The Discipleship Debate

What is more important for us to be doing: discipling new believers or building functional churches? There seems to be an increasing debate about whether the egg does actually come before the chicken, or even without the chicken. The emergence of the ‘emergent’ has given added strength to the ‘discipleship only’ camp.

Sparked by a debate on Discpleship vs Building Healthy Churches over at NeoLeader [the stated aim of Queensland Baptists is to 'grow healthy churches], I’ve been doing some thinking on my previous experiences working on the parachurch side of the ministry fence. I worked as an evangelist with Campus Crusade for Christ, probably the world’s largest evengelistic organisation. We were good at what we did, partly because that is ALL we did. I often long for the simplicity of an existence whereby all I had to cworry about was getting up every day and telling people about the Gospel and helping to disciple those who made the decision to follow Christ.

Life is altogether more complicated now, thanks to being a pastor and having a range of other concerns to balance. This can include anything from counseling, pastoral care, leadership, conflict resolution, meetings, services, funerals etc. My ministry now encompasses a far wider scope of activities than it did back in the old days with Crusade.

Here’s my thoughts on how discpleship when disconnected from the ministry of the local chruch can happen in a vacuum:

Is building a ‘movement’ the same as building the ‘church’?

Examining the notion within Campus Crusade for Christ [Agape] of ‘building movements’ and how it relates to the Body of Christ.

A while ago I was motivated to visit the Agape UK website to familiarise myself with the latest developments, and catch up on what many of my ex-colleagues are getting up to. I was greatly encouraged to see new staff, new developments, and read about how familiar faces are still powering on.

When I transitioned out of Crusade I followed the call of God and ventured into the realm of the local church.

Since then I have often reflected on the journey that I underwent from para-church to local church, and the difference in priorities that govern your thinking and activity and theology.

Leaving a tight knit movement of people involved at the cutting edge of evangelism is not an easy process. When I was inside the movement it always seemed to me that there was nothing I could do outside of it that would possible come near to the significance of the mission I and others were engaged in. This was reflected by some colleagues in the process of extraction. I left with a sense of being a ‘deserter’ and that I was now settling for something ‘less’. I in no way thought this to be systemic, but it is something I felt myself from within, and encountered from some.

The more I become involved in building churches [and thereby the body of Christ], the more uneasy I have felt about the gulf between churches and some para-church organisations, [not least Campus Crusade for Christ] on the nature of what we are trying to build.

As an ex-staff member of Campus Crusade for Christ I am well versed in the purpose statements that seek to explain the mission. No other word features more prominently than the word ‘movement’.

If you read through the Agape UK website you will not notice the word ‘church’ or the term ‘body of Christ’. You will come across the word and the notion of ‘building movements’ a lot. Displayed prominently is the following purpose statement:

Agapé’s dream is to help build spiritual movements everywhere so that everyone knows someone who truly follows Jesus. But we must not miss this foundational lesson: it is only God that builds spiritual movements.

Reading through the pages on the site that explain the purpose of Agape you will find a definition of the word movement:

“a group of people who are organised for, ideologically motivated by, and committed to a purpose which implements some form of personal or social change; who are actively engaged in the recruitment of others; and whose influence is spreading in opposition to the established order in which it was originated.”

An explanation of the specific aims of Agape UK [Campus Crusade for Christ] reads:

Agapé works with people of influence in most areas of life, and has sent British staff to help build spiritual movements on every continent. Because we believe that the university has the greatest leverage on society, our work with students is a central focus.

We believe that if students are truly prepared at university to build multiplying disciples of Jesus throughout their lives, whether at work, in their communities, or as full-time missionaries, God will use them to change the world.

Staff members and the Church

During my time as a staff member the respective churches that we came from, attended in situ, and other churches formed an important part of our support base. In fact our entire support base came from outside of the ‘movement’. It came from Christians within churches and churches themselves who helped make our ministry possible. Churches were the financial and spiritual lifeblood [in terms of prayer support] of every Agape staff member.

The urban context of my ministry also entailed being involved in youth ministry in the context of a local church. However, for the most part interaction with the extended church was primarily for the purposes of support.

During my time as a staff member in the late 80’s till the mid 90’s I understood that the policy of Campus Crusade worldwide was that it did not plant and manage churches. This clear separation of church and ‘movement’ even extended to the extreme of us never being able to celebrate Communion together in our staff gatherings unless an ordained minister was present.

