A Pink Slip for an Apostle
From: Rev. Alexander Demas
New Ekklesia Church, Thessalonica
To: Missionary Saul Paulus (The Apostle Paul)
C/c: Church at Antioch
Dear Brother Paul,
Greetings, from your former disciple, Alexander Demas. You will be excited and encouraged to hear that I have recently been called as pastor of the church at Thessalonica that has faithfully supported your ministry for many years. Our church has recently heard of your health issues and your incarceration in Rome. Please know that we have been faithfully praying for you. (I have especially been concerned for you, because I still fondly remember the short time that we served together in missions work before the Lord led me elsewhere).
New Ekklesia Church is so grateful for your years of service to our Lord. I know that you have had many long time friends in our church. (Unfortunately, many of these friends have recently left our church for various reasons.)
Since becoming pastor of this church, I have done my best to attempt to reorganize the church in such a way that it can function more effectively and efficiently. One of the first things that I have done is to establish a missions Committee in our church that I encouraged to make a detailed study concerning current missions techniques and practices and how we can most effectively reach this modern world for Christ.
After this intense study, our Committee concluded that we need to concentrate on certain specific areas of world missions outreach at our church. Our greatest desire is to find the neediest people of this world so that we can concentrate on taking the gospel to them through modern business principles and current technology. missions scholars and our own meticulous research have made it clear to us who these persons are and how we can best reach them. Of course, we know that souls need to be saved around the world, but we have come to the conclusion that New Ekklesia Church must concentrate upon the area of the “20-25 Window” for our missions outreach.
We have further concluded that in our modern world, it will be best to concentrate on supporting short term projects, rather than lifelong ministries since short term projects yield the most visible results in the shortest possible time period. The missions experts that we consulted have confirmed that this will be the best way to reach the world in our generation.
We also feel that such short term projects are the most efficient way to get the members of New Ekklesia Church to be involved consistently in giving to missions since they will be continually excited by the ever changing missions opportunities that are presented to them. We will support condensed, pithy missions projects, not time-consuming, long term investments.
Brother Paul, please know that we love you with all of our hearts. (This is especially the case with me, because of our past history since you were such an incredible blessing in my life; I know you feel the same way toward me). So, you can imagine how difficult it is for me to inform you that, after compiling our report, our missions Committee has come to the conclusion that we can no longer financially support your ministry. I know that this is a great disappointment to you and I apologize for that, but we know that you have many other supporters who can stand in the gap for you.
Let me outline some of the factors that have led us to this difficult decision:
1. Your age
Our Committee is afraid that because of your advanced age, you are no longer able to identify with the current generation. You have had a significant ministry, especially when you served in Asia Minor, but we, as a Committee, do not believe that you will be able to make the difficult transition necessary to minister in Europe. We feel that you are too tied to Oriental culture and so, it will be difficult, if not impossible, for you to adapt to ministry in Europe.
Our research has led us to believe that the greatest hope for world outreach is to use young missionaries who can identify with the current generation. You have had your chance, now it is time for us to go in a “different direction” with our financial support, and give someone younger a chance. I know that you, who have discipled so many young preachers yourself (myself included), will surely understand our decision.
2. Your health
Our Committee is so thankful for your many sacrifices, but as a result, you have had too many life threatening situations which have caused too much wear and tear on your body. To be completely honest, we on the missions Committee, feel that, in your current health situation, you would not be a good investment of our missions denarii because your health will prohibit you from expending the energy that is necessary to do the ministries that our church envisions. Again, we are thankful for your sacrifices, we know that the Lord will honor them, but we must think about the future of our missions program. There are so many projects that we desire to accomplish in the harvest fields of the world and this will require healthy bodies. We cannot waste our hard earned denarii! We know that you will understand and that the Lord will surely continue to provide for you from other sources. (Besides, I am sure that you have an adequate retirement plan in place).
3. Your field
You have left a fruitful ministry in Asia Minor, especially in Ephesus, where you proactively influenced a whole culture. Our Committee does not feel that this move to Europe can possibly bear the same results. Your talents were perfectly matched to the Asian mission field. We believe that you will be a “duck out of water” in Europe. Now, we have learned of your incarceration in Rome. This development will definitely further reduce your effectiveness. How will you ever be able to have an effective ministry while being chained to those licentious Roman soldiers? We are sorry for your situation, but we must think about getting the most “bang for our denarii.” A missionary whose freedom of movement has been so curtailed just cannot get the job done that we have envisioned. We feel that we would not be good stewards of God’s money if we continued to pour our resources into your ministry, since you are now incapable of free movement.
New Ekklesia Church agreed to support you in Asia Minor, but since you chose to change your field of service to Europe, our contract with you can legitimately be canceled. This is not a judgment upon you or your future ministry. We will continue to pray for you and for your release, but we must move on to fields that we think are more deserving of the gospel than Rome. (Please do not take this personally; we have had to take the same step with other missionaries who left a very successful ministry in Samaria to move on to Ethiopia). After our research, we have determined at New Ekklesia Church that our target field must be Asia. So we are concentrating on Asian ministry, not European or African ministry.
4. Your status
Our Committee also believes that you have probably been out in field service too long. Many of the people of our church no longer even know you or your ministry. It has been such a long time since you last visited us. We just cannot pump our people up for missions without regular personal contact. So, we feel we must concentrate our efforts on new missionaries and partner with them to reach our targeted fields. We even plan to send teams from our church out to instruct these new missionaries in what our research has indicated is the best way to reach these targeted people for Christ. I am sure that with your vast missions background you can understand, accept, and appreciate this fact.
