I had a conversation a few weeks ago with a couple of church leaders who wanted to “mobilize†their church members into ministry. They wanted to turn around the situation in their church (common to many congregations) where 20% of the people do 80% of the work, where most members were “pew warmers†and where the underlying assumption is that ministry is the work of the clergy, not the work of the people.
As so often happens in these conversations the talk turned to “spiritual gifts.†The working assumption in these matters seems to be that if we can get people to discover their spiritual gifts they’ll get off the pew and do something more than just attend church and let others do most of the ministry in the congregation. So they’ll ask about a spiritual gifts inventory that’s “easy to use†and doesn’t take too much effort to administer.
My challenge in these conversations is in trying to find a way to get folks to see two things: (1) it’s not about getting people to “do more†in the congregation, and, (2) it’s not about spiritual gifts. But I must admit, my success rate in getting people to see those two points hasn’t been very high—but neither has their ability to actually mobilize their church members when they ignore those points.
(1) I’m always amazed at how difficult it is for persons who are interested in mobilizing their church members to see that the mobilization of those members (primarily the 80% who are not engaged) is in ministries and mission OUTSIDE of the congregational structures, services, programs, and internal ministries. Certainly, getting church members involved in keeping the church programs running is important—and a constant challenge. But that felt urgency is also the very reason why one must intentionally focus on getting members involved OUTSIDE of the church. We’ll always be pressed to get people to shore up the committees, programs, and services the church needs for itself and for its own members. But too often, lacking an appropriate theology of ministry and missions, we unwittingly make service to the church as the be-all and end-all of what it means to be a Christian disciple.
This perspective is so entrenched in leaders that we often go around in circles on this one. My challenge is: if you’re going to engage in a program to mobilize your church members, start with mobilizing them into ministries and missions OUTSIDE of your congregation FIRST. The hesitancy to entertain that challenge speaks volumes.
(2) The concept of spiritual gifts is important for both the growth of the individual Christian and for the health of the church. When I say “It’s not about spiritual gifts†I don’t mean to imply that they are not important or that we should not give them their due attention in the life of the church. But the point is that spiritual gifts is not a sufficient starting point for mobilizing church members. The reason is that spiritual gifts does not comprise a fundamental theology upon which to build.
The reason for this is that “spiritual gifts” is at best, closer to a “theological concept.” That is, it is a concept that has implications and applications for the Christian life–but it is insufficient for a “theology.” There has to be something else–a more fundamental theology–that informs concepts like “spiritual gifts.”
A frequent fundamental error is the propensity to build a theology out of a secondary concept. Case in point: faith orientations and churches that attempt to build a “theology” on a spiritual gift (often one single charismatic one) that becomes informative and normative for everything else. It’s getting things backward: one’s theology must inform one’s understanding of spiritual gifts–not the other way around.
I think it is a theology of calling (a more fundamental theological concept) that needs to inform our understanding of spiritual gifts. A theology of call is the starting point for member mobilization—not a concept of spiritual gifts. That every Christian is CALLED of God–first to a redemptive relationship and secondarily to service/mission/ministry, is the issue at heart–NOT that every Christian has a spiritual gift (which, while true, is secondary). Similarly, I think we’d do well to talk more about a theology of the laity and less, perhaps, about which, how many, and what kind of spiritual gift one may or may not have. (I’m not arguing that we should NOT talk about, teach about, use, apply, or help people discover their spiritual gifts–please don’t misunderstand).
I think there’s plenty of evidence around about what happens when we get it backward and put the emphasis on the wrong thing. How many churches engage in a “spiritual gifts†program, run dozens of church members through an inventory, offer a class or two, preach about it—only to find themselves right back where they started within six months: 20% of the members doing the work, 80% doing little or nothing, and few if any engaged in ministry and mission OUTSIDE of the church. I’m convinced that for a church to turn that around, then it must embrace, practice, and inculcate in its members a theology of call, first.
To make the concept of spiritual gifts central and ontological to the issues of the laity is to put the emPHAsis on the wrong sylLAble. Get the theology straight and everything else will follow.
“If the shoe fits, get another one just like it.”
