This is the second in a series of posts on commitments that I believe will be essential to the future Methodism in all of its forms. In the last post I offered my thoughts on the necessity of lay mobilization in the local church and beyond. A necessary component of lay mobilization will be a renewed commitment to intentional discipleship from all levels of the denominations and expressions of Methodism. This may seem like a surprising need for those stemming from a denomination with the mission statement,“To make disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world”, yet the need is very real.
Before serving in my current position with the Indiana Conference I taught Bible at a large Christian school in Louisville, KY. The mission statement of the school came from Luke 2:52, “And Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man.” (NIV) The Bible curriculum was to be a primary context in forming students into young men and women of godly wisdom. When I began, the Bible curriculum was almost entirely focused on teaching the narrative of the Bible with some attempt to help students see how biblical principles could be applied to life as they knew it.
We found that the students who graduate from the school system were not much more likely to remain in the church after graduation than students who graduate from public schools. For all the years of Bible classes (many students attended the school K-12), a significant number of students were not being formed into maturing disciples of Jesus. I have little doubt that the academic heavy approach to the Bible curriculum was part of the problem.
Many of our churches have been operating with the same emphasis for decades. Our seasoned church members have attended Bible study after Bible study, but many have not been given a full vision of the life of a disciple of Jesus or the mission of the Church. For many, this is not their fault because for their whole lives they have been told they were responsible for coming to church on Sunday morning, Bible study, periodic service to the community, and not getting in trouble. If they did these things, they were living the Christian life expected of them. They were not instructed that the local church is the missional outpost of the Body of Christ or that being a faithful disciple was multiplicative in nature. The clergy are paid to go out into the community, to evangelize, and disciple people. The incomplete vision of discipleship has led to a failure to fully realize the mission of the church in many congregations. The future of Methodism must include a robust model of the life of mature disciples anchored in Scripture, as well as support for realizing that model.
Let me pause to say that the above may be overstated for some contexts and is not meant to place shame on all the clergy of the last several decades. A common experience I hear from clergy is that they were simply not equipped to intentionally disciple people in a holistic manner. For the most part, seminary prepares clergy to give meaningful sermons, interpret the Bible, and manage the church organization. In general, seminaries have neglected teaching future clergy how to fully disciple people and to create vibrant missional congregations. The seminary I attended offered “spiritual formation” as an emphasis, but it was not a primary aspect of the core course of study. I also recognize that there have been pastors and churches focused on discipling for missional impact all this time. They have been the exception, but must become the rule.
Intentional Discipleship
Those familiar with curriculum design will know the principle of backward design. Backward design is the idea that a curriculum designer begins by identifying what a student or participant will know or be able to do after completion of a course. Phil Maynard and others describe this process as “beginning with the end in mind.” When applied to intentional discipleship this means that the vibrant vision of the mission of the Church and the practices of disciples of Jesus must be the primary focus in the life of our faith communities. They cannot just be written by General Conferences or spoken from the pulpit. They must be taught and retaught through the very forms and practices of all levels of the church organization. It must be clear where we are going as we all emerge from this time of transition.
What, then, is the model for discipleship? Since we are seeking to make disciples of Jesus, the model of discipleship is the life of Jesus. There is no one model that can claim to be the exclusive model for describing the life of Jesus, and therefore the only discipleship model. Mike Breen offers a simple formulation of “Up, In, and Out” to express the disciple’s relationship with God, others within the church, and those beyond the faith community as part of his method for building a discipling culture. Alan Hirsch and Tim Catchim see the roles of apostle, prophet, evangelist, shepherd, and teacher found in Ephesians 4 as the foundation for maturing disciples for living out the functions that comprise the mission of the church. The United Methodist Church membership vows ask members to offer their prayers, presence, service, gifts, and witness as part of the congregation. Phil Maynard describes three responses to God’s love as “being part of the body of Christ”, “becoming more like Jesus”, and “joining Jesus in ministry” which are broken down into the six discipleship dimensions of a life of worship, hospitality, opening to Jesus, obeying Jesus, service, and generosity. All of these models have strengths and weaknesses and there are others to consider. However, the thing they all have in common (besides being Jesus-centered) is the emphasis on intentional relationships as the vehicle for discipleship.
