecker, ed. Community Formation: In the Early Church and in the Church Today (Peabody: Hendrickson, 2002). 

 

5.0 out of 5 stars Outstanding book on biblical and historical backgrounds of church leadership structures, November 22, 2008

By
Andrew D. Rowell (Durham, NC) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)

The subject of this book is church leadership structures. It addresses the question: "What are bishops, elders and deacons?"
There are 11 chapters plus a fantastic introduction to the history of the debate by editor Richard Longenecker. "Most of the chapters in this volume were originally presented at the Bingham Colloquium, held June 26-27, 2000, at McMaster Divinity College, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada" (xvii). I will highlight the chapters I happened to find particularly helpful. I found the first two chapters by Richard Ascough on Greco-Roman associations, and Alan Segal on the Jewish institutions, to be excellent concise descriptions of the context from which the church emerged. Then there are chapters by well known New Testament scholars Craig A. Evans, Richard Longenecker, and I. Howard Marshall on the church in the Gospels, Paul, and the Pastoral Epistles respectively. Frances Young traces the development of the forms of church leadership in the whole New Testament and into the Greek fathers--arguing that probably elders meant "senior citizens" and not a church office. Finally, there is a brilliant essay by theologian John Webster on how church leadership should be considered; an interesting essay by David Hester about the development of Presbyterian polity and whether it is still valuable today; and then finally a summary by Miroslav Volf of his book After Our Likeness. If I were teaching ecclesiology in a seminary, I would require all of these essays. They are concise and well-written by outstanding scholars.
Because of my own interests, I did not delve into the chapters by Peter Richardson, Scott Bartchy, and Alan Hayes.

November 03, 2008

The Ecclesiology of John Howard Yoder paper

I am placing online the major paper I wrote this summer:  The Ecclesiology of John Howard Yoder: Scripture, Five Practices of the Christian Community, and Mission.

It is 96 pages and I don't expect many to read it but it might be helpful for someone. 

Here are my casual blogpost-informal introductory comments; you can read my academic phrasing in the paper. 

I find Yoder's writings on the church to be enormously inspiring.  Some people caricature Yoder as a "bury your head in the sand" "come out from them and be separate" sectarian who supports Christians huddling together as the world goes to hell in a handbasket.  (That's a lot of cliches).  His point of view is much better summarized as: "let's walk our talk"--Why do we expect people to want to become Christians if we don't live as Jesus did?  This seems to me to be basic Christianity.  (Make disciples . . . Matt 28:18-20).  Yoder writes a book called For the Nations in 1997, while Stanley Hauerwas wrote Against the Nations in 1992--note well the difference in emphasis.  Not only is this missionary emphasis explicit in his later writing, Yoder's emphasis on the importance of the church being missional is found in his 1967 essay "A People in the World" in The Royal Priesthood and greatly resembles the paradigmatic missional theologian Lesslie Newbigin's understanding of the church as missional.  (See page 70 of my paper.  By the way, Newbigin drew upon Yoder regularly in his writings and did not caricature Yoder). 

Similarly, in the last 17 years of his life (1980-1997), there is very little emphasis in Yoder's writings on pacifism which is what he is most famous / infamous for.  He deliberately tried in these later years to show that his ecclesiology was much more multifaceted and fruitful than this emphasis.  The idea that Yoder = pacifism is another caricature that must be debunked.  

Still, I do offer some critiques of Yoder's ecclesiology in my paper.  I argue that the five practices that he presents in Body Politics (as well as in various other places) do not adequately represent the main practices of the early church.  As he admits, they are "sample" practices--not necessarily the most central ones (and I argue they are of particular interest to him as an ethicist interested in moral discourse)--but the casual reader could easily get the idea that these are the main practices that characterize the New Testament church.  (See pages 13-15 of my paper).  I argue for example that the Acts 2:42-47 arguably better represent the early church's life than the five practices Yoder draws out of the New Testament. 

Along these same lines, I also think he does not adequately capture the importance of leaders (specifically the apostles in the New Testament) and teaching.  By his emphasis on the multiplicity of gifts and the open meeting, he gives the impression that we do not need leaders, nor someone to show up at the open meeting adequately prepared to present something that edifies the community.  Though I am a huge fan of interacting with the congregation in preaching, shared leadership, and gift-based ministry, I think Yoder does not adequately address the central importance in the New Testament of someone like the apostle Paul.  There is no place in Yoder's ecclesiology for someone doing the kind of leading and teaching that Paul did and my sense is that this leading and teaching function need to be taken up somehow in all Christian communities.  I am making quite a pedestrian boring point here I think--churches are not wrong in thinking that often there will be a very good Bible teacher in the community who will also exercise leadership in shaping the direction of the community--Yoder does not want to say this because he is trying to emphasize the priesthood of all believers.  Again, you will need to read the whole paper to see my full arguments on these points. 

Therefore, here is my advice for people who are Yoder fans.  If you liked his Body Politics, you need to see how you can incorporate those excellent practices in your church but at the same time, you may need to keep other good practices like the practice of teaching Scripture. 

If you think the church is a boring, bureaucratic sleepy organization where mediocre people dutifully show up to pay their dues, then Yoder is what you need.  For Yoder, the church is the means by which God intends to change the world.  It is a laboratory run by revolutionaries who intend to undermine all that is wrong with the world by the way they love one another.  Amen to that. 

Download The_Ecclesiology_of_John_Howard_Yoder.pdf

Download The_Ecclesiology_of_John_Howard_Yoder.doc

   


See my posts:
Based on Yoder's five practices: Everything I needed to know about the church I learned at Taylor University.
John Howard Yoder on Voting
I recommended Yoder's Body Politics at my post: Best book on ecclesiology I read this year.

See also my major paper: The Missional Ecclesiology of Rowan Williams.

Books mentioned in this post:








October 27, 2008

A wider target: Deconstructing and redeploying the Seeker Sensitive Service planning of The Purpose Driven Church

In 1995, Rick Warren published The Purpose Driven Church.  It was perhaps the most influential book in church circles in the decade.  It was the definitive "how-to" manual of how grow a megachurch.  In it, he presented Donald McGavran's "Church Growth" principles from the 1970's to a new generation.  Younger leaders in their 30's like Leadership Journal managing editor Skye Jethani and myself continue to feel like these ideas need further theological reflection.   In his post in January 2008 entitled Sense & Sensitivity: Why It’s Time to Abandon the Seeker-Sensitive Model, Skye reflects on biblical and monastic hospitality and urges churches to embrace people first rather than focusing on which people our church is targeting.  Although I largely agree with Skye, I want to affirm in the seeker sensitive approach the principle of intentionality.  I think it makes sense to be intentional about how we are communicating in our worship services but I agree with Skye that a narrow target is theologically problematic. 

What we need I believe is a wider target.  The educational and missional and liturgical task demand that we attempt to communicate as clearly as we can with as many people in attendance as possible.  For those not involved in this ideological argument between seeker-senstive vs. not seeker-sensitive, this should be quite obvious.  In plain English, the pastor and worship leaders should attempt to draw in and engage as many people who may attend the church from the surrounding community as possible.  This is the wide target.  This involves speaking clearly, using music that has broad appeal, and using images that are accessible to a large range of people.  This is why the tasks of preaching and leading worship are so difficult.  However, this seemingly obvious insight does have some edge to it, some "bite," because it means that congregational worship and preaching that only appeals to the most entrenched insiders needs to be given greater accessibility.  The pastor can address very complex Christian concepts and stories but they need to use vocabulary that people readily understand (or they need to define those theological words).  Rituals need to explained.  Music needs to be singable or otherwise accessible or it needs to be carefully taught.  What Warren and other seeker-sensitive people get is that the person who visits the church for the first time needs to be given tips and help on making sense of what is going on.  This, as I argue below, however does not mean that churches need to only have one target audience.  They need to be intentional about communicating with the wider target of their surrounding community.   

Here then is my comment on Skye's blog in response to his post

I think this theological probing into hospitality is important work.  I agree with you that the biggest problem with seeker-sensitive approaches is that they seek to capitalize on people's social prejudices by giving them an environment, communication and music that makes them feel comfortable.  This can tend to reinforce social barriers.  If the worship service is designed to appeal to "Saddleback Sam . . . in his late thirties or early forties . . . among the most affluent of Americans" (Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Church, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995, p. 169-170), then one wonders whether people who do not fit this profile will feel that they do not belong. 

