Tag: Discipleship

How might space be created for discipleship growth in our churches?

On By JamesIn Discipleship, Mission, Youth ministry1 Comment

I dont do gardening. At least I am in denial that I might be ‘doing gardening’, its more ‘being self sufficient’ trying to live closer to nature, and a whole host of other things that it might be known as , but it isnt gardening. So, that thing that I have been doing the last few years, not gardening, came about as I in herited a whole load of fruit trees and bramble in my garden (great free food) and, I wondered if there was a way of creating some kind of space in it, that the dog wouldnt destroy (she digs) that would mean that not only fruit but other stuff as well would be grown. The first year i got a load of large plastic containers and tried growing peppers, chillis and tomatoes, and ended up with about 90 green tomatoes.

The following year I played safe and instead of tomatoes put salads in the containers and ended up with lettuce, spring onions, beetroot, some herbs and with a few exceptions managed to grow most of them. The same the next year, with the addition of a few potatoes.

But I was given a seedling chili plant from my sister in laws parents, which i put into our sunroom, and watched it grow and grow. It gave us three seasons of chillis during the year, about 100 in all. So this year I am trying out the chillis and peppers again. (and have planted garlic in the pots – so basically I am after the base of a good curry)

Its not remarkable. But what I noticed this time, trying to grow plants from seedlings was that as the seedlings start to grow and expand, you have to increase the size of the pot they are in so that they can expand into it and grow a little bit more. And thats it.

Seedlings will only grow if you expand the pot they grow into. To stop my chili plant growing last year i left it in a fairly large pot – but didnt keep increasing it.

What if this process of ‘pot-expansion’ is the one that we develop with young people and their discipleship? It becomes a process where we as workers/leaders/volunteers continually seek ways of creating a slightly larger, or even much larger ‘pot’ for them to grow into for them to expand.

A Seedling might last if put in the Garden, and in a new phase of ‘not gardening’ I have spend the easter holidays making a raised bed.

It now has several seeds in it. For a young person, that might present having a space expanded too much – for others they might rise to such a challenge of growing into a space that demands that they fill in to.

If Discipleship is a process of ongoing learning (the greek word Mathetese)

and Empowerment a process of ongoing participative competence (the community writer Keiffer)

Then in our work with young people- actually – given the state of the church- in our discipleship with everyone – empowering leadership, that doesnt just tend to the plants (and not bruising the damaged reed) but empowering the competence of others to grow into a larger space might be what is required. What we have is a one-size-fits-all approach with gatherings as large groups or smaller groups – what eah need it not more sprinked water from the top, even plant food, or sunlight (though all are helpful) – but space in which the roots are given the opportunity to grow. and How do we do that? The how is easy. We get to know where people are and create spaces for them to be challenged, why dont you do that? or can you go away, read that and talk to me afterwards, or what are your ideas on that? What difference could you make here? How might we use you better, and your gifts?

If i had a pound for everytime someone said we need to have a culture shift in our churches, on discipleship or mission, then id be able to buy at least a few more packets of seeds. If the farming and growth metaphors Jesus used were good enough for him, then they might be good enough for us now. I think in youth ministry, we are better at ‘pot’ expansion than elsewhere, young peoples horizons are hopefully opened up constantly and are given opportunities at times. It would be very wrong to say that young people are kept in small pots. It would also be wrong however to say that this is the case everywhere. Though sometimes the pot is only slightly bigger, and young people go elsewhere to be challenged.

Whole life, empowering discipleship, believing in the Human person to rise to the challenge, to have their ‘pot’ enlargened, is something i think we need to be doing, and keep doing, and keep asking. How might this church grow- is the current question? – well it needs to be given a larger pot to grow into. How might all the individuals within it grow? you get the picture. When we empower people , sorry, that isnt possible, when people are empowered it is because they are given space to empower themselves, space to grow. If discipleship is about growth, then we have the responsibility as leaders to keep discovering ways, real ways of expanding the pot size. The space for them to grow into. And its not just our responsibility, its also about trying to help the whole church to encourage the potential growth in each other.

By the end of three years, I would be pretty certain that Jesus disciples had had enough, every day presented new challenges, new scearios to act, new learning to take in, new directions about what to do. Constant expanding the space for them to grow into. Hey Peter, heres 5000 people – you feed them!. There seem to be times when Peter and only a few of them get given the opportunities to grow, at least thats what we hear anyway. But the 72 are sent out, as are the 12. They are not just given the ‘opportunity to do mission’ they are given challenges to enable them to grow as disciples.

Why did Jesus’ practice of telling parables disappear?

On By JamesIn Mission, Theodrama, TheologyLeave a comment

I was reading through the passages in Matthews Gospel that tell us a little about the goings on during Holy Week in Jerusalem all those 2000 odd years ago. What I was hoping to was write a piece on something to do with Holy Week. What I noticed instead, was that in the midst of the week, there seemed to be good deal of story telling going on that Jesus was still doing with the disciples and others around him.

Theres the Story of the two sons (no not the prodigal one)

Theres the story of the evil farmers

Theres the story of the bridesmaids

Theres the story of the great feast

Theres the story of the 10 bridesmaids and also the Three servants

All of these occur, notably in Matthews account between the Palm Sunday narrative and then the lead up to the arrest and betrayal of Jesus in chapter 26. On one hand we might deduce, accurately that Jesus was a great story teller, and these stories have sacred value (as well as make pertinent points). But the question I ask – is where did all the story telling go?

Image result for parables

From a missional perspective – Jesus doesn’t tell the 12 or 72 to ‘tell stories about the kingdom’ when they are given instructions to go into the villages. Neither is story telling part of the deal for the great commission. But at the same time, after three years of watching Jesus – you would think that there may be records of the disciples developing story telling as part of the emergence of the early church. But it seems to be almost completely absent.

A clue might be found in Luke 24 – When Jesus meets the two disciples on the Emmaus Road, his revelation to them, and their great surprise is that he told them how Jesus’ own story was now fulfilment and part of the whole of Gods bigger story ( Luke 24:34) – The story they needed to tell was that Jesus was the Messiah, and this was the one they were guided to. And then throughout the description of the early church, there is the chronological retelling of this one story, at least this is what we hear from the lengthy public discourse by Stephen (acts 7) and then Paul (acts 17) they preach theology- the story of the knowledge of God.

Image result for parables

It is almost as if priority is given to this one story (and probably rightly so) and then the functions of the early churches as a community of many small organisations across the middle east of the time. But it still seems strange that one of the principle teaching methods of Jesus is barely mentioned again. Its not as if Paul or Silas are documented telling stories, neither Peter or John.

But I am intrigued, as to why it seems to have gone out of view all together.

Other practices that occurred in the early church seem to be also at odds (with current moral view of faith) – but so soon after Jesus the disciples drew lots to see who would replace Judas as one of the 12 – was this seen as acceptable practice, endorsed by Jesus for decision making? If this was implicit from Jesus – why did story telling seem to not be in vogue?

What might be some of the reasons why parable telling seems to be absent post Jesus’ ascension?

