Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Join the Youthworks Ministry Support Team as they discuss how to have an effective youth and children’s ministry in every church in conversation with local ministry workers as well as national and international voices.
Get in touch - effectiveministrypodcast@youthworks.net
This is part of our
house conference series.
We've had three episodes in the
lead-up to the conference, episodes
114 and 115, which were audio readings
of the papers by Mike Dicker, Fit
for Purpose: Contextualization in
Children's and Youth Ministry, and
Derek Brotherson, How Far is Too Far?
Contextualization versus Syncretism in
Youth and Children's Ministry, as well as
episode 116, which was paper reflections
by youth and children's ministry
practitioners that helps us to begin--
That helped us to begin thinking about
the papers, what stood out, and how
we might begin to move into practice.
This episode is the post-conference
Q&A episode, where we get the paper
presenters back for one final party
to answer some of the questions that
came up on conference but didn't get
answered, or in some cases, we thought
were worth having another go at.
What we do at House Conference is
challenging and important to do well.
To think deeply from theological
principles and be driven by those
to better practice in youth and
kids ministry is really hard.
So it's our hope that these episodes,
both in the lead-up and after conference,
will give you some support to do it, and
to do it well and if you're listening
in and are a fly on the wall to House
Conference, I'm really praying these
episodes will be a huge blessing to you.
Keep going.
Keep doing the hard work, and maybe,
just maybe, you can join us next year,
24th to the 26th of August 2027, where
we'll be diving into a theology of
friendship with the theme, the gift of
friendship in the church and to our world.
Next year at House Conference,
our presenter will be Ed Shaw
jumping on a plane from the UK.
So if you have to jump on a
plane to be there next year,
you'll be in good company.
Ed is the author of The Plausibility
Problem and The Intimacy Deficit,
two wonderful books, so it'll be
fantastic to have Ed with us next year.
Enjoy the episode
AL: Welcome back to the Effective
Ministry Podcast, the podcast that
helps you have an effective youth and
children's ministry in your local church.
And this is our post-house
conference Q&A episode, and so itâ¦
I'm really excited, uh, to be welcoming
Derek Brotherson to the chair.
G'day, Derek.
Derek: G'day, Al.
It's good to be here.
AL: G'day,
Alan.
It's good to be here.
And Mike Dicker
Mike: Great.
It's good to be here
AL: Derek and Mike, uh, presented,
uh, w-- in fact, they wrote,
, papers, , for the conference.
So Mike wrote the the paper, "Fit for
Purpose: , Contextual Children's and
Youth Ministry," , and Derek wrote
the paper, "How Far is Too Far?"
And we were thinking about the
topic of contextualization in
youth and children's ministry.
, And if you were at the conference,
you were part of this discussion, but
not all of the questions that we asked
on conference got to be answered.
And so what we're doing today is
we're planning to just kinda take
some of those questions that were
asked and ask them to the paper
presenters, um, , and have a rip-roaring
discussion about contextualization
in youth and children's ministry.
But I just thought, , let's
introduce the guests first.
So Derek, , tell us a
little bit about yourself.
Derek: So I'm married to Anna,
I've got three children, and for
the last six years have been, uh,
serving at Sydney Missionary and
Bible College as the principal there.
AL: And before that you were a missionary
in Southeast Asia, is that right?
Derek: right?
That's right.
We were serving for ten years in Southeast
Asia doing Bible college teaching, uh,
the training of local missionaries and,
um, discipleship of church planters.
AL: Yeah, fantastic.
And Mike, why don't you tell
us a little bit about yourself?
Mike: Uh, yes, married to Faye.
We've also got, uh, three kids, and in
fact, uh, Derek and I both have kids
that go to the same school together, and
I'm the principal of Youthworks College.
And so I feel like that's a quite a unique
experience having, uh, two, two, two
girls actually in the same, same school,
same scripture class as a matter of
fact, uh, who both have dads who are the
principals of Bible colleges in Sydney.
I think must be a fairly kind of
rare occurrence, that Venn diagram
AL: It'd be an interesting
my dad's better than your dad
kind of conversation, wouldn't
Derek: with your dad.
If only there was a song about that
Mike: Derek wins
AL: a something like that.
Uh, yeah.
Anyway, um, uh, really good to have you
both, uh, on the podcast and, uh, we'll
get stuck into the questions soon, but
I thought we'd just start with a little
bit of, uh, just a question about what
your highlight from conference was.
So Derek, it was just a real honor
to have you at, at conference.
It was fantastic to, I mean, to, to
have you present your, your, um, your
paper and get stuck into a discussion.
But I wanna know, what did you
find, um, good or great or helpful,
or what was the highlight for you?
Derek: you?
So it's my first ever House Conference.
Welcome.
Yeah.
And I just loved being there.
Um, a real, the real standout for
me was just this community, the,
the character of the community.
These, uh, gospel-minded, humble, uh,
servants, the way they all were working
with each other just to really grapple
with, you know, how can we, how can
we advance the gospel in the lives
of these people that we're serving?
Uh, there was a real, uh, atmosphere
of cooperation and love and, um,
it was great to be a speaker at a
conference like that where people are
asking good questions and- Yeah ⦠and
listening to each other's answers.
AL: Well, I can imagine, um, presenting
papers, uh, in a kind of academic format
is not, not always as constructive as,
and, and kind of, I guess, lovely as that.
Is that right?
Derek: I won't tell any stories,
but the short answer is yes.
Yeah.
This was a very warm environment.
AL: Yeah.
Robust discussion, but, um, a very
warm kind of discussion as well.
Yeah.
Fantastic.
Hey, Mike, what was one of your,
um, highlights from the conference?
Mike: Uh, I mean, look, I, I've been
to a few house conferences, and I think
actually watching the process is always
the, the biggest highlight for me.
I, I feel like there's always a
moment there where I wonder, how
is this all gonna come together,
and where's everyone gonna take it?
But, uh, sure enough, y- you just
watch the conversations develop and
the discussion, the questions being
asked, and then also the conversations
with people in between sessions.
Um, yeah, people really chewing it
over and, and trying to think what,
what will a faithful, effective gospel
ministry with children and young
people look like where they are?
And, um, yeah, and that's great.
And actually to hear what people
are already doing and how they've
already been thinking about this.
Uh, and i- in a way, being able to
give them permission to keep thinking
about it so that it's, uh, it's not
just trying to reproduce something,
but, uh, trying to work out what's
best for their particular context.
That's, that was a highlight.
AL: Yeah.
And in, in many ways, as, as I sort
of thought about the, the topic this
year, in some ways it felt like just
a, a giant advertisement for what we do
at House Conference every year anyway.
Um, it's just that this year we kind of
delved-- It was ki- bit, little bit meta.
Like we're sort of sitting above
it going, "Oh yeah, we're d- we're
doing contextualization, but we're
thinking about doing contextualizing,
uh, contextualization this year."
So it was, it was kind of an interesting
and fun one this year, wasn't it?
Mike: It was a little bit like doing
a theology of the what we do at House.
D- diving into the theology of
contextualization and thinking about
really what are we doing at House,
which was, uh, yeah, there was sort
of two levels of things going on there
AL: Yeah.
Yeah, it was fantastic.
Well, we're gonna dive into questions
in a second, but I'm keen to get, uh,
a little bit of an overview of the
papers just in case there's peopleâ¦
Well, I know that there are people that
weren't on conference who are listening
in and just interested in this topic.