5. Your contact
Our Committee must also point out that you have been inconsistent with your reports from the field lately. We realize that you have been in some awkward situations, but it is still absolutely essential that we receive regular reports from you in order to keep missions before our people. This is a very vital way for us to know whether our investment in your project is consistently bearing fruit. Regular “prayer letters” are a “must” and their neglect for any reason whatsoever must result in missionary termination. I might also say, as a word to the wise, that when we do receive your letters, they are good, but our Committee feels that they are much too long and wordy. We feel that the best letters are those that are short and pithy; our people will never read them otherwise. Furthermore, our people need to hear of exciting results from their missionaries, not to be preached to!! You can see where I am coming from, I am sure.
I hope that we can part ways as friends. Your termination is only a business decision that is in the best interests of our church. It is not personal. We still love you in the Lord and will continue to be praying for you. We do love you, my brother! You are still important to us. We apologize to you that we could not speak with you about this in person, but you understand that, due to your situation in Rome, this was impossible. Also, our exciting and growing church does not have anyone that we can spare, at this moment, to come and visit you in your Roman prison. When you are released, if you get back to Thessalonica, I would be happy to meet you over a cup of coffee.
May the Lord continue to bless you, as He is blessing us.
Yours in Christ’s service,
Rev. Alexander Demas
New Ekklesia Church, Thessalonica
[Editor’s note: thanks to Doug Kutilek of As I See It for making us aware of this piece.]
Rick Moeller is a graduate of Baptist Bible College in Springfield, MO. He and his wife served as missionaries for 18 years in South Africa, mostly to the Zulu tribe. Rick later served as Associate Director of Baptist Bible Fellowship International, then returned to South Africa for several more years. He and his wife are now seeking to plant churches in Scotland.
- 1 view
[MClark] I find it interesting that while many churches demand communication from missionaries (“it’s the 21st century; there’s no reason for you not to communicate”), they rarely communicate personally with the missionary at the same level or frequency that they are demanding from him/her. Some do, and I’m glad; they’re the exception.You’re right about churches not always communicating well, and I think that’s a sign of how much they really care about missions. On the other hand, the communication requirement is known up front (as part of the covenant between the missionary and the church upon receiving support), so it should not seem onerous. If it is (pardon me if this sounds harsh), then there are probably other churches to which you can appeal for that money. I don’t think I’ve ever heard a missionary say that as part of the agreement, they require the church to communicate with them regularly or they will “drop” the church and give up the support from that church. I’d actually find that refreshing. However, your point stands — churches (and specifically, the members) should make it a point to really care about the missionaries they support, and that includes getting to know them and communicating with them regularly.
The point was made above that churches should understand that they have no idea about the challenges facing the missionary on the field, and take that into account before making any precipitous decisions. Exactly! There’s no way we can understand the challenges any of you face on the field unless you let us know. And by the way, our church takes communication in pretty much any form. E-mail, web updates, blog, snail-mail, phone calls — all are acceptable with us. We prefer electronic, but we take anything. There is one church planter we support who is over 80 and still going, who recently got an email address. If we send him an email, he types (on a typewriter) a nice response to us and mails it to us! I’m sure some churches are not so accomodating, but just as we expect communication, we try to do everything we can to make it easier or convenient for the missionary. After all, they’re the ones on the front lines.
Even though it sounds too much like “business,” a church does need reports on how the money spent is being used, just as stockholders need reports from the company in which they own stock. In fact, we need it even more so — we are going to give account to God for how we use the resources he has given us as a church, and that means what we spend needs close tracking. And lest you as missionaries feel singled out, we expect the same from anyone (pastors included) spending church money. The missionary requirement is actually less intrusive, as it does not require receipts, etc., just a general report of what is happening on the field.
I would also suggest that when a church is forced to consider who to support because finances are low and it is impossible to continue supporting everyone at the same level, the church should do its best to start with missionaries who are already in the States and have the opportunity to try to raise more support. To drop support without notice for a missionary who is out on the field, who will have little opportunity to seek to replace the income, is not the best approach (although, I understand, could be inevitable in some situations).I agree with this completely. This is exactly how we try to do things when we can.
And I have to say that there is way more going on here than mere church autonomy. I know too many sad stories of missionaries who lost support from churches for little or no reason. In one case, a missionary noticed that support from a particular church had not arrived that month. Not wanting to make an issue out of nothing and realizing that sometimes finances are limited, he decided to wait until his upcoming furlough (just a couple months away) to meet with the pastor personally and see how the church was doing. He knew there was a new pastor and was concerned about how the transition was going. Once in the States, he drove out of his way to meet with the pastor and seek to encourage him. The missionary was more than a little surprised to discover that the church was actually growing; and the pastor had decided that, as there were new people in the church, they should drop all their missionaries and start over again in their selection of missionaries to support. Church autonomy? I suppose so. Right? Hardly.You’re right. Words fail on this one.
Dave Barnhart
whose post are you referring to?Rob, I was referring to the original article itself.
Jeremy Van Delinder Church Planter, Pastor North Hills Baptist Church Round Rock (Austin), TX
Me, I’d say neither. But, then I look at AoLC as a given among Baptist\baptisitic churches.
[JVanDelinder]whose post are you referring to?Rob, I was referring to the original article itself.
Hoping to shed more light than heat..
Discussion