  1. Jesus story telling was so unique – before Jesus and after – the story telling of the chronology of history is what seems to have been the norm. See for example the references to the story of Israel – or at least these are what is written down and recorded. It may be that the narrator was keen to record the facts in line with the theological chronology and not the incidental fictional stories – but in a way that doesn’t seem to fit with the story of Jonah which has more evidence that it is fictional than historic. So this may be a fable of novel like proportions that is told to reveal something of God – and referred to by Jesus as such. However, the story telling and sharing capacity of Moses, David, Elisha or Esther is barely mentioned- they are the story. With this in mind it might be as reasonable to suggest that this method of narrative story telling is so part of the Jewish culture that it continues post Jesus- so that it then includes Jesus within the chronology. Just as Jesus gives the permission to do for the two disciples walking along the Emmaus road Luke 24. But then is Jesus story telling so unique that it shouldn’t be copied? Only Jesus could tell such stories inn that culture – and so the task of the disciple was not to replicate Jesus, but fulfil the tasks that he set out for them, none it seemed to revolve around story telling.
  2. The context shifted. This response is from Roger Mitchell on Twitter. The fall of the church , because story I harder to control or contradict that historical accounts and so the church of the empire depended on control and conformity, rather than the expansive story telling that is implied in Jesus own stories. Jesus had to talk in parables – argues Mitchell, in this piece, because the entire church was under threat politically. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fall-Church-Roger-Haydon-mitchell/dp/162032928X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1522261353&sr=8-1&keywords=roger+mitchell

3.So maybe it was less that the disciples didn’t continue telling parables, than just that they didn’t need to. What about the possibility that the stories Jesus told, were the ones that were continued to be told by the disciples and so these were the ones remembered when it came to compile the 4 gospels? It may account for some of the variations – as some were more remembered than others. Also as Ricouer discusses, there may be some narrative building between the different accounts as each was written and then recollected, but essentially its at least 2-3 people remembering the stories, and some may have heard them again and again and others not so.

  1. What if the message and not the context changed? Post Jesus resurrection – talk of kingdom seems to disappear almost completely, from what is talked about in Acts, and then Pauls letters to the churches. There are 155 references to Kingdom in the New testament, but only 30 of these occur after the four gospels, and 8 of these in Acts, which isn’t surprising on one hand as there are 43 mentions in Luke itself (second only to Matthew ), in Johns gospel there are less than 3. The message has shifted. The elaborate explanatory stories of kingdom seem to have changed. OR alternatively, they have continued with the writers of 3 of the gospels and inserted into their narratives as they were commonly told and then needed to be attributed to Jesus as to give them their original authority – if it was indeed Jesus who told them originally. The explanations of the kingdom through pictures and stories needed to continue and was being continued through story telling, and it was the gospel writers who were the key narrators of this. This seems in contrast to Pauls more explanatory practical epistles, which barely have any mention of Kingdom at all. Did the objectives change; the early disciples had the job of proving to people who Jesus was in connection with the religious history of the culture – Jesus himself was merely proving himself to be God through how he had authority, through wisdom and pictures.
  2. Can we assume much about ‘how the early disciples evangelised?’ – This is the question posed by John Drane on the facebook conversation that I opened up on this subject. And of course to a point we cant. We can deduce that the early disciples met frequently, they shared belongings, miracles were performed and councils were had. Conversations with people seemed to be more confrontational (and leading people to be imprisoned) than how Jesus communicated. We can only deduce so far, or more to the point, only have the information to hand that include the epistles and written information. The tradition of oral story telling was part of the culture, and telling the dramatic story, both of Jesus within the Jewish tradition to the town squares, councils and in front of the judge, and also Pauls own story as part of the epistles is indicative of this. There is undoubtedly Dramatic retelling and embodiment of the story through its retelling. We cant I guess prove that the early disciples didn’t tell stories – maybe they told stories about Jesus to each other, and shared their collective wisdom about him – what he did, said and amazed – and so parabolic stories about the Kingdom faded from view at least they faded from importance in the task of evangelisation. Maybe stories were so embedded in the culture in the tradition, that it was taken for granted that this was how to do it, and it was uniquely rare to have the longer public discourse of the town square or market place (so these were written down as exceptions) – the story telling over food, fires and walking might have been so regular and repeated than it was barely mentioned. But its not as if at any point- there is a plea to any of the churches, or within the group to ‘carry on telling the stories Jesus told’ or to use stories in this way. Maybe because it just wasn’t needed to be said.Wells suggests that the role of the disciple is to be a witness to the story (2005) and acknowledge the place of the saint verses the hero in the story. Jesus as Christ is the centre of the story, and he creates the narrative – is the role of the disciple just to tell Jesus story? That may be the case.What if story telling was so apparent in the early church as the norm, that it wasn’t worth mentioning? It was taken as red that it was occurring? So it wasn’t needed to be mentioned. What if the reasons that these stories of Jesus have stayed the test of time is because the gospel writers themselves were hearers and retellers of them, and therefore they had been retained through theie ongoing audible use.
  3. What if the disciples were no good at it, and to preserve the dignity and sacredness of Jesus, only retold the same stories Jesus did. They didn’t get the metaphorical stories as Jesus told them, so it might have been easier for them not to maintain trying to use this method for the future. Maybe Jesus let them off the hook and didn’t make this expectation on them. The Wisdom of Jesus gave him story telling nous for the everyday stage – it wasn’t what the disciples could do. Words they did write down that were in any way poetic or metaphorical are attributed as prophetic ( Revelation) and so derived from God – rather than as a gift of eloquent methaphorical speech that the disciples have themselves.

Thank you to the social media communities of Facebook and Twitter for some of these recommendations from the original question.

It leaves us with potentially a further question, how are we expected to be witnesses of Jesus?

We learn so much from Jesus communication methods – from parabolic stories, that inspire, educate and confound their hearers, and create a expansive space for understanding the kingdom of God- but is it in our humanity to try and emulate, replicate or re-appropriate in the contexts we are in. It is said by Vanhoozer that Character (ours) is plot. We tell the story through our lives, but we also need to tell the story through our actions, provocative, prophetic and practical. (not just that we don’t swear) .

The sacred myth, story, narrative of Jesus within chronology has faded from popular view- and replaced by other myths that have a detrimental impact upon people – commercialism, materialism, capatalism and others- the stories of self indulgence that are never satisfied. The place we might have in the story is to know, just like the disciples did how the story all fits together with an ending that draws ever closer, that requires even more love, charity and hope more story. And not just a story to believe – but a story to participate in, as it participates in us ever prompting, ever guiding. The Jesus story is not just a story to live by, it is a story to perform – and that is something, there is no doubt, that the disciples did. To their own personal sacrifice and as they quite literally were martyred for the faith.

References

Wells, Sam, Improvisation, 2005

Ricoeur, P Figuring the Sacred, 1991

Kevin Vanhoozer, 2005, The Drama of Doctrine

I still might not have found what im looking for, but finding might be in the searching

On By JamesIn Discipleship, Mission, TheodramaLeave a comment

Bear with me (non U2 fans) , but now im post 40, i can quote U2 lyrics…

I believe in the Kingdom Come
Then all the colours will bleed into one
Bleed into one.
But yes, I’m still running.

You broke the bonds
And you loosed the chains
Carried the cross of my shame
Oh my shame, you know I believe it.

But I still haven’t found
What I’m looking for.