Um, and e-even if you're not involved in
youth and children's ministry, I, I'm,
I'm absolutely certain that you will
get something very valuable for whatever
ministry you're, you're involved in,
um, by listening to this, uh, this Q&A
session and by listening to the, the
audio readings of the papers beforehand
and the practitioner reflections and
all-- the whole suite of house kind
of podcasts that led up to, uh, and
now are flowing out of the conference.
But Mike, we're gonna start with you.
Can you just give us, you
know, the potted summary, um,
of what your paper was saying?
Mike: Uh, yeah, the, the key idea I think
that I, I, I put up even on the slide,
uh, when I was presenting is that, um, a,
an effective and faithful, uh, children's
and youth ministry should be driven by its
foundational ministry principles, which o-
obviously arise out of your reading from
scripture and from your theology, uh, and
carefully contextualized to your specific
cultural setting rather than thoughtlessly
replicating, um, uh, ministry models
that are flat and rigid and reductionist.
So that's kind of the
big key takeaway idea.
AL: Nice.
Very, and I think that was achieved.
I think that was a lot of the
discussion that was had was, uh,
was around that kind of stuff.
Um, Derek, keen to get your
kind of potted summary as well
Derek: Mm.
Uh, so in my paper I asked the
question: How far is too far?
So when we're seeking to engage, uh, the
culture around us and to bring the, the
good news of the gospel into that, how
far do we go in, um, using cultural forms
without distorting the gospel message?
So that was the, the question.
Um, the missiological terms
are: How do we distinguish
contextualization from syncretism?
Uh, and I, I talked about some, some
tests that people will sometimes use, what
I call the restrictive test and what I
call the permissive test, both of which
I said there were some problems with.
And I proposed a, a, another test,
which was just to ask, uh, what would
be the impact of using a particular
form on faith and worship, and I just
sort of unpacked how using that test
might, uh, might go in the field.
AL: Yeah.
Fantastic.
Well, I mean, uh, this is not one of
the questions on our list of questions,
but, um, you've, you've piqued my
interest, and both of you kind of
had, um, alternatives in your paper.
So Mike, you had, um, you had the kind of
idea of, uh, contextualization as opposed
to rela-relativism, and Derek, you had,
um, contextualization versus syncretism.
, By way of, I guess, some definitional
stuff, Mike, can you just kind of unpack
the difference between those two for us?
Um, and then I'll get Derek to do the
same for contextualization and syncretism.
So Mike, go for it.
Mike: Yeah.
I mean, look, I, I wanna kind of say
upfront that, uh, reading Derek's book
and other books on, uh, contextualization
and syncretism, they usually will have a
scale that has faithful contextualization
down one end and syncretism at the other.
And I think actually relativism would kind
of fit under a, a, a type of syncretism.
But I decided to split it apart so
that, uh, navigating between relativism
and syncretism, mostly because I think
there's, uh, relativism is a distinct
enough danger of its own, uh, especially
in youth and kids ministry in the West.
And so I, I was, uh, thinking
particularly, um, you know, relativism
as a, a definition is the denial of
any absolute or, uh, objective truth,
morality, or knowledge, so that each
is subject to differing perspectives of
individuals, of cultures or contexts.
And, uh, and the-- in the paper,
I really kind of teased out the
danger of this as we think about
top-down and bottom-up approaches
to children's and youth ministry.
Uh, so you know, top-down approaches
are very didactic, and so therefore
they're less, less, um, uh, open to,
I guess, relativism because it's,
it's one person with an authority
dictating the way that things should be
understood and, and teaching, you know,
older to younger or youth minister or
children's minister down to children.
Uh, whereas, uh, bottom-up approaches
to children and youth ministry are very
child-centered and youth-centered, and
so it's all about, uh, non-directive.
In fact, it's kind of anti-directive,
I think, at its most extreme, and
just letting the Holy Spirit, uh,
help a young person just become
into whatever they wanna do.
And so therefore, that kind of type
of children's and youth ministry is
about creating spaces and place-sharing
so that the Spirit can do something.
But you, you don't actually, uh, tell
people what to do or, or give them
the commands of Jesus or, uh, y- you
know, build a relationship with them
in order to introduce them to Jesus.
It's not that kind of idea.
And, and that's, uh, you know, look,
in, in this part of the world, in
Sydney, that's seems to be aâ¦
You know, we're very much more
top-down, so we can learn a bit from
being a bit more child-centered and,
and youth-centered in our approaches.
But, um, in the Northern Hemisphere,
there is a huge movement about people
that are, are really deliberately being
more child-centered and youth-centered,
and that, you know, that filters down
into places in Australia as well.
But there's lots of literature out
there that is really, I guess, will push
us towards that danger of relativism
if we're just not astute to it.
Um, not that we wanna reject
bottom-up approaches, but, um, at
least be wary of the dangers as
well as the dangers of top-down
AL: But there's something good and
healthy about a child-centered approach
to ministry, and yet, um, it does
open itself out to that idea of, of
relativism, the danger being there.
Um, Jared, do you wanna say
anything about syncretism verseâ¦
Sorry, contextualization
versus syncretism?
Derek: Yeah.
Yeah.
So I'd, I'd wanna start by sort
of agreeing with Mike that I think
relativism is one type of syncretism.
Syncretism's a pretty broad
category, especially when you define
it like I'm about to define it.
Um, I'll, I'll define
s-contextualization and syncretism.
They're both a process of taking the text
in the scripture and i-i-it interacting,
interacting the text with the context.
So the word in the world or text in
context, both of them are process
of the-- those two interactions.
When that process has gone well,
we call that contextualization.
That's good, faithful,
biblical contextualization.
When that process has somehow
distorted the message of scripture,
we call that, it's an evaluative
term, we call that syncretism.
That's why we don't tend to call
what we do syncretism, we call
what other people do syncretism.
I,
AL: I, and I, I read in your paper,
I love that rule of thumb, um,
about, uh, you know, how you define
contextualization versus syncretism.
If you do it, it's-- Or if I do it, it's
con- it's context- contextualization.
If you do it, it's syncretism.
Derek: Yeah.
And that was very tongue in cheek from
the, um, missiologist I was quoting.
But, um, th-th-th-that, that is the,
the issue we face with the definitions.
They don't actually get us to resolve the
question of how we work out what it is,
'cause it's just a, an evaluative term.
If you've done it well,
that's contextualization.
If you've done it badly, syncretism.
So one expression of syncretism might be
where you relativ-relativize to culture,
and that's what Mike was talking about.
Another expression of syncretism might
be that we have so cut ourselves off
from culture that we as a church are
not actually helping people to apply
the gospel to all of their life.
'Cause we're so disconnected from
culture, we don't know what's actually
going on out in their, in their workplace
or their school or whatever it is.
Yeah.
So that's actually also syncretism.
So that's the irony, that some people are
so afraid of s-syncretism that they'll-
AL: That they
Derek: create-- That's
right.
They'll create a, a, aâ¦
Will, will hermetically seal
the church off from the world.
But actually you can also
create syncretism there as well.
Mike: Oh, that's what I call cultural
syncretism, which is often that blind
syncretism, I guess, and ironic too.
And I love actually that phrase that
you said, Derek, the, or the, yeah, the
missiologist you were, were quoting.
Is it syncretism when you do it?
As in, if I don't like what
you're doing, it's syncretism.
