ABSTRACT
EVERY CAMPUS: BEST PRACTICES FOR STARTING NEW CAMPUS
MINISTRIES
by
Delvin Jevon Pikes
There is an enormous need in North America for renewal, but the challenge is to determine the most strategic place to engage, establish, equip and empower those with the energy, passion, and flexibility to take the gospel to the ends of the earth. This research assumes the answer is the college campus, historically a place with tremendous social and cultural influence to shape young future leaders, especially towards or away from Christ. If Jesus parabolically told His followers to leave the righteous ninety-nine for the rebellious and wayward one, then there is no better example of obeying this than by pursuing the average college student. If college students are the most strategic people to reach with the gospel, then Christ-followers should attempt to multiply their efforts to reach as many as possible in that generation. Similar to the need for both established churches and new church plants to reach the lost, there is a need for both existing campus ministries and fresh new ones to reach new people for Christ.
This research looks at taking this mindset of church planting multiplication and combining it with a vision of campus ministry multiplication. It explores the possibility of starting new campus ministries which are engaging, disciple-making communities on campuses. The church has left too large of a ripe harvest to the limited hands of a few parachurch and denominational campus outreaches while so many more millions of students’ faith rots on campuses.
Much has been written in the last thirty years on church planting, but not a lot has been written on campus ministry planting, nor has much been seen in combining the two in some fashion. As a ministry, Every Nation Churches and Ministries endeavors to start church-based campus ministries capable of impacting every student center in North
America. This research project was a means to discover best practices for starting these new campus ministries to see new students reached with the Gospel and see the glory due
His name in every square inch of creation.
This research project discovered, through qualitative data and analysis,
various practices which existed in staring a new campus ministry. The findings point to the importance of informal preparation in starting new campus ministries,
the transformative nature of starting a new campus ministry upon the campus
minister, the possibilities of extending missionary careers through starting new
campus ministries, and the average length of time of prior involvement before an
Every Nation Campus worker sought to start a new campus ministry.
EVERY CAMPUS:
BEST PRACTICES FOR STARTING NEW CAMPUS MINISTRIES
A Dissertation
Presented to the Faculty of
Asbury Theological Seminary
In Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Ministry
by
Delvin Jevon Pikes
May 2020
©2020
Delvin Pikes
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF FIGURES ...... vii
LIST OF TABLES ...... viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... ix
CHAPTER 1 NATURE OF THE PROJECT ...... 1
Overview of the Chapter ...... 1
Personal Introduction ...... 1
Statement of the Problem ...... 4
Purpose of the Project…………………….……………………………………….8
Research Questions ...... 8
Research Question #1 ...... 8
Research Question #2 ...... 9
Research Question #3 ...... 9
Rationale for the Project ...... 9
Definition of Key Terms ...... 12
Delimitations ...... 15
Review of Relevant Literature ...... 16
Research Methodology ...... 17
Type of Research ...... 18
Participants ...... 18
Instrumentation ...... 19
Data Collection ...... 19
iii
Data Analysis ...... 19
Generalizability ...... 20
Project Overview ...... 20
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW FOR THE PROJECT ...... 21
Overview of the Chapter ...... 21
Biblical Foundations ...... 21
The Missionary God ...... 21
Abraham as Missionary ...... 23
Israel as Missionary ...... 24
Jesus as Missionary ...... 26
The Church as Missionary ...... 27
Paul as Missionary ...... 28
Theological Foundations ...... 30
Paul as Campus Minister Missionary: A Theology of Campus Ministry .30
Christology ...... 32
Pneumatology ...... 35
Ecclesiology ...... 37
Missiology ...... 39
Campus as Missionary: The Origins of American Universities...... 40
Students as Missionary: The Birth of Modern Missions...... 43
Parachurch as Missionary: Rise of the Parachurch Movement...... 46
Church Planting as Missionary: A Return to the Campus ...... 48
Money as Missionary: Funding New Campus Ministries...... 52
iv
The Next Mission Force: Gen Z ...... 58
Starting a New Campus Ministry...... 62
Research Design Literature ...... 69
Summary of Literature ...... 70
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY FOR THE PROJECT ...... 71
Overview of the Chapter ...... 71
Nature and Purpose of the Project ...... 71
Research Questions ...... 71
Research Question #1 ...... 72
Research Question #2 ...... 72
Research Question #3 ...... 72
Ministry Context(s) ...... 73
Participants ...... 73
Criteria for Selection ...... 73
Description of Participants ...... 73
Ethical Considerations ...... 74
Instrumentation ...... 74
Procedure for Collecting Evidence from Participants ...... 75
Procedure for Analyzing the Evidence Collected ...... 76
Reliability & Validity of Project Design ...... 76
CHAPTER 4 EVIDENCE FOR THE PROJECT ...... 77
Overview of the Chapter ...... 77
Participants ...... 77
v
Research Question #1: Description of Evidence ...... 80
Research Question #2: Description of Evidence ...... 84
Research Question #3: Description of Evidence ...... 87
Summary of Major Findings ...... 90
CHAPTER 5 LEARNING REPORT FOR THE PROJECT ...... 91
Overview of the Chapter ...... 91
Major Findings ...... 91
First Finding ...... 91
Second Finding ...... 92
Third Finding ...... 93
Fourth Finding ...... 94
Ministry Implications of the Findings ...... 95
Limitations of the Study ...... 96
Unexpected Observations ...... 98
Recommendations ...... 98
Postscript ...... 99
APPENDIXES ...... 101
A. Interview Schedule and Questions ………………………………………….102
B. Participation Email and Informed Consent Form ...... 103
C. Document Analysis Form ...... 105
WORKS CITED ...... 106
WORKS CONSULTED ...... 116
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 2.1 Poe & Heie’s Academy 3 Position Relational Model for the Academy ...... 37
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 2.1 Fundraising Models Contrast ...... 57
Table 2.2 Comparison of Steps to Start Campus Ministry ...... 68
Table 4.1 Participant Demographics ...... 78
Table 4.2 Participants’ Exposure to Campus Ministry ...... 79
viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
To my wife Ginessa, thank you for your matchless love, sacrifice, and encouragement during every bit of this doctoral research journey. You are God’s greatest gift to me outside of Christ. I am daily thankful for the treasure you are to me, our family, and to the world. You play your MVP role so well, there is no one like you.
To my children Simeon, Judah, Eden, Elias, Selah, and Tobias may this research be a seed in the ground for you as you venture in the decades to come and you potentially head to a college if the Lord tarries. May there be a ministry waiting to meet you and help you grow during this important time of life.
To my parents Eugene and Veronica Pikes, my sisters Danielle and Vanessa, and my brother in law Adriel. I would not be much without your constant love and thoughtfulness. You have each been a blessing to us in this research journey. To my late father-in-law Gerald Laneaux, who passed a few months before I could finish this, may your legacy of faith and sacrifice be honored through this work. Thank you for showing me what it looks like to love others well and finish the race.
To the entire Asbury D.Min team of Dr. Milton Lowe, Dr. Verna Lowe, Dr.
Ellen Marmon, Dr. David Gyertson, and the administrative staff of Ashley Watson and
Lacey Craig. Your hearts from the first days we met has been to purely serve us students.
Thank you for leading the D.Min program with academic excellence and professionalism but also with a keen sense of personal and pastoral ministry. I have been greatly encouraged by your example in leading leaders.
ix
My dissertation coach Ken Nash who was gracious in more ways than I could have imagined while leading a growing church. Thank you for your patience and work with me to edit and shape my research through the past several years.
Thank you as well to my Asbury Seminary professors Dr. Dave Ward, Dr. Tom
Tumblin, Dr. Russell West, Dr. Joe Dongell, Dr. Jeff Frymire, Dr. Gregg Okesson, Dr.
Steve Seamands, and Dr. Randy Jensen. You challenged me to become a better preacher, minister, and leader who not only finished assignments but sought to be transformed through them. You have each enriched me in significant ways.
My local church family at Bethel World Outreach Church including Dr. Rice
Broocks, Pastor James and Debbie Lowe, Pastors Bruce and Carol Fidler, and the rest of the Bethel staff for their encouragement in this time and pointing me to Jesus and His
Word continually.
My beloved ministry partners who have prayed and financially invested to fulfill the Great Commission with my family through the years. We have truly been better together with you and your spiritual partnership. I especially want to thank Ed and Carol
Britton for their generosity which enabled me to finish my research during the last stretch.
My Every Nation family that has encouraged me to continue in my many hours of research and writing in the middle of my ministry assignment and family responsibilities. Thank you to our Every Nation Campus North America National
Director, Nick Jones, who graciously allowed me time to work on this project in the middle of a busy season of campus work. I especially am grateful for the “Asbury 8” of
Dr. Steve Murrell, Dr. David Houston, Dr. Manny Carlos, Dr. Noel Lancho, Dr. Nixon
x
Ng, Dr. Chris Johnson, and Dr. Brian Taylor. You men have been a great joy to personally learn from, and I look forward to seeing how God uses our time together to make a greater impact on the nations to the glory of God. We are forever “from Asbury brothers.”
An immeasurable thank you to Ron David Moore and Franco Gennaro who stepped into my life with their families when I was a college student to share Christ, baptize me, and open their homes to learn what it looks like to follow Him. I have no clue where I would be if you would not have obeyed God to fulfill the Great Commission and start a church near my campus in faith. I am eternally grateful for your years of investment and patience with me.
Lastly, to every person who has ever labored or is currently laboring to reach college students on the campuses of our world playing your part as “some sow, some water, but God gives the increase” (1 Corinthians 3:6-9). Thank you for your perseverance, faith, and obedience to see the glory due the Lamb brought to the frontlines in our culture!
xi Pikes 1
CHAPTER 1
NATURE OF PROJECT
Overview of the Chapter
What follows is an introduction to the research project, which was devoted to gaining a clearer insight into the field of starting new campus ministries. After the introduction is an examination of the ministry problem which spawned the research.
Finally, the purpose of the project is stated, as well as the specific research questions it answered which were developed in alignment with the purpose. This all shaped the results of this project in unique ways which are summarized at the end of this chapter.
Personal Introduction
I was talking to a college student who was a seven-hour drive away from me of nearly four hundred miles. He had been impacted by our annual Every Nation Campus student conference alongside hundreds of others and I had been in contact with him in the weeks that followed. He had been growing in his faith and a passion to live His life on mission for God. I was enjoying our periodic talks as he sought to become more like
Christ, but I will never forget the day in which his growth challenged me.
On one particular discipleship focused phone call in 2017, he asked me out of the blue, “So, when are we going to start an Every Nation Campus chapter here on my campus?” I paused before answering as my mental wheels turned. I looked down at the trendy gray rubber bracelet on my wrist imprinted with one of our ministry catchphrases which we gave out to students as swag gifts. Its wording was inspired from a message by one of our ministry’s co-founders spoken back in 2010 that read simply, Every Nation.
Every Campus. (Every Nation videos, 00:16:43 – 00:23:34) It was then that I asked
Pikes 2 myself, “Was this just going to be a nice slogan or become a reality? Are we really going to reach every campus? And if so, how?”
At that time, even though I was serving the role of Central Region Coordinator for our national church-based campus ministry called Every Nation Campus, if I was honest I really did not have a clue what to tell him on how we would start a new chapter on his campus that far away that would be sustainable. My faith knew it was possible, but
I began to get the slow sinking feeling that our current ministry systems and structures were not designed to anticipate walking through this open door on a new campus this far away.
In many ways I felt unprepared to tell him how we could go about starting a new campus ministry because in our region we had only started two chapters successfully in the past decade in a new locale but none without a partnering Every Nation local church being physically nearby. Since we had no plans anytime soon to start a new church in his midwestern town I really had no clue what to do next outside of moving myself and my family to help him directly. It was then I remembered this was not the first time I had felt like this.
Rewind about six years earlier to another scenario in my ministry life. It was the year 2011, and from April 25th through 28th the largest outbreak of tornados in United
States history occurred at the time. A record 360 tornados ravaged a large part of several southeastern states causing destruction and casualties across Alabama. At the time I was our lone full-time Every Nation Campus missionary at Middle Tennessee State
University (MTSU) and was only a couple of years into helping our local Every Nation church, Bethel Community Church, be replanted in Murfreesboro, Tennessee after a
Pikes 3 pastoral change. Following a special relief benefit concert in Birmingham, one of my spiritual mentors Dr. Rice Broocks had a moment to briefly speak before leading a time of prayer in a filled stadium. He felt the prompting from the Holy Spirit to ask every college student in the room to stand up and to pray for them specifically.
He prayed, “Lord, we pray for the victims of this tragedy, but we also pray for these students who have spiritual tornadoes hit their lives on campus every day.” This led to a time of ministry where over fifty students came forward declaring they wanted to find out more about how to live for Jesus and reach their campus for Christ. After collecting some basic contact information, it was discovered these students attended over
20 different campuses across Alabama. The next question was, now what do we do next with them? We decided to focus our efforts on Tuscaloosa and the University of Alabama where we had some other connections and sought to rally some of those students together to see a new faith community be established there on campus.
The summer after that powerful springtime concert we hosted a one-night outreach at the University of Alabama during which I was called upon to help be the face of our ongoing efforts there. This led to several trips over the following school year by myself to meet students and identify those who could lead there, all while I was also staying fully engaged to reach out to MTSU.
By the next school year, we had identified a married couple with previous ministry experience who agreed to move to Tuscaloosa to help to lead the ministry. I still took several trips to help as this ministry got started, but they shouldered the load of following up individually with every student contact there and moving this new group forward. After one school year, this couple shared the gospel considerably with students
Pikes 4 and ended up baptizing 25 students which was more than they had ever baptized previously in one school year!
Despite all of the momentum that happened during that year at the University of
Alabama, the campus ministry was not able to be sustained past that school year. Despite pastoral oversight from a distance, a combination of relational challenges, personal loss, a lack of a larger team with them, and a lack of a local church partnership on the ground ultimately spelled the end of this ministry work. The couple moved back home and dissolved the ministry there, encouraging existing students to get involved with other churches and ministries there in town.
Like most who step out to serve the Lord, I entered ministry to honor Christ and serve others, but I cannot help but think of all I have learned outside of a traditional classroom environment. As I consider the aforementioned scenarios, I realize how much of campus ministry is on the job training, decision making, and adaptive leadership in learning to be attentive to what the Lord is doing day-to-day and semester-to-semester in students’ lives. Most of my formal training in ministry covered Biblical and theological studies, missiology, prayer, preaching, and leading. In many ways, much of my training has been to grow or maintain existing ministries, not start new ones. This consideration reveals the huge tension in my current ministry structures, the desire to continue to build higher can fight against the desire to build wider.
Statement of the Problem
Most ministers feel the weight of the world at some point because they deal with the depth of sin on a daily basis while simultaneously holding fast to the Good News that can heal the world. The sheer number of spiritually lost, harassed, and helpless people in
Pikes 5 in the cities and nations of the world is enough to discourage even the most hopeful in the profession over time. Most ministers in America do not spend much time in an ordinary week with crowds of hundreds or even thousands of people in need of real ministry, but there are some who do every single day: college campus ministers. Most campus ministers are surrounded daily by thousands of young students, of whom it is estimated only 4% presently have a Biblical worldview (Barna 25). The issue is, not only are they not knowledgeable about Biblical information, these students now trust their feelings more than objective facts, with no anchor to keep them steady through the storms of life.
This sea of lostness produces an ongoing tyranny of the urgent in the world of campus ministry. Ministers and ministries can easily feel overwhelmed by the combination of the massive needs of thousands of students, a shortage of time, potential underfunding, and a shortage of staff and volunteers. Ministries react to these influences in a variety of ways. They maybe change leadership teams or strategies, focus on reaching a small uninfluential group on campus, or simply maintain decades old programming. All of these can leave the vision for reaching students focused on addition and subtraction on one campus. It is hard to focus on multiplying a ministry beyond the present context when there is enough work remaining there, especially considering the new wave of students each semester or quarter. The missionary impulse to reach a particular campus can lead to seeing that campus as an unfinished place and diminish any impulse to consider more ministry on a new campus.
One of the problems facing campus ministry today is the predominately held way to increase the number of students being reached is to increase the number of full- time staff on campuses where there are longstanding ministries. Re-staffing campus
Pikes 6 chapters has been much of the focus for the past decade in the Central Region of Every
Nation Campus, rather than looking beyond current chapters to start new church-based, campus-focused ministries. If the best form of evangelism is to plant a church with groups like the Southern Baptist experiencing three times the number of baptisms in new churches versus established ones, then starting new campus ministries on new campuses has the potential to reach new students as well (Stetzer and Bird 25). The issue at the heart of this project is discovering the best practices on starting a new campus ministry, on a new campus, reaching new students in a new place.
Jesus has made it clear that His followers are to be the “salt of the earth” (The
Holy Bible, Matthew 5:13). Salt has long been known as a healing agent, a great additive for flavor in food, and for its ability to preserve meat. One of salt’s uses in the ancient world was also as a fertilizer (Bradley 72-77). Salt was used to help plants grow, but it had to be sown first in order to benefit both existing plants and newly planted ones. Jesus wants His followers to be used for more than themselves; He wants them to be sown into the lives of others as well.
In order to become “salt” as campus ministries it is not enough to build existing ministries larger. The goal must be as well to grow God’s kingdom on other campuses in order to see more students grow into Christlikeness. To continue to better fertilize the soil of higher education with the Gospel these ministries must spread to places where the gospel has not presently taken root. With most college campuses seeing a maximum of five percent of the student body involved in campus ministry, there is a need for more ministry to happen on every campus to reach more students (Shadrach Heart of Campus
7). While technical aspects of ministry such as homiletics, hermeneutics, biblical
Pikes 7 orthodoxy, and relevance to youth culture are important for new campus ministers, so too is having an expansive global vision, an understanding of organizational dynamics and a willingness to take risks. Moving towards impacting more campuses for Christ can develop these qualities as we consider the multitude of other campuses that need to be reached in America and beyond.
While every local church should consider how they can reach college students within their reach, sadly not every church values the difference they can make by investing in this transient population. In order for this to happen there must be a vision to not wait upon students to come to local churches, but rather a missional move to go to them. This can only happen as the whole church gets mobilized to reach the whole world in their community, which in many ways is right down the street in thousands of
American cities on the college campus.
While this is a tremendous vision which takes significant supernatural and natural resources to attempt, it often gets overlooked how influential students can be in influencing other students on campuses not their own. For this reason, students should be seen as both a mission field and as a mission force to impact this world for Christ.
Students can be effective reaching other campuses because they are often viewed as
“interesting outsiders” whom are refreshing to connect with for those who are attending a particular school. Outside of conferences, retreats, spring break or summer mission trips, and other summer outreach projects there can be a lack of a clear way for students to be a part of something bigger than themselves, their campus, church or campus ministry.
Students, campus staff, and volunteers need to see themselves as missionaries not just to their campus, but also to their generation.
Pikes 8
A student’s college years can be seen as preparation for the ultimate mission trip, living and serving Christ off campus as an alum wherever He sends them. A great use of the two to four years on campus is for a student to not only develop a strong identity in Christ, but also to properly be prepared and sent to be on mission for Christ when they leave their campus culture. In many ways this can happen as a student has the opportunity to engage not only their campus, but also another campus community and experience what God is doing on another campus.
Purpose of the Project
The purpose of this research project was to discover best practices for starting and sustaining new campus ministries by which new Every Nation Campus chapters can be developed in the central region of America.
Research Questions
Any research project is not just looking to gather data, but data that will help shed light on answers to a question or problem. Each of the following questions were used to aid this research by shedding some light towards the purpose of starting new campuses ministries. The following three research questions were addressed through this research on best practices for starting new campus ministries:
Research Question #1- According to campus ministry leaders who have established campus ministries and maintained them for at least two years, what factors contribute most to the starting and sustaining of effective campus ministries?
Pikes 9
The data to answer this question was gathered by means of semi-structured online interviews via Zoom video conferencing software, observations of select campus ministries and evaluating printed materials and other resources.
Research Question #2- According to campus ministry leaders who have established campus ministries and maintained them for at least two years, what obstacles most hinder the starting and sustaining of effective campus ministries?
The data to answer this question was also gathered by means of semi-structured online interviews via Zoom video conferencing software, observations of select campus ministries and evaluating printed materials and other resources.
Research Question #3 –Moving forward, what are best practices for starting and sustaining effective campus ministries in order to bolster the development and longevity of new Every Nation Campus chapters in the central region of America?
The data to answer this question was gathered from a synthesis of the answers to the first two research questions in addition to information drawn from the Literature
Review in Chapter 2.
Rationale for the Project
The first reason for this project was tactical in nature. Many students spend their college years drifting from their faith even if they had a solid faith before leaving for college. With this work there is the opportunity to impact tomorrow, today for Christ.
According to the National Center for Educational Statistics, for the 2018-19 school year about 19.8 million students enrolled in 4,042 degree granting institutions in United States of America (U.S. Dept. of Education Digest of Education Stats, 2019). Each one of these students represents the next wave of educators, politicians, engineers, entrepreneurs,
Pikes 10 artists, lawyers, medical professionals, and industry leaders who will influence every area of society.
Changing the campus can change the world, because the world is already coming to the doorstep of campuses in the form of international students (Broocks Every
Nation 137; Phillips et. al 48). In a time of unprecedented global migration due to war, sickness, poverty, and globalization, college students represent a slice of the greater global diaspora for missions (Okesson, slide). If ministry begins to happen on campuses among students, many can enter into the various streams of culture ready to lead driven by their faith, hope and love.
The second reason for this project is Biblical. The Psalmist says, “One generation commends your works to another; they tell of your mighty acts” (Psalm
145:4). Though King David is attributed to these words, they also articulate a proper response for anyone who loves Jesus as King. Until Jesus returns, Christianity will always be one generation away from extinction so there is a necessity to transfer a love of the King who acts mightily. This Biblical mandate is embedded in the Great Commission fueled by the Great Commandment: to help make disciplined followers of Christ who love God with everything and love our neighbor as oneself (Matthew 22:36-40; 28:18-
20). The Great Commission was to be fulfilled by those filled with God’s Spirit who are willing to follow Christ and be sent by His authority and power to disciple those from all nations (Mark 16:15; John 20:21-22; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:4-5, 8). This project is about spreading this knowledge of God to the group in America most likely to spend formative years drifting from God while not having a Biblical worldview: college students (Barna
Pikes 11
17; Powell et al. 17). Biblically speaking, the goal of this project is to bring fame to Jesus among the nations spreading the reality and experience of the love of God.
The third reason for this project was organizational. As the researcher served as a Regional Director for 3 years with Every Nation Campus from 2016 through 2018, it was noticed the region was in need of a process to reach more campuses. Much of the regional work starting new campus ministries had been through trial and error, which is understandable with any new ministry among transient college students. To develop this system the continued humility that comes from learning from others was sought. This included discovering what has more recently been working in terms of impacting the ever-changing mission field of college students while also organizationally examining existing systems and models for launching new campus ministries. As of November
2019, there were 142 full-time campus missionaries leading 65 official Every Nation
Campus chapters in America, with an additional 40 campuses having unofficial status, meaning at least one student on that campus was being impacted despite no official chapter being present (Barker). This means 3,937 campuses in America remain to impact in order to realize the vision of impacting every campus in America, and this does not even consider the other 191 countries in the world! This project was undertaken to aid the organization as it continues to launch new campus ministries, as well as bless those outside the ministry who desire to impact more students for Christ as well.
The fourth reason for this project was financial. There is much to be gained from this project in the realm of the stewardship of resources. Ministry and missionary activity cost money, and since campus ministries are funded typically by individuals, organizations, and churches who are non-students there is a real need for donor dollars to
Pikes 12 be used wisely and strategically. Every missionary needs to be in their mission field as quickly as possible and to stay as long as the Lord is desiring. If a donor feels their money is not making a difference, they will most likely simply stop giving. This project seeks to aid every financial ministry partner by allowing them to have greater confidence in new ministry launching projects which are undergirded by research.
Finally, this project aimed to be developmental. The field of campus ministry is not frequently researched or written about, so this project is a humble attempt to further progress in this field of work. Campus ministry is a truly frontline ministry on the edge of the future of culture and can be continued if not careful without long-term thinking. Often the goal can be to work incredibly hard just to see an existing campus ministry grow.
This project was developed to challenge this thinking beyond “ministry addition or subtraction” and move towards “ministry multiplication.” The desire is not merely for more students to be gathered in crowds to be entertained or better informed, but for more students to be Biblically equipped and empowered by the Holy Spirit to be sent into all of the world. The developmental goal is not just to multiply ministries but also to multiply missionaries to every sphere of society by impacting students on new campuses.
