Some of the comments to my previous posts have assumed that uni ministry is kinda suckful because it is not a real church and so detracts from the church. Some of these posts have seemed to imply that parachurches are in principle bad.
I have heard this from traditionalists, who only want to allow for structures of Christian organisation that formally fit under neat theological and ecclesiological and institutional categories. In their case, only gatherings that are delcared to be churches are legitimate, other gatherings are necessarily threatening to church order.
I have also heard this from progressives, such as Mark Driscoll and Phillip Jensen. In Jensen's case, he says that any gathering of Christians around the gospel is not only sufficiently, but