In much of the evangelistic work I have been involved with, we have moved between two poles: friendship evangelism and stranger evangelism. Generally we have thought that stranger evangelism (going up to people on a University campus or on a beach-mission-type context and saying ‘can I share the gospel with you?’) is more or less a training ground for the real end-game, friendship evangelism. The logic is: if you can explain the gospel to a stranger, then you’ll be able to explain it to your friends.
However, like Tony Blair in the mid-1990s, I am wondering if there is a third way.
Stranger evangelism is increasingly difficult in a post-Christian context, where your chances of finding someone with the mental furniture to comprehend the gospel you explain to them is just so rare.
Friendship evangelism seems more promising, but I reckon evangelising your mates is—like evangelising your parents—harder than it looks. Often you’re friends with your mates for all sorts of reasons: went to school together, used to get drunk together, played sport together, or were in the same chess-club. The fact that you have recently become (or come out as) a Christian might be curious to them, but getting traction on that is a long-term and often difficult project.
The third way? Well, to borrow a phrase from Steve Timmis, maybe we should focus our efforts on people we are in relationship with because of gospel intentionality. Let me give some examples to explain what I mean:
- You and a few friends decide to start hanging out at a local Shisha bar to get to know the Kurdish immigrants who hang out there. You are the only non-Kurds who go, and so naturally people ask you why you do. You say: “We are from the local church, where Christians, and we wanted to get you know you guys. So, what’s it been like setting into this country?…”
- After 3pm, the kids from the local school gather at the local park to smoke, play soccer and just hang out. You pull a few Christian friends together and start going down to the park to play soccer and get to know them. They are curious why you want to do this and you say: “We are from the local church. We’re Christians, and we wanted to get to know you guys. Kick it to me!…”
- At the local University, the Arts Union Common Room has got people hanging out in it at most times of the day. They are the uber-Arts students: into the local arts scene, up for talking about ideas, willing to have an argument. You are a staff-worker with the Christian Union, and you decide with a mate to start hanging out there a couple of days a week. You look a bit goofy because you’re a bit older and nowhere near as cool, so they ask you: “Why do you hang out here?” And you say: “I work with the Christian Union and I’m really interested in talking to people about Jesus. So, does religion come up in your courses?…”
In each of these cases, it is neither friendship evangelism (trying to evangelise your pre-existent network of friends) nor is it stranger evangelism (sharing the gospel with someone with whom you have no relationship). In all these examples, they were strangers before you went to them, and in all cases you will probably end up in friendships. What they all have in common is gospel intentionality. The gospel is on the table from the very start. Indeed, your presence at any of these places is only intelligible through the gospel.
But in all these cases you could find yourself doing all sorts of things: helping refuges get visas, helping kids navigate the difficulties of school, helping Arts students to understand the biblical allusions in Milton, etc. But the gospel is always on the agenda. Like any good missionary, you don’t fit 100% and never will. But like any good missionary, the people you are sent to learn to trust you, learn that you are for them, and learn that your concern for them isn’t contingent on their response to your message. God willing, they learn eventually to trust and follow the Jesus in whose name they know you were sent.
What would happen in our ministries if we moved the centre of evangelistic gravity away from stranger evangelism on the one hand and friendship evangelism on the other and instead focused on this sort of missional gospel intentionality? Is it just me, or would this represent a step forward for many of our churches? I’m almost certain it would for us.
I was helped in this line of thinking by the book Total Church by Steve Timmis and Tim Chester.
05 February 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Thanks Rory. Helpful analysis of the coldturkey/friendship polarity.
Interestingly, I think in each of your examples there is an activity that will give rise to relationships. It reminds me of the Tipping Point observation that usually activity gives rise to friendships, and not the other way around (we often think that we have friend who we think similarly about life and then go and do stuff together).
Maybe something like:
prayerfulness+gospel intentionality+ activities (ie building relationships) might make a good framework to analyse what we do.
Steve Timmis et al would add + introducing people to Christian community.
Thanks again Rory
Great thoughts Rory.
I love your term "gospel intentionality" (although 'intentionality' is a bit of a big word and may intimidate some).
I was about to write more, but I think I'll write something on my blog in the next day or two...
Hi Rory,
I like the idea of opening evangelism up to using our creativity. I think it's freeing to realize we're not just stuck with the two forms of evangelism you mentioned, and that we're so familiar with thinking about. I also like the idea of approaching someone with the view to becoming their friend, as opposed to simply as a stranger.
One idea I wanted to float -- which maybe was already assumed in the concept -- was that I could imagine that people might be suspicious of me approaching a soccer field when I've never played a game of soccer in my life. I think people are looking for authenticity, so perhaps picking some activity that I'm already interested in, or a skill I'm already familiar with -- or not, but then asking them to teach me -- would give me some credibility.
By the way, soccer is a great example. Here in the Bay Area, as I'm sure in Perth as well, we have lots of immigrants who don't speak much English, but love to play soccer. It can be a great way to get to know people, and help them feel less isolated.