As one attempts to speak the language of the people; (I like this terminology because it makes one think of the missionary task or educational task); we must be careful to include the whole surrounding community--a wider target.  Warren and others are wrong I think for championing the targeting of one demographic (Saddleback Sam), but they are right in wanting to clearly communicate the gospel of Jesus to those present in language those people understand.  "Why do we got to all this trouble defining the typical person we're trying to reach?  Because the more you understand someone the easier it is to communicate with him" (Warren, Purpose Driven Church, 171).  Yes, that we can agree with.  Warren contradicts his own emphasis on Saddleback Sam when he notes in passing that his church has not rigidly followed the single-demographic targeting!   He notes, "One of the advantages of being a large church is that you have the resources to go after multiple targets . . . we've been able to add additional ministries and outreach programs to reach young adults, single adults, prisoners, the elderly, parents with ADD children, and Spanish-, Vietnamese-, and Korean-speaking people, as well as many other targets" (Warren, Purpose Driven Church, 159-160).  Warren's conscience, even in 1995 before his awakening to the needs to the world, would not allow him to strictly only target one group's needs.  But he is wrong that only large churches have the luxury of reaching a variety of people.  No, every church needs to intentionally communicate with (and minister to) the broad range of people who live within their community.         

Therefore, I do not think that it is mutually exclusive to "welcome strangers indiscriminately into our tent/monastery/church" and "determine our target audience’s desires in advance."  Preparing for people to come over is precisely what hospitable people do.  The monastery has clean beds and food in the cupboards so that when the stranger shows up, they can be hosted appropriately.  Similarly, it is appropriate for churches to prepare well to communicate with the people who will come through the doors.

Furthermore, negligence by worship leaders and preachers in preparing well to communicate in language that guests understand will not necessarily lead to congregation members stepping up and being more hospitable.  I have seen friendly and distant congregation members at both seeker megachurches and traditional small churches but my sense is that the pastor and worship leaders have a significant role in shaping congregational practice by their own example and practice.       

See also my posts

Strengths of the Purpose Driven Church and Sober Advice For Those Considering the Megachurch

Why pastors should be both goal-setting fanatics and cynics


October 17, 2008

Everything I needed to know about the church I learned at Taylor University.

Last weekend, I missed my ten year reunion at Taylor University.  The following article is published in the Fall 2008 issue of Metanoia, an admissions publication for Taylor.  In the article, I reflect that when I was a student at Taylor I grew familiar with the practices theologian John Howard Yoder argues in Body Politics are key to church health.    

Notes:
Taylor has about 1800 students and was named the #1 Baccalaureate College (Midwest) in this year's US News and World Report Best Colleges.  My wife Amy and I returned to teach Christian Educational Ministries at Taylor for the 2005-2006, and 2006-2007 school years.

I recommended Yoder's Body Politics at my post: Best book on ecclesiology I read this year.

I recently also recommended a book for people interested in ministering to college students: Outstanding book about college students; Book Review: I Once Was Lost by Everts and Schaupp

I also recently reviewed the new book Coffeehouse Theology by Taylor graduate Ed Cyzewski

Having written this a few months ago, my question today is: How do we help adults to experience community if they have never had experiences of community when they were younger?  I reflect on the classroom aspect of this in the post  Education in the Local Church: Taylor, Willimon, Storey, Niebuhr, and Groome  but certainly there is much more to this topic.

I have written a 100 page paper on John Howard Yoder's Missional Ecclesiology.  I will post it sometime.


Full article:

Pastor and theology professor declares: “Everything I needed to know about the church I learned at Taylor.”

By Andy Rowell

July 10, 2008

Sidebar:

The six most important things you need to know about Christian community that you learn at Taylor:

1. It is not good for a person to be alone.

2. Small groups for Bible study and prayer are a good thing.

3. Worship should include hugs, fun, challenge to the mind, and passionate expression.

4. Meals should be eaten with friends and include good conversation.

5. Life in Christian community involves regular conflict resolution.

6. Service is worth doing.

Main article:

I have been doing quite a bit of research and writing on the practices of the church for my Doctor of Theology (Th.D.) coursework at Duke University Divinity School this year. Before coming to Duke, my wife Amy and I were Visiting Instructors of Christian Educational Ministries for two years at Taylor. We are both Taylor graduates (1998). In the process of doing my research, I have really enjoyed the work of Mennonite theologian John Howard Yoder (1927-1997). In his little 80-page book Body Politics: Five Practices of the Christian Community Before the Watching World (1992), Yoder describes five important practices of the early church. He suggests that they have a great impact on the world when they are practiced by the church. I noticed that my formation in many of these practices had come through my experience as a student at Taylor. Meanwhile, I have met various Taylor alumni during our time in Vancouver, British Columbia and now here in North Carolina. I regularly notice in these people a deep love for Christian community.

My hypothesis is that Taylor University alumni have a hunger for Christian community. They have tasted it at Taylor and their stomachs grumble until they find it in their post-Taylor lives. Taylor students get a taste of all five of the practices that John Howard Yoder suggests are critical to the functioning of the Christian community. Because of how they have been formed at Taylor, Taylor alumni tend to be outstanding participants in their churches.

I believe Taylor University instills six principles of Christian community life in its students that prepare them for later service in the local church.

First, Taylor students learn that it is not good for a person to be alone. At Taylor, all freshmen and sophomores live on campus. Most juniors and seniors do too. Usually, if they live off-campus, they do so because they want the opportunity to form a different kind of community. I think of the hospitable community of curry-cooking missionary kids and international students who inhabited the Soup House when I was at Taylor. There are not many living arrangements at Taylor that allow a person to isolate themselves. Typically, students share bathrooms with one another. Sometimes you keep quiet to allow others to get studying done. At other times, the people nearby function as your ever-ready means for a study break. In this enforced immersion into close-living quarters, you learn that life is better when lived in close proximity to other human beings.

When I was a student at Taylor, there was someone at the end of the hall on my floor who watched a lot of television and played a lot of video games by himself. We found out later he was clinically depressed. A number of us sensed that there was something wrong. We would knock on his door, strike up conversations with him, invite him to do go to dinner with us, and include him in our activities. This love, and that is what it was, made a difference in his life. His habits began to change from instinctively flipping on the TV and flopping on the couch to peeking in our rooms to see what we were up to. His life changed. He ended up organizing in 1995 the first Tonight We Ride (motorcycle themed open house) on Second West Wengatz. As a professor, I visited the 2007 version.

Today at Taylor the critique of technology isolation is organized on some floors as a voluntary week-long “technology fast” from video games and TV. The Taylor culture instills the truth that activities with others (taking walks, playing Frisbee, jamming on musical instruments, pick-up basketball, intramurals, taking road trips, and lip-syncing) are better than sitting in front of the TV. You learn that doing something social in a mixed group of women and men (i.e. “pick-a-dates”) is fun regardless of who someone on your floor set you up with.

John Howard Yoder urges churches to recover the value of every person in the congregation, “The Fullness of Christ.” The apostle Paul wrote “The eye cannot say to the hand, ‘I don't need you!’ And the head cannot say to the feet, ‘I don't need you!’ . . . God has put the body together” (1 Corinthians 12:21, 24). Taylor alumni get the fact that Christian community is about investing in people. Taylor alumni, I suggest, (with no empirical evidence to support it), are more likely to resist isolating technology, initiate social activities, and pursue relationships than other people. They are less likely to believe that wealth, gadgets and fame are the key to happiness.

Second, Taylor students learn that small groups for Bible study and prayer are a good thing. When I was at Taylor I participated in wing small groups, Senior-Freshmen small groups, Christian Educational Ministry small groups, and Baseball team small groups – sometimes having three different meetings per week. Each year in the fall there was some pressure by the PA’s and Discipleship Assistant on the wing to get involved in a wing small group. “Come on. Sign up. It is good for you. Dude, are you going to be in a small group? Be in mine.” In practice, some people decided to be in other small groups than the wing small groups. Others signed up but rarely made it because “it is a busy week.” Others just said, “No, that’s not my thing.” But at least there was some expectation that small groups should be the normal practice of growing Christians.

In this way, almost every Taylor student had both good and not-so-good small group experiences. They had experience in rich, engaging, fascinating, challenging, and caring groups. And they had experience in boring and legalistic ones.

