There are gads of books written about discipleship.
The true answer—what we read in the Bible and what see with our eyes is not the same.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that the majority of Christians possess an inch-deep faith. Only 20 percent of Christian adults are involved in any form of discipleship activity.
But—I believe change is coming. More believers are opening their eyes to the benefits and obedience of communal disciple-making.
So, what happened?
In the early church, baptism unified new believers with Christ, as disciples under Christ’s Lordship (Mt. 28:19–20; Jn. 20:19–20). By the second century, the church had developed a three-year process of discipleship training, called catechesis, prior to baptism.
Baptism necessitated an examination and call for obedient discipleship. Historian Philip Schaff notes:
We should remember that during the first three centuries…adult baptism was the rule…Hence in preceding catechetical instruction, the renunciation of the devil, and the profession of faith.
Candidates for baptism would partake in the church’s communal teaching, instruction, and spiritual disciplines, but not in the Lord’s Supper.
Disciple-making consisted of the cultivation of spiritual maturity within the ecclesiological community. The early church made disciples in the same manner as the Twelve—they lived out activated faith in communal life—together.
In the infant stages of the church, catechesis specifically related to communal instruction of the disciple-making process.By the late first century, Clement of Rome (c. 35–99), a disciple of Paul (Phil 4:3), provided evidence of following Christ’s Great Commission “commands” to “instruct” baptismal candidates.
By the late second century, Origen (c. 184–253) and Tertullian (c. 155–240), referred to catechesis as discipleship instruction and disciplines.,Yet, discipleship still took place within communal gatherings.It was distinctively a shared life-on-life spiritual maturity.
As time progressed, the church formed schools—such as, Pantaenus, a converted 3rdcentury philosopher and highly regarded gospel-proclaimer, who founded a “catechetical school” in Alexandria.These catechetical schools provided a more structured discipleship than a “random outdoor meeting.”
By the early fourth century, the church had received an onrush of enthusiastic converts. With increasing heresies and sects, a move from the Apostolic Tradition to a “specified three-year catechumenate” became the preferred model of discipleship.
Heresies established the classroom style and didactic shift from the communal teaching-gathering. The church desired all new believers to possess “treasured knowledge” of the Eucharist and baptistic doctrine.
The biggest shift
A great change occurred due to heretical teaching, but infant baptism was the catalyst. With the (latter) assistance of Augustine of Hippo and Emperor Constantine marrying the Church to the state, infant baptism became the catalyzing shift.
Baptism became viewed as a “rite of entry into” the communal church.Believers were “born” into the church, instead of the stringent ties of baptismal catechism. Discipleship developed into a study of doctrines instead of a life-on-life baptistic Christ-identified community.
While catechesis evolved into didactic doctrinal training—it was still a form of discipleship. And, for argument sake, could be done in community.
Infant baptism is not to blame for today’s lack of discipleship.
How should we view the shifts?
All of the disciple-making shifts were factors of enculturation. Society influenced the church. I, personally, do not fault what occurred—it is what it is. But, how do we respond?
I think it’s wise to research our past—not for blame, but correction. If life-on-life communal gatherings were the incubator for disciple-making, then let’s shift back.
David Kinnaman, “New Research On the State of Discipleship,” Barna Group, https://www.barna.org/research/leaders-pastors/research-release/new-research-state-of- descipleship#.VqDcJFJQmDU.
Michael Green, Evangelism in the Early Church(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003), 218.
Philip Schaff, and David Schley Schaff, History of the Christian Church,Vol 2. (Grand Rapids: C. Scribner, 1910), 255.
Green, Evangelism in the Early Church, 217.
Kittle, Bromiley, and Friedrich,639.
“Clement of Rome,” Diane Severance, www.Christianity.com, http://www.christianity.com/church/church-history/timeline/1-300/clement-of-rome-11629592.html.
Andrew B. McGowan, Ancient Christian Worship: Early Church Practices in Social, Historical, and Theological Perspective(Grand Rapids, Baker, 2014), 95.
Tertullian, “Latin Christianity: Its Founder Tertullian.” in vol. 3 Ante-Nicene Fathers, eds.Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson (Peabody: Hendrickson, 2004), 263.
McGowan, Ancient Christian Worship, 95.
5 Reasons Pastors Leave the Ministry
When I was 7 years old, I caught our cat with its arm in my brother’s fishbowl. The cat was poking, prodding, and antagonizing the goldfish. The cat didn’t get the fish, but I know how it felt.
I’m connected to many pastors who live the “fishbowl” life. I’ve heard their “horror” stories of being prodded, poked at, and antagonized. Sometimes, I am in sheer disbelief that anyone would be so heartlessly treated. For the sake of my love for Christ’s church, I won’t share those stories.
