+ A ! 2 + . S . + ` , - .

- a \+ _ c d Y _

(56+MC?H=6;+:8I+J56+MC?;<96+?K++
!:;<=>+2<8<9JC>
D*["'+')#40'+%&(G+(&20(G[+M"1#+A0')4

After decades on the back burner of congregational

life, family ministry has suddenly become a hot topic.
Type family ministry into a search engine, and you
computer is likely to crank out more than twenty-five
million results in fewer than ten seconds. Conference after conference
DC>:8+'6=9?8+
`M5SOS+E:8IST+(56+
claims to provide congregations with
4?BJ56C8+D:NJ<9J+
the missing key that will enable the
(56?=?@<E:=+
churchs staff to launch a successful
46;<8:C>a+<9+
family ministry.
J56+M:9J?C+J?+
4JBI68J9+:J+
As a pastor and as a father, this
7<=6:I+D:NJ<9J+
renewed
focus on family ministry is
L5BCE5+<8+7=68I:=6T+X68JBEF>T+
at once encouraging and frightening.
:8I+&89JCBEJ?C+?K+"NN=<6I+
2<8<9JC>+:J+(56+4?BJ56C8+D:NJ<9J+
Its encouraging because many Chris(56?=?@<E:=+46;<8:C>S+DC>:8+
tians seem to be regaining a biblical
=<P69+<8+)=<k:H6J5J?Q8T+X68JBEF>+
perspective on Gods vision for the
Q<J5+5<9+Q<K6+)==<6+:8I+I:B@5J6C9+
2:C>+)P6=>8+:8I+2:C@?S+DC>:8+
role of parents. For too many years,
=?P69+9N68I<8@+J<;6+Q<J5+5<9+
churches and parents have encouraged
K:;<=>^+Q568+56+<9+8?J+E5:9<8@+5<9+
paid professionals to take the primary
I:B@5J6C9+:C?B8I+J56+5?B96+?C+
86<@5H?C5??IT+56+E:8+H6+K?B8I+
role in the discipleship of children.1
E5:9<8@+JBCF6>9+:8I+I66C+:C?B8I+
This, even as research continues to
X68JBEF>+:8I+(68869966S+
reveal thatalthough other significant adults are also importantparents remain the most influential people in childrens

_U

spiritual, social, and behavioral development.2

Why, then, does this new emphasis on family ministry also present a potential problem? Simply this: In
many cases, churches are focusing on family ministry
as a reaction to dismal retention statistics. It has been
repeatedly reported over the past few years that somewhere between 65% and 94% of churched youth drop
out of church before their sophomore year of college.3
As a result, many congregations are shifting their ministry models not because of convictions that have grown
from a seedbed of sustained scriptural and theological
reflection. Instead, what motivates them is the supposed
crisis of abysmal retention ratesa crisis that they plan
to solve by launching a series of family ministry programs. Their focus on family ministry is a pragmatic
reaction rooted in a desire for numbers with no standard by which to judge the results other than an increasing number of warm bodies.4
In contrast, the goal of this journal is to call congregations to develop theologically-grounded, Scripturally-compelled perspectives on family ministry and
then to make Spirit-guided transitions in every ministry
to move wisely toward this ministry model. Such shifts
may increase the numbers that appear in the spreadsheet

columns that summarize your congregations buildings,

budgets, and bodies. Then again, these changes could
have a negligible or even a negative effect on those numbers! But the spreadsheet numbers arent the primary
point; biblical faithfulness in ministry to families is
the goal.
(9*1*!2#-0)>!-0&04.1>!9#4!<**&
Before examining what is promising about family
ministry, it will be helpful to take a look at where family
ministry has been. Over the past couple of centuries,
three distinct trends have characterized church-based
ministries to families in the industrialized Western
world. Timothy Paul Jones has traced the historical
development of these three strands and identified them
as comprehensive-coordinative, segmented-programmatic,
and educational-programmatic.5
$RW]NVUVKLQ`VH$RRN\QKTMQ`V!!
2TWQ[X!-QKQLMNX
Comprehensive-coordinative ministry seeks to
coordinate the churchs ministries so that each ministry
actively and comprehensively partners with parents in
the Christian formation of their children. One historical example of comprehensive-coordinative ministry
can be found in the work of a nineteenth-century pastor
named Samuel W. Dike. Seeing how Christian parents
in his Vermont congregation had disengaged from their
childrens spiritual growth, Dike developed a plan that
he dubbed the Home Department.6
Samuel W. Dikes Home Department equipped
parents with needed materials and training to imprint
biblical truths in their childrens lives. Even when Dike
launched the Home Department in the 1880s, he did
not intend to supplant efforts such as young peoples
societies or Sunday Schools. Dikes purpose was for the
congregation to partner with parents so that the faithtraining of children occurred both in classes at church
and in the day-by-day contexts of their households.
Despite early initial acceptance in thousands of
churches, the Home Department met a rapid demise,
largely due to misapprehension of the original purpose.
By 1907, Dikes original design had been nearly forgot-

