Para Church Ministries?

[Deleted member 7239]

I appreciate and value all of your thoughts on this. I think there is a difference between telling my neighbor about Christ and standing up and preaching in front of a congregation.

 

[Deleted member 7239]

Jesse, by all means talk to your neighbor about Christ. Just take heed to understand your call and gifting. Much harm can be done by well-intentioned lay "evangelists". I shudder at the some of the false things I've ignorantly said of Christ when sharing the gospel.

Since you feel so strongly about this, have you considered talking to your elders about call discernment? Perhaps you are called to preach and teach. They would be able to help you figure out if that is the case.

I operate a small business and I wouldn't be a very good pastor.

 

[Gforce9]

Joshua said in a previous post, "Not only should it prove difficult "not to tell the lost about" Christ, but it is every Christian's duty according to place, station, and ability."

I am in agreement with Josh. I understand my "place, station, and ability". It is not minister of the word and sacrament.....

 

[Deleted member 7239]

I am in agreement with Josh. I understand my "place, station, and ability". It is not minister of the word and sacrament.....

Neither am I a minister of word and sacrament. Does this prohibit me from actively telling the lost about Christ? If they show interest I'm not going to sprinkle them with water and start preaching to them. I am going to move them toward joining a biblical church.

 

[Gforce9]

Neither am I a minister of word and sacrament. Does this prohibit me from actively telling the lost about Christ? If they show interest I'm not going to sprinkle them with water and start preaching to them. I am going to move them toward joining a biblical church.

I think that is a good course of action. I would only add that it is a confessionally Reformed church that has not bought into the threshold/decisional nonsense that Brett and Josh talked about......

 

[Deleted member 7239]

I was going to baptize them and sign and date their bible, just kidding-- I am a member of a PCA church. I do agree with the WCF, but I also think that we err too much on the side of letting the ordained worry about the lost. I think we all should do what we can to point all we can to Christ, the scriptures, and His church.

Appreciate you guys

 

[Joshua]

I do agree with the WCF, but, I also think that we err too much on the side of letting the ordained worry about the lost.

If this is what you think the Confessional position is, or that it is what has been asserted in the thread, then you have missed the point.

I think we all should do what we can to point all we can to Christ, the scriptures, and His church.

Your intent seems pious, and commendable insofar as intent goes, but if "what we can" falls outside of the King's ordering of His Kingdom, all the good intentions in the world do not make it right, and your argument is not with men, but with the King Who orders His Kingdom as He sees fit. Christ Himself gave perfect obedience to His Father, not straying from His Father's commandment, even praying, "Not my will, but thine be done," (Luke 22.42, see also John 5.19, John 6.38, John 10.18b). Do we -according to place and station- pattern our practice after the obeyer par excellence, the God of all creation, or do we take our own measures, howsoever seemingly pious, and do that instead? Do we listen to and submit to Him as the Architect of His own kingdom, or do we go about trying to "help" him and -like Peter (Matthew 16.22)- tell Him a better way? Let us check our wills, good intentions, so on and so forth at the door, and let the Lord of the house take those things, wash and sanctify them in the Water of the Word, then return them to us with His design.

 

[Deleted member 7239]

If this is what you think the Confessional position is, or that it is what has been asserted in the thread, then you have missed the point.
Your intent seems pious, and commendable insofar as intent goes, but if "what we can" falls outside of the King's ordering of His Kingdom, all the good intentions in the world do not make it right, and your argument is not with men, but with the King Who orders His Kingdom as He sees fit. Christ Himself gave perfect obedience to His Father, not straying from His Father's commandment, even praying, "Not my will, but thine be done." Do we -according to place and station- pattern our practice after the obeyer par excellence, the God of all creation, or do we take our own measures, howsoever seemingly pious, and do that instead? Do we listen to and submit to Him as the Architect of His own kingdom, or do we go about trying to "help" him and -like Peter (Matthew 16.22)- tell Him a better way? Let us check our wills, good intentions, so on and so forth at the door, and let the Lord of the house take those things, wash and sanctify them in the Water of the Word, then return them to us with His design.

I don't think that letting the clergy worry about the lost is what the confession teaches. I am saying that in our recognition of the importance of the official ministry of the Word and Sacrament we can't overcorrect and do nothing.

Just like we can't use the doctrine of election to justify our own lack of zeal for the lost.

 

[Joshua]

I don't think that letting the clergy worry about the lost is what the confession teaches. I am saying that in our recognition of the importance of the official ministry of the Word and Sacrament we can't overcorrect and do nothing.

