The Correctives of Intentional Discipleship
Previously, I described the process of intentional discipleship as opposed to the haphazard approach so many churches take (see here). A successful discipleship program must be focused, universal, and church-based, thereby addressing several issues with which churches often struggle. Because it focuses the ministries of the church on one overall objective, making disciples, it forces it to deal with troublesome matters like fragmentation and traditionalism. Having a universal process, one that engages all members of the church, deals with the problem of AWOL members who assume discipleship is for other people. And a church-based program restores the church to its rightful place as indispensable to the disciple-making task.
Fragmentation
One of the frustrations many church leaders face is having a constellation of ministries that are either unrelated, or at least not obviously related to the church’s mission. Over time churches can develop programs which may be good but are ancillary to its purpose. As a result, our churches easily become fragmented:
We no longer have a disciplined faith development track for Christian adults in our churches. Instead we have adult Sunday schools, Christian how-to books and seminars, Christian radio and small group study guides designed to be led by facilitators who are usually without an ordered didache themselves. We must develop an approach that takes seriously the need for ordered learning among adults. It must be disciplined, accurate, and attainable. We must convince every Christian within our churches of the need for becoming established in the core truths of the faith, and for beginning a lifelong learning approach to the Christian life which will lead toward a mastery of the Scriptures.1
Traditionalism
One hurdle to thinking clearly regarding the need for intentionality is the notion that “what we have always done will get it done.” That is, we can easily settle into ministry patterns that have served us well in the past but may not do so today. For instance, discipleship begins when one is converted. But our church structure may be ill-suited to gathering unbelievers for a hearing of the gospel so that conversion can take place. While the church’s people may be personally faithful in giving the gospel outside the ministries of the church, often there is no place in the church’s schedule for corporate evangelism. Though the gospel should be presented when the church gathers for worship, and unbelievers are to be welcomed (cf. 1 Cor 14:23–25), a worship service is designed for believers.
Therefore, it would be wise for churches to consider a time specifically aimed at addressing unbelievers, apart from worship. Willow Creek Community Church popularized the “seeker service” that has transformed the evangelical landscape, and not for the better, because the seeker service in effect replaced gathered worship. Having a regular time to communicate with unbelievers is a good idea. However, the worship service is the wrong time to do it because worship is for believers, and unbelievers, by definition, cannot worship. Some have claimed that the Sunday evening service began as an evangelistic service,2 but that has not been substantiated.3 And even if the Sunday evening service was at one time evangelistic, for the vast majority of churches that emphasis ceased long ago. Willow Creek developed the “Seeker Service” to address this need but has done so at the wrong time (in effect, replacing worship) and in the wrong way (marketing, entertainment, etc.).4
We need a method for gaining a hearing with unbelievers that does not involve the compromise that accompanies many contemporary models. Both Jesus and the apostle Paul used forums that were readily available for this purpose. Pritchard observes,
We see in the Scriptures that Jesus regularly taught many people who were not yet his disciples. A good deal of his ministry was public teaching on hillsides and at street corners. … Likewise the apostle Paul regularly interacted with nonbelieving Jews and Greeks in whatever public forum was available. Acts 17:17 records that Paul “reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and the God-fearing Greeks, as well as in the marketplace day by day with those who happened to be there.” In Ephesus, Paul had daily discussions in a public lecture hall for two years with the effect that “all the Jews and Greeks who lived in the province of Asia heard the word of the Lord.” Paul used a variety of public settings to proclaim and explain the gospel to his audiences.5
Given that in our culture most are inclined to consider spiritual matters on Sunday morning, it is wise to offer a service on Sunday morning, separate from worship, at which we can address unbelievers directly, win them to Christ as He wills, and move them forward in the discipleship process.
Still, change is always difficult, and sometimes made more difficult due to “traditionalism.” While “tradition” can be very good, “traditionalism” can stifle a church’s ministry. It has rightly been said that “tradition is the living faith of the dead, while traditionalism is the dead faith of the living.”6
Mission Creep
An intentional track gives definition to the church’s ministries and provides criteria against which we can evaluate them. Leaders who have clearly laid out the church’s discipling purpose can then determine whether each ministry is contributing to it and, if not, decide whether those resources should be reallocated. This requires that we go back to the Bible to identify the core functions that God has given us to carry out, and to determine whether the forms of ministry we currently offer best fulfill those objectives. Ronald Reagan said, “No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. So governments’ programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.”7 Unfortunately, we could say much the same for many church ministries.
Such are the obstacles to discipleship avoided by a focused process. Next we will look at those overcome by making our spiritual growth efforts universal and church-based.
Ken Brown is the pastor of Community Bible Church in Trenton, MI. We republish his article by permission.
Photo by Jon Tyson on Unsplash
- Jeff Reed, “Church-Based Christian Education: Creating a New Paradigm” (paper presented at the 1996 BILD International Conference, Atlanta, GA, May 9, 1996), 9–10. [↩]
- Kenneth D. Harris, “Shedding Light on the Sunday Evening Service,” Moody Monthly, November 1989, 18. [↩]
- Thom Rainer, “Whatever Happened to Sunday Evening Services?” Church Matters (blog), May 10, 2014, accessed August 4, 2021, https://churchanswers.com/blog/whatever-happened-sunday-evening-services/. [↩]
- For a devastating critique of the Willow Creek model, see G.A. Pritchard, Willow Creek Seeker Services (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1996), 187–287. [↩]
- Ibid., 188. See Acts 14:1; 17:1–3; 18:4, 28; and 19:8–10. [↩]
- Harry L. Reeder, Pastoral Ministry 3 (DMin class, Westminster Theological Seminary, August 2000). [↩]
- “A Time for Choosing” (recorded speech, October 27, 1964), accessed September 16, 2021, https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/reagans/ronald-reagan/time-choosing-speech-october-27-1964. [↩]