Prayerfully, an increased amount of campus ministry will happen on new campuses as a result of this research.
Definition of Key Terms
Campus Ministry
A ministry designed to impact college students with the power of the gospel specifically, with an orientation towards reaching the entire campus community as a result. This ministry is focused on the physical location(s) of the university or college
Pikes 13 because this is where students typically spend significant portions of their time studying, training, learning, conversing and building community. This ministry can take many forms depending on the theological stream, context, gifts of the leaders, number of staff, volunteers, and number of students involved. Students, faculty, chaplains, parachurch workers, church staff, volunteers, or lay church members may all be involved in this type of work.
The Gospel
“The good news is that God became man in Jesus Christ, living the life we should have lived (perfectly keeping the moral law); He then died the death we should have died (for breaking the law). Three days later He rose from the dead, proving He is the Son of God and offering the gift of salvation to everyone who will repent and believe the gospel” (Broocks God’s Not Dead xvi).
Every Nation
A denomination of global ministries and churches founded in 1994 that exists to honor God by establishing Christ-centered, Spirit-empowered, Socially responsible churches and campus ministries in every nation.
Every Nation Campus
A worldwide church-based campus ministry which serves campus communities and Every Nation Churches seeking to engage, establish, equip, and empower college communities to follow Jesus and help their world follow Christ.
Every Nation Campus Chapter
A campus with at least a presence of a delegated Every Nation Campus staff member, church volunteer or student leader(s) with some level of oversight by the
Pikes 14 leadership from an Every Nation church. Each chapter is typically a registered student organization and recognized by the school.
Best Practices
What tends to be effective in sequence and/or practice. It also involves the habits and attitudes worthy of emulating by others. These do not guarantee success because God is infinitely creative, but they do establish some general guiding principles and processes to consider.
Starting
Includes a college or university where there has not been an Every Nation campus chapter previously or recently. Starting a ministry can begin in a variety of ways, but the goal in starting is to see “disciples making disciples” be the result.
Sustaining
Seeing a campus community be impacted by the gospel and, as a result, seeing students become leaders on their campus so that spiritual momentum continues beyond initial relational and gospel engagement.
Central Region
An area of America loosely defined as the states within Every Nation’s cluster in the central region of the country. This currently includes Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio,
Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois.
Church Planting
A view of expanding the gospel’s impact through starting new churches with a view towards starting other new churches. This is currently embraced as the greatest form of evangelism to reach the unchurched and unengaged. These new churches are
Pikes 15 considered sending centers not only of addition but of multiplication for the gospel locally, nationally and internationally.
College Town
A town in which college student life as a whole hugely impacts the population, economy, real estate, and social life of its residents by the sheer presence of the campus(es) in the town.
Metro Area
A metropolitan city in which college student life does not hugely impact the population, economy, real estate, and social life of its residents by the sheer presence of the campus(es) in the city.
Large College or University
An accredited school of higher learning with enrollment of over 10,000 students.
Midsize College or University
An accredited school of higher learning with enrollment of 4,000-9,999 students.
Small College or University
An accredited school of higher learning with enrollment of 100-3,999 students.
Delimitations
Participants were college ministry leaders who personally helped start a campus ministry since 2004 which lasted more than two years. This eliminated from the research anyone who had simply inherited a previously established campus ministry or who had started one that did not last longer than a year. Further limits were placed by excluding non-leading staff, laymen or laywomen in the research, even if they had experience or
Pikes 16 played a critical role in starting new campus ministries. There is room for future research to be done which includes these important individuals as well as students who played a role in helping new campus ministries begin.
Review of Relevant Literature
This literature review covers many books and articles spanning the fields of
American university history, campus ministry, church planting practices, current college student culture, leadership theories, and organizational dynamics. One of the largest studies done on campus ministry in the 20th century was produced by Kenneth
Underwood for the Danforth Foundation in 1969. The study attempted to look at how ministry and the academy come together to effect social policy. Though his conclusion landed toward a more secular, ecumenical approach to ministry, one of the most helpful insights was seeing the role of campus ministry in the Biblical terms of being pastoral, prophetic, priestly, and governance or kingly (Portaro and Peluso 149; Shockley 98;
McCormick 80-88). The study, though dated by its time of print, was nonetheless influential in examining campus ministry from a multi-faceted perspective.
In America the overall secularization of the public and private university system, combined with a decline in church membership and the rise of the “nones,” has left many ministry leaders struggling with their role impacting students on the college campus (Pew
Research; Barna 81; White Rise of Nones 23). This contrasts with the church in the
Global South growing and multiplying at a staggering pace in a time of worldwide migration (Okesson, slides; Escobar 28). While much has been written in the past thirty years on the field of starting new churches to address these problems in North America, little has been written in the area of starting new campus ministries to combat the decline
Pikes 17 through the proclamation and demonstration of the Gospel in community (Ma 226;
Shadrach Launching 69; Broocks Man, Myth, Messiah 229). The literature on college students has been limited to exploring generational shifts in worldview and documenting increases in mental health issues, such as anxiety as the first generation to grow up with smartphones (Twenge loc 61; White Meet Gen Z 43; Barna 80). While helpful, these descriptive writings are not prescriptive enough to incarnationally engage a digital generation who have left their homes and often their faith to be prepared for the future in college.
The history of American college campuses as well as noteworthy revivals on them show the importance of this phase of life being used by God to spark societal changes in areas such as global missions, denominational growth, political progress, family structures, and moral standards (Escobar 51; Shockley 21; Ahrend 20-21).
Campus ministry offers an environment to practice something future-oriented: the training of upcoming spiritual leaders to be adaptive and adopt a process-oriented mindset which is essential for renewal in churches and society as a whole (Keller, loc
150; Friedman 304, Parks, 53) It is imperative to crack the missional code of every campus to see new movements of Christ-centered, Spirit-empowered, socially- responsible students take their faith into a global, digital world (Putman and Stetzer 232;
Addison Change World 77; Murrell 100 Years 27). This will take courage and supernatural help in this time of significant cultural change.
Research Methodology
The following is an examination of the methodology used for this research. The type of research, participants, instrumentation used, data collection steps, data analysis,
Pikes 18 and generalizability are all covered. This research was prepared in order to avoid causing harm while admitting and eliminating bias in the collection of data. Data for this project was collected over the course of thirty-seven days with thirteen interviews of those who had started new campus ministries. Qualitative data was gathered to determine best practices for starting new campus ministries.
Type of Research
This research was pre-intervention, mixed-methods, and qualitative. Tools used included semi-structured interviews, document analysis, and field notes. Participants were selected for their experience in starting campus ministries which lasted longer than two years. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to determine answers to the established research questions.
Participants
The participants for this study were ministry workers who worked among college students and who had started new campus ministries which lasted longer than two years. These participants were able to give unique insights as practitioners with the vantage point of starting a campus ministry where there had not been one previously. The participants for this study were thirteen parachurch workers, bi-vocational ministers, and church-based campus ministers across ten states in the United States. These participants were all college-educated and worked on campuses which were public, private-secular, private-Christian, and community colleges. The size of these campuses ranged from an enrollment of about 2,000 to over 40,000 in fall 2019. All but one of the participants were male. All but two were Caucasian, with those two being African American. The age range of the participants at the time of starting the ministry was 20 to 38 years old.
Pikes 19
Instrumentation
This research used various forms of instrumentation to collect data according to the research purpose. Semi-structured interviews consisting of over twenty-one questions, along with participant observation, produced significant field notes. They were used to pull the narratives together of why and how each participant started new ministries to impact students as well as determine what was implemented to sustain this new ministry. Printed materials, articles, websites, and training documents were also consulted from each ministry to analyze as another layer of data. The interview schedule and questions can be found in
Appendix A and a document analysis form can be found in Appendix C.
Data Collection
Potential participants were contacted about the criteria for the research project among college workers and sent consent forms via email. Thirteen participants were then interviewed individually through semi-structured interviews with questions aligned with the research purpose statement. The narrative data was collected via recorded video and audio from Zoom meetings and then transcribed for later analysis.
Data Analysis
The research for this project was a pre-intervention, qualitative, mixed methods in order to ascertain best practices for starting new campus ministries. This led the researcher to use semi-structured interviews, document analysis and other related materials for the data for study.
This project examined the narratives from those who were in the trenches leading and starting campus ministries yet were able to see them sustained beyond two years. This allowed for a unique set of narrative data to arise for analysis. Common
Pikes 20 phrases, themes, categories, and stages of development of new campus ministries were examined across the participants’ interviews, as well information from document analysis to determine best practices to see new campus ministries started.
Generalizability
This research could be of use to pastors and campus ministers seeking to establish new college ministry works on new college campuses. There is also some use of these findings for anyone taking over an existing ministry in a new context or relaunching a campus ministry that had previously been dormant. Additionally, this research might be of use to anyone new to working in the field of campus ministry. This project was significant because in the field of campus and college ministry little has been studied or written on how to start new ministries, as oftentimes college ministers do not stay in the field long enough to write about what was intuitive to them and pass their experiences on to those coming behind them (Hines 31). This project allowed other’s experiences to be passed on to those coming behind them to minister to college students.
Project Overview
This project examined best practices for starting new campus ministries. The first chapter was an overview of the entire project. Chapter Two looked at current literature related to the project and research questions, as well as the Biblical and theological foundations which undergirded the research. Chapter Three outlined various ways the researcher investigated the questions pertaining to the goals of the project.
Chapter Four showed the qualitative information from the data collected. Chapter Five looked at the major findings and future implications from this study.
Pikes 21
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW FOR THE PROJECT
Overview of the Chapter
This chapter examined the Biblical and theological foundations for starting new campus ministries, as well as reviewed relevant writings, research, and articles. The review of the literature surrounding the topic enabled key insights to inform the research questions and the data collection phase of the research. The Biblical, theological, and thematic elements of
Biblical Foundations
This research project assumed the Bible as the foundational book not only for this project but also for all of life and ministry. One cannot take serious consideration of spiritual matters without examining and understanding what Scripture says. What follows is an examination of the major Biblical themes in the pages of Scripture which connect to this research project and the study of best practices for the starting of new campus ministries. The term “mission” is based on the Latin root “missio” which means sending
(Guder 13). One of the themes found throughout scripture pertaining to the research topic is missionary work being done by God and by extension His people.
The Missionary God
“In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth” is how the familiar opening verse of the Bible begins (Genesis 1:1). This can be viewed as merely introductory language to display the eternal existence of God, but it also demonstrates what type of God is in this book. God’s uniqueness can be seen through what He creates as well as how He creates. Genesis 1 shows God creating the universe through His word,
Pikes 22 while Genesis 2 shows God creating through His hands. These are two accounts of the same creation narrative and show God creating both through His words and His hands.
This orderly, creative, authoritative God not only sends in His creating, He sends His created image on a global mission to subdue the Earth (Genesis 1:28). To use the phrase of missiologist David Bosch, this is a missionary God, which makes the Bible a missionary book (Bosch 390). The one who does the sending displays His authority through relational commands while also creating a world on purpose with purpose.
The assignment given to Adam and Eve was so large it was not to be attempted alone but through the partnership found in marriage, childbearing, and parenting as the first family was instructed to “subdue” the plants and animals as they “fill” the Earth, two words that echo the reality of the God giving the command (Genesis 1:26-28; 2:18).
Subduing and filling can be thought of as extensions of the very image of God over nature and created things. God was sending His likeness in humanity to do and act as He would on the Earth. Adam and Eve were destined to multiply themselves in order to fulfill their roles as the image bearers of Yahweh who would rule over all of creation on
Earth by reflecting His nature and character (Wright 50).
This future promise is in jeopardy when sin and rebellion enter into God’s good creation. When Adam and Eve rebel, their new knowledge of good and evil bring palpable uncertainty to the text. It is not clear if God will send His word to create again and if fallen humanity will still be sent to accomplish their mission. God does send His word again, but this time God sends Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden, with new consequences because of their sin and clear promises despite their sin. There would be a
“seed” that would come forth that would crush the head of the serpent (Genesis 3:15).
Pikes 23
Though the first couple is removed from Eden, the promises of God go with them as they are sent east. The narratives of Genesis continue with one of the first main characters to the book, Abram who would become Abraham.
Abraham as Missionary
Abram is a man born to parents living in the city of Haran who were headed to
Canaan but never made it (Genesis 11:31). Key to the life of Abram is the idea that God is not merely calling Him into relationship with Himself, but that He is sending Abram on a larger mission. This mission is to be partly fulfilled through him becoming a father to a promised child and will be fulfilled as his children have children. The other part of this promise was to be fulfilled in the land God promised to give Abraham as well (Genesis
12:7; 15:7, 18-21; 17:8). The Apostle Paul would later say God was announcing the gospel in advance to Abraham in which he was told, “all nations will be blessed through you” (Galatians 3:8). God’s blessing was to give Abraham a people and a place for this blessing to flow through.
This is connected to the rest of the Abrahamic narrative that follows because it shows God not merely selecting a man to be blessed in the world but also sending a blessing through a man to be delivered to the world. God sent Abraham as a father, to
“father many nations” while also calling his wife Sarah to be “the mother of many nations,” thereby blessing the entire world through them both (Genesis 17:4, 5, 15, 16).
This sending of an individual and of a blessing together for the sake of others resounds as extremely personal and corporate, not just for Abraham and Sarah, but also for the whole world as recipients of the one who is sent.
Pikes 24
There are glimpses of him walking in his purpose of “sentness” in Genesis.
Abraham is the first mentioned in scripture as praying for healing from barrenness for
Abimelek, a local pagan ruler, even though Abraham and Sarah were at the time still barren (Genesis 20:17,18). He was a blessing to his nephew Lot by rescuing him from being a prisoner of war and from the eventual destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah
(Genesis 14:1-16; 18:16-19; 19:1-29). He is blessed in some of his most difficult moments, such as being asked to sacrifice his son Isaac where protection for his son and provision for a sacrifice are provided (Genesis 22:1-18).
God even blesses Abraham in his missteps. Instead of waiting for the promise of a child with his wife, they conspire in their own wisdom to have a child through their servant Hagar. After Sarah conceives God gave her child the promise of numerous descendants even though she and the child would ultimately not live in Abraham’s household (Genesis 16:1-10; 21:8-21). Even the two times Abraham tells white lies about his wife being his sister to the kings of Egypt and Gerar they end up blessing him with livestock and servants after discovering the truth (Genesis 12:10-20; 13:1,2; 20:1-18). All of this confirms the promises which God declared in sending Abraham to be blessed, so that he could be blessing to all nations.
Israel as Missionary
While the promise to bless the world was uniquely given to Abraham, his descendants multiplied to form a nation known as Israel which was “as numerous as the stars of the sky and the sand of the seashore” as God has promised (Genesis 15:5; 22:15-
18). The Israelites were chosen not because of their power, influence, or beauty but because of God’s great mercy, grace, and faithfulness (Deuteronomy 7:7-9). While
Pikes 25 calling this people to himself, God declares they would be like a sun that would be a light to the nations (Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6; Isaiah 60:3; Acts 13:47; Acts 26:23). The story of the Old Testament continues with God preparing these people to walk in His purposes in in full view of the world.
Israel’s unique role in history was to be those who trusted in God despite the many other corrupt nations serving other false gods and idols. The laws for worship, governing, and living given to Moses by God were partly to help them stand unique, holy and set apart like the God they served, in the middle of these nations (Leviticus 19:2). In many ways this concept of being a “kingdom of priests” was their primary function in the
Old Testament. The mission of God’s people was communal towards one another while also being outward towards the world. In this way we can view Israel as having a centrifugal and centripetal mission (Okoye 12; Wright 96). They were sent again by
God’s word and hand to be a peculiar people.
As the children of Israel continued to adventure with their God, they were brought both into and out of a land that was promised. They would be sent to plant themselves in the middle of a promised land where other nations, and even giants, lived.
There they were forced to fight to drive these giants out and depend on God’s promises not just to gain the land but to stay in the land. They find prosperity and victory for a season as they attempt to live out the mission for which they are sent, but ultimately their sin and rebellion against God cause their humbling eviction from the land and into exile.
Even in their being sent away from the promised land, God sends His word again through the prophets and declares His sovereign plan to send them back to Jerusalem and the
Pikes 26 promised land again (Jeremiah 29:1-11). The mission was not over because the Messiah was still to come in the most unlikely of ways.
Jesus as Missionary
Jesus appears on the scene of the New Testament as one sent by God (John
6:38). He comes in an unassuming yet miraculous birth as the fulfillment of many things that God had promised centuries beforehand. Through His genealogy, birth, life, earthly ministry, death, and resurrection He fulfilled many Old Testament prophecies (Genesis
3:15; Psalm 16:8-11; Isaiah 7:14; Jeremiah 31:31; Isaiah 53:1-12; Zechariah 9:9;
11:12,13; 12:10; Hosea 11:1; Micah 5:2). His life, ministry, and death recounted through the four gospel witnesses show a life lived with a clear purpose even from a young age
(Luke 2:41-52).
Jesus not only lived out His purpose, He seemed to consistently refer to instructions He was given to help Him avoid any missteps along the way (John 5:19, 20;
8:28; 14:31; Matthew 26:39). Despite the temptation to miss His purpose along the way,
He managed to stay on task and walk perfectly in line with what the Father desired
(Matthew 4:1-11, Luke 18:31-34).
Scripture speaks of Jesus being sent to the house of Israel, even sending His disciples there (Matthew 15:24; 10:5,6). Though He was the savior of the world, His intention was to focus on ministering to those He was sent to, while also teaching a few personally how to minister and giving them the name “apostle”, which means “sent ones.” Their calling to be sent by Him to minister was within His focus when they were originally called to walk with Him (Luke 6:12-16). Jesus spent His three-year ministry in an intentional manner grounded in the secure identity, mission, and focus found in
Pikes 27 serving, loving, and teaching those the Heavenly Father gave Him to go to (John 13:3).
This ministry and life came to a culmination on the cross as Jesus finished the purpose for which He was sent and exclaims with His last breath, “It is finished!” (John 19:30) With
His death there was a sense that the mission was finished when it was really just beginning.
The Church as Missionary
Though Jesus rose from the dead three days after being crucified, it would be another forty days until He would ascend to be with the Father. The mission He came for seemed to be slowed by His insistence that the disciples wait in Jerusalem to receive power from on high, but the promised gift of the Holy Spirit was finally poured out on all of the disciples on the Day of Pentecost (Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:4,8). This gave the previously scared disciples a boldness and spiritual giftedness they had previously not had. After Peter boldly preached, three thousand multi-cultural Jews repented and the first church was started in Jerusalem, the very place where they had grieved and mourned when Jesus had died there just fifty days earlier. The response to Peter’s sermon showed how the apostles had been sent to gather a people set a part for God from every tongue, tribe, and nation.
The original promise of the Holy Spirit came with the instruction that they would receive power to be witnesses “in Judea, Samaria and to the ends of the earth”
(Acts 1:8). The power of the Holy Spirit was not merely to witness in Jerusalem, it would aid them as they were sent all over the world to testify to the truth of Christ’s resurrection. Power was available as they were sent out by His authority and with His presence to make disciples and teach them to obey Jesus (Matthew 28:18-20).
Pikes 28
This sending of the apostles is seen throughout the rest of the book of Acts as
God sends those impacted by the gospel and filled with the Holy Spirit to teach, pray, fellowship, preach, prophesy, testify, perform miracles, and even be martyred in the name of the Lord. The impact this has through the whole of Judea is significant, with over five thousand eventually described as coming to faith in Christ, many of whom had been visiting from other nations. The new multi-ethnic community of faith was called out from existing religious and political structures to begin to live in a way they had never lived before by the power of the Spirit as they followed spirit-led leaders.
Paul as Missionary
The missional reality in the book of Acts can be seen as the people of God being sent to the ends of earth (Hammond et al 54; Wright 17).The “sentness” of the early church was not just to those in their immediate locale of Jerusalem, but also to nearby
Samaria, and to the ends of the earth to places like Ethiopia (Acts 8:1-40). God even sends a disciple named Ananias to be a part of the most dramatic conversion of the early church: Saul of Tarsus. When Ananias prays for Saul, scales fall from his eyes, and his sight is miraculously restored after being blind (Acts 9:1-19).
Upon Saul’s conversion to Christianity he is immediately told that he will be sent to proclaim Jesus to both Gentile kings and the people of Israel, and that he would suffer by doing so (Acts 9:15). This sending of Saul becomes a catalyst to churches being started throughout Asia minor and the rest of the Roman empire. Saul becomes Paul and takes three missionary journeys which produce several churches that are ethnically diverse with both Jewish and Gentile believers.
Pikes 29
In all of his journeys, Paul would rarely travel or minister alone. This missionary insight is key to Paul’s ministry and theological framework: we are a body joined together in Christ and need one another (1 Cor 12:12; Eph. 4:12). The churches Paul starts along the way are helped by another early church leader, Barnabas. Like Adam in
Genesis, Paul valued partnership in the gospel so much so that he would later argue with
Barnabas about who they should take along with them on their second mission trip (Acts
15:36-40).
Paul was sent to minister but where he went to minister primarily was to crossroads or trade cities. His pattern was to preach first in the synagogue then over the course of time speak further with those open to the message. He used his cultural background and skills in each of these places to provide inroads for the gospel into new communities and thus make disciples of those who were open to receiving his message (1
Corinthians 9:19-23). His dramatic conversion was an oft shared message wherever he found himself (Acts 22:6-11; 26:13-19). The missionary nature of the apostles and early church propelled the gospel not only to the Jews but also to the entire Roman kingdom, as Paul went on his three missionary journeys with a final journey to Rome as prisoner.
Exhibiting great courage, Paul shared Jesus with a diversity of people. He said he was sent to declare something to those viewed as outsiders of the promises of God--
Gentile Greeks and Romans--while also carrying a message for his beloved Jewish brethren (Acts 26:17,18). This boldness to speak and testify was not weakened by threats of jail, death, or injury. Much like the original twelve apostles, he could not stop speaking about what he saw and heard. His boldness was not dependent upon who was traveling with him either, whether Luke, Barnabas, or Silas. He spoke as one sent by God to all
Pikes 30 people because all people needed God. This gave those he was ministering with confidence and even shocked them at times.
Theological Foundations
Paul as Campus Minister Missionary: A Theology of Campus Ministry
Missionary in modern terms has been the idea of an individual going with a message to a people from a people. While this applies to reaching any group of people, college campuses can uniquely feel like foreign mission fields due to the foreign culture, language and land which varies on each one. Many students miss key moments in local church life such as Advent, Lent, and Pentecost because the rhythm of campus life often conflicts with breaks, scheduled class time, and campus events. The transient nature of the campus also means church life must be contextualized for college students, even if many of them come from a church or Christian background.
In the book of Acts, the Apostle Paul enters the city of Ephesus where he had previously preached and then left for Caesarea and Jerusalem (Acts 18:18-24). On his return he finds twelve disciples, possibly impacted by the ministry of Apollos, Priscilla and Aquila, who believed in Jesus but had incorrect theology. After instructing them in the truth, he baptized and prayed for all of them to receive the Holy Spirit, and spiritual gifts flowed out of them (19:1-7). Paul stays in the city to teach in the local Jewish synagogue and boldly preaches the gospel there for the next three months. He is met with incredible resistance. Not discouraged by this opposition, he finds a space in the nearby
“lecture hall of Tyrannus” where he can minister and have daily discussions for the next two years. The result of Paul’s investment in daily preaching throughout that time was noteworthy. “All the Jews and Greeks who lived in the province of Asia heard the word
Pikes 31 of the Lord. God did extraordinary miracles through Paul, so that even handkerchiefs and aprons that had touched him were taken to the sick, and their illnesses were cured, and the evil spirits left them” (Acts 19:10-2).
Dr. William Senn III called this time period for Paul in Tyrannus’ lecture hall
“the roots for campus ministry” due to the primary place of ministry happening in an educational setting resulting in the gospel spreading to an entire region (Senn 16-17). At the time under Roman rule, Ephesus was a prosperous harbor capitol of Asia on the west coast of modern-day Turkey. It was a major place of banking and commerce, had a
25,000 seat theater, and was home to the Temple of Artemis one of the Seven Wonders of the ancient world (McDonald 318). Paul’s willingness to go daily to a place of learning to preach the gospel, make disciples, argue persuasively, and teach the Scriptures led to a church that he could leave behind after three years (Acts 20:31). In many ways the ministry in Ephesus during this time period became key to much of what Paul would do in the years to come.
