There's a church in Seattle called Mars Hill -- founded by a guy named Mark Driscoll -- which is generally marked by its fierce commitment to Reformed (Calvinistic) theology, its high value on preaching as the foundation for ministry, and its sharp focus on developing men as church planters and church leaders.  If you've heard about Mars Hill and Mark Driscoll, you probably have an opinion about them.  People tend to love 'em or hate 'em.

I personally have mixed feelings about Mars Hill and Mark Driscoll.  I appreciate their theological rigor, and I admire the strength of their convictions.  I'm impressed by the way they embrace church history while simultaneously trying to contextualize their ministry for their environment.  And I'm generally a fan of anyone who is passionately pursuing God and seeking to make disciples for Jesus (which I certainly think that Mars Hill and Mark Driscoll are doing).  At times, though, I confess that I've been bothered by the subtle arrogance betrayed in the ways they express their convictions (perhaps more in earlier years than today).  I'm not a big fan of the current large church trends in "video campusing" (primarily because of the cult-of-personality and consumeristic overtones that go along with such a means of growing a church).  And while I seriously value the role of preaching in Christian ministry, I don't feel that it all starts and stops with preaching, like Mark Driscoll (and his fans) would probably tend to say.  None of these personal points of contention are enough to outweigh the good that Mars Hill is doing; I just personally favor a more grass-roots model of ministry which more meaningfully blends various spiritual gifts in a team-centered approach to church leadership.

Anyway, I say all this to set up an interesting article that I recently came across, written by the youth pastor at Mars Hill:  Dustin Nickerson).  The article is entitled, "Is Your Youth Group Accomplishing Anything?" and I'd say it's definitely worth a read (only 569 words long).  What's interesting about the article is the way that it undermines many of my points of critique of Mars Hill.  First of all, the article has a down-to-earth tone to it -- and it specifically makes a point to say that, "There is no perfect youth group playbook or set of procedures to follow if you want it all to 'work.'  The only perfect model is to walk daily in the Spirit, to be faithful to his leading in your life as a youth pastor, and to examine the Scriptures and let them be authoritative in how you decide to build your ministry."  I really appreciate that perspective, especially coming from Mars Hill.  Secondly, the current approach to their church's youth ministry, as described by Nickerson, seems to be very grass-roots, decentralized, and surprisingly shifted away from the attractional style of church that seems to be so epitomized in the preaching ministry of Mark Driscoll.  Does this mean a shift in the long-term trajectory of Mars Hill (and other churches like it)?  Not neccessarily.  But it is an interesting shift -- in Mark Driscoll's own church, no less!  Finally, I appreciate the focus on making disciples more than simply proclaiming the truth.  I've often asked the same question that Nickerson asked:  "My leaders had a heart to disciple, but how could they in 90 minutes that were filled with programming?"  Again, I don't know if this really means anything in the grander scheme of ministry -- but I'm encouraged to see that Mars Hill is earnestly trying to sort through these issues, in some ways that might be traditionally seen as being contrary to their more well-known approaches to church planting.

I've long felt a kind of allergic reaction to the campy attitudes that crop up around a particular style of ministry -- be it organic house churches or technology-driven mega-churches on the other end.  In our own church here in Amsterdam, we've tried to cull from numerous resources in creating a system and strategy that's uniquely suited to our people and our city.  But I guess I'm just saying that it's cool to see how one church -- which I would typically consider to be loudly championing a particular "camp" of ministry ideology -- is trying to break through the artificial distinctions and try to figure out what really works.  While we're all so busy in trying to find the right answer to the "multiple choice test" of ministry, in the end it seems that we might discover that the answer is "all of the above."