“The process for faiths search for understanding- seeing, hearing, engaging and reflecting upon,’ what we have seen and heard’ through reading is itself a matter of high drama’ (Vanhoozer, 2005, p19)

This one of three aspects of thinking of Theology as a Drama, is explained by Kevin Vanhoozer, in effect he is saying  that there is drama in the search for faith – in the search for God and understanding. On one hand it is the least of the three aspects of theology as a drama that i focus on in most of my previous writings on Theodrama. But in reality- it might be one of the more profound. God is in the search. Less the destination. Finding is in the searching. Trying to find something, but not know if we found it is something we’ve all experienced. Participating in the search might be enough.

Often we are told in Christian culture that – ‘when we seek we find’  and this is a paraphrase from Jesus own words in Matthew 7- ‘keep on asking and you will receive what you will ask for, keep on seeking and you will find’  Note however that this is about a continual searching, a continual looking. Its almost as this is about our very nature to be seekers, searchers and curious (something implied in the creation of nations in Acts 17; 27) . We find in the process of being those who are curious, being those who participate in the searching. Not what we might find. God is less in the answer of the prayer, than the prayer itself. Yet the temptation is to think that God is in the destination of what is found, rather than in the finding.

Participating in God’s overall drama – The Theodrama – is about the ongoing search – the ongoing curiosity – and because it is a drama – and not the predictability of the maths that underpinned much of early philosophy- or the predictability of science and rationality – the search is a drama in itself.   Is Aslan good? – yes – but he isnt tame – said Lucy. Predicting the prowling Aslan, is only possible because of the signs, the winter starts to melt away. The Drama takes a new twist when Aslan is on the move.

The ongoing search is a drama in itself. It is fraught with danger and distraction all the time, we may have access (because of the cross) but it is still a drama to attune to God, still a drama to participate in the search after God – still a drama because God herself might not be as predictable or predicted. To search after God, to seek, may just be to participate in the drama, Gods drama itself, what we find might not be what were looking for. Some are still not finding what they look for.

Because, finding is in the searching.

Will the good man find the lost sheep – when he leaves the 99? who knows.

Will the woman find the coin, even when the others are in the tin? it might have been stolen.

These are metaphors Jesus uses for the Kingdom of God – maybe the kingdom is found in the searching itself. Not the finding. That trauma of having lost something and knowing it.

So, whilst the overall Drama of Gods redemption is taking place towards the fifth and final act of the ‘Return of the King’ – in this in between time of the emergence of the church since the ascension – we are left to search for God in the midst, and respond to prompts, signs and symbols, a search that is dramatic in itself.

Even if we ‘know’ the truth – it still has to be found, and re-found and re-lived again and again. It is an ongoing drama, an ongoing search, of shaping character and gaining knowledge, and faith barely exists outside knowledge. There is struggle and drama in the reading – how many distractions are there instead of reading the bible – or even tempting – just to hear our own voice in the scripture – and its specific or worldwide context or interpretation. Drama is a collective search – it is mysterious and artistic – and it is performative – it is in what we do – acting with God in the search for God.

Thanks to Richard Passmore, for his post here: http://www.sundaypapers.org.uk/?p=3623 and those on the subsequent facebook discussion, for helping to stimulate some of these thoughts.

References, On Theodrama

Vanhoozer, K , 2005, The drama of Doctrine, p19 

(and if you’re new to ‘Theodrama’, there are many others in the links on the tab to the right)

Youth Ministry and Discipleship for ‘Generation Non-Religion’ – what needs to change?

On By JamesIn Context, Discipleship, Mission, Youth ministry, Youthwork Methods1 Comment

On the face of it this piece of research would indicate that Youth Ministry has failed. 70% of young people in the UK are non religious. For all the Generations X, Y and Millenial. None matters, in a secular, or even post secular world – non religious observance is rife. Even Spirituality is relatively scarce.

This piece of research was circulated in the media today, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/21/christianity-non-christian-europe-young-people-survey-religion,

The Headlines from the Data were, for the UK as follows:

Remember: Young people are defined as 15-29 year olds, (not the young people of youthwork of under 18’s)

70% of young people identify as non religious

6% as non christian religion

24% as Christian religion, 7% of these anglican,

59% of young people do not regularly attend religious services, the UK is 4th highest with this number.

The UK however only has the 9th least praying young people for the whole of europe. (65%)

The report compiler said that :

The figures are published in a report, Europe’s Young Adults and Religion, by Stephen Bullivant, a professor of theology and the sociology of religion at St Mary’s University in London. They are based on data from the European social survey 2014-16.

Religion was “moribund”, he said. “With some notable exceptions, young adults increasingly are not identifying with or practising religion.”

The trajectory was likely to become more marked. “Christianity as a default, as a norm, is gone, and probably gone for good – or at least for the next 100 years,” Bullivant said.

But there were significant variations, he said. “Countries that are next door to one another, with similar cultural backgrounds and histories, have wildly different religious profiles.”

Today Theos published its own comment on the data here: https://www.theosthinktank.co.uk/comment/2018/04/06/generation-noreligion-what-the-data-really-shows-about-youth-religiosity?platform=hootsuite

So – what do we make of all this then?

I cant help think that for quite a while most of this is obvious. Even the most large youth groups in churches across the UK might only connect with 10% of the young people population of a town or city, maybe higher in a village, but that leaves well over 90% of young people not connected. One message from these statistics, is that the way of trying to evangelise, be relevant or practice faith in the UK over the last 50 years has barely made any difference. We have one of the lowest proportion of religious observance in 15-29’s in western europe.

Every trick in the book may have been tried to ‘reach’ young people, but a different tack might be, that faith has not been made meaningful, challenging enough, it is less a dynamic movement for social and spiritual transformation, than an organisation content with its laurels, and young people – especially young people with ideals and a desire to change the world, are no more likely to join the church to do this, than sign up to greenpeace. But that might be what I think too. We know that faith is transferred predominately through parents, (but that is largely young people in the church already, to stop them leaving) – the challenge is that theres 70% of young people not involved in religious services. 

I would have been in interested to know in the data what the figures were for the under 15’s and what the differences are. I guess in a way from 15 many young people have their own choice about whether they attend church or not – rather than being dragged by their parents. It is worth thinking then about what churches who kept young people beyond the age of 15 looked like, when fuller youth institute did the research; this is what they found on churches who kept 15 year olds, the report is on this previous article: https://wp.me/p2Az40-NP

If nothing else, this data announced today should be a wake up call, to churches and affiliations not doing anything positive, innovative or meaningful with young people, that they should. But also that there is still plenty of young people to go around right across the UK who have no connection with a church. The challenge might be finding them, the challenge might be connecting in a meaningful way, the challenge is making faith dangerous and meaningful in risk adverse conforming churches.

Somehow, we need to make the christian faith something worth believing in.

And make Discipleship the active, prophetic, dangerous yet life and human affirming thing it is meant to be – challenging the very conformity that churches gravitationally pull towards. Jesus is more disruptive than that.

Richard Passmore on Facebook today saidd – we need a new way of being christian, on the back of the research. Id say we need to provide more spaces for an action orientated, dangerous discipleship to begin.

What do you think?

Is the most faithful discipleship happening ‘outside’ the church?