This new Ephesian church became a hub for missionary activity in Asia. Paul likely wrote the letters of 1 Corinthians, Philippians, Galatians, Philemon, and the largest part of 2 Corinthians in his time there (1 Cor 16:8, 19; Seal Ephesus). This church likely helped start the churches at Laodicea, Colossae, Hierapolis, and perhaps also Smyrna,
Pergamum, Thyatira, Philadelphia, and Sardis (McDonald 320; Rev. 2:2-3). Paul’s initial ministry to Ephesus became a gospel-preaching, leader-multiplying, Spirit-filled, church planting center for all of Asia.
Acts 19 is a good passage to examine when considering a theology of campus ministry because of its confluence of theological themes of Christology, Pneumatology,
Pikes 32
Ecclesiology, and Missiology in a diverse urban context. While Paul would have never called himself a “church planter” or “campus minister”, his ministry in the first century did bring together these theological elements which informed his ministry praxis much like it would a modern day church planter or campus minister. Every college campus might not be urban in location but comparatively can be designated as such. Most campuses in America--including those in smaller college towns--would be considered urban populations in terms of density when contrasted with the population which immediately surrounds them. This consideration allows us to examine more closely these theological elements in the ministry Paul had in Ephesus and connect them to modern day campus ministry. Next we will take a look at each of these elements.
Christology
A theology of campus ministry must begin with the Lordship and preeminence of Jesus Christ. A high Christology is the only way to explain Paul’s actions or why anyone would go to a place like a college campus to minister knowing they will often be rejected. Paul was not calling people to accept a new personal religious trinket to add or replace their other idols on a keychain to be used when they had some spare time. Paul was not calling people to hear how they could work a little harder and through self-help have their lives be accepted by God. Paul was offending people by claiming there was a
God who demanded complete allegiance from them because He had died for them and rose again, even though they were not there to witness this event (Acts 19:26). This meant everyone needed to know, understand, and believe in God’s commitment to them in Christ, which was an utterly radical statement for the time. Lesslie Newbigin puts it like this:
Pikes 33
The Greco-Roman world in which the New Testament was written was full of
societies offering to those who wished to join a way of personal salvation through
religious teaching and practice. There were several commonly used Greek words
for such societies. At no time did the church use any of these names for itself. It
was not, and could not be, a society offering personal salvation for those who
cared to avail themselves of its teaching and practice. It was from the beginning a
movement claiming the allegiance of all peoples, and it used for itself with almost
total consistency the name ecclesia - the assembly of all citizens called to deal
with the public affairs of the city. The distinctive thing about this assembly was
that it was called by a more august authority than the town clerk: it was the
ecclesia theou, the assembly called by God, and therefore requiring the attendance
of all. The church could have escaped persecution by the Roman Empire if it had
been content to be treated as a cultus privates - one of the many
forms of personal religion. But it was not. Its affirmation that "Jesus is Lord"
implied a public, universal claim that was bound eventually to clash with the
cultus publicus of the empire. The confession "Jesus is Lord" implies a
commitment to make good that confession in relation to the whole life of the
world - its philosophy, its culture, and its politics no less than the personal lives of
its people. The Christian mission is thus to act out in the whole life of the whole
world the confession that Jesus is Lord of all. (Newbigin Open Secret, loc 225)
This declaration by Paul is important, as he called people to change their confession and lives in light of what Christ had done. This is the essence of the missional task within campus ministry: to call students to align their whole lives to the priority of
Pikes 34
God in Jesus Christ. This also exposes the weakness in the Danforth Study’s view that campus ministry functions on campus in the Old Testament roles of prophet, priest, pastoral, and governing (Portaro and Peluso 149; Shockley 98; McCormick 80-88).
While those roles are helpful in ministering to campuses, they presume the ministry exists primarily to serve religious people, not all people. The passion to proclaim the gospel to the world is not present in these Old Testament roles, while for New Testament people the commission to preach to all--not just the religious--is important to Jesus as each
Gospel writer records some type of commission (Matthew 28:18-20; John 20:21; Luke
24:46, 47; Mark 16:15).
This high Christology was not just a way to have the gospel shared but also the way to help these believers grow. This is clear in Paul’s decision to stay in Ephesus and invest in the lives of people for a total of three years, as well as in his later letter to the
Ephesians (Acts 19:10; 20:31; Ephesians 1-3). His daily conversations about Christ in
Ephesus became so meaningful, even to outsiders, that the seven sons of Sceva felt comfortable using Jesus’ name towards non-believers who were demon possessed (Acts
19:11-17). Sorcerers also had a massive and costly burning of their magic scrolls breaking allegiance with their less valuable ties to spiritual power destroying over 50,000 drachmas worth of material (Acts 19:19). All of this show the way the power in the gospel through the Holy Spirit as a sign of the kingdom being near and invaluable.
Likewise, campus ministry has the ability to form disciples who experience the power of
God and see the gospel as more valuable than what they previously jockeyed for to earn.
Pikes 35
Pneumatology
Another key to a theology of campus ministry is found in the pneumatology around Acts 19. Paul clearly saw the importance of not simply preaching the gospel for the sake of orthodoxy surrounding beliefs about Jesus; he also found significance in praying that new believers received the power and presence of the Holy Spirit (Acts 19:1-
7). The spiritual gifts given by the Spirit were not just meant to be received but shared with others. The goal was not just to believe in the truth that the Holy Spirit was available for these new believers to enjoy but that the Holy Spirit would be crucial in preparing them to be strangers in the world by learning and speaking the language of the stranger through glossolalia just like those who experienced Pentecost in Acts 2 (Hauerwas Chapt.
2). This similar receiving of the Spirit happened not only at Pentecost but also amongst the Samaritans and Gentiles in Cornelius’ house (Acts 2:1-4; 8:14-18; 10:44-48; Keener
61). This means becoming Spirit-filled people can be seen as foundationally disposing a believer to expect to be involved in multiethnic cross-cultural ministry.
A part of the Spirit-filled life is discovering that the Spirit has been working in others’ lives just as much in the personal life of the believer. This helps on the college campus because no matter the level of secular influence, past religious background, or current sinful practices, God is still working to reveal Himself by the Holy Spirit. No student’s heart is too hard, and no administrator’s life is out of reach.
While the scriptures claim there is no place anyone can go from His Spirit, from the modern university’s vantage there is a different view of a campus ministry’s influence and role on campus (Psalm 139:7-12). Typically, the administration views the campus ministry from a secular lens as just another student organization useful for social and
Pikes 36 practical good at best, and a place for bigotry and close mindedness at worst. A model for the academy’s view on campus ministry is found below in Fig. 2.1 (Poe 39). The perceived place for the impact of religion in the life of the campus can be seen as either completely integrated, on the periphery, or completely disconnected depending on if the campus is a religious, secular, or public institution respectively. While this is an administrative view in terms of programming, it has less to say about the incoming students’ views on spirituality which may be an active part of the admissions process.
Students can hold a varying view from the administration even if the institution desires a different view on religion and campus ministry for them.
This administrative model is problematic to any theology of campus ministry because God has claimed every square inch as His in Christ. By extension the Spirit of
Truth has access to everything as well, He is not peripheral to anyone or anything but rather is the reason there is a “university”---which means unity in diversity—in the first place: He is the author and unifier of all disciplines of study (Colossians 2:15-20). This includes every moral decision, every relationship, every bit of expressive language, every musical note, every sporting event, every organization, every dorm, and every activity on campus. He deserves first consideration and final authority. Any campus ministry must rely heavily on this fact as a foundation in order to discover the places where the Spirit is working already on every campus.
Pikes 37
Fig. 2.1 – Poe & Heie’s 3 Position Relational Model for the Academy
Ecclesiology
This leads to another theological concept which Paul encountered in Ephesus and is connected to campus ministry, the question of ecclesiology. Ecclesiology is the stream of theology concerned with considering what the church is and what makes a church a church (Kärkkäinen Ecclesiology 14). It has to do with what God designed the church universal for scripturally. The Church universal has had many different expressions in many different contexts. The varying interpretations of leadership structures based on Scripture and church tradition explain the variety of modern
Pikes 38 denominations and streams of the Christian faith today. In seeking to reach college students in a transient environment, the place of campus ministry has always been to contextualize the gospel to a group of people who are the least likely to be involved in local church life. When conversions begin to take place on campus, it can be unclear whether the group of new believers becomes a church or whether they are only to join one.
Starting a new ministry on a college campus will eventually expose an ecclesiological framework which leads to a certain praxis. Ralph Winter claims that throughout church history there have been two groups operating in the church universal: institutionalized modalities and missionary band sodalities (224). Examples of sodalities are Apostle Paul’s missionary journeys, the monastic movement, modern western mission agencies, and the parachurch movement. The debate over whether sodalities are “the church” has long been a conversation in The Church universal.
Jesus said He would build His church and the gates of Hades would not prevail.
He did not say that He would build his campus ministry, hospital, or school (Matthew
16:13-18). While not unimportant, these are not central to what God is building. It is His
“called out ones” He is building. Jesus’ interest is for His bride. While campus ministry is not the local church in whole, it can be viewed as an extension of the local church reaching out and serving a group of people alienated from Christ and His Church for a variety of reasons including schedule, location, unimportance, ignorance, and season of life. While church can be defined by leadership structures, administering of sacraments, church discipline, liturgy, catechesis, and other traditions, the other thing that makes “a church a church” is if it exists for itself or for the world around it. Campus ministry can
Pikes 39 help the church do this and fulfill its essential role in the world while also bringing new life and vitality to local churches.
Missiology
Another theological element for campus ministry is from the field of missiology, the study of missions. The theological concept of “Missio Dei” has been used to describe the mission of God on the Earth. God’s people to are to be missional in nature (Bosch
390; Roxburgh and Romanuk xv). He also has a people by which He seeks to accomplish this mission by starting with an explosion of joy (Guder 62; Newbigin Gospel in Pluralist
116). Campus ministry exists to make Christ known where He has not been, because believers should want everyone to experience the joy and hope that a life with Christ can bring.
Missiologists for years have talked about the “10/40 window” describing the longitudinal and latitudinal lines between which the majority of people live who have never heard about Jesus and are not within reach of a local church. An equally under- reached group of people for today’s church in America is the “13/30 window”, those who are aged 13-30 years old who are increasingly missing from American churches and yet also in a time of life when they more likely to receive the gospel as opposed to later in life (Broocks Every Nation 126; Barna Group). Historically this age group has been a fruitful ground for ministry when congregants and ministers pray and actively reach out to them. Since the church does not exist for itself but for Christ and the world, it would make sense that it would spend its resources trying to bring as many as possible from this age group to the King.
Pikes 40
A theology of work and culture is also important to a theology of campus ministry. This means connecting the grand metanarrative of Scripture to the personal lives of students as well as to their careers and classes so they can work in theologically informed ways when they leave campus. Campus ministries take time to minister to those who will graduate and impact every sphere of society. If these students can go into their fields of study shaped by Scripture not just secular theories, they can have a great impact for Christ. One study found that when professors taught a particular worldview, it directly impacted the lives of their students and subsequently the cities these students ended up living in, which greatly affected the cities’ viewpoints on the Reformation (Hyojoung and
Pfaff 195). This is just one example of how the university is a diffuser of ideas that will spread into society as graduates leave. A theology of campus ministry must seek to send these students with a Biblical framework and worldview for their own lives as well as an understanding of the gospel which can be applied to the unique challenges of broken systems they will face out in the world.
The Campus as Missionary: The Origins of American Universities
Campus ministers can easily lose perspective for their place in the Body of
Christ because they are in the trenches at the collision of the past and the future of faith in
America. It is essential to understand what campus ministry is by viewing the current reality in light of where it all began. While the descriptive phrase “campus ministry” did not arise until the 1950s, for this study the phrase will be used to describe a particular type of ministry unique to young people (Shockley 36). “College ministry” or “student ministry” are other phrases used today, but these are very similar to “youth ministry” where the presumption is that this stage of life ministry exists mainly for those who go to a particular church. For many churches this is not the case during the college years. Even
Pikes 41 though many colleges and universities increasingly offer learning opportunities online, significant demand continues for physical campuses in which students can be shaped for the future together. For this project, “campus ministry” broadly describes any focused ministry which takes place primarily for and among college and university campuses.
The type of campus, whether private or public, religious or secular, community college or four-year institution with graduate programs, urban or rural, commuter or residential, flavors the campus culture as well as how to do effective ministry there. While there are many campuses where ministry has taken place in the world, for this project campus ministry in America is primarily only being considered. Before we take a look at
American campus ministry, we must first examine the beginnings of American campuses themselves.
Far from only providing leaders for the church, the first colleges saw themselves as producing righteous and just leaders for a new democratic society (Shockley 26). In
1636, Harvard University became the first university in the United States with a vision not merely to educate young people for a job or trade, but to train clergy. Out of the first
108 college campuses started in America, 106 were founded for the purposes of advancing the cause of Christ into every field of work, and by the time of the Civil War fully 175 of the 182 colleges and universities were religious in nature (Broocks Every
Nation 139; Shockley 26). This illustrates the original foundation of higher education in
America and what it was designed to produce: those who serve Christ, others, and the world. Higher education and ministry were like Siamese twins inseparable at birth, with
Christianity being their true mother. As young students were equipped with a Biblical worldview, these students were also being trained to serve the world.
Pikes 42
In those first couple hundred years in which American college life was being created, most universities and colleges had denominational affiliations, and their school presidents were ordained clergyman (Shockley 27). As American colleges grew in number, and public universities were established, denominations considered how to serve the needs of their denominational young people who had grown up in their churches but now were leaving for college. By 1890 Catholics, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, and
Congregationalists had all formed clubs on various campuses, and some had even started their own schools (Byerley 76, 98; Shockley 33). In many ways this was the beginning of the denominational age of campus ministry.
In the mid- to late nineteenth century, missionary organizations like the
American Missionary Association (AMA) sought to educate African Americans before and after Emancipation. Many historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) were established in this time to train black students; the AMA alone started seven such colleges and thirteen other normal schools including what is now Fisk University,
Howard University, and Talledega College in the 1860s (Obas 3). Though initially taught primarily by Northern white faculty, Fisk as an institution explicitly took aim to “aid the evangelization of Africa” and saw this vision take root in the student body. Student
Albert Miller is attributed as saying about the institution “her sons and daughters are ever on the altar” which became a Fisk motto even to the present day, speaking to the sacrificial heart students have for the Lord to use them in this world (Quirin 22). Between
1878 and 1907, ten Fisk students went to Africa to begin missionary work and several
African students came to study at Fisk with the purpose of returning as missionaries
Pikes 43
(Quirin 21). While all of this can be seen as paternalistic, it also can be seen as a natural movement of the gospel from university life to the globe as a mission field.
Another early development in campus ministry at public schools was the creation of foundations or buildings which sat on or near campuses where students could find additional programming for social life. In 1913 The first Wesley Foundation started by the Methodists at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign was established to be a home away from home for students there (Shockley 34). The Foundation at
University of Michigan included gyms, meeting rooms, and eating areas. These early foundations were innovative and became the inspiration for the later development by universities of student unions to centralize college life for students on the campus.
An additional development in early campus ministry was the creation of “Bible
Chair” classes by the Disciples of Christ denomination in 1893 at the University of
Michigan (McCormick 6; Shockley 35). These classes offered an academic approach to spiritual life by providing courses which students could take on campus about the Bible.
This was an early missional method to teach and train young people in the truths of
Scripture in a similar setting to the academic setting the students were accustomed to. As schools became more secular and developed their own religion departments, many of these ministries moved off campus and evolved into Bible colleges to continue to serve young students in studying God’s word.
Students as Missionaries: The Birth of the Modern Missions Movement
At the beginning and end of the nineteenth century, God began to stir a heart for the gospel in the hearts of college students with a desire to reach all of the other nations of the earth. In 1806, five Williams College students led by Samuel Mills gathered
Pikes 44 together to pray weekly. One day, due to a rainstorm, they were forced to find shelter under haystacks. It was during this time of prayer they all sensed God leading them to pray for foreign missions in China and India with the added commitment that they would each spend their lives advancing this cause. Concerning reaching the lost in Asia, Mills is noted to have said, “We can do this, if we will” (Ahrend 44). This prayer meeting would later become known as the Haystack Prayer Meeting and just six years later these men formed the first mission agency in the United States called the “Society of the Brethren” which would spawn six other such agencies (Ahrend 44). The beginnings of the modern missions movement was birthed when college students got a global vision to extend the gospel.
Eighty years after the Haystack Prayer meeting, a growing Young Men’s
Christian Association--later known as the YMCA--had already expanded to the United
States from its origins in London as a Bible study and prayer group outreaching to youth in industrial cities (Shedd 92-93; Ahrend 20). After seeing new YMCA chapters created at the University of Michigan and the University of Virginia because of student excitement, leaders of the organization decided to create a new college division and appointed Luther Wishard to oversee it, making him by all accounts the first full-time college minister in America (Ahrend 44; Shedd 94-103, 355-357). He had been inspired when visiting Williams College by seeing the monument on campus in honor of the late
Samuel Mills and the Haystack Prayer Meeting. He is said to have prayed there, “Lord, do it again. Let water flow where water once flowed, do so once more” (Shadrach Fuel and Flame 18). This perspective deeply influenced his new role which would consist of
Pikes 45 traveling to various campuses and stirring the hearts of young people to give their lives to missions to reach the unreached nations of the world.
Luther Wishard’s involvement with students, along with the likes of evangelist
D.L Moody, A. T. Pierson, John R. Mott, siblings Robert and Grace Wilder, and Jon N.
Forman, led to a rapidly growing movement of college students who got involved with cross cultural missions and eventually became known as the Student Volunteer
Movement (Ahrend 20-62). At a summer camp at Mt. Hermon Camp for Boys in
Northfield, Massachusetts during July 1886, 251 male undergraduates from 89 campuses came together with these leaders for a month of Bible study, sermons, and fun (Ahrend
21). By the end of the conference, one hundred students had signed up to give their lives to foreign missions. Along with the leaders, this “Mount Hermon 100” began to sign-up an increasing number of students for foreign missions across the country in the years that followed. The Student Volunteer Movement was born and would eventually see over
100,000 young people complete a written pledge documenting, “we are willing and desirous, God willing, to become foreign missionaries” (Shadrach Fuel and Flame 18).
By 1945 it was determined over 20,000 of these young people had become foreign missionaries, launching the modern missions movement through their attempts to fulfill their watchword: “the evangelization of the world in our generation” (Shadrach 18).
The turbulence in America following World War I, the Great Depression, and
World War II greatly impacted campus life for every American college student, as well as those in the Student Volunteer Movement. Schools’ enrollment dropped by as much sixty-five percent during the wars, and campus ministry was greatly impacted, though still vital. Theological disputes, financial challenges, the growing secularization of
Pikes 46 universities, and an increased focus on social issues slowed the momentum gained at the turn of the century. The missionary zeal from the Student Volunteer Movement and the early YMCA began to wane due to disillusionment and skepticism (Hunt & Hunt, 50).
The end of a mighty move of God amongst college students was the beginning of something else.
After World War II, the G.I. bill was instituted in 1944 by Congress enabling veterans to receive a free secondary education which led to a boom in campus life. Post- war G.I. enrollment hit its peak in 1946 with over a million veterans making up nearly half of all college enrollments. Most campus ministries struggled with staffing and financial issues in order to meet the new demand for ministry (Portaro and Peluso 6).
Despite all of the shifts and setbacks, ministry to college students continued and was about to be set on a new course with a new branch of ministry beginning to form.
Parachurch Ministry as Missionary: Rise of the Parachurch Movement
It was in this time after the World Wars that a new development for campus ministry known as parachurch ministries began to grow. Similar to mission agencies in terms of being outside of denominational structures, these ministries began to fill the void formed through a disconnect between students and their growing unease with institutional religion. Ministries such as Bill Bright’s Campus Crusade for Christ on the campus of
UCLA founded in 1951, Don McClanen’s Fellowship of Christian Athletes founded in
Oklahoma in 1954, and Dawson Trotman’s Navigators founded in California in 1934 were all byproducts of individuals who took seriously the call to personally evangelize and disciple young people where they are, rather than wait for them to desire to be a part of a denominational institution (Skinner 106). Though America was in a time of
Pikes 47 enormous social change and transition after the World Wars, these ministries served a unique new role in ministry to young people.
These ministries were geared towards specific groups such as athletes, transient college students, international students, and military men and women, making a difference in the lives of those often left out of traditional church programming. These parachurch leaders rightly asked the missiological questions of “what does it mean for the people of God to be sent to students who are not interested in denominational tradition?”
In many ways the eras of campus ministry had moved from “what does the denominational church need?” to “what does the world need?” and then to “what do students need?” They sought to meet these needs in new and innovative ways.
With the emergence of the parachurch phase of campus ministry there was an emphasis on personal discipleship and evangelism. Campus ministries engaged in these areas of the Christian life and developed tools which enabled students to extend the ministry to impact other students around them such as Campus Crusade’s Four Spiritual
Laws or FCA’s Summer Camps. This had a multiplicative effect allowing the ministry to reach more young people. The power of personal, Biblical, multiplicative ministry was reclaimed in this stage of campus ministry development much like the Protestant
Reformation reclaimed the priesthood of all believers. Campus ministry became synonymous with the fact that one did not need to be a clergyman of a local congregation nor a professional minister to make a difference for Jesus in their generation.
As the impact of the parachurch movement continued to develop, the tensions of
American social life in the 1960s and 70s put a strain on many college students. With protests for racial justice and the Civil Rights movement along with objections to the
Pikes 48
Vietnam War, many students found themselves concerned about more than just studies.
Despite the significant uprisings on campuses, significant revivals occurred in this time period which saw many students impacted through two broader movements in the 1960s and 70s: the Charismatic Renewal and the Jesus Movement. While denominations such as Calvary Chapel and Vineyard trace their roots to these movements, these broader movements would also impact campus life and ministry to students.
On February 3, 1970 Asbury University was deeply touched and transformed by a move of the Holy Spirit leading many to uniquely sense God’s presence, openly confess sin, pray and testify of God’s presence in their lives. By the summer of 1970 the Asbury revival had spread to impact at least 130 other campuses as well (Coleman and Gyertson
39-40). In the summer of 1972, Campus Crusade for Christ hosted a conference called
“Explo 72” in Dallas Texas, which drew more than 80,000 in attendance mostly young people to a Christian Woodstock like experience (Jin 18). These and other events in this time period sought to mobilize students to experience the gospel and share it with others in a time of societal angst.
Church Planting as Missionary: A Return to Campus
Much has been made of the need to reengage North America with the Gospel.
Lesslie Newbigin was right to say in the 1970s upon returning to his British home from a missionary career in India that the West needed the gospel again (Poe 59; Newbigin
Gospel Pluralist 232). Some have taken this to mean there was a point in the past when the Gospel under Christendom had fully penetrated the culture, when really what happened was more similar to what happened under Constantine when the West became more culturally Christian. The Gospel does influence culture, but the message was not
Pikes 49 meant to become a museum to examine relics of theology and tradition but to become a living transferable faith given from generation to generation.
While the parachurch movement has been influential the past sixty to seventy years on college campuses, there has been a desire in many Protestant circles today to return to the original denominational goals of starting new churches and revitalizing older ones near universities to reach these student populations. This movement, more commonly known as church planting, is taking place among mainline denominations and more contemporary non-denominational churches as a strategy to reach college students with the gospel (Lawson 158; Brittain 674; Putman and Stetzer 232). A current name for this model among the Southern Baptist denomination is “collegiate church planting,” and it has gained momentum to the point of the denomination designating all college campuses as a strategic “city” for their church planting endeavors. Some of the churches involved in this strategy have created their own church planting networks to further fuel their endeavors. Cornerstone Church and their church-based campus ministry called The
Salt Company based out of Ames, Iowa, Gracepointe churches based out of California,
H2O churches based out of Ohio, and Resonate churches out of Pullman, WA are some current examples of this model. Southern Baptists are reporting three times the number of baptisms in their church plants versus their existing churches.
This development in starting churches near predominately secular campuses is a break from the previous trend in the church planting world of church plants occurring in faster growing suburban areas where people are moving to. When public universities began to be established in America the church flocked to start new churches near these schools in order to disciple the next generation of leaders. Over time many of the
Pikes 50 previously established churches near colleges have struggled in their relevance to campus life. Some had to close due to decline in membership; others had their properties purchased by universities or investors to make room for expansion having, and some moved further away from campus as congregants climbed the social ladder. Others remained near campus despite each of these forces threatening their existence. The difference today is that 96%of the over 300,000 churches in America have not started a single church, and only 3% of existing churches are growing through evangelism (Wilson
16; Broocks Gift of Evangelist). Most churches and ministries are focused on activities which appeal to existing Christians as opposed to engaging those who are not yet followers of Christ on college campuses.
