Scott Bushey
Puritanboard Commissioner
Do you think that the parachurch idea benefits the the local church or hurts it in it's ecclesiology?
Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The New Testament assumes itinerant evangelists and mobile folks traveling around for the sake of the Gospel. Often these brought letters of recommendation with them from local churches, but their ministries were not confined to a local church.
The New Testament assumes itinerant evangelists and mobile folks traveling around for the sake of the Gospel. Often these brought letters of recommendation with them from local churches, but their ministries were not confined to a local church.
I cannot think of an example in the NT where a man is preaching and teaching without being sent by some body and/or Apostle.
Even in times of persecution (like Acts 8) there were no evangelists just popping up of their own recognizance.
I cannot think of an example in the NT where a man is preaching and teaching without being sent by some body and/or Apostle.
The New Testament assumes itinerant evangelists and mobile folks traveling around for the sake of the Gospel. Often these brought letters of recommendation with them from local churches, but their ministries were not confined to a local church.
I cannot think of an example in the NT where a man is preaching and teaching without being sent by some body and/or Apostle.
It seems that something like this happened to Jesus and the Apostles:
Mark 9:38-40
38 And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.
39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.
40 For he that is not against us is on our part.
The New Testament assumes itinerant evangelists and mobile folks traveling around for the sake of the Gospel. Often these brought letters of recommendation with them from local churches, but their ministries were not confined to a local church.
The office of the type of evangelist described in scripture has passed.
I cannot think of an example in the NT where a man is preaching and teaching without being sent by some body and/or Apostle.
It seems that something like this happened to Jesus and the Apostles:
Mark 9:38-40
38 And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.
39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.
40 For he that is not against us is on our part.
The key phrase there is "he followeth not us".
As I noted above in the NT there are cases where we are not told explicitly who sent them, but they were sent by someone (in Mark 9, Christ Himself through the Spirit).
But that situation in Mark 9 is a far cry from the kind of "parachurch" thing in the OP.
But that situation in Mark 9 is a far cry from the kind of "parachurch" thing in the OP
The New Testament assumes itinerant evangelists and mobile folks traveling around for the sake of the Gospel. Often these brought letters of recommendation with them from local churches, but their ministries were not confined to a local church.
The office of the type of evangelist described in scripture has passed.
That's what you say.
Chaplains generally are commissioned and sent by Presbyteries (as are evangelists and missionaries) in our circles, so no that would not be an example of parachurch.
..... I'm a big believer that discipleship really cannot occur outside of a solid Church.......I know one PCA friend who says this: "Baptists and Pentecostals convert people and we disciple them." I believe in an educated clergy and will never veer from that conviction but we sometimes just can't seem to keep up with the harvest.
..... I'm a big believer that discipleship really cannot occur outside of a solid Church.......I know one PCA friend who says this: "Baptists and Pentecostals convert people and we disciple them." I believe in an educated clergy and will never veer from that conviction but we sometimes just can't seem to keep up with the harvest.
I am a believer that Our Lord can disciple people in churches that are less than solid. Now saying this I am blessed to be part of a rather solid church and see the advantage of such.
Chaplains generally are commissioned and sent by Presbyteries (as are evangelists and missionaries) in our circles, so no that would not be an example of parachurch.
Yes, I understand how Chaplains work. I've examined many in our Presbytery for ordination.
That said (and I'm going to get in trouble here), it's one thing to provide Chaplains where there are no Churches to serve people but Chapels exist near where established Churches exist. Military families tend to see Chapels as examples of "normal Church".
I'll shut up before I write more that might unnecessarily offend and distract from the main point of the conversation.
I only have a few brief moments. I was thinking of the New Light/Old Light controversy in America as the thread on the Ligonier Statement was debated.
I guess this all depends on what the term "parachurch" means.
Are chaplains examples of parachurch?
It's interesting to look historically at the impact that George Whitefield had on the Church as well as the impact that other revival movements have had in American Church history. These impacts are not only sweeping in terms of the Church but even the political process and, given America's influence in mission work globally, spread throughout a lot of the world.