ten, and the Home Department had degenerated into

little more than a program for the distribution of study
booklets to shut-ins.7 Throughout the twentieth century, a more segmented approach to ministry rose to
dominance, especially in American churches.
4VYWVKMV\H=NRYNTWWTMQP!-QKQLMNX!MR!
2TWQ[X!-VWbVNL
In a segmented-programmatic congregation, every
church ministry is segmented by age with little interaction or continuity between them. Ministry to families
means having a separate ministry for each member of
the family. Segmented-programmatic ministry developed out of the church-based young peoples societies
that had emerged in the nineteenth century. In some
sense, the segmented-programmatic approach in the
churches mirrored what was happening in the larger American culture as a
(<;?J5>+M:B=+
A?869+`M5SOST+(56+
growing public education system clus4?BJ56C8+D:NJ<9J+
tered youth in tightly-graded classes.
(56?=?@<E:=+
In the economic boom that succeeded
46;<8:C>a+<9+
"99?E<:J6+
the Second World War, churches
MC?K699?C+?K+
solidified segmented-programmatic
O<9E<N=695<N+:8I+!:;<=>+2<8<9JC>+:J+
practices as they increasingly called
(56+4?BJ56C8+D:NJ<9J+(56?=?@<E:=+
46;<8:C>T+Q56C6+56+E??CI<8:J69+
ministers who focused on particular
K:;<=>+;<8<9JC>+NC?@C:;9+:8I+6I<J9+
age-groupings.
=?$!J+&,21@!+B!K1E(@5!L(2(4',5H!
Whether or not such an approach
MC6P<?B9=>T+56+96CP6I+9<WJ668+
ought to be called family ministry
>6:C9+:9+:+N:9J?CT+>?BJ5+;<8<9J6CT+
at all is debatable. What is beyond
:8I+E5<=IC68b9+;<8<9J6CS+(<;?J5>+
debate is the dominance of this
5:9+J:B@5J+7C66F+:J+2<IQ69J6C8+
ministry paradigm, particularly in
D:NJ<9J+(56?=?@<E:=+46;<8:C>+:8I+
<8+0F=:5?;:+D:NJ<9J+18<P6C9<J>b9+
American churches. Segmented-pro2<8<9JC>+(C:<8<8@+&89J<JBJ6S+"+
grammatic ministry so thoroughly
C6E<N<68J+?K+J56+D:F6C+D??F+G?B96+
dominated church administration in
"Q:CI+K?C+(56?=?@<E:=+4JBI<69+:8I+
J56+'"ML)+4E5?=:9J<E+*6E?@8<J<?8+
the twentieth century that, even in
"Q:CIT+(<;?J5>+5:9+:BJ5?C6IT+
the opening decades of the twentyE?:BJ5?C6IT+?C+E?8JC<HBJ6I+J?+
first century, many church members
JQ68J>+H??F9S+(<;?J5>+=<P69+<8+4JS+
2:JJ56Q9+Q<J5+5<9+Q<K6+*:>:88+
know no other approach. In less than
:8I+J56<C+I:B@5J6C9+G:88:5+:8I+
two centuries, the segmented-pro4F>=:CS+G6+68i?>9+5<F<8@T+N=:><8@+
grammatic paradigm became, at least
@:;69+Q<J5+5<9+K:;<=>T+:8I+IC<8F<8@+
!C68E5dNC6996I+E?KK66S+(56+A?869+
in peoples perceptions, traditional.
K:;<=>+<9+<8P?=P6I+<8+4?i?BC8+X<I9+
It would be a flagrant overgeneraliza;<8<9JC>+:J+J56+6:9J+E:;NB9+?K+
tion to blame parental abdication on
4?i?BC8+L?;;B8<J>+L5BCE5S
segmented church programming. At