On By JamesIn Discipleship, Mission, Theodrama, Youth ministryLeave a comment

As part of my role with Frontier Youth Trust, and also, my experience of being a youthworker over the last 10 years, one of the common conversations in the many Christian based projects, activities and ministries reverberates around the following kind of statements:

We met with _______ person the other day – they would really love to follow Jesus and show signs of being interested in believing in God – but I couldnt imagine them going to a local church

or

Young people we work with, we have great conversations about faith, we also have conversations where they tell us how church has damaged them before

or

These young people would be considered on fire for Jesus for what they do, serve and be loving in their community, but because they dont go to church on a sunday the church arent interested.

So the question I am left thinking is the following

Can (youth) discipleship happen ‘outside’ the church?

or maybe, pertinently, might better youth discipleship happen outside the church?

Obviously no discussion like this can happen without first trying to define what church is and what discipleship is, or at least that are both discussions within studies of Ecclesiology, although a study on what ‘discipleship’ is more difficult to find. There are calls for ‘True discipleship’, ‘deeper discipleship’ and ‘radical discipleship’ often, even within these pages, though cementing a definition is difficult. Skipping over the complex nature of both of these things, is not done because it is not important to think on these matters, but need extensive study further. Nicholas Healys definition of Church within the Theodrama, existing as an ongoing reality that is practical and prophetic is one that i find helpful.

In regard to discipleship, and building on that Theodramatic theme, Wesley Vander Lugt separates it out into two aspects ; formation and performance, both as he says in Living Theodrama are interlinked and inter-dependant of each other. What tends to happen is that Discipleship can often be short hand for ‘learning’, attending bible study groups, house groups or church activities – when this might usually only reflect the ‘formation’ element of it. Thoughts on thinking of Discipleship as Pedagogy practices ive written about here

In previous posts i have talked about developing action first discipleship – if you’re interested take a look here: https://wp.me/p2Az40-1af  there also youth resources that FYT produce that encourage action first – thinking second as a shift in focus for formational discipleship , see http://www.fyt.org.uk.

So, If Discipleship is about Formation and Performance – can it occur outside the ‘walls’ of church? – and not just could it, in some cases – should it?

What has been discovered across the country, is that as youthworkers, chaplains and mission workers connect with people and create places of home, support, acceptance and deepen relationships, then these have intrinsic spiritual (not just emotional) value. A place of home and safety is created in the relationships, and these relationships are the source and space of faith, of discovery and ongoing learning. Attempts to use relationships as  strategy seem unfulfilling, and against the ethics of some practices.

Sometimes what gets tried is to ‘bolt-on’ formation in the place of ongoing open conversations and youth work practices – such as ‘if anyone wants to do it, theyll be a ‘discussion’ group, on a certain evening’ and sometimes these things, when developed with appropriate process, care and attention may encourage formational thinking on faith within that space. Other times these things crash and burn. It is more likely that gradual processes in this direction , gradual risk taking, is more likely to produce enthusiasm for faith formation. But faith formation, can occur in other ways that ‘sit down’ discussion groups. The default for this shouldnt be youth alpha, or equivalent. And there are plenty of spaces where performative/action discipleship can occur in a youth project – as young people participate in it, and develop consciousness of local community activism.Image result for acting training

But the question remains – can Discipleship happen outside the church? 

In another way, forget the projects working in local communities. Think of Youth Groups. The separation of youth groups from ‘church’ (albeit there are often church attending volunteers of workers) – the youth group is a place often where formational discipleship happens, (whether it actually happens and is any more than a social club to keep young people involved until next years soul survivor is another question), and many young people attending youth groups don’t attend church either. So it is not just the community based project, but the youth group too.

Is it ever appropriate to encourage young people not to go to church? I mean, for their own good – do they ‘have to be ready’ for it, prepared even. A project leader recently told me that they knew of someone who said that ‘they could cope and agree with being a christian, but go to church and belong to that group of people?’ no thanks. So, in a way as we create connections with people outside of the walls of the church, we will meet many many people. As church we need to be relaxed enough about our identity and self critical to know that the faith community has a lot of baggage, and many not be an encouraging place for ongoing faith journey, or insight into the way of following Jesus, that someone outside is desperately looking for, or at least enquiring.

Can discipleship happen outside the church? One on hand, developing new church communities and groups as part of an ongoing movement is how the church grew, and continues to do so. Increasing existing gatherings is difficult, starting new ones (as both church planters and emerging church leaders tell us) is a key way. What we might be doing, accidentally, is expanding the stage where God is active in local communities, through the conversations we have with people where they become opters in of God prompting them through us, being formed and becoming performers, the question metaphorically then is do they need to be part of the existing theatre troop, or have that troop help shape new theatrical acts and scenes in different contexts, even in the same town, but with other people groups.

Of course, the path is paved with sharp pebbles and stones, and no two performances are the same. The church’s role is to water and provide food for the emerging shoots that are located and planted already, not keep hoping that the root is uprooted and located elsewhere for feeding and watering, thus making it weaker, and also out of its place. Is there a sadness, that local acts of mission and discipleship are not being used to shape the practices of local churches. If people find a home, and space of discipleship in the local foodbank, with volunteers, how might a church be as accessible, be as a home, be as inclusive and welcoming, on a sunday, the same for the young people at the youth club on a tuesday evening.

References

Living Theodrama, Wesley Vander Lugt, 2014

Here be Dragons, Youthwork and Mission off the Map, R Passmore, 2013

Ecclesiology and Ethnography, Pete ward, 2013

The church, the world and christian life, Nicholas Healy, 2000

 

Should Youth Discipleship be regarded as performative pedagogical practice?

On By JamesIn Context, Discipleship, Theodrama, Theology, Youth ministry, Youthwork and Theology1 Comment

One of the dangers, writes Giroux, of modern educational practice set within a global economy that has economic growth as its driving force is that it has involves even more so a

‘narrow pedagogy, memorization, high stakes testing and helping students to find a good fit within a market -orientated culture of commodification, standardization and conformity’

Giroux wasnt writing this that long ago. As a result; Young people, writes Giroux further, ‘are treated as customers and clients rather than a civic resource, whilst many poor young people are simply excluded from the benefits of a decent education through the implementation of zero tolerance  policies that treat them as criminals to be contained, punished or placed under the jurisdiction of the criminal justice system’. (Giroux, On critical Pedagogy, 2011)

Over the last few weeks I have written a number of pieces on young people and participation within the church, and I am thankful to the few of you who have read and shared them widely. Quite expectantly, one of the key tools to think about participation has been Harts Ladder of youth participation, which i have now shared twice, and i do so without apology again here.

Image result for hart's ladder of youth participation

However, whilst participation is a key aspects to how young people interact with agencies and establishments, from Giroux, critically young people can be little more than consumers in their role in the school, and probably barely on rung 2-3 at all. Developing a culture of youth participation in schools can only be achieved if it is part of what drives to actions of a school towards its funding expectations, including its Ofsted reports and league tables, none of which barely mention young people as participants in the overall ‘Good/Outstanding scale’ – So if its not measured and idealised as an outcome, it will barely feature as significant, in the rigorous testing and managerial culture of the school. Being run as a business within the global economy and with spending targets to boot. However, this is a sidetrack to a question about young people and participation, and more so about discipleship as a pedagogy.

I wonder, when reading the quotation from Giroux above, did you think about how young people are discipled in church and youth ministry?

