Covenant Joel
Puritan Board Sophomore
Having recently begun reading Tim Keller's Center Church, I found a couple of his thoughts interesting and would love to get some healthy discussion of the points he raises. To be clear, I understand the issues with other views of Keller (creation/evolution, etc). I'm not really interested in discussing those. I have also downloaded the book "Engaging with Keller" which will deal with those issues. For now, I'm really interested in these specific ideas, as they relate closely to my own life and ministry.
Keller discusses how various people and churches evaluate ministry. He rejects the approach that simply seems to see numbers as indicative of ministry "success." He goes on to say the following:
After citing Spurgeon, he notes, "As I read, reflected, and taught, I came to the conclusion that a more biblical theme for ministerial evaluation than either success or faithfulness is fruitfulness" (Kindle Locations 95-96). After looking at several biblical considerations regarding "fruitfulness," he concludes with the following:
These thoughts were interesting to me for a couple of reasons:
(1) In my context (the Arab world), it's not always a lot of fun to play the numbers game. But then again, knowing from experience how hard it is to learn Arabic, I know that great effort in order to become competent is key. I see some people worried about techniques and numbers. I see others considered only about faithfulness in preaching the gospel--but not a lot of effort being put into being competent to communicate well and faithfully in this context. Keller seems to me to strike a balance here.
(2) Thinking back on many past experiences in the US (even going back to my childhood), I wonder if perhaps this is something that we in the confessional Reformed world have struggled with at times. I.e., have we been so focused on "faithfulness" to the means of grace that we may have forgotten to actually care about whether we see fruit in our neighborhoods? As an example, I spent some years as a kid in a an all white church in the middle of an all black community. Everybody drove in to meet there, little attempt was made to get to know the people actually in the community. Was there faithfulness? In many areas, yes. Was there fruit? Some spiritual growth in the members, I'm sure, but not much in the community. Predictably, the church ended up moving.
(3) As I think about my own efforts at sharing the gospel and preaching, I never want to be accused of being unfaithful in them. I pray that God would give me the confidence in his Word and Spirit to continue to use the means he has provided and not my own innovations. At the same time, I don't want to use my own "faithfulness" as an excuse for not being competent (which, in my case, means knowing another language well, knowing how people think here, knowing how to answer typical Mslm objections, etc). And I don't want to see that in the Western church either (examples could be: the pastor says true things, he's faithful, but his sermons are disorganized, unclear, and lacking a discernible point, etc).
So here are my questions (but feel free to comment on any of this):
(1) Do you think that fruitfulness may be a helpful category for evaluating ministry? If so, why? If not, why not?
(2) Do you think that we, as confessional Reformed people, have at times erred in not looking at the reasons why we're not seeing fruit?
(3) How can we encourage our churches to remain biblically and confessionally faithful and also seek to see fruit in our communities?
(4) How can we advocate for ministerial competence and yet avoid a numbers game or a lack of dependence on the Spirit?
Keller discusses how various people and churches evaluate ministry. He rejects the approach that simply seems to see numbers as indicative of ministry "success." He goes on to say the following:
In reaction to this emphasis on quantifiable success, many have countered that the only true criterion for ministers is faithfulness. All that matters in this view is that a minister be sound in doctrine, godly in character, and faithful in preaching and in pastoring people. But the “faithful — not successful” backlash is an oversimplification that has dangers as well. The demand that ministers be not just sincere and faithful but also competent is not a modern innovation. (Kindle Locations 83-86)
After citing Spurgeon, he notes, "As I read, reflected, and taught, I came to the conclusion that a more biblical theme for ministerial evaluation than either success or faithfulness is fruitfulness" (Kindle Locations 95-96). After looking at several biblical considerations regarding "fruitfulness," he concludes with the following:
The church growth movement has made many lasting contributions to our practice of ministry. But its overemphasis on technique and results can put too much pressure on ministers because it underemphasizes the importance of godly character and the sovereignty of God. Those who claim that “what is required is faithfulness” are largely right, but this mind-set can take too much pressure off church leaders. It does not lead them to ask hard questions when faithful ministries bear little fruit. When fruitfulness is our criterion for evaluation, we are held accountable but not crushed by the expectation that a certain number of lives will be changed dramatically under our ministry. (Kindle Locations 107-111)
These thoughts were interesting to me for a couple of reasons:
(1) In my context (the Arab world), it's not always a lot of fun to play the numbers game. But then again, knowing from experience how hard it is to learn Arabic, I know that great effort in order to become competent is key. I see some people worried about techniques and numbers. I see others considered only about faithfulness in preaching the gospel--but not a lot of effort being put into being competent to communicate well and faithfully in this context. Keller seems to me to strike a balance here.
(2) Thinking back on many past experiences in the US (even going back to my childhood), I wonder if perhaps this is something that we in the confessional Reformed world have struggled with at times. I.e., have we been so focused on "faithfulness" to the means of grace that we may have forgotten to actually care about whether we see fruit in our neighborhoods? As an example, I spent some years as a kid in a an all white church in the middle of an all black community. Everybody drove in to meet there, little attempt was made to get to know the people actually in the community. Was there faithfulness? In many areas, yes. Was there fruit? Some spiritual growth in the members, I'm sure, but not much in the community. Predictably, the church ended up moving.
(3) As I think about my own efforts at sharing the gospel and preaching, I never want to be accused of being unfaithful in them. I pray that God would give me the confidence in his Word and Spirit to continue to use the means he has provided and not my own innovations. At the same time, I don't want to use my own "faithfulness" as an excuse for not being competent (which, in my case, means knowing another language well, knowing how people think here, knowing how to answer typical Mslm objections, etc). And I don't want to see that in the Western church either (examples could be: the pastor says true things, he's faithful, but his sermons are disorganized, unclear, and lacking a discernible point, etc).
So here are my questions (but feel free to comment on any of this):
(1) Do you think that fruitfulness may be a helpful category for evaluating ministry? If so, why? If not, why not?
(2) Do you think that we, as confessional Reformed people, have at times erred in not looking at the reasons why we're not seeing fruit?
(3) How can we encourage our churches to remain biblically and confessionally faithful and also seek to see fruit in our communities?
(4) How can we advocate for ministerial competence and yet avoid a numbers game or a lack of dependence on the Spirit?