_f

the same time, the growth of professional, age-focused

ministers may have made it easier for parents to perceive
that the training of their children in the fear of God
must be someone elses responsibility.
*\OPTMQRKT[H=NRYNTWWTMQP!!
2TWQ[X!-QKQLMNX
In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries,
the informal family improvement societies of earlier
generations gave way to formal Family Life Education programs. By the mid-twentieth century, not only
universities but also many states and counties featured
Family Life Education departments.8 Soon, denominations and congregations were establishing Family Life
Education departments too. One advantage of this
educational-programmatic approach was that it could
coexist with segmented-programmatic ministry. Family
Life Education could be added quite easily to the existing array of programs in age-segmented churches.
Educational-programmatic ministry was the perspective promoted in some of the most popular
twentieth-century textbooks for church-based family
ministries. In 1957, Oscar Feucht edited a text entitled
Helping Families through the Church: A Symposium on
Family Life Education.9 Feuchts approach provided

practical helps for developing programs to educate

families for healthier relationships and to equip parents to train their children. In the 1960s and 1970s,
many churches expanded their Family Life Education
programs to provide counseling and support groups for
troubled family members. Textbooks from Charles Sell
and Diana Garland provided foundations for educational-programmatic family ministry that incorporated
therapeutic components.10 While not disregarding parents responsibility to disciple their children, Family
Life Education focused primarily on developing healthy
family relationships.
$'-0&,!23))!$01$)*
As the twentieth century faded into the twenty-first,
a renewed recognition of the need for biblically-motivated parental engagement in childrens discipleship
began to emerge among many evangelical pastors and
scholars. Now, a rising generation of family ministry
practitioners is proclaiming anew the ancient biblical
truths that call parents to function as primary faithtrainers in their childrens lives. Within this larger
movement, three identifiable family ministry models
have emerged: family-based, family-integrated, and family-equipping.11 Each of these models recognizes that the

Figure 1: Modern and Contemporary Approaches to Family Ministry

Y-

family is a fundamental context for the discipleship of

children. Yet none of them ignores the crucial role of the
larger faith community in childrens Christian formation. Perhaps most important, significant proponents of
each of these models have made it clear that what they
are pursuing is not a programmatic panacea to improve
retention rates but a biblically-grounded partnership
between churches and families.
None of these three family ministry models is
absolutely exclusive of the others. The worship celebration in a family-integrated congregation, for example,
might look a lot like the intergenerational worship in
a family-equipping church. Much of the programming
in a family-based congregation will likely look like the
segmented-programmatic models of previous decades,
though family-based churches will involve parents in
as many events as possible. Timothy Paul Jones applied
the following definition to the common ground that
these three contemporary, comprehensive-coordinative approaches share: All of them entail church-wide
engagement in a process of intentionally and persistently
coordinating a congregations proclamation and practices so that parents are acknowledged, trained, and held
accountable as primary disciple-makers in their childrens
lives. At the same time, each model of family ministry
represents a distinct and identifiable approach to the
challenge of drawing the household and the church into
a life-transforming partnership.
.UV!2TWQ[XH0KMVYNTMV\!-R\V[!SRN!
$UONPU!-QKQLMNXA!#!$RW][VMV!<NVTa!
SNRW!#YVH4VYWVKMV\!4MNOPMONVL!
The family-integrated approach represents a complete break from the neo-traditional segmented-programmatic church. Proponents of family integration
contend that the modern American practice of age segregation goes beyond the biblical mandateand may
even obstruct parents obedience in discipling their
children. As a result, in a family-integrated church, all
or nearly all age-organized classes and events are eliminated, including youth group, childrens church, and
even age-graded Sunday School classes. The generations
learn and worship together, and the entire community
of faith calls parentsand particularly fathersto