Last year, I heard a seminar by Jo Dolby who had done an academic piece of work on Discipleship. Within it she referred to the definition of discipleship that arrived from the greek word ‘Mathetes’ , which literally means, to be involved in the process of ones own learning. Discipleship seems to involve an ongoing process that involved the learner and teacher as an ongoing process. Jo pointed to a number of aspects of discipleship based from the culture of discipleship in Jesus’ time that were provocative and counter cultural. She shared these things at last years Streetspace national gathering, a write up for which and the flipcharts on discipleship are here: Streetspace Gathering 2017

But Mathetes and discipleship as an ongoing process of learning. Interesting…

One definition of Pedagogy is :  The method and practice of teaching, especially as an academic subject or theoretical concept. (From The online Oxford dictionary) , Pedagogy is often used in educational practice as seen above. It is less well used in Faith Based discipleship conversations. Discipleship is less seen as educational, and more formational. At least that is the common language within churches in regard to discipleship, formation and authentic practices.

 Though forming, as Root goes on to say, has been thought of in not a neo-liberal vacuum (Root doesnt talk about this at all) but in a secular age, which values Authenticity. Formation has become another buzzword for educational group work that hopes desperately to keep young people within an institution (pages i-xiv).

Churches have become no better or different than schools. Where the schools curriculum is bent towards the market. Churches have been hoodwinked into reductionist programmes of survival. Reductionist in that they hope to keep young people, having only avoiding worst case scenario to hand. If Root is to be believed, though i think the British context is different, churches have turned to youth to keep their own authenticity intact, for being youthful is a sign of authenticity in todays western culture. What Root lacks in his prognosis is the effect of neo-liberalism, power, control and education within his analysis, though what he strives for is a rethink of formation, doing so without a huge mention of discipleship, though with one that calls for increased awareness of divine action, and young people as participants beyond just the institution (p191-194)

Will an understanding of Discipleship as Pedagogy help? Again, Root will probably say no, i think. Though in an age where youth participation is lessening in schools, then at least the church might offer something distinctive if discipleship was a process of ongoing collaborative learning. Discipleship as ongoing learning that also including aspects of divine action, and also performance might be closer to what is required. A quick aside, when Vanhoozer diagnosed American Youth Ministry and the church as a whole with the MTD disease that Smith Identified, his cure was to uphold Theology and also the Drama of doctrine in the ongoing actions of Human performance ( Vanhoozer, 2014, Faith Speaking Understanding) for him, limited doctrinal knowledge was the pre-curser to the God that makes me feel good attitude prevalent in MTD. How might a performative pedagogy that enabled the ongoing learning of Christian doctrine help within Youth Ministry?

Wesley Vander lugt suggests that Formation and Performance are intrinsically linked. There is limited use for one without the other, performance reveals formation, and vice versa. (Vander lugt, Living Theodrama, 2014). The process of learning, of formation within youth discipleship might benefit from how its ongoing pedagogical practice is performative and in doing so reveals, and helps young people embody theology in the world, being more that participants within faith institutions.

In the same way, Giroux and Root have at their heart the sense that pedagogy and discipleship are for the same ends, the flourishing of humans within the flourishing of local communities, Root suggest that the church is the only collective society that is for personhood itself ( p207), and as Giroux above indicates pedagogy of persons is, at its most ambitious :

‘is to educate students to lead a meaningful life, learn how to hold power and authority accountable and develop the skills, knowledge and courage to challenge common sense assumptions while being willing to struggle for a more socially just world‘ (Giroux 2011, p7).

Discipleship as prophetic pedagogy? It may be that the church, if it can think of youth discipleship as a process of helping young people lead a meaningful life (and not just conformity to institution) then it might have something to give and contribute in society with young people who do get ‘left behind’ but also who are in the system and struggling to cope. But discipleship as a pedagogical practice, that forms disciples to lead meaningful lives for the greater good, and gives them keys to understand their place in the world, to enable it to flourish, and challenge structures of power. How might churches do this – let make them places of welcome, and places where young people create hope, and places where young people are ministers of it in their world.

References

Giroux, On Critical Pedagogy, 2011

Root, Andrew, Faith Formation in a secular age, 2017

Smith, Christian, Soul Searching, 2004

Vanhoozer, Kevin, Faith Speaking Understanding, 2014

Van der Lugt, Living Theodrama, 2014

 

How many youthworkers does it take to change a lightbulb?

On By JamesIn Context, Discipleship, Mission, Theology, Youth ministry, Youthwork MethodsLeave a comment

Image result for changing a lightbulb

 

Go on: ‘How many youthworkers does it take to change a lightbulb? ‘

Answer: 100.

Well it takes 1 to change the lightbulb, and 99 to write papers on coping in the darkness.

So the old joke goes, and im not sure this is as accurate as it used to be. Youthworkers have at times had to find the reserves to cope in the darkness, and cope and fight for the rights and welfare of young people often left behind or deemed the underclass. However, the joke could almost read, ‘and 99 to write papers on how the darkness came about’.

At times there might the odd lightbulb moment in youthwork & youth ministry. One person reaches up to grasp at an actual solution, and makes a change and the lights could be switched back on. This week, if i was being critical, has been a week of darkness pronouncing. Whilst The church times has ran a whole load of articles on teenagers and young people – mostly written by esteemed colleagues and friends (though they might not be after they read this!) – much of it has been darkness pronouncing. Much of it, with a few small exceptions, has been what has been said many many times before. And I throw my own hat into this ring- darkness pronouncing is particularly easy to write about, sometimes it gets rave reviews under the guise of ‘being prophetic’ or reflective or challenging. Maybe the Church times audience has never heard half the things that the youthworkers are writing about. But i cant imagine any of them are surprised by the correlations between the reductions in sunday school and then exclamations that less than 1/4 of churches have any young people. Many people in churches have lived through this shift, and still go goey eyed at remembering those good old days.

Much of the time, as Pete Ward commented on this week, youthworkers and churches have known the answers – such as family work, generational work and creating positive participative places for discipleship (as ive said in the previous two pieces on this site)  – but has it not been able to happen? or not been able to be a long term change? or something else – not become culturally norm – and when the youthworker leaves this way of being reverts back (as can be the way).  Nothing new is being said, though it might be being said on a different platform. For once the established church might be listening, and not youthworkers circulating the same darkness coping papers around themselves.

As youthworkers, brought up or educated with critical reflection as part of or an extension of our being, can be easily put into find the thing to blame mode. And usually it is not ourselves.

From the point of cause comes the how to fix it mentality – how might that lightbulb be changed?

so from this there becomes 10 things that ‘we need’ in youth ministry or the church needs:

  1. The church needs a youthworker#
  2. The youth ministry needs this resources
  3. The young people need to gather to a large gathering
  4. The ministry needs to be thought about theologically
  5. People need training
  6. Church needs to change
  7. Youth ministry needs a new vision
  8. Your practice needs more of Jesus
  9.  Do you need better self care?
  10. Are you praying enough?

There is some logic and reasoning to all of these, though beware the wolves selling goods and franchises. But fix-it responses to darkness pronouncing, sometimes only skims the surface, (not saying Jesus is a surface thing) but more of Jesus might only be strategic. hmm….

But something does have to change. and its not the lightbulb…

When I used to work in a call centre, one of the things that was said to me was that it only takes 1 bad experience for a customer to leave a shop, tell 10 friends and then you lose 11 potential customers. And that was before trip adviser or amazon reviews were invented. It is easy to argue how much of a detrimental effect in local communities it is when something that people enjoy going to is closed, and this ties back into the sunday schools to a point. But when it comes to the positives that are happening, or positive experiences, people barely tell other people, again from a customer/client perspective.