While the Church Planting Movement has developed from the Church Growth
Movement, there has been a noted critique of some of the early insights of its forbearers.
Donald McGavran is known as the father of the Church Growth Movement which sought to help churches reclaim the Biblical and corporate expectation that all churches should grow. His theories and writings influenced many church pastors and missions leaders in the 1970s and 80s who followed his principles to grow megachurches well over the average church size in America of under 100 people. McGavran’s Homogenous Unit
Principle (HUP) states that people are best and more quickly reached when they are considered sociologically as whole groups of peoples. While this may expedite outsiders joining a congregation or ministry, one criticism is how it unintentionally lends itself to ethnically and socio-economically segregated communities, creating churches and ministries which continue to look like pre-Civil Rights era America despite an increasingly diverse American population (Bosch 415; Hendrickson 344; Newbigin
Pikes 51
Gospel Pluralist 184). The famous Martin Luther King Jr. quote still sadly rings true,
Sundays at 11am continues to be the most segregated time in America (King Jr. Most
Segregated Hour 00:10-00:52). Much of this has been propped up by the philosophical underpinnings of the HUP meaning all church growth is not assumed to be healthy just like all growth in the human body is not perceived to be a healthy.
Other recent focuses in the church planting movement that have seen fruitful seasons of growth have been starting urban churches, mono/multi-lingual or multi-ethnic churches, house or simple churches, replanting or revitalizing older churches, and multi- site churches (Stetzer and Bird 11; Keller loc 8429). These all differ at some level in ecclesiology, methodology, or theologically yet each can be seen as a viable goal for a different type of church plant. The assumption for all of them is that there is a need for more Christians everywhere and thus more churches will be needed as the American population continues to grow and become increasingly diverse.
One phrase in the world of church planting which has gained notoriety is the idea a Church Planting Movements (Garrison 21-23). While the phrase is aspirational for most church plants, these are used to describe a specific phenomenon characterized for seeing the rapid multiplication of indigenous churches. While there are documented
Church Planting Movements in various countries with remarkable explosive growth, all of the movements have taken place in the Global South with none having yet been identified in North America (Stetzer and Bird 51; Escobar 66). This is noteworthy because despite great resources and theological training, the West has still seen no multiplicative church growth as seen through these movements of evangelism, conversion, rapid disciple making, and church planting. This is a point of concern as huge
Pikes 52 amounts of resources and energies are currently being spent on planting churches to reach the West, yet this type of movement has yet to be realized.
One church planting ministry which pertains to this project is the birth of Every
Nation. Every Nation Churches and Ministries began in 1994 when itinerant US-based evangelist Rice Broocks, pastor Steve Murrell in the Philippines, and pastor Phil Bonasso in Los Angeles decided to unite their existing churches and ministries to honor God and advance His kingdom through church planting, campus ministry, and world missions together. This vision lends itself to targeting major student centers and cities throughout the world.
A popular Every Nation colloquialism used in Europe, Asia, South Africa, South
America, Australia, and North America amongst campus missionaries and church planters alike is to have “one foot on the campus and one foot in the community.” In the twenty-five years since beginning, Every Nation has sought to do this and grown from ten churches in three nations to 402 churches in 82 nations worldwide in 2019 (Antonio;
Lopez). As of April 2020, Every Nation has 90 churches in North America with eighty- two of these being in the United States and another ten in the process of being launched by the end of the year (Mingus). As of November 2019, there are 142 full-time campus missionaries serving 65 Every Nation Campus chapters in the U.S. and an additional 40 campuses with at least one student being impacted by the ministry (Barker). These campus ministries have been established as churches have been planted, vocational campus ministers identified and trained, and equipping these campus ministers to be fully funded by developing a team of financial and prayer supporters.
Money as Missionary: Funding New Campus Ministries
Pikes 53
There is no getting around the fact that extending ministry has a financial cost. It took money to build the Jewish Temple (1 Chronicles 22:14), restore the Israelites back from exile (Ezra 3:7), meet the needs for Jesus to minister with his disciples (Luke 8:1-3), and for the apostle Paul to travel on three missionary church planting trips (Acts 13-14;
15:40-16:10; 18:23-21:15). Anyone who seeks to minister to college students must embrace the need to develop a financial plan to fund the ministry.
The funding for campus ministry is rarely helped by the colleges or universities where the ministry is taking place, with the exception being the limited funds an official student organization group may be able to receive upon approval from the university.
Though some longstanding ministries use residual means from endowments established through large monetary gifts or estate property sales, the majority of campus ministries operate in less sophisticated ways (S. White Ch 5). The current funding models for campus ministry can be categorized in three groups: the traditional model, the bi- vocational model, and the missionary model.
Historically, ministries and churches have used a traditional funding model that includes receiving donations from those who are recipients of the ministry. Campus ministry work is unique in that college students are not typically able to personally finance the ministry work due to their stage of life primarily focused on their schooling.
In this case funds must be developed outside of the direct recipients of the ministry. For the traditional model this often looks like a local church supporting a college minister on staff with a full salary and a budget for ministry expenses. While previous participants in the ministry can become a part of this model after they graduate and get jobs, this usually necessitates these graduates staying in the city with their jobs. This model can put new
Pikes 54 campus ministries in a difficult place since their students have not graduated yet.
Traditional funding models work well for longstanding campus and college ministries who have a proven track record of fruitfulness since givers like to give to something established and proven.
Another common funding option for campus ministers is the bi-vocational model where the ministers earn part or all of their income outside of the ministry while using additional time to handle their ministerial duties; this is much like apostle Paul did at times in his ministry (Acts 18:1-3; 20:33-35). An example of this is the monks responsible for the evangelization of Europe from the fifth to fifteen centuries who funded their missional work with their farms and businesses from the monasteries (Breen loc 992). Many pastors and missionaries today use a similar model to make a living and provide for ministry expenses, especially in restricted access countries where it is illegal or unwelcome to be a full-time minister. Global statistics of the number of bi-vocational ministers to college students are not known, but in the United States it is estimated that about one-third of local church pastors are bi-vocational, with this number on the rise
(Roozen 8). This model has tremendous potential in leveraging pastoral staff and lay leaders near campus to focus some time outside of work ministering to college students.
This potential grows when one considers the number of believers who work in close proximity to campuses, including the over 1.5 million faculty who work for universities and colleges across America (U.S. Dept. of Education Digest of Education Statistics,
2017 ).
The third funding model is the missionary model, which the parachurch world has largely developed. This model allows its ministers to be missionaries to college
Pikes 55 campuses by developing a personal team of ministry partners who supply both living and ministry expenses in addition to prayer support, much like Christ and the apostle Paul did
(Shadrach God Ask loc 987; Luke 8:1-3; Philippians 4:14-19). Ministries seek to reach their annual financial goals in a variety of ways in this model, with the most common being combining personal relationship building and asking with fundraising events like banquets, car washes, golf scrambles, and student programs like conferences and summer projects. This funding practice allows for the spirituality of raising funds to be kept intact by direct personal relationships with donors (Nouwen 27; Morton 14). This model also offers the flexibility of location of ministry due to the relational bonds created over time.
As the traditional, bi-vocational, and missionary models are currently used to fund college ministries, new campus ministries will also likely be funded with at least one of these models. For instance, denominationally some regional churches may decide to pool monies from their traditional models to help boost outreach and staff new campus minister positions. Other groups may seek to blend the models to reach new campuses.
One example of a hybrid model combines elements from the missionary and bi- vocational models by expecting a campus minister to raise the money for the new campus ministry and salary through donations while also depending on a few bi-vocational volunteers to be on the launch team.
Each funding model has its own set of strengths and weaknesses. For instance, the strength of the traditional funding model is its reliance on older, more financially stable believers or those who benefited from the ministry such as alumni and want to stay connected to the ministry. This model can include a partnership with a local church which depends on the traditional model whose members may be able to staff a college
Pikes 56 pastor or simply provide for budgetary items as well as practical oversight and accountability throughout the year. The weakness of this model is that both the funding for the campus ministry and the amount of college ministry staff is dependent on the size and income of the local church. If the church is plateauing, declining, small, or a new church plant, the amount of money available will directly impact the reach of the ministry.
Likewise, the missionary model has strengths and weaknesses. One strength is its ability to open up the possibility for a large number of campus staff to reach any campus. Since staff trust God to develop their own partnership teams to cover their ministry expenses, the ministry can multiply to students without becoming an added budget expense. Since most campuses have many students, this makes this model attractive to truly engage and empower a large number of students. This model has several weaknesses including its inability to consider past and present socioeconomic problems disadvantages minorities and women (Robinson 17; Perry Social Capital 171;
Perry Diversity 400). This model also allows staff to become good at fundraising without becoming equally good at ministering to students on campus. This can make them hard to fire since they have a full salary, seemingly God’s stamp of approval. Another weakness is that campus staff can overstay their usefulness on campus since they may be getting better pay than they would in a comparable church-based ministry position.
Before starting a new campus ministry, it is helpful to consider the strengths and weaknesses of each funding model and to select the model or combination that God desires. While no model is perfect, no model is easy either. There will still be the need to exercise faith, strategy, and diligence (Every Nation Ministry of Partnership Development
Pikes 57
Workbook 5). The contrasts of these strengths and weaknesses are shown in Table 2.1,
which includes a comparison of the Every Nation Campus model which is a hybrid of the
missionary and traditional models.
[Table 2.1-Contrasting Funding Models] 1 - Taken from Every Nation’s Church-based Campus Ministry Model document Bi-vocational Missionary Traditional Hybrid Model Model Model Model (Lay leader) (Parachurch) (Church-centered) (Every Nation) Funding The campus missionary The campus missionary’s The campus The campus missionary’s funding Summary has a job(s) outside of funding comes from his or missionary’s is a partnership between Every their ministerial duties her own efforts to develop funding comes Nation Campus & local church. which provides their living a team of financial from local church Every Nation Campus trains, expenses. This job(s) has partners, and the pool of directly or from a coaches, & resources to be a level of flexibility to still potential ministry partners denominational successful in deputized be available to meet is unlimited.1 budget. 1 fundraising, local church is student’s needs. responsible to partner at some level & allow some safe level of partnership development within the church.1 Strengths -Is able to be involved in -Flexibility to do ministry -The campus -Allows for an infinite number of the local community and with students any time & missionary has campus missionaries to be be a witness for Christ in live anywhere, even accountability and developed while allowing them to their industry. expensive cities. covering pastorally. have local pastoral oversight. -Can provide mentorship -Skills from fundraising -The local church, -Blends strengths of missionary for students on what faith transferable to ministry to denomination, and traditional models. in the marketplace looks students. and/or alumni can -Depends on the whole body of like. - No burden to church provide great Christ to finance the campus budget, helpful in the relational network ministry(s), not just a local Every church plant or for financial needs Nation Church. revitalization stage. to be met. Weakness -Primary allegiance will be -Must spend part of the -If the church or -Donor fatigue from those asked to to what pays the bills not year developing their denomination has a support campus missionaries the ministry. support team, typically for shortage in the within the partnering Every Nation -Potential strong 3-6 months on the front budget, outreach is Church over time, especially if the disconnect from campus end. usually the first ratio of campus missionaries to the life (unless they work on -Can linger on staff too thing to be cut. size of the church is high. campus). long, act like “free agents” -The number of full- -Staff can also be pulled off -Time with students will and/or be hard to “fire” for time staff is finite, campus to refocus on fundraising most likely be limited to underperforming because typically just one at any time in the year if their nights or weekends. they may be good at full-time & maybe partnership teams get too low. -Ministry expenses will raising funds and make one part-time -Also, there is potential confusion need to be met outside of more than they would in a person. that can come from other both ministerial time and similar role at a local -If the college Christians in nearby local work time. church. ministry grows, churches thinking they are staffing -Minorities & women budgetary needs another local church’s ministry. appear disadvantaged. may or may not be available.
Pikes 58
The Next Mission Force: Generation Z
Most campus ministry models in America have been unchanged since the 1950s, an era marked by Christendom and parachurch growth. While programming may not have greatly changed since then, the students have in many ways. The following illustration, while meant to describe European churches, perfectly explains the reaction many in the realm of campus ministry are having in this time of history in America:
Hedgehogs are wonderful creatures. In a long period of evolution, they have
developed an infallible defense mechanism. If a fox threatens a hedgehog, it
simply rolls up into a prickly ball, and becomes impregnable in relation to any
danger. Sooner or later the enemy will lose interest and move on. This tactic has
always worked; it has helped a noisy, small, weak, and rather dumb animal to
survive since times immemorial.
But then the world begins to change, and one day our hedgehog starts
to cross a long, smelly strip of tarmac. In the distance it sees two round bright
eyes approaching rapidly. A deep roaring sound becomes louder and louder. But
the hedgehog knows what to do. It will use the strategy that has never failed its
ancestors: the animal rolls up and waits until the danger is over.
Unfortunately, its most reliable tactic is now the most dangerous thing
to do. Becoming a ball and out-wait the danger will almost certainly cost the
hedgehog its life in a world full of cars. The tragedy of rapid contextual change
is that our best may become our worst overnight. Traditions and routines that
have never failed us begin to work against us when cultural conditions become
different.
Pikes 59
Discovering this brings great uncertainty, and it introduces us to a steep
learning curve. Christianity in Europe is in such a state of uncertainty—to put it
mildly. We know, to some extent, what we have lost, and what is not likely to
return. But we do not know what the future will bring. Ideas abound and
inspiring initiatives emerge everywhere, but until now there is no general
direction or convergence of insights. This may be the eve of a new Reformation,
just like the centuries before the previous Reformation brimmed with scattered
attempts for renewal and restoration. (Paas 4.3)
Like these hedgehogs, campus ministries have become used to tactics which were successful in the past, but current contexts have changed. This is not just on an institutional level but on the student level. When considering starting new campus ministries today, one must consider how students now view the world. In many ways a new generation of college students are on American campuses with different viewpoints and experiences than the previous generations before them. The proliferation of smartphones and tablets has had an impact on global culture and the lives of the generation who have recently begun to attend college. These current students have had their formative years shaped by living lives online, and early studies are beginning to show the impact this is having on them.
Researchers have labeled the current generation of college students, typically born between 1995-2002, with various labels including “screenagers”, Gen Z, or iGen.
Though there is not consensus on a generational label just yet, Gen Z has become the most commonly used phrase (Seemiller and Grace loc 690). There are three key moments in history during the lifetime of Gen Z which has left indelible marks on them and the
Pikes 60 culture they have grown up in. The first important historical marker for Gen Z is they do not remember the cultural impact of the terrorist attack on the United States on
September 11, 2001. The second historical event for Gen Z was the Great Recession caused by the American subprime mortgage crisis from December 2007 until June 2009.
The third marker is the release of the iPhone on June 29, 2007, which revolutionized the world of cellphones and smartphones with its popularity.
These events have created a world in America where heightened security, overprotective parenting, and digital overstimulation have become the norm. The effects of these change are beginning to show on youth on college campuses now as recorded in studies emerging now for the first time. Dr. Jean Twenge notes the unique findings:
(Gen Z) is distinct from every previous generation in how its members spend their
time, how they behave, and their attitudes toward religion, sexuality, and politics.
They socialize in completely new ways, reject once sacred social taboos, and want
different things from their lives and careers. They are obsessed with safety and
fearful of their economic futures, and they have no patience for inequality based
on gender, race, or sexual orientation. They are at the forefront of the worst
mental health crisis in decades, with rates of teen depression and suicide
skyrocketing since 2011. Contrary to the prevalent idea that children are growing
up faster than previous generations did, iGen’ers are growing up more slowly: 18-
year-olds now act like 15-year-olds used to, and 13-year-olds like 10-year-olds.
Teens are physically safer than ever, yet they are more mentally vulnerable. (loc
75)
Pikes 61
In many ways these things could be said by any generation of youth compared to their elders, but there are some important, unique things about this generation (Barna 103).
This new generation has grown up as the most ethnically diverse and technologically immersed generation with instant access to a sea of information. They only know a world where a minority could lead in the White House, all forms of media are available “on- demand,” and free wi-fi seems like an American right.
Gen Z is dating less, having less sex, and has lower teen pregnancy rates than the generations before them (Twenge loc 355, 372; Seemiller and Grace loc 4685). They are more likely to enjoy going out with their parents (Twenge loc 337). They are also less likely to drink alcohol but more likely to smoke pot or do opioids than the millennial generation before them (Twenge loc 591, 604). They are radically committed to individualism, as evidenced by their majority political support of abortion and the legalization of marijuana while also opposing gun control (Twenge loc 3790).
Students have not only changed in terms of their habits; they have changed in terms of their perceptions on faith as well. Only 25% strongly agree that the Bible is totally accurate, and about one-third of them say they do not believe in God, up from the past ten years (Barna Group and Impact 360, 79; Twenge loc 1754). Only ten percent would be considered “resilient disciples” who attend church at least monthly, trust the
Bible authoritatively, trust Jesus personally and theologically and desire to change society outwardly (Kinnaman and Matlock 33). This rise of the “nones” who affiliate with no religion has concerned church leaders as, increasingly, white males are choosing to take a blasé approach about church and religion in general (J. White Rise Nones 23; Seemiller and Grace, loc 6020). The majority of them think Christianity is anti-gay, judgmental,
Pikes 62 and hypocritical and that gender is fluid and same-sex marriage is a positive (Twenge loc
1922). This all spells the end of cultural Christianity and its presumed respected place in
American culture at large, instead it has become a religion seen as irrelevant to the times.
What has been most alarming at the college level is the mental health issues that
Gen Z is dealing with. The number one issue for young people now is not depression but anxiety (Twenge, loc 1447, 3543; Seemiller and Grace, loc 5226). There has been an increase in loneliness and major depressive episodes as well as a decrease in sleep habits
(Seemiller and Grace, loc 5232, 4936). These all spell a heavy load for college counseling services who must see an increased case load with faster turnaround times.
While Gen Z has grown up with social media, they face an increase in insecurity around image and self-worth which effects their confidence. They have had to learn how to navigate having parts of their lives immortalized through platforms, even creating fake social media accounts to try to share more of who they really are and express themselves more fully (Seemiller and Grace 2093).
While many of these statistics alarm some clergy, veteran campus ministers know these are not new ideas that popped up overnight, but merely the progression of what students on campus have been thinking over the past decade. With only 4% of Gen
Z holding a Biblical worldview, it is no wonder any of these statistics are the way that they are as truth has become an individual and secular, corporate thing (Barna Group and
Impact 360, 25). New campus ministries must consider that increasingly the Bible is not well read or understood and that upon initial introduction most students do not see their ministry as something interesting or helpful.
Starting a New Campus Ministry
Pikes 63
In the fields of organizational development, entrepreneurship, and church planting, there have been established clear stages of development (Houston 126; Nash 89,
90; Adizes 109). These stages have been established over time by observation and practice. The same cannot be said for theories on starting new campus ministries, though the assumption is that the organizational stages of birth, growth, development and decline can also be applied to any group organizing themselves around a common mission such as a campus ministry.
Much of starting new campus ministries relates to balancing the crucial tension between formal and informal environments to accomplish the mission. The tension of these environments can play out in ministry settings such as evangelistic events, trainings, leadership development, discipleship meetings, or other planning meetings
While both of these environments will be needed to begin a ministry, the campus context and personality of the leaders can lend to making these decisions easier. Overall these environments will lean towards one of two opposite ends of a spectrum. One is a more organic approach that feels fluid, relational, and adaptable where praxis flows out of connections with students and with the Holy Spirit. The other end of the spectrum is a highly organized approach that is rigid, structured, and sequential (Keller loc 8429).
When starting a ministry one must consider what type of approach one wants to take in order to build the culture of the ministry environments to accomplish the kingdom vision the leaders have.
In the church planting world, there has been some debate around what comes before a new church or ministry is started (Houston 134). Some have a person-centric sociological approach, which is all about the person needed to lead the new work. The
Pikes 64 assumption is that by focusing on the character or personality of the leader right results will follow. Most of the current literature about church planting takes this approach
(Addison Pioneering 19; Stetzer 87). Other say there is need for a spiritually gifted individual such as a visionary apostle or gifted evangelist who is sent to preach the gospel with extraordinary results. There are also those who say the key is the right method, technique, structure, or strategy. If the plan is right, the results God desires will come about (Woodward and White 59).
While one’s character, giftedness, and strategy all need to be considered before starting a new campus ministry, what cannot be argued is that Biblically God has used both anointed individuals and united teams to start new churches and ministries. Paul’s ministry in Acts includes many examples of individuals who worked together with him in his apostolic ministry including Priscilla and Aquila, Barnabas, Silas, and Luke (Acts
18:18-28; 13:1-3; 13:4-14:28; 16:16-40; 20:6). These individuals possessed a passion for
Christ and love for people which made them available to go anywhere and do anything for the Lord with the Apostle Paul. Before new ministries are begun there must be at least one person with this heart and willingness to be used by God. God is able to use every gift to advance His kingdom and spread the gospel whether the most strategic plans were in place before starting the new ministry or not.
Christlike character is important to any work God desires to do through His people. Lists vary on the descriptions and characteristics needed to start ministries, but all of the qualities should exemplify the character of Christ in the individual. Most writers on campus ministry spend time writing about technique and strategy. Some writings explain the type of person it takes to be used by God, namely someone with a vibrant prayer life,
Pikes 65 full of faith, shaped by Biblical convictions, obedient to the Lord, and filled with the
Holy Spirit (Broocks Change Campus 61, 85; Young 8.01; Shadrach Fuel and Flame Ch
1-4).
Before starting a new campus ministry it is important to have a vision and desire to see Jesus exalted in a dark place and to understand what the campus would look like if God brought humility where there was pride, redeemed every bit of brokenness and relational strife, healed every disease, gave purity in exchange for perversity, forgave every sin, and untied every yoke of bondage (Bolsinger loc 1601). This vision of could be and should be on a campus restored and renewed to original intent would be a wonder for all to see (Stanley 17). The vision to see the Kingdom of Heaven enter into a place must be compelling and personal to those who claim it. It must be able to motivate and inspire them and others on even the most discouraging dark day. This vision is what gives birth to the development of strategy to see it fulfilled.
Development of strategy is important because it creates the actionable steps needed to accomplish the vision. While strategy has its place, it can lead to the presumption that since something is happening, God must do something great.
Missionary author Roland Allen warns about avoiding this temptation:
We have often heard of the importance of seizing strategic points. But there is a
difference between our seizing of strategic centres and St Paul’s. To seize a
strategic centre we need not only a man capable of recognizing it, but a man
capable of seizing it. The seizing of strategic points implied a strategy. It is part of
a plan of attack upon the whole country. Concentrated missions at strategic
centres, if they are to win the province, must be centres of evangelistic life. In
Pikes 66
great cities are great prisons as well as great railway stations. Concentrated
missions may mean concentrated essence of control or concentrated essence of
liberty: a concentrated mission may be a great prison or a great market: it may be
a safe in which all the best intellect of the day is shut up, or it may be a mint from
which the coin of new thought is put into circulation. A great many of our best
men are locked up in strategic centres: if once they get in they find it hard to get
out. At many of the strategic points where we have established our concentrated
missions it is noticeable that the church rather resembles a prison or a safe or a
swamp into which the best life of the country round is collected than a mint or a
spring or a railway station from which flows out into the country round. We are
sometimes so enamored with the strategic beauty of a place that we spend our
time in fortifying it whilst the opportunity for a great campaign passes by
unheeded or neglected. (27)
The danger of focusing on strategy first can lead to a dependence on personal ingenuity and understanding instead of trusting in the Lord (Proverbs 3:5,6; John 15:5). This can lead to great frustration, pride, and pain if not taken seriously.
Starting a campus ministry requires immense amounts of flexibility and leadership skills in the area of change. Students can be very immature and ever-changing, making it hard to keep up with them. There is also the added challenge of learning and adapting to a new campus culture. Those who seek to start a campus ministry must possess self-differentiated leadership abilities which are adaptive and not just tactical or technical in nature (Roxburgh and Romanuk 98, Parks 10; Bolsinger loc 592). There must be an ability to handle continuous change into uncharted waters without losing heart
Pikes 67 for the mission. There must be a willingness to lead beyond just merely examining technique or repeating past successes; there must be a willingness to examine what this change is doing to their own hearts as well (Parks 10; Friedman 453; Bolsinger loc 1392).
Leading a new ministry must also mean that the leader be focused on being transformational in nature. There must be a focus on being a leader who not only leads the organization or ministry towards its intended goals, but also helps everyone become transformed in the process, including themselves (Freidman loc 453). There must also be a self-awareness on how to manage the anxiety and stress which come as difficult decisions and resistance to change in the organization happen in order to see the transformation happen in the life of the leader first (Bolsinger loc 2007, 2384).
