The Narrow Path Ministries

What exactly makes these organizations "parachurch"? Why do we feel the need to label them as such? I've heard pastors say things to the effect of, "You need to be involved in the ministries of this church over any parachurch organizations." Why is that?

Any thoughts?

They're "para" (alongside of {around}, beside, near) the local church. I think pastors say that so you will stay involved in your (local) church, keeping it and its ministries in the first place of importance.

Many tv and radio preachers ask for financial help, but only after you give to your local body first (as they see the local church as primary and themselves as secondary and/or parachurch after it). A few radio preachers often say and insist on this.

The Greek preposition "para" means "by the side of".

So a "parachurch organization" is an organization that does some of the work that churches ought to do but generally don't do, or at least don't do very widely or effectively. If churches were truly representive of the One Church of Christ which our Lord founded, and helped the poor and needy effectively, then parachurch organizations would be unnecessary.

I support parachurch organizations such as World Vision and Food for the Hungry because they put a wholehearted effort into their ministries.

The translation of "You need to be involved in the ministries of this church over any parachurch organizations," is "Don't give your money to parachurch organizations; give it to us." That is also the reason most churches insist that their members tithe, sometimes in the same sermon where they explain that the Mosaic law no longer applies.

Money given to many churches is used largely to build buildings or maintain existing church buildings. Such uses are robbing the hungry children of the world. Churches could meet in small groups in homes as they did in the first two centuries, and could rent a hall once in a while for meetings with the whole body (the early Christians used synagogues for that purpose). Then money would be available to assist widows, orphans, and the starving, homeless, and needy people everywhere.

I do support my local church. In this particular church a large portion is used to support the ministry of the apostolic brethren who travel worldwide and establish new churches and help needy people. The amount used locally is mostly needed to maintain the church building, but is also used to help needy families locally.

Notwithstanding, most of my giving goes to parachurch organizations.

We have several friends who have gone overseas with a missions agency that sends people specifically to the unreached areas of the world. They have an awesome five month intensive training school every year for those wanting to be on home staff or who are wanting to go overseas.

They say that they are not a church but a parachurch organization. They meet daily for teaching, live together, pray together, preach the gospel together, eat together, etc... There are leaders there that help guide everything. Why is this not a church? Because they don't "officially" baptize (I say "officially" because at their yearly conference LOTS people get baptized) and because they don't do the Lord's Supper together (although they do break bread daily together).

In fact, they require everyone who comes through their training to be "involved" in a local church while at training, but because of the serious time demands involved in the training, this generally amounts to the Sunday morning meeting only.

So why in the world would this organization be a "parachurch" organization and then the place they attend every Sunday morning be their "church"? It just doesn't make sense to me.

It is certainly a fellowship of believers... it is certainly an assembly of believers. Why then is the "church" here in America not okay with calling it a church?

When I was a student at an Assemblies of God Bible college I went to the local secular university to meet with an A/G sponsored college ministry there: Chi Alpha. My homechurch (aka, primary local church) was Central Assembly of God. All of these were expressions and/or ministries in Christ's church. Does that help you any, Rae?

Hi Rae,

I don't know either. The way you describe the parachurch organization sounds like the church to me. I just got removed from the membership roll of the last church I was a member of, and I haven't been to any church's Sunday morning service since last spring. I think because of that I'm seeing the body of Christ in a different way than I used to.

Hi
It sounds like church to me too.
It seems the difference might lie in peoples' understanding of the meaning of 'church' - not the way we probably understand it, but rather as an institutional organisation with an official name, laws, by-laws, etc. & possibly needing to comply with government regulations - and probably also being required to pay a yearly administration fee to the denomination's head office.
Practices can become traditions unthinkingly followed, without being necessarily biblical.

I tend to look no farther than 1 Cor. 12 for an explanation of the body and how the members relate to each other. Are there members by the side of the main body? Verse 18 relates that God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him. KJV. So, it appears that the parachurch folks need a little teaching.

livingink

Are there members by the side of the main body?

Many people who are part of parachurch organizations are in the "main body", that is the CHURCH which Christ founded.

In my opinion, some parachurch organizations express the CHURCH in a more effective way than most denominations do.

Paidion wrote:

Are there members by the side of the main body?

Many people who are part of parachurch organizations are in the "main body", that is the CHURCH which Christ founded.

In my opinion, some parachurch organizations express the CHURCH in a more effective way than most denominations do.

I agree.