View Single Post
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 12-24-2007, 08:18 AM
Pergamum's Avatar
Pergamum Pergamum is offline now.
The MacDaddy
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 6,168
Thanks: 1,109
Thanked 1,190 Times in 674 Posts
Rich, thanks I agree - even though I have no problem with the word "ministry."

I do see that "demystifying" missions seems to help people get a grasp on who missionaries are and what they do. They do tasks overseas for Christ, often the same tasks that they could be doing at home. Much of it is very mundane and the thing that makes them "missionaries" is that (1) they do it full time and for Christ (which all people should do in all their labors) and (2) they often do it in poor countries and need a little extra help from supporting churches to finance their efforts.

They do translation, nursing, teaching, computer work, even grounds-keeping and properties management.

Perhaps a lot of this "vocation" work is called "ministry" because it is done in communities where "missions work" is occurring and also (I suspect the main reason) is because they need funds to sustain that work (the local economy won't help them) and so they ask for funds from US churches and US churches will only support "ministries" and not vocations.

I am curious about feedback on this particular point.

Also, a big question, should we therefore restrict the term "missionaries" only to elder-qualified church planting men?

And, what should we call all the others? "Vocationers?".... and how would this affect funding for all the support workers needed on the "mission field"? Would we then call people who work with Wycliffe Bible Translators missionaries, or only Christians who have a vocation? And since these folks need home-country support to help them pay bills while translating the Bible into oompa-Loompa or whatnot, do we present their efforts to the church as Ministries or as jobs that do not give wages (thus requiring church support)?



There does seem to be a difference in managing a hotel chain in the US and trying to do it for the glory of God and calling this a vocation and giving up that job in the States to go and manage an orphanage or missionary kid hostel overseas (relocating to a Third World country, relying on donations and denying one's self of some USA pleasures to do much of the same job for a different target population). While I agree that both can be done for the glory of God, the one who travels overseas may need some added church support and so I suspect that the proliferation of items that count as "ministry" is partly due to this need to fund a "missions infrastructure" overseas. Therefore, I still have no problems with people speaking of their "ministries of helps".


Regarding oversight:
It does not seem that a man would need to be elder-qualified to move overseas and work in a "missions community" and fix toilets.

And if a single women was good at unclogging toilets (or sewing clothes for widows) and moved overseas to work in a "missions community" as a "missions janitor" than I would not demand direct and local male oversight over her "ministry."


Whether you call it vocation or ministry (unclogging poopers for Christ) is of little import to me. I do favor the moniker ministry over vocation because it is more translatable to our modern masses, but if you all can help teach the general public about Biblical vocation than all the better.
Perhaps you are right that vocation is a better term, and if we began to think in terms of "vocation" than we would see that females could do a great deal more without the dreadful charge of "usurping" occurring.


I do believe, however, that church planters who will plant churches and baptize and administer the Lord's Supper and chose and train local leaders ought to be elder-qualified.

Some churches I know only regard this type of missionary as a "missionary" and they label all others as "missionary support". While I admire their desire for doctrinal exactness, no missionary pilot who cannot get insurance due to dangers and risks his life daily wants people to remind him that he is not REALLY a missionary, only a support worker.



QUESTIONS: Did Dorcas make her clothes under "direct and local oversight" of a man?

Did she need a "call to ministry" to do so?

Would a computer guy who works on a missions base in Ukurumpa New Guinea, etc, need a "missionary call" even though he is not a church planter but is basically doing computer tech work in the Third World..and would his wife need to be "called as a missionary" to be the wife of a computer geek who works on a missions base in the Third World?



Many single women do go overseas and are supported by churches to do their "vocation" or "ministry". And many of these are single so that there is no "home" for her to work out of, having no husband or children. Therefore, should we merely badger than about "why aren't you married yet...what's wrong with you.." or place them in the work somewhere where they can be useful? Much has been said about wives, but very little about single women - a large percentage of the foreign missionary force.
__________________
Pergamum


"If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
-- David Livingstone

Last edited by Pergamum; 12-24-2007 at 08:40 AM..