I’m excited to be partnering with the NCBSC in developing training materials for churches that are considering, or already making, the move to the small group model for discipleship of their people. In my study and development time, I have tried to isolate the most common objections pastors and leaders of a local church have to making the jump to groups (in that vein, I’d greatly appreciate your feedback on objections you have yourself, or have heard frequently regarding launching small groups in a church.)
Maybe the most common one I encounter is that small groups, because they are discussion oriented, lose the element of biblical teaching which is of course a core part of growing as a disciple. One version of this said to me was “All it is is people sharing opinions and whoever shares their opinion most confidently is the one who speaks truth. Its a dangerous and unhealthy setting for discipleship.”
At the root of this objection is an assumption that teaching = monologue from teacher to student. Since small group gatherings do not include this lecture / sermon type element, the objection goes that there is no teaching in small groups. Now, I do need to talk about how discipleship is a two-way street but let me start by directly handling the objection. The reality is teaching, as it relates to making disciples, is FAR MORE than this! (so hear me now. I am affirming speaking truth into someone’s life. I just think speaking is but one slice of the teaching pie)
How did Jesus make disciples? Did he JUST gather them in a room once a week for an hour? Of course not. He shared life with them. he “taught” them by explaining the deep mysteries of God, by miraculous signs, by demonstrating what would later come to be the fruits of the Spirit (Gal 5:22), and ultimately by sacrificing himself for them.
So do we teach in small groups? OF COURSE! Sometimes that is by explaining a theological truth. Sometimes, no…always it is by putting on display a gospel-centered life among those who have never witnessed such a life before. This example has helped me: how do you teach your children? By 30 minute weekly dialogue? Or by living out how they should live, and then seizing 30 second windows we call teachable moments?
So to my friends who are hesitant to jump into small group life, i want to encourage you that it is a model where teaching can happen. And humbly I want to ask you how much true teaching is happening in the model you are in right now. If you feel like well-rounded teaching is taking place in the model you are operating under, keep it up! Remember, models/methods are simply tools to help us get where we want to go. They aren’t the end in themselves.
While I see the merit in small groups for discipleship, in general, I think it to be a poor conduit for Christian Ed specifically. All it takes is for one to be exposed to good teaching to be able to recognize this by way of contrast.
There are certainly teachable moments exemplified by Jesus and by parents. However, the gospels and epistles contain a great deal of formal instruction by Jesus and the apostles. The Church historically has always been a teaching institution. There is a vast body of truth to be taught, learned, and applied.
And by the time a child graduates from HS, she will have sat under over 12,000 hours of formal education. Children who are merely exposed to teachable moments are woefully prepared to explain and defend their knowledge.
Besides, your primary objection to Christian Ed via the group remains unanswered. Those with the gift of teaching are often marginalized if not absent from many a small group.
Great thoughts Rob! You’ve helped bring clarity to this whole idea of “teaching” I think in distinguishing between formal vs. informal instruction. As I said in the post, I am affirming the role of speaking truth into someone’s life. Sometimes that is in formal settings. We teach formally every week as a church. The proclamation of truth is a core value of our faith that I am in full support of. We are introducing formal teaching settings into the church this summer to equip our people for the work of ministry. So, im totally with you here.
I think what I am suggesting is that teaching has, if you will permit me to use your language, both formal and informal elements. I fear too many discipleship settings involve only formal instruction. The result is a culture of disciples that are only taught that vast body of truth, but said truth is never learned and applied. I think small groups, when working well, reflect & expand on the formal teaching done weekly in a church and also create opportunities for informal instruction that can come about via intentional life-on-life relationships.
As far as your comment on gifted teachers being absent, while I’m not sure about them being marginalized or absent, what I can do is push every believer, especially those with the gift of teaching, to get plugged in! After all, I’ve never known a small group to willingly say no to Godly instruction. My friend Rob, are you in a group? If not, the Summit is less without you. I’d be glad to help you and Brooke get there.
Yea, we just switched groups to one that works a little better with our schedule. Thanks for asking.
And I’m glad to hear that there will be more opportunities for formal training this summer too.
And I’m really not trying to poo poo small groups in general. I just don’t think that they are so great for CE.
My observation with small groups in a handful of churches (and I’m only an authority on my own experience here) has been that unless the small group, or any group for that matter, has a designated teacher (not facilitator) the arbiter of truth becomes personality instead of, well, truth. The people with the most charisma present their view with the best rhetoric, thereby edging out lesser personalities who may be presenting the best logic.
The whole scenario is similar to modern day deconstructionist renderings of early Church history. They claim that the form of Christianity that spread throughout the western empire was altered by means of successful power plays between Church leaders that had little, if anything, to do with right reason. Of course we know that apostolic succession had less to do with the persons who possessed and transmitted the theology of the church and more to do with the continuation of apostolic doctrine in the churches being preserved by faithful leaders. Doctrinal positions were evaluated, not by human successors, but by tracing their beliefs to the beliefs to the apostles themselves. Nevertheless, Church leaders (i.e. teachers) were given authority by the Church, and rascals were run out, based on whether they adhered to the apostles doctrine. Not only was their authority intrinsic, in that they taught the truth, but it was also extrinsic, in that it was given to them by the Church.
In many small groups, where there is no designated teacher (i.e. one approved by the church), the group inevitably seems to revert to power plays between personalities. The stronger personalities are able to submit their own views more forcefully than those with lesser personalities. And, as the history of the Church shows, sometimes those views are right, sometimes they’re wrong. My point is that they tend to get the greater hearing. And this is minimized in a more formal environment.