So here’s the thing.  I know there are faithful campus ministers on each of those campuses.  I’d take time to list them, but it would be a long list (if you need a connection to one on a particular campus, let me know and I’ll hook you up).  Most of those campus have multiple leaders, ministers, and missionaries serving on them.

We in the church spend, it seems, a lot of time wringing our hands and worrying about where all the young people went.  We fret, “Why aren’t they in church on Sunday morning?”  Justifiably older members tend toward fears of whether their beloved local church (or denomination) will even exist in the next 20-30 years.  They reason, understandably, that if the next generation aren’t in the pews there won’t be people to carry on once they’re gone.

My friends, them there colleges and universities are filled with young people!  In fact, taken together just the campuses I selected (ones where I know one or more campus ministers/ministries) would total a population of more than most cities in the Commonwealth of Kentucky or the Greater Cincinnati metro area!  Only Lexington, Louisville have more than 134,532 in Kentucky and, in Ohio, Cincinnati.

If we gave up on our campus ministries at these institutions of higher education (AKA “mission fields”) it would be akin to abandoning a major metropolitan area.  (Not that I’m expecting that to happen…. I’m just saying)  I know we must continue to re-envision what it means to be effective and successful in our ministry endeavors – much less faithful – but we mustn’t stop trying.  Whether or not our job is to get those young people into the pews on a Sunday morning (and I’m pretty sure that’s not our main job) or however we define success.  We must keep being creative, innovative, and experimental in our mission to be a sign, instrument, and foretaste of the Kingdom of God.

Finally, I think there’s work to be done on how we understand our role on each of these campuses.  I’ve written before about conceiving of success ecologically in a ministry/mission environment and I think there’s more to delve into there.  Likewise, if we consider network theory (social networks both digitally and geographically contrived) we might begin to see our role as a campus minister as more of instigator and seed distributor than as only a chaplain or shepherd.  This is where 5-fold ministry, the empowerment of the laity, and flexible structures of mission come into play in a big way…. but that’s for another post.

We’re talking about Vision, Successes, Challenges, and Recommendations.

As United Methodists we live by the Book of Discipline, the governing document of the denomination.  There is a section (about 6 pages worth) on campus/collegiate/higher education ministry.  I’m not sure if I’m allowed to do this, but I’m posting a PDF of this section.  There is a lot there, so I doubt any/many of you will read this whole document, but if you get a chance to skim it – I would love to know your thoughts, impressions, and reactions.

Here it is - The Book of Discipline 2008 – Part V – Organization and Administration – Chapter Four – The Conferences – Section IX. The Annual Conference – Other Conference Agencies - ¶ 634. Conference Board of Higher Education and Campus Ministry

TANK WI-FI Bus

This is a follow up to my post, On Success, and it has generated some good feedback and dialog (note the comments, good stuff there).  Benson Hines posted some other links around the same topic.  Here’s an excerpt:

defining success in college ministry: Quite providentially, several college ministry thinkers have turned their attention simultaneously to the very important topic of how we define success in college ministry. (God is a gracious Synergist, isn’t He?) HeartOfCampusMinistry began a weekly series on the topic – with a post by the much-respected Dean Thune. (I’ll be posting in that series in a few weeks!) Aaron Klinefelter wrote a great (and interesting) post on an “ecological” understanding of college ministry success. I posted on why aiming for numbers isn’t (usually) a good college ministry priority. And Ian Clark is asking the same question about how we define success.

Be sure to check out those links.

I have also been pondering “modalities” and “sodalities” as they relate to the structure and success of campus ministry.  The Two Structures of God’s Redemptive Mission by Ralph D. Winter is a must read for this.  Here’s a post about Ralph D. Winter (who died this past summer) from the Tall Skinny Kiwi.

Essentially the article deals with “Modalities” and “Sodalities” as two complementary structures for God’s Mission in the world.  This has been helpful as I think about what the WF is and how we come alongside Asbury Church and the other churches (UMC and otherwise) in the region.

Intervarsity thinks of itself this way, as do CCO and Campus Crusade, but we can also see this in the new monasticism of late with folks like Shane Claiborne and Communality (not to mention traditional Monasticism and those early Methodists).

Here’s an Intervarsity link about the topic:

Put simply, “modality” refers to the permanent structure, the local church. Multi-generational and geographically limited, a congregation puts down its roots and makes a long-term commitment to its community. As theologian Darrell Guder observes: “The parish must always be looked upon as the central and continuing form of the church.”

The second structure, “sodality,” focuses on a specialized aspect of the Lord’s purposes on earth. This “laser vision” may target a particular people group (e.g. Laotians), age group (e.g. high school students) or spiritual discipline (e.g. prayer).

Parachurch ministries like InterVarsity are sodalities—expressions of the local church, but not churches in themselves. “Para” means “along side.” Historical examples of such extensions of church ministry include first century mobile missionary missionary bands and medieval Catholic orders.

See also, The Order of the Mustard Seed.

My hope and prayer is that this will spur our minds as we consider what God is birthing at NKU and how the WF fits into the overall ecosystem of the Kingdom in our neck of the woods.

(oh, and I wrote and posted this while on a bus from NKU to downtown Cincinnati.  how cool is that?!)

Oak Tree by Alan Creech

Success is clearly not numerical growth.  It may involve numerical growth, but it is not exclusive to that.  An oak tree is not successful if it merely grows larger and larger.  In fact, even if it did grow larger and larger that would not be the oak tree’s ultimate aim, purpose, or telos.  Surely part of an oak tree’s purpose – and by extension, definition of success – would be to reproduce.  Making more oak trees makes an oak tree successful.

However, we can’t stop there.  Just making more and more oak trees would eventually become self-defeating.  A good forest has biodiversity as integral to its ultimate success.  So an oak tree is only successful if it contributes to the overall success (in this case, think sustainability) of the forest/ecosystem/biosphere.  In other words, it plays well with others.

How might our friend the oak tree translate into campus ministry?  I think we need a ecological approach to ministry.  How might a successful campus ministry contribute to the overall biodiversity of a college campus, of local churches, of other campus ministries?  Maybe success is living sustainably in the social, spiritual environment in which we are situated.

As a leader of a United Methodist Campus Ministry it is important for me to know how those in authority over me define success.  Here’s this from the Mother Church:

The General Board of Higher Education and Ministry is the lead agency in providing assistance in developing principled Christian leaders for the church and the world – the first of the Four Areas of Focus of The United Methodist Church.

Leaders of four of the denomination’s general agencies are shown here during a joint presentation to the 2008 General Conference about the Four Areas of Focus

These Four Focus Areas are meant to sharpen the mission of the church and direct critical aspects of our ministry in collaboration:

• Developing Principled Christian Leaders
• Congregational Development
• Ministry with the Poor
• Improving Health Globally

“We live in a world that once had courageous Christian leaders, but now cries out for them – the kind of women and men who are set apart to show by example how to live faithfully in bold discipleship and to engage a world starving for the Gospel,” the Rev. Jerome King Del Pino, GBHEM’s general secretary, said during General Conference 2008.

How can these 4 areas guide our thinking for what is a successful campus ministry?  I’ve blogged about these elsewhere, by the way.  And while these are all related to making disciples of Jesus Christ, I wonder if these are leading indicators or trailing indicators (like unemployment numbers for this economic recession we’re in).  If we made disciples would we then see these things happen?  Or would doing these things make disciples?  The answer is probably both, but I think it is an important question.

What are your thoughts?  What is success for a campus ministry?