What I will do is shed light on the reality of why pastors leave the ministry—here are my top five.
70% of pastors feel grossly underpaid.
Over 50% of pastors are paid $50,000 or less—many even below the poverty line. As well, those pastors receive no benefits, medical insurance, or retirement options.
When they leave the pulpit, the church casts them aside.
While the pastorate is a calling, the church should have a true love for their pastor—excited to say, “We take great care of our pastor.”
In Paul’s letter to the Philippians, he gushes with love for them—but it’s mutual. The Philippians were passionate about their “partnership in the gospel” and they “well supplied,” Paul (Phil 1:5, 4:18).
I know many pastors barely making the income needed, causing them to become bi-vocational (which has pros and cons). The dilemma is not bi-vocationalism, but that these churches expect “full-time” (and more) work. It seems Jesus was right about the “sons of this world” (Luke 16:8). The business world cares more for their peoples than the church.
Perhaps I meant—lack of leadership? While deacons and elders may be in positions, they may also give no support to the pastor.
When leaders have no desire to serve or to cultivate spiritual disciplines, the pastor is the one who suffers. He’s stuck with a rudderless ship. He’s a lone captain at sea, navigating “storms,” with no guides.
Without leadership, the pastor takes the brunt of the finger pointing when things don’t go as planned. Business meetings become gripe sessions—or the contrary, no one cares.
When bad leaders are in positions they are spiritually or experientially unqualified to partake, there’s no vision, mission, and reaching the lost. The pastor becomes a chaplain, overburdened and leaves.
Toxicity can be fatal. I’ve worked with churches that have closed and some existing ones that should!
Wherever there’s gossip, inside concentration, or manipulation—there’s toxicity. I have an ex-pastor friend who was forced out. The church belittled him at corporate meetings, made his life miserable, and asked him to supply his preaching outlines for review. They wanted to rule the pastor.
I know another ex-pastor whose treasurer would withhold his check. He would have to hunt him down to get paid—even though the church had over 1 million in the bank!
I know 4 others with similar situations—never to return.
80% of pastors believe pastoral ministry has negatively affected their families.
A pastor’s family will always see, and feel, how he is being treated. Whether lack of compensation, undue stress, or other—unlike any other profession, the family worships where the pastor “works.”
Consequently, the pastor’s home becomes an unstable environment. I know a pastor’s wife that literally cried and begged her husband to leave the church—for the sake of the family.
Unfortunately, wives (and children) of pastors experience emotional, relational, and spiritual stress. They hear all of the gossips. They may question: where is God? Is this what the church is really about?
The family of a pastor sacrifices much.
70% of pastors do not have a close friend and constantly fight depression.
True, and I know why. Many pastors have stated an inability to confide in church members. They feel that whatever they say, or do, will be used against them at some point. This is truth.
Pastoral loneliness is a horrible certainty—going through life with no close friends and feeling depressed. It’s a reality that pastors neglect to share and a major reason they leave.
Quick to Listen. https://pca.st/NC00?fbclid=IwAR1eIDRUl_rgYeFQhbDe7eQtElOdQApObV17VlpanU41O0Hu1mtVacM6Mu8
Thabiti Anyabwile, Don’t Make Your Pastor a Statistic?,9 Marks, https://www.9marks.org/article/dont-make-your-pastor-a-statistic/
Is your church struggling? Is it plateauing? Is your church planting core team losing interest? Are you having difficulty in reaching the unreached?
Become a force seven multiplier—sounds awesome—doesn’t it? It’s reminiscent of one of my favorite movie titles, Force 10 from Navarone!
What’s a force seven multiplier?
Click. bait. We’ve all been hooked at some point, sorry. We read a sweet eye-candy infused headline and take the bait! For church planters and revitalizers, there are tons of baited hooks.
But, for the most part, many of the “hooks” are baited with buzzwords that appeal to emotion.
There’s something about catchwords that church planters love—and thrive on. They eat them up and spew them out like sunflower seeds. Missional, attractional, immersion, engagement, bi-vo, co-vo, relational, and so on… I even used them—I’m guilty.
At any church planting conference, these hipster slogans become incantations over coffee as lyrical prose.
Lately, I’ve been reading a lot about pipelines, champions, and co-vocational topics. Maybe you have, too? But, can we address the overall picture of why? Can we hit reset for a second?
The Truth about Gospel Engagement
As I stated, I’m guilty. In my last article, I wrote about the psychographic viewpoint and the fruitfulness of their examination (I’ll stick with my claim, too). Recently, I’ve been asked to speak at several small events. I met with planters and revitalizers—and listened to their heart.