There have been two more recent books written about starting a campus ministry. Campus ministry veteran Steve Shadrach, in his classic book The Fuel and the
Flame, lays out the stages of beginning a new campus ministry and uses the metaphor of having the fuel or the preparation of the leader combined with the flame of execution of ministry on campus (Shadrach Fuel and Flame Chapt 1-4). Former campus church planter and campus church network leader Jaeson Ma brought a simple house church methodology to his work in The Blueprint using a process of prayer combined with power evangelism as a means to start campus ministry (102-126).
One of the largest parachurch campus ministries, InterVarsity, uses a Chapter
Planters Manual to coach those starting new campus ministries. It contains various stages and elements necessary to consider for their chapter planters. Paul Worchester, Eric Fish, and Dave Hess each use lists of tips on how to start and grow ministries on college campuses. Dr. Rice Broocks in Change the Campus, Change the World uses a visionary
Pikes 68 approach to reach the campus which emphasizes evangelism and basic discipleship. The most thorough and in-depth treatment on campus ministry is from a dissertation by Dr
William Senn III, though it includes limited steps on starting a campus ministry focusing instead on gaining official student organization recognition status. The collective initiative called EveryCampus has created a launch guide to encourage students to start praying and establishing new works on campuses, especially where there is no ministry.
There is a Launch Guide they have produced as well.
Table 2.2 shows a comparison of the literature reviewed for starting a new campus ministry. It breaks these thoughts down into three sequential action categories: pre-launch, launch actions, and post launch multiplication.
[Table 2.2 – Comparison of Steps to Start Campus Ministries]
Pikes 69
Research Design Literature
Qualitative data holds rich information for research. People use qualitative methods to explore deeply what is going on in an area of study (Sensing, loc 2258). The data produced through the form of narrative helps show what and how something is happening in a way that can be interpreted for learning and potential further study. As
Sensing says:
Qualitative research is grounded in the social world of experience and seeks to
make sense of lived experience. Qualitative researchers, then, are most interested
in how humans arrange themselves and their settings and how inhabitants of these
settings make sense of their surroundings through symbols, rituals, social
structures, social roles, and so forth. (loc 1,628)
This project was designed to explore how people are involved in starting new campus ministries and, unbeknownst to them, are creating new systems and ways of doing ministry in the world.
The key part of research is its use of instruments (Joyner 234). This research used instruments which the researcher could later examine for connections, tension points, and common understandings. Semi-structured interviews gave the researcher critical feedback into the nature of the problem of starting new campus ministries. There were many data points found from using consistent questions and documentation in field notes. Each of the answers in the interviews was transcribed for further study. Answers were then compiled by question and cross-analyzed accordingly to find common phrases, words, and experiences.
Pikes 70
Before collecting the data, the researcher got the instruments approved by a dissertation coach and the Asbury Seminary Doctor of Ministry office. Institutional
Review Board approval was sought and received, and the data collection phase was then started. This began with identifying participants who would fit the study and getting formal consent. Once consent was gained, semi-structured, 90-minute interviews were setup to collect the data as well as any pertinent documents related to starting the new ministries.
Summary of Literature
Starting any new ministry takes faith and patience to inherit the promises. The literature showed that campus ministry has a rich history with deep roots in Scripture and on college campuses. In many ways the reason higher education exists is because of a heart to develop young leaders. The secularization in the twentieth century of American colleges and universities led to a shift in how ministry was done with college students, but it has not changed the need students have for the gospel.
The generation in college now is a part of “Gen Z,” a freshly researched group who has grown up in a world with smartphones, high speed internet, and headphones in their ears. They have been found to be dealing with many mental health issues such as anxiety, depression, and loneliness, and they will need the gospel translated to them in a digital age, as only 4% come to college with a Biblical worldview. All of this presents an opportunity for ministry to reengage students with Scripture in innovative ways.
There is much hope to continue developing new campus ministries today which are built with deep Christology, rich ecclesiology, powerful pneumatology, and grand
Pikes 71 metanarratives which can shape and form students who can be readied, not just for the workforce, but for the mission force of making disciples of all nations.
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY FOR THE PROJECT
Overview of the Chapter
This chapter looked at the methodology for the pre-intervention research which was rooted in the nature and purpose of the project to discover best practices for starting and sustaining new campus ministries. It also examined the research questions used, which correlated to the purpose of this project. Since all ministry is contextual, not merely theoretical, the unique ministry context was considered, as well as the participants and the instrumentation used to collect the data for this study. Finally, this chapter looked at the data collection and the data analysis necessary to complete the project.
Nature and Purpose of the Project
The purpose of this research project was to discover best practices for starting and sustaining new campus ministries by which new Every Nation Campus chapters can be developed in the central region of America.
Research Questions
To fulfill the purpose of this research, the following three research questions were considered through qualitative analysis using a triangulation of semi-structured interviews, participant observations captured in field notes, and documents used by each ministry pertaining to the purpose of the research. For a complete list of the interview questions that relate to each research question see Appendix B.
Pikes 72
Research Question #1- According to campus ministry leaders who have established campus ministries and maintained them for at least 2 years, what factors contribute most to the starting and sustaining of effective campus ministries?
These questions qualitatively examined the who, what, and where behind the start of a new ministry, looking at what led up to the start of the new outreach being formed. Using a semi-structured interview and field notes from participant observation, consideration is brought to the mindset, vision, personality, spiritual giftedness, financial plan, preparation, training, and structures which existed in order for this new ministry begin.
Research Question #2- According to campus ministry leaders who have established campus ministries and maintained them for at least two years, what obstacles most hinder the starting and sustaining of effective campus ministries?
Once a new ministry is started, what happens next is equally critical. These semi-structured interview questions begin to examine what steps were instituted right after the ministry was started to help it grow and continue to make an impact for the semesters and years to come.
Research Question #3 –Moving forward, what are best practices for starting and sustaining effective campus ministries in order to bolster the development and longevity of new Every Nation Campus chapters in the central region of America?
Answers from the first two research questions are analyzed which consider the implication of starting new campus ministries. Questions about mistakes, models of ministry, pitfalls, essential elements, and preparation components are considered as data was collected through semi-structured interviews and field notes.
Pikes 73
Ministry Contexts
The context for this research was with American college ministry workers who had helped start a ministry to college students and helped see it sustained for at least two years since 2004. These individuals were Protestants holding a high regard for the Bible as authoritative for life with a focus on the Good News of Jesus Christ as the power of God for all who believe while holding a love for Jesus’ bride, The Church universal. The ministries they started were at public, secular private, Christian private, and Community College places of higher learning.
Participants
Criteria for Selection
The participants were selected for their involvement in helping to establish a new campus ministry which was sustained beyond two years since 2004. Through consulting others in the field of campus and college ministry, ministries were identified for their vision and ability to start new ministry works on new campuses. Each ministry had a high regard for the local church and worked at some level with a local church or a network of churches in a partnering relationship. Individuals were chosen for their role in leading to start a new campus ministry to ascertain their vantage point. Participants held positions such as college pastor, bi-vocational minister, parachurch campus minister, church-based campus minister, and church planter.
Description of Participants
The individuals who participated in this study understood the value of reaching the next generation of leaders at a critical time of life. The individuals were college-educated with at least a bachelor’s degree and had an appreciation for theology and its impact on all
Pikes 74 of life. All were American citizens who had seen firsthand the erosion of influence and loss of respect of cultural Christianity, particularly on the frontlines of the campuses in which they served. These participants lived in ten different states in large metropolitan cities, medium-sized cities and smaller, more rural college towns. All but one of the participants was married. All of those interviewed were Caucasian males with the exceptions being two
African American males and one Caucasian female in this study. All had started at least one campus ministry since 2004 and were the primary leaders of these new ministries. The participants included church-based campus ministers, bi-vocational ministers, parachurch campus ministers, local church pastors and college pastors. The ages at which these leaders began the new campus ministry ranged from age 20-38 years old.
Ethical Considerations
All participants were sent a consent form via email to take part in this research (See
Appendix A). All names of individuals and ministries were kept confidential throughout the research so all data collected from participants would allow them to speak freely in each of the interviews. The researcher gave each participant an identifier such as Participant #1,
Participant #2, and Participant #3. The interviews were identified and numbered according to the order of their interviews. The only other identifier assigned was the type of campus
(public or private, Christian or secular, and large, medium, small), worker role, and city and state context in which the new campus ministry took place.
Instrumentation
This research used various forms of instrumentation to collect data according to the research purpose. Semi-Structured interviews of twenty-one questions along with participant observation produced significant field notes which could be used to pull the narratives
Pikes 75 together of why and how each participant started new ministries to impact students. Printed materials, articles, websites, and training documents were also consulted from each ministry to analyze as another layer of data. The interview schedule and questions can be found in
Appendix A. A document analysis form can be found in Appendix C.
Procedure for Collecting Evidence from Participants
All of the data for this qualitative research was collected over the course of thirty-seven days. After gathering a list of ministries which fit the criteria set for this research study, a post was made in a Facebook group for college ministers with over
2,000 members were first given a notification of the study. Additionally, an email was sent to the national director of Every Nation Campus for permission to contact the six
Every Nation Campus Regional Directors, who represent over 100 American campus missionaries to extend an invite to participate in the study.
Individuals who expressed interest and fit the criteria of helping to start a campus ministry that lasted longer than two years were contacted and then sent an e-mail, found in Appendix A, which extended a formal invite to participate in this research project. A follow-up consent form was then emailed to gain consent through e-signature.
Interviews were then setup for data collection to answer the research questions.
An individual one and a half hour Zoom video conference was setup with each participant in order to gather the qualitative data needed for analysis. This project collected data through semi-structured interviews, extensive field notes, and relevant documents offered by the participants. Randy Joyner says this qualitative method used in research is a “disciplined inquiry concerned with providing meaning by using an
Pikes 76 inductive process” (122). This process allowed for a collection of data and insights from those who have ministered in a complex setting.
Each interview had audio and video captured through the online software Zoom for video conferences for the purpose of transcribing the information later for analysis. In addition to these interviews, field notes were kept in a journal which was consistent in structure for each interview and location. As available, documents were also collected from each ministry to help in revealing the narratives that arose from the research.
Procedure for Analyzing the Evidence Collected
The various data for this project was collected through semi-structured interviews, documents, and field notes. These were all used to form a strong body of data around what happens when a campus ministry begins and what was implemented to sustain the ministry. Audio from the semi-structured interviews was transcribed into notes; participant observation field notes were digitized, and documents and resources which each ministry produced were examined.
After the various data was collected, the next step was to read through each of the notes multiple times looking primarily for common phrases, words, and concepts to determine patterns and themes. Data was analyzed through a variety of means including demographically and categorically. Those themes and the places of potential for further study were then interpreted and reported.
Reliability and Validity of Project Design
Attempts to do any data collection, whether qualitative or quantitative depend on reliable instrumentation and accurate collection of data with minimal bias. To minimize error and improve this research, the use of mixed methods was used to strengthen the data
Pikes 77 collected. The questions asked in the semi-structured interviews were asked in the same way with each participant, and responses were recorded accordingly as field notes. As a participant-researcher, bias was sought to be minimized by standardizing the questions and field note forms, as well as by recording all answers from the interviews electronically for later transcription. These recordings were securely stored digitally.
Along with the consistent collection of any pertinent documents to the research, enough data was collected to strengthen the research to discover best practices in starting and sustaining ministry to students.
CHAPTER 4
EVIDENCE FOR THE PROJECT
Overview of the Chapter
This chapter examined the data collected about best practices for starting new campus ministries. A brief look at the participants for this study is considered as well as an examination of the qualitative data gathered from the research questions for this project. This chapter ends with a summary of the major findings discovered in the data collection phase of the project.
Participants
The participants for this study were selected specifically for their involvement and experience in starting new campus ministries. They also saw these ministries sustained for at least two years. They worked with various Protestant denominations, parachurch organizations, church plants, and church-based campus ministry positions. All those involved had a bachelor’s degree or higher, and all except one participant was male.
Pikes 78
All but two of the thirteen participants were Caucasian, with those two being African
American.
The age range of the participants was 20 to 38 years old when they started the campus ministries. The states where these were started were Hawaii, Oregon, California,
Texas, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Arkansas. All but one of the participants was married when they started the new ministry. The types of schools represented were public, secular private, Christian private, and community colleges. The local context for each of these campus ministries varied from college towns to metro areas. The size of these campuses varied as well with enrollment ranging from
2,000 to over 40,000 in enrollment in Fall of 2019.
Table 4.1 - Participant Demographics
AGE AT LAUNCH: (20-24) (25-29) (30-34) (35-39) ROLE: (Parachurch Minister) (College Pastor) (Churchbased Campus Min.) (Church Planter) (Bivocational)
CITY TYPE: (College Town) (Metro)
CAMPUS TYPE: (Public) (Private -Secular) (Private - Christian) (Community College)
0 2 4 6 8 10
Pikes 79
Table 4.2 –Participant’s Exposure to Campus Ministry
Participant Campus Size, City Context, Worker Type # years as vol. # years on Total Yrs of # or student staff Campus before Exposure launch 1 large state school, college town (OH), bi-vocational 3 0 3 minister 2 large state school, college town (MO), parachurch minister 4 5 9 3 large state school, metro (MN), church-based campus 4 5 9 minister 4 midsize private school, metro (PA), church-based campus 2 11 13 minister 5 midsize state school, college town (AR), denominational 4 2 6 campus minister 6 large state school, college town (TX), church-based 2 0 2 campus minister 7 private Christian school, metro (TX), parachurch minister 4 3 7 8 large state school, college town (CA), church-based 4 0 4 campus minister 9 large state school, college town (TX), church-based 2 0 2 campus minister 10 private elite school, metro (MA), church-based campus 2 3 5 minister 11 large state school, college town (OR), church-based 2 0 2 campus minister 12 public community college, metro (HI), church-based 2 5 7 campus minister 13 large state school, metro (OH), church planter 4 11 15 AVG: 3 years AVG: 5.6 AVG: 6.5 as yrs on total yrs vol/student staff involved MEDIAN: 3 MEDIAN: 5 MEDIAN: 6 yrs as yrs on yrs total vol/student staff involved
Every Nation Results AVG: 2.3 yrs. AVG: 5 yrs. AVG: 7.3 yrs.
Pikes 80
Research Question #1: Description of the Evidence: According to campus ministry leaders who have established campus ministries and maintained them for at least two years, what factors contribute most to the starting and sustaining of effective campus ministries?
Each of the semi-structured interviews were transcribed and sorted by answer to each research question. Answers to categories for each research question were further analyzed and categorized to ascertain connections and interpretations from the data. What follows is a look at the most common answers to the questions which pertained to this research question.
Passion for Christ, Students, and Personal Growth
Many of the participants said the reason they decided to go and start a new campus ministry was related to their heart for students to hear the gospel. Participant #1 spoke of how most people “come to Christ before the age of twenty-one years old,” while
#2 said they had a “strong conviction for reaching students.” Participant #4 spoke of taking a visit to an Ivy League campus before starting a ministry there and the compassion they felt standing on campus seeing the students there. Participant #11 voiced the desire to build the “college ministry they wish they had” when they were in undergraduate schooling. This drive to create space for others spoke to the work Jesus had done in their hearts.
Participants #5, #4, #2, and #12 all spoke of their desire to grow personally as a follower of Christ through starting a new campus ministry. Some experienced
“restlessness,” as #12 put it, or as #2 said they “hit a ceiling and (were) ready for
Pikes 81 something new.” One reason given for those feelings was they had spent four years at their school getting their bachelor’s degree and then additional years on staff after graduating and were ready for something new, or as #5 put it, “I didn’t want to go backward.” Each of the four participants who voiced the desire for growth had spent an average 6.5 years on staff before they started the new campus ministry, with additional prior years as a student before coming on staff.
Local Church Involvement
All thirteen participants were asked about the involvement of the local church as this new ministry began and was sustained. Parachurch, church based, and bi-vocational participants alike all expressed the critical role local churches played. For many it was funding (#4, #9), for others pastoral mentorship and prayer as they transitioned to a new community (#2, #1). For some it was having a community for their students to worship in outside of the campus bubble (#5). All saw the local church as positive help in a new campus ministry getting off the ground and spoke to that relationship growing as the new campus ministry continued.
Being Personally Impacted Led them to Personally Impact Students
All but one participant spoke of their involvement before they started a new campus ministry being due to a campus minister who personally invested in them. Each participant answered Questions 1 and 3 with either a name or multiple people who had taken the time to personally meet with them and impart the truth of God’s word to them in their formative years. Both those who were Christians before college and those who became believers while in college voiced how these mentors helped them grow in their faith in this critical time of life. Participant #7 said he was led to Christ in a fraternity
Pikes 82 house by another campus staffer. Participant #8 was inspired by their campus minister to move into the dorms and minister, which they did for all four years. All of the data pointed to personal ministry flowing out of people personally, not just corporately, ministering to them.
Going with a Team
While all of the participants seemed to have strong leadership abilities, they each seemed to be aware of some of their own weaknesses and desired a team approach to ministry to help balance this. This led all but one of the participants to seek to launch their ministries with others by recruiting other students, staff, friends, church leaders, or recent college graduates to join them.
Questions 2 and 8 gave insight into the people who were alongside the leader, as well as what the leader focused on with team members. Participant #3 spoke of working with one team member who was their “exact opposite” in terms of giftings, but they flowed really well together having previously worked on the same ministry team. There was no consistency in terms of how many people were on the initial team with size varying from one other person to dozens being on the largest team.
The Time It Takes to Start a New Campus Ministry Varies
The amount of time it took these ministers to launch a ministry varied depending on a number of factors. Question 1 and 6 really allowed for this portion of the narrative to unfold. Some were unable to physically go to the campus they wanted to reach so instead they found other ways to make connections. Participant #2 spent “one day a week, for an entire (school) year driving” to their new campus an hour and a half away to begin meeting students before they moved to their new city. Participant #3 moved about eight
Pikes 83 months after making the decision to start the new campus ministry but spent a lot of that time recruiting, raising funds, and finding student connections through their relational network.
Other participants moved and within months started a new campus outreach in a short amount of time. Participant #5 finished at their previous ministry role in May, got married in June, and then moved to a new town to prepare to reach out to their new campus in August. They used the shortened time to build relationships with possible student leaders and volunteers to plan their first outreaches. Participant #6 moved back from a ministry training school in the middle of the semester to their alma mater and jumped back onto the campus full speed reaching out.
Funding Matters
Each of the participants were asked specific questions about their funding plans with questions 5 and 17. Since ministry costs money, all participants commented on how they had to solve the challenges which come with paying for ministry expenses and their living expenses. Some had multiple streams of resources, but out of the thirteen participants, one was bi-vocational and two were full-time paid staff by their local churches.
All participants still had to consider how not just to get funded to get to their new campus but also the new costs which would grow as the ministry expanded in size.
Participant #3 spoke of the difference financially over the years as their group grew an annual dinner from fifteen students the first year to several hundred years later. This participant, along with several others, got creative in their funding plans and created fundraisers that included students and alumni playing an active role.
Pikes 84
Research Question #2: Description of the Evidence: According to campus ministry leaders who have established campus ministries and maintained them for at least two years, what obstacles most hinder the starting and sustaining of effective campus ministries?
Going Alone
Only one participant, #12, reported that they had tried to start a campus ministry completely from scratch with no team of volunteers, staff, or student leaders. Participant
#12 said they wish they could have done one thing differently, which was “first build a team” to reach the campus, because it was incredibly hard to reach students with the gospel alone. The rest of the participants all noted other team members with them when they sought to launch a campus ministry. These team members were spouses, lay church members, pastoral staff, transfer students who came with them, or students on the campus they sought to reach who expressed an interest in seeing God do something in their lives.
One participant said they even started a ministry with two homeschooled high school seniors.
Underfunding
While ministry costs money, participants spoke about not understanding the importance of being fully funded before beginning a new ministry to college students.
Participant #8 said getting some training on developing funds was one thing they “wished
(they) would have done better” on the front end. Instead they mentioned their family struggled the first year unnecessarily until they got some formal training in support raising, and it was four more years until they got financially healthy for good. Participant
#12 mentioned they could not have gone to start their new campus ministry if they had
Pikes 85 not planned “double” their previous budget to account for the increased expenses in the new city they would live in. Both participants said this area can be one of the greatest pitfalls to starting new campus ministries.
Unclear or Inward Plan for Students
In the data the importance of developing leaders and disciples was mentioned.
Not having a clear way to do this with the students or thinking shortsightedly about it can slow down a new campus ministry. Participant #9 said it is “hard to build a ministry with marginalized (inward-focused) students.” When asked question 14 and 8, participants had varying responses on who they were targeting when they began and how they were
“reaching lost students” with this new ministry. Those who answered this with confidence were able to articulate a clear plan of how they would engage and reach out to lost students as well as how they would map this out with their newly involved Christian students. Only two participants said they were targeting Christians on campus, the rest said things like “we wanted to reach those who were lost and wouldn’t go to (other campus ministries) and were unchurched” (#5).
Discouragement, Fear, and Indecision
Many participants spoke of the issue of discouragement, fear, and indecision as being great hindrances to the work of starting new campus ministries. When no one knows who you are or does not trust why you are on their campus, this can be bring all kinds of emotions to the forefront. Participant #2 laughed as they told the story of a meeting that went awry where a student got “weirded out” by an invite to a leadership bible study and told the administration. The student became involved in the ministry years later, but it was a definitely a scare for the participant and their team of where they
Pikes 86 stood with other students and administration. Participant #12 said discouragement is one of the biggest pitfalls a campus worker will go through as they seek to launch something new and learning how to push past that consistently made the biggest difference to their campus work.
Participants also mentioned the importance of pushing past the fear of imperfection and making mistakes. Participant #3 said that indecision was the biggest pitfall a leader can make because they can miss out on the opportunity right in front of them that will not be there later.
Unrecognized Growth Inhibitors
As with any church or ministry, there can be natural or supernatural barriers which inhibit the group from growing. Not understanding organizational dynamics of groups was mentioned as a pitfall of starting and sustaining new campus ministries by
Participant #5. By not recognizing growth barriers inherit in group size that impact momentum, future ministry opportunities can be lost. For instance, there is a different set of physical, social, spiritual, and emotional needs in a small group of 2-5 people versus a midsize group of 20-30 people. Not only are there different needs for the students, there are different needs in the administration of the group. These issues can be what keeps a ministry from reaching more people and raising up more leaders. Systems are built for the people they presently have, not for the ones who are coming. When one does not understand organizationally what needs to change based on group size dynamics, there can be frustration and disengagement from staff or students.
Another inhibitor mentioned by Participant #9 was the barrier of sin. They spoke of the need to be able to sense or “smell sin”. By this they spoke of the need to be able to
Pikes 87 have transparency and closeness of relationship in the campus ministry community, so much so that there is an awareness when things are not going as the Lord intends relationally. This Participant also spoke of how they had seen this adversely affect a ministry’s momentum.
Other inhibitors mentioned were “not learning the campus culture” by
Participant #10 and trying to “recreate what you had in the past” by Participant #12.
These comments showed that the work of starting a new campus ministry is not possible when coming onto a campus with cultural blinders on. A campus minister must not seek to work through bringing their past experiences as predictors of future success. There should be a humility to learn and experience the new things God is doing in their midst without closing themselves off to learning new ways to contextualize the gospel to their new campus.
Research Question #3: Description of the Evidence: Moving forward, what are best practices for starting and sustaining effective campus ministries in order to bolster the development and longevity of new Every Nation Campus chapters in the central region of America?
Considering the answers to the first two research questions, here are some findings which emerged from the data to answer this final research question.
Seeing the Sequential Stages of Starting a Campus Ministry
The data showed a sequential process to starting a new campus ministry that consisted of three phases: preparation of team and leader, entry to campus, and the two- to three-year sprint. This was seen by looking at the narratives of how participants were able to start the ministry. All of them did so after being personally and practically
Pikes 88 prepared through involvement in a campus ministry, on average for three years (see Fig
4.2). Only bi-vocational participant #1 did not speak of previously being involved as a student in campus ministry but became exposed to it while doing graduate work and entered their profession working with students and in their local church setting. All participants voiced how they had spent time getting informally trained through their involvement in their previous college ministry, which is noteworthy.
The most common traits or characteristics offered in answers to question #4 about the type of person it takes to start a new campus ministry included consistency, persistence, initiative, and high relational skills. Participant #3 used the word “grit” to describe the type of person who would get things done in ministry even if it looked hard or the task seemed impossible. Participant #1 expressed the need for the Holy Spirit to be the guide when starting a campus ministry, while Participant #13 said “being a person of prayer” was key. The type of person needed to reach a campus is clear, and it is also clear how to prepare students or volunteers long before they go to start a new campus ministry.
