Category: Evangelism

Evangelistic interrogation

interrogationI was evangelized this weekend by a well-meaning, young seminary student.

He asked my wife and I if we would like some of his evangelism tracts. We smiled and said no thanks.

He asked, “Are you Christians?”

“Yes,” I confirmed, “we are.”

Someone else nearby came up and chastised us. “You’re Christians, and you wouldn’t even take his materials?” We explained that we didn’t think it was necessary for him to waste his time and paper on us. Better to let him move on. (I didn’t also mention that I know how these things tend to go and wasn’t feeling up for the song and dance again.)

“Did you even affirm him in what he was doing?” he asked. “He’s trying to do something important here. It takes courage.” No, we hadn’t affirmed him. We apologized. We affirmed him.

And then, the person who originally offered us literature asked, “So what do you believe a Christian is?” And here we were, doing the song and dance…

I told him I was a pastor, assured him that we believe in Christ, tried to let him know it was okay to move on. So he asked where I’m a pastor and again asked me to tell him what makes someone a Christian… This is where the kindly offer turns into more of an inquisition. The point where I’m quizzed about exactly what my faith entails to make sure I’m really a Christian.

Now there’s an element of this I can appreciate. I know many people who claim to be Christians mean only that they were raised in the Church and believe God exists, and perhaps even believe Jesus really lived and died and was raised. And I’m sure there are some Christian pastors whose faith doesn’t really meet the standards of what I would consider real Christianity.

But a sidewalk inquisition doesn’t strike me as the best approach here. It wasn’t my first. It won’t be my last. And frankly, I’ve just grown tired of them. Perhaps I’m wrong, but if I weren’t a Christian, I don’t think these uninvited interrogations would do much to sway me.

I generally know the answers I need to give to help people move along: “I have accepted Jesus into my heart, repented of my sins, and have faith in him alone for salvation.” Avoid saying anything about the Church and sacraments – as nearly all street evangelists see the Church and its sacraments as nothing more than functional. Don’t mention holiness either. They’ll start to suspect works righteousness. Your best shot at a quick conversation is vanilla evangelical Christianity.

All of that will help, but I’ve encountered a number of people who want more. They end up wanting to make sure I subscribe to the particular brand of Christianity they subscribe to. This weekend, I somehow ended up with my inquisitor “enlightening” me about the Greek words in various passages to help show me what they really mean. I told him I hadn’t come for a Bible debate and that it was probably best for him to move on, but he said he was very concerned that as a pastor I might be teaching people in error. Oh my…

I really do believe this young seminary student was (mostly) well-intentioned. But what were the odds that he was going to suddenly convince me, there on that sidewalk, that my understanding of God and Scripture and Christianity had been in error all this time? I’m not usually put in a disposition to make drastic change in my life through uninvited interrogations. Especially when they become demonstrations of how I don’t really understand the truth and need to change my beliefs. Especially when they come from total strangers. Especially when the strangers begin spouting off Greek words at me (which were either badly mispronounced or not real Greek words) to demonstrate their understanding and my ignorance.

I’ve begun wondering how common this experience is. And how common my feelings about it. We don’t generally welcome interrogations from strangers. We welcome them less when they move toward showing us our error. The whole conversation, from its very beginning, sets up an inferior (the [likely] ignorant interrogated) and a superior (the knowledgeable interrogator). Is this really the way to share our faith? There seem so many problems with it.

I believe there’s an urgency to share the gospel. I believe we have to find ways to do it – even when they may be uncomfortable. But should we do it in a way that puts the other person on the defensive from the start of the conversation? Is there a way to just as urgently and aggressively share the gospel and yet come from a position of service rather than a position of power?

Let me be clear, I’m not recommending timidity and passivity when it comes to evangelism. I’m asking whether we can do this in a way that doesn’t thrust upon innocent bystanders such a power imbalance. Can we share our faith with confidence and conviction without an air of arrogance and presumption?

And of course, I’d also like a way of understanding and sharing our faith that goes beyond some of that vanilla response I mentioned above. Something that shares with people a Church and sacraments that are deeply connected to the faith. Something that considers discipleship an essential part of our ongoing conversion, not just the cherry on top of it…

I’d really love your thoughts and ideas.

Related articles

A new root metaphor for evangelism

evangelizingWell this is just brilliant:

Some years ago, I suggested that American evangelism needed a new root metaphor: journalism, as opposed to salesmanship. The key to that argument was the issue whether the gospel is a commodity or a message of good news, and if a message of good news, whether the news is still unfolding.

A Christ-centered evangel leaves no doubt at all about the answer. For the risen Christ is at work in the world in the person of the Holy Spirit, preparing for the ultimate family reunion promised by God, the ultimate parent.

Our evangelism must therefore begin with the headlines of this tremendous good news; it must be informed about the world in which it is to be announced and about the persons with whom it is to be shared; it must be edited so that it is indeed good news; and it must report new happenings as God’s salvation unfolds.

For too long Christ’s editors have filled their columns with in-house gossip and have made personnel their priority rather than news coverage. It is time indeed for a radical change.

