Today I want us to look at an article written by Paul Johnson way back in April of 1998. The article, Preaching What We Practice: Not Always the Answer is a great article dealing with subsidy and the role of Missionary vs. the Role of Pastor/Elder.
Perhaps the best paragraph in the article is,
I believe there's often a lack of delineation between pastors and missionaries. As Wayne points out, they are two distinct entities. Evangelist and missionaries carry Christ to where there is no church, with the objectie of establishing one. Pastors and elders minister where a body of believers is already established. Biblically it seems the ways in which they are sustained also differ.
The article goes on to discuss how missionaries are supported over and against how local church leaders are supported. One of the criticisms that the author finds is that too often, financial renumeration is the "calling" from denomination to denomination. We find some pastors going to the highest bidder. Also, he points out how the catalyst usually comes from the outside but that in order for new testament principles to be carried out, leadership must be grown from within the body.
Let us join together to pray that God would clearly present His vision for us and that we would be able to work together in order to assure that He is praise everywhere, all the time.
Oh yeah, go subscribe to EMQOnline and read this yourself!
2 comments:
Of course I am in agreement with the general principles presented in this article. When outside resources are the primary source of resources it will invariably turn out bad. However, the writer of this article has taken some liberties that I also believe are unhealthy when having this discussion. He states:
Although you can't find a nickel in Acts 13, one would imagine the sending church at Antioch assisted Paul and Barnabas.
We cannot base decisions and practices upon what we imagine or what conjectures seem obvious to us. Someone else could have easily stated, "although the it's not stated in Scripture, it seems to me that Paul and Barnabas were partially support from outside resources. Either statement is void of biblical support and great care needs to be implemented when making sweeping generalizations like this.
The best argument that I have been exposed to in terms of supporting local leaders is that they do need, as the write states, multiple sources of financial backing:
1. A craft or trade that can bring in basic support funds for the leader's family, like Paul demonstrated with tent making.
2. A strong and intentional teaching of new believers and churches about their responsibility to stewardship issues.
3. Crisis support from the global Christian family. There are times when it is appropriate for outside funds to be utilized for emergency or crisis situations.
The more indigenous we can make the work, the better the chance of the work growing and reproducing. Also, there is a strong loyalty connection between money and service. If the funds needed for the work is coming in from outside sources, where do you think loyalty lies? Follow the money!!
Probably the most powerful statements in this article is as follows:
After 25 years of full-time involvement in missions and the church scene at most levels, I'm convinced that the basis for most decisions is simply what's best for us, for our church, or for our mission board. What will enhance us? What will sustain our interests, our growth, and our popularity? Determining what will most greatly enhance God's global church and the reaching and teaching of all nations has, sadly, been replaced by well-intentioned but self-serving agendas. These divide the family, sterilize the message, and confuse new
believers in the Two-Thirds World. It is time for a change of spirit and practice. It's time to put God's cause and not our own organizational agendas at the top of the priority list.
When we can divorce ourselves from personal agendas and self-serving interests for the greater good of the Gospel, we will then see changes in strategies. Until then . . . . But before we bend over to pick up a few stones, we might want to identify and evaluate our agendas. Yes, we have some too.
Donald,
I get the difference between "missionary" and "pastor," but I've struggled with the idea of being a "full-time, professional missionary" ever since I arrived on the field.
The fact that I'm paid to plant churches really seems to undermine the discipling relationships I work to build. No matter how much I try to encourage nationals to take responsibility for the work and the church, the bottom line is that I get paid to do it.
Thanks for your post.
-stepchild
Post a Comment