Just like we can't use the doctrine of election to justify our own lack of zeal for the lost.

Great.

The question is why are you saying this? Have you seen such things asserted in this thread? You began by asking about organization who call identify themselves as "ministries," yet are not under the authority of the Church, whether they were helpful or competitors to the Church. I have not read all of the posts in this thread, but I can say with a strong amount of confidence that surely no one has asserted that any Christian may "do nothing."

 

[Deleted member 7239]

Great.

The question is why are you saying this? Have you seen such things asserted in this thread? You began by asking about organization who call identify themselves as "ministries," yet are not under the authority of the Church, whether they were helpful or competitors to the Church. I have not read all of the posts in this thread, but I can say with a strong amount of confidence that surely no one has asserted that any Christian may "do nothing."

We are all brothers here and its a sensitive topic I know. I was saying that, in general, not anyone in particular because i don't know any of you personally, that it seems as though many reformed believers do not share their faith because they may think its not their duty. I think it is unclear what exactly the duty is of the laity when it comes to sharing their faith.

So without infringing on the authority of the clergy, what would you say is the witnessing responsibility of us laypeople? Is it passively waiting for someone to ask us about our faith or actively pursuing discussions with non-believers about Christ?

 

[Scott Bushey]

The Bible speaks of giving witness... all of us are cognizant of that. All the parts working together make up the whole. Much angst in this sphere is from the silly dispensationalism that is rampant in our culture and even our churches. God is not up in Heaven wringing His hands in a sweat, nor should we. There's a great difference between complacency and confidence. Most Reformed believers are a bit more biblically relaxed about giving witness and do so as the spirit leads and opportunity arises.

 

[Scott Bushey]

I want to add that many times, the secondary services that make the machinery work optimally are deficient. For example, the infrastructure of prayer and hospitality in these realms. Much more emphasis is given to the outward means and the other avenues many times devalued to the degree where people who have these important gifts are not even asked to support the effort; it's like going to a gun fight with a rubber band! But I'm sure u get the point. It is a process of many means and given, as mentioned earlier, the culture, the emphasis is placed on the actual witnessing or preaching alone.

 

[Edward]

People cannot be saved outside of the official means of grace.

In context above, that appears to be contra-confessional.

For example, the elect people, incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word, are saved.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Not really...Christ Himself preaches the gospel, delivering those means of grace to those that are unable otherwise. No one can be saved outside of the gospel message.

 

[RamistThomist]

So without infringing on the authority of the clergy, what would you say is the witnessing responsibility of us laypeople? Is it passively waiting for someone to ask us about our faith or actively pursuing discussions with non-believers about Christ?

One of the differences I see in lay people sharing the gospel with their coworkers, and (non) think tanks like the Gospel Coalition is that I, as part of the former, don't act like a church body.

 

[Inactiver user19912]

I once had a conversation with an elder in my current denomination about parachurch ministries. He was willing to funnel the church's meager resources over to this group because they "do work the Church doesn't do."

At one point in the conversation I said, "Jesus said in Matthew 16:18 that on the rock of Peter's confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God He would build His Church. Can you find me a passage in Scripture that elaborates on this and says, 'But in the event that His Bride is not getting it done people can raise up for themselves organizations that function like the businesses of the world but use the language of the Church, to divert people, time, and resources away from the Bride, to mimic the works the Bride are commanded to do.' If you can find me an explicit command for parachurch ministries then by all means, we can have this conversation. But unless and until we can see a clear command or something that we can deduce by good and necessary consequence I'm opposed to this."

Rather than usurp the role of the Church and tack on "Ministries" at the end of the name, I'd say that we should focus on ensuring the the Church is doing what God has commanded the Church to do. A lay member of any given congregation can certainly share the Gospel with a non-Christian; that they would seek out an "umbrella organization" to pay them to do it and not be content with the Biblical oversight of the elders is problematic, to say the least. The two ideas discussed over the course of this thread (personal evangelism v. parachurch ministry) are apples and oranges.

Parachurch ministries claim to be helping the Church. But is it really helping the Church to say that she is insufficient unless she supports them in doing her work for them? No thank you. God has established His Church. He has not established his parachurch.

Finally, my presbytery asks this question of candidates on our theology exams: "What is your opinion of 'parachurch ministries'?" My answer was that they are not commanded in Scripture, divert the saints from the true work of the Church, and siphon away resources from Her. No one spoke in opposition to my answer. Take that for whatever it's worth.

 

[Deleted member 7239]

"The two ideas discussed over the course of this thread (personal evangelism v. parachurch ministry) are apples and oranges."