Excellent small groups correspond closely to what Yoder calls “The Rule of Paul,” – the procedure outlined by Paul in 1 Corinthians 14. Everyone should have the opportunity to share. Speech that improves, encourages and consoles, called by Paul “prophecy,” should be given priority. The other members of the group should “weigh” what has been said.

Having been involved in small groups at Taylor, alumni understand the beauty, care and insight of small groups. They understand what Paul was talking about in 1 Corinthians 14. Upon graduating, most students have spent more time in small groups than much older people. No wonder so many Taylor grads end up as small group leaders in their churches.

Third, Taylor students learn that worship should include hugs, fun, challenge to the mind, and passionate expression. At Taylor, worship in chapel is voluntary (though expected). Because there is no taking attendance, there is a feeling that the people in the chapel on a given day have chosen to be here. They have come because they want to worship. They want to learn. They want to be part of this community.

Students sit with their friends and when they arrive, they give each other hugs, hand slaps, fist-pounds, and pats on the back. They rowdily cheer when the president is introduced to speak. They jokingly boo when other schools are mentioned from the podium and jokingly cheer when their dorm is mentioned. They sing loud. They expect speakers to challenge them and inspire them from the Scriptures.

Yoder says that the early church participants were bonded together as a family. Other loyalties and obligations related to social class and race were diminished because of their common connection to Jesus. He calls this “Baptism and the New Humanity” citing Galatians 3:27-28, “for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” It is this joy that Taylor alumni bring with them when they seek to make their church communities places of warmth and welcome. They warmly welcome new people and embrace old friends. They celebrate great music. They are strong supporters of their pastors who they expect will challenge and inspire them from the Scriptures.

Fourth, Taylor students learn that meals should be eaten with friends and include good conversation. At Taylor, eating is an event. You don’t just grab a sandwich in your room. If you eat, you go to the Dining Commons. This involves a hike there for that purpose. And since it is a project, an outing, you do it with others. You make the trek over from your dorm, go through the line and find a place to sit. In the process, you invite people who look to be alone if they want to grab a seat with your group. If you’re alone, you look for a familiar face and gesture and learn to courageously say, “Can I eat with you guys?” to which the answer is almost invariably “yes” unless the meal has been planned as a special meeting or study session. Furthermore, Taylor students get accustomed to booking meals with people they look forward to conversing with. “I can’t talk now because I have got to run to class. But can you do lunch on Thursday? What about Monday dinner?”

Day after day, week after week, of meals with friends, builds the habit that meals with others is what happy people do. Sure, every once in a while, you get stuck eating alone, with not a familiar face in sight. But this is the unfortunate exception which instills in you the determination to be more intentional and strategic in the future. It is no wonder then that Taylor graduates are the people who say to others after church – “hey, do you all have lunch plans? Anyone want to run to Panera?” Or, hey, “I can’t talk today. We’ve got to get our kids home for naps. But do you want to do coffee sometime? Or maybe you all can come over Friday night for dinner. ”

Yoder writes that another practice of the early church is that “Disciples Break Bread Together.” Yoder points out that what we call today “Communion” or “Eucharist” or “Lord’s Supper” was surely a meal in the early church. Though this subject has a complicated history with debates between Catholics and Protestants about the meaning of this practice, it is can at least be acknowledged that eating together, then and now, is most often done with family. Sharing a table is one way of opening up our lives to others. From hundreds of significant conversations at meal time over four years, Taylor alumni understand that God works when we sit and eat with other people.

Fifth, Taylor students learn that life in Christian community involves regular conflict resolution. In Taylor’s “Life Together Covenant” Matthew 18:15-18 is suggested as the model confrontation procedure. John Howard Yoder calls this “Binding and Loosing” (Matthew 18:18). If you have a problem with what someone else has done, you are supposed to talk to them about it. If you are unsatisfied with how this conversation goes, you are to enlist the help of someone else to help you two see if you can come to a mutual understanding of the issue. For example, PA’s and Discipleship Assistants in men’s dorms are often involved in conversations trying to keep pranks from spiraling down from fun into revenge. When I was at Taylor, we jokingly called the Matthew 18 confrontation process “care-fronting,” as in, “if he does not quit playing that music loud, there may be the need to care-front him about it.” To put it in biblical terms, Taylor students are familiar with the delicate task of “speaking the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15).

I don’t think we can underestimate the collective expectation that even in Christian community conflict resolution will be necessary and regular. Taylor alumni do not leave a church the minute someone hurts their feelings or does something different than the way they would do it. There is no false ideal that Christian community is perfect. They assume there will be conflict within even great, healthy Christian communities.

Sixth, Taylor students learn that service is worth doing. There is the expectation at Taylor that you will give of your time and money to serve others. You are challenged to give money to fight AIDS in Africa, to spend time with teens in Hartford City and Marion, to travel overseas on Lighthouse and Spring Break trips to show people God’s love.

Taylor graduates do not need to be taught by their churches that it is important to be generous with their financial resources – even as recent college graduates. Taylor grads expect to find ministries in their church to get involved in. They know that they can’t be involved in everything because they experienced the flood of opportunities to serve at Taylor, but they expect to serve in an area that fits their interests and abilities.

In addition to the five practices name above, Yoder urges Christians to be characterized by holy living and witness. There is among Taylor graduates the understanding that we are to be eager to serve. The common Taylor phrase, “servant leader” gets at this idea.

Taylor University, though not a church, has the potential to prepare students for the very things John Howard Yoder says are key to the thriving of local church life. This has been my experience. I hope it is of many others as well.

Andy Rowell is a Doctor of Theology (Th.D.) student at Duke Divinity School in Durham, North Carolina. His areas of concentration are "The Practice of Leading Christian Communities and Institutions" and "New Testament." Andy grew up in Wheaton, Illinois and received his BA at Taylor University in Upland, Indiana triple-majoring in Christian Educational Ministries, Biblical Studies and Spanish. He graduated with his M.Div. from Regent College in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. He served as an Associate Pastor at Granville Chapel in Vancouver from 1999-2005. From 2005-2007, he served as a professor of Christian Educational Ministries and Biblical Studies at Taylor University in Upland, Indiana. Andy blogs at Church Leadership Conversations (www.andyrowell.net). Andy is married to Amy Rowell, Director of Children's Ministry at Blacknall Presbyterian Church in Durham. Andy and Amy have two sons Ryan and Jacob.

October 12, 2008

Ecclesiology Dissertations: Volf and Bonhoeffer on thinking theologically about the church

Miroslav Volf's book After Our Likeness: The Church as the Image of the Trinity (originally published in German in 1996) was "a dissertation required for a postdoctoral degree" (p. xi) and Dietrich Bonhoeffer's book Sanctorum Communio was his doctoral dissertation that was submitted in 1927. 

In the quotes below, both note a surge of interest in the church and both insist on the importance of better theological reflection on the church. 

With seminar papers under my belt on Rowan Williams, John Howard Yoder, the New Testament witness, Matthew 18 and 1 Corinthians, David Bosch, Lesslie Newbigin and Bonhoeffer; and now Volf, Gregory the Great, and sociology of congregations; I am building conversation partners; but I will never touch the erudition of Volf and Bonhoeffer. 

Volf:
Without an ecumenical agreement of what the church is, one can either allow the diverging understandings of office to stand unreconciled next to one another, or one can try to cloak them with merely verbal convergences.  Either way, unity is feigned rather than genuinely attained.  This is why in recent years the question of the character of the church, especially of the understanding of the church as communion, has moved into the center of ecumenical dialogue.  Reflection on the ecclesial structures obviously presupposes reflection on the church.  If the structures of the church really are to be the structures of the church rather than structures over the church, then the church must take precedence over the structures.  (p. 222).

