Should Missionary Couples have 2 sending churches?

[J.Paton24May1824]

Should Missionaries have 2 sending churches? Which church exercises the authority for specifics such as counsel, needs, ect.?

I know of a newly married couple struggling with this. He is from one church, she is from another.

Should the wife leave her church of 20 yrs. and follow her husband to his church? Or should they join the efforts for missions with both churches as their sending church?

 

[py3ak]

I suppose the answer will depend on where you come down on a couple of different questions.

1. Is it proper for a missionary wife to be independently sent? That will tie in with your whole idea of calling and service. What is a missionary wife supposed to do? In my view, a missionary's wife should not consider herself a missionary independently of her husband, so I would oppose the idea of two sending churches.

2. May nuclear families properly be spread out over multiple churches? I would again think not - the circumstances where that might come up are very far from ideal. A household in that degree of disarray is not in a condition to be commissioned for difficult work.

In the situation you present, I would hope that they could maintain cordial relationships with both churches, but I would think the wife's home church would understand that if she leaves father and mother to cleave to a husband, she leaves home church as well!

 

[Pergamum]

Great answer, Ruben!

I have read somewhere that the Northhamptonshire Baptist Association sent out William Carey. This might mean that a member church of that association sent out Carey, but the book (which I have now misplaced) says that the association sent him. Thus, even some Calvinistic baptist churches might (if the book is true) believe it is okay for an association of churches to send a missionary rather than a solitary sending church.

However, the two churches that you mention above are not linked into a fellowship and have little to no interaction with one another. They cannot properly be called an association.

I am of the opinion that a single sending church seems best. Also, it is more natural for the wife to follow the husband, though a 20-year relationship makes a good consideration to use the wive's church as a sending church. Though, like Ruben said, a close and personal relationship can still be maintained even if the husband's church is the sending church.

 

[Edward]

Should the wife leave her church of 20 yrs. and follow her husband to his church?

I would suggest that they may have larger issues that they need to work through before they consider going out on the mission field.

 

[Pergamum]

Edward,

I don't think she has voiced any refusal, only a sadness over the distance and a desire to keep close ties.

 

[Edward]

I don't think she has voiced any refusal, only a sadness over the distance and a desire to keep close ties.

That's still an issue. And if that is a problem, how will she adapt if she ends up half way around the world from her comfort zone?

The question asked in the original post reflects a legitimate concern, and one which has been addressed. Certainly they should seek support (prayer, financial, and emotional) from both congregations. But they should be sent by, and responsible to, one body. But it is my concern that the focus is really in the wrong place.

 

[Pergamum]

Sadness at leaving loved ones is normal. And everyone gets out of their comfort zone once they move overseas.

 

[J.Paton24May1824]

I agree the wife must follow the leading and direction of the husband. I agree with Ruben, the couple is not independent of one another. The best option may be to have one sending body. However, is it unbiblical to have 2 sending churches? We look to this topic from the lenses of trends and missiological practices of the church, but at the end of the day, can missionaries function even better in the task of foreign missions with a broader sending base?

I have 1 sending church and if I had 2 sending churches, I could see pros and cons to that.

 

[Pergamum]

Hypothetically, let us suppose that the book that I read was correct and William Carey was sent by an association (The Northhamptonshire Association of Baptists)...is there anything amiss in that?

Some missionaries are denominationally sent.

Many of my presuppositions are based on my preference for a polity of independency and thus I am concluding that one, single, local, autonomous church has the authority to send rather than the broader session, or denomination.

 

[TylerRay]

Hypothetically, let us suppose that the book that I read was correct and William Carey was sent by an association (The Northhamptonshire Association of Baptists)...is there anything amiss in that?

Some missionaries are denominationally sent.

Many of my presuppositions are based on my preference for a polity of independency and thus I am concluding that one, single, local, autonomous church has the authority to send rather than the broader session, or denomination.

You've hit the nail on the head here, Perg. If you're an Independent, it seems that one particular congregation should be the one to send the Missionary (I don't believe it's proper to speak of a missionary's wife and kids as missionaries, anymore than it is proper to speak of any other minister's wife and kids are ministers).

As a Presbyterian, I believe that it is appropriate for Presbytery to send the missionary, or even GA or the particular congregation. So I think that William Carey's Presbytery to send him was perfectly appropriate wink.

I think that when an association of "Independent" churches sends a missionary or the like, they are functioning as de facto Presbyterians.

 

[Tirian]

I agree with Tyler - isn't the biblical model given to us by the Jerusalem Council that the Presbytery is responsible for sending. Resources could come from many churches used at the direction of Presbytery. If you are in an Independent church, well get into a church with a Presbyterian government and that part is solved

As for husband and wife being in separate churches - it breaks my heart. I think it is the worst possible situation for a married couple to be in. If a couple find themselves in this position surely they need to start with that. The husband, as spiritual head of the family, after much counselling from his session, much prayer earnestly seeking wisdom from the Holy Spirit, should make the decision on place of worship. However husbands love your wives so the decision needs the to be the one that most demonstrates him laying down his life for wife as Christ did for the church.

 

[Pergamum]

I agree with Tyler - isn't the biblical model given to us by the Jerusalem Council that the Presbytery is responsible for sending. Resources could come from many churches used at the direction of Presbytery. If you are in an Independent church, well get into a church with a Presbyterian government and that part is solved

As for husband and wife being in separate churches - it breaks my heart. I think it is the worst possible situation for a married couple to be in. If a couple find themselves in this position surely they need to start with that. The husband, as spiritual head of the family, after much counselling from his session, much prayer earnestly seeking wisdom from the Holy Spirit, should make the decision on place of worship. However husbands love your wives so the decision needs the to be the one that most demonstrates him laying down his life for wife as Christ did for the church.

I am not sure how the biblical model of missions can be drawn from the Jerusalem Council. A better model would be Paul and Antioch in Acts 13 and 14.

Paul, an apostle who directly saw the Lord, despite his extraordinary calling was sent out by the local Antioch church. They laid hands on him, and then he was sent.

The Apostle Paul felt this local church important enough that he returned there after his trip was complete.