The entry onto campus is an important time, with all but one of the participants seeking to begin their new ministry with the start of the new school year in August or
September. While church plants may look to start around Easter or other times in the calendar year, the start of the school year gives those starting new campus ministries a unique window each year to be prepared for and built up to. This means the campus ministry calendar has times of year that are better than others to launch a new campus ministry.
Relationships with administration, official student organization status, and regular meeting times were surprisingly not seen as critical by the participants with each
Pikes 89 one doing these things in different orders. Some participants met administrators first and leveraged those relationships (#13); others met students first to build up to their levels of trust on campus before launching a weekly larger gathering one year later (#2). These different elements were seen as key, but there was not consensus on which order they should be established. It depended on the pace of development of relationships on campus as well as the amount of spiritual growth in students’ lives.
Coaching New Campus Ministry Launchers through the Phases
One of the things this research exposed was a need for coaching and support during the different phases of starting a new campus ministry. There is often a lack of help for those starting new campus ministries. Often many feel like they must ‘recreate the wheel’ on their new campus because everything seems so new. While there are a handful of gatherings and conferences specifically where campus workers can connect, many are siloed within or for one denomination or parachurch network. The data suggests that the church planting world has developed a much more systematic way to collate ideas, resources, and experiences while identifying and preparing those planting churches in a systematic and relationally supportive role. Churches and campus ministries would do well to consider developing this aspect of coaching ministers as they seek to grow new campus works.
Participants #3, #4, #5, and #13 all said they had been helped positively by some type of church planter assessment or bootcamp before starting their new campus ministries. Every Nation specifically provides church planters with pre-launch help through assessments and bootcamps, while also providing post-launch regional gatherings called clusters, coaching calls with a church planting coach, and consulting
Pikes 90 with a trained consultant. While something similar could aid campus ministers, currently no clear process exists for those starting new campus ministries who are facing the complexity of new ministry contexts while also leading others. The development of a similar or parallel process may be of immediate help to the ministry.
Extending Every Nation Campus Missionary Careers
After comparatively analyzing the total length of time exposed to campus ministry, the participants who were in this study and are currently a part of Every Nation had a slightly higher number of years of exposure to campus ministry before launching the new campus ministries than the rest of the participants. While this study does not assume this was their first or only campus ministry they helped launch, it is worth noting the difference and potential implications, as are considered in Chapter 5.
It is also helpful to know that the average Every Nation worker who started a new campus ministry in this study had previously been involved in campus ministry as a student or volunteer for an average of 2.3 years and was on staff for 5 years on average before they started the new campus ministry. These appear to be natural transition points for campus ministry workers and the ministry can now begin to consider encouraging staffers to start something new in their third or fourth year on staff, possibly extending the missionary careers of our campus staff.
Summary of Major Findings
There were several findings from the data collected as it was analyzed. These are a summary of the major findings which arose out of the research findings:
Pikes 91
1. Informal preparation is an essential part of the process in starting new campus
ministries.
2. Starting a new campus ministry is transformative for the campus minister as
much as it is for reaching new students on new campuses.
3. Starting a new campus ministry can extend the missionary careers of campus
ministers.
4. The average years an Every Nation worker had been involved as a student or
volunteer before coming on staff was 2.3, and the average length of time they were
on staff before starting a new campus ministry was 5 years.
CHAPTER 5
LEARNING REPORT FOR THE PROJECT
Overview of the Chapter
This final chapter examines the findings from the data collection phase for research on best practices for starting new campus ministries. Each of the major findings are discussed in detail with a view towards their representation in current literature and
Biblical and theological considerations. Implications from this research are then considered, and limitations from the research project are acknowledged after the conclusion of the study. The final section of this chapter discusses any unexpected observations and recommendations which arose from the research project.
Major Findings
First Finding: Informal Preparation is Essential
While many tools, books, and resources exist for ministry today, the most powerful teacher continues to be doing. Educators have shown the importance of the
Pikes 92 psychomotor for learning and its impact on memory as people remember close to 70% of what they do (Im loc 93; Vella, 17). There must be a better job in campus ministry of seeking to make it more closely resemble Jesus in the way He made disciples. There is a need to get out of the lecture hall and get into the laboratory of the real world with those being discipled and interact with real people, in real situations and in real time.
This study showed that the average length of time amongst all participants to be directly impacted by campus ministry as students or volunteers was three years. The implications of the three-year window for disciple making should be considered. Daniel spent three years learning the literature and language of Babylon (Daniel 1:4,5); Jesus spent three years with his disciples, and Paul spent three years being mentored and ministering with Barnabas and others before leading trips of his own (Gal. 1:11-19; Acts
9:1-31, 11:19-26, 12:25, 13-15). Three years is also about the length of time available to invest in students’ lives before sending them off to be missionaries to the world (Wright, loc 414). This time with them must be better focused to make the biggest difference, knowing some of them will be called to help start other campus ministries in the future.
Second Finding: New Campus Ministries Transform the Campus Minister
Part of a missionary’s life is the adventure of seeing God do the extraordinary that He has never done before. Part of campus ministry is the built-in fresh adventure, as every year students come and go. It is easy for a campus minister to think they should stay in a certain place, but God might have ideas to take them elsewhere, not merely for student’s sake, but also for the missionary’s sake. Darrell Guder’s claim rings true that evangelizing is not just meant for the world but also for those doing the evangelizing, in order to see a continual conversion from the gospel (26). In other words, sometimes
Pikes 93 gospel messengers need to hear the gospel they preach, namely that God is with them, for them, and not against them no matter where He takes them.
The four different commissioning phrases in each of the gospels all speak of movement outward with the message of Christ (Matthew 28:18-20; John 20:21; Luke
24:46, 47; Mark 16:15). While the first church in Jerusalem was more of an attractional church due to the nature of the festival surrounding Pentecost, all of the churches the
Apostle Paul later planted were founded by being more outward and missionally focused on planting the gospel. The finding of personal growth in those who started new campus ministries was huge because it does not exclude internal growth happening as people go to external new places to advance God’s kingdom. In going to new places and spaces with King Jesus, people find God waiting for them through simple obedience to His word. This centripetal and centrifugal mission of God will eventually send them out beyond the command part of the Great Commission into the promise part of the Great
Commission of His presence being with us until the end (Okoye, 12; Matthew 28:20).
Third Finding: Extending Campus Ministry Careers
While there have been little statistics in the literature, it seems that the shelf life of the average campus minister on staff is two to three years. In this study it was found that when you include the time campus staff had been involved previously as students or volunteers, their time span of involvement grew by three more years. This natural boundary makes sense then that campus staff would often face a challenge and crossroads after a few years on staff. Questions which can be common for campus ministers in this phase are: “Should I do this any longer? Do I still connect with this demographic? Do I want to continue to hang around and minister in the same place I went to school and to
Pikes 94 those who are so immature? What is my career path and trajectory? How can I make more money? How is this impacting my family or ability to get married and start one?”
The power of campus ministry is that Jesus had the first small group of immature teenage disciples, and this group is whom He wanted to entrust with the message that would heal the world. Paul also spent years with some of his churches, others he spent weeks or months (Allen 6). While there is no literature to support the idea that starting new campus ministries alone can extend a missionary’s career, there is much hope in this study that further research might be able to further confirm natural boundaries related to length of work, at which point engagement can happen with campus missionaries to explore new possibilities. The starting of a new campus ministry can be a way to aid professional and personal development as a staff person gets closer to their fifth year on staff.
Fourth Finding: Every Nation Workers’ Involvement Before Launching Campus
Work
This project helped identify several things which had been under the surface for this ministry. While there had not previously been a process by which to start new campus ministries formally within Every Nation, there was an informal system which had never been examined over the course of time. This project illuminated some things which can possibly can shift thinking and practice for the future.
Namely, that the average Every Nation worker in this study has been on staff on average five years before they launched a new campus ministry. While this may seem like a trivial finding, this gives the ministry a potential vantage point into a natural
Pikes 95 boundary where missionaries can be further engaged and developed by encouraging them to start something new on a new campus.
This process could take the form of a multi-year approach to leadership development. Regionally campus ministries could identify leaders long before someone comes on staff, but instead start with a student leader’s last years of campus involvement preparing them to lead well on campus. This could then lead them into their first few years when they come on staff, and then move into a time of training and coaching before starting a new campus ministry on a new campus.
Ministry Implications of the Findings
The implications of this project will be shared with Every Nation Campus’
Regional Directors and National Director, as well as the Ministry of Partnership
Development division for further feedback and input into its application with current processes and systems to train campus ministers. Hopefully ways to integrate these findings into current and updated processes can help see the ministry to reach another 100 campuses in America. Some of the ways the church planting world already uses information like this in their process of launching church planters is through bootcamps, content driven approaches, classes, and assessments (Stetzer and Bird, 87-98). Selecting one of these methods may better prepare people to start a new campus ministry.
For instance, one such application of this could be a two-year or eighteen-month engagement plan for the last part of Every Nation Campus’ student leaders’ undergraduate experience for those prayerfully coming on as full-time staff. As they enter full-time ministry a three-year developmental plan for every campus missionary to grow as a minister while developing core competencies necessary to start a new campus work
Pikes 96 can be imparted. At the end of the third year the campus minister could then be encouraged to consider being a part of another ministry training, assessment, or bootcamp which focuses on preparing them to start a new campus work. This last step of the process would include a level of coaching, accountability, and community along with those at a similar stage of their ministerial careers. The multi-generational impact of more experienced coaches and their peers can create a network of campus multipliers and a culture of pioneering in the ministry that has not existed previously.
In terms of the broader body of Christ, these findings were shared with all of the participants to better inform their work in campus ministry. Additionally, these findings have the potential for a broader audience and can be developed into a popular level book and seminar or workshop to help churches and campus ministries begin to think through the implications for their process of developing staff, pastors, and congregants who can reach the campuses within reach of them. With so many digital platforms available this has the potential to be shared digitally in written, video and audio form as well as in person.
Limitations of the Study
One of the limitations of this study was where these semi-structured interviews took place. The interviews with each participant took place in one sitting in a one to two- hour timeframe via Zoom video conference software. Since the calls mostly happened over video, and two happened over audio only, there was not as much ability to read body language or to judge how well the participants were recalling the facts surrounding the narrative of their campus ministries’ beginnings. This information is helpful in interviews and was lacking, though not completely.
Pikes 97
There is also the limiting factor of the interviewees. The perspective from each leader possibly was subjective more than objective as to how things really went. By interviewing the leaders of the ministry, there may have been blind spots that they were unable to see as the ones leading the charge. Other staff, lay leaders, or student leaders could have been interviewed, and may have had a more objective view to about the start of their new campus ministries. Amongst the interviewees there was also the potential for the Hawthorne effect, where subjects’ answers are influenced because they know they are being interviewed and want to paint things in the best light (Sensing, loc 2239).
The study also could have been more diverse in who was interviewed, both ethnically and by sex. The interviewees were potentially not diverse enough to cover the wide varieties of students and campus ministries across America. For instance, participants were not involved in this study who had started a campus ministry at a
Historically Black College or University (HBCU), an international student campus ministry, or a specialized ministry to athletes. There was also only one female involved in this study so the important voice of females in leadership was not a part of this research even though several wives were involved with their husbands in starting these new ministries. There is potential for further study to be done in these areas of diversity.
Likewise, those who started campus ministries before the year 2004 were not included in this study, primarily because of the generational shifts seen in American students in the past fifteen years with the rise of Gen Z. This might have excluded important information by not allowing data from other experiences to be brought into the study.
Pikes 98
A final limiting factor is that one of the participants was unable to do a video or audio call with the researcher and instead wrote out their answers to the questions which meant some of their rich narrative data was lost. Finally, another participant’s interview had to be broken up into multiple days, thus possibly hurting the flow of narrative and train of thought.
Unexpected Observations
It was surprising to hear such a wide range of experiences yet with many similarities amongst these campus ministry peers. They all had great faith to step out and believe God in the midst of a culture where so many of their peers are not making those strides. The stories of some of the Every Nation family who have started campus ministries across the country and are making something out of nothing by the grace of
God were encouraging. Their commitment, resolve, and focus on the Great Commission despite opposition were inspiring.
It was also surprising to discover so many like-minded church-based campus ministers who are also seeking to start new church-based, campus-focused campus ministries. As stated, campus ministry tends to be done in a silo among different denominations and ministries, and this project allowed for further needed cross pollination. This research showed that there is some tremendous campus ministry happening by some incredibly committed people on both a small and large scale. It was personally refreshing to the researcher to get to spend time getting to know, at least for an hour or so, these brothers and sisters in Christ who are on the frontlines of cultural engagement on campuses.
Recommendations
Pikes 99
It is recommended that the questions asked in this study be used with a wider range of more diverse participants to compare the findings from the data. There was not a large number of female voices or much ethnic diversity. Specialized ministry was also not covered by this research such as in the areas of Greek, athletic, international student, or ethnic specific ministries.
It is also recommended that more research be done looking at the career span for campus ministers, college pastors and parachurch workers. While many go on to pastor, do missionary work, or leave ministry, there is little research done on career paths for those who stay longer.
It is also recommended that there be further study on the next step after starting new campus ministries, specifically around the inevitable transitioning of campus ministry leadership, since many studies have been done for businesses and churches in these regards (Murrell Post Founder 117).
A final recommendation would be for more research to be done specifically on starting and sustaining campus ministries at community colleges, technical institutes, and the growing number of online colleges and universities.
Postscript
The journey of doctoral research is like a long journey to a new land. When you go somewhere new, it typically seems extra-long since your senses are trying to take everything in. This journey felt quick in hindsight, but the journey took place over months and years, not days. Like the seafaring travelers of old, this journey has been filled with unexpected twists, turns, challenges, and even the occasional storms. While working on this project our family personally experienced death, loss, financial
Pikes 100 challenges, the birth of newborn children, and moving to a new city. Even at the end of this project we experienced the world coming to a standstill due to the COVID-19
Coronavirus Pandemic with higher education likely forever shaken. I am thankful for it all because of what I have gotten to hear from my brothers and sister about the tremendous campus and college ministry happening across the country, and I know that
God is up to something good in these uncertain times.
In going through my personal journey of research for this project, I can definitely say this was a transforming process because I was forced to face weaknesses in my own life which needed to be changed. I have learned and discovered there is much more to learn and to discover through research, and I am eternally thankful for this time to study and learn to examine the world around me in a more rigorous, systematic, and holistic way.
Pikes 101
APPENDIXES
A. Interview Schedule and Questions
B. Participation Email and Informed Consent Form
C. Document Analysis Guide
Pikes 102
APPENDIX A – Interview Schedule Participant # Context Notes 1 large state school, college town(OH), bi-vocational interviewed Fri Feb 28 2pm 2 large state school, college town(MO), parachurch interviewed Mar 4 10:30am 3 large state school, metro (MN), church-based campus minister interviewed Mar 4 1:30pm 4 midsize private school, metro (PA), church-based campus minister interviewed Mar 5 10:30am 5 midsize state school, college town (AR), denominational interviewed Mar 6 11am 6 large state school, college town (TX), church-based campus minister interviewed Mar 9 9am 7 private Christian school, metro (TX), parachurch interviewed Mar 9 10:30am 8 large state school, college town (CA), church-based campus minister interviewed Mar 12 10am 9 large state school, college town (TX), church-based campus minister interviewed Mar 11 1pm 10 private elite school, metro (MA), church-based campus minister interviewed Mar 24 9am 11 large state school, college town (OR), church-based campus minister emailed interview answers 12 public comm. college, metro (HI), church-based campus minister interviewed Mar 27 3pm 13 large state school, metro (OH), church planter interviewed Apr 4 10am Research Interview Questions 1. What made you seek to start a new ministry at a new campus? 2. Who was involved and how did they become involved? 3. How were the leaders identified and prepared before starting the new work? 4. What type of person did it take to reach that campus? 5. What was your funding plan for this new work for both ministry expenses and living/moving expenses? 6. Was this a targeted campus to reach out to? If so, how far in advance was a plan put into place to reach it? 7. If yes to question 6, what steps were taken before starting the ministry? 8. What type of student(s) were you seeking to impact on that campus before starting? 9. How would you describe your ministry’s model or philosophy of ministry? 10. How does the local church play a role before this ministry began on the new campus? 11. Were there any practical tools you created or used as the ministry began? 12. What was first implemented after this ministry launched to students? 13. When this ministry began, what was the primary focus? 14. How would you say this new ministry did reaching lost students vs. reaching existing Christians? 15. What was key to this new ministry existing two years later? 16. How did you practice soul care to stay healthy mentally, emotionally, spiritually and physically? 17. As ministry continued on that campus, what affect did this have on the ministry’s finances? 18. How was the local church involved ongoing in this new work? 19. If you were mentoring a minister through their first year on a new campus, what are some benchmarks that you would look for? 20. Were there any practical tools implemented, whether created or borrowed, to sustain the ministry work? 21. What are the biggest pitfalls in starting a new ministry to college students?
Pikes 103
APPENDIX B - Participation Email & Consent Form
E-MAIL TO PARTICIPANTS
Date:
Dear College Worker,
Thank you for your initial interest in this research project. As spoken earlier on the telephone, I am writing an applied research dissertation for a Doctor of Ministry degree through Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Kentucky. The research I am seeking to complete is related to best practices for starting new campus ministries through a qualitative research approach.
I have identified ministries which are not only reaching college students for Christ but are also committed to seeing other new campuses reached for Christ through multiplication.
For the purpose of this study, each of these ministries: • Has been a part of starting new ministries to reach students on college campuses. • Has full-time staff which help lead this growing ministry. • Partner closely with and believe in the local church. • Have existed at least two years since being started.
Based on my initial findings via website research, various conversations, and phone interviews, I believe your ministry fits the criteria above for my research. I would be grateful if you would allow me the opportunity to interview you and/or your staff who have been involved in the work of starting new campus ministries for further research.
Please be assured that all participant identities and their responses will be kept completely confidential. I look forward to your response to this request. Feel free to respond to me through e-mail or by phone with any questions.
Thank you for your consideration,
Delvin Pikes Every Nation Campus Nashville Campus Director
Office: (615) 260-3391 E-mail: delvin.pikes @everynation.org
Pikes 104
INFORMED CONSENT LETTER
Project: “Every Campus: Best Practices for Starting New Campus Ministries”
Hello,
You are invited to be a part of research study being done by Delvin Pikes as a Doctorate of Ministry candidate from Asbury Theological Seminary on Best Practices for Starting New Campus Ministries. You are invited because of your involvement in helping to start a college-aged campus ministry which lasted longer than two years.
If you agree to be in the study, you will be asked to be a part of up to three (3) one-and a half hour interviews. Participation is seen as completely voluntary and will not involve any compensation. By participating in this study, it is understood that you will be recorded to enable accurate transcription of what was discussed.
If anyone else is given information about your responses, they will not know your name. A number or initials will be used instead of your name in the findings from the study.
If something makes you feel uncomfortable while you are in the study, please let me know. If you decide at any time you do not want to finish the study, you may stop whenever you want. You can ask me questions at any time about anything in this study. I can be reached at 615-260-3391 or at [email protected].
Signing this paper means that you have read this or had it read to you, and that you want to be in the study. If you do not want to be in the study, do not sign the paper. Being in the study is completely up to you, and no one will be mad if you do not sign this paper or even if you change your mind later. You are agreeing by signing it that you have been told about this study and why it is being done and what to do.
___ Signature of Person Agreeing to be in the Study Date Signed
Pikes 105
Appendix C: Document Analysis Guide
1. Document Number:____
2. Document Type: (Check one): a. ___ Flier b. ___ Sermon c. ___ Website d. ___Training Material e. ___Bible Study f. ___Outreach Tool g. ___Other (______)
3. Unique aspects of document:
4. Date of document:
5. Document Creator (Position or Title):
6. Who is the audience for document?:
7. Document Information:
Pikes 106
WORKS CITED
Addison, Steve. Movements that Changed the World: Five Keys to Spread the Gospel. IVP,
Revised Ed. 2011.
--- Pioneering Movements: Leadership that Multiplies Disciples and Churches. IVP. Kindle
Ed. 2015.
Adizes, Ichak. Managing Corporate Lifecycles. Adizes Institute Publications. 2004.
Ahrend, Todd. In this Generation: Looking to the Past to Reach the Present. Dawson Media.
2010.
Allen, Roland. Missionary Methods—St. Paul or Ours? The Lutterworth Press, Kindle Ed.
2006.
Antonio, Carlos. “Re: Statistical EN Origins Question.” Received by Delvin Pikes, 1 May
2020.
Barker, Leigh. “Re: ENC NA Stats.” Received by Delvin Pikes, 22 Nov 2019.
Barna Group. “Evangelism Is Most Effective Among Kids.” www.barna.com,
https://www.barna.com/research/evangelism-is-most-effective-among-kids/. Accessed 13
July 2020.
Barna Group and Impact 360 Institute. Gen Z: The Culture, Beliefs and Motivations Shaping
the Next Generation. 2018.
Bolsinger, Tod E. Canoeing the Mountains: Christian Leadership in Uncharted Territory. IVP
Books. Kindle Ed. 2018.
Bosch, David. Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission. Orbis Books.
1991.
Pikes 107
Bradley, Anthony. “You Are the Manure of the Earth.” Christianity Today Oct. 2016: Pg 72-
76. ReWord.
Breen, Mike. Leading Kingdom Movements: The Everyman Notebook on How to Change the
World. 3DM Printing, Kindle Edition. 2013.
Brittain, John N. “Revitalizing College Ministry: The ‘church-on-Campus’ Model.” The
Christian Century, vol. 105, no. 22, July 1988, pp. 673–75. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0000804825&site=eds-live.
Broocks, Rice. God’s Not Dead. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson. 2013.
---Change the Campus, Change the World: A Battle Plan for Reaching this Generation.
Gainesville, FL: Maranatha Publications. 1985.
---Every Nation in our Generation: Recovering the Apostolic Mandate. Lake Mary, FL:
Creation House Press. 2002.
---The Gift of the Evangelist. Fuller Theological Seminary, DMiss Dissertation. 2010.
---Man, Myth, Messiah: Answering History’s Greatest Question. W Publishing Group. 2016.
Byerley, Timothy E. The Great Commission: Models of Evangelization in American
Catholicism. Paulist Press. 2008.
Coleman, Robert E. and Gyertson, David J., "One Divine Moment: The Account of the
Asbury Revival of 1970" (2013). Heritage Material. 67.
https://place.asburyseminary.edu/firstfruitsheritagematerial/67
Escobar, Samuel. The New Global Mission: The Gospel from Everywhere to Everyone. IVP
Academic. 2003.
Pikes 108
“Every Nation Ministry of Partnership Development Workbook.” Every Nation Ministry of
Partnership Development. Accessed April 2020.
Every Nation videos. “Rice Broocks - Every Nation, Every Campus.” Vimeo,
https://vimeo.com/13848380. Accessed 19 Feb. 2020.
“Every Nation’s Church-Based Campus Ministry Model.” Every Nation Campus, staff
archive. Accessed April 2019.
Fish, Eric. Student Church Planter’s Kit Small File. Pdf.
http://scpx.org/paperclip/posts/24/Student%20Church%20Planter's%20Kit%20Small%20
File.pdf. Accessed 29 Dec. 2017.
Friedman, Edwin H. A Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of Quick Fix. Seabury Books,
Kindle Ed. 2007.
Garrison, David. Church Planting Movements: How God is Redeeming a Lost World.
WigTake Resources. 2001.
Guder, Darrell L. The Continuing Conversion of the Church. Eerdmans. 2000.
Hammond, Kim and Darren Cronshaw. Sentness: Six Postures of Missional Christians. IV
Press. Kindle ed. 2014.
Hauerwas, Stanley and William H. Willimon. The Holy Spirit. Abingdon Press. eBook. 2015
Hendrickson, Craig S. “Ending Racial Profiling in the Church: Revisiting the Homogenous
Unit Principle.” Mission Studies, vol. 35, no. 3, Oct. 2018, pp. 342–65. brill-
com.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu, doi:10.1163/15733831-12341589.
Hines, Benson. Reaching the Campus Tribes: An Opening Inquiry. eBook, 2009.
The Holy Bible. New International Version. Zondervan. 2011.
Pikes 109
Houston, R. David. Discovering Church Planter Building Blocks for Integration into Every
Nation Campus Missionary Training Providing a Seamless Path from Campus Ministry
to Church Planting Ministry. Âsbury Theological Seminary, DMin, 2019.
