I’ve been thinking through the issue of “assimilation” and the local church – a lot. This has been one of those areas in which I feel weak. The theology of the church (ecclesiology) is something I am passionate about and comfortable with. But systems and methods for doing church where Scripture does not explicitly speak are more difficult for me. Assimilation is generally considered to be the process of leading visitors to the church to become active, healthy members of the church. I believe every church needs to put serious thought in this system, method, or whatever you want to call it, as it is clearly a part of Christ’s Great Commission to make disciples. So what should it look like? Whose model will we adopt?
Some assimilation models are based around a well designed program with classes that emphasize education. For example, there may be four classes that relate to different stages of assimilation. One completes a class and moves ahead. I don’t think this is wrong. Classes are helpful tools in assimilation, but it’s easy to adopt this method (or any other method) second hand without first laying a theological/philosophical foundation on which the system can be built. New churches want to get going, don’t want to reinvent the wheel, and therefore sometimes adopt a program for assimilation that can amount to running people through formalities without ever really accomplishing the goal of producing mature members who are on mission. So here are my thoughts on a foundation for assimilation. You can think of it like a skeleton on which muscle and flesh must be added. Or you can think of it in terms of our goals concerning general experiences and spiritual progression. Like most of my thinking, this is very simple stuff, but perhaps you will find it somewhat useful.
Gospel-Centered Assimilation (sketch from my journal)
I write and draw everything out in my Moleskine journal. This is what my thinking on assimilation looks like visually. It breaks down into four progressive experiences/spheres that overlap with one another. When a family or individual comes to an event or gathering – or even into a member’s home the process begins. For more info on [circle, triangle and square, see this post.]
Gospel Encounter
The first sphere is a gospel encounter. At every event, in all our gatherings and ministries, and in even our homes as we practice hospitality, we expect visitors to encounter the gospel in word and/or deed. This is something we are completely in control of. While we cannot ensure that an individual will embrace the gospel, we can ensure the gospel is demonstrated through works of mercy, preached in our worship gatherings, seen in our parenting, fellowship and dialog with the world.
The unchurched, non-Christian and the mature believer who has walked with Christ for decades will both encounter the gospel. A gospel encounter is not dependent on a particular program, but can use them as appropriate. The point is that in every point of entry to the body (worship gathering, mercy ministry, etc.) the gospel is exalted and people are in some way confronted with it.
Gospel Experience
The second stage of assimilation for us is experiencing the gospel. This is out of our control, but is the aim of all our ministry. By gospel experience I mean people are not only confronted with the gospel, but are in some way affected by it. Conviction of sin, seeking God, and eventually faith and repentance (conversion) are progressive goals. There is overlap between the gospel encounter and gospel experience, for some will have been prepared for this in advance, and some will be Christian. Therefore, some who come into our midst will encounter and experience the gospel immediately. Others will experience it later as they continue with us.
For many of our visitors, the first two stages of assimilation focus on the gospel and them as individuals and families. People are more the recipients of the gospel, rather than the servants of it.
Gospel Service
The second stage in assimilating into the church is gospel service – where people begin to see the gospel as something not just for them, but for everyone. Consequently they begin participating and serving with the church in her mission. It is our goal and expectation that everyone at Redeemer will participate in and serve both the body and the community with the gospel. At some point in this stage covenant membership is expected. How a church moves forward with membership varies greatly, but I like the idea of a class or classes to help in this aspect of assimilation.
Gospel Calling
As believers are growing in grace the church must work to help individuals identify their spiritual gift, mature as followers of Christ, be able to reproduce themselves via discipleship, lead in whatever capacity God has equipped them, and determine what God has called them to (in church life, family, vocation, etc.).
These latter two overlapping spheres orient the indivudal outwardly. Rather than focusing only on the “gospel and me” they are brought to live out a “gospel and me and the world” perspective.
I have not addressed the issue of new visitors and the parking lot, visitor’s centers, worship guides (bulletins for the old schoolers), etc. All of that is relevant – even important in my estimation. But first, I needed to work out in a clear way what assimilation really is. I do not believe assimilation is simply becoming a member of an organization. It is the spiritual progression of an individual with Christ and his people. It moves one from conviction, to conversion, to covenant membership and beyond. In ym view it should rely less on a program and more on immersion into the church’s culture (and counter-culture).