Vocabulary is good. Humanity uses it to glorify God, build relationships, express emotions, feelings, opinions, and also to define specific contexts. So, hear me out, I’m not against all of the “hipster” terminology—it has purpose and can be edifying. I merely want to “lift some fog” and bring clarity to what we’re doing.
The truth about gospel engagement is derived from our captivation by God’s love, through Jesus Christ. Natural gospel conversations will occur when our hearts, minds, and souls are aligned with the first and greatest commandment—to love the Lord…
Sometimes we make things more difficult than they need to be. We seek out instantaneous low-hanging fruit. We try to mimic the Apostle Paul’s journey, utilize tested programs, or buy into the newest network.
Observation: I’ve never seen a garden grow overnight. That’s fairytale stuff. There’s always plotting, plowing, sowing, weeding, and then reaping. Only to do it all over again each year and each year the variables are different (sun, rain, clouds, temperature, soil).
Sometimes we get delusions of grandeur because we read a best-selling-megachurch guy’s book. We get depressed when we don’t see multiplicative fruit, immediately. We’ll say, “What and where did I do wrong?”
Our focus is wrong. We’re concentrated on tertiary concepts more than obedient disciple-making. And the cause is our reliance on self or man, more than Christ.
Community gospel engagement is not about an event, but Jesus. If we see the world through the lens of Christ, we will see humanity’s brokenness, lostness, addictions, and a sin-laden culture. When we look upon Christ, we will see our own sin, the great forgiveness granted to us, and our hearts will burn with passion.
None of us want to hear the words given to the church of Ephesus—you have lost your first love (Rev. 2:4). So, let’s just set aside some of the jargon for a second and be intentional and practical.
The Practical Side of Missional Engagement
I get it. Most church planters, and more revitalizers, are finding themselves in bi-vocational settings. I love much of what is being written about navigating these waters. Kudos to the “heroes” who devote time and energy to pour into others. We all know that it’s not easy juggling family, ministry, and diverse occupations—needless to say—remaining an obedient disciple-maker in the midst.
But the practical side of any gospel mission is the Holy Spirit’s sanctifying and sustaining power. Whether we are building relationships within our first, second, or third job, with our next-door neighbor, seeking the rhythms of the community, or strategizing to reach out to our children’s sports’ moms, our obedience comes from our intentionality. We must yield to the Spirit’s control.
The practical side of missional engagement is to realize why we’re on the mission in the first place. Rescue, redemption, reconciliation, renewal, and rejuvenation. We have been set apart for God’s use—sanctified—and for God’s mission—gospel proclamation.
The practical side is whether we’re bi-vocational, co-vocational, full-time, or volunteering—the Apostle Paul’s confession should rend our hearts, “But my life is worth nothing to me unless I use it for finishing the work assigned me by the Lord Jesus—the work of telling others the Good News about the wonderful grace of God” (Acts 20:24).
The practicality is finding the rhythmic natural gospel conversation—and that overflow from a rescued and redeemed heart.
Let’s not lose focus on what is most important. Strategies, programs, acronyms, catchphrases, and resources are all tools to assist in gospel proclamation—but our first love and primary focus must be the gospel.
You’ve never heard about psychographics?
Well, it’s not too late to learn—and you should.
Recently, I was having coffee (of course) with an experienced church planter/pastor—he’s a very respected friend. We were discussing the many models, programs, and classifications of planting and revitalizing churches. A great edifying conversation.
We briefly touched on the topic of how church planting gurus utilize demographic data for missional engagement but have no concept of psychographics.
What is psychographics? In a nutshell, psychographics is detailed qualitative consumer market information. It is the results, opinions, activities, and interests of specified demographics.
In layman’s terms, psychographics helps to know what people enjoy, are passionate about, participate in, and love—it’s basically an Instagram photo.
Let me give you two of the most important psychographic information tools.
A psychographic view provides the possible ways and means in which a church may reach a demographic. One such way is by examining the activities that people enjoy.
For instance, I have demographic information (true story) about the county and town where my church is located. I have spent six years in a revitalization, here. The demographics, from census.gov, illustrate that the town has grown faster than the county—but the African American population has grown by an astounding 120%, while the Caucasian population has decreased by over 7%. What does that tell me? It tells me a lot about the people group I am reaching.
However, what demographics do not tell me is how to reach the new African American members of the community—and what they value. This is where psychographics comes in handy. Psychographics will show me what activities my community is passionate about—the online gaming, crafts, fishing, fortnite (if you have to ask, forget it!), football, surfing, kayaking, sewing, bingo, etc.