When I do it, of course, it's
contextual because I like what I do.
But, um, that reveals that b- that
cultural blind spot, doesn't it?
That kind of idea that I already come with
a preset of assumptions about what true
Christianity should look like, usually
based on my own culture and experience.
And therefore, if you do something
which sits outside of that, then
I, I call you a syncretistic.
And, and again, that just reveals your
own cultural syncretism, you know?
That you've not thought
about your own barnacles that
you've attached to the gospel,
Derek: Yeah.
AL: Um, uh, Mike, you talked a fair
bit about models of ministry, um,
in your, um, in your paper and as
you presented on conference as well.
Um, one of the questions that is,
uh, you know, that's still left
over, and I think we did address it
to a, to a certain extent, but, uh,
there are a couple of questions.
One was, how is contextualization
not a super model for ministry?
So why don't we start by what, what do you
mean by a model of ministry, and what's
the problem with a model of ministry?
Mike: Yeah.
Well, I mean, look, that, uh, that is a
good question, 'cause it would be ironic
if you're, you know, you propose a model
which is against all models that, you
know, it's that paradox kind of idea.
You know, I had a friend that used to
say, "You shouldn't say should to someone.
You c- you can say you could,
or you, you would do something,
but you shouldn't say should."
And I remember thinking,
"Well, I shouldn't say should?
Like, the only should is toâ¦"
You know.
Anyway, it's, it would be that kind of
idea, except that, um, when I was talking
about models of ministry, and this is
really something that's kind of, um,
come about mostly in the history of youth
ministry more than children's ministry.
It's definitely there
in children's ministry.
But, uh, youth ministry certainly
had, uh, best-selling books and
practitioners, uh, who wrote about a
model, a particular way of doing ministry.
It's quite prescriptive.
AL: And it was often describing
what they, what they were doing
in their own context, right?
Mike: Yeah, that's right.
And, and how successful it had been.
So it often is, uh, you know, brought
along with anecdotes of success and,
and then sort of saying, "If you
also do these or, or replicate this
model where you are, then you too
will be able to build a successful
m- ministry based on this model."
And so I guess w- thinking about
models of ministry, thinking about
kind of prescriptive ways of doing
ministry, whereas contextualization
is not a model, it's a, it's a method,
if I can make that distinction.
And it's a way of helping you work out
what you should do in your own context.
So it's, it's not a model that tells
you, um, "Do this and then do that."
It- it's a, a, a method for you to
think about what you should do and,
and why you're, why you're doing it.
And so I guess that's the, the difference
I would draw in my own mind, um,
rather than, uh, yeah, a prescription.
Derek: If I could, um, illustrate
that with a short story.
When I got back from House Conference,
in, in the queue to pick up my meal at
SMBC, someone asked me what I'd been
up to, and I said I'd been at this
conference speaking on contextualization.
And so the, the student's question
was: what, what's your, um, what's
the best way to do contextualization?
What's your preferred model?
And my short answer was: Well,
it all depends on the context.
The contextualization isn't a model, it's
a, it's a description of a process that we
adapt to our contexts and have a different
way of doing things pretty much in every
AL: Yeah.
I mean, le- let me put this out there and
see if I'm sort of on the right track.
But, um, it s- it feels a little
bit like a lens rather than a,
a prescription, if that ma- oh.
Wait, I've just
realized I'm mixing my
metaphors unintentionally.
But it feels like a lens by which you
view ministry rather than a kind of a,
an, a, a specific prescribed approach.
Is that right?
Mike: Yes.
I mean, that's right.
And I think you, you can
do contextualization in,
in your own ways as well.
I mean, we, uh, sort of gave some
examples of, of how you might know
whether or not you've left the land
of contextualization and ended up in
an unhelpful place like syncretism.
Um, but again, w- not
prescribing a model of that.
Um, and in fact, it, it came apparent
to me during the conference that, um,
people were working out, uh, by theâ¦
I, I noticed this in the
questions they were asking and,
and the discussion I overheard.
People were working out this
is a very iterative process.
And so therefore, you really need
to be someone who is familiar
with critical reflection.
And of course, critical reflection
is one of those things of
which there is many models.
You know, there's the Gi- Gibbs
reflective model, and then there's,
uh, the Scholes, and there's a whole
bunch of different ones out there.
And again, they themselves
are not, um, flat models.
They're, they're kind of little tools to
help you think about where you are and
what you're doing and why you're doing it.
Um, Emma Collett at College Love, her
simple one is just ask, uh, what, uhâ¦
Was it, um, what, so what, now what?
They're the three questions that
you can use as in, you know, w-
w- what happened or where am I?
And, uh, so what, what
difference does it make?
And, and now what do I do?
And you think that, that's
actually like a, a contextualizing
process, critical reflection.
So it's not a flat model.
You can do it lots of different ways, and
you do it in a way that works for you.
But, um, that's the, that's the idea
of contextualization, is being able
to kind of be reflective and, and to
do that, you know, with God's word
open in front of you particularly.
AL: uh, we'll stick with this sort
of, this idea of supermodels, um,
thing, uh, partly because there's
a, there's I think quite a pertinent
question, which I'm really keen to
hear both, uh, from both of you on.
How can we implement this thinking,
okay, so thinking about contextualization
and so on, avoiding supermodels
when our senior minister uses
or operates under these models?
Like whatâ¦
Uh, this may be a little bit of a
curly, difficult question, but how--
like what, what do you do when you are
actually, you know, you're operating in
a world that, that does use a prescribed
models but, uh, model, but you're
wanting to kind of, you know, I guess
you're wanting to do contextualization.
You're wanting to kind of avoid
the supermodel and think that
it's the, the, you know, the bee's
knees, the only way to do things.
Anyone got wisdom on that?
Mike: I mean, I, I remember.
I thought that was a
great question, actually.
I remember seeing that on the Slido.
And it's interesting, isn't it?
That, um, i- if your senior minister has,
uh, pitched a vision or a, a certain model
of the way that, uh, he or the, the church
wants to do church community and to do
ministries, that itself creates a context.
And so you have to then work out
what you will do in that context.
So can you see how it gets very meta
very quickly, as in your context
is a church that has maybe quite
prescribed areas, um, or, or maybe
portfolios or something like that.
But then, you know, within your particular
portfolio, if it's youth or children's
ministry, then there's a way that perhaps
you can, uh, you know, contextualize.
You can think about how to deliver the
best, most faithful version of gospel
ministry wi- within the kind of, you
know, either constraints or freedoms
that you're given in that ecosystem.
And I think, you know, Amy gave a,
um, gave, gave a great answer when
she was asked this on stage, which
was just, you know, I actually justâ¦
She just says she just keeps saying what
she wants to do over and over again until
everyone starts thinking it's their idea.
And may- maybe that's
really good wisdom in that.
Um, takes a while, I guess.
Um, but yeah, there's, there's
opportunities, and constraints are not
necessarily things that kill ministry.
Y- constraints often bring creativity
and ways to thrive in ministry.
So, um, yeah.
Y- y- removing all constraints
won't help you be a better minister.
Um, constraints will actually probably
help you find creative ways to do
effective, um, gospel ministry.
AL: Um, keen to hear from you, Derek.
I, well, I've just got a quick story
as well, like, uh, thinking about
constraint, and that's a really
interesting way to think about it, the
model being a constraint on ministry, and
yeah, constraint can breed creativity.