This clear distinction between church and para-church does make a lot of sense in western contexts where the country is broadly speaking a ‘Christian’ country with many churches already in existence. The U.K. being a prime example of a country already saturated with churches but with many pockets of society untouched by the Gospel. The para-church can extend its reach into niche’ areas of ministry that the local church is unable to. The potential of church and para-church working in partnership is great, and there are many examples of this to be found throughout the U.K.

Theology Lite.

During my time as an Agape staffer I was one of the only staffers who had any theological training. The rationale for the activity of the movement is often traced back to the writings and pronouncements of Bill Bright. The key directions of the movement both during his lifetime and after are focussed on the vision and strategy that he developed. The literature used for discipleship training was written by Bill Bright as well. This is not to say his writings are bad. I use the Ten Basic Steps Towards Christian Maturity as the main source of our discipleship training in our local church.

The question I do have goes to the heart of theological reflection or the absence of it by Crusade staff as they contemplate where they fit into the Body of Christ and their responsibility to extend it. Bill Bright’s teachings provide the movement with excellent resources, but surely a wider framework of theological grounding is needed by a movement of full time evangelists who are helping to shape the kingdom?

Without adequate theological grounding the activity of Crusade staff can potentially be within a bubble. It may well be possible that working with a limited horizon, staff contribute more towards the aims of Crusade itself. It may well be possible that the aim of ‘building movements’ is an end in and of itself, rather something connected to a grander plan.

Going Solo

If what is articulated on the Agape UK website is an accurate picture of the degree to which Agape sees its role with the Church, then there is good cause for alarm. There is no mention of ‘partnership’ with the church or the role and purpose of Agape in the wider scheme of things. The language in that sense is isolationist. The ‘movements’ that are being built do not seem to be hyperlinked into anything. There is no apparent link into the wider Body of Christ. The movements would seem to be attached to the juggernaut of Crusade [or Agape in the UK], and not the Church per se.

I would argue that the consciousness of being limbs [melos] of the Body of Christ [and the accompanying language] needs to become more prominent within the organisation. The fact that Crusade is a global organisation provides reasons not to dovetail with the Church. When you are placed within an existing hierarchy and support mechanism there appears to be very little need to connect in any meaningful way with churches, except of course for that all vital support.

I could have quite happily worked as a staffer and never attended church. Such was the sustenance I received from fellowship and ministry with my fellow staff. I derived much more from staff meetings than I did from church services and the finest calibre Christians I have ever connected with have been from within Crusade. Combined with a over-arching disposition of separation from the Church, these reasons maximise the potential for disconnection from the Bride of Christ.

The way ahead

I note that there is one Crusade ministry that is drawing local churches into a partnership in its effort to reach UPG’s: Story Runners. Ron Green in his letter of introduction states:

“So, what are we waiting for? We’re waiting for you… We believe that reaching our

“Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, and the uttermost parts of the earth” is the task of the local

church. We have a whole team who is committed to come along side you and help you be

successful in working among these unreached people groups and walking with you

throughout this journey.”

Story Runners is linked with another initiative called ‘Finishing The Task’, which has as its byline: ‘Churches starting spiritual movements everywhere’. This is an altogether different slant from the rather disconnected purpose statement to ‘build spiritual movements everywhere’. Story Runners sees the building of movements rooted from within the church, and coming alongside churches as a paraclete to assist them in this task. I see this as the true calling of the para [alongside] church movement. When a para-church movement begins seeking to achieve things within its own localised universe it has ceased to be a para-church organisation and is now a hybrid church.

The mission statement of Story Runners reads:

‘The mission of Finishing the Task is to form a global network of local churches, denominations, church planters and mission agencies from across the Evangelical spectrum that are willing to work together in partnerships to see church planting initiatives launched initially among the 639 Unengaged, Unreached People Groups with populations over 100K. The ultimate goal is to see zero unengaged people groups. The challenge is for local churches to take the lead as a “managing partner” and the mission agencies will serve the local church in their endeavor.’

This I believe is the most biblical model of partnership that the church can have with the para-church. I may be contradicted by the facts on the ground within Agape and Crusade further a field, but if the language in the literature and websites are anything to go by I may well be close to the mark. Would it be true to say that Story Runners is the exception rather than the rule?