Rory,
Enjoyed this piece. I think you have captured 3 important elements of modern day evangelism: Community (engaging in this activity with someone else - presumably from your local church), gospel intentionality (there is a clear intention that we go there to share the gospel) and being sent (going onto their turf).
I am with Nigel - with one modification - prayerfulness, gospel intentionality and their activities. Too often we construct the activities and invite them into our turf .. which we control and shape often without realising how this will condition the interaction. The challenge is to engage with them on their own turf. One thinks of Paul in Acts 17:22ff.
But I also think that perseverence is so essential here. Pagans, particularly post modern ones, are deeply suspicious of the hard sell... and will quickly recognise those who come amongst them to have a quick foray into enemy territory ...its there that we need to be the loving alternative .. 'loving' in the sense of the sort of virtues that are shaped by the presence of the Spirit in our lives over the long haul. This in a modern setting is no easy task.
Well done.
Simon B
Hi Rory,
I found my way here from Michael Jensen's blog.
I haven't heard it put in these terms before but I think it makes a lot of sense.
What you suggest sounds just like what we do in pioneering missions situations (I am working in Taiwan). Find a way into the community, take time getting to know people but be up front about who you are as a Christian from the beginning. We have just used the term 'relational evangelism' to describe what we do.
It is amazing how many different ways there are to do this with different types of people. e.g. We have some people reaching out to prostitutes and they ran four evenings of free beauty treatment (offered by Christian beauticians) for these ladies. It had a wonderful effect in building trust and opening further doors for relationships and conversations.
BTW I will be speaking at St Matthews missions conference in August so may meet you then.
Phil
Hi Phil,
Thanks for dropping by. Yes, I did know that you were coming over. For some reason I had in my head that you were also going to be here on the 27 July, in which case I was hoping you might be able to come along to Unichurch. However, I think maybe I have my wires crossed. Could you let me know?
Yes, I guess that much missionary work works along these lines of gospel intentionality. At its best the missonal church people are simply saying: "See what missios do? Lets do that here."
Blessings.
We will be arriving in Perth on August 1. The conference starts the 8th I think. We have a few commitments in this week but if there is time I would be happy to visit UWA.
Phil
G'day,
I agree that stranger evangelism is different from friendship evangelism, and different from family evangelism. I think the depth of relationship determines the approach to evangelism.
For a person I'll never meet again, I go hard and try to explain the gospel briefly.
For a person I meet for a limited time (eg. Physiotherapist), I try to introduce the gospel early and in an intriguing way.
For the friend and the family member who I'm in a long-term relationship with, I go soft, gentle and not too much, but enough to keep them interested.
Another major factor in evangelism is the person's Christian background. If a person is "Christianised" then we can almost jump to "Repent and believe in Jesus!"
Most Aussies now know nothing of the gospel, so it takes much longer (eg. weeks to months) to explain the gospel gently.
There's clearly no "one" approach that works.
Interesting!
I like this way of thinking. Traditional ways of thinking are of them and us, bring them into the program of the church...instead of us going to them, getting involved in where they are at..building community with them in a natural way..
Hi Rory
Would be great to hear you write more on the crowded house stuff- interested on whether you see the links as strongly between community and mission as they do, and whether community is the drving paradigm for church.
Steve Timmis will be here in Sydney on April 8 for the Total Church Conference, interested in getting over?
Hi Shane. Cheers. I will be keen to get a few more Crowded House reflections down. Thanks for the encouragement to do so. Yes, theologically the nexus between community, church and mission is the thing to work out.
Steve Timmis is dropping by Perth too, so no need for me to make the trip 'over east'.
Hi Rory, since this is an old post maybe you'll never read this but...after so much talk re 'gospel intentionality' I'm wondering where the action is? Have you had any ideas or attempts at intentionally engaging people with/for the gospel?
Another question: what do you do if the people you're intentionally engaging aren't interested in engaging with you? (have a chat to jeff re the parkour club!)
I'm not dissing the idea, I think it sounds great, I'm just wondering if you or anyone you've been talking to here has tried it out 'in our context'- when will we be able to give an example from Perth? Liana
Hi Liana,
Nice to hear from you. In Perth I guess you see this sort of thing most times people plant a new church. I think there is something about church planting that forces gospel intentionality on you. Sadly, as churches get established, then often look back on this as the early phase.
Some of the forge guys are also doing stuff along these lines.
And you see it on beach missions all the time. In fact, if you could imagine a beach mission with 1/2 the intensity and a longer-term engagement, thats probably a pretty good idea of where I think this could go.
We have tried to move in this direction a bit at Unichurch. Tried a thing called "Summer of Love" but it kinda flopped! We have a few more projects planned that are trying to test this thesis, so we'll let you know how they go--especially if they don't flop!
That last answer was from Rory, not Susan. My bad.
Post a Comment