It feels like it is significantly hard work to make the sort of institutional changes required. It may be that research into what is happening that is good and ‘working’ needs to happen. But on the ground where 1 local youth ministry project has become a faith community/emerging church is really positive, the process of enabling their process to be embedded elsewhere should be as quick as it would be for churches to pull the lightswitch and close the sunday school.  There are positive stories across the UK, about youth ministry ‘on the edge’ the pioneer stuff (and any youthwork could sometimes be pioneering), the risk taking and those living on the edge of their purse strings in order to do it.  Under the guise of Fresh expressions, youth churches in areas are growing and developing, where resource is given to be able to facilitate and encourage it. Messy church is another positive thing.

Whilst there is no quick fix, though there has been a quick decline, and that has been easy to accomplish.

We might have to ask some of the serious questions, beyond how the lightbulb might be changed. If we ask – what might young people want from a church? – or need it to be for them; we might discover a variety of responses:

a safe place

a place that provides space

a place in which i can escape

a place to think through life

a place that feels at home

a place where i am part of something bigger

a place to be listened to

a place to grieve and mourn a loss

a place to socialise

a place to be involved

But dont take my word for it: research, from 1400 churches in the USA, that had young people over the age of 15 as part of their congregations still ( i know a luxury) – pointed to the following things:

  • a Healthy place
  • A place of challenge
  • depth.

That article, one that at least points how the lightbulb shines is here: What do young people want in a church?  – at least young people have been asked.

Every article points to the same things, essentially. Young people need to be more that consumers, and church needs to create spaces where they feel participants, feel at home and be respected and challenged, and they want churches to help them raise their game. Lets change the question to:   ‘Can we do this?  – any what did Bob the builder say?

If discipleship is about participation, then why is this an issue in churches?

On By JamesIn Context, Discipleship, Youthwork MethodsLeave a comment

‘To show just how much this church values young people – we’ve appointed a youthworker!’

‘to all young people of _____ area, the adults from ______ church/ministry are putting on an evening entertainment in a building you’ve never been before and involving people you’ve never heard of but we know them, and please if you can bring a friend too’

‘ we had a successful evening when 3 young people turned up‘

‘We closed a ministry because there was only 14 young people’

‘It was great to have 100 youthworkers together at a conference to discuss young peoples issues’

This week I was in Cumbria talking with a group of youthworkers based in churches on the subject of participation, following on from my post last week on participation on this site; participation (part 1)

Image result for hart's ladder of youth participation

We looked in the session about what participation is, and also in what areas in youth ministry that were easier to encourage participation. Examples given included giving young people opportunities to shape and design the room, and the activities, others included the development of leaders. There were many examples of trying to encourage young people to be more than consumers of youth activities, one way around this was to change the starting point, especially if young people consuming youth activities felt like the default starting point. It was about creating participatory cultures.

But the question from one of the delegates was ‘why doesnt the church believe in participation?’ And defaults to consumer/attendance/telling mode?

And this was the question, that i could ony give a short response to at the time, that I have been pondering ever since. Why does it seem to be a paradigm shift for the church to consider participation as default within its practice, why is non-participation the default mode?

Obviously as the diagram above shows there are significant levels of participation. The question might as also be how might churches embody participation in everyone, and so this is the culture that young people discover, or young people grow up in. Yet, at times the church is about a form of participation, from rotas to meetings, volunteering to contributing, participation does occur in the church, to a point. In general however, none of these things are accounted for or valued when church growth is discussed (positively or negatively), it is all about attendance, rather than participation – unless a few people become trained or ordained. But though it believes in participation, it is not often that participation is part of how it values itself. But i wonder why this is and whether gradually, there are even less spaces in which young people can participate.

Power is undoubtedly one reason, and linked to this is control. Churches can become big beasts that require high levels of organisation, especially as the expectations of them in view of affiliations or the charity commission can weigh heavy. But this is only one aspect of it. Foucaults view of power is that it is not in the organisation, but in the spaces between, it is ‘everywhere’ and there is no finite amount. The organisation of churches and youth ministry can create spaces where power is at play, especially expert power, and legitimate power – where the youth minister or ministry can hold the keys of expertise, or be in a role from which power is deferred from. Looking back, it is difficult to ascertain where youth ministry in the UK has ever been anything other than an adult orientated movement. It was philanthropic adults who began sunday schools, the evangelists in the 60’s with a ‘reaching’ young people agenda, and the development of clubs and groups that have been adult, rather than young people run, including the many ministries, festivals and programmes. The default may have been set, and it keeps people in places of power and control where they can feel comfortable and create an identity of ‘being a leader’ in a church. In a situation where young people have limited participation, they become little more than consumers. Given a token role in the odd service. Essentially whilst churches believe in power and control over participation young peoples experiences within will only be consumerist, and that leads to boredom.

Im pretty sure, so far, this isnt rocket science, or new.

Fundamentally i think the problem is deeper that this. I think theologically there is a stream of thought that shapes an understanding of other people in the church that means that theyre not fully trusted.

As Christians we read stories of disciples who God used but had failings (though we dont often refer to Mary, Deborah or Esther in these lists, whose ‘failings’ dont appear in the Biblical narrative) – and we often sing about ‘trusting in God alone’ , and comparing ourselves as failing Humans to the unfailingness of God. We also hear that no one can serve two masters, usually referring to God and Money/wealth. I wonder tentatively, whether a combination of these thoughts, implied through preaching, singing and the biblical narrative mean that within churches, though we rely on people to do things, it becomes a risk, beyond the call of the culture within the church to fundamentally trust someone. Especially a young person. Its only a thought, but what might be the effect on the kind of participation possible in a church in which the sinfulness of persons is readily preached? Why might a church not believe in participation, because it doesnt trust people enough or create the right environment where participation is a possibility. Valuing the humanity, and encouraging the contribution of others according to gift, can be low down on the radar, especially if at the same time persons feel reduced by an overload of sinfulness. The opposite however, is true, as I wrote in part 1, is that God believes in our participation.

Thinking through further. The role of the church can often revolve around being the moral guardian, or the rescuer of persons. The pressure is on to ‘tell’ young people, to ‘protect’ young people, to ‘guide them’ , at the same time, the church might view its role as the saviour of young people, a place where they are found from being lost, a place of community when before they were alone, light instead of dark. These roles carry with them the same sense of power as above, and also the limited trust of persons, because they are regarded as in need of rescue, and also in need of guidance. That young people, especially, are participants in this seems alien. The churches role, it may have changed in the last few years, but has largely retained the language of serving the poor, or engaging with young people, or reaching them, and this has been accompanied by non biblical views of young people that emphasise the negative traits of them (lazy, ferel, in transition, etc) – rather than the participative roles that the Bible gives young people within the narrative, that call forth the kingdom, Mary, for one. David the young King, defeater of the philistines. Our cultural shift has delayed the ages of trust and responsibility, to the point where young people are delayed in growing up. The church may be complicit in the same process of delaying the age of young peoples responsibility and participation, to a point which is too late, a point beyond when young people feel invested and contributers within it.