embrace a primary responsibility for the evangelism and

discipleship of their children.
Proponents of family-integrated churches believe
that there is no scriptural pattern for comprehensive
age-segregated discipleship, and that age-segregated
practices are based on unbiblical, evolutionary and secular thinking which have invaded the church. As a result,
family-integrated congregations reject the emphasis on
family-fragmenting, facility-based programs which disregard the Church as a people in community and which
displace family outreach. From a family-integrated
perspective, the churchs relationships are nurtured
primarily through daily discipleship in everyday life,
especially fathers and mothers training their families to
fulfill the Great Commission, living out the Gospel in
ministry to the saints and witness to the lost. 12
Proponents of family-integrated ministry have
sometimes described the local church as a family of
families.13 In this, family-integrated churches are not,
however, redefining the essential nature of the church.14
When it comes to the nature of the church, familyintegrated churches stand with other models of church
ministry, affirming the orthodox confessions of faith.
Family of families is a functional description of how
family-integrated churches structure their processes of
evangelism and discipleship.
In the latter decades of the twentieth century, church
planter Henry Reyenga as well as Reb Bradley at Hope
Chapel in California were promoting family integration
in American churches. Voddie Baucham and Paul Renfro, from Grace Family Baptist Church in Texas, have
been some of the most articulate recent defenders of
family integration. Other promoters and practitioners
of family-integrated ministry include Doug Phillips at
Vision Forum and Scott Brown from the National Center for Family Integrated Churches.
Families in family-integrated congregations view
their households as contexts for mutual discipleship as
well as evangelism of unbelievers. As a result, they are
likely to invite unbelievers into their homes for meals
on a regular basis. Through intentional hospitality,
unbelieving families observe the dynamics of a Christcentered family, providing opportunities for the believing family to share the Gospel. Small group Bible studies

Y.

bring entire families togetherincluding singles, singleparent households, and children of non-believing parents who have been enfolded into believing families.
.UV!2TWQ[XH<TLV\!-R\V[!SRN!$UONPU!
-QKQLMNXA!#PMQ`QMQVL!TK\!*W]UTLVL!
MR!*W]RcVN!=TNVKML!cQMUQK!#YVH
4VYWVKMV\!4MNOPMONVL
The family-based model seeks to merge a comprehensive-coordinative vision for parents with the
segmented-programmatic perspective that remains
prevalent in many contemporary churches. Mark DeVries pioneered this approach in his book Family-Based
Youth Ministry after recognizing that the real power
for faith formation was not in the youth program but
in the families and the extended family of the church.
. . . Our isolated youth programs cannot compete with
the formative power of the family.15 DeVries indentified
two key priorities in creating and maintaining a familybased model. First, churches must empower the parents
to participate in the discipleship of their children. The
second priority is to equip the extended family of the
church so that the generations build relationships with
one another.
In this model, age-segmented ministries continue
with minimal change, but the congregation constantly
creates opportunities to involve parents and other
adults. The model that Reggie Joiner has dubbed supplemental family ministry would probably describe
the more programmatic side of family-based ministry.16
The difference between family-based models and typical
segmented-programmatic models is that family-based
churches intentionally include intergenerational activities in each ministry and consistently train parents to
function as disciple-makers in their childrens lives.
Proponents of the model are quick to assert that the
segmented-programmatic paradigm is neither faulty
nor broken. The segmented perspective simply needs
to be rebalanced so that parents are empowered and
intergenerational relationships are emphasized. There
are, Brandon Shields asserts,
no pressing reasons for radical reorganization or
restructuring of present ministry models. There is

Y,

certainly no need for complete integration of age

groups. What churches need to do is simply refocus existing age-appropriate groupings to partner
intentionally with families in the discipleship
process.17
Family-based congregations add new activities and
expand existing opportunities so that the generations
grow in their appreciation for one another. In the process, the churchs leadership calls parents to engage
actively in Christian formation within their household.
.UV!2TWQ[XH*dOQ]]QKY!-R\V[!SRN!2TWQ[X!
-QKQLMNXA!.NTKLSRNWQKY!#YVH'NYTKQeV\!
-QKQLMNQVL!MR!$RH$UTW]QRK!MUV!2TWQ[X!
TK\!MUV!$RWWOKQMX!RS!2TQMU
Timothy Paul Jones coined the term family-equipping ministry to describe the family ministry paradigm
that he and Randy Stinson developed for the School of
Church Ministries at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Soon afterward, Randy Stinson located
and brought together an informal coalition of ministers who were doing in practice what he and Jones had
sketched out in theory. Leading early practitioners of
the family-equipping model included Jay Strother at
Brentwood Baptist Church in Tennessee, Brian Haynes
at Kingsland Baptist Church in Texas, and Steve Wright
at Providence Baptist Church in North Carolina.18
In many ways the family-equipping model represents
a middle route between the family-integrated and family-based models.19 Semblances of age-organized ministry remain intact in family-equipping contexts. Many
family-equipping churches even retain youth ministers
and childrens ministers. Yet every practice at every level
of ministry is reworked to champion the place of parents as primary disciple-makers in their childrens lives.
Because parents are primary disciple-makers and vital
partners in family-equipping ministry, every activity
for children or youth must resource, train, or directly
involve parents.20 Family-equipping churches cultivate a
congregational culture that coordinates every ministry
to champion the role of the parents as primary faithtrainers in their childrens lives.
Whereas family-based churches develop intergen-