Um, I was listening to
the Silverchair podcast.
There's only one Silverchair podcast,
but, um, uh, so listen out for it.
It's a really good one.
But, um, it talked about when Daniel Johns
and, uh, old mate, uh, what's his name?
Andy, uh, it's, it's Paul Mac,
um, were doing their album.
They limited themselves to
five instruments on each
track, and they actuallyâ¦
What-- Their reflection on that
was that it actually made them more
creative rather than less creative,
which is, you know, that idea of
constraint actually breeding creativity.
Um, so maybe it's not the worst
thing in the world after all.
Derek, I'd love to hear your wisdom
Derek: Well, I'm not sure I can
speak with ex- much experience to
this, having never been either an
assistant minister or a minister.
Um, but I, I can maybe draw in a, a
really important missiological principle
that people often talk about when it
comes to contextualization, which is,
uh, the, the, the value, say, if you're
a missionary, of empowering the local,
um, new, new believers to make, as
a group, to make decisions about c-
contextual decisions so that they own
it, so that they, they make decisions
knowing what the meaning of the forms that
they're, they're using are, et cetera.
And so I guess we could, we could
say something like, um, best practice
contextualization isn't one maverick
going off in a church, whether it's the,
the youth minister or the senior minister
sort of m- plotting their own course.
Good practice p- particularly when
it comes to contextualization,
is discussing this as a group.
So I would s- I wouldn't w- I
wouldn't want the youth minister to
be undermining the senior minister.
I wouldn't want the senior
minister to be ignoring the voice
of the, of the youth minister.
Um, because when you're having-- when
you're discussing things related to
contextualization, y- you, you're trying
to bring sc- scriptural principle,
which presumably after some discussion
you'll agree what scripture is saying.
Uh, but then you're trying to,
uh, say, "Okay, how is this gonna
be communicated into and applied
into this particular context?"
And everyone will have different insights
into what the context is and what's
important in the context, what felt needs
are, where misunderstandings could arise.
And so through that healthy discussion
between youth minister and senior minister
and, and other stakeholders, I would
suspect that the best outcome might
AL: Um, y- something you just
said reminded me ano- another
question that, that came up a
number of times on conference.
Certainly, um, uh, at my table it came
up, and we were on the same table,
so I think you heard it as well.
Um, but a, a couple of different places,
it came up in different forms, and that
is the question of, you know, Mike's
paper talked a lot about kind of deciding
on, um, or, or, or being driven by
foundational theological principles.
Um, but the question, well, who decides
what the foundational theological
principles are that drive your ministry?
So I'm keen to hear from
you, Derek, first, and then
we'll hear from Mike as well.
Derek: Mm.
Well, I think Mike decided
what they were, didn't he?
He told us what they were.
AL: There were four instead of seven.
Mike: Oh, actually, I, I, I
do, um, have a, a, a slightâ¦
I, I actually should have edited
this in the paper, 'cause I, I
was a bit sloppy with my language.
I think I said theological,
uh, principles, foundational
theological principles.
Actually, what I mean
is ministry principles.
So, um, slightly different, right?
As in, you know, people have their
theology and their doctrines,
which arises from your reading of
scripture and, you know, um, engaging
with God's revelation of himself.
But your ministry principles flow
from that, and they're s- they're
slightly different, and I, I wish
I'd made that distinction a bit
clearer, cer- certainly in the paper.
But, um, uh,
you know, th- there'sâ¦
AL: you there, Mike, like, um,
part of what you're saying there is
that, of course, all of our ministry
principles will be y- you know,
like the aim is that they will be
consistent with sound doctrine, right?
Like that they'll be bi- they, they'll
be consistent with biblical, um, the
biblical witness and that kind of thing.
But there might be principles of
ministry that are not necessarily
derived theologically, but
are still helpful and true.
Is that kind of what you're getting at?
Mike: No, I, I think they should
all be, uh, connected theologically.
But, um, I, I guess the way that you
articulate them is where there's probably
r- room for flexibility and, and movement.
And so, you know, m- m- like a doctrine,
for instance, on the, the resurrection
and ascension of the Lord Jesus, you know,
that He, He reigns over the world today.
That's, that's not up for debate
or, um, or, you know, w- agree
to disagree or that kind of idea.
But, you know, I, I may have a,
a ministry principle described
as being intergenerational.
That, you know, that one of my min-
ministry principles is I, I derive
from theology that, uh, we think
about human beings holistically, young
people in the space of households,
they grow from younger to older.
Church actually is a place for all
people, therefore, I want ministry
to be intergenerational in some way.
But some- someone else may disagree
with that because that's-- their,
their reading of scripture hasn't
brought them to that conclusion.
Or maybe they would not, uh,
emphasize it as much as I
would as a ministry principle.
And so I th- I guess I wanna be gracious
and humble in those moments where you
can, you can y- y- I guess agree to
disagree, or at least keep a conversation
going about what kind of emphasis that
should have as a principle of ministry.
And I say this partly because of,
you know, um, history and also
the, the state of the church today.
There are people who are very much, you
know, would say intergenerationality
sounds like really nice, but
I, I don't think that's, uh,
pragmatic or proper or necessary.
Um, you know, and, and the way that y-
you then talk with someone who maybe has a
different point of view is you go back to
scripture and try and, and reason it out.
But, you know, the, the church has,
um, I guess, e- existed for a while
without people necessarily articulating
that as a ministry principle.
And I guess that's what I mean,
if that makes a, a distinction.
I mean, I think the more that we
work together and go back to the
scriptures, the more our ministry
principles, I think, will be aligned.
But I, I think actually in churches,
you know, um, the, the fights
happen between people that believe
the same gospel but have differing
philosophies of how to do ministry.
Maybe that's a better way to put it.
Derek: And I think if the, um, the,
the question is who decides what those
principles will be, uh, I, I would say
that's the role of the ministry leaders.
And if, if you wanna think about
it in theological terms, Ephesians
four, that God gives to the
church certain people with certain
roles, such as teachers and so on.
Um, so in any given ministry context,
ultimately there's somewhere-- someone
with accountability in it, um, for that.
But h-how they go about exercising
that leadership, it might be quite
collaborative and they might do
a lot of listening, et cetera.
Um, and those that do that will
tend to contextualize better 'cause
they're hearing how- The voices.
Hearing the voices of the context.
Um, but yeah, ultimately that's
o-one of the responsibilities of
leadership, I would say, is, is
the way you shape that church.
If you, if you settle on something
like intergen-intergenerational being
an important principle, uh, that's a,
that's a decision a lead- the leadership
takes, whether you're a pl-plural,
plural leadership or whatever it might
be, and then you s-find strategies
for implementing that in your, in your
church, but, um, or your ministry context.
Mike: I, I think the other thing to
say there is that, um, al- although
we, you know, uh, as Christians by,
and Protestant Christians by and large
agree on the same doctrines, I guess,
we, we still have subcategories, right?
We have evangelical Protestants, and
then we have reformed evangelical
Protestants, and then we have
different denominations that emphasize
different doctrines perhaps as well.
And I guess I'm wanting to kind of
leave a little bit open there, you know.
So, you know, for, um, a, a, a doctrine
you might have a, a certain view
of the sacraments and how necessary
they are, or perhaps how those
sacraments are delivered becomes
like a, a ministry principle, right?
So, you know, if you're in a Baptist
denomination, then, you know, a, uh,
a believer's baptism is a necessary
expression of your doctrine.