While this doesn’t spell out all the ways we, or any other church, may practically carry out assimilation, it is a helpful foundation from which we are developing the ins and outs of this process in our fellowship.
Of course, I am always curious how others are doing it, thinking about it. From big picture stuff to the practical details – please share your thoughts on this.
I am the Lead Pastor of Redeemer Fellowship; husband to Jen; Dad to Katherine, Elias, Madeline, and Kilian. If you're in town you can probably find me in the local coffee house or running through the neighborhoods.
{ 19 comments }
Joe:
do you see this as a linear progression?
PS: Could you put the scan of your diagram up in some way we can download/print it off/see it larger? Thanks!
In terms of the experiences/spheres – generally yes. One cannot experience the gospel until they encounter it. But one may, in some sense, “serve” the gospel by participating while not yet converted. Here care needs to be exercized to avoid giving false assurance/confidence to the unconverted seeker. (See my series on this here) So there things can be less linear. So classes, service, and various parts of the system not discussed here can happen at different times. So it’s mostly linear, but not entirely so.
I’ve been following your development (along with Steve) of your circle, triangle and square. We’re doing something similar here at Cradock–slightly different shapes and definitions.
I guess I wonder how a linear spiritual development model works in a very cyclical and non-linear culture…..
Your models are making me re-think my own presuppositions about spiritual growth……thanks for the challenge!
Hey Joe — this is a great topic.
Let me suggest something: if someone is planted in the church, they will grow in the church. Here’s what I mean by that — people don’t want to be enticed into doing things. The truth is, our society is constantly enticing us to do everything from drinking Milk to watching the Olympics.
I think Piper’s vision of the church — which is a people who love God and find unity with each other in that love of Him (if I can paraphrase the DG vision) — is the one which will plant people in the church and grow them there.
We have a joke at our church among the pastoral staff (I’m not on it, but I serve them as the facilkitator for adult sunday school) that I’m starting my own church in my SS class — because my class is one of two which is growing. My class is the bigger class, but it started as the bigger class. Anyway, I mention it because we are seriously reading the Bible from Gen 1:1 to the end of Malachi in a year together — and for almost everyone in the class, it is the first time they have read the Bible as something more than the source material for AWANA.
In that soil, people are learning to love the actual God of History and the actual Author and Finisher of our faith, which has really lit the firecracker of fellowship among them.
Here’s what I don’t think you need: I don’t think that your church needs to be organized like open of those coin-droppers you see at WMT where one the coin passes through the entry slot it doesn’t have much choice but to follow gravity down the hole in ever-tightening spires. Your church shouldn’t be some kind of trick or device to get people past some point of no return.
I have blogged this before, but I think your church should be like Sonic. People should know what you have — which is Christ, and Him crucified, and resurrected, which is the victory over the world. And you should be big-red-and-yellow-sign proud of Jesus. And the people who are there need to love Jesus, which will cause them to love each other. And this is how the world will know you: by your love for one another.
If your church is a family with Christ as its first-born Son and the rest of you adopted to His Father, the people who come in will come all the way in. Not, btw, because you didn’t need to convince them, but because you had something that is available no place else.
For whatever that’s worth, btw. You guys who earn your living as workmen who are not ashamed know something I don’t know and live a way I admit I can’t live.
Frank, you may need to correct me, but it sounds to me like we mainly agree. My point is, less on program, more on the process of progressing with the gospel and the body – and that happens in a variety of forms and contexts. It’s about immersing into the body and becoming a part of it. There is a progression, and much of that is linear, but I am certainly not arguing for a narrow single path model of assimilation (4 classes everyone must complete and that’s the end). But feel free to clarify, add, or critique.
However, assimilation is a topic that needs to be discussed and rethought, IMO, because some tend to trust in a program to accomplish what only the gospel can, while others think God will make it a reality of we all just love Jesus. As I see it, we need to think clearly about how we make disciples, what progression would look like, and determine the best way for us as a church to accomplish it. The fact that you have SS speaks to a part of your church’s assimilation process. It sounds like a good one.