When it comes to participation, the church might not believe in it for a number of reasons. What is needed to happen is that the language of consumer, attender and measuring the effectiveness of ministries by numbers is challenged. Discipleship is a participative activity, and so, it is not that 5 people put on an event that 50 people attend that is as important as 50 people being valued as creators, shapers and discipled through the process of the activity. Might we measure and create spaces of participation with young people, starting on hearing their views, voice and trusting them to create their own spaces, starting at rung 5 of the ladder already. And hoping that they get bored of the consumer approach when they are receivers of it, because they desire more involvement. Not to be told but to discover. It might be risky to trust young people, trust they might know actual useful information, trust that we might learn from them, and create cultures of participation in churches, in groups and ministries. God calls us to participate in his mission, might God be asking young people to be participants too?

not only is it risky, it is also the more difficult thing. The slower thing, but that because it involves processes of learning, processes of collaboration, listening and creating community frameworks. Collaboration and processes are slow and difficult, maybe even chaotic. But again, didnt Jesus give the opportunity for chaotic discipleship, Peter wasnt controlled, but given freedom to ask back, to criticise even as a disciple. Discipleship isnt about control, its about pledging a relationship that gives space for ongoing conversation, participation of tasks and learning.

As church we face the wrath if we cause a little one to stumble, and this might happen if we create cultures of power and control, of morality and rescue, that are log jams in the ongoing participation of the kingdom that young people can be part of. In the ongoing mission of Gods redemption in the whole world. For that to happen a shift is needed that churches believe in participation.

One day a church might value young people so that it provides the possibility that they can be deacons. One day a youth ministry conference will be held that young people are part of, not just talked about. One day, young people in churches will write the articles.

Youth Discipleship; What if young people were performers of the gospel?

On By JamesIn Discipleship, TheodramaLeave a comment

‘Christian children all must be, Mild, Obedient, Good as He.’

By the time he was 12, the boy Jesus was teaching the religious leaders of his time, questioning their beliefs and slightly defying his parents. Why wouldnt he, after all, he would regularly go to the temple for that festival, so why wouldnt he find a space to announce himself. Mild, Obedient, good? hmm…

In some places we might be lucky to have any 12 year olds in church. Let alone give them a platform.

At the same time many 11-12 year old are captains for sports teams, leaders in uniformed groups, participants in school councils.

What I found growing up evangelical, was exactly this, or well not quite this but something similar. What I did was make the translation from reading the Bible, the works of Jesus, and the commands to ‘do good’ , to ‘doing activities in the church’ , and trying (but often failing to be ‘nice’). Though I was given lots of responsibilities in a local church, all very positive, inclusive and participatory, this didnt seem to equate with the kinds of things that seemed important when I read the gospels. Jesus didnt say – now children go and work the OHP, or hand out hymn books. But it seemed to be the spaces the church created for me to act.

A few weeks ago I was in Newcastle at the Diocese Office, leading a seminar on ‘Drop ins and Discipleship’ this was organised through the Diocesan Youth Team, and was an attempt to begin a conversation about discipleship, especially discipleship ‘after’ (or during) the open spaces of the activities that occur, such as messy church, drop ins or youth club spaces. During the day we heard from a number of practice leaders, from Bishop Mark Tanner, some group discussions and it gave me an opportunity to share a few ideas around the topic, and also promote the developing work of FYT in the north east. (see above menu for more of this) 

In session I suggested that we have often viewed church as the source of learning for discipleship. It is implicit in a way, and cultural, given that for many of the last 200 years churches have also been ‘sunday schools’, and before that, church was the only place to go to ‘hear’ the Bible being read, before the printing press. Learning has become a key feature and implicit in the building and practices of the church. It is therefore not unusual to see the process of discipleship as a learning experience.

From Sunday School upwards, or was it from Sermons downwards, this process can often be heavy on the cognitive learning, low on the connection to real life, and even lower on the value of actually doing something. The forming of disciples can feel like a learned experience in closed off boxes, and the actions that follow usually are to help children and young people be the ‘Christian children all must be, Mild, obedient, good as He.’ That gets sung at this time of the year.

And ‘learning first’ discipleship is almost the only model in current youth discipleship.

A quick survey of ‘ready to use material’ often points to ‘themes’, ‘games’ , ‘messages to reveal’ and questions for young people to reflect on. None of which in any way is invalid. What happens when this ‘method’ fails, is to ramp up the anti, and make the games bigger, more stupid and dangerous. What the type of teaching implies is that listening and the moral behaviour that is encouraged by it, is what discipleship is all about.

The problem with learning first discipleship – is that it feels a world away from the type of space created in the ‘open’ session. And not just for young people. Often to help people learn more about faith we ask them to ‘come to another event’ or to ‘do a course’ – for young people it is often the same. Open club to youth alpha equivalent. But many youth fellowships are not too dissimilar. Meant to be about discipleship – often not much more than an hour of games and a two minute epilogue. However, it is still learning first, even in a 2 minute epliogue. It would be easy to say that a consequence of some of these kinds of learning discipleship has produced effects such as MTD (moral therapeutic Deism (search this site for more on this) or that a ‘Happy Midi Narrative’ exists in which faith is just so that young people feel happy/confident. Once in this type of rut has set in it is time for a cure.

But there is no cure needed for the young people who are just connecting to your church via open sessions, youth clubs or messy church – this is an opportunity to do differently from before.

What i suggested in the talk, and then also in my Thesis, is that we need a new metaphor for thinking about young people (in fact all) in the church especially in discipleship. It is that of helping young people be ongoing performers and be formed through performances. A crisis of discipleship needs new imagination.

What if we perpetuated the idea that the Gospel was a drama to be performed – rather than to be learned and understood?

What if young people learned how to ‘do’ the gospel, before learning it?

What then, might action first – ‘learn’ second discipleship look like?

On one hand it looks like Jesus. Though the disciples watch him go to the village and meet the samaritan woman ( John 4), when he commands them to go to the villages two by two, these are not places he has been before, and with minimal instructions and equipment, commands them to go. And they come back and talk about their experiences. Though he has ‘done’ something in their presence and they watched – he is not ‘with’ them as they go and do it later on. When Zaccheus ‘does’ something in the repaying of tax receipts, it is there where redemption is found and Jesus finds a home. How might both of these be ‘played’ out in the ongoing ‘acting’ of the gospel as a drama with young people?

  • Put it this way, if a young person sells their xbox and gives the money to the foodbank, is this a salvific act?

The Christian Drama, calls us to action; ‘faith requires self-involvement; we too are asked to become part of the drama’ (Richard Carter, Sam Wells, 2014). Drama means Action.

One of the fascinating stories that I heard in Newcastle at the seminar, was of a young person who was part of a youth club in which they did alot of social action/justice type projects within the group, they did fundraisers for charities, wrote letters to MPs, and got involved with campaigning. For anyone thinking of doing this in youth groups then theres usually a stack of free resources at Tear Fund/Christian Aid or others. However, what the youth leader found is that when the young people ‘did’ more social action and supporting/protesting – so their faith also grew. Young people would voluntarily read more of their bibles, and pray in response to the actions they were taking. They were building a movement of faith and justice, and their discipleship framed around it. Its a profound thing to think that young people might be reading the Bible as their guidebook for creating social transformation!

