John H. Adams PCUSA failure shouldn't stymie world missions By John H. Adams Commentary Special to The Layman Online Tuesday, March 25, 2008 The Presbyterian Church (USA) is on the verge of snuffing out its already sputtering foreign missions candle. The dust-up to the 2008 General Assembly's consideration of the cutbacks has been mostly about dwindling finances for mission resources and salaries. But that's a lame excuse. There's plenty of money. The PCUSA is believed to have the highest per-capita income of any denomination in the United States. But that money is not going to Louisville to be disbursed for the sake of world missions. The real reason: Priority The real reasons for the continuing decline in mission spending are numerous, but they can be summed up in one word: priority. The PCUSA still spends lavishly on the World Council of Churches, the National Council of Churches and other faltering ecumenical movements. It writes big checks to rescue failing colleges, finance leftist political offices in Washington and at the United Nations, a peacemaking program that serves mainly to get people riled up, an entrenched social witness bureaucracy, corporate monitors who nag companies that don't knuckle under the PCUSA's social strategies, and interreligious lobbyists who trumpet rights (especially abortion) over the righteousness of Christ. The mission numbers are embarrassing. In 1959, the mainline denomination sponsored nearly 1,900 foreign missionaries. By the end of this year, that number will be down to 190. During its meeting in April, the General Assembly Council will talk about trying to prop up world missions temporarily at the 200-assignment level. But that depends on an unlikely windfall. Further decline expected Thus, the decline is expected to continue. The mission assignments are being reduced by about 30 per year. So, in six or seven years … zero. The perky PCUSA logo may be no more than a relic in parts of South America, the Mideast, the Far East, Africa and elsewhere. Here's another way to gauge the collapse. It currently takes more than 10,000 PCUSA members to support a single missionary. The two denominations that were extracted from the PCUSA – the Presbyterian Church in America (1972) and the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (1982) – are significantly more committed to world missions. For every 10,000 members, the PCA sponsors 18 full-time foreign missionaries, while the EPC sponsors 10. Together, those two denominations have a combined membership that equals only 20 percent of the total in the PCUSA. Yet, the EPC and PCA together sponsor nearly 750 foreign missionaries. Should Presbyterians in the PCUSA wail over the situation? Sure, there should be some expressions of concern. Outstanding men and women have served this denomination well around the globe. Past mission efforts have been heroic, and many still are in that category. But the mainline Presbyterian message has been muted by a denomination whose leaders press issues that are not relevant to the proclamation of the Gospel. 'Did God really say …' Furthermore, there has been a growing irreverence toward the Scripture. Imagine the Wycliffe translator who has spent years developing a written language for an indigenous people and then giving them the Scriptures as their first reading lessons. What happens when a Presbyterian missionary asks, "Did God really say …?" and begins tampering with that love relationship that is offered by Christ incarnate and Christ the Word of God? We're not suggesting that has happened, but it is true that many of our mission alliances are teaching contrary to the Gospel. One of the PCUSA's close partners in the Mideast is a liberation theology center that all but calls for the extinction of Israel. Some of our mission work has been intended to appease non-Christians, particularly Muslims, and to avoid the kind of evangelism that will anger them. But we're certain the non-PCUSA evangelical missionaries will feel little remorse over the end of this denomination's foreign missions. The overall work and reputation of the PCUSA simply detracts from their work. A job for congregations There's another advantage, something that many congregations are already doing. They're sending their own – not as PCUSA missionaries, but as ambassadors for Christ. The congregation that gave me my Presbyterian roots is an example. With only 550 members, that congregation sponsors 12 mission couples and three individuals. Of those 27, 24 came out of that congregation. Many of them work with Wycliffe – which is one of the best expressions of an ecumenical ministry. There are congregations across the PCUSA that have a similar commitment to the Great Commission. With the collapse of the PCUSA's missions program, more congregations will be free to do the same. They may even send their young men and women to the triennial Urbana mission conferences sponsored by Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship in Illinois. There, in one of the largest mission-sending events in the world, thousands of young people hear the question, "Whom shall we send?" And thousands will answer, "Send me." So, don't despair for foreign missions. They'll thrive without the PCUSA. Despair that the PCUSA no longer believes the Great Commission is a priority. John H. Adams, a longtime observer of the Presbyterian Church (USA), retired in 2006 as the editor of The Layman.

Respond to this article

Home · Archives · The Layman · PLC Publications Presbyterian Lay Committee · Feedback · Links