If anything can be said about how Jesus created the movement that is the Church, it is that it began with intentional relationships with twelve people. A lot can be learned about discipleship from studying the way Jesus prepared his disciples to carry on the Gospel. The works cited above are all good resources for such insights. One point I will highlight here is that Jesus ushered his disciples through a learning process in which he met their changing needs as they matured. We must take this to heart for a revived Methodism to form.
As Wesleyans with the doctrine of Christian Perfection as part of our theological heritage, we know that a profession of faith and baptism does not equal spiritual maturity. Yet, many members of our congregations have been in an early stage of maturity as a disciple of Jesus for decades or even their entire lives. Like in any other process of maturity, there are multiple stages that disciples move through as they mature. Maturing disciples also need different types of support, education, and relationships throughout their growth. Phil Maynard’s model is particularly helpful in identifying the needs of growing disciples in his formulation of the stages of discipleship. First time visitors are probably not ready to be recruited into a band meeting where they are expected to hear and share deep spiritual struggles. We need to be intentional about not forcing people into what is offered, but instead offer what is needed. This attention to matching particular types of relationships and resources to the needs of disciples throughout the maturing process was a significant factor for why I chose Phil’s model as a primary discipleship resource for the Indiana Conference.
Intentional discipling relationships within the church range from those entrusted with connecting with visitors through those who are developing leaders for the local church and beyond. All of these relationships are vitally important to meeting people where they are in their relationship with Jesus. Of these, the small group probably gets the most play in church talk at the moment. “Small group” can mean almost anything, and people meeting together can have all sorts of benefits. Some small groups are affinity groups designed to welcome new people into congregations, while some are essentially Bible studies or rebranded Sunday school classes. These are valuable times of learning and fellowship. However, the small group which practices accountable discipleship is still absent from many congregations.
Accountable discipleship is the practice of sharing with others about one’s life with God and supporting each other in spiritual growth. Our Wesleyan history and research indicates that there is a need and desire for this type of relationship for maturing disciples. The society, class, and band system was the very foundation of early Methodism, but this practice can take many forms and can be incorporated into many existing groups. Whatever the setting or form, accountable discipleship is not easy to maintain. It takes commitment to vulnerability and presence. The practice of accountable discipleship is also often a new dimension of growth for many. Such discipling relationships must be consistently encouraged (expected) and supported in order to establish their normalcy. As accountable discipleship becomes a common practice, multiplication of disciples emerges as a natural next step.
In Hero Maker: Five Essential Practices for Leaders to Multiply Leaders, Dave Ferguson states that disciples are not fully disciples if they are not discipling others. Considering the example of Jesus and his disciples, it is hard to argue with the statement. Jesus spent a lot of time forming the twelve and left his disciples with the mission of making disciples (Matt. 28). This is a clear point of intersection between my first post on lay mobilization and this one. Even clergy who are motivated by a robust vision of discipleship cannot disciple all their people in the relational way necessary for maturity. Lay people must be matured and equipped to be disciples who make disciples. This is an uncomfortable reality for many who do not even invite people to church (the average for Methodists is one invite every 30 years!). Accountable discipleship in the context of a holistic vision of the mission of the church will naturally lead to people ready to invest in others. This must be foundational to the life of our faith communities, not simply a program made available.
I will end this post with a word on measuring the growth of discipleship. I have found to be mostly true the common statement, “We measure what we care about.” It is also true that it is often not immediately clear how to measure phenomena like spiritual maturity. Dave Ferguson offers the suggestion that an indicator is how many people are actively discipling others. Not teaching Bible studies or other valuable ministries, but personally investing in someone’s spiritual growth. There are surely other similar measurements that go beyond simply counting participation or attendance that the future Methodism must identify.
We are beginning to use a tool developed by Phil Maynard called The Real Discipleship Survey in the Indiana Conference. It is a self-assessment tool that gives an indication of where people are in their maturity in the six dimensions of discipleship identified above. Simple self-assessments are not an exact science, but this tool offers a starting place for discipleship conversations and offers some basis for measuring the lived discipleship of congregations. I anticipate it being a very helpful ministry tool for local churches and all levels of the Indiana Conference.
Discipleship in the future Methodism must be intentional, relational, and accountable. The Scriptural foundations, theological heritage, and useful models and tools are at our fingertips. The remaining and emerging expressions of Methodism will need to choose to embed intentional, missional discipleship into its forms and practices, to form the emerging culture.
In the next post I will dive into another essential commitment that I have touched on in these first two posts; a culture of multiplication.