After Our Likeness: The Church As the Image of the Trinity (Sacra Doctrina) by Miroslav Volf (Paperback - Oct 30, 1997)

Bonhoeffer:
In this study social philosophy and sociology are employed in the service of theology.  Only through such an approach, it appears, can we gain a systematic understanding of the community-structure of the Christian church.  This work belongs not to the discipline of sociology of religion, but to theology.  The issue of a Christian social philosophy and sociology is a genuinely theological one, because it can be answered only on the basis of an understanding of the church. (p. 21) . . . To be sure, there rarely has been as much talk about community and church as in the last few years.  Yet it seems to me that such thinking has lacked the thoroughness of theological reflection (p. 23) 

Sanctorum Communio: A Theological Study of the Sociology of the Church (Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works) by Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Clifford J. Green, and Nancy Lukens (Hardcover - Nov 1998)

September 12, 2008

Education in the Local Church: Taylor, Willimon, Storey, Niebuhr, and Groome

A number of churches are doing weeknight adult Christian education courses this fall for the first time in a long time. Classes@Willow at Willow Creek Community Church (which you can watch or listen to online), The Midweek Experience - Journey Bible Classes at Granger Community Church, and my own TableTalk at Blacknall Memorial Presbyterian Church.  I am teaching Philippians with Duke New Testament Ph.D. student Tim Wardle. 

I have come across in my reading this week four theologian-pastors talking about education in the church.  I have reproduced those quotes below as they raise almost all of the important issues related to the educational task.  

In summary, Barbara Brown Taylor worries that too often Bible classes do not sufficiently explore what we learn about God from the text and the imagination is too often left unengaged. Will Willimon stresses the importance of pastors instilling the depth of Christian faith in congregations so that they can live despite the unChristian onslaught of the world's messages. Peter Storey's comments are similar to Willimon in stating the crucial nature of education for faithful living. Reinhold Neibuhr's journal reveals his frustrations with students not understanding his theological ruminations.  He later learns to ask more questions and not talk so much. Finally, I note that Thomas Groome's teaching process--which encourages teachers to start with real life, move to the content, and then move back to life and response--takes into account these various issues.  I hope this will be helpful to any thinking through education in their local church today.  

Four quotations

  • Barbara Brown Taylor: The Preaching Life


Barbara Brown Taylor, The Preaching Life (London: Cowley, 1993), 49.  
During my tenure as a coordinator of Christian education, I heard a lot from people about their hunger to know the Bible, so I hired professors from a nearby seminary and offered regular courses on the Old and New Testaments.  People told me the descriptions sounded like just what they needed, but that was usually the last I saw of them.  The classes were small and sporadically attended, while classes on religion and the arts or parenting techniques overflowed their banks. Yet every quarter, people asked for more Bible courses.  They said they wanted more; they were not getting enough.  So I offered more Bible and still no one came. 
Finally, I got the message.  "Bible" was a code word for "God."  People were not hungry for information about the Bible; they were hungry for an experience of God, which the Bible seemed to offer them.  So I laid off the seminary professors and offered a class on biblical meditation instead, which filled up at once.  The plan was simple: every week we locked the door, took off our shoes and closed our eyes and listened to a story about the raising of Lazarus, or the feeding of the five thousand, or John's vision of the heavenly Jerusalem. 

  • William H. Willimon: Pastor: The Theology and Practice of Ordained Ministry

Will Willimon, Pastor: The Theology and Practice of Ordained Ministry (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2002), 71.
I therefore predict more of a pastor's time will be spent in the education, formation, and enculturation of the members of the congregation to be people who know how to analyze the corrosive acids within the surrounding and essentially indifferent--at times openly hostile--dominant culture.  More of our efforts will need to be expended in giving our people the means to resist, to live by, and to creatively communicate the gospel in a world where Christians are a cognitive minority.  Just the other day I was talking with a pastor who formed a "Public School Teachers' Prayer Breakfast" for the teachers in his congregation.  At this weekly breakfast, the teachers present case studies from their work that challenge their Christian faith.  They share a meal, have prayer, and venture forth better equipped to live their faith in the public-school setting . . .
There is much to be said for the pastor being educated in the classical forms of Christian ministry.  The church has much experience as a minority movement.  We need to draw from that experience today.  In that regard, I predict a recovery of the classical shape of ministry: to teach, to preach, and to evangelize through the ministries of Word, sacrament, and order.  I sense the end of a proliferation of ministerial duties and a reclamation of the essential classical tasks of Christian ministry.  Because so many of our people have not been well formed in the faith, pastors now must stress doctrine, the classical texts of our faith, our master narratives, the great themes.  The culture is no longer a prop for the church.  If we are going to make Christians, we must have a new determination to inculcate the faith.  In some ways our age parallels that of the Reformation, in which the church was faced with a vast undereducated, uninformed, unformed laity and clergy.  Pastors must be prepared to lead in catechesis, moral formation, and the regeneration of God's people.

Peter Storey, "Rules of Engagement: Faithful Congregations in a Dangerous World," Inaugural Lecture for Ruth W. and A. Morris Williams, Jr. Chair of the Practice of Christian Ministry at Duke University Divinity School.  Storey taught at Duke from 1999-2006.

Reclaim the Teaching Office.  Anything else I say tonight actually depends on this. I have a friend back home whose name is George Irvine, and this very fine pastor says, “If you want to get your congregation moving into mission, you’ve got to do three things:  the first is to teach. When you’ve done that, then for goodness sake, teach. That’s the second thing. And thirdly, teach!”
This has been my experience. It has been a non-negotiable in the churches I’ve served in South Africa: a central teaching and learning experience for the whole congregation, led by the best qualified people available – including certainly all the pastoral staff.  And all lay persons in leadership are required to commit to this weekly educational discipline. All newcomers must do so too, as part of joining. It’s a no-brainer. Nothing effective can happen in a church until its leaders and people begin to think theologically.
I wonder if you know how unique it is that adults attend Sunday School in the numbers they do here? It doesn’t happen anywhere else in the world. Yet most Sunday Schools follow an ad hoc approach to a curriculum which is left very much to each class to discuss and decide. What would happen if a curriculum on mission, for instance was agreed and the pastor trained all the Sunday School class leaders each week in how to teach each lesson? I used to do that with a whole lot of home group leaders when our centralized Academy for Christian Living was in recess.
Reclaiming the teaching office means that we will teach Scripture and Doctrine and Christian Practices and above all, we will, as Ted Jennings puts it, “understudy Jesus.” Above all, we want to learn the mind of that one teacher, remembering his words: “You study the Scriptures diligently supposing that in them you have eternal life, yet although their testimony points to me, you refuse to come to me for that life.” (John 5:39)
And we will also train people in the skills the world desperately needs but doesn’t know. I was speaking with Filipino delegates at the Nairobi World Council of Churches gathering about the overthrow of the tyrant President Ferdinand Marcos and how armored vehicles had to stop and bombers had to abort their bombing runs because hundreds and thousands of Christians jammed the streets. “How did you do it?” I asked. The answer: “We studied and trained for twelve years! We trained in the practice of non-violence and the prayer that is needed for it.”
To be about God’s mission in the world, we need to reclaim the teaching office.

  • Reinhold Niebuhr: Leaves from the Notebook of a Tamed Cynic

Reinhold Niebuhr, Leaves From the Notebook of a Tamed Cynic (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1929, 1980), 16, 29.

[Neibuhr is 24] 1916. The young fellows I am trying to teach in Sunday school don't listen to me attentively.  I don't think I am getting very clse to where they live.  Or perhaps I just haven't learned how to put my message across.  I am constantly interrupted in my talk by the necessity of calling someone to order.  It is a good thing that I have a class like that.  I'll venture that my sermons aren't getting any nearer to the people, but the little group of adults I am speaking to in the morning service are naturally more patient or at least more polite that these honest youngsters, and so I have less chance to find out from them how futile I am.  But that doesn't solve the proble of how to reach the fellows. 

[Neibuhr is 28] 1920.  I had a great discussion in my young men's clas this morning.  Gradually I am beginning to discover that my failure with the class was due to my talking too much.  Now I let them talk and the thing is becoming interesting.  Of course it isn't so easy to keep the discussion steered on any track.  Sometimes we talk in circles.  But the fellows are at least getting at some of the vital problems of life and I am learning something from them.  Disciplinary problems have disappeared.  The only one left is the fellow who is always trying to say something foolish or smart in the discussion. 

Here's a fifth bonus quote:

Howard Gardner, The Unschooled Mind: How Children Think and how Schools Should Teach (BasicBooks, 1991).
"coverage is the enemy of understanding"

Taylor University Christian Education professor Faye Chechowich's response:
How about education as a task of “uncovering” rather than “covering”?

My conclusion and synthesis. 

I think Boston College professor Thomas Groome's Shared Christian Praxis approach gets at all of these aspects. 

Christian Religious Education: Sharing Our Story and Vision by Thomas H. Groome (1980, 1999).  We required students to read chapter 9 and 10 in Teaching and Learning Strategies at Taylor University. 

