Will your work survive according to 1Cor 3?

View the most recent article

Recently Lionel Windsor wrote on the necessity to ‘Watch out’ as we use ‘Secular Wisdom to Achieve Ministry Goals’. But it left me frustrated for several reasons. However, responding to each idea is tricky since Lionel’s essay is itself a response to Andrew Heard’s ‘Reflections…’, which was a response to Lionel’s initial article (“Dangerous Necessity of Goal-Driven Ministry”). This back-and-forth has created a tangled web of what appears to be several misunderstood ideas – like ships passing each other in the night. And while I don’t wish to be another useless vessel, I’ll just try and address a few points – all under the umbrella of warmth and thankfulness to Lionel for pushing this conversation forward.

First, I want to raise some issues with Lionel’s language around goals.

A label-definition mismatch

The “thing” Lionel wants to talk about is “the kind of ministry that borrows heavily from worldly wisdom”. Okay, so what does he want to say about this thing? He wants to both encourage us and warn us about our use of “secular wisdom”, including things like “systems theory—inputs, processes, measurement, outputs—strategic planning, leadership, statistical analysis, quality control, business management, etc.”. That’s great! I think almost everyone would agree with this encouragement and warning – including Andrew! In fact I doubt many people would disagree with Lionel’s approach?

Lionel refers to this approach (or mentality) as “Plundering the Egyptians” (PTE), which seems entirely fitting. Plundering the Egyptians is a label that captures the sense of the thing he’s defining (with some required understanding of the biblical background). However, this is not the key label Lionel uses. Instead the label he has chosen is “Goal Driven Ministry” of GDM.

The choice of this label is extremely troublesome. By using GDM to mean the use of secular wisdom, Lionel has equated every ministry that has some vague sense of a goal with a ministry that uses “secular wisdom”. That is, if you even think to yourself about some thing you hope God might achieve in your church… bam! You’ve just used “secular wisdom” (according to Lionel’s definition).

As an analogy, imagine if I defined “Servant Hearted Ministry” as “being a quiet, respectful helper who simply does whatever other people suggest you do, without ever sharing your thoughts or ideas”. By using that label for that definition I’ve taken one possible expression of being servant hearted and made it the sole idea. (I could even follow this definition by encouraging people to both have this attitude towards Jesus, but also be wary of holding it in all human circumstances). There are real implications of using this label as such. For example, when someone in my circles of influence refers to being servant hearted in passing, I’ve now introduced a confusion. Are they talking about the more general (and biblical) idea of being servant hearted, or are they talking about the narrow sense I’ve given as a definition?

In the same way I believe Lionel’s definition of “Goal Driven Ministry” leads to confusion because it takes a general term (“goal driven”) and defines it extremely narrowly. It leads me to assume that since Jesus described his own ministry as having a ‘goal’ or ‘end’ (i.e. to seek and save the lost in Luke 19:10), it must mean that Jesus was using secular wisdom! (Maybe Jesus was a type of systems theory articulated by the Egyptian engineers of his day? 🙃)

However, I’m very confident that Lionel does not intend this confusion. I’m sure he would point out that I’m falling into the converse error fallacy and he’d assure me that while all ministries that use secular wisdom are goal driven, not all goal driven ministries use secular wisdom. However, I think I disagree with both sentiments. And the sentiment in this conversation really matters to our ministries! As Andrew stated;

…we are ministering in a context where confusion over
exactly this issue is creating unhelpful and unnecessary battles. Many are rejecting the idea of goal-driven ministry, in its most natural sense, because they attach to it all that is bad about Lionel’s very particular definition (p81)

For example, after reading Lionel’s article and agreeing with nearly everything he says, I felt slightly uneasy about ever using the language of goals in church. I’m left with the sense that simply having a ‘goal’ in ministry, or an ‘outcome’ that I’m praying for, or ‘aiming’ at seeing God do anything through my ministry is, by definition, “using secular wisdom“.

But that’s not really the case, is it? A minister of the gospel can choose whether to use secular wisdom, or not; because it’s an option, a decision they can make. But being goal-driven? I’m not sure that is an option for Christians.

Cross-shaped ministry is goal-shaped ministry

From before the creation of the universe God has had a purpose (a goal) in the crucified and risen Christ to bring all things together under him (Eph 1:10, Col 1:16, 2Tim 1:9, 1Pet 1:20). God has been working in the Son and through the Spirit towards that cross-shapped goal for all time. And as such, we who have been saved through Christ are called to join him in working towards this cross-shaped goal as his co-workers. Every Christian has been ‘created in Christ Jesus’ with purpose (a goal) to do good works including works of ministry (e.g. ‘speaking the truth in love’) which builds up the body to maturity (Eph 2:10, 4:11-16).