If it is good for a private individual to engage in an activity (witnessing, counseling, giving to poor, etc.) wouldn't it be better to do these in an organized and more effective way with other believers?

 

[Steve Curtis]

organizations that function like the businesses of the world but use the language of the Church, to divert people, time, and resources away from the Bride, to mimic the works the Bride are commanded to do.

Okay, we get it. You don't like parachurch ministries. But to throw them all under the bus and impugn their motivations is simply wrong.

 

[RamistThomist]

"The two ideas discussed over the course of this thread (personal evangelism v. parachurch ministry) are apples and oranges."

If it is good for a private individual to engage in an activity (witnessing, counseling, giving to poor, etc.) wouldn't it be better to do these in an organized and more effective way with other believers?

As a rule and a trend, parachurch ministry almost always start to view themselves as "the real deal." With the exception of a few cultists, individuals witnessing on the streets usually do not replace the church in peoples' minds. Parachurch ministries do.

 

[Ben Zartman]

So without infringing on the authority of the clergy, what would you say is the witnessing responsibility of us laypeople? Is it passively waiting for someone to ask us about our faith or actively pursuing discussions with non-believers about Christ?

A life lived according to God's law will itself be a witness. That is your primary duty, and if you're like me, even that is difficult enough without adding duties that God has not imposed. When the lost see the way you live, they will know you are a Christian. That is a far more effective witness than searching people out specifically to tell them about Jesus. I don't shy away from declaring that in Christ is forgiveness of sins during conversations with my acquaintances, if it comes up, but I'm not forever steering the conversation that way, or bugging them with it out of the blue. And certainly I don't buttonhole perfect strangers to "share" the Gospel, because of the Golden Rule.
There are those who are called to proclaim the Gospel to all and sundry, but not every christian is called to that.

 

[Inactiver user19912]

Okay, we get it. You don't like parachurch ministries. But to throw them all under the bus and impugn their motivations is simply wrong.

It doesn't have anything to do with what I like or don't like, Doctor. What matters is that to copy the role of the Church (for whatever reason), form a non-profit, and tack on "Ministries" to the end of it is unbibilcal, confusing, and it causes saints to be divided between what they are biblically commanded to do as a member of Christ's Church and what someone urges them to do to support via a marketing letter.

Often that business exists because someone has created him or herself a niche wants to play the role of minister without the oversight and examination of the Church's officers. Or worse, they've convinced themselves and others that Christ's Church has failed some group and that, rather than engage inside the Church to correct it, they simply must form a niche "ministry" to reach those people. Whatever the motives are the end result is that the saints aren't strengthened as much as they're divided and God's Church is seen as deficient in its gifting and duties.

So to those who are 100% supportive of parachurch ministries, find me the book, chapter, and verse. Otherwise, stop supporting them and discuss with the elders that God has ordained for His Church what your concerns are that you think require a parachurch group. It could be that God has placed that given niche on your heart so that you could speak with your elders about it, so that they could, in turn, see and correct a deficiency. But don't divert the saints into your niche at the expense of the Church, because that's what winds up happening, more times than not. People support the guy who sends the flashy support letter with the sense of urgency and not the Church, who doesn't.

 

[Deleted member 7239]

It doesn't have anything to do with what I like or don't like, Doctor. What matters is that to copy the role of the Church (for whatever reason), form a non-profit, and tack on "Ministries" to the end of it is unbibilcal, confusing, and it causes saints to be divided between what they are biblically commanded to do as a member of Christ's Church and what someone urges them to do to support via a marketing letter.

Often that business exists because someone has created him or herself a niche wants to play the role of minister without the oversight and examination of the Church's officers. Or worse, they've convinced themselves and others that Christ's Church has failed some group and that, rather than engage inside the Church to correct it, they simply must form a niche "ministry" to reach those people. Whatever the motives are the end result is that the saints aren't strengthened as much as they're divided and God's Church is seen as deficient in its gifting and duties.

So to those who are 100% supportive of parachurch ministries, find me the book, chapter, and verse. Otherwise, stop supporting them and discuss with the elders that God has ordained for His Church what your concerns are that you think require a parachurch group. It could be that God has placed that given niche on your heart so that you could speak with your elders about it, so that they could, in turn, see and correct a deficiency. But don't divert the saints into your niche at the expense of the Church, because that's what winds up happening, more times than not. People support the guy who sends the flashy support letter with the sense of urgency and not the Church, who doesn't.

