The Relationship Between The Ecclesia And Parachurch Organizations

Read the Lausanne document on “The Relationship between Church and Para-Church Organizations”. In a ten-page paper, describe a Para-church Organization you belong to, or are familiar with, indicating its origin, reason for existence, particular emphases, and the way it relates to the church in your area. State lessons you consider both the Parachurch Organization and the Church can learn from the papers that can enable them to function more harmoniously together and achieve their objectives more effectively.

The term ‘parachurch’ or ‘alongside the church’ describes special-purpose Christian organizations that are not tied to a church or denomination.1 Some people find the term derogatory as it may imply that the ‘true church’ is only found elsewhere in more traditional ecclesial structures. Others take the other extreme of according them full ‘church’ status in the congregational sense even though such organizations do not administer the sacraments like baptism or the Holy Communion. Nevertheless, it seems fitting for our purpose to use the term without its negative connotation but retains the distinctions that members of the Body of Christ are extending their service within these non-congregational structures.

1

John G. Stackhouse, Jr., Evangelical Landscape: Facing Critical Issues Of The Day, (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002), page 27

1

My spiritual journey as a Christian began in secondary school, where I first heard the gospel of God’s love and forgiveness shared at an Easter event organized by the student fellowship. In Malaysia, several parachurch organizations like Scripture Union (SU), Fellowship of Evangelical Students (FES) and Campus Crusade For Christ (CCC) had a rich legacy of service amongst students. I consider myself a fruit of their evangelistic labor and subsequently took active part in the student fellowship at school and later, college. Upon obtaining my degree and starting on a new job in the city, I naturally ‘graduated’ to the marketplace ministry called “Graduate Christian Fellowship” (GCF).

In retrospect, much of my own 17-year pilgrimage has been influenced by interaction with these different interdenominational parachurch agencies. Even in Malaysia, George Marsden’s description of American evangelicalism as being built around networks of parachurch agencies rings true2. Based on my experience, the overall relationship between these groups and churches in Malaysia could be characterized by synergistic cooperation and mutual respect. However, I could also recognize the existence of tensions and contentious issues discussed by the Lausanne paper on Church/Para-church relationships, which could help us to improve on the existing symbiotic networks.

2

George Marsden, “Introduction”, Evangelicalism and Modern America, ed. George Marsden (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), page 14.

2

Origin, Vision And Emphases

By way of introduction, Graduates Christian Fellowship (GCF) of Malaysia is a nonprofit organization for Christian professionals and graduates to “build a community of servant-leaders committed to transforming society for Christ".3 It evolved as a natural

outgrowth from the ministry of the Fellowship of Evangelical Students, which is committed to reaching university and college students for Christ and nurture them in the faith. Some of these students continued to gather informally after finishing their studies to encourage each other to impact the post-campus world. Eventually, in 1969, the informal fellowship grew into a movement of people committed to make a moral impact in the marketplace. Due to its historical roots, GCF is focused on ministering to Christian graduates and professionals while not restricted to only those who came through the FES ministry.

3

Soo Inn, Tan, “What is Our Vision?” Graduate Christian Fellowship of Malaysia. http://gcfmy.org/reflection_vision.php (5 October, 2007).

3

Current specialized emphases of GCF today involve helping graduates to transition into the marketplace in small, peer accountability groups called “Headstart”, training them to seize the opportunities afforded by their tertiary education as a responsibility for humble, servant leadership to others (Matthew 20:26). As the members mature and took up more influential roles in their respective workplace, the “Beyond Headstart” cohort groups would equip them in transforming these spheres of life for Christ. The distressing drop out rate among converts in campus present a great need area for its existence as many do not eventually survive as disciples in the “working world”. Also, some graduates who came back from overseas or too accustomed to the campus ministry environment faced acute ‘reverse culture shock’ or reentry problems into the local church.

