Monday, August 03, 2009

Does missional spell the end of full-time ministry?

Catching up on RSS feeds and other things, I came across an article that suggested that the reason many pastors were reluctant to "take their churches missional" was because it would endanger their jobs. Can that be right? Does it necessarily follow that a missional church no longer needs pastoral oversight? Personally I find it hard to believe, but I will do some more reading to see what I can find out.

As it is, I can't see that my job, which after all isn't actually a job at all but a call, could be "at risk" by seeking to realign the church I serve with the mission of God in the world. It might reshape my role, in fact it ought to reshape it, but make it unnecessary, I'm not so sure.

There has always been a mixture of bi-vocational or tent-making ministries alongside the so-called "full-timers". I don't see any reason why this should not be true of the future church as much as it has been true for the past or present church.

And if, for whatever reason, my paid full-time role should disappear because the church becomes more connected to its primary purpose, then why should I be afraid of that? If the church becomes what God intends it to be, then actually that fulfils my ministry rather than threatens it.

No comments: