Limited by words,
Chris W

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

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.

[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?

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.

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?