Through its peer mentoring groups and annual iBridge camps, GCF sought to provide a support group for these graduates to work out issues like meaning in work, vocation discernment, avoiding materialism, intentional rhythm of work/rest and spiritual revitalization in the midst of busyness, relationship-building and other marketplace concerns so that they could be ‘salt and light’ in the world.4

Relationship With the Local Churches

4

“If we do not have a theology of vocation we lapse into debilitating alternatives: fatalism (doing what’s required by ‘the forces’ and ‘the powers’), luck (which denies purposefulness in life and reduces our life to a bundle of accidents), karma (which ties performace to future rewards), nihilism (which denies that there is any good end to which the travail of history might lead) and… self-actualization (in which we invent the meaning and purpose of our lives, making us magicians).” Paul Stevens, The Other Six Days: Vocation, Work, and Ministry in Biblical Perspective, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 1999), page 72

4

Most active members of GCF also serve and belong to a local church. Indeed, the GCF committee members are also leaders of good standing in their respective churches. They consciously do not see the ministry as a church per se. Generally, they have a broader perspective of the ministry as the extension from Body of Christ actively involved in the marketplace. Fresh graduates who attend the Headstart groups are also encouraged to recognize the need for community and accountability, subsequently joining a local church as part of their discipleship. In the resource material used for Headstart group discussions, we would be admonished not to be “satisfied with just casual social gatherings anymore. Seek out and cultivate true Christian fellowship. A Christian life is to be lived in community, reflecting the truth that in Jesus, we have already been incorporated into a new family.”5

The GCF also provides an interdenominational context for cross-pollinating ideas and shared ministry such as national anti-corruption campaigns. These projects of shared concerns could be carried out with support from the denominational leaders without having to go through lengthy bureaucratic procedures. Sometimes, issues such as lobbying for integrity in corporate governance, discernment of personal vocation and integration of biblical values in the marketplace do not feature prominently on the radar of many churches.

Given the huge amount of waking hours we spend at work, it seems rather strange that “secular” work occupies such a vague place amongst Christians.6 By and large, many 5

Marvin K. Y. Wong, Between Friends: Reflections On Christian Discipleship in the ‘Real World’, (Petaling Jaya: Scripture Union, 2002), page 149 6 Among others, Paul Stevens argued that business could be an arena for individual witness, a means of church planting, societal service and grappling with the powers. R. Paul Stevens, Doing God’s Business:

5

Christians are still caught up in a ‘sacred-secular’ dualism that regards the workplace as merely a platform for evangelism but carries little intrinsic spiritual value in itself7. Through GCF public seminars on marketplace theology conducted by scholars like Robert Banks, Gordon Preece and Paul Stevens, awareness is created amongst local churches to integrate the sacred and ‘secular’ spaces. With emphasis on developing servant-leadership, GCF seeks to help Christians develop a proper theology of work, integrate biblical worldview into their work and develop strategies for evangelism in their workplace.8 In these ways, the organization has served the wider network of local churches in Malaysia.

However, there are also signs of friction from time to time. Some may argue that parachurch ministries merely prolong and perpetuate the ‘reentry’ problem by providing graduates-in-transition with an alternative albeit artificial environment, where they missed out the intergenerational interaction available in a local church. As long as they stay exclusively among people of similar age group or background, their spiritual growth would not benefit from the wisdom of elders, lessons learnt from believers of different social class or opportunities in caring for the children or teenagers.

There are also some church groups who felt that the existence of bodies like GCF is like a temporary crutch, needed only because the local church was not able to do its job well in Meaning and Motivation for the Marketplace, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 2006), pages 78 7 “Dualism blurs the valid duality between obedience and disobedience because dualism identifies obedience, redemption and the kingdom of God with only one area of life. It sees the rest of life as either unrelated to redemption (or the sacred), or worse – under the power of disobedience, sin and the kingdom of darkness”. Brian Walsh and Richard Middleton, The Transforming Vision: Shaping a Christian Worldview, (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1984), page 95 8 Soo Inn, Tan, “Equipping Christians For The Marketplace” Graduate Christian Fellowship of Malaysia, http://gcfmy.org/reflection_mission.php, (16 November, 2007).

6

this area. Ideally, if churches were able to develop their own ministry for young adults or graduates, then there would be no longer any need for their continuance. Indeed, some larger churches have now developed young adult ministries, which deal with similar marketplace concerns therefore creating some duplication of efforts and competition for resources.

“When two groups (one church, one Para-church) want the same people, the same programmes, the same dollars and the same authority, a clash is inevitable and both ministries suffer”9. In smaller churches, church leaders may frown upon the divided time and energy of their young members. The Lausanne document accurately described some ecclesiastical figures who “in their zeal, deny their flocks the freedom of interdenominational contact, out of fear of doctrinal contamination.”10 Sadly, such parochial attitudes rob others of the opportunity to learn from other traditions and join them in shared action on common causes.