Hunt, Keith and Gladys Hunt. For Christ and the University: The Story of InterVarsity
Christian Fellowship USA 1940-1990. Downers Grove, IL: IVPress. 1992.
Hyojoung Kim and Steven Pfaff. Structure and Dynamics of Religious Insurgency: Students and
the Spread of the Reformation. American Sociological Review, Vol. 77, No. 2 (April 2012),
pp. 188-215.
Im, Daniel. No Silver Bullets: Five Small Shifts that will Transform your Ministry. B&H
books. 2017.
Jin, Kim Helen. “Campus Crusade ‘Explosions’: Conversions and Conservatism from the US
Bible Belt to Cold War South Korea, 1972–1974.” Journal of Korean Religions, vol. 9,
no. 1, Institute for the Study of Religion, Sogang University, 2018, p. 11. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=edsjsr&AN=edsjsr.26594680&site=eds-live.
Joyner, Randy L., et al. Writing the Winning Thesis or Dissertation. 3rd Ed., Corwin. 2013.
Kärkkäinen, Veli-Matti. An Introduction to Ecclesiology: Ecumenical, Historical and Global
Perspectives. IVP Academic. 2002.
--- “The Holy Spirit.” Basic Guides to Christian Theology. Westminster John Knox Press, 1st
ed. eBook, 2012.
Keller, Timothy J. Center Church: Doing Balanced, Gospel-Centered Ministry in Your City.
Zondervan. Kindle Ed. 2012.
Keener, Craig. Spirit Hermeneutics: Reading Scripture in Light of Pentecost. Eerdmans.
Kindle Ed. 2016.
Pikes 110
King Jr., Martin Luther. “The Most Segregated Hour in America - Martin Luther King Jr.”
Interview by Meet the Press from April 17, 1960. YouTube, uploaded by Jason Tripp, 29
April 2014, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1q881g1L_d8.
Kinnaman, David and Mark Matlock. Faith for Exiles: 5 Ways for a New Generation to
Follow Jesus in Digital Babylon. Baker Books. 2019.
“Launch Guide.” Every Campus. Accessed Feb. 2020.
Lawson, Eldridge Leo. Passion Church: The Parallel-Church Planting of a Postmodern
Campus Church. Fuller Theological Seminary, School of Intercultural Studies, ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/docview/920155484/abstract/203009B991F04BF0PQ/1. 2010.
Lopez, Cindy. “Question for My Dissertation Research.” Received by Delvin Pikes, 9 July
2020.
Ma, Jaeson. The Blueprint: A Revolutionary Plan to Plant Missional Communities on Campus.
Regal. 2007.
McCormick, Thomas R. Campus Ministry in the Coming Age. CBP Press. 1987.
McDonald, Lee Martin. “Ephesus.” Dictionary of New Testament Background: A
Compendium of Contemporary Biblical Scholarship. p. 318. InterVarsity Press. 2000.
Mingus, Laurie. “Re: Question for My Dissertation Research.” Received by Delvin Pikes, 17
April 2020.
Morton, Scott. Funding Your Ministry: An In-Depth Biblical Guide for Successfully Raising
Personal Support. NavPress. eBook. 2007.
Murrell, William Stephen. Post-Founder Sustainability: Building Ministries That Outlive
Their Founders. Asbury Theological Seminary, 2019. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/docview/2279899854/abstract/8A8D6F2EE785419APQ/42.
Pikes 111
---100 Years from Now: Sustaining a Movement for Generations. Dunham Books. 2013
Nash, Kenneth. “The Identifying, Equipping, and Sending of Laypersons to Lead a Multi-Site
Church.” ATS Dissertations,
http://place.asburyseminary.edu/ecommonsatsdissertations/794. Jan. 2014
Newbigin, Lesslie. The Gospel in a Pluralist Society. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1989.
---The Open Secret: An Introduction to the Theology of Mission. Revised Ed., 1995. Kindle
Edition.
Nouwen, Henri J. M. Spirituality of Fundraising. Upper Room Ministries, eBook. 2004.
Obas, Kenley H. The History of Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Their
Association with Whites. International Journal of Education and Human Developments.
no. 1, 2018, p. 6.
Okesson, Gregg. DM911: Discovering God’s Missional Heart, Section 5: Lessons from World
Christianity. Aug. 2017. Asbury Theological Seminary. Microsoft PowerPoint
presentation.
Okoye, James Chukwuma. Israel and the Nations: A Mission Theology of the Old Testament.
Orbis Books, 2006.
McCormick, Thomas R. Campus Ministry in the Coming Age. CBP Press. 1987.
Paas, Stefan. Church Planting in the Secular West: Learning from the European Experience.
Eerdmans, eBook. 2016.
Parks, Sharon Daloz. Leadership Can Be Taught: A Bold Approach for a Complex World.
Harvard Business School Press. 2005.
Pikes 112
Perry, Samuel L. “Social Capital, Race, and Personal Fundraising in Evangelical Outreach
Ministries.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, vol. 52, no. 1, Wiley
Subscription Services, 2013, p. 159. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1111/jssr.12005.
--- “Diversity, Donations, and Disadvantage: The Implications of Personal Fundraising for
Racial Diversity in Evangelical Outreach Ministries.” Review of Religious Research, vol.
53, no. 4, [Religious Research Association, Inc., Springer], 2012, pp. 397–418. JSTOR,
JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/41940750.
Pew Research Center. “In U.S., Decline of Christianity Continues at Rapid Pace.” Oct. 17,
2019. https://www.pewforum.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2019/10/Trends-in-
Religious-Identity-and-Attendance-FOR-WEB-1.pdf . Accessed 28 Feb. 2020.
Phillips, Tom and Bob Norsworthy. W. Terry Whalin, editor. The World at Your Door:
Reaching International Students in Your Home, Church, and School. Minneapolis, MN.
1997.
Poe, Harry Lee. Christianity in the Academy: Teaching at the Intersection of Faith and
Learning. Baker Academic. 2004.
Portaro, Sam Anthony and Gary Peluso. Inquiring and Discerning Hearts: Vocation and
Ministry with Young Adults on Campus. Scholars Press. 1993.
Powell, Kara and Jake Mulder, Brad Griffin. Growing Young: Six Essential Strategies to Help
Young People Discover and Love Your Church. Baker Books. 2016.
Putman, David and Ed Stetzer. Breaking the Missional Code: Your Church Can Become a
Missionary in Your Community. Broadman & Holman, 2006.
Pikes 113
Quirin, James A. “‘Her Sons and Daughters Are Ever on the Altar’: Fisk University and
Missionaries to Africa, 1866-1937.” Tennessee Historical Quarterly, vol. 60, no. 1, 2001,
pp. 16–37. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/42628499. Accessed 7 May 2020.
Robinson, Eric. From “I” to “We”: Pursuing More Just Funding Practices in Mission. Fuller
Theological Seminary, School of Intercultural Studies, 2018. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/docview/2191710596/abstract/6A1FDC225DF148D5PQ/1.
Roozen, David A. “American Congregations 2015: Surviving and Thriving.” Faith
Communities Today 2015 (FACT2015) Report. 2016.
https://faithcommunitiestoday.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/American-
Congregations-2015.pdf. Accessed Apr 2020.
Roxburgh, Alan J and Fred Romanuk. Missional Leader: Equipping Your Church to Reach a
Changing World. Jossey-Bass. 2006.
Schmalzbauer, John. “Campus Religious Life in America: Revitalization and Renewal.”
Society, vol. 50, no. 2, Apr. 2013, pp. 115–31. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1007/s12115-013-
9640-6.
Seal, David. “Ephesus,” ed. John D. Barry et al., The Lexham Bible Dictionary. Lexham Press,
2016.
Seemiller, Corey and Meghan Grace. Generation Z: A Century in the Making. Routledge,
2018. Kindle Edition.
Sensing, Tim. Qualitative Research: A Multi-Methods Approach to Projects for Doctor of
Ministry Theses. Wipf and Stock. 2011. Kindle Edition.
Senn, William III. A Manual for a Church-Based Campus Ministry. Tren Dissertations. 2004.
Pikes 114
Shadrach, Steve. The Fuel and the Flame: 10 Keys to Ignite Your College Campus for Jesus
Christ. Authentic Lifestyle. 2003.
---The God Ask: A Fresh, Biblical Approach to Personal Support Raising. CMM Press. Kindle
Ed. 2013.
---Heart of the Campus: Ministry Principles and Strategy for Focusing on Student Leaders.
CMM Press. 2016.
---Launching, Growing, and Multiplying a Campus Ministry. Class sponsored by Campus
Outreach Augusta & Reformed Theological Seminary-Atlanta, May 2-5, 2016. Class
Handouts.
Shedd, Clarence P. Two Centuries of Student Christian Movements: Their Origins and
Intercollegiate Life. Associated Press. 1934.
Shockley, Donald G. Campus Ministry: The Church Beyond Itself. Westminster/John Knox
Press. 1989.
Skinner, Betty Lee. Daws: The Story of Dawson Trotman. NavPress. 1974.
Stanley, Andy. Visioneering. Multnomah Publishers. 1999.
Stetzer, Ed and Warren Bird. Viral Churches: Helping Church Planters Become Movement
Makers. Jossey Bass, ebook. 2010
Twenge, Jean M. iGen: Why Today’s Super Connected Kids are Growing Up Less Rebellious,
More Tolerant, Less Happy—and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood and What that
Means for the Rest of Us. Atria Books. Kindle Edition. 2017.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Digest of Education
Statistics, 2019. Degree-granting postsecondary institutions, by control and level of
institution: Selected years, 1949-50 through 2018-19, Accessed May 2020.
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_317.10.asp?current=yes
Pikes 115
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Digest of Education
Statistics, 2017 (NCES 2018-070), Chapter 2. Accessed May
2020. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d17/ch_2.asp
Vella, Jane. Learning to Listen, Learning to Teach: The Power of Dialogue in Educating Adults.
Revised Edition, Jossey Bass. 2002.
White, James Emery. The Rise of the Nones: Understanding and Reaching the Religiously
Unaffiliated. Baker Books. 2014.
---Meet Generation Z: Understanding and Reaching the New Post Christian World. Baker
Books. 2017.
White, Stephen L. The College Chaplain. Pilgrim’s Press. 2005.
Wilson, Todd. Multipliers: Leading Beyond Addition. Exponential Resources. 2018.
Winter, Ralph D. “The Two Structures of God’s Redemptive Mission” Perspectives on the
World Christian Movement. Edited by Ralph D. Winter and Steven C. Hawthorne.
William Carey Library, 3rd Ed, pg 220-229. 1999.
Woodward, J.R. and Dan White. The Church As Movement : Starting and Sustaining
Missional-Incarnational Communities. IV Press, eBook. 2016.
Wright, Chris J. H. The Mission of God’s People: A Biblical Theology of the Church’s
Mission. Biblical Theology for Life Series. Zondervan Academic. 2010.
Young, Shawn et. al. InterVarsity Chapter Planting Manual Version 3.0. Edited by Jeff
Yourison. InterVarsity Christian Fellowship, June 2009.
Pikes 116
WORKS CONSULTED
A Church-Based Collegiate Ministry Strategy for Crosspointe Community Church.
http://place.asburyseminary.edu.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article
=15210&context=trendissertations. Accessed 22 Aug. 2017.
Adams, James Edward., and James Edward Adams. “Missionary Pastor.” Missionary Pastor,
1895, pp. 1–175.
Alleman, Nathan F. “The College ‘Y’: Student Religion in the Era of Secularization.”
Christian Scholar’s Review, vol. 38, no. 1, 2008, pp. 157–59. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0001688905&site=ehost-live.
An Investigation of Discipleship Strategies in Collegiate Ministry Models - ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses Global - ProQuest. https://search-proquest-
com.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/pqdtglobal/docview/1459392124/61AEC567C7F54BE
EPQ/8?accountid=8380. Accessed 2 Sept. 2019.
Are Emerging Adults Spiritual but Not Religious. Pdf.
https://www.baylor.edu/content/services/document.php/224506.pdf. Accessed 1 Mar.
2019.
Armstrong, Blake. “The Differing Views of College Instructors and Mexican American
College Students Regarding Religion, the Supernatural, and Evolution.” International
Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences, vol. 5, no. 9, Jan. 2011, pp. 453–65.
EBSCOhost, doi:10.18848/1833-1882/CGP/v05i09/51872.
Atkins, Fredrika. A Comparative Analysis of Factors Related to the Performance of Ethnic
Majorities and Minority-Owned Small Businesses in Alabama. Capella University, 2015.
Pikes 117
ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/1658143924/abstract/FD79138F29A249E
DPQ/49.
Azondjagni, Holale C. From the Pew to Mission Field: Raising Missionary Support. Drew
University, 2017. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/1885898500/abstract/FE080761B5BB4C
D4PQ/9.
Ballard, Timothy Paul. The Missionary Enterprise, Racial Conflicts, and the Transformation
of American Evangelicalism, 1945–1980. University of Montana, 2019. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/2302019322/abstract/E285A4D7D6DC47
53PQ/33.
Baumgartner, Erich, and Andres Flores. “Creating a Spiritual Learning Space: The Changing
Leadership Roles in the Life Cycle of a Church Plant.” The Journal of Applied Christian
Leadership, vol. 11, no. 2, Fall 2017, pp. 52–63. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=a9h&AN=134016369&site=eds-live.
Beyond These Walls: A Church’s Intentional Ministry with College Students beyond Sunday
Morning. https://cots.ent.sirsi.net/client/en_US/search/asset/1101/0. Accessed 17 Aug.
2017.
Bio, Rick Richardson. “Emerging Adults and the Church: Is There Really an Exodus?” The
Exchange | A Blog by Ed Stetzer,
https://www.christianitytoday.com/edstetzer/2019/february/emerging-adults-and-
church.html. Accessed 1 Mar. 2019.
Pikes 118
Bowman, Nicholas, and Jenny Small. “Do College Students Who Identify with a Privileged
Religion Experience Greater Spiritual Development? Exploring Individual and
Institutional Dynamics.” Research in Higher Education, vol. 51, no. 7, Nov. 2010, pp.
595–614. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1007/s11162-010-9175-2.
Boyd, Malcolm. “A Protestant Approach to the Campus Ministry.” Encounter, vol. 27, no. 2,
1966, pp. 184–86. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0000395796&site=ehost-live.
Brittain, John N. “Revitalizing College Ministry: The ‘church-on-Campus’ Model.” The
Christian Century, vol. 105, no. 22, July 1988, pp. 673–75. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0000804825&site=eds-live.
Brock, Jackie. “Campus Ministry in Japan.” Journal of the European Pentecostal Theological
Association, vol. 26, no. 2, 2006, pp. 147–55. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0001645731&site=ehost-live.
Buckman, Allan R. “Modalities and Sodalities.” Missio Apostolica, vol. 22, no. 2, Nov. 2014,
pp. 170–73. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLAn3893270&site=ehost-live.
Campbell, Jeremiah J. The Effect of Discipleship Small Groups for University Ministries in
Bolivia: A Quantitative Analysis. Biola University, 2017. ProQuest,
Pikes 119
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/1966223285/abstract/6A541EEDF60443
ECPQ/30.
Cannister, Mark. “Youth Ministry in the 21st Century: Five Views.” Journal of Youth
Ministry, vol. 15, no. 1, Fall 2016, pp. 139–41. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=a9h&AN=119263359&site=ehost-live.
Casey, Bonnie-Jeanne. The Nuance of the Nones: Aligning Campus Ministry Programs to
Include an Overlooked Group of Students. Boston University, 2018. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/2068030928/abstract/2ADE84D8B5D742
4BPQ/17.
Cho, Yong-gi, and Harold Hostetler. Successful Home Cell Groups. Logos International, 1981.
Chumley, David Allyn. Relational Youth Ministry in the Foursquare Denomination. Fuller
Theological Seminary, School of Intercultural Studies, 2015. ProQuest,
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1681637969/abstract/AA928B39E66A42E3PQ/1.
Church Planting in New York City: A Case for a Global Cities Church Planting Strategy -
ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global - ProQuest. https://search-proquest-
com.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/pqdtglobal/docview/1268747841/61AEC567C7F54BE
EPQ/42?accountid=8380. Accessed 2 Sept. 2019.
Coe, Aaron B. Implications for Urban Missiology in the United States from the Life and Work
of Jane Jacobs. Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2016. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/1850522024/abstract/BE1902083588498
BPQ/1.
Pikes 120
Cokley, Kevin O’Neal, et al. “The Moderating Role of Gender in the Relationship between
Religiosity and Mental Health in a Sample of Black American College Students.” Mental
Health, Religion & Culture, vol. 16, no. 5, June 2013, pp. 445–62. EBSCOhost,
doi:10.1080/13674676.2012.684346.
Coleman, Derek Oakley. The Evangelistic Strategy of the Fellowship of Christian Athletics,
1963--1971. The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1999. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/304549035/abstract/61AEC567C7F54BE
EPQ/99.
College Ministry in a Post-Christian Culture.
http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/eds/ebookviewer/ebook/bmxlYm
tfXzUyMDAwMl9fQU41?sid=a5f33f0e-30eb-471c-b5b1-
4f95aae6f294@sessionmgr4007&vid=14&format=EB&rid=1. Accessed 21 Dec. 2017.
Community Colleges: Methodolofy for Developing Ongoing Campus Ministries.
http://place.asburyseminary.edu.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article
=8305&context=trendissertations. Accessed 22 Aug. 2017.
Costa, Dan. “Fast Forward: Are Smartphones Hurting Our Kids?” PC Magazine, Oct. 2017, p.
20. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=f5h&AN=125284128&site=eds-live.
Cowling, Marc, and Neil Lee. “How Entrepreneurship, Culture and Universities Influence the
Geographical Distribution of UK Talent and City Growth.” Journal of Management
Development, vol. 36, no. 2, 2017, pp. 178–95. 2017-07021-003, EBSCOhost,
doi:10.1108/JMD-03-2016-0043.
Pikes 121
Daugherty, Timothy K., and Suejung Han. “Not Just a Prayer Before a Test: Theodicy Among
Students.” Education, vol. 137, no. 1, Fall 2016, p. 59. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=f5h&AN=118494316&site=eds-live.
Davidson, Charis Rebecca. Conversations about Sexuality on a Public University Campus:
Exploring Perspectives from Campus Ministry Leaders and Students. University of South
Carolina, 2016. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/1808939033/abstract/6A541EEDF60443
ECPQ/4.
Davis, Zac. “MINISTRY AND MILLENNIALS. (Cover Story).” America, vol. 217, no. 10,
Oct. 2017, pp. 18–27. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=tfh&AN=125912038&site=eds-live.
Dean, Thomas. Effects of Student Clubs and Organizations on Leadership Skills Development,
GPA, and Engagement in Select North Carolina Community Colleges. Southeastern
Baptist Theological Seminary, 2014. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/1664049506/abstract/E285A4D7D6DC47
53PQ/34.
Deeley, Mary. Continuing Ed: What the Church Can Learn from Campus Ministry. U.S.
Catholic, vol. 71, no. 8, Aug. 2006, pp. 30–33. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=CPLI0000433832&site=eds-live.
Pikes 122
Designing a New Worship Gathering for Young Adults in Downtown Hickory, North Carolina.
http://place.asburyseminary.edu.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article
=14320&context=trendissertations. Accessed 22 Aug. 2017.
Determining the most Effective Racial Model to Reach College Students of African Descent
for Christ.
http://place.asburyseminary.edu.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article
=15150&context=trendissertations. Accessed 22 Aug. 2017.
Developing a Missional Ministry on a State University Campus.
http://place.asburyseminary.edu.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article
=14825&context=trendissertations. Accessed 22 Aug. 2017.
Doak, Charles W. “The National Campus Ministry Association, 1964-94: A Brief History.”
Journal of Ecumenical Studies, vol. 32, no. 4, Fall 1995, p. 500. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rlh&AN=9601094820&site=ehost-live.
Donahoo, Saran. “Fostering Fellowship: Church Participation of Students Living On
Campus.” Journal of College & University Student Housing, vol. 40, no. 2, Jan. 2014, pp.
178–91. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=a9h&AN=110375370&site=eds-live.
Dymond, Terry Lee. Developing a Strategy to Connect Students of Auburn University at
Montgomery, Alabama, to Local Area Baptist Churches. 2014. Open WorldCat,
http://aaron.swbts.edu/login?url=http://site.ebrary.com/lib/swbts/Doc?id=80189650.
Pikes 123
Dziewanowska, Katarzyna, et al. “Generation Y’s Expectations of Their Future Employment
Relationships Pose a Challenge for Their Employers.” Journal of HRM, vol. 19, no. 1,
Jan. 2016, pp. 1–12.
EBSCOhost: American Theological Library Association (ATLA) Historical Monographs
Collection: Series 2; Missionary Pastor, (1895), Page: 6.
http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/eds/archiveviewer/archive?vid=2
5&sid=46a6cc57-f0dc-4213-bb75-
f0649ee209be%40sessionmgr101&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmU%3d#kw=true&a
cc=false&lpId=divl004&ppId=divp0008&twPV=true&xOff=0&yOff=0&zm=2&fs=true
&rot=0&docMapOpen=true&pageMapOpen=true&AN=33762687&db=h8h. Accessed
22 Dec. 2017.
Cawthon, Tony W. and Camilla Jones. A Description of Traditional and Contemporary
Campus Ministries. College Student Affairs Journal, v23, n2, p158-172. Spring 2004.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ956985.pdf. Accessed 17 Nov. 2019.
“Engaging the Next Generation: The Future of College Ministry.” Facts & Trends, 22 Feb.
2019, https://factsandtrends.net/2019/02/22/engaging-the-next-generation-the-future-of-
college-ministry/.
Epting, James B. An Analysis of How Participating in a NCAA Division I-A Football Program
Impacts the Christian Faith Development of Student Athletes. Clemson University, 2013.
ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/1499230004/abstract/61AEC567C7F54B
EEPQ/94.
Pikes 124
Five Step Strategy for Planting Churches.Pdf.
http://scpx.org/paperclip/posts/199/Five%20Step%20Strategy%20for%20Planting%20Ch
urches.pdf. Accessed 29 Dec. 2017.
Foppen, Annemarie, et al. “Personality Traits of Church Planters in Europe.” Journal of
Empirical Theology, vol. 30, no. 1, June 2017, pp. 25–40. brill-
com.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu, doi:10.1163/15709256-12341349.
Fowler, Gloria Young-Eun Kim. Planting, Transitioning, and Growing Multiethnic Churches.
Asbury Theological Seminary, 2015. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/1756675699/abstract/76E73E64167B454
EPQ/50.
Friedman, Francis Damon. Critical Factors That Ignite a Missions Movement. Fuller
Theological Seminary, School of Intercultural Studies, 2017. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/1940481632/abstract/61AEC567C7F54B
EEPQ/57.
Galligan-Stierle, Michael. “Millennials and Ministry on College Campuses.” New Theology
Review, vol. 22, no. 1, Feb. 2009, pp. 5–15. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=CPLI0000479631&site=ehost-live.
Garren, Benjamin N. “Undoing Erasure Missiology: Immanent Interactions with Indigenous
University Students.” Anglican Theological Review, vol. 99, no. 2, 2017, pp. 305–15.
EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLAiC9Y170529001868&site=ehost-live.
Pikes 125
Gross, Neil, and Solon Simmons. “The Religiosity of American College and University
Professors.” Sociology of Religion, vol. 70, no. 2, 2009, pp. 101–29. EBSCOhost,
doi:10.1093/socrel/srp026.
Guldalian, Sarah. “The Millennials: Reflections on Reaching a Lost Generation for Christ.”
Missio Apostolica, vol. 21, no. 1, May 2013, pp. 41–47. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0001942307&site=ehost-live.
Harrington, Michael A., et al. “The Coming Out Process Among Non-Religious
Undergraduate Students: Implications for Residence Life Professionals.” Journal of
College & University Student Housing, vol. 40, no. 2, Jan. 2014, pp. 164–77.
EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=a9h&AN=110375369&site=eds-live.
Haskell, D. Millard, and Kevin N. Flatt. “When Youth Experience God: The Reported Impact
of a Mainline Protestant Youth Rally Attendees’ Religious Faith.” Journal of Youth
Ministry, vol. 13, no. 2, Spring 2015, pp. 21–52. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=a9h&AN=102224208&site=ehost-live.
Hodge, Daniel White. “No Church in the Wild: Cultivating the Theological Message in Hip
Hop for Youth Ministry Among Emerging Adults.” Journal of Youth Ministry, vol. 13,
no. 2, Spring 2015, pp. 97–120. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=a9h&AN=102224211&site=eds-live.