Sharing Faith: A Comprehensive Approach to Religious Education and Pastoral Ministry : The Way of Shared Praxis by Thomas H. Groome (1991)
This book illustrates the process described in chapter 10 of Christian Religious Education.  

Groome's book Christian Religious Education is the classic in the field.  It is a foundational book we teach in the Christian Educational Ministries program at Taylor University.  It is in the curriculum of education courses at Regent College where I did my MDiv.   And it is required in the Th.D. seminar at Duke Divinity School. 

This is from chapter 10 of Christian Religious Education.   

Movement #1
Naming Present Action

Movement #2
The Participants’ Stories and Visions

Movement #3
The Christian Community Story and Vision

Movement #4
Dialectical Hermeneutic Between The Story and the Participant’s Stories

Movement #5
Dialectical Hermeneutic Between The Vision and the Participant’s Visions

I have given a rough informal look at this process in my post: How to Lead An Impressive Bible Study

A similar flow for a lesson is Hook, Book, Look, Took in Larry Richards's classic Creative Bible Teaching (Chicago: Moody, 1970, 1998), which we teach to freshmen in Introduction to Christian Educational Ministry at Taylor University.

Groome's technique is to engage with the needs of the world, then draw upon the classic content, then probe possible faithful responses. I think it is perhaps easiest to think of the process the way Groome describes it in the introduction to Christian Religious Education--imitating Jesus' approach on the walk to Emmaus in Luke 24:13-35.   

Movements 1-2.  What is going on in Jerusalem?  Get them talking about their lives. 

Movement 3.  Jesus explained the Law and Prophets.  We introduce students to life-changing content from the Christian tradition. 

Movement 4. They reflect on what they have heard and how it intersects with their lives. 

Movement 5.  The people decide to head back to Jerusalem.  Response. 

There is some food for thought on a very practical topic from some great thinkers.  Happy teaching. 

July 09, 2008

Best book on ecclesiology I read this year: Body Politics by John Howard Yoder

I am doing my doctoral work here at Duke Divinity School on "The Practice of Leading Christian Communities and Institutions" with my secondary concentration in "New Testament."  This spring each of my courses (Scripture and Ethics with Allen Verhey and Richard Hays, Church and Ministry in the New Testament with Richard Hays, and Theology of Mission with Laceye Warner) required me to read John Howard Yoder.  Yoder's 80 page, (that's right, very short), Body Politics is the book I find myself recommending almost daily. 

Here is my Amazon.com review of John Howard Yoder's Body Politics, which I just wrote tonight.  

 

5.0 out of 5 stars Outstanding brief book of provocative ecclesiology, July 8, 2008
By Andrew D. Rowell (Durham, NC) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

John Howard Yoder (1927-1997), who was a professor of theology at Notre Dame and a Mennonite, outlines in 80 pages five practices that should be central to every church's life together. He argues that congregations need to recover these practices that are described in the New Testament and have since become distorted. This book grew out of a 1986 lecture at Duke Divinity School entitled "Sacrament as Social Process: Christ the Transformer of Culture," later published in his book The Royal Priesthood: Essays Ecclesiological and Ecumenical. In Body Politics, Yoder describes the five practices this way:
(1) Binding and Loosing
(2) Disciples Break Bread Together / Eucharist
(3) Baptism and the New Humanity / Baptism
(4) The Fullness of Christ / Multiplicity of gifts
(5) The Rule of Paul / Open meeting

In each case, Yoder argues that the original New Testament practice has been today almost entirely lost in most churches. (1) Binding and loosing - moral discernment through dialogue and forgiveness as described in Matthew 18 - is rarely practiced. (2) The sense of the Eucharist as a meal (1 Corinthians 11) where people share their food with one another is rarely practiced. (3) Baptism (Galatians 3:27-28) rarely communicates the profound transcending of social and cultural barriers - between Jew and Gentile, slave and free there is one baptism. (4) In almost every church there a few so-called "gifted" people who dominate the church while most congregation members are spectators. (5) And it is the rare congregation that truly opens the floor for all congregation members to participate (1 Corinthians 14).

What is compelling about Yoder's writing is his skill as a reader of biblical texts, his weaving of historical context (his dissertation work was on the Radical Reformation), and his ability to talk to theologians of many denominations (he did his doctoral work with the reformed theologian Karl Barth, taught at a Roman Catholic school, and strongly influenced the United Methodist theologian Stanley Hauerwas).

Yoder is also amazingly concise for a theologian. In my first year as a Th.D. (Doctor of Theology) student at Duke Divinity School, this is the one book I read this year that I find myself recommending to friends and family.

So, who will like this book? Yoder writes sympathetically denominational groups that have less formal hierarchy: Mennonites, Quakers, Methodists, Plymouth Brethren, evangelicals, Baptists, Pentecostals, Puritans, and house churches. If you are a part of any of these denominations, you will probably cheer all the way through this book and say "Aha!"

On the other hand, Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Anglicans, and Presbyterians will surely find Yoder's ideas radical, wild, far out, untenable, foreign and unrealistic. For example, a Roman Catholic might initially think about the five practices: (1) the priest facilitates confession, (2) the priest facilitates the mass / Eucharist, (3) infants are baptized, (4) the priests have a special religious ritual calling, and (5) the congregation is silent as the priests recite mass. Yoder argues from the New Testament that all of these developments are unfortunate! Thus, if you are coming from that perspective, it will probably be tough to swallow Yoder's ideas and he may not convince you to be a radical protestant in 80 pages! However, if you have a niggle of doubt about any of these things, Yoder is sure to fan it! It is also worth noting that many Roman Catholics want to recover the biblical meaning of these practices. For example, I read this year at Duke a number of books that get at this by Roman Catholic authors: Raymond Brown's The Churches The Apostles Left Behind, Michael Warren's At This Time, in This Place: The Spirit Embodied in the Local Assembly, and Vincent Miller's Consuming Religion: Christian Faith And Practice in a Consumer Culture.

Yoder, is most known for his book The Politics of Jesus and for his defense of pacifism but this little book is a gem. I would highly recommend this book for anyone thinking about church leadership or planting a church. I would also highly recommend it as a textbook for Systematic Theology III courses which cover ecclesiology. If you liked this book, read Yoder's For the Nations: Essays Evangelical and Public next.

Update: Other related posts that I wrote after this one:

Based on Yoder's five practices: Everything I needed to know about the church I learned at Taylor University.

The Ecclesiology of John Howard Yoder paper


A number of other books that I read in the past prepared me for thinking as Yoder does about ecclesiology: 

In all of his work, retired Regent College faculty member Paul Stevens argues for the empowering of the laity, for every-member-ministry, for a lessening of the clergy-lay divide. 
Sande in all of his work argues for the practical benefits of biblical conflict resolution, particularly Matthew 18. 
Pagitt describes the way that he encourages interaction at his emerging church - soliciting feedback during the preparation, inviting oral questions and comments after the sermon, and encourages dialogue about the sermon online afterward. 
This is one of McLaren's earliest books (now revised) where he stresses some basic ways most churches can improve.  It is the least provocative of any of his books.  It is basically how he would talk if he was gently encouraging pastors to consider change.  With his book  A New Kind of Christian, he decided to be more provocative and controversial. 
Retired Regent College New Testament professor Fee describes the lack of formal leadership structures in the New Testament. 

Hays (one of my doctoral work advisors) and Fee (a previous mentor) both describe the participative and fluid nature of the early Christian communities.  Barrett, Banks and  Käsemann, who Hays had me read this semester, all do the same. 
Banks's book is 48 pages and much faster to read than Yoder's 80 pages!  You can read for one afternoon and claim to have read two books!  
I also reviewed Barrett's book on Amazon.com since there were no reviews!
 
5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent reflection on ecclesiology by a great New Testament scholar, July 8, 2008
By Andrew D. Rowell (Durham, NC) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
C.K. "Kingsley" Barrett preached at 90 years old in November 2007. He taught New Testament at the University of Durham from 1945 until 1982, writing commentaries on John, Romans, the Pastoral Epistles, Acts, and 1 and 2 Corinthians. This book "Church, Ministry & Sacraments in the New Testament" incorporates Barrett's love for the church and his New Testament scholarship.

