Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Prepositions In Ministry
Not too long ago, Tod Bolsinger wrote a piece about prepositions and their importance when considering ministry.
Preaching is a one man ministry and Tod is just dead-nuts on that it should be done for the sake of the congregation, the listener, not at them, and certainly not as an expression of "where the preacher is." But most of the rest of the church's ministry is not so directional.
Take for example a calling ministry. Sure, I go for the sake of the homebound, but how much more effective is that visit if I visit with them. - If I open up, if it becomes genuinely relational and not just uni-directional, even if sincerely sacrificial, will not the Spirit flow more easily and rapidly through such a bond?
Have you ever thought about where the best ministry occurs when putting on a major event of any sort? Is it really to the audience, or is it in the relationships of the team?
Which brings me to the real point I want to make. There should not be "owners" of ministry and then volunteers filling slots. Ownership by all involved makes for so much better ministry - that means we all do ministry with each other. This is inclusive of those towards whom the ministry is "aimed." Worship is not a performance, it is a shared experience. Sunday School is not pedagogy, it is shared exploration. And so I could continue.
Prepositions matter. "For," not "to." But defintiely "with."
Related Tags: church, ministry, prepositions, to, for, with
I have been thinking about this one a lot lately: How much of church life is experienced by the average, ordinary person out there as “to” instead of “for” them? We do stuff “to” people all the time? We preach to them, we sing to them, we make announcements to them? (Maybe worse, we do things “at” them. If there is anything worse than “to” ministry, it has got to be “at” ministry.)Tod is really making a great point here and one I agree with, but there is another preposition that I think should be added to the mix - "with."
How much different would our ministry be received if everything we did was “for” ministry? My preaching professor said something like this to me years ago, though I never thought of it as practicing “hospitality” at the time. He said, “We don’t preach to a people, we preach for them. We offer the word of God to give expression the work of the Spirit at work within a community of faith.”
Preaching is a one man ministry and Tod is just dead-nuts on that it should be done for the sake of the congregation, the listener, not at them, and certainly not as an expression of "where the preacher is." But most of the rest of the church's ministry is not so directional.
Take for example a calling ministry. Sure, I go for the sake of the homebound, but how much more effective is that visit if I visit with them. - If I open up, if it becomes genuinely relational and not just uni-directional, even if sincerely sacrificial, will not the Spirit flow more easily and rapidly through such a bond?
Have you ever thought about where the best ministry occurs when putting on a major event of any sort? Is it really to the audience, or is it in the relationships of the team?
Which brings me to the real point I want to make. There should not be "owners" of ministry and then volunteers filling slots. Ownership by all involved makes for so much better ministry - that means we all do ministry with each other. This is inclusive of those towards whom the ministry is "aimed." Worship is not a performance, it is a shared experience. Sunday School is not pedagogy, it is shared exploration. And so I could continue.
Prepositions matter. "For," not "to." But defintiely "with."
Related Tags: church, ministry, prepositions, to, for, with