In the grip of anxiety about numbers and success, it is easy to fall into the safe game, or to do the ‘tried and tested’ – even if the tried and tested is by established youth ministers or in a recognised publication- what we need is a new imagination for the process of discipleship – that views young people as participators of the drama, and ourselves as co actors with them. One that imagines and experiments, and appeals to meaningful actions that young people can do (together) on the stage of the world.

Frontier Youth Trust (FYT) have recently put together a resource, which i admit I havent used yet, which focusses on the ‘experiments’ that young people might do. What it does well is give young people and their leaders a range of potential actions around a theme, and then the young people ‘do’ these things, and the following week/session, they talk about how it went, how they felt, and how it relates to something that Jesus Said. If you’re keen to give young people a space to do ‘action first discipleship’ then you can order them through the link below. As far as i know there are plans to produce a second version soon. But in reality, once this framework is developed, then you might not need the cards in the future.  http://www.fyt.org.uk/resources/the-experiments/

So, what about ‘action first’ discipleship? It might require new imagination, it might require us to think about how ourselves an young people are caught up in a larger drama that we are all part, and have roles to play together. Beyond the open interaction of the youth club – if they wont ‘sit and learn’ why not create the spaces for them to have meaningful action, allow them to rise to the challenge. Maybe ‘action first’ is not that much different to ‘experiential learning’ – if thats an easier concept.

The challenge too, is that neither young people, nor we, nor the church are the principle actors in the drama. So whilst we might give young people ‘prompts’ to their actions, we also need to help them be aware of and obedience to, (as Vanhoozer suggests), the voice of God in the midst of the action. Some things might need improvising even in the midst of them.

 

Helping young people be active in discipleship is more than ‘just’ giving them something to do in our local churches, though, it possibly might help. Imagining discipleship as a drama, might help young people feel connected and participating in something, and also the agency to contribute meaningfully within.

Christian children all must be, wild, creative, prophetic and challenging the structures, just like he? What if this was socially and for the common good – not just ‘morally’ good.?

References:

Kevin Vanhoozer, Faith Speaking Understanding, 2014

Vander Lugt, Trevor Hart, Theatrical Theology, 2014

Shepherd, Nick, Faith Generation 2016, Nick discusses both MTD and ‘Happy Midi Narrative’ , more on MTD is here: https://wp.me/p2Az40-KS , or via the category tab. For more on Theodrama, see also the Theodrama Category on this site. 

Churches shouldn’t just entertain young people, they need to make them feel at home.

On By JamesIn Discipleship, Youth ministry, Youthwork MethodsLeave a comment

We’ve struggled to make formulas of youth ministry work, because weve tried to make churches look like nightclubs or conference halls or entertain young people, when they should help young people feel at home. I think.

I was reflecting on the Old Testament story of Samuel, the boy who heard from God as he grew up in the temple with Eli the Priest. It was within the temple that Samuel heard Gods voice, and it was within the temple that he grew up, it was his actual home. It wasnt a comfy home necessarily, as clearly from it he was sent and passed on messages of challenge, but it was the place he could call home. (Read 1 Samuel 3)

Often one of the great joys in youth work is when young people say they feel at home. And not only that, its when you can tell they feel at home, its the little things like when they feel they can make a coffee, or when they feel like they have some respect and reciprocate, when they feel part of something and can contribute to it. For the youthworker, who can be adept at creating a space young person can call home in a variety of settings, it is about ensuring that their youth activity is more that a place, it is a homely space. The environment of learning and atmosphere of the place is significant.

Maybe on detached work, the tables are turned. Because, often the action of conversation occurs in places that young people might be more at ‘home’ in than the youth worker. It is their regular ‘home’ on the bench, under the slide, in the bus shelter. Young people find home in the streets – or at least they might do. The streets may be much more than this too, a challenge might be that young people actually dont find the streets or public places as much of a ‘home’ as they used to, so they’re not there as much any more. They find home elsewhere.

So, it pains me to ask the question;

Where do young people find a home in the church? 

In the countless discussions there are about ‘keeping young people in the church’ (and most of them are on this blog page, see ‘the one question in churches that hasnt gone away’) there is the search for a hidden grail almost, the magic answer, the solution beyond all solutions, on how to keep young people in the church. The answer might not be in trendy programmes, in person centred education, in ‘youth churches’ or emerging churches. The answer might be, that young people, in a desire for both autonomy and connectedness, will opt into places that they can feel at home. Its also a place that they might choose to be, choose to be emotionally connected to. Image result for feeling home

Don’t you think its slightly weird that ‘home’ is a regularly used concept by Jesus, that is hardly spoken of? Jesus invites the first disciples to his home (John 1:39), in ‘my fathers house there are many rooms’ John 14. Yet Jesus ‘home’ at birth was not a usual dwelling, but a place Mary made into his home, and where they stayed for 2 years. He went to Zaccheus home, ie went to where Z felt comfortable, interesting. The environment matters.

In Nick Shepherds ‘Faith Generation’ he talks about young people generating a faith identity, this can be created in a number of ways, including ‘buying into the culture’, the actual t-shirts, the activities and festivals, but also that buildings, people and sacraments help to create identity. Id want to go further, and say that its more than an identity for young people – they need to feel at home in the church. 

It may be that young people do not need to feel at home in the church, because they have other places to call home – but thats not doesnt mean to say that all of us who work with young people do not attempt to create the kind of spaces in churches where young people might ‘feel’ the same as what young people feel in the clubs, groups and projects ‘outside’ the church. We need in youth ministry to have more place making, and home making, than to have activity, attendance and attraction. If young people are not allowed to use the kitchen to make Tea/Coffee, then this has become less of a home than their own. If they dont feel they can relax. If they’re too used to someone not even trying to remember their name, or that they feel lost in a large number, or not offered hospitality, then they wont feel at home. The environment is important, and what is implied in all of these actions that exclude, belittle, annoy, patronise or over protect young people.

But home, is not just a place of comfort, its the context for challenge, (aka Samuel) , the bedrock, foundation or scaffold. Yes, relationships might be ‘key’ in youth ministry, but place where relationship happens is too, and a place to call home, rather than place to do a group, or place to have fun, might only be temporary, until the next place is. When i look back at my own teenage years, i found space of ‘home’ in the churches, but also spaces where i didnt fit. Also peoples homes were open.

It might be worth asking the young people in your group – where they feel at home, or what causes them to feel at home – would they – without prompting and the sense of ‘trying to appeal to the youthworker’ say that church is a place they call home?  The more and more church is an organisation, the church is a place of teaching, a place where young people are a project to work on – the less they might feel at home in the space. Feel respected, feel listened to, feel at home. How many young people in your church youth groups would feel at home in the church that its connected to?

How might the church be home for young people?

We might crave the ‘deeper’ discipleship – but its likely this will only happen when young people feel at home.

I thank Alison Urie, Vox Liminis, Glasgow for sharing with me her insights into ‘Home’ that she wrote about a few years ago for an MA. In her thesis, she uses the following quotation: Eyles suggests that: To be attached to a place is seen as a fundamental human need and, particularly as home, as the foundations of our selves and our identities.

“Home is far more than a place of shelter. It is a concept charged with psychological and emotional importance,
the core place of belonging, of meaning-making and of memories.”

References

Shepherd, Nick, Faith Generation, 2015

Eyles, J.D. 1989 The Geography of Everyday Life, 102-117, in Gregory D. & Walford R.
Horizons in Human Geography, London: Macmillan