Below are my summary notes from reading Church, Ministry & Sacraments:

Barrett begins the book by acknowledging that though he is a Methodist he has been highly influenced by Anglo-Catholics and has worked with many Anglicans at the University of Durham. In chapter one, Barrett explains that his thesis is a paradox: "that the church is both central and peripheral in the New Testament." On the one hand, calling disciples was central to the mission of Jesus Christ. On the other hand, Barrett argues, the formation of an organization was surprising necessity when the consummation of the age did not follow the resurrection.
In chapter two, entitled "Ministry," Barrett reflects on the leadership of the church as described in the New Testament - beginning with the Pauline literature. Every member was to be a minister. Functions are emphasized over offices. There was no leader who gathered money, administered the sacraments, oversaw worship or led church discipline. He points out that Paul was the authority in his churches while he lived and Spirit-gifting was emphasized. Churches also met in the households of rich people who probably exercised some leadership. Barrett emphasizes the importance of talented people and people who specialize in their ministries but also warns of the dangers of people flaunting their gifts, being enriched by them, and creating an aura of superiority.
Barrett then looks at the issue of presbyters and episkopos in 1 Peter. He wonders if presbyters may have been primarily older people rather than an office. The advice of 1 Peter is to lead with humility. In the Johannine literature, Barrett sees evidence of apostles, prophets, a leading elder, traveling preachers and witnesses. The criteria for evaluating these leaders is their teaching that Jesus Christ came in the flesh and in their love. In the book of Acts, Barrett again emphasizes the informal nature of leadership: evangelists, prophets, teachers, elders, apostles - not ordained but chosen by people and the Spirit. They are unpaid and part-time.
Barrett points out the diversity in the practice of the sacraments in the New Testament in the third chapter. He argues that the writer of the book of Acts is likely trying to point out that baptism is not magic because the Spirit and water are usually but not always together. Barrett argues that Paul too mitigates the importance of baptism in his comments in 1 Cor 1. Barrett theorizes that Paul may have infused the two basic practices (baptism of initiation and regular resurrection meals) with greater cruciform emphases because they were causing division in his communities. Thus, he argues, the sacraments like the church should be seen as both peripheral and central.
In chapter four, Barrett reflects on the development of the church into a more formal, priest-dominated institution. Barrett concludes that the church is at its best, is central, when it sees itself as peripheral.


April 01, 2008

My sermon "The Spirit-led Missional Church" (Acts 11) Audio

I preached Sunday, March 30th at Clayton Presbyterian Church in Clayton, North Carolina.  My text was Acts 11:1-18 as part of a series in the book of Acts.   I would argue that this is one of the most important texts on the church in mission in the New Testament. 

The iTunes link is Clayton Presbyterian Church Podcasts (will only work if you have iTunes - a free program - installed on your computer). 

The direct link is Clayton Presbyterian Church Sermons - you can download the sermon there or listen to it streaming. 

I have also made a copy of the recording and put it here.

The transcript is

here as a Microsoft Word document

and here as a pdf

Summary:
In the sermon, I suggest we appreciate the passion for un-churched people that seeker-driven churches embody.  I also suggest, however, that there is real value in churches that are very diverse and ignore the seeker-driven philosophy of reaching a specific target audience.  I suggest that Acts 11:1-18 (which essentially retells Acts 10) in which Cornelius, the Gentile centurion comes to faith in Jesus, exemplifies what mission in the church should be like.  Not only are unbelievers reached but diverse ones.  I suggest that the Acts 10-11 narrative can serve as a paradigm as we think about the mission of our churches. 

Here are some of the points I draw out from the narrative:  Change is hard.  We all like to stay in our comfort zones.  Prayer is where it starts but our prayers are often weak.  We are prodded by the Spirit to obey what is clear.  We are to do this work with others.  The message of Jesus is simple.  The Spirit goes before us.  What can we do to get out of the way so that people can see Jesus?

Additional notes on some of the examples in the sermon:

  1. There is the old pastor’s legend about the pastor who wanted to move the piano to the other side of the sanctuary and the way he got away with it was by moving it an inch every week.   Source: I can't remember where I heard this one. 

  2. Pastors often overestimate what they can change in one year but underestimate what they can change in five years.  Source: I first heard this from Sandy Millar at Holy Trinity Brompton Church but I don't think it was original to him. 

  3. Erik Erikson  “all change is perceived as loss.” Source: internet.   

  4. If you find the perfect church, don’t join it or it will no longer be perfect.  Source: I can't remember. 

  5. Like Noah’s ark, it stinks being inside but it is still better than being outside.  Source: I can't remember.   

  6. Mark Twain: "It ain't the parts of the Bible that I can't understand that bother me, it is the parts that I do understand." Source: internet. 

  7. G.K Chesterton: “Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried.” Source: internet.

March 26, 2008

The missional ecclesiology of Rowan Williams

I have posted below for download the paper I finished recently on the missional ecclesiology of Rowan Williams, the current Archbishop of Canterbury, the head of the Anglican Communion.  The question I was asking was, "What would Rowan Williams be thinking about if he was a church planter or emerging church pastor?" 

Download Rowan_Williams's_Theology_of_the_Church_as_Missionary.pdf

I look forward to reading your comments.  I am not an expert on Williams but I have read eight books by him.  If you know of any place I might consider publishing this, I would be open to advice.   

Three benefits of my paper:

This paper has three main benefits.  First, Christians might use the four “practices” as a guide for evaluating their own churches.  Does our church embrace fully the four practices in Williams’s work that can help ensure our faithfulness to the gospel? 

The terms “practices” and “standards of excellence” are borrowed from MacIntyre and are not used by Williams but I think they are an enlightening way of organizing his arguments related to the mission of the church.

Second, Christians might use the “standards of excellence” for the practice of communicating the Good News to evaluate their own church’s outlook toward mission.  Does our practice of communicating of the Good News adhere to the standards of excellence which should characterize that practice according to Williams?

Third, this paper brings together in an organized way the diverse thought of Rowan Williams for the edification of the church.  Williams tends to be misunderstood as the recent furor over his comments about Sharia exemplify.  His writings have different audiences and content so that one could get a skewed understanding of Williams’s thought if they are unaware of the scope of his work.  For example, if someone only read Lost Icons, they might be unaware of his explicitly Christian writing such as Tokens of Trust.  This paper allows both liberals and conservatives, critics and fans, to better appreciate and understand Williams.  By organizing it in these categories and explaining it, I hope to set Williams’s work “on a lower shelf,” that is, making it somewhat more accessible than it might otherwise be.  I have also quoted liberally from Williams in order to point readers toward the places in Williams’s writing where he makes these arguments so that further research can be done.

When one understands Williams’s work in its breadth, it is difficult not to appreciate the beauty and sensitivity and brilliance of his writing.  His writing truly can help churches who are attempting to do innovative mission work to do so with faithfulness to the Christian tradition as well as great effectiveness and flexibility.  The difficulty in reading Williams is that his essays tend to be so occasional, that is, trying to address a specific situation.  Therefore, it is possible to misinterpret them if they are taken to be representative of Williams’s approach to related issues.  I think this essay helps to relieve some of those possible misconceptions by framing the issue in terms of practices and standards of excellence and bringing together eight of Williams’s works.

A few websites with Anglicans thinking about new forms of church:
Anglimergent
Fresh Expressions

Jonny Baker

Emergent UK:

Emergent UK

Jason Clark

 

Archbishop Rowan Williams: How is emergent church viewed in the Anglican Communion?

Archbishop Rowan Williams: What are the strengths and weaknesses of the emergent church? Archbishop Rowan Williams - What is church?

December 10, 2007

Willow Creek's Discipleship Problem: How to Fix the Seeker-driven Church

Update, December 10, 2007

As I suspected, the interpretation and methodology of the Reveal study are deeply flawed.  I like Willow Creek's ministry model but they have really bungled this survey. 

See the Review of Reveal by Bradley Wright, a sociologist at the University of Connecticut. 

Here’s a selection from Wright’s conclusions:

The conclusion draw by the study’s authors, and loudly echoed by critics of Willow Creek, is that the Willow model is flawed. The data presented here are sufficiently ambiguous to make such strong claims. Given the weaknesses of the study design and analytic strategy, it’s possible that the results indicate strong support for the Willow Creek model . . . Simply repeating the Reveal study with hundreds more churches potentially adds very little knowledge.