erational activities within existing segmented-programmatic structures and add family activities to current
calendars, family-equipping churches redevelops the
congregations structure to cultivate a renewed culture wherein parents are acknowledged, trained, and
held accountable as the primary faith-trainers in their
childrens lives. As in family-integrated churches, children whose parents are unbelievers are connected with
mature believers in the types of relationships that Paul
described in his letter to Titus (Titus 2:1-8). Every level
of the congregations life is consciously recultured to
co-champion the churchs ministry and the parents
responsibility.
To envision the family-equipping model in action,
imagine a river with large stones jutting through the
surface of the water. The river represents the Christian
growth and development of children in the church. One
riverbank signifies the church, and the other riverbank
connotes the family. Both banks are necessary for the
river to flow forward with focus and power. Unless both
riverbanks support the childs development, you are
likely to end up with the destructive power of a deluge
instead of the constructive possibilities of a river. The
stones that guide and redirect the river currents represent milestones or rites of passage that mark the passing
of key points of development that the church and families celebrate together.
Most of the authors whose contributions appear
on these pages view family-equipping ministry as the
ideal. At the same time, the principles that they present
will be useful far beyond family-equipping churches,
particularly in family-integrated and family-based contexts. Even segmented-programmatic and educationalprogrammatic ministries may find this journal helpful
as they seek to develop theological foundations for their
ministries to families.
2#-0)>!-0&04.1>!04!&'.!!
.9*!#&4(*1
Before you make plans to launch a family ministry in
your church, a few words of warning about family ministry are in orderwords that may seem to work against
the success of this very journal! Our words of warning
are simply these: Family ministry is not the answer; fam-

ily ministry will not fix your churchs problems; and,

family ministry will not transform peoples lives.
The Gospel is what changes peoplenot programs
or practices; not models or methods; but solely and only
the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Every local church should be
concerned first about how the Gospel is portrayed, presented, and practiced in the congregation. This includes
considering how local congregations teach on the subjects of marriage and parenting and how they encourage and minister to families. Healthy families are not,
however, the goal. To place anything as the churchs goal
besides the glory of God experienced through the Gospel is to create an idol, and the idol of family ministry
is no less loathsome to God than the orgiastic shrines of
Canaan or the pantheon of ancient Rome. The believing household is a target for the enemy, but Christian
families are not the answer to humanitys problems. The
Gospel is the answer. Our households are not targeted
because Christian families are flawless families. Our
households are targeted because they are God-ordained
contexts where cross-centered, Gospel-empowered living can be constantly rehearsed and practiced. Through
these day-by-day rehearsals of the Gospel, children and
parents alike are trained in the fear of God.
ENDNOTES
1
For discussions, see George Barna, Parents Accept
Responsibility for Their Childs Spiritual Development but Struggle with Effectiveness, http://www.
barna.org/barna-update/article/5-barna-update/120parents-accept-responsibility-for-their-childs-spiritual-development-but-struggle-with-effectiveness;
Dennis Rainey, Ministering to Twenty-First Century
Families (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2001), 57-58;
Brian Haynes, Shift: What it Takes to Finally Reach
Families Today (Loveland, CO: Group Publishing,
2009), 37; Steve Wright, ApParent Privilege (Raleigh:
InQuest, 2009), 17-18.
2
Regarding spiritual development in particular, see
Christian Smith and Melinda Lundquist Denton,
Soul Searching: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of
American Teenagers (New York: Oxford University
Press, 2005), 261. For the perspective of a familyequipping practitioner, see Steve Wright, ApParent

Y_

Privilege (Raleigh: InQuest, 2009) 17.

