Editor:

I read with deep appreciation your column “Is ‘Missional’ the Best Word to Use”?

Our PCA church, which recently completed a ‘consultation’ program via another PCA church providing consultation, is now having it’s new ‘core values’ outlined in a series of sermons by our senior pastor. As you can guess, calling our church to be “missional’ has been a part of that sermon series on core values. I think our leadership, generally, equates the term ‘missional’ with ‘evangelistic” (it’s that Jell-o again).

Unfortunately, the ways in which this ‘evangelistic/missional’ dynamic moves forward are less than ideal. Over the last year and half, we, as a congregation, have publicly joined with other congregations, who are from other religions, worshiping other gods, in joint social service ‘ministry’ to aid homeless families. Our church is part of a ‘network’ of local religious congregations of a nationwide organization that explicitly aims to harness the ‘religious’ passion and zeal of people of different faiths to aid homeless families. As such, understandably, it is absolutely forbidden to integrate what we call ‘evangelism’ (the organization calls it ‘proselytizing’) as a fundamental part of the program.

The hope of our leadership in getting involved is that it will win us a ‘hearing’ from the ‘ministry’ recipients so that informal conversations will result, allowing the sharing of our faith. ‘Ministry’ recipients live in the churches/synagogues/meeting houses/mosques, moving from one to the next on a weekly basis – until a more permanent arrangement can be found.

I’ve yet to get a meaningful response from our leadership on how they think our ‘common cause’ with all these other religions will not result in ‘ministry recipients’ learning from all this that ‘all religions fundamentally lead to God, just on separate paths’ – in other words teaching them, and the local community that sees our public alliance, through our example that we are ‘validating’ the other faiths as equally acceptable.

We as a church are not even allowed to screen or review the needs/backgrounds/problems of the ‘ministry’ recipients. That is all done by a board or administrators who can come from any religion – what does that say about the exercise of proper leadership and discretion by our officers in their ordained roles and responsibilities?

The logistical demands of this ‘ministry’ are so great that it has become the dominant drainer of time/energy/people in our relatively small church (about 170 average number of members/regularly attendees each week). Those few members who don’t join in are really ‘outside’ the major ‘outreach’ activity of the church.

Does this kind of situation illustrate what you were getting at, in part?

I have no idea what, if anything, to do about it as my thorough yet quiet objections to the alliance, brought to our pastoral and diaconal leadership when still considering it, fell on deaf ears. I feel like I’m living in a solid gospel preaching church that is acting like a mainline religious organization – and it’s a dirty feeling.

Thanks again for the column and The Aquila Report.

PCA Member
South Carolina