Psychographics tells me how people spend their time, not merely their interests. It’s great to know the socio-economics of my community, but if I don’t know the psychographic activities then I don’t know the community.
This psychographic analysis is very insightful. I, not only, want to know about the community’s passion, but I want to know their attitudes towards those passions. How does my community feel about President Trump may not mean much to you, and you may not care, but if the community strongly despises the President—probably my first missional outreach should not involve a “Trump 2020” booth.
What does the community think about Christianity? Adoption? Sports salaries compared to teacher salaries? What do they think their greatest social need to be? Do they care about environmental protection, recycling, or clean water?
Knowing the attitudes of the people that you are reaching is a major bonus. This is nearly identical to the Apostle Paul walking through Athens, making the summation, “I perceive that in every way you are very religious. For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription: ‘To the unknown god.’” (Acts 17:22–23). The people of Athens were passionate about their gods—Paul used their passions to reach them.
There are several other facets of psychographics that are very helpful, I listed the two that I enjoy researching. To me, activities and attitudes tell me how people “tick” and what motivates them. I’m going to provide some graphics below. Each of the graphics has a linked source—do yourself a favor and click on some of those links.
As far back as I can remember I have played team sports.
I was born with a competitive nature. I am the youngest of three boys. To survive, I was required to push harder and better. To be frank, I learned to loathe losing. But, I’m grateful that I was raised in an era when only winners received trophies.
While I surpassed many of my peers in natural ability, I hated to see them struggle. If my teammates didn’t produce—the team suffered. I quickly learned the effectiveness of teamwork.
Nearly every team sport has an individual that excels—but a team that wins utilizes a collective input and mutual investment.
The plurality of oneness
Surely, the phrase “plurality of oneness” seems like an oxymoron. And, sort of—it is. But within the realm of any fruitful organization should be a collaboration and unification of differing talents.
For example, the Apostle Paul manifested God’s design for the church—that there would be “apostles, prophets, evangelists, shepherds, and teachers” (Eph. 4:11). More than mere office titles, each of these five labels provides unique giftings and talents—for the whole.
The respective offices illustrate a plurality of oneness—teamwork.
Effective team building is not found in gathering similar talents, but diverse. As another example, think about football. Not everyone passes, or kicks, or runs, or blocks—yet each teammate’s unique skillset completes the whole.
Seeking diversity with clarity
Everyone knows that if you gather ten Baptists in a room, you’ll have ten opinions and a casserole. Yet, in all seriousness—team diversity is good—if done correctly.
In Paul’s “team-list” (above), while there is a uniqueness of talent, there is also a unified vision. When seeking team members, two essential foundations exist in building and developing a successful team.
We briefly examined the first—gathering a diversified group of people. Second, each of the team members must understand the organization’s vision. With vision, clarity comes succinct goal setting and completion.
When a diversified team collaborates with a unified vision then creativity, innovation, and goal setting help to reach specified key objectives. However, diversity without vision clarity is merely an opinionated fellowship.
Creating key objectives for specific results
Why have a team at all? What is the purpose of a team?
Normally, a team is created because it outshines the effectiveness of what one person can accomplish. Therefore, a team should exist to achieve strategic objectives with specified results.
Recently, I read John Doerr’s book, Measure What Matters: How Google, Bono, and the Gates Foundation Rock the World with OKRs.It seems that “OKRs” are the new buzzwords. OKRs are objectives and key results.
To maintain a unified vision within the diversified team, write down realistic and achievable goals. Concurrently, the team should also log a measurable means of identifying how each objective is met (i.e. how do we know when the objective is complete?).
But remember, having a diverse group helps achieve a unified vision by utilizing each person’s talents, but each team member may have differing methods of achieving a specific goal. The purpose of writing down the objectives and key results allows each team member to be invested in the process and know when/how to move forward.
Think of a young child singing their ABC’s. My youngest daughter used to skip over the letter N, singing, M.M.M.O.P.
Did she complete her objectives? Not really. First, she repeated “objective” M, three times. She also missed “objective” N, completely. And, in the grand scheme of things, failed to sing the alphabet—the entire reason for learning the song.
However, I loved to hear her sing. And, when she got it correct—ice cream was always a good reward.
Celebrate the small victories
Everyone likes to be edified. Too many times organizations do not celebrate the little wins of reaching key objectives. When visible results are measured and the steps to fulfilling the vision come to pass, it is important to recognize a job well-done.
This last point is not a team building feature, but it will solidify validity and provide encouragement. Collectively celebrating is something every team strives to witness.
Celebrate the small victories of the team.