Back to School, Back to Discipleship

I have commented before regarding my concern about the lack of discipleship in the local church and how I have wondered why it seems easier to for ministries centered on discipleship (like the Navigators and Campus Crusade) to thrive on a college campus than in a local church. As we continue to read and discuss Transforming Discipleship in our men's group, today the chapter for discussion focused on 'reproducing disciples' and made reference to the relationship of the Apostle Paul with Timothy and with Barnabas as well as the author's experience. While this was not in the book, it seems to me that one key element of what Paul did in his church planting and development of leaders as well as what Jesus did with the 12, is that they moved on after a short time. Paul might stay for a couple of years at most, but he then moved on. That of course forced the local followers to 'step up' and take on the leadership role(s) that Paul left vacant. That was also true for Barnabas, and Jesus left the entire fate of Christianity in the hands of the 12 after only 3.5 years!

This is also true of ministry on college campuses: the seniors graduate every year and the underclassmen have to 'step up'. There is a new freshman class every year, and if they are not reached then the ministry will be gone in 4 years. This makes for a dynamic of student leaders and new disciples both knowing that the leaders will leave and that the younger folks will of necessity take over. There is no option other than the ministry folding. I am wondering if this is indeed an important part of discipleship ministry. While one can ask new members up front for a 'commitment' to start another discipleship group themselves, this is not the same as a situation like graduation where it is clear that is an absolute necessity. My experience in the local church is that very few will make that kind of commitment: and when there is no driving necessity, as there is in a campus ministry, why should they?

Early in the book the author (Greg Ogden) had asked rhetorically what would happen if pastors new that they only had 3 or 4 years to establish a church and then they had to move on and leave it with the lay people? That is what Jesus did, and while Paul kept in touch by his letters to some degree, it is what he did too. How would that change the church? It is a good question. I am not suggesting that there is no need for ordained clergy. However, the dynamic of knowing that we are accountable to pass on the faith seems to me to be vitally important. I am not sure how to duplicate the sense of necessity that is clear on the campus, but it seems to be a good thing.