Not all para-church ministries are equal and I don't think anyone is 100% for all of them. I think the question is the difference between performing the good works that we were created for, and carrying out the Great Commission apart from the visible church and ordained ministers.

I think we would all agree that doing good works is scriptural. Feeding orphans for example. So doing this in an organized way is a good thing. Telling these orphans about the gospel is a good thing. None of this competes with the church, but the opposite. Pointing people to scripture and Christ will always point toward His church.

 

[Steve Curtis]

Maybe we need to define the term more precisely. Do we denigrate the work of ministries that translate the Bible into indigenous languages (I use the word, "ministries," intentionally because they do, in fact, minister to the needs of people who do not have God's Word in their tongue)?
What about seminaries not under direct church or denominational oversight? Is RTS (as one example) "diverting the saints...at the expense of the church"? They solicit funds that might otherwise be designated for a local church (though, hopefully, gifts to these types of "ministries" are above and beyond tithes).

 

[Inactiver user19912]

Y'all go ahead and parse away and I'll wander back onto the Board to watch. I'm bowing out at this point because: A) I'm not really interested in commenting on a long thread of "what abouts" (no offense to anyone involved in the conversation) and B) I'm close enough to Houston to be affected by Harvey so most of my attention will be diverted. I only hopped on here to just browse some posts, got involved, and frankly, wish I had kept my mouth shut.

As for the seminary thing I'd prefer the training of men to be at the presbytery level with close supervision of local elders of the Church. I have mixed feelings about seminaries as they're currently utilized. I don't care for the academic establishment and its methodologies as they apply to the study of Scripture but I've said more than I care to say already.

 

[Deleted member 7239]

Y'all go ahead and parse away and I'll wander back onto the Board to watch. I'm bowing out at this point because: A) I'm not really interested in commenting on a long thread of "what abouts" (no offense to anyone involved in the conversation) and B) I'm close enough to Houston to be affected by Harvey so most of my attention will be diverted. I only hopped on here to just browse some posts, got involved, and frankly, wish I had kept my mouth shut.

As for the seminary thing I'd prefer the training of men to be at the presbytery level with close supervision of local elders of the Church. I have mixed feelings about seminaries as they're currently utilized. I don't care for the academic establishment and its methodologies as they apply to the study of Scripture but I've said more than I care to say already.

It's easy to be rigid and paint with a broad brush with para-church ministries. I just hoped in this thread that maybe some people on this board would see that all Christian organizations outside the church are necessary and good.

The homeless shelter/orphanage aren't "what abouts" they are actual places in your area meeting actual needs that the local church isn't meeting.

Sorry that you have to deal with the "nonsense of surviving mortals".

 

[Stope]

"Para church" ministries are extremely valuable and used by God all the time!!! This shouldn't even be a real question and it pains my heart to see that it is

 

[Steve Curtis]

It doesn't have anything to do with what I like or don't like

See, I'm not convinced that's true:

I'd prefer

I have mixed feelings

I don't care for

I would encourage you to step back and reconsider things more objectively.
I do understand that Harvey demands your attention and I will be praying for you and all those affected. I look forward to hearing from you after the crisis has passed.

 

[yeutter]

Are para-Church ministries doing God's work today? yes
Should these ministries be structured as para-Church ministries?
Should seminaries be para-Church ministries or is theological education properly a function of the Church?
Should ministries of compassion be par-Church or should it be properly a ministry of the deacons of the Church?
Should Bible translation work be a para-Church ministry, or an effort by publishers, or should a Church have oversight over these endeavors?

 

[Deleted member 7239]

I've come to the conclusion that the term Para-Church is a bad term was invented by a person with bad ecclesiology. All of the "in a perfect world" scenarios aren't helpful either. In a perfect world the church would make all charitable organizations obsolete, but the church is scattered and divided, as we clearly demonstrate here on the PB. Baptists and Presbyterians laypeople should be able to feed the needy and clothe the naked without charges of supplanting the church. If the officers were doing these things effectively, there wouldn't be a need for others to step in, so where does the real fault lie?

I don't believe all charity and spreading of the Gospel message is to be done by officers alone, and if I were an officer I would hope that this were true.

 

[earl40]

IBaptists and Presbyterians laypeople should be able to feed the needy and clothe the naked without charges of supplanting the church.

I will say that I believe no one here did such. I understand you seem to see it as so, but as has been pointed out earlier this is a characterization that is simply not true.

I don't believe all charity and spreading of the Gospel message is to be done by officers alone,

Charity is to be practiced by all the church, and the official proclamation of The Gospel is to be done by TE's as prescribed in scripture.