You said,
“I have blogged this before, but I think your church should be like Sonic. People should know what you have — which is Christ, and Him crucified, and resurrected, which is the victory over the world. And you should be big-red-and-yellow-sign proud of Jesus. And the people who are there need to love Jesus, which will cause them to love each other. And this is how the world will know you: by your love for one another.”
I agree 100% and believe this is true, and is increasingly true of our church, Redeemer Fellowship.
And when did Sonic start selling Jesus?
Joe, I appreciate the post as always. I am in this struggle right now with our 18 month old church. I have cast the vision for our church being in a phase of leadership birth and development. People have responded and I have found myself in an assimilation struggle. We are a very simple ministry style – corporate worship, small group, and mission.
I understand that you are trying to assimilate without creating programs… but, how do you take person “a” and plug them in to a leadership/serving role at the church? Is there some level of program necessary? i.e. spiritual gift classes, etc..
If I understand your post correctly then I am asking the same questions you are and these questions were not intended to be answered in your post… But, I do think this is one of the temptations for the program driven church. In that ministry style you have a huge need to assimilate people into different areas of service. With a simple ministry style you have less slots to fill but a discipleship need to empower leaders.
Sorry, you hit a hot point for me right now… I hope some of that made a little sense : )
I’ll be interested to follow along and see how this works out for you guys. Very much like the process and thought behind it (for what it’s worth). It seems you’re now ready for square one and fleshing out what this will look like in practical application (look forward to seeing how you progress here).
Great thinking man, I appreciate your thoughts.
I appreciate this philosophy of Ministry reflection, and how the groups in the church relate to the assimilation process. It will be good mind candy over the next couple of days as I sort out and integrate this into my presuppositions. To help my reflection, could lead me to your paper on “Internal Church Life” that is referenced in “Full Paradigm” blog post?
How do you account for the relational dynamics of unity, fellowship, and intimacy that are some of the necessary components in building a biblical and disciplemaking infrastructure where people are encouraged to develop loving relationships? In your perpsective does each entity – “table,” “pulpit,” and “square” – engage all relational dynamics or do does each entity – “table,” “pulpit,” “square” – deal with a particular relational dynamic?
IMHO I have come to affirm that all 3 relatioal dynamics (unity, fellowship, intimacy) are necessary for disciples to be trained and reproduced. This (which is a biblical perspective to me) entails people need to be involved in 4 different kinds of groups as part of their growth and service in the body life of the church:
1. Worship services (Celebrations) for unity,
2. Biblie Fellowships (congregations) for fellowship, and
3. small groups (cells) for intimacy, and
4. Family (core) which integrates all 3 dynamics.
Could you explain further how the entities of table, pulpit and square would encorporate an infrastructure in the body life of the church so as not to duplicate effort and to see each group working with and needed each other in fullfilling the mission of the church?
Thanks for you time.
No no, assimilation just happens. It is just like discipleship that way!
I think the point both you and Frank are trying to make is about intentionality. Some rely on programs to be intentional, but you can stagger through the program hoops and still feel lost, lonely and confused. Frank seems to be reacting to that. The other option is that there is no program and no plan and we’ll just hang out and it will all be good. My mom was subjected to that. She came to a church regularly for about two years. She was older and single and didn’t fit the mold. She got tired of the ice and loneliness and left. No on has contacted her about it to this day, three or four years later.
Frank, I think what Joe is saying is that there must be a third alternative and I agree.
I just started at a church in the Nashville area a few months ago as Pastor of Assimilation. Simply, it’s my job to create a foundation and think creatively on how to do the process you have displayed above.
One of the things I was asked to do was create a New Believer’s class because of the high rate of professions of faith we have had at our church (we are over 100 baptisms this year so far). I have done this already, writing a six-week curriculum called First Steps: Following the Master. We discuss the gospel, God, the Bible, the Church, Spiritual Disciplines, and Mission.
Now I am trying to figure out how to move people from convert to service. Our church is 31 years old and made up of mostly people over 40, although our pastors are mainly in their 30s (I’m 24).
Because of the nature of our church I am struggling on where to move from here. The church has always had covenant membership since its beginning, but I have found out most of the members don’t see the point of it and were never educated about its purpose other than to protect the body from divisive people.
All this to say, I am in the boat with you, Joe, especially since this is my job as Pastor of Assimiliation. Our contexts are probably different, but I will be sure to check out what you come up with.
I do have one question: if the majority of discipleship comes through teaching and correction, why do you have such a seeming disdain for classes?
Thanks for posting this. I’m convinced you’re headed in the right direction.
I think working out the programming side of this, before understanding this model, inhibits ever understanding the model.
In a church 150 years old, it takes a great deal of time to own this model. . .
Lots to think about. I’m thankful for the post.
The slush. Fruit of the, um, vine and work of human hands, it has become for us our spiritual drink.
Joe said:
[QUOTE]
more on the process of progressing with the gospel and the body – and that happens in a variety of forms and contexts. It’s about immersing into the body and becoming a part of it. There is a progression, and much of that is linear, but I am certainly not arguing for a narrow single path model of assimilation (4 classes everyone must complete and that’s the end).
[/QUOTE]
I read that, and like every other clause makes me change my mind about whether I agree or not.
” the process of progressing with the gospel ” — um, yes? Phil 3:8-11? Not to be an old guy here, but I guess I don’t know what a “process of progressing” is in this context. Discipleship? I don’t think it’s that complicated, really — I think that if people hear the word preached and taught, and in that they talk about it open and honestly (including their doubts or disagreements), the word forms and reforms them, and then they have to live in some such way that it looks like they believe what they believe. is that what you mean? If so, then yes. Amen.
” in a variety of forms and contexts ” — um? I think it comes from the church, to the believers, into the world — which I guess is three major contexts, and you’d never have (for example) the Lord’s Supper outside of the church context. I think my bias against words like this (which, I am sorry, I think are vague) is stopping me from just amen-ing you.
” immersing into the body ” — OK, but is it my responsibility to wedge into the body, or should the body just be open to me as a new body-part? And is it that simple that one just “immerses”? My wife and I had a long month hashing this out when we started small groups for prayer and fellowship — is it phony and disingenuous to just say, “you join my group,” or is that intentional and necessary like any good habit starts out? The way you said this seems to make it both too organic and too contrived. What if you just said “joining the body”, which seems to me to sound more like the biblical call?
All I’m saying is that it sounds to me like you’re trying to invent a new vocabulary here which will make it hard to be understood outside your (no offense – small) circle. Why make that harder — especially in an SBC context?
” model of assimilation ” — I think that’s where I lose you. I understand the perfectly-good word “assimilation”. It is a fine sociological word for what you’re talking about. I think the church is tasked with achieving something more profound than “to absorb into the culture or mores of a population or group”. I think — because I trust you and your intentions — that you are trying to build the household of God, and you don’t “assimilate” people into your household. The girls in the Chapman household have not been assimilated: they have been loved. They have been adopted in the finest and the most God-exalting way.
And I bring this all up not just because I have a free afternoon.
I bring it up because I think — as I read what you’re working on here — that you’re trying too hard. In our church, we realized something: it’s one thing to be a “friendly” church — anyone can be facelessly friendly. It is another to be a friend — and this is where most (SBC) churches blow it because it actually costs something to actually be someone’s friend.
A friend. A neighbor. But to do that, God has to work in you — and for God to work in you, at some point — all calvinism and all systematic aside — you have to let him. You have to let the word of God dwell in you richly.
That’s the hump which every church has to overcome: how do we meet the word of God so that it dwells in us richly, making us people who are friends of sinners?
I think you’re right, that we are not very far apart here — our objectives are not far apart at all. But I think trying to over-examine the process, and use process language to describe it, overlooks what the objectives are.
Does that make sense?
Frank,
Thanks for stopping by and talking through some of it. I hardly have time to blog these days – commenting gets far less attention. I don’t have the time to walk through your quotes and questions, so I’ll be (too) brief. My situation, and all church plants, is in a different situation from yours in that I don’t have an assimilation model to inherit or tweak. We have to create it. And while it may seem like I’m “trying too hard” what I am really doing is the hard work of practical ecclesiology and making disciples. Some of your objections are not very different from someone saying, “The gospel is preached and we believe and God justifies the guilty. Who cares about the ins and outs of regeneration preceding faith? Or any of the more detailed aspects of the ordo salutis?” So, I think it’s a bit simplistic to say – it’s the gospel. It’s the church. Of course I’d agree, but it in practice – how will we do these things? How do we give them the word? Worship? Yep. Primary. Catechisms? SS? Small groups? And how will these function and fit together without underdeveloping or overtaxing the people?
Rob, I think too much is made of pitting linear thought against a postmodern culture. Some things are linear, and people get that.
Matt, yeah programs and classes are good. We have a system for developing elders and deacons/deaconesses. We are putting together a full membership class, and I love the idea of a new believer’s class. Such things can be very helpful. But there are other ways to accomplish assimilation, and my point in the post – which you get – is that we need to think more theologically first and then develop a structure to make things work.
Jason, I will share the details as I have time, and as they continue to develop.
Glenn, those papers are not yet available to the general public. Some day soon. And it sounds like you and I would agree on the relational aspects of this, though I would word some of it differently. I may be posting more on these issues in the future when I have time.
Luke, I’d love to hear more about the class you developed! And you have misread me (or I have miscommunicated) if you think I have disdain for classes. I do not. I am only cautioning against people adopting classes and programs before first figuring out what the whole point is of assimilation. I always try to work from theology to practices. And we cannot trust the class/program, but the body. The class should be a tool the body uses, but it’s the presence of Christ in the body that accomplishes the work.
Chris, hope to see you tomorrow!
Please feel free to comment, disagree, or make fun of Steve McCoy – just please understand I am low on time to really dialog.
Amen.
Great conversation once again Joey – thanks!
My sister’s husband (my brother-in-law) moved into the role of Assimilation Pastor 2 years ago.
He is an elder at our church and he oversees the Deacon ministry. Through the Deacons he is made aware of needs and with the help of the Deacons they “assimilate” people. They together find people to fill in the gaps who have the correct giftedness to do the job.
He also uses the Spiritual Gift test – but that’s not his only tool. Much of it comes through the Deacons.
He goes to all the ABF’s and teaches lessons on spiritual gifts and makes the body aware of the needs. He is the main contact for all the needs in the church and then he is the main contact if you’d like to serve and need plugged in. He also oversees all the small groups in our church which is a huge ministry.
He has helped our body of Christ just function smoothly – he is a great go to person and with the help of the Deacons it is not a program but a way of ministry – a way of building the body up.
Discipleship is one part – but service is another key.
When he moved from Youth Pastor to this position I’ll admit I thought it was a little wierd – but now that I see it in action – I think it is awesome. Our body of Christ is growing by leaps and bounds and we are about to send out 100+ members for a 2nd church plant in the last 2 years. (Our pastor is trying to avoid creating a mega church which we would have if we didn’t continue to plant churches like we have over the past 10 years).
All I can say is God is using it for his glory for the gospel to be spread, disciples to be made and the body to work in unity.
Courtney Joseph
I really like this post, and while I have no comment on the content per se (other than I’m looking forward to hearing you bring this to the congregation), I just wanted to tell you I appreaciate your ability to put your thought process down visually, graphically. Words can be limiting, and so can graphics, but the ability to present those tools together really helps make things clear. Thanks for showing us how you work thru these concepts.
Limited by words,
Chris W
I’ve thought through similar issues, and agree as a fellow church planter that such thought is essential. I agree with your diagram. Our paradigm is to use a “training track” called “The Year of Building” in which new members are shown what it is to be living stones in God’s temple. And much like your diagram, the focus shifts half-way through the process to show how we are not only individual stones in the building, but fellow builders as well. This model comes from straight exposition of Scripture from texts in 1 Peter, and 1 Corinthians and Ephesians. That’s what we want isn’t it – a paradigm that flows from Scripture? So I think your model is on the right track and look forward to how it works out.
Comments on this entry are closed.
{ 3 trackbacks }