And so your, your ministry principle
will be that, you know, we, we wanna
bring people to Christ and, um, when
they're of age, what- whatever that age
is, and we trust their confession, then
we will baptize them by full immersion.
Whereas an Anglican or a Presbyterian
down the road will have a, a
different ministry principle.
M- maybe theirs will be, uh, for
those kids that have already been
baptized, we wanna grow them up in
their faith and help them to know what
they believe until they're confirmed.
And can you see how they're, they're both
coming from a doctrine of the sacraments,
but they're, they're expressed quite
differently in their ministry principles?
And I, I wanna leave a little bit
of space so that a, a Baptist, a
Presbyterian, Anglican or whatever
could, uh, be faithful to their
denomination's doctrinal stance in the
way that they enact their ministry, um,
without necessarily being, um, called a
heretic for having a different doctrine.
You, you ⦠Do, does that
distinction make e- enough sense?
AL: Well, so, so let me put, let me put
it back to you to kind of just see, see
if I'm understanding what you're saying.
So, um, you're, you're saying let's
talk about ministry principles.
So you, you're wanting to tighten
the language that you kind of came
into the conference with, uh, rather
than the- foundational theological
principles because the doctrine of the
sacraments, that might be one of the
foundational theological principles,
but you're s- you're suggesting that
maybe there's, um, foundational ministry
principles which are sort of a little
bit downstream from that doctrine.
Is that right?
Mike: Or, or maybe just, uh, rather
than downstream, how you practice
AL: Sure.
Yeah,
yeah,
Mike: is perhaps the emphasis, yeah
AL: Yeah, no, that's helpful.
Um, uh, it's, uh, really helpful
to kind of clarify that, I think.
One of the other questions that,
that came up was, um, , Mike talked
about being principle-driven.
Derek talked about being outcomes-driven.
Um, and both of you will
wanna nuance that, I'm sure.
Um, but one of the questions that
came up was: can you speak to the
relationship between effectiveness in
ministry and contextualization and being
faithfulness-- uh, faithful to principles?
And so, you know, we've gotâ¦
we're driven by principles, um, by
theological principles, but we're
also kind of concerned about outcomes
and, you know, um, Derek proposed
that test for contextualization
what, uh, what is the impact on
the faith and worship of someone?
Um, yeah, keen to hear just a, a little
bit of a discussion of principles,
effectiveness, and outcome, um, in when
we're thinking about contextualization.
It's a big question
Mike: maybe Derek, you could, um, he- help
us work out whether or not you're, uh,
proposing the ends justifies the means
Derek: Great question.
Um, so I, I did say at the
conference- It's criticism, right?
AL: That's what, that's
what it is, isn't it?
Derek: Not quite.
Uh, I did say at the conference that
contextualization is a means to an
end, and I think that's right, and I
think that's theologically justified.
I think you can even see that there
when, when Paul is, um, saying
that he becomes a Jew to the Jews
and a Gentile to the Gentiles.
He keeps saying the, the reason he
does so is to win as many as possible.
Um, and so there's a, there's an end of
advancing the gospel, bringing people
to faith, growing people in faith.
AL: Well, and, and can I just say,
I remember when you said that at the
conference and, um, and I think the
s- the specific end you talked about
at that point, um, and I think there's
probably multiple kind of possibilities
to go with, but you, you said the,
the, the end is union with Christ.
And I-- My, my feeling when you
said that was, oh, that's so
freeing in a sense because that's,
that's where we're heading.
Like, if I make mistakes along the way,
all good because I-- that's the a- that's
the aim that I'm sort of going towards.
That's what I-- where
I wanna bring people.
So I just wanted to
kind of highlight that.
That was a
Derek: really
interesting- So that is a
good, that is a good end.
But, but I, I, I don't want for a moment
to suggest that, that, that legitimizes,
um, illegitimate means to that end.
Yes.
So I mean, I-- for example, 2
Corinthians 4, Paul says, "We have
renounced secret and shameful ways.
We do not use deception.
We do not distort the Word of God.
On the contrary, by setting
forth the truth plainly, we
commend ourselves to everyone's
conscience in the sight of God."
Um, uh, so, so if, if pra-- if by
pragmatism we mean, um, compromising
our principles in order to
achieve a particular end, that's
never gonna be what I would put
forward as good contextualization.
But there is still great freedom,
you know, excluding those,
um, immoral or sinful options.
There is still great freedom, I suggest to
us, in many of the ways that we do things.
Uh, and, um, I think the model we see
of Paul in 1 Corinthians 9 is he's,
he's basically saying, "According to
the context, I will be flexible and
adaptable in order to achieve that end."
And I think that's a good way for
us to think about how we exercise
the freedoms that we do have.
Sure, there are some freedoms
that we don't have, um, in
terms of immoral behavior.
Um, but in terms of where, where
we do have freedom, let's choose
wisely according to the context
i-in, in such a way as to maximize,
uh, the advance of the gospel.
And so, um, when you said before,
you know, if union with Christ
is the, is the goal, it's okay
to make mistakes along the way.
Let's unpack that word "mistake".
Sure.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
So, so a mistake might be I went and stole
or I deceived, um, that's, that's sinful.
But a, a mistake might simply be I
tried something which I thought would be
culturally helpful, but it landed flat.
Yeah.
That's just, uh, I, I wouldn't even
really wanna call that a mistake.
That's, that's a, a trial and error.
It wasn't- Sinful or, or, or I-- that
it was just something I thought might
help the communication of the gospel.
Turned out didn't work
in my, in my evaluation.
I realized that and moved
on to something else.
I think that's the process of
Christian ministry all, all the time.
AL: Yeah.
And I mean, and, and interestingly
as well, like Mike talked
about the iterative process of
contextualization, and on conference
you talked about experimentation.
I- that- is that kind of what you're
talking about with that let's define
mistakes, you know, that kind of
experimentation, the freedom with which
you have, uh, the freedom that you
have to kind of try different things.
Is that, is that where, where you're
coming
Derek: from?
Yeah.
Yeah.
I, I, I can tell that some people would
probably hear the word experimentation
and sound like it's trivializing
the process of Christian ministry.
Yeah.
Um, but really what we're doing, and I,
I think you see this a lot more, more
in what you, what you might call very
pioneer mission, mission settings where
people are trying to find something
that's gonna find that first believer.
Um, it's, it's just continuing to
try things that will help to remove
barriers, get a hearing for the gospel,
communicate this powerful truth.
We have a powerful truth.
People haven't yet grasped the
power of that, um, and trial
and error experimentation
sometimes is what's needed.
If we don't, if we, if we keep doing
things the way we always have, we can fall
into that syncretism because we've lost
touch with culture, and that's just as
much a danger as capitulating to culture.
AL: I was
gonna say that
Mike: I just wanna add a, the pers-
a perspective on the kids and youth
ministry sort of cycle of that as
well, which is that, um, you, you can
institute all kinds of really helpful
practices into your kids and youth
ministry, which are not mistakes.
They actually do help people grow in
faith, and it might be like a, a regular,
uh, daily Bible reading app or something.
But it, it turns out that after you
keep banging on, banging that drum
for six months or maybe a year, that
has now actually lodged itself in
people's minds or hearts as a, as a
work or a good deed that is now, they
have to do in order to be Christian.
