Grace - thank you so much for adding your comments. I agree. I am aware of Bob Hyatt's community and have been watchful. Thanks for pointing him out. Feel free to jump into the discussion here anytime : )

Hey Jules - You've touched on much here, mostly about the tactics of childrens ministry. I can't address it all, except to say that every Vineyard church does it differently, so 12 week rotations, 1 week rotations, 3 month rotations, yearly rotations...I've seen them all in different churches.

The bigger point is that the childrens and youth ministry system you're describing don't work - not just for getting volunteers, but, more importantly, for making disciples. The data indicates that most kids grow up and leave the church. Moreover, the system of "church" itself (within which Sunday school and youth ministry depend) - that is, "come to us to get your weekly spiritual fix from the professionals" - doesn't work either. Church, by and large, doesn't reach most people in emerging cultures because it is based on a Christendom mindset, and Christendom is nearly dead in the west. But even those people who are reached aren't discipled effectively because the church expends too many resources trying to attract and hold people and not enough resources trying to train them to effectively follow Christ. Therefore, the issue is not tweaking scheduls and creating new youth programs, it's about rethinking the foundational assumptions on which the institution is built.

These comments come from those who have rethought the institution and have consequently abandoned many of its structures - especially the structures that look like consumer products. That creates a difficult void for the task of discipling children and youth because the most consumer-oriented products in Christendom churches ARE the children and youth ministries. So the question is essentially, If we don't do Sunday school or youth groups anymore because those models aren't theologically tenable or even pragmatically effective, how DO we disciple our kids?

Lots of people have ideas (including me and Jenell) but to my knowledge nobody has proven anything yet. I'm not sure anybody will - for at least a half a generation. Spiritual fruit takes a lifetime to germinate.

Thanks for being so transparent about your struggles with family ministry. Over the years, in emerging circles, I know a variety of approaches have been tried but it seems like nothing has taken root as a proven approach. The tensions you describe seem common among the various missional leaders I know who have children of their own.

...and my heart was strangely warmed...

Well, it's about time. Welcome to the Kingdom. : )

Ardell, I think that's very true, and I think there are a variety of Vineyard churches across the spectrum that have demonstrated a re-embrace of a few traditional liturgical practices. Ken Wilson's church in Ann Arbor has even re-imagined the "radical middle" concept as a "radical center," turning the linear continuum into a quadrant that includes spaces for liturgical and social justice space. I've used the offices of prayer on and off and have settled into a few other practices as well such as the use of prayer beads and the stations of the cross. AlI that is pretty widespread, I think.

I guess I took Hunter's comment as a prediction of large-scale return to liturgical traditions, but maybe I misunderstood. Still, there's a difference between appropriating some traditional elements and becoming Anglican or Catholic or Orthodox. I affirm much in those traditions, but some of my theological underpinnings preclude me from joining any of them as an adherent.

Scott, what a fantastic addition to this post! Thank you so much for sharing this vivid image. It's gonna stick with me for a long time.

Incidentally, I have a friend whose MFA project at Fuller is making a documentary movie about wine-making as a metaphor for faith. Your comments reminded me of his project.

Blessings.

I really agree with your assessment, both about the use of the word missional and the idea of a revival of religion. The symbols must be recast in order to function as sysmbols. Perhaps they can with a generation for who they are essentially a blank slate, and I'm sure that will be the case for certain temperament types. But as I consider it, I keep remembering something Don Williams has often said: "Religion is our last line of defense against the living God." Even if Todd is right, for how many people will it simply be that last line of defense?

Scott, thank you very much for providing an Australian perspective. Interestingly, I would say your description is startlingly similar to the U.S. situation.

Oh Tom, I know you generally disagree with me, and I'm fine with that, but it would be more helpful if you contributed the substance of your reasoning (back-handed flattery is not a support for your argument). I agree the word missional will likely turn out to be faddish or trendy, but that doesn't mean the discussion is unimportant. Faddish terms don't necessarily equate to faddish ideas. When language becomes trite - as it always does - and old terms evolve to connote faddish ideas, it's helpful to coin new terms in order to renew the discussion of older, more important ideas. That is what the missional conversation is all about. Maybe I'm wrong, but, if so, it would be helpful if you contributed an argument rather than merely a conclusion.

(Amusing indeed!) Those are great questions Steve, and worthy of a dedicated new thread someday om someone's blog.