The proposed mission policy of the MBA of Texas holds superiority to the current policy in that it allows decisions to be made by sponsoring churches and missionaries without fear of interference of policy-driven debate. The proposed policy defines what a missionary is, and what state mission work is. It affirms the authority of the sponsoring church, the autonomy of local churches, yet protects the finances of the association.
Under the new policy, eligible mission work will be new church starts, work with struggling churches to prevent their demise, and works that assist churches with the Great Commission (this is where TMD, Berean Ministries, etc could qualify.) The policy allows for mission projects (such as building funds) and missionary salary.
Instead of paying salary, the mission money would be given to the sponsoring church in the form of "support" that could then be paid by the sponsoring church to the missionary as salary.
Protections for the association come in the form that the messengers are given the authority to set the amount of support to be paid to the missionary.
So far, I have only heard two complaints about the proposed mission policy.
(1) There needs to be a provision that the policy is not a set of laws, but guidelines. This article is in the current policy and introduces a lot of controversy. In my mind, the requirements of the sponsoring church and missionary in the proposed policy are minimal... if one can't live up to the expectations in the proposed policy, one has no business in missions.
(2) There needs to be more missionary accountability. Actually, I'm kind of tired of hearing about missionary accountability. All the association can really expect from the missionary is that he stay on the field and continue the work, and report on that work. What more should be expected?
Hopefully, the policy will be put up for a vote in November. If so, I'll be voting yes.
No comments:
Post a Comment