And I, Iâ¦
So again, it wasn't a mistake for you to
do that, and it has led to growth, but
you have to kinda keep an eye on those
things that humans don't make an idol
out of them and turn them into special
feast days and, you know, rules and things
which have the appearance of wisdom but
actually have become detached from Christ.
So I think that's the, that's the other
language to talk about, is not necessarily
a mistake, but a, a, a habit-forming habit
that is now forming the wrong habits.
Derek: Mm-hmm.
AL: Um, and on, I mean, that same question
that asked about, uh, you know, the, the,
the question that Mike kind of alluded
to and, uh, you know, we're, we're
talking about here is it, it says this:
The contextualization test sounds like
pragmatism, ends justifies the means.
I think, Derek, you've spoken to that.
But the end of that question
was, does this justify the
homogenous unit principle?
What of intergenerational ministry?
Um, thoughts on that?
, Derek: Does it justify the
homogenous unit principle?
Like i-in itself, no.
Um, because contextualization and, and
saying, you know, we adapt in order
to maximize gospel am- impact doesn't
actually short-circuit necessary
theological discussions on each issue.
So when it comes to the homogenous unit
principle, we'll need to consider the
arguments, theological arguments for and
against that, you know, um, which are
for, you know, sort of removing, removing
cultural barriers and against is the fact
that Christ has removed the dividing wall
of hostility and, um, the church isâ¦
The global church is a multi-ethnic,
multi-generational, and can we express
that in our local, local gathering?
So those kind of, uh, that's, uh, that's
a-- I've just skated over that debate,
but that kind of debate needs to happen.
Good contextualization, uh,
identifies that issue and then goes
to have that theological discussion.
So, um, asking that question,
what's gonna facilitate faith and
worship, doesn't short-circuit all
those other important theological
AL: important discussions.
Yeah, lots of important discussions
I have that, yeah, as, as you say,
like good contextualization is going
to actually delve into that and kind
of seek to have a, a godly answer
to it and then move forward from
Derek: there.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yep.
AL: Helpful.
Um, all right.
Well, here's, here's a
question, um, for each of you.
Um, uh, and this sort of in some
ways cuts to the heart of your
paper, Derek, how far is too far?
Here's a question: Where do we stop?
Do we go all the way down to
even contextualizing for each
separate individual where,
that we're ministering to?
Um, I mean, this, this reminds me a
little bit of the kind of education
discussion in terms of differentiation,
you know, kind of i-identifying the
different needs that each student has.
And, um, certainly one of the
conversations that happens, uh, in the
education space is like, "I can'tâ¦
How can I do this for every
single, um, single person?"
As we're thinking about contextualization,
what are the thoughts on this?
Derek: Well, um, I would
say yes, right down to that.
If we're having a, a, a discussion
with someone one-on-one, uh, yes,
we wanna contextualize to them.
Like, the truth is, everything we
do is in one sense contextualized.
You know, we-- every, every
expression of the gospel, every
communication we make is, is in a
context and therefore contextualized.
So to be more precise in our language,
what we're talking about is, are we
gonna reflect consciously on the way
we do our contextualization, or are
we just gonna let it sort of happen
as it, howev-however it happens?
So the whole purpose of, of, I think,
House Conference and this discussion
is let's, let's, uh, think reflectively
and, and make our contextualization
better, more likely to communicate
gospel truth, apply gospel truth well
holistically to all of life, et cetera.
Um, so, uh, how far do we have to go?
Well, I think wh-whoever is before us,
whether it's one person or a hundred,
um, we try to understand everything we
can about that, that context and adapt
our communication, the way we love them,
the way we serve them to who they are.
And so the process of contextualization
is just doing that work.
And, and we, we do so
much of it intuitively.
We, we pick the, the language we're gonna
speak to them according to who they are.
Um, and then the way we speak
to them and, and by asking them
questions, we learn more about them.
Uh, and if it's a larger context,
there may be people with all sorts of
backgrounds, but we adjust to that,
and sometimes that involves kind of
pulling the camera out and recognizing,
okay, we've got different people with
different backgrounds and issues who
will understand this term differently.
I'm gonna have to explain it a bit more
because of this large group and all
the different ways they might have it.
So w-w-whatever our context is,
whatever our-- the people we're
serving are, we, we adjust to that.
Mike: Um, our, uh, the administrator
at our church, he, he has a little
phrase which says something like,
you know, "We're, we're committed
to the gospel, but not necessarily
the vehicles for the gospel."
And I, I quite like that idea, um, in
that, you know, as a church or, you
know, in, in youth or kids ministry, you
create a program which is essentially
a vehicle for gospel ministry.
You know, it's a, it's a Thursday night
afternoon, you know, kids club or a Friday
night youth group or a Sunday afternoon
thing or whate- whatever it is that you
do, that's your kind of vehicle, and
you've, you've done the work of reflecting
on, look, do you even have kids which are
available for an after-school kids club?
Because, you know, the, both parents
are working, they're in long daycare, so
actually that's not gonna work, so we're
gonna have to do something different.
Like, you, you do all that hard work
to think of a general vehicle, but
then because you're not committed
necessarily to the vehicle, you, you
gotta kind of sit loose to it and
be happy to adapt and change things.
And so, you know, I remember, like,
a practice at, at, uh, uh, at our
church in youth and kids ministry
was that, uh, you know, term, was
at term four you'd graduate up from
kids club into youth group, right?
Um, but there are always kids that kind
of have friends that are a bit older
than them and, and those kids that have
friends that are younger than them, and
so rather than making a hard, "Sorry,
you're in year five, only the year sixes
are going up to youth group," for, um,
certain individuals, you'd be, you'd be
happy to kind of flex on those rules.
Or, or maybe someone's in year six
and they're not ready to go up in
term four, you know, they, they wanna
wait till they've started high school.
Then you say, "Sure, that's fine."
You know, you-- We have a process
where we- we've kind of worked out
this vehicle, but there's exceptions
to, to rules and ex- um, ways
that you wanna be flexible to it.
And I think that's a way that you
can be contextual to a general, uh,
you know, culture or context in your
church, but then y- your con- you can
be contextualized down to an individual,
depending on their certain circumstances.
And that would go for, you know,
thinking about a kids ministry or
youth ministry that has, uh, kids with
learning difficulties or special needs.
You know, you have a general program,
a vehicle that fits your context,
but then you make, uh, um, exceptions
and adaptations for, for people
that need them or as they're needed.
I think that's, that's kind of
really what you're trying to do.
AL: Yeah, and that's helpful, and I
think that sort of helps you to kind
of think about both the, the big group
and the individual within the group.
Like there's a, you know, if you're
doing group ministry, you know,
you're contextualizing to that
group, but you're recognizing that
there might be people that have
specific needs, that kind of thing.
And in, in that way, I guess it is, you
know, in some ways being a teacher in
a classroom is also very much, um, very
similar to contextualizing as well.
Um, I wanna ask, uh, a question about, um,
so here's the question that was
asked: How do we preserve the
offense of the gospel in seeking
to facilitate faith and worship?
When is it suitable to
be counter-cultural?
And there are a, a, a few questions
that talked about, you know, um,
contextualization seeks to kind of, uh,
remove barriers, I guess, for the gospel.
Um, but how do we balance that idea that,
um, that, uh, the gospel is also different
to culture, the prevailing culture or
the culture in front of you potentially?
Um, yeah, that, that's an
interesting question to think about.