From David Lowes Watson, “Christ All in All: The Recovery of the Gospel for Evangelism in the United States,” in The Church Between Gospel and Culture. 

The entire essay is incredible. I’m restraining myself from posting at least three other equally profound and/or provocative quotes from it. You should find a way to get your hands on it.

What would it mean to handle the gospel as journalism as opposed to salesmanship?

And what do you think Watson means about “in-house gossip” and making personnel priority rather than news coverage?

Please share in the comments. I’d love to talk about this more.

Multi-site church, localized ministry

multisite

multisiteAt First UMC of Lexington, KY, where I’m executive pastor, we’re doing something that is becoming quite common in the North American Church — we’ve gone to multiple sites and multiple worshiping communities.

At the same time, we’re doing something very unique, at least from what I have seen as I survey the landscape — we are localizing nearly all of our ministry and mission. This is not a hub-and-spoke sort of model, where one site is the “mother church” with several “daughters.” That’s different from the typical central planning we usually see in multi-site churches, and it’s a very intentional difference.

We’ve begun to see the great opportunities this structure provides. I’m posting below an article that I recently wrote for our church community. I hope you’ll see some of my excitement for what this structure allows. We currently have three communities: Andover, Downtown, and Offerings. I’ve made it no secret that I hope we have at least two more in the next five years.

I’d love to hear your thoughts and questions. There’s plenty more behind all of this, and I hope to share more of it soon.

—————–

One Church, Multiple Communities

“What does it mean that we are one church and multiple communities?”

“Why wouldn’t Andover be its own church since they are 8 miles away from our downtown campus?”

“Can we really be one church when we don’t all see each other regularly?”

If you have been around First UMC for long, you’ve probably had some of these questions. I think we all have. Our church is doing something unique, so it’s no surprise that we have all had some questions and confusion along the way.

In the coming months, I’m planning to write a few articles about our structure that might help all of us get a better understanding of how First UMC is organized. More importantly, I hope to show the mission behind why we are organized the way we are.

We are a multi-site church. That’s a relatively new concept. In 1990, there were only 10 multi-site churches in the US. By 1998, there were only 100. By 2005, shortly before we opened our Andover campus, there were 1,500 multi-site churches.

Why multi-site? You may have heard Pastor Mike talk about First UMC’s mission: to make disciples across the street and around the world. That value of making disciples “across the street” takes seriously the importance of being where people are. The Methodist Church has always been serious about that. Until the year 2000, the UMC had a church in every county of the US!

To make more disciples, to reach more people for Christ, we believe it’s important to be across more streets. In the history of the Church, the best way to reach new people has consistently been to open new places of worship. We’ve seen the great value in that at Andover. Our church is reaching people in that community that we never would have reached if we had remained only downtown. I hope you’ve heard Todd tell some of the stories about families who have come back to the Church and people who have been baptized into the faith because of the new Andover congregation.

We’ve also learned that we can do some things better together than we can apart. Why hasn’t Andover become its own, independent church? Because we believe we’re better together. Mike, Todd, and I spend time together weekly to offer each other support, encouragement, and direction in the way each of our communities is going. We have a financial team that is able to handle the church’s finances much better and with less cost than if Andover, Downtown and Offerings each tried to handle finances separately. On high days of worship like Pentecost, we are able to draw on the gifts of people from all of our communities. And should we consider starting a fourth worshiping community – getting across another street to reach more new people – we believe that we can do that better together, too.

We are a very different multi-site church. Yes, there are over 1,500 multi-site churches in the US, but as far as we know, there is only one multi-site church doing what we’re doing! The typical multi-site church beams in a video of one pastor preaching to all of the sites. Or if not, all of the preachers preach the same sermon in their own setting. They have the same announcements at each site. They essentially offer worship site alternatives and keep everything else together. That’s very different from what we’re doing.

Each of First UMC’s worshiping communities has quite a bit of freedom in its worship, its preaching, its discipleship, and its outreach. That has been a very intentional, much-discussed decision. We have decided to be one church with multiple expressions. 

We believe there are a number of good ways to worship and become disciples, and we want to allow each community to embrace the forms that are best for them. We all have the same Wesleyan theology. We all believe in the importance of worship, growth in small group community, and service in the world. We all believe in making disciples. But we each embody those values differently.

Why are we one church? Because we believe we are better together. Because we all share the mission of making disciples. Because we want to maintain a connection of encouragement and ideas, even if we aren’t in the same building on a regular basis.

Why are we many communities? Because we believe we can make more disciples by being across more streets. Because we believe we reach more people through multiple expressions. Because we believe we can become stronger disciples when each community has the freedom to handle worship, discipleship, and outreach just a bit differently.

We have created a structure very different from most you may have seen. That inevitably creates questions and confusion. It has been a learning process for all of us. But I have a great excitement about the possibilities for First UMC’s future. I truly believe our willingness to try new things is preparing us to do great new things in Lexington and around the world. All of this only by the grace and power of God. To God be the Glory!

Grace to you and peace,
Teddy Ray
Executive Pastor

More to come. Why don’t you subscribe for e-mail updates?