Faith Sowers “Sowing Youth Ministry for Churches”

First, let me say I am definitely enjoying this book as a whole. I haven’t had any “aha” moments as of yet (I’m only finished with chapter 2) but am encouraged that much of what I’m thinking isn’t an episode of “Tom’s World” and no one else wants to watch. Oh yeah…I’ve noticed some people out there seem to think Chris is a bit liberal in some of his theological thoughts. All I have to say is you really need to expose yourself to what Christians have said for thousands of years. You’re only at the tip of an iceberg if you think he’s liberal or “risky.” Enough of those comments though…here are some thoughts on chapter 2.
______________________________________

Chris jumps into this chapter by desiring to see a “reculturation” of discipleship in church. He is critical of simply helping students attain head knowledge about a faith that has no forward momentum and applicability to life as each person’s context changes throughout their time on earth. He calls this movement a “mobile faith.”

From this point he dives into something I feel very passionate about. Narrative Theology! Chris writes, “We need to help our students understand the story of God and their own role in God’s story.” (This is one reason I’m really looking forward to his upcoming book.) In light of postmodernism and the awareness of the breakdown of denominationalism, it seems to me that Folmsbee is on to something with the emphasis on story as a way to communicate truth and life and faith in a theologically meaningful way. I’ve ceased referring to our denominations as “denominations” and started calling them accents. No longer is a people in a geographic area representative of a specific religious accent. People from those areas are exposed to the “cereal aisle” of life. They are more and more aware of choices they can make about religion and what different religions and accents say about the God.

One critique I have about the way Chris lays “story” out in his book is the assumption of certain theological positions. Obviously this is the way Chris understands God and his revealed work in creation but I don’t think the story in Scripture ties us to the way Chris exegetes the passages. Namely, I struggle with the idea of original sin that seems to come across in his interpretation of of Adam and Eve in the garden. He says, “Not long into the story, sin impacts and infects God’s entire world. No one can escape the stain of sin.” I do feel like this story shares the idea that humanity is sinful but personally don’t follow the line of thought that Augustine has passed down to us that is “Original Sin.” As I read his comment though, it is possible that I’m misinterpreting what Folmsbee has put into words.

A second critique I would offer is for the reader to not encapsulate themselves within the story Chris has drawn for us as if it is “storybook law.” It seems to me it is possible to understand many themes and images by seeing them throughout the biblical story that are outside one of the options Chris gives us. What I mean is similar to Doug Fields, Purpose Driven Youth Ministry, work. Often I meet youth workers who feel like there is no other way to understand the passages that Fields and Rick Warren have exegeted in a specific way. They lock themselves into one understanding as if we’ve arrived at the absolute understanding of those passages. I think it is helpful when an other like Chris mentions to the reader not to lock themselves into only one understanding of Scripture…even within story.

It is helpful that following this narrative thought process that Chris begins to jump into what it means to live out faith and disciple students in understanding what living out faith means. Folmsbee articulates our movement forward in the context of putting trust in Jesus, that his way is the true way for a person to live life. This way is a restorative way of life. This way is categorized by three principals –1) surrendering to God 2) abiding in God 3) reflecting the nature of God.

After Chris’ helpful articulation of the above points he moves into some material that, as I was reading, I thought, “He is making some very particular theological assumptions.” Immediately after this crossed my mind the next paragraph started by saying, “Now, before you jump to any conclusions about me, understand that I am aware of the debates surrounding the theological positions illustrated above.” I had to laugh at myself. He read my mind. The illustration he spoke of was a point by point summary of “Positional Sanctification” and “Practical Sanctification.” One might to understand these categories by answering the question whether or not salvation is instantaneous or or happens over time as a process. Chris helps us wrestle with the tension between these ideas by sharing that he wants us to help our students recognize new life in Jesus and better encourage students to live in Jesus’ way.

In the end, Chris recultures our language and asks youth leaders to begin thinking of themselves as spiritual directors and not program directors. Chris…that thought sings to me and I must say, “I’ll drink to that. Cheers mate!”

Here are some thoughts on chapter 1. I enjoyed and found it thought provoking. It resonated with me as a reflection of a lot of what I’ve been thinking about regarding youth ministry and evangelism in general.

