Di*cip*eshi*

What in God’s name do we think we are doing? If I hear one more prominent church leader define discipleship as going to church I will scream. We aren’t going to count the number of people who attend church anymore. Some genius decided we will count “disciples” in worship. What? We can do that with one hand! And I keep hearing about discipleship “programs” and “systems”. Do we not have any clue what we are talking about? Well, we did form a Board of Discipleship, so it isn’t a new confusion, but really… let’s take the heart and soul of the Christian movement and reduce it to just one more institutional church growth travesty.

No one with a lick of common sense or the ability to read the Bible defines discipleship as church membership/participation/attendance. The only way to do this is to believe that Jesus was wrong and had no idea what he was talking about — in which case, it is hard to defend the idea you are a Christian. There is no such thing as a passive disciple. Discipleship isn’t about believing in God, believing that Jesus is God’s Son, wanting to live a “good, Christian life,” or attending worship whenever you feel like it (sorry Vital Congregations/Vital Signs dashboard…). Discipleship is a lifestyle — a commitment to live as Jesus lived and taught. It is “high-end” Christianity — where we actually integrate beliefs and behaviors and give ourselves to God’s will for our lives. It is not for the faint of heart, the Christian consumer, or apparently for a significant number of people in prominent positions of leadership in our denomination. No, many would like to make Christianity easy and simple — undemanding and appealing. Let’s reduce everything to an insipid broth so anyone anywhere can choke it down. Jesus wept!

We should be raising the bar, not lowering it. Have we not noticed that by making our church all about numbers and attendance that we have created a mediocre and impotent presence in the world? Do we not realize that when we make our church about TV ads and door-hangers we shout to the world that the church is cheap and vulgar? Does pandering to the lowest common denominator of American culture actually get us where God wants us to be?

As I prepare for General Conference I am reminded again that there are two churches in today’s United Methodism: one that is concerned with its own survival and existence that will spend exorbitant amounts of money to justify its own existence and a much smaller church that wants to serve God and Jesus Christ in the world. One is concerned with numbers, the other is concerned with lives. One is concerned with image, the other is concerned with integrity. One is concerned with power and control, the other with justice and service. We stand at a crossroads. We need to make a choice. Will we sell out to a lesser vision of church as social institution or will we rise up to BE the body of Christ? It begins with discipleship — and if our leaders are going to make this rich and wonderful concept meaningless, we are in deep, deep trouble.

Rate this:

32 responses to “Dicipeshi*”

Nancy Smith

October 13, 2011

What happens if, for conscience’s sake, we refuse to enter the weekly stats?

Reply
1. Dan R. Dick
  
  October 13, 2011
  
  It is going to be very interesting to see. Numbers have value, but they often do not measure what we want them to. I hope and pray we wake up and shift our evaluative metrics before we go much farther down this road.
  
  Reply
Chris Roberts

October 13, 2011

The lowest-common denominator can means lots of things, At our District supported Vital Congregation’s meeting the clergy presented asked the following questions:
About counting professions of faith: “Can we count reaffirmations of faith if we have a reaffirmation service?”
About counting small groups: “Can we count an AA meeting? or girl scouts? or other outside groups using our facility?”
About counting outreach and missions: “Do we count everyone who comes to our soup kitchen or just the workers who are part of our church? What about a Habitat build, do we count everyone or just our people? Do we count everyone who comes to our Farmer’s Market or just our people who are working there?”
I wanted to ask (but didn’t): “If we send a mission trip to Bolivia, do we count just our people or can we count the entire population of Bolivia?”
I wonder if we, the clergy, have any clue about what any of this means? Why aren’t we willing to hold ourselves accountable? These numbers will be useless if we lower ourselves to the lowest common denominator in any way. We can get really creative about how we fudge the number.
The main thing is to “make disciples of Jesus Christ.” If our small group or mission team or whatever isn’t on that task, then I say “don’t count it.” I’m not sure how you do that on Sunday morning, but…

Reply
Bill Dye

October 13, 2011

So, not seeking a “solution” even when we don’t agree, or unilaterly understand the “problem” might be the way to deeper dilemma. There are many people in “the church” & outside, who want the world to be a better place because of what humans think & do. I believe God has a plan that most of us are not onto. Keep moving.

Reply
David Mills

October 13, 2011

Thanks Dan! As always, you are spot on. I just wish our leadership listen. Your book Vital Signs provides much better measures of vital congregations than the CTA report.

Reply
George H Donigian

October 13, 2011

Dan, thanks for your honesty. We need not continue to extend cheap forms of grace; rather, we follow the way of Christ, eloquently expressed by Bonhoeffer and effectively practiced by Wesley.

Reply
Holly Boardman (@halehawk)

October 13, 2011

I seem to recall that if anyone wants to be Jesus’ disciple they must deny themselves, take up the CROSS and follow him. I suspect that renewal for the church will involve that hard truth. Knowing that Jesus is risen makes it somewhat easier, however…

Reply
Jamie Arrison

October 13, 2011

Poking holes in the idea of holding each other accountable through trackable metrics is a pretty easy task. It does not take deep Christian thought to identify discipleship as more than church attendance and making disciples as more than putting out doorhangers.

Yet, I have to ask what Dan is defending here? Are our churches that are diminishing in numbers being better at true discipleship than the ones that are growing? Are the churches that never invite anyone new more true to the faith than those that put out doorhangers?

The fact is that there is often enough a correlation between growth and real discipleship that it is worth recognizing that it is not good enough to stagnate. Doorhangers may be impersonal, but it is almost impossible to hang a few hundred without conversing with people you meet along the way which ends up being more real connection than most of our dying churches have.

We don’t want to end up with a “No Church Left Behind” mentality that encourages pastors to “preach to the test” a shallow, consumer driven faith. Yet, our church, once rooted in strong questions of accountability for clergy and laity alike, has suffered incredible damage from a privileged complete lack of any accountability.

I’m all for replacing the dashboard with keeping statistics on the spiritual health of clergy, laity and congregations through weekly examination as per our general rules. Until then, let us at least not be ashamed by efforts to maximize the number of people we connect with the Good News of Jesus or quick to defend our terrible track record in the matter.

Reply