Should Mission Strategy Always Be Congregationally Based?
Rick Warren once said, “In the first century, mission strategy was always congregationally based…. Local churches accepted the responsibility for Jesus’ Great Commission and his Great Commandment.” Today, Warren writes, that he sees that most local churches have become “sidelined and uninvolved” because the agencies are saying, “pray, pay and get out of the way.” Warren further challenges his readers: “I believe the proper role for all the great parachurch and relief organizations is to serve local churches in a supportive way, offering their expertise and knowledge, but allowing local churches around the world to be the central focus and the distribution centers.” [1]
Is Warren correct? Was 1st century mission strategy “always” congregationally based?
Should parachurch and relief organizations serve local churches? What do you think that means? How would it look?
Should local churches be the central focus and THE distribution centers? What if the Mission strategized local churches instead of vice versa?
[1] Paul Borthwick. Western Christians in Global Mission: What’s the Role of the North American Church? (Kindle Locations 822-826). Kindle Edition.
Comments“parachurch” is a word in use describing a form of ministry ... by MarshallThere are no such things as para church organizations. It is ... by David BartholomewAs much as I think saying so is not going to change anyone's ... by CarlosRelated StoriesTraining Every Believer For Mission, Not Just Pastoral Care For CongregationsFor Where Your Church Treasure is, There your Mission Heart Will be Also.Are Local Churches Supposed to be Missional Turnstiles?