Though Willow does not need to repent for its ministry strategy (though we could all repent for our ministry strategies to some extent - whose is perfect?), those who published this sociologically unsophisticated research probably need to apologize to seeker-sensitive church proponents everywhere. It is hard to say if Willow’s reputation will ever recover from the tidal wave of publicity saying that the Reveal quantitative data discredits Willow’s approach.

Still, all is not lost. The idea of doing quantitative research is a good one. But next time Reveal needs to do it right. Those who are part of Reveal need to do a serious crash course in American religious sociology: Christian Smith, Mark Chaves, Robert Wuthnow, Scott Thumma, and Nancy Ammerman.

For an example of a more a more sociologically sophisticated study see the U.S. Congregations Study which surveyed 300,000 congregations in 2001.

U.S. Congregations Survey

U.S. Congregational Life Survey, 2001, Random Attenders

Or see the:

National Congregations Study

See also the excellent summary of different recent postings about this at Leadership Networks Leanings blog "Reveal Squeal gets louder on the web" by DJ Chuang.


Original Post October 19, 2007

Though Willow Creek continues to reach "people far from God" they admit that they are not doing as good a job at helping those people become "fully devoted followers of Jesus" as they thought they were.  Of course a lot of critics are saying "We told you so" but it is good Bill Hybels and friends are broadcasting their "mistake." (Leadership's Out of Ur blog post "Willow Creek Repents?" brought this to my attention.  There are 120 comments there now on that post).  They also have an updated post with a response from Willow Creek: Willow Creek Repents? (Part 2): Greg Hawkins responds with the truth about REVEAL.  They are not giving up their seeker approach.

Below I have summarize what Willow Creek has realized in the last few years in five quick statements.  Then I have described Willow Creek for those who are unfamiliar with it.  Finally, I have tried to put in perspective their five realizations. 

"Willow Creek's Five Realizations."
1. They want to be good stewards.  They want to use the financial resources they are given in the offering plate wisely. 
2. Research helps. They did a survey. 
3. They are still effective with seekers. They find that people who are exploring Christianity or are new Christians still rate what Wilow is offering very highly. 
4.  Consumer discipleship is not working.  There are many people who are highly involved in activities (i.e. consuming the religious goods they are offering) but are not growing in Christ that much. 
5.  Many mature Christians are unsatisfied with the church. There are a number of people who are strong Christians but are dissatisfied with their church.  But, Willow has concluded, the issue is not just offering people more meaty options, rather people need to learn to feed themselves.

All of this is available on their new website (August 2007) "Reveal."  You can hear executive pastor Greg Hawkins and founding pastor Bill Hybels describe the findings in their own words in 13 minute video presentations.  (I had to use Internet Explorer rather than Firefox to make them work).   Or you can buy the book which is only available from Willow Creek Resources.  (Why not have Amazon distribute it too?)

Who is Willow Creek?
If you don't know who Willow Creek Community Church is, it is the "second most influential church in the nation" according to a survey commissioned by Leadership Network. 

Still, many mainline church leaders (Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Methodist, Lutheran) have never heard of Willow Creek, which is something I have become increasingly sensitive to.  Those people have other churches they admire.  They wouldn't admire Willow even if they knew about it because they place much more value on continuity with the the great tradition of Christianity as passed down through church history and denominations. 

Anyway, Willow Creek Community Church (i.e "Willow") is led by Bill Hybels who founded it 30 years ago in South Barrington, IL which is about 45 minutes from Chicago in the suburbs.  It is a non-denominational church with weekly attendance of about 23,500 according to Hartford Seminary's database of megachurches.  It was designed specifically for "seekers" or what they now call "people far from God."  As the story goes Hybels, walked around the area going to door to door asking people why they didn't go to church and they reported things like "they are always asking us for money," "boring," "irrelevant," "nothing for the kids." So Hybels and friends started a church in a movie theater that had upbeat music, relevant sermons, and no offering plates.  As the church grew exponentially, they formed a consulting branch in 1992 called Willow Creek Association which sells resources to churches like bible study materials, sermon tapes, etc. and also holds conferences.  Churches can become a member of the Willow Creek Association but all this really means is that the pastor subscribes to their resources for about $249 a year. 

Perspective and Context on Willow Creek's Five Realizations.

1. They want to be good stewards. My comment: Amen.  May they continue to wrestle with the problem.  When you see Willow Creek's facility, you are either envious or disgusted.  There is a 7400 seat auditorium complete with state of the art lights and audio.  The building includes a bookstore, coffee shop, and expansive facilities for children.  Most people say, "It feels like a mall."  These facilities were intended to make Willow a comfortable place for people who were turned off to church and needed to hear about Jesus in a place that was more familiar than a gothic cathedral.  I think this makes sense given their philosophy of ministry.  Still, it is very good to hear them saying, "We want to welcome people well but we don't want to spend a penny more than we have to.  Are we spending God's resources appropriately?  Are there other ways that God might be calling the wealthy North American church to use its resources?"  Additional note: Willow Creek has never had a major financial scandal and their books, salaries, etc. are public.

2. Research helps. My comment: Make sure this research is done well.  Randy Frazee, author of The Connecting Church, has been a pastor at Willow for a few years now.  He is one of the preeminent people in the evangelical world insisting that we need to measure and assess the development of people's discipleship.  As pastor of Pantego Bible Church in Texas, he came to see the need for assessing whether small groups actually help people become better disciples.  He even made up a tool to measure discipleship called The Christian Life Profile

I was glad to see Willow hire Randy because I knew he would encourage them to evaluate how they are doing beyond the kneejerk way it is often done, i.e. the ABC's (Attendence, Buildings and Cash) or the three B's (Bodies, Buildings and Bucks). 

I would simply urge them to continue to get good advice about how to do sociological research well.  There are many people out there doing research on the American church and for this I'm thrilled.  Here are some that I'm familiar with: Barna Group, Gallup Poll, Baylor Surveys of Religion, Natural Church Development, Pulpit & Pew: The Duke Center for Excellence in Ministry, National Study of Youth & Religion, the Louisville Institute, Hartford Institute for Religious Research, the new book After the Baby Boomers: How Twenty- and Thirty-Somethings Are Shaping the Future of American Religion
by Robert Wuthnow (chair of the sociology department at Princeton University), Church Innovations, the Alban Institute.  But the devil is in the details.  Numbers can be manipulated to say most anything.  We, as church leaders, have got to pay more attention to appropriate use of statistics.  I am not saying we need to use statistics less.  Actually, I think we need to do so more but we need to deal with those statistics and studies in a better way.  We need people who know statistics and who understand sociological research so that our numbers mean something.  (Are there any sociology majors and professors at Christian colleges out there listening to this?)  We need people who can sort through all of these statistics in such a way that it makes sense and in a way that is meaningful for congregations.  It drives me crazy when I hear stats like, "You know you need to add another service when 80% of seating is filled up" and "You know children who sit in the worship service with their parents continue to attend church after they have left home better than those who just go to youth group."  Sure, these have a glimmer of truth but they are more conventional wisdom (i.e urban legend) than solid analysis.  People build entire ministries on statistics like this.  For more outrage at evangelical misuse of statistics, see Christian Smith's "Evangelicals Behaving Badly with Statistics: Mistakes were made" from Books & Culture February 2007 and "What Scandal? Whose Conscience? Some reflections on Ronald Sider's Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience." by John G. Stackhouse, Jr. from Books & Culture August 2007 .   

3.  They are still effective with seekers. My comment: Willow Creek's gift to the wider church has been its passion to see unchurched people become followers of Jesus. Willow Creek, along with Andy Stanley's North Point Community Church, is still one of the best examples of an effective seeker model.  They see many people who were not Christians become Christians.  In this way, they are a model of contextualizing the gospel so that nonChristians can learn about it and begin to follow Jesus.  Though there are other ways of doing evangelism by the church, the seeker model is still one to be reckoned with because most the other approaches are so ineffective.  (Are lots of adults becoming Christians at the churches you know?) 

One of the principle problems with the seeker approach is that they replace Sunday worship with Sunday evangelism services.  Willow though still does have a worship service on Wednesday nights called "New Community."  Though some would see Sunday seeker services as a tragic terrible flaw, I think it is a valid move because of the lack of evangelism happening through other methods and because I place less value on the traditional-handed-down-for-centuries liturgy. 

