EFFECTIVE DISCIPLESHIP

A friend wrote the other day, wondering about the most effective model for making disciples. Is it the traditional church? The house church? Something else? Here is my reply:

Maybe this is my own hangup and reaction against what I have come from, but I believe discipleship works best in a family of some sort. It could be a small group based on affinity within a program-based church, it could be in a house church or small group in a non-programmed church, but it is best done through close familial relationships.

Here’s why: the bigger a church becomes, the more we have specialization to make the circle of influence wider (but not deeper). We add a youth minister in order to log time and create programs for youth, etc. In effect, we have specialists, much as we have in medicine. A person who does nothing but brain surgery talks to me only if I have a brain problem. Otherwise, we never meet. But when we do, he really has expertise in this narrow area, and I am glad that he is there for me in my area of need. His specialization helps me with my special need. This is the reasoning and the value of program-based churches.

But then here’s the kicker. We’re talking about emergency dealing with a crisis. But discipleship is not like that. I may have a brain surgeon "friend" in my crisis, but does he remember me five years later? Does he take me through therapy and rehabilitation? No, he does his specialty and passes me off to other specialists. His practice may be growing, but his sphere of family is not.

In a small group (household or family is a better word), everyone becomes a general practitioner. Rather than taking a spiritual gifts assessment and using that to determine which specialized program to plug into, in a small group I use my gifts holistically, you might say. The program-based church gives the IMPRESSION of discipleship, because everyone who serves touches more and more people (within the arena of their specialty). But how deep are we going? Discipleship is holistic, and it is deep.

Interdependence of specialization is the mark of an advanced civilization. But again, the problem here is, we are not talking about efficiency or economy, as if the goal of a church is to produce programs. The goal of the church is relational, and that is best done in families (small groups of people committed to each other to live life together for an extended time, perhaps even a lifetime).

Jesus Himself did not become a specialist, but rather called twelve men “to be with him.”

While writing my email reply, I got a phone call from a friend who is a worship minister in a large program-based church. He was preparing to meet with a young depressed man who is a great musician. The fact that my friend met him through his specialty is fine (writes a guy who teaches a specialized field in a parachurch organization), but if all he talks about it music and worship leading, then that is all he has trained. But that young man never learns a thing about marriage, for example, unless my friend mentions that aspect of his life. And who has time for that? There’s another appointment to talk to another specialist in an hour, so we stick to the topic before us. If, on the other hand, he takes that young man to live in his basement and eat meals with him and his wife, then he is discipling holistically, including his specialty, but also so much more.

Now, which is more effective? My personal conclusion (as a home educating dad) is that God brings us into this world individually and places us all in families. So I would say that if you want to disciple people, buying or writing a twelve-week curriculum and running them through the 101 class or 40 days of something pales in comparison to the picture in my head.

The follow-up to that question is about outreach. Does outreach to real non-Christians work better in the house church or the traditional church?

I think that totally depends on the person doing the work. We tend to insulate ourselves over time. As for me, I’d rather free up my schedule from the 5-night a week schedule of church programs and use that time to raise a family and meet my neighbors on their turf, rather than inviting them to my church to watch my local specialist do his thing. It all comes down to relationships, and the traditional church will reach some people, but I’m not interested in using that model anymore.

House church is not the answer. But purposeful relationships are the answer. Then the test is whether you are multiplying those relationships (2 Tim 2:2). Are you finding faithful men who will be able to teach others also? If not, then the discipling ends with you.

Jesus took a great risk in His ministry. He did not run from crowds, preaching a famous sermon on a hill, and ministering to thousands at a time. But He did not run after the crowds, either, and they all left Him at least twice in His three years of ministry. So a shallow but wide ministry is deceptive, and it does not indicate whether you are multiplying your ministry or making disciples. Jesus poured Himself into twelve men, eleven of whom proved faithful (we will not always make the right choice). When they followed His pattern, they changed the world.