I am intensely fascinated with creative people. I have never really seen myself as a creative type so being around creative people always inspires and challenges me. Even more than that — it gives me the permission to generate new ideas, imagine, innovate and invent.

I have been reading a short book called, Interactive Excellence: Defining and Developing New Standards for the 21st Century by Edwin Schlossberg. Schlossberg is the founder of ESI Design, one of the world’s foremost experiential design firms that is known for creating physical and virtual spaces for people to interact, exchange ideas and learn from each other.

In his incredibly winsome book, Schlossberg says this…

“…I am interested in the patterns and forces that shape and create culture. I am not interested in learning how to subvert the interest of an audience into things that are for sale or create methods for propaganda. What I am interested in is calling attention to the discipline of looking at the audience as part of the act of composition or design.” (pg. 5)

Schlossberg’s thoughts above have gently pressed me to reflect on how we treat culture, intermittently use the gospel as propaganda and avoid thinking about the “audience” as part of the creative work we call youth ministry. Here are some random thoughts about that…

Are we really interested in the “patterns and forces” that shape culture? Do we really care about what makes culture what it is? Unearthing the “patterns and forces” that make culture what it is can be very demanding work. It can surprise us. It can be messy. It can be frustrating. It can be scary. It can raise anxieties in us we thought we never had. It (the process if unearthing the realities of culture) can also, however, reveal insights to us that help us discover into the most effective way to engage in culture and live missionally. Why does the intellectual, physical, emotional, social and spiritual make-up of the context in which we do ministry surprise or even scare us? I think there are many of us that would rather not encourage our students to engage in culture and instead “subvert the interest” or “create methods for propaganda.” This undermining technique can tend to speak a gospel message of distance and divergence. Instead, I would think our gospel message would be one of intimacy and convergence.

“…anointed me to preach the “good news” to the poor…” (Luke 4:18ff)

I get the whole “in the world but not of the world” deal. And I get that there are some things about life outside the bubble of protection we sometimes hide under called, Christianity that are alarming, concerning and downright troublesome. What I don’t get is why we often spend more time in our ministries making sure that our students are not “of the world” and very little time helping them understand what it looks like to be equally concerned and passionate about “being in the world” or living missionally.

Understand me, I think spiritual transformation is vitally important and I am not choosing one over the other. I fully believe that we all should be working away from “conforming to the patterns of this world” (Romans 12:1-2). But why are we allowing the “patterns and forces” to scare us into an unwarranted way of thinking that can result in an ineffective and idle ministry?

Also, I often wonder why we are so afraid to let the “audience” participate in the life of the church. This confuses me. I cannot reconcile why many youth pastors try to make sure that their students are protected from the “patterns and forces” of life outside the bubble. And in doing so, leave the accessibility of and the association with a genuine community so hard to enter into. We invite and welcome people to follow Jesus but many of us are so nervous to allow culture and the “patterns and forces” that direct it into our community that it ultimately directs us away from our mission of blessing others through God’s love and restoration.

On another note, we talk like we love kids and that our student communities are ripe with acceptance and belonging. But how disingenuous is that “love” if our primary but often underlying goal is to “subvert the interest” or use the gospel message as “propaganda” rather than letting it stand for what it is — a plausible or sufficient story that can meet and/or fulfill all of one’s needs, hopes and dreams.

The Schlossberg quote above got me thinking that our creative methods to show and share the gospel can not be based out of a fear of the “patterns and forces” of culture and therefore turn the gospel into some “propaganda” based story. Rather our creative methods must be based on a trust in the gospel truths of incarnation, crucifixion, resurrection and Pentecost.

Just rambling here … any thoughts?