Other resources on this topic: I recently wrote a reflection on this: Download The Seeker Model Paper.doc.  See Andy Stanley's Seven Practices of Effective Ministry for the most persuasive compelling case for the seeker-driven approach.  See my category Andy Stanley for more that I've written about him.  For a critique of the seeker approach, see The Great Giveaway: Reclaiming the Mission of the Church from Big Business, Parachurch Organizations, Psychotherapy, Consumer Capitalism, and Other Modern Maladies by David E. Fitch

Many mainline denomination (Methodist, Presbyterian, Episcopalian, Lutheran) people who have a heart for evangelism put forward the Alpha course as the best evangelism program going right now.  It, like the seeker approach, allows people to learn about Jesus in a non-threatening way, with informational talks about the basics of Christianity by the winsome Nicky Gumbel, a meal, non-directed conversation in a non-churchy atmosphere.  The Alpha course comes from Holy Trinity Brompton in London, England.  They do this on a Tuesday night and then have regular worship services on Sundays.  Thus, you keep the tradition on Sundays but have effective evangelism program during the week.  For many people, this is the ideal approach. 

Interestingly though there are some mainline people who want to imitate seeker driven approaches (e.g. United Methodist Bill Easum and  Episcopalian Tom Ehrich).   

  4.  Consumer discipleship is not working.  My comment: Programs have limited usefulness.  It sounds good to put a system in place as Rick Warren suggests in The Purpose Driven Church (p.130) where people move from 101 (first base - discovering membership) to 201 (second base - discovering spiritual maturity), to 301 (third base - discovering my ministry) to 401 (home - discovering my life mission).  But discipleship is not an assembly line and it just doesn't work (for long) like that.  After working at seeker-driven megachurch, my friend wrote me: "I think discipling people may only be able to be done a few at a time."

Another friend wrote me about his experience working in a megachurch, "The megachurch approach can truly breed an unhealthy consumerism mentality. Specializing in everything to cater to our every need (affinity groups, a cafe in the lobby, Sunday school programs for children that are incredible, etc) isn't always bad, but can foster a 'it's all about me' mentality."  This is the concern of basically all of the critics of the megachurch approach. 

5.  Many mature Christians are unsatisfied with the church. Their conclusion is that people need to learn to feed themselves.  My comment: I think probably people want tradition and depth not just a personalized spiritual growth program. John Ortberg, now pastor at Menlo Park Presbyterian (PCUSA), was a pastor at Willow Creek for many years.  He has written one of the very best books on "feeding yourself" called The Life You've Always Wanted: Spiritual Disciplines for Ordinary People.  These were originally sermons at Willow.  It is not new to Willow to feed yourself.  Thus, I think they probably need to dig deeper in order to find out what the path forward should really be. 

Hybels says that one thing they want to do is help people design a personal spiritual growth plan.  On the one hand, this still sounds consumeristic.  But on the other hand, my experience in theological education does lead me to believe that when mature Christians want to dig deep intellectually in order to further grow in their faith, they have very different interests as is evident in any list of course offerings at a seminary.  (See Fuller Seminary's School of Theology courses or Duke Divinity School's list of courses). 

This leads to my other point.  I think some of the mature Christians who are dissatisfied with what they are receiving at Willow, want a better connection to Christian history.  You find this in spades here at Duke Divinity School.  People want to connect to Augustine, Aquinas, Barth - someone with more worldwide and historical importance.  Traditional liturgical churches have a taste of those resources in the music and liturgy of every worship service.  The most extreme form of being unsatisfied with the nondenominational church is converting to Catholicism which a few of my friends have done.  Because church tradition is the one thing Willow decided to systematically expunge during its founding, its people miss it.  Like most churches, its greatest strength is also its greatest weakness. 

If Willow's mature believers long for history, there is no quick fix.  But here are some suggestions. 

  • Give each of the staff a subscription to Christian History
  • Encourage mature Christians to take seminary correspondence courses. 
  • Foster connections with local Roman Catholic priests and nuns to do spiritual direction. 
  • Attempt to introduce a modified Anglican eucharist to the mid-week service (Invitation, Confession, Gloria, Word, Eucharist, Benediction). 
  • Use Robert Webber's outstanding eight volume Complete Library of Christian Worship which gives us an easy to use reference for deepening worship through the insights of the centuries. 
  • Have the staff and congregation work through some of Richard Foster's Renovare resources like Devotional Classics and Spiritual Classics
  • Have learning sessions with mainline people who have confessional (orthodox) theology and are pro-evangelism who are positive about things like the Alpha course (described above).
  • Listen to North Park New Testament professor, amazing blogger, and Willow Creek attender Scot McKnight.
  • Ask Mark Noll, preeminent historian and former Wheaton College professor, now at Notre Dame and author of Scandal of the Evangelical Mind

 
If those solutions seem too far removed from the Bible-centered non-denominational tradition, then at least read the very best Biblical Studies people that you can find (which I am told Randy Frazee is now doing).  I recommend An Annotated Guide to Biblical Resources for Ministry by David R. Bauer or Commentary and Reference Survey: A Comprehensive Guide to Biblical and Theological Resources by John Glynn as a way of sorting through the vast array of commentaries out there.   When you are preaching, you should always (if possible - I have always been near a theological library), consult commentaries.  Use these resources to find some good ones.  When you begin a series, invited your congregation members to buy a commentary and read through it with you.

Update.  Here are a couple of "I told you so" articles:

"Willow Creek Repents?
by Diana Butler Bass, author of Christianity for the Rest of Us: How the Neighborhood Church Is Transforming the Faith.  Book description: "A detailed survey of progressive church growth in recent decades reveals how non-evangelical, neighborhood churches are flourishing without emulating the tactics of mega-churches, in an analysis that counsels Protestant readers on how to remain authentic to denominational traditions while promoting one's spiritual community."

A Shocking “Confession” from Willow Creek Community Church
by Bob Burney, a Christian radio host in Columbus, Ohio

July 24, 2007

Small church vs. large church

On Out of Ur, the Leadership journal blog, the latest post is about two nonChristians who have been attending churches in Toronto.  The post is called: "Razzmatazz or Ragamuffins? Two non-Christians paid to visit churches are impressed with charity not facilities."

They were turned off by the megachurches they visited but were moved by the devotion to Jesus by a small church that served the homeless.  I posted the following comment. 

This post is exactly right to point out that churches without flash and pizzazz can still definitely show people who Jesus is.  Small churches do not have the resources to put on a fancy Sunday morning show.  They should be who they are - equipping their people to serve and showing the community Jesus by serving them.  Many, who are not attracted to the slick production, will be attracted by them. 

But I do question the implication that the majority of young people and unchristian people are not attracted to quality Sunday morning programming.  I do not think we can make that conclusion based on the opinions of these 2 college students.       

My experience is that more young adults and nonchristians are attracted to megachurches and cool emerging churches than poor social justice churches.  But I would be thrilled to be wrong.

The sample size of two is inconclusive.  Are there statistics about how many people are coming to Christ in megachurches vs. small-churches that are more oriented toward social justice?  There are many sociologists people out there doing research on this kind of thing: Gallup, Barna, Christian Smith, Christian Schwarz (Natural Church Development), Lilly Endowment, Baylor survey, denominational stats, and the Alban Institute.

There is still a place I think for quality Sunday morning programming (welcoming, music,  and preaching) for the purpose of drawing in new people and equipping the Christians.  And yet it is easy to spend all of a church's resources on the Sunday morning show.

May the Spirit of God give us eyes to see what he is doing through the variety of church forms.

 
Further thoughts:

I want to affirm small churches and churches that care for the poor.  I also want large churches to appreciate these small churches.  Posts like this one on Out of Ur serve to do that.  That is good. 

But it also bothers me when churches don't at least try to have quality Sunday morning programming.  (The end results will vary depending on the size of the church.  A church of 500 can do more than a church of 30 in terms of quality programming). 

This probably bothers me because this is one of my strengths - organizing people into a team to improve Sunday morning programming.  (See my post "How to plan and lead worship.") I just don't want churches to get complacent thinking that the quality of the Sunday morning programming is irrelevant to their outreach to young adults and nonChristians.  I think the seeker folks (like Granger Community Church and Willowcreek Community Church) are right to urge churches to welcome people well, clearly explain the elements of the service to them, and try to relate the eternal truths of Scripture to the world of today.