Another frequently asked question we heard was, “Is GCF an elitist organization since her membership is open only to Christian graduates? Are non-graduate Christians lesser in the eyes of God or less effective in transforming the society?”11 Specialized ministry should not lead to a superior attitude since all Christians are equally valuable in the eyes of God (Galatians 3:28).

9

Co-operating in World Evangelisation: A Handbook on Church/Para-Church Relationships, Lausanne Committee for World Evangelisation, 1983, page xiiiv. The complete handbook is available at: http://www.lausanne.org/pattaya-1980/lop-24.html 10 Co-operating in World Evangelisation, LCWE, page xiii. 11 Soo Inn, Tan, “Is GCF Elitist?” Graduate Christian Fellowship of Malaysia, http://gcfmy.org/reflection_elitist.php (5 October, 2007).

7

Therefore GCF took special effort to clearly communicate their mission to the public in order to avoid unnecessary suspicion and misunderstanding. As clarification, we could find out from the official website that “associate membership in GCF is not restricted to graduates and even the ordinary membership accepts members with any valid tertiary educational experience, not just those who have gone through the traditional university system”.12 Being focused is not a sign of elitism. Just as many churches today have agegroups ministry to cater for different needs of believers at different phrases of their lives, the GCF ministry is structured similarly to better address context-and-age-specific needs of a particular group - Christian professionals and graduates. They would then be released to minister to all regardless of educational background.

Proliferation of marketplace-oriented parachurch bodies highlighted a concern of the Lausanne Committee, which was ‘rivalry between ministries’ as a result of the growing number of independent but similar ministries.13 Could there be unnecessary uniqueness generated in diverse organizations such as GCF, Grace@work, Influencers For Christ, Full Gospel Businessman Fellowship and The Agora? From time to time, we also hear complaints from one campus evangelism organization that the other student ministries were not doing enough in evangelism. In response, the organization was also accused of being overzealous in their methods. Sometimes, campus events organized by two or more agencies overlap and resulted in wasteful competition, if not presenting a fragmented image of the Body of Christ. Although some may view that as healthy competition leading to better efficiency, we also need to heed John Stott’s reminder that “sometimes

12 13

Ibid. Co-operating in World Evangelisation, LCWE, page xxv.

8

the attempt to glorify the spirit of competition among us thinly disguises a sinful evangelical power-struggle of which we need to repent in dust and ashes”.14

Some Proposals For Improvement

The Lausanne document gave a helpful overview of some models for understanding the validity of so-called “para-church organizations”. Some missiologists view churches as vertical structures and other Christian ministries as horizontal structures, forming an interdependent tapestry that shows unity in diversity of the Christian movement. The former has internal diversity, overall objective perspective but lacks mobility and prone to remain in maintenance mode. The latter has more defined objective and greater mobility but tends to be myopic and oversell its causes. Both need to learn and complement each other. Other missiologists reject the term ‘parachurch’ and argued that both structures together constitute the Church.15 In my view, it would be more helpful to maintain that some distinctive marks of a church are absent in most parachurch organizations such as the preaching of the Word, administration of the sacraments and discipline. Though they are not churches, these agencies are certainly part of the church.

From the Lausanne Commission proposals, organizations like GCF could function more effectively and harmoniously with the local churches by clearly communicating their goals and purposes.16 A suggested approach may be inviting denominational leaders to be part of the Advisory Board so that they could be aware of decisions made and endorse 14

Ibid., page xx. Ibid., page xiiv 16 Ibid., page xviii. 15

9

these plans concretely in the churches.17 Concerns by the local churches could also be shared openly via proper channels with the executive committee.

Christians have often been urged to “tithe where you are fed (i.e. in the church) and let the church decide which agency to support” perhaps due to questionable fund-raising techniques in some circles.18 But if a denominational leader is able to check financial dealings are transparent and responsible, church members would be more assured and receive guidance from their leaders to choose wisely from the plethora of existing agencies in need of funding and volunteers. A weakness in the approach is the fact that most denominational leaders would be too occupied to be actively involved in the decision-making process. It may also result in more bureaucratic red tape if leaders from multiple denominations are represented, thus slowing down the usually responsive “horizontal” organization.

