Feature
Defining Evangelicalism's Boundaries in Ministry
by James Sweeney
A steady flow of writing and publishing about evangelical ministry pours off the presses every day. It ranges across a spectrum of purpose and perspective, from "How to Make Your Worship Ministry Exciting and Relevant," to sober analysis and critique of the overall state of evangelical ministry. It reflects concern for both ministry function and ministry form. And it coincides with a period of history in which form is outstripping function for the attention of the church. Today it is fair to say that in terms of form, evangelical ministry is virtually "up for grabs".
It is necessary to stay alert to the fresh winds of creativity and innovation in contemporary ministry, and it is also necessary to listen sensitively to voices expressing concern about trends within evangelicalism that have the potential to lead us astray.
While wishing to steer a course that maintains my own positive enthusiasm for the church in the 21st century, I want nevertheless to begin with this question: Is evangelical ministry in trouble?
Is Evangelical Ministry in Trouble?
If we take seriously the burden of many who have published assessments in the past few years, we might have to concede that evangelical ministry is indeed in trouble. In fact, it is quite common to find those assessments expressed in terms of crisis. To be sure, the voices of alarm do not all share the same perspective. There are those who see the church as "increasingly (if not terminally) out of touch with the postmodern culture." From the other end of the spectrum, and voicing a concern raised by many, one observer has questioned whether or not American evangelicalism and its ministry will continue to look anything like the historic evangelical Protestantism of which it is an heir. Such concerns must be taken into account in what follows. I hasten to say that this is not intended as a critique of the church and its ministry-it is about exploring boundaries. While there is indeed cause for concerns among those who believe in the church, there is also much to celebrate. Having spent significant time reading and reflecting on the growing body of literature related to this issue, I am indebted to many others for their observations and assessments on which I've drawn.
The title I was given-Defining Evangelicalism's Boundaries in Ministry-posed some initial challenges. The first was definitional. I wrestled with the concept of "boundaries" in this context inasmuch as the term does suggest a map of a territory that is clearly known. I don't need to convince this audience of how elusive is a consensus on a definition of "evangelical." But in necessarily using the term as an adjective to qualify ministry, I would put the subject at hand in this way: Can we describe in adequate fashion the contours of ministry that can be characterized as evangelical?
There is a sense here in which I prefer contours to boundaries, for the term suggests shape rather than territory. And this discussion will seek to examine the shape, the contours, of ministry appropriate to evangelicalism. One particular nuance of the term boundaries is pertinent. The term does suggest a line drawn in the sand, which when stepped over may put one in very different territory. I do want to draw on that imagery to some extent, not so much to identify contemporary ministries that are "out of bounds," as to rather explore ministry territory mandated for the church which we have yet to occupy effectively as evangelicals. In other words, at what points are we failing to be fully evangelical in ministry by default?
In considering evangelical boundaries in ministry, I have taken a cue from Millard Erickson who has asked elsewhere how we might determine whether a given theological position is evangelical or not. He acknowledges this is a sticky question, but he recasts it in terms of what he calls a "theological version of Zeno's paradox" in reverse. The question becomes one of "how far one may move, or how many times one may halve the distance between things and still remain within the original group." As he works out the implications in theology, he concludes that "surely there must come some point where the line has been crossed, and at least a hybrid must be present."
When applied to ministry-that is, to practice in addition to profession-the question has an additional dimension. By this I mean that it is possible for one to sincerely confess evangelical doctrine but then turn to ministry and apply some other criteria. It is appropriate to ask: “Is this ministry evangelical? Has some line been crossed?” In seeking an answer we must assess ministry not only in terms of doctrine, but also methodology. Is the methodology a fruit of sound theology, or is it the result of the conditioning of the culture, or is it simply a product of the flesh? The consequences in ministry are as important and distinct as "gold, silver, costly stones," and "wood, hay or straw." Even among those of us who seek to be fully evangelical in our theology, there is always the danger of practicing ministry on some other terms. And we may indeed have non-evangelical ministry, or some hybrid.
Another challenge is the rapidly shifting face of ministry in our time. As just noted, in terms of form, how we "do" ministry at the beginning of the 21st century seems virtually "up for grabs." So quickly do trends in the church sweep into view, receive a flurry of attention, and then give way to the next wave, it is difficult to absorb the literature describing them before they disappear. Intentionally and unintentionally, we contribute to this culture of rapid change. I recall seeing in a publication of a well-known evangelical organization a statement of purpose that said in essence, we see our mission to be the promotion of innovation and change. It went on to note that before a book describing the most recent ministry innovation can be digested, it is obsolete and another innovation has already taken its place. This simply underscores the fact that it is sometimes a tricky business to find a place to stand from which to observe and assess the shape of evangelical ministry.
We need to note that observations made here largely concern evangelical ministry in the West-especially North America. While acknowledging that the center of gravity of Christianity has dramatically shifted to other parts of the world over the past quarter century, time will limit our scope here.
What follows in this paper is a brief examination of the fundamental contours of ministry in terms of the theological foundations which mark its evangelical character. Since our scope must necessarily be limited, we will specifically examine three critical boundary markers, considering how we might strengthen the evangelical integrity of ministry by cultivating it in the soil of sound theology.
Note: All references may be found in the Endnotes section of the PDF file.