Kara Powell and Krista Kubiak, When the Pomp
and Circumstance Fades, Youthworker (Sept.-Oct.
2005): 51.
4
David F. Wells, God in the Wasteland: The Reality
of Truth in a World of Fading Dreams (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), 221. See also Haynes, Shift,
37-38.
5
Timothy Paul Jones. Models for Family Ministry
in A Theology for Family Ministry, eds. Michael and
Michelle Anthony (Nashville: B&H, 2010).
6
Edmund Morris Fergusson, Church-School Administration (New York: Revell, 1922) 124-125.
7
Flora V. Stebbins, The Home Department of To-day
(Philadelphia: The Sunday School Times Company,
1907) 3.
8
M.E. Arcus, et al., The Nature of Family Life
Education, in Handbook of Family Life Education,
ed. M.E. Arcus, et al. (Newbury Park, CA: SAGE,
1993); Stephen Wallace and H.W. Goddard, Family
Life Education (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2005),
3.
9
Oscar Feucht, ed., Helping Families through the
Church: A Symposium on Family Life Education (St.
Louis: Concordia, 1957).
10
Diana Garland, Family Ministry (Downers Grove,
IL: InterVarsity, 1999); Charles Sell, Family Ministry
2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995).
11
In the new edition of God, Marriage, and Family,
these three distinct models are presented as three variants of family integration, with the family-integrated
modelwhich is criticized sharplyidentified as
more purist in the conviction and application
of family integration (Andreas Kstenberger with
David Jones, God, Marriage, and Family 2 nd edition [Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010] 259-260, see
also footnote 20). Family-based ministry, however,
emerged in the 1980s and 1990s, not as a modification of family integration but as a course correction
that assumed the continued existence of age-organized ministries to youth and children (see, for
example, the first edition of Mark DeVries. FamilyBased Youth Ministry. [Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1994]). The practice of family-equipping,
3

YY

on the other hand, grew largely out of a conviction

that family-based ministry was well-intentioned but
insufficient (Jay Strother, Responses, in Perspectives
on Family Ministry [Nashville, TN: B&H Academic,
2009] 127). Throughout this time, family-integrated
churches in their contemporary form were developing independently from family-based and familyequipping models.
12
A Biblical Confession for Uniting Church and Family: http://www.ncfic.org/.
13
For this quotation as well as a fuller description of
family-integrated ministry, see Voddie Baucham,
Family Driven Faith (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway,
2007) 191-195.
14
This point has been repeatedly clarified by proponents of family-integrated ministry; see, e.g., Paul
Renfro, Why Family Integration Still Works, in
Perspectives on Family Ministry, ed. T. Jones (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic) 89-90. Despite these
clarifications, the errant charge that family of families entails ecclesiological revision continues to be
repeated, most recently in the second edition of
Andreas Kstenberger with David Jones, God, Marriage, and Family 2nd edition (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010) 259.
15
Mark DeVries. Family-Based Youth Ministry 2nd edition (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004),
61, 67. A new chapter in the second edition of God,
Marriage, and Family incorrectly states that familybased ministry is not widely-known or widely-pursued, overlooking the fact that family-based ministry
first made an appearance in the early 1990s, in the
first edition of Mark DeVries Family-Based Youth
Ministry, and has remained widespread both as a
practice and as a terminology ever since. See Andreas
Kstenberger with David Jones, God, Marriage, and
Family 2nd edition (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010)
372-373 (footnote 20).
16
Reggie Joiner, Think Orange: Imagine the Impact
When Church and Family Collide (Colorado Springs:
Cook, 2009), Concentrate 6.2.
17
Brandon Shields, Family-Based Ministry: Separated
Contexts, Shared Focus, in Perspectives on Family
Ministry, ed. Timothy Paul Jones (Nashville: B&H,

2009), 98-99.
For the model as practiced by these ministers, see
Jay Strother, Family-Equipping Ministry: Cochampions with a Single Goal, in Perspectives on
Family Ministry, ed. Timothy Paul Jones (Nashville:
B&H, 2009); Brian Haynes, Shift: What it Takes to
Finally Reach Families Today (Loveland, CO: Group
Publishing, 2009); Steve Wright with Chris Graves,
reThink: Is Student Ministry Working? (Raleigh:
InQuest, 2007).
19
Much that is found in Think Orange: Imagine the
Impact When Church and Family Collide (Colorado
Springs: Cook, 2009) fits in the overlap between the
family-based and family-equipping paradigms, at
least from an organizational and programmatic perspective; many of the associated publications could
be helpful in resourcing the development of familybased and family-equipping ministries, although
these materials provide little in the way of theological
foundations for family ministry.
20
For the resource, train, involve principle as well
as the term co-champion, see Steve Wright with
Chris Graves, reThink: Is Student Ministry Working?
(Raleigh: InQuest, 2007).
18

YV