Although duplication of effort in itself may not be wrong, it could be motivated by competitive, “law of the jungle” attitudes.19 In view of the growth of overlapping ministries, leaders need to strategize and network together how to leverage on strengths and specialize. For example, Youth For Christ Malaysia noticed that many government universities and colleges already have ongoing ministries and intentionally chose to focus their efforts on Chinese-language schools instead. Much duplication of work and waste of resource could be avoided with humble and strategic ministry specialization. Perhaps in an overly generalized way, I would suggest that among the marketplace ministries 17

Ibid., page xv. Ibid., page xxxii 19 Ibid., page xxviii 18

10

Grace@Work has its forte in teaching, IFC has its strength in marketplace evangelism and GCF has experience and strategy for mentoring and marketplace transformation.

On the part of local churches, denominational leaders would need to avoid dogmatism about non-essential doctrines while remaining steadfast in the touchstones of orthodoxy such as the Deity, Incarnation, Atoning death and Bodily Resurrection of Christ.20 It is possible to stress so much on the ideals of unity and failing to ground it on solid doctrinal foundation or overemphasize ‘separation’ by creating unnecessary schisms. Indeed, different levels of agreement determine the extent of collaboration. Perhaps it may be appropriate to suggest as Yoder had done that less unity is needed to tackle dualism than to commune and less agreement needed to advocate integrity in corporate governance than to apply church discipline.21

The sacred-secular divide is pervasive amongst churches and some church leaders may need to leverage on the skills and experience from GCF in their congregational young adult or marketplace ministries. It should be seen as a mutually edifying relationship rather than an intrusion into our authority or territory. A defective ecclesiology may lead to a sense of insecurity and reactions of jealousy that promote “spiritual inbreeding” and hinder trans-denominational edification.22 In an illuminating discussion on the meaning of laity and clergy, Paul Stevens wrote, “Clergy must be liberated by laity from having the impossible task of representing the entire ministry of the church. Laity must be liberated from becoming clergy assistants to discover and embrace their own ministry. Pastors then become 20

Ibid., page xiii Ibid., page xiv 22 Ibid., page xviii 21

11

assistants to the rest of the people of God. This mutual liberation must be a ministry of love, not rebellion.”23

Conclusion

I am deeply indebted to the selfless service of Christians who ministered in parachurch agencies that provided a trans-denominational context to appreciate diverse church traditions and work together in a harmonious way. Generally, they work well with the support of local churches in a God-honoring way. However, there is always room for improvement and certain tensions exist and could potentially be problematic if left to fester.

The evangelical patriarch John Stott summed up some basic guiding principles when he wrote, “The tendency of the ‘establishment’ to control individual initiatives runs the risk of quenching the Spirit. The tendency of voluntary organizations to insist on their independence runs the risk of ignoring the Body. It is the age-old tension between authority and freedom… It is therefore, basic to our evangelical responsibility that in all of our labors and relationships we should magnify Christ by seeking simultaneously to give honor to His Body and liberty to His Spirit.”24

23

Paul Stevens, The Complete Book Of Everyday Christianity: An A-to-Z guide to Following Christ in Every Aspect Of Life, edited by Robert Banks and Paul Stevens, (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1997) 24 Ibid., page xvi

12

Bibliography

1. Between Friends: Reflections On Christian Discipleship in the ‘Real World’, Marvin K. Y. Wong, Scripture Union: Petaling Jaya, 2002

2. Co-operating in World Evangelisation: A Handbook on Church/Para-Church Relationships, Lausanne Committee for World Evangelisation, 1983

3. Doing God’s Business: Meaning and Motivation for the Marketplace, R. Paul Stevens, Eerdmans Publishing: Grand Rapids, 2006

4. Evangelical Landscape: Facing Critical Issues Of The Day, John G. Stackhouse, Jr., Baker Academic: Grand Rapids, 2002

13

5. The Complete Book Of Everyday Christianity: An A-to-Z guide to Following Christ in Every Aspect Of Life, edited by Robert Banks and Paul Stevens, InterVarsity Press:Downers Grove, 1997

6. The Other Six Days: Vocation, Work, and Ministry in Biblical Perspective, R. Paul Stevens, Eerdmans Publishing: Grand Rapids/Cambridge, 1999

7. The Transforming Vision: Shaping a Christian Worldview, Brian Walsh and Richard Middleton, InterVarsity Press: Downers Grove, 1984

14