There is certainly a lot of bad to point to with enthusiasts and sentimentalists. I'm a big believer that discipleship really cannot occur outside of a solid Church. Paul sent Timothy and Titus to plant Churches with elders who cared for people's souls. I don't have the time to share some heart-warming and encouraging testimonies of people who came to our Church who were cared for for the first time in their Christian lives and really discipled. I participate in local Bible studies in what may be considered parachurch. I am often very frustrated about the energy these organizations take from Christians who are not joining a real local Body because the parachurch tends to masquerade as an entity for discipleship.
Do all activities of Christians need to flow from the top down and through the authority structure of the local church?
Also, let me ask you: What does the Church of God look like? And how does the priesthood of all believers impact our ability to voluntarily interact one with another without a strict chain of command?
Do all activities of Christians need to flow from the top down and through the authority structure of the local church? Or can Christians voluntarily join together in common cause to meet some deficiency or need?
Example 1: I briefly attended a church in NC where the elders desired to review the gospel tracts that believers passed out to people in their spare time. They wanted to give permission prior to any church members sharing the gospel using literature with anyone, i.e. members could only use church-approved tracts to give to others in their spare time. While one elder insisted that this approach was wise, my wife and I drifted to another church as these announcements were made because it seemed too "top-down" and seemed to ignore the priesthood of all believers.
Example 2: A typhoon hits a country. A dozen Christian businessman decide to quickly help, so they meet together and organize relief. Such packages and workers must go out in the name of one banner, so a name is adopted and staff are sought and official registration with the gov't occurs. This Relief Group then sends the relief to the country. And they keep it up for a year or two.
On Sundays, these Christian businessmen go to their own respective home churches. As Christians they are part of their own local churches, but they also voluntarily banded together for this disaster relief project.
You could say that they formed a "parachurch" - but also realize that they themselves are part of the Church (Big C). So, this is not so much an expression of a parachurch but of the actions of Christ's Church around the world and how Christians have always functioned.
In the New Testament, we do not see tight organizational structures. In fact, the Bible is not an ecclesiology hand-book and there are lots of silences on how to do things.
Another example: Example 3: I know an old baptist pastor who runs a youth camp that used to be popular. Many people would go to the youth camp, even as the local church that organized and ran this camp shrank and shrank. This old pastor was very much against parachurch orgs. He preached against them often. Every single ministry in the world must be "under the direct supervision of a local church" he would say. That was his mantra.
But now, this shrunken church only consisted of a handful of people. But they wanted the camp to continue. They didn't have enough qualified people from their own local church to sit in on the meetings as directors of this camp to supervise and run this camp. So this church which preached very much against any parachurch organization and asserted that every ministry in existence must be under a local church...they invited outside pastors and men to sit on the board of directors and help lead the camp.
Do all activities of Christians need to flow from the top down and through the authority structure of the local church?
Your questions fails to represent the true nature of the issue under discussion. A parachurch "organisation" imposes a new authority structure for the activities of Christians which ipso facto competes with the authority structure of the church.
competes or complements?
Many parachurch orgs have accountability to local churches.
Example: several missionary orgs I know have the pastors of the sending churches of their missionaries sitting on the board of directors for that missionary org. Therefore, the governing of the org falls under the direction of the leadership of the churches which supply the org with missionaries. This can hardly be seen as "competition."
Many parachurch orgs have accountability to local churches.
Example: several missionary orgs I know have the pastors of the sending churches of their missionaries sitting on the board of directors for that missionary org. Therefore, the governing of the org falls under the direction of the leadership of the churches which supply the org with missionaries. This can hardly be seen as "competition."
Then why have these parachurch organizations at all? Why can't the missionaries simply work from the oversight of the local church? What is something the parachurch organizations do that the local church, presbytery, or denomination cannot do?
A good example of the competition has to do, as it always seems to, with money.
If you are giving $500 to the parachurch, that's $500 which is not going to the church and all of us who pastor churches can vouch for the slim margins our budgets operate on.