In other words, all Christians—and especially those who are called to be undershepherds—are saved into cross-shaped goal-driven ministry. Andrew makes this point very well;

…not only was Paul goal-driven at every point of his ministry; it is impossible to be otherwise, especially as gospel ministers. Everyone ministers with a goal in mind – an outcome we’re pursuing. This is, almost by definition, what it is to be human. We are made for a ‘telos’, an end goal. It is wired into our very being. This means there is no ministry that is not goal-driven. The danger with some of what Lionel has written is that it might be heard to suggest we can choose whether or not to be goal-driven. (p78)

While I think Lionel agrees with this, I hope he can see how using the label “Goal Driven Ministry” to narrowly refer to “the kind of ministry that borrows heavily from worldly wisdom” is so unhelpful. Instead, we need to hold the idea that all gospel ministry is goal driven ministry, and then because of that conviction we might choose to use certain frameworks to help us prayerfully work towards that goal and its sub-goals.

In fact, Jesus seems to suggest we should be even more goal-driven than the world we live in.

Maybe we’re not enough like the world?

In Luke 16:8 Jesus suggests something damning about Christians. He’s just told a story about an unrighteous manager abusing his position and using whatever was at his disposal to ensure his own security.

And then Jesus follows it up with this;

The master praised the unrighteous manager because he acted shrewdly. For the children of this age are more shrewd among their own people than the children of the light; I tell you use unrighteous wealth to make yourself friends so that when it fails they will welcome you into eternal homes.

So Jesus is referring to us (Christians) as the children of the light, and therefore the children of this age are unbelievers (who are shrewd like the unrighteous manager). And as children of the light, we’re to make friends (i.e. make new disciples) who will welcome us when we enter heaven (cf 1Thess 2:19-20).

But notice the comparison and implied appeal Jesus is making here. As Darrel L. Bock says it,

Christians should apply themselves to honor and serve God in their actions as much as secular people apply themselves to obtain protection and prosperity from money and the world. (Luke, 1996, p1333)

Jesus tells us to look at the people of this world; to consider them carefully. He tells a whole parable about how shrewdly they use whatever resources they have available to them to ensure they get the outcome they want. His point is how shrewd (clever, wise, cunning) they are when they have a clear goal and apply themselves completely to that end. Even if the goal is selfish, and the means are deceptive, Jesus still wants to point out how amazingly shrewd they are.

And then Jesus calls out Christians for not being anywhere near as shrewd with our own kind – with our own eternal purposes.

That is, if the people of this world use shrewd and clever methods in their pursuit of meaningless goals, shouldn’t we be even more shrewd, more zealous, more dedicated in pursuing eternal goals?!?

Sure, there will be loads of things we won’t do; e.g. flattery or using deception (1Thes 2:3-5, 2Cor 4:2). And because the goal is more friends in eternal dwellings, we definitely won’t tamper with the gospel – for that is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes (Rom 1:16).

But apart from that, we’re to be more shrewd than the world! We’re meant to use everything available to us, every resource, every trick of the trade, every tool. Indeed, to not use whatever tools are at our disposal is not only foolish (the opposite of shrewd), in the next verse, Jesus says it’s unfaithfulness :

11 Whoever is faithful in little things is faithful in big things, and whoever is unrighteous in little things is also unrighteous in big things. 12 If you have not been faithful with unrighteous assets who will trust you with true ones?

I think Jesus’ point is that Christians (especially those who are leaders entrusted with a little bit of spiritual responsibility) live in a temporary world with temporary assets and the faithful ones will be as shrewd, if not more so, in using the things of this world for eternal ends.

All that to say that true gospel faithfulness means using worldly shrewdness (under the law of Christ) for eternal ends. We shouldn’t just use secular wisdom carefully… we should be using it better than the world around us, because we have a greater goal and purpose driving us!

Wrapping up

I would like to say much more about the issues raised in the articles; e.g. I disagree with Lionel because I think we should be “valuing human effectiveness, especially when it comes to salvation“—just not value it more than the gospel that brings salvation. And the debate about the wise builder seems to miss Paul’s larger point that a true gospel builder will make disciples who will endure the day of day of judgement. It’s not a condemnation of using eloquence (as understood in modern English), it’s a condemnation of doing any kind of gospel work that doesn’t simply point people to the foundation; Jesus.

That all being said it is important to affirm the danger that Lionel is concerned about.

1. Don’t despise another man’s servant

We must be careful in these discussions how we speak of Jesus’ church and leaders. When you look at a ministry which is applying secular ideas – be careful you do not judge your brother’s heart and assume they’ve abandoned the gospel. Similarly when you look at a ministry which has little to no systems and intentionality, do not be quick to judge and assume they have decried all forms of shrewd thinking. And, if it turns out that they have abandoned the gospel message for the sake of systems, or that they have deemed any such wisdom as evil, be gracious and pray that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth.

2. Don’t trust in tools, trust in God.

It would be a terrible tragedy for gospel workers to put their confidence in their tools more than their God to save souls. Our methods and techniques do not bring people to salvation, only God does that by His word and Spirit.

Trusting in our tools, would be like the farmer trusting in his plough to cause his plants to grow. That’s silly. But, since the plough allows the farmer to plant more seeds, get the biggest and best plough you can afford.

If the harvest is plentiful, thank God for horses!