Chris starts by sharing an experience with an event driven form of evangelism (I think I know which “festival” this was Chris). Of course this is so prevalent in youth ministry. Event driven evangelism is a place where “the Gospel” is proclaimed. It is usually one image of the Gospel and therefore speaks in a limited way. He then goes on to talk about friendship evangelism. This type of evangelism is where students are encouraged to sit with their friends and either “share Christ” or invite them to an event where the people that know evangelism can actually do the evangelism. I have two thoughts I’d like to add about friendship evangelism in addition to Chris’ critique of creating an unhealthy sense of what it means to evangelize.

1) Chap Clark has written a wonderful book about a study he completed regarding adolescent development. Hurt (without going into the study) talks about a phenomenon called “clustering” that should be added to the list of critiques of such types of evangelism. “Clustering” is the acknowledgment that people, adolescents more so, spend time with people who are like themselves because it is safe. Now I won’t go further into this but if evangelism is restricted to one’s cluster then God’s grace is less often being shared with people unlike us. Clustering assumes many of our students friends are Christians in confession. This is my experience. Of course they have non-Christian friends as many of us do but they are not “safe” to share Jesus’ way with.

2) I forgot my second point.

After jumping into the topic of “bridge building,” which he describes as a means of connecting to separate points that are disconnected, he explains why this analogy of evangelism creates problems in the way he feels it should happen. Chris asks “So what does it reveal when the church needs to build a bridge to the culture?” and responds with, “It reveals a disconnection…” He says that a new kind of youth ministry is committed to compassion. He uses an analogy that involves getting into a canoe and rowing with them in relationship. He calls it “life-dynamic evangelism.”

(Now Chris (assuming you look at this though this is unlikely) I love to poke fun at people. Since we don’t know each other I’m giving you this explanation so you don’t think I’m a total jerk.)

Those of us in youth ministry love to create awesome sounding names for things. It is like we’re making a name for a new concert tour. I think it is hilarious. I called something “Momentum” once and my old youth group name was, “G2R,” Genesis 2 Revelation. Chris has come up with “Life-Dynamic Evangelism!” This is a most “Extreeeemeee Youth Ministry” form of evangelism. Just kidding. The name works well for what Chris wants to convey so jibes aside I understood it as practicing compassion in our lives.

Life-dynamic evangelism is simply “sharing the truths of God in the context of our everyday lives.” This creates a type of evangelism that does not focus on the “us and them” relationship or dangling a carrot in front of someone saying, “I’ve got heaven yes I do. I’ve got heaven how about you?” It is simply being people and living life together. A missionary I met from Russian said the biggest problem he had with American Christians that came over to help and serve was that they came to solve problems and fix the people or situation rather than joining with those people in walking through life. Compassion. Life-dynamic Evangelism. Chris adds 10 points that are also helpful in breaking this down.

The only critique, and I guess it is a big one, I have from the chapter is some language he used near the end of the chapter that I’m very sensitive to. He says, “Your recultured evangelism would be driven by the goal of connecting students with God through Jesus, not packing a calendar full of events for the purpose of appearing active.” What is my critique about this? Well I think it takes us back to an unequal power relationship and becomes proselytizing when we have a mindset of having a goal. We assume the place of having motive behind our relationship with a person when we have a goal. People then revert back to numbers, or those that need to be saved. They cease to become people when we have a goal. I would propose that we work towards building a mindset, an atmosphere in our ministries, a culture that does not have a goal of evangelism but has a desire to share life with each other as Chris said earlier in the chapter. An example would be I really want someone to go to a party with me so I ask them if they want to join me. If they say “no” then that is fine though I might experience rejection or disappointment. If they say “yes” then that is awesome. We get to share life together and make some memories. I don’t have a goal in that kind of relationship. I let them live their story out in the manner they would like to and it does not change that I still have a desire for them to participate with me (and with God in the evangelism case.) If we don’t have the desire to have people we love, join us in God’s story then I’d say we have a very big problem. Why wouldn’t you want someone to walk this path with you? There needs to be no goal. Just a desire to share what is your own life. Your adventures!

Needless to say, I felt Chris’ constructive criticisms of evangelism were right on. He does a good job of critiquing and not simply disregarding those forms of evangelism. People who consider these forms of evangelism valuable can simply heed the warnings and challenges associated with this type of evangelism without being attacked by yet another author.