Pikes 126
Hull, Brian C. “THE NETWORKS OF GOD: EVANGELIZING PEER CLUSTERS
LEARNING FROM SAINT PATRICK AND DONALD McGAVRAN.” The Journal of
Youth Ministry, vol. 16, no. 1, 2017, pp. 86–100. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLAiGEV171230001547&site=eds-live.
Hunady, Jan, et al. “The Effect of Higher Education on Entrepreneurial Activities and Starting
Up Successful Businesses.” Engineering Economics, vol. 29, no. 2, Mar. 2018, pp. 226–
35. EBSCOhost, doi:10.5755/j01.ee.29.2.19069.
Inserra, Dean. “To Reach Unsaved Christians, First Help Them Get Lost.” CT Pastors,
https://www.christianitytoday.com/pastors/2019/february-web-exclusives/to-reach-
unsaved-christians-first-help-them-get-lost.html. Accessed 11 Mar. 2019.
“Interns at the Ivies: Christian Leaders Are Formed on University Campuses Seminary Interns
Should Be There Too.” In Trust, vol. 25, no. 3, 2014, pp. 4–6. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLAiREM180312000994&site=eds-live.
James, Rick. “Launching 1: Eight Ways to Start a Ministry | Cru.” Cru.Org,
https://www.cru.org/us/en/train-and-grow/leadership-training/starting-a-
ministry/launching/launching-1-eight-ways-to-start-a-ministry.html. Accessed 2 Jan.
2018.
Jonsson, A., and N. J. Foss. “International Expansion through Flexible Replication: Learning
from the Internationalization Experience of IKEA.” JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL
BUSINESS STUDIES, no. 9, 2011, p. 1079.
Pikes 127
Kane, Libby. “Meet Generation Z, the ‘millennials on Steroids’ Who Could Lead the Charge
for Change in the US.” Business Insider, http://www.businessinsider.com/generation-z-
profile-2017-9. Accessed 28 Dec. 2017.
Karlgaard, Rich. “Live Rich in College Towns.” Forbes, vol. 176, no. 11, Nov. 2005, pp. 39–
39. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=bth&AN=18859322&site=eds-live.
Kazakov, Sergey. What Creates a Successful Entrepreneur? Study of Determinants of
Entrepreneurial Survival and Success. Clark University, 2012. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/1017708564/abstract/62C90204FD24823
PQ/42.
Kenney, Meghan. Spirituality and Social Change Leadership: A Mixed Methods Investigation
of Undergraduate Student Leaders. Johnson & Wales University, 2018. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/2037221834/abstract/A17E6E2BE4EC44
12PQ/4.
Khor, Patrick, and Gido Mapunda. “A Phenomenological Study of the Lived Experiences of
the Generation X and Y Entrepreneurs.” Annual International Conference on Business
Strategy & Organizational Behaviour (BizStrategy), Jan. 2014, pp. 6–15. EBSCOhost,
doi:10.5176/2251-1970_IE14.04.
Kim, Rebecca Y. “Second-Generation Korean American Evangelicals: Ethnic, Multiethnic, or
White Campus Ministries?” Sociology of Religion, vol. 65, no. 1, 2004, pp. 19–34.
EBSCOhost,
Pikes 128
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0001402243&site=ehost-live.
Kneipp, Lee B., et al. “Religious Orientation: The Role of College Environment and
Classification.” College Student Journal, vol. 45, no. 1, Mar. 2011, p. 143.
Lackey, Russell, and Mark C. Mattes. “New Directions for Campus Ministry: Grand View
University as a Case Study.” Word & World, vol. 37, no. 2, 2017, pp. 142–51.
EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLAn4073418&site=eds-live.
LEADING CHANGE ON THE FIELD: A CASE STUDY OF MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE
PROCESSES IN THE MINISTRY STRATEGY AND ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE OF
A MISSION FIELD STAFF.
http://place.asburyseminary.edu.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article
=15389&context=trendissertations. Accessed 22 Aug. 2017.
Lee, Samuel. “Can We Measure the Success and Effectiveness of Entrepreneurial Church
Planting?” Evangelical Review of Theology, vol. 40, no. 4, Oct. 2016, pp. 327–45.
EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLAn4105488&site=eds-live.
Libson, Scott P. “Faith in Money”: Mission Movement Fundraising and American
Philanthropy, 1860-1930. Emory University, 2016. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/1903626181/abstract/FDFEE7E2DCA74
B23PQ/7.
Pikes 129
Linder, Kestrel. “21ST-CENTURY FUNDRAISING: If Schools Don’t Offer Options for
Online Giving, They’ll Miss out on Millennial Donors--and Those from Other
Generations as Well.” BizEd, vol. 16, no. 4, Aug. 2017, pp. 48–52. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=tfh&AN=124094896&site=eds-live.
Lipka, Michael. “Millennials Increasingly Are Driving Growth of ‘Nones.’” Pew Research
Center, http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/05/12/millennials-increasingly-are-
driving-growth-of-nones/. Accessed 1 Mar. 2019.
Logan, William S. “Wayne State University: Ministry on an Escalator.” Religion and
Intellectual Life, vol. 7, no. 2, 1990, pp. 47–51. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0000824776&site=eds-live.
Longo, GregoryS., and Jungmeen Kim-Spoon. “Homesickness in College Students: The Role
of Religion in Combating Depression.” Mental Health, Religion & Culture, vol. 16, no. 5,
June 2013, pp. 489–500. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1080/13674676.2012.696600.
Luna, Naelys, and Thalia MacMillan. “The Relationship between Spirituality and Depressive
Symptom Severity, Psychosocial Functioning Impairment, and Quality of Life:
Examining the Impact of Age, Gender, and Ethnic Differences.” Mental Health, Religion
& Culture, vol. 18, no. 6, July 2015, pp. 513–25. EBSCOhost,
doi:10.1080/13674676.2015.1087481.
Maley, Melissa. “Loving All Your Neighbors: Why Community Colleges Need the Academic
Study of Religion.” New Directions for Community Colleges, vol. 2013, no. 163, Fall
2013, pp. 61–68. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1002/cc.20071.
Pikes 130
Martinson, Roland D. “Faith and Spiritual Practice among College Students: Social Inquiry
and Biblical Imagination.” Word & World, vol. 34, no. 3, 2014, pp. 310–19. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0001997532&site=ehost-live.
McDowell Ott, Teri. “In the Realm of the Nones.” Christian Century, vol. 133, no. 1, Jan.
2016, p. 28. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=f5h&AN=112049431&site=eds-live.
McGeever, Mark. Effective Equipping of Sent Network Church Planters and Leaders Using
Blended Learning with Active Training. Lancaster Bible College, 2018. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/docview/2139269840/abstract/6E0E800235AE4789PQ/1.
MERGING THE COLLEGIATE GENERATION INTO THE LIFE OF PILLAR CHURCH
THROUGH COLLABORATIVE PLANNING.
http://place.asburyseminary.edu.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article
=15290&context=trendissertations. Accessed 22 Aug. 2017.
Miller, David, and Zoltan Acs. “The Campus as Entrepreneurial Ecosystem: The University of
Chicago.” Small Business Economics, vol. 49, no. 1, June 2017, pp. 75–95. EBSCOhost,
doi:10.1007/s11187-017-9868-4.
MISSIO APOSTOLICA —Journal of the Lutheran Society for Missiology, Inc.- May 2013.Pdf.
http://www.lsfm.global/uploads/files/MA-5-13_Final_Online.pdf. Accessed 22 Dec.
2017.
Pikes 131
“Most Teenagers Drop Out of Church as Young Adults.” LifeWay Research, 15 Jan. 2019,
https://lifewayresearch.com/2019/01/15/most-teenagers-drop-out-of-church-as-young-
adults/.
Nell, Werner. “The Religious Lives of Students at a South African University.” Hervormde
Teologiese Studies, vol. 72, no. 1, Jan. 2016, pp. 1–11. EBSCOhost,
doi:10.4102/hts.v72i1.3177.
Nielson, Jonathan Scott. How Campus Ministry Influences and Facilitates Spiritual Growth in
the Lives of Princeton Undergraduate Students. Trinity International University, 2017.
ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/2050760188/abstract/2ADE84D8B5D742
4BPQ/6.
Noise. Hurry. Crowds.: On Creating Space for God Amidst the Chaos of Campus and Culture.
http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/eds/ebookviewer/ebook/bmxlYm
tfXzEwNDIyODhfX0FO0?sid=a5f33f0e-30eb-471c-b5b1-
4f95aae6f294@sessionmgr4007&vid=1&format=EB&rid=18. Accessed 21 Dec. 2017.
Online Library Catalog. http://rim.atla.com/scripts/starfinder.exe/1248/rimmarc.txt. Accessed
17 Aug. 2017.
Ott, Craig. “Missions and Money : Revisiting Pauline Practice and Principles.” Evangelical
Review of Theology, vol. 42, no. 1, 2018, pp. 4–20. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rvh&AN=NTA0000085687&site=ehost-live.
Pikes 132
Paas, Stefan. “A Case Study of Church Growth by Church Planting in Germany: Are They
Connected?” International Bulletin of Mission Research, vol. 42, no. 1, Jan. 2018, pp.
40–54. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1177/2396939317738896.
Perry, Sam. “She Works Hard(Er) for the Money: Gender, Fundraising, and Employment in
Evangelical Parachurch Organizations.” Sociology of Religion, vol. 74, no. 3, 2013, pp.
392–415. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1093/socrel/srt024.
Peterson, Ryan. Developing a Strategic Plan for Campus Ministry to Undergraduate Students
at Concordia University--Ann Arbor. Trinity International University, 2017. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/2161003347/abstract/6A541EEDF60443
ECPQ/10.
Phillips, Russell E., and Michael B. Kitchens. “Augustine or Philistine? College Students’
Sanctification of Learning and Its Implications.” International Journal for the
Psychology of Religion, vol. 26, no. 1, Jan. 2016, pp. 80–94. EBSCOhost,
doi:10.1080/10508619.2014.999492.
Pierce, Kent. Campus Ministries: The Search for New Models. 2006, p. 4.
Possamai, Adam, et al. “Chaplaincies in a ‘post-Secular’ Multicultural University.” Fieldwork
in Religion, vol. 9, no. 2, 2014, pp. 147–65. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1558/firn.v9i2.16454.
Powell, Kara, et al. “Put Away the Skinny Jeans.” Christianity Today, vol. 60, no. 7, Sept.
2016, p. 52. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=f5h&AN=117650690&site=eds-live.
Pugh, Jonathan, and this link will open in a new window Link to external site. Imaging
Spiritual Growth for the IPhone Generation: Taking College-Aged Young Adults on a
Pikes 133
Pilgrim’s Journey in Dallas, NC. Gardner-Webb University, 2018. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/2077034058/abstract/A17E6E2BE4EC44
12PQ/8.
Quirin, James A. “‘Her Sons and Daughters Are Ever on the Altar’: Fisk University and
Missionaries to Africa, 1866-1937.” Tennessee Historical Quarterly, vol. 60, no. 1, 2001,
pp. 16–37. JSTOR, JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/42628499.
Ramsey, Dwayne George. College Evangelists and Foreign Missions: The Student Volunteer
Movement, 1886-1920. University of California, Davis, 1988. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/303672148/abstract/61AEC567C7F54BE
EPQ/80.
Rasor, Robert Mark. Assessing the Impact of Student Involvement in Campus Ministry on
Retention and Academic Success: A Mixed Method Study. The Southern Baptist
Theological Seminary, 2017. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/2009351813/abstract/AAE9AE0415B24C
8APQ/3.
RECOVERING THE COMMUNAL CHARACTER OF THE LORD’S TABLE AT NORTH
BOULEVARD CHURCH OF CHRIST, MURFREESBORO, TENNESSEE.
http://place.asburyseminary.edu.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article
=15316&context=trendissertations. Accessed 22 Aug. 2017.
Reimer, Johannes. “Empowering Church Planters. Which Training System?” Evangelical
Review of Theology, vol. 40, no. 1, Jan. 2016, pp. 70–81. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rlh&AN=113791248&site=eds-live.
Pikes 134
Relational Youth Ministry in the Foursquare Denomination - ProQuest. https://search-
proquest-
com.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/docview/1681637969/fulltextPDF?source=fedsrch&ac
countid=8380. Accessed 27 Dec. 2017.
Releasetheape_V1.Pdf.
https://s3.amazonaws.com/expo_ebooks/releasetheape/releasetheape_V1.pdf?X-Amz-
Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-
SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIAI3YLBJ56S4JNWHHA%2F20171127%2Fus-east-
1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20171127T163223Z&X-Amz-
SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=10800&X-Amz-
Signature=e09ccc9536f6264c807be43ee7f7b54510e2095d5ae7c0fe47ad99fbb9e3d408.
Accessed 27 Nov. 2017.
Reymann, Linda S., et al. “Exploratory Study of Spirituality and Psychosocial Growth in
College Students.” Journal of College Counseling, vol. 18, no. 2, July 2015, pp. 103–15.
EBSCOhost, doi:10.1002/jocc.12008.
Rhinehardt, April R. Are We There Yet? Mapping an Effective Ministry Model for the
Historically Black College and University Campus. Regent University, 2018. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/2076440008/abstract/2ADE84D8B5D742
4BPQ/3.
Rising, Geek Girl. “Meet The Teen CEO Unlocking The Secrets Of Gen Z.” Forbes,
https://www.forbes.com/sites/geekgirlrising/2017/12/20/meet-the-teen-ceo-whos-
unlocking-the-secrets-of-gen-z/. Accessed 28 Dec. 2017.
Pikes 135
Sadusky, Julia A. Loneliness and the Celibate, Gay Christian. Regent University, 2019.
ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/2071927263/abstract/BE46B4991564483
4PQ/10.
Scheitle, Christopher, and John D. (John David) McCarthy. “The Mobilization of Evangelical
Protestants in the Nonprofit Sector: Parachurch Foundings Across U.S. Counties, 1998-
2016.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, vol. 57, no. 2, June 2018, pp. 238–57.
EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLAi5IE180827002137&site=ehost-live.
Scheitle, Christopher P., et al. “The Rise of the Nones and the Changing Relationships
between Identity, Belief, and Behavior.” Journal of Contemporary Religion, vol. 33, no.
3, Sept. 2018, pp. 567–79. Taylor and Francis+NEJM,
doi:10.1080/13537903.2018.1535379.
Schmalzbauer, John. “Campus Religious Life in America: Revitalization and Renewal.”
Society, vol. 50, no. 2, Apr. 2013, pp. 115–31. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1007/s12115-013-
9640-6.
Schneeflock, Brad. A Team Approach to Support Development for Baptist Collegiate
Missionaries. 2014. Open WorldCat, http://www.tren.com/e-docs/search.cfm?p116-0089.
Schubmehl, Jessica, et al. “The Effect of Spirituality and Campus Ministry on Academic
Accomplishment in College Students.” Adolescence, vol. 44, no. 174, Summer 2009, pp.
499–502. EBSCOhost,
Pikes 136
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=slh&AN=44208887&site=eds-live.
Schwadel, Philip. “Birth Cohort Changes in the Association Between College Education and
Religious Non-Affiliation.” Social Forces, vol. 93, no. 2, Dec. 2014, pp. 719–46.
EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=buh&AN=99749804&site=eds-live.
SCPX-FacGuide-PermissionGiven.Pdf. http://scpx.org/paperclip/posts/157/SCPX-FacGuide-
PermissionGiven.pdf. Accessed 29 Dec. 2017.
Sedlacek, David, et al. “The Impact of a History of Childhood Abuse on Life as a College
Student.” Journal of Research on Christian Education, vol. 24, no. 2, May 2015, pp.
169–84. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1080/10656219.2015.1052601.
Shellnutt, Kate. “CHURCH PLANTING GOES BIG: Strong Launches Help New Churches
Stay Viable, According to the Association of Related Churches.” Christianity Today, vol.
63, no. 6, July 2019, pp. 13–15. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLAiG0V190812000922&site=eds-live.
Sheppard, Jimmy. Perceptions of Leadership on Survival of Successful African-American
Small Business Owners: A Phenomenological Study. University of Phoenix, 2010.
ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/520412097/abstract/FD79138F29A249E
DPQ/48.
Pikes 137
Short, Mary, et al. “The Relationship Between Religiosity and Internet Pornography Use.”
Journal of Religion & Health, vol. 54, no. 2, Apr. 2015, pp. 571–83. EBSCOhost,
doi:10.1007/s10943-014-9849-8.
Smith, Amber. The Implications of Instructional Design for the Training of Transformational
Leaders in the Reality Family of Churches. Fuller Theological Seminary, School of
Intercultural Studies, 2018. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/2058025370/abstract/A35AB5FE67C54C
00PQ/29.
Smith, Brian H. “Teaching the Devout Student: Faith and Scholarship in the Classroom.”
Teaching Theology & Religion, vol. 16, no. 2, Apr. 2013, pp. 132–49. EBSCOhost,
doi:10.1111/teth.12024.
Snapshot. https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=84. Accessed 15 Nov. 2018.
Snapshot---. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13537903.2018.1535379. Accessed
10 Mar. 2019.
Snow, Kevin C. “Experiences of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Questioning or
Queer Students at Evangelical Christian Colleges as Described in Personal Blogs.”
Journal of College Counseling, vol. 21, no. 1, Apr. 2018, pp. 58–72. EBSCOhost,
doi:10.1002/jocc.12087.
Sorenson, Jacob, and Roland D. Martinson. “Ministry at the Crossroads: Lutheran Campus
Ministry’s Power and Peril.” Word & World, vol. 38, no. 4, 2018, pp. 398–409.
Spofford, Jessica L., et al. “Meditative Practices Predict Spirituality but Mindfulness Does Not
Predict Alcohol Use in African-American College Students.” Mental Health, Religion &
Culture, vol. 17, no. 4, Apr. 2014, pp. 379–89.
Pikes 138
Stafford, Tim. “The Tiger in the Academy: Asian Americans Populate America’s Elite
Colleges More than Ever--and Campus Ministries Even More than That.” Christianity
Today, vol. 50, no. 4, Apr. 2006, pp. 70–73. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0001502525&site=ehost-live.
Stamule Stere, and Todea Steluța. “Millennials between Consumer Ethnocentrism and
Attitudes towards Local Campaigns.” Proceedings of the International Conference on
Business Excellence, Vol 11, Iss 1, Pp 720-729 (2017), no. 1, 2017, p. 720. EBSCOhost,
doi:10.1515/picbe-2017-0076.
Starks, Brian. A National Study on Catholic Campus Ministry. p. 29.
Taylor, Kevin Matthew. “What American College Students Want from Religion:
Facebookismanity, Lucid Dreaming, and Bodhisattva Tupac Shakur.” Implicit Religion,
vol. 19, no. 2, Apr. 2016, pp. 237–65.
“THE END FOR WHICH I AM CREATED”: THE SPIRITUAL EXERCISES OF SAINT
IGNATIUS AND COLLEGE STUDENTS’ SEARCH FOR FAITH AND PURPOSE.
http://place.asburyseminary.edu.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article
=15069&context=trendissertations. Accessed 22 Aug. 2017.
The Everything Guide to Generation Z. Pdf. https://www.visioncritical.com/wp-
content/uploads/2016/10/GenZ_Final.pdf. Accessed 28 Dec. 2017.
The NCES Fast Facts Tool Provides Quick Answers to Many Education Questions (National
Center for Education Statistics). https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=84.
Accessed 15 Nov. 2018.
Pikes 139
The Newman Center: A Third Space for Young Adult Catholics.
http://place.asburyseminary.edu.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article
=15078&context=trendissertations. Accessed 22 Aug. 2017.
The Perfect Human Capital Storm : Workplace Human Capital Challenges and Opportunities
in the 21st Century: Implications for Organizations and Leaders.
http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/eds/ebookviewer/ebook/bmxlYm
tfXzE1MzU2MzBfX0FO0?sid=40123bbc-e90c-4ae9-93ed-b3262039ce98@pdc-v-
sessmgr03&vid=63&format=EB&rid=2. Accessed 31 Jan. 2019.
The-Missional-Bishop. Pdf. https://8rni5x4rr7303jrr3le65f1bhv-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-
content/uploads/2017/05/The-Missional-Bishop.pdf. Accessed 27 May 2018.
Thomas, Amber R. “God Has a Plan for Your Life”: 1947, p. 333.
Thompson, Leroy W. Witnessing in Modern Antioch: Beginning the Process of Transforming
a Secularized Multi-Ethnic Liberal Arts College for Christ through a Biblical
Postmodern Model. Drew University, 2007. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/304862061/abstract/FA3842B1FC7D47C
3PQ/11.
Thompson, Robert Joseph, et al. “The Relationship of Self-Compassion with Perfectionistic
Self-Presentation, Perceived Forgiveness, and Perceived Social Support in an
Undergraduate Christian Community.” Journal of Psychology & Theology, vol. 43, no. 4,
2015, pp. 231–42.
Tipton, James Davis. Equipping Christians through Sojourn Community Church in Louisville,
Kentucky, to Defend the Sanctity of Life. The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary,
2018.
Pikes 140
Tkacz, Monika. “New Generation of Social Entrepreneurs: Exploratory Research and Cross
Case Study Analysis of New Generation of Social Enterprises.” Nowe Pokolenie
Przedsiębiorców Społecznych - Studium Przypadku Przedsiębiorstw Społecznych
Pokolenia Millenialsów., no. 2, July 2016, pp. 20–37.
TOWARDS A HEALTHY COLLABORATION OF LOCAL CHURCH AND CAMPUS-BASED
MINISTRIES: A CASE STUDY OF EUGENE/SPRINGFIELD CHURCHES AND
GREATER MCKENZIE YOUNG LIFE IN SPRINGFIELD, OR.
http://place.asburyseminary.edu.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article
=13797&context=trendissertations. Accessed 22 Aug. 2017.
Trueman, Carl R. “Parachurch Groups and the Issues of Influence and Accountability.”
Foundations (Affinity), vol. 66, 2014, pp. 25–37.
TWENTY-SOMETHINGS IN THE CHURCH: THE IMPACT OF A BIBLICAL WORLDVIEW
STUDY. Pdf.
http://place.asburyseminary.edu.ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article
=1369&context=ecommonsatsdissertations. Accessed 27 Dec. 2017.
“U.S.C.C.B. Report: Campus Ministry Virtually Nonexistent at Community Colleges.”
America, vol. 219, no. 13, Dec. 2018, pp. 14–14. van der Merwe, Michelle C., et al. “Getting Young Adults Back to Church: A Marketing
Approach.” Hervormde Teologiese Studies, vol. 69, no. 2, June 2013, pp. 1–12.
Vilela, Alexandra M., and Michelle R. Nelson. “Testing the Selectivity Hypothesis in Cause-
Related Marketing among Generation Y: [When] Does Gender Matter for Short- and
Long-Term Persuasion?” Journal of Marketing Communications, vol. 22, no. 1, Feb.
2016, pp. 18–35.
Pikes 141
Warren, Gabriel Emmanuel. Small Business Strategies for Sustainability beyond 10 Years.
Walden University, 2016.
Warren, Tish Harrison. “The Wrong Kind of Christian : I Thought a Winsome Faith Would
Win Christians a Place at Vanderbilt’s Table--I Was Wrong.” Christianity Today Sep
2014, Sept. 2014.
Weber, Shantelle. “Decolonising Youth Ministry Models? Challenges and Opportunities in
Africa.” Hervormde Teologiese Studies, vol. 73, no. 4, Oct. 2017, pp. 1–10.
Wellman, Ned. “Authority or Community? A Relational Models Theory of Group-Level
Leadership Emergence.” Academy of Management Review, vol. 42, no. 4, Oct. 2017, pp.
596–617.
Winings, Kathy. “Campus Ministries and New Paradigms for Educating Religiously.”
Religious Education, vol. 94, no. 3, 1999, pp. 329–44. EBSCOhost,
http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0000996418&site=ehost-live.
Wolf, Helen M. Abundant Grace: The Religious Educational Dimensions of Peer Ministry
Programs at Catholic Colleges and Universities. Fordham University, 2014. ProQuest,
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/1563376496/abstract/FA3842B1FC7D47
C3PQ/19.
Yaconelli, Mark. “Failure to Launch.” Christian Century, vol. 133, no. 16, Aug. 2016, p. 26.
Yim, Hyung Rok. From Birth to Fortune 500: Strategic Behavior and Performance of Very
Rapid-Growth Startups. The Claremont Graduate University, 2006.
Zurinsky, Bob. “The Story We Share: Toward a Unifying Campus Vision.” The Christian
Century, vol. 132, no. 4, Feb. 2015, pp. 22–25.