Doug Fields has been the Pastor to Students at Saddleback Church in Southern California since 1992. Early in his book, Purpose Driven Youth Ministry, Fields identifies his goal for the book is to coach the reader “through a plan to build a healthy youth ministry that isn’t dependent on one great youth worker and won’t be destroyed when that person leaves” (17). Fields proceeds to describe the model that Saddleback has established and utilized for a number of years. Although Fields states that the goal is not to direct programs but to disciple students (18), he admits that purpose-driven youth ministry will have programs and structures which reflect the program’s purposes (17).
The first step, according to Fields, is to develop and communicate a purpose statement for the youth ministry (55-57). Fields suggests a clear purpose statement will assist the leader in making sense of the program, utilizing volunteers, and providing direction for the student’s spiritual maturity (56). He also adds that a purpose statement will attract followers (57). Following the purpose statement is the process of identifying the audience (87). Saddleback has designed a circular system to identify those individuals who are least committed to those who are most committed in the church (87). Fields has adjusted the circular diagram into a funnel in order to demonstrate that with the purpose-driven system, some students will drop out rather than move to the next level of commitment (92). My concern with this system and diagram is that instead of expecting all the students to deepen their relationship with Christ, there is an assumption that some supposed believers will drop out, while others move to the next level. Fields states that he has never experienced any opposition from the students to the circle of commitment (or funnel system) (93). Could this be because those who oppose the system have simply dropped out as predicted?
It is unfortunate that Fields feels compelled rather than excited to write a chapter on the subject of teaming with parents (252). Fields concludes that the early years of youth ministry did not see parents or the home as significant (252). This is historically inaccurate. Individuals including Samuel Dike, Henry Cope, and others actively sought to include the parents and the home in the process of youth discipleship. Thankfully, Fields admits that “our role in a student’s spiritual development is helpful, but a parent’s role is crucial” (254).
Many good ideas can be gleaned from Fields’ suggestions and experience. Two components seem to be missing in his approach: (1) centeredness in the gospel, and (2) equipping of parents to sustain the spiritual development of the youth. Instead of developing a funnel where we sacrifice some for the sake of others, could the youth minister not develop a tunnel where every believer is expected to enter and to continue toward maturity in Christ?
_______________
[Editor's Note: W. Ryan Steenburg (Ph.D., The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary) is the Director of Administration and Development for the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood and the Founder and Director of DaddyDiscipeship.com. This review originally appeared in the Journal of Discipleship and Family Ministry 1.2.]