Derek: Yeah, it's a really good question,
and I think it, uh, taps into a, a
misunderstanding of contextualization
that's, that's easy to-- It's easy to
have this misunderstanding, and sometimes
people who are advancing contextualization
are probably guilty of teaching it,
which is that contextualization is
the same as simply cultural relevance
or making it easier for someone in a
particular culture to come to the gospel.
And that's, uh, that's a distortion
of what contextualization is.
I would say contextualization
is making the message of the
gospel understood in the culture.
And sometimes, uh, there is an,
there is an offense to the gospel.
So, um, Paul talks about that
in, in, in, is it 1 Corinthians?
Uh, Jews demand signs, Greek looks for
wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified.
And you know, the cross is
foolishness, uh, to those who are
perishing, but to us who are being
saved, it's the power of God.
Um, there's something about
the gospel which is offensive.
It tells me I'm a sinner.
It tells that my sin can be taken by
someone else de-death on the cross.
That hasâ¦
There's an offense to that which we don't
wanna remove because the-- it's true, and
in, in the preaching of that and in people
being convicted of that, that is the
moment where they, um, can come to faith.
So, um, no, we're not removing that,
but we are removing unnecessary offense.
So if, if the offense is because
I didn't realize in the particular
culture that using myâ¦
Passing food with my left hand is, is
rude, that's just an offense I could have
removed if I'd done my contextual work.
So we wanna, we wanna remove those
offenses, basically offenses that I bring
'cause of my cultural misunderstandings.
We don't wanna remove the offense
of the cross, a-a-and, and the, and
also the messages that, you know,
this particular element of the
culture is sinful, we need to repent.
Um, so good contextualization studies
the culture so well that we see what
those cultural idols are and then
find culturally effective ways to
communicate that and call for repentance.
Mike: In, uh, my, my paper I have
a little diagram when I'm talking
about divine accommodation and
h-how the divine revelation comes
to us in, in culture rated form.
So, you know, that, um, uh, God reveals
himself in his word through, uh, you know,
human words and languages and idioms using
kind of local reference points from an
agrarian society, uh, you know, and, and
so on, and customs, and then, you know,
uses anthropocentric and anthropomorphic
kind of words to talk about creation
and even to talk about himself.
But how even though his divine revelation
comes through those cultural forms,
it then also transforms culture.
And, and I think that's a really kind
of important point to understand about
divine accommodation, which is, you
know, akin to like contextualization.
They're related kind of ideas.
Is that, uh, i-if, if God was to bring
him- reveal himself just through human
cultural forms and understandings, but
not bring any transformation of those
things, then what we might expect to
see is Israel just accepting all of
the, the idolatrous forms of the nations
around them and practicing the same
type of sacrificial system and so on.
But th-there's a transformation that
comes in the word that God reveals in an
understandable way that causes a scandal,
uh, to those nations by rebuking them
and revealing those things as sinful and
therefore transforming whole societies.
And wherever the gospel goes, you
see it do those kinds of things.
You know, I think about the gospel
going to India and having an impact on
the caste system or, or the way that,
say, women and girls are treated and,
and funeral rites and things like that.
You know, the, the gospel may come in
an understandable way, but it transforms
that culture over time as well.
Um, that it necessarily comes
with a, a, a, yeah, hard edge.
That's the message you're
trying to contextualize.
Um, whereas if, if you're just really,
um, modifying the message to, to be
whatever the culture wants to hear,
you've not done contextualization.
You've just comâ¦
Yeah, you've syncretized.
You've c-completely abandoned
whatever you've been trying to do.
You know, you've lost the,
lost the substance, and the
thing has completely changed.
AL: Um, Paul says in 1 Corinthians
the idea of, you know, be
all things to all people.
Um, one of the questions that came through
was, is this just giving up rights?
Derek: That's another really good
question because the context for
the quote in 1 Corinthians 9, uh, it
starts out with that problem to do with
idol meat, uh, idol food, you know,
they eat food sacrificed to idols.
And Paul says, even though, um,
it could be eaten theoretically,
in practice, he won't.
He'll give up that right so as
not to cause someone to stumble.
He goes on to give another example.
You know, "I'll, I'll do ministry
in Corinth without taking, um, a
salary, a wage for the ministry, um,
because I don't want that to be an
obstacle to the gospel going forward."
So the, the, the context very
much is the giving up of rights.
But I think by the time you get to 1
Corinthians 9:19-23, where he-- the
sort of famous passage where I become
a Jew to the Jews, one under the law
to one under the law, one not under
the law to those not under the law.
He does kind of broaden it, um, to,
to speak just more generally about
this adaptability that he ha-has
d- has practiced in his ministry.
And then if we look, say to Acts,
um, for examples, we see more
than just Paul giving up rights.
We see-- Or we also see, I would say,
positive activity that he does sometimes
in order to avoid cultural offense.
So in Acts 21, he takes a purification
rite in the Jewish temple in, in order
to sort of, um, remove a, a problem
that might be happening between the Jews
and, and the ministry that he's doing.
Um, and in Acts 16, as, as Mike
explained last week, he, he
gets Timothy to get circumcised.
So this is a sort of positive act
as well, uh, as well as just sort
of refraining or abstaining from
something that might cause offense.
So I think, I think, um, what Paul's
talking about in 1 Corinthians 9
is broader than just hol-- res--
abstaining from things, although
that's certainly part of it.
But contextualization
is certainly broader.
And if we look, contextualization is
bigger than just becoming all things
to all p-all people in 1 Corinthians
9, and we look at Acts again, we
see Paul adapting his communication
of the gospel to the Athenians.
It's very different to, um, the
way he'd speak to evangelize Jews.
So,
AL: Anything
Mike: I think it's, i- i-â¦
Yeah, well, I think it's interesting
as well, uh, you know, uh, Paul, I
mean, we learn so much actually from
his letters in the New Testament.
But, uh, you know, in Galatians, he,
uh, you know, it, it, Paul has been
quite happy to, you know, have Timothy
circumcised and to do some of those
proactive things to be, you know, uh,
like a Jew to the Jews in lots of ways.
But then he really calls Peter to
account when, when Peter seems to have
capitulated to the Jewish faction.
And, um, uh, Paul s- sort of has a,
an argument with Peter and, like a
sharp argument with him, and says,
"Actually, you know, you in another
situation, uh, have basically accepted
grace and therefore, you know, can live
like a Gentile, but now you're kind
of capitulating to the circumcision
group, and you've gone too far."
And it seems as though that the, the,
the bit where, uh, Peter has crossed
a line in Paul's mind is that his
behavior has now actually canceled out
justification by grace through faith.
And, and so that's, that's,
that's too far, right?
Like he- he's positively accommodated
himself to this particular group of people
in a way that has now undercut the gospel
of justification by grace through faith.
And that, that, for that reason,
Paul calls him out on it.
And so isn't it interesting how
you can be very proactive in, in
perhaps accommodating yourself?
But if the outcome is people don't
depend on the Lord Jesus and His
salvation alone and grace alone, then
like using Derek's test essentially,
right, the outcome is not true and
proper worship, and therefore, uh,
your accommodation of them has actually
done a disservice to the gospel.
Derek: Mm-hmm.
Which is why That's an-- I,
I really agree, you know.
It's why that some people at a distance
might say Paul is inconsistent.
'cause his practices are different.
But actually, he's consistent.
He's always seeking
that, that facilitation of true faith
and, and worship, which is why you
can have a different practice of
contextualization in a different context.
AL: And in a sense, he, he knows
what's to ho- what to hold onto and,
and also what he can let go of, right?
Derek: Yeah.
Yeah.
Mike: Yeah.
And it is probably a good question
to ask yourself, you know, in a, in a
practice, like in a children's and youth
ministry, you know, m- maybe you've,
you've decided to, you know, really think
deeply about, b- and being creative about
a way to, to minister the gospel, and
m- maybe you just wanna ask yourself,
"If by doing this practice, or if by
shaping our ministry this way, will
it somehow undercut the gospel of, uh,
justification by, by grace through faith?"
You know?
Um, that salvation.
And that, that would be
a good question to ask.
You know?
Like, that, that's basically
sort of Derek's test, right?
That true and proper worship, you know,
it, if it's gonna lead people to depend
on themselves or on their works, or
to diminish this, the work of Christ
in some way, then maybe you should
think about doing something different.
Or at least keep an eye on the
practice to see that it doesn't
turn into something like that
Derek: And as you pointed out earlier,
uh, something which is good and effective
today, next year might have become a,
in the minds of some, a ritual which
is undermining justification by faith.
So constant evaluation and
knowing about people is needed.
Mike: Yeah.
And I mean, I love actually that the,
you know, the Anglican Prayer Book
is very self-conscious about this.
You know, it's in, in the articles
as well that, that not all ceremonies
and rites should be in one and every
place the same, but should be diverse
as according to the diversity of
men's manners, and, and so on it goes.
And I, I mean, it's deeply ironic when
you think about the Anglican Church
where, you know, uh, in, in some places
where, um, it's 38 degrees most of
the year round, you've got Anglican
ministers wearing, uh, dog collars and
r- robes, yeah, which were made for, you
know, medieval England winters, theâ¦
which is where they totally make sense.
And so you think, you know, I
wonder if, uh, Cranmer would be
rolling in his grave saying, "This,
that's not the point," right?
Like you canâ¦
These are things that are
supposed to adapt and change,
AL: Hey,
last question, um, and that is
this: What are some good waysâ¦
Mike, you talked about cultural barnacles.
Um, just give us an explanation of
what a cultural barnacle is, and what
are some good ways to find out, uh,
what our own cultural barnacles are?
Mike: Yeah, I, I, a cultural barnacle
is something that attaches itself to
the gospel a little bit like a barnacle
attaches itself to the ship, and
actually to the point where sometimes
you can't tell the difference between a
barnacle and the hull of a ship itself.
Uh, which is why I think it's a good
metaphor, because we have a whole bunch
of different cultural things that we
attach to the gospel and, uh, we're
not always aware of those things.
And I think, um, you know, again, like
we said before, critical reflection,
just being able to notice what some
of the, the cultural particularities
are that, that we have in our context
will, will bring some of those to light.
I, I think interacting with other
Christians, this is another reason why
it's really good to be part of a, a
Christian network and even, you know,
from people, um, from your, your wider
area, but even across denominations
because people will reveal some of your
cultural idiosyncrasies, things that,
you know, you think are part and parcel
of Christianity, but, but really aren't.
Uh, again, mission trips, going overseas,
being able to spend time with people
from other places will reveal a lot
of those kind of blind spots as well.
Um, but it-- the other thing is, um, a,
a good reading of the scriptures with,
with proper humility, which is, you know,
to, to read the Bible not w- looking
for it to confirm your assumptions,
but being general- genuinely open to
the fact that God's Word may rebuke you
and correct a position that you have.
Uh, and that's-- I mean, that's really
hard to do, to, to read the Bible
with that kind of openness to not
bring all your assumptions with you.
But it's definitely, um, the
practice I th- I think that helps
Christians, uh, notice their own,
um, biases and, uh, blind spots.
And then being able to read
the Bible with, say, older,
wiser Christians of the past.
You know, as-- I think C.S.
Lewis said, "For every modern book
you read, uh, two modern books
you read, read a, a classic."
You know, read Athanasius.
They, they were wrestling with
different concerns and in a different
time, and that kind of theology is a
good way of exposing, you know, our
own blind spots or barnacles as well.
So there's a few things you can do,
but I, I reckon, um, they're good ways
to kinda notice your own barnacles.
Derek might have a few other good ones.
Derek: Look, no, I, I, I agree.
I, I never understood my own culture
and my own blind spots as well
as I did after going and living
in another culture for 10 years.
And early in my time in the new culture,
I found myself constantly wanting to ask
the locals: "Well, why do you do this?
Why do you do that?"
And I had to bite my tongue 'cause
I didn't wanna be the, the annoying
person who was always doing that.
But I asked plenty of times, and I,
I learnt some 'cause they understand
to a, to a point why they do things,
but often we don't.
they,
AL: they- don't
Derek: They don't always- It's what
we've always done kind of thing.
Um, but it's, it's, it's really helpful,
um, say if you're, if we're doing ministry
in a particular context in Australia
to get outsiders, whether they're from
another denomination or another culture or
another country, and, um, just ask them:
What do you notice and what do you have--
What why questions do you have for us?
'Cause we might not have thought about it.
And so that kind of interaction
can be really helpful.
Uh, and then like Mike said, that
that kind of humble reading of
scripture where you're constantly
reading scripture and asking: Okay,
what does this mean for our context?
And, um, what blind spots might I have?
Even to be asking that question,
you're more likely to see them.
AL: I mean, I love the idea
of youth and kids ministers
visiting one another's ministries.
You know, that, that might be an
easy or a relatively easy way of
kind of, or at least accessible
way of doing something like that.
Um, uh, guys, I just wanna say what
a pleasure it's been to interact with
each of you both, um, in the lead-up
to the conference, on the conference
itself, and then today as well.
Um, we talk about con- contextualization
being an, an iterative process.
I, I think understanding contextualization
for me has been an iterative process,
and I just am deeply thankful for
the sustained thinking and work
that you have, have put into this.
And, and even as I ask questions
today, and the same thing happened
last year as we're doing the Q&A
episode, I realized that I didn't
understand the thing that I thought I
was understanding as you guys explained
it, which, um, is part of the process.
This is what we're doing, and
I'm just so deeply thankful for
the work that you've put in.
Um, and you've been a huge blessing to
youth and kids ministers, um, in Sydney,
uh, and to people that are listening.
And actually, this will be a huge blessing
to people, um, across the globe as well
as, as we kind of contribute to the
conversation, um, of youth and children's
ministry across, across the globe.
Particularly, Derek, thanks
for kinda stepping into the
youth and kids ministry world.
It's been a real pleasure.
But thank you so much for, uh, for both
of you, - the work that you've done.
It's fantastic.
Derek: It's been a real pleasure.
Thank you so much for the opportunity.
Mike: Absolutely.
Yeah.
Thanks, Al.
Thanks, Derek
Intros/outros: The Effective
Ministry Podcast is a production
of Youthworks in Sydney.
We wanna see effective youth and
children's ministry in every church.
And one of the ways that you can
help us do that is by letting people
know about this podcast in all the
usual ways, like, comment, share,
and review on your favorite social
media and podcasting platform.
If you've got comments,
thoughts, or questions for this
podcast, you can email us at
effectiveministrypodcast@youthworks.net.
And also check out youthworks.net
for other ways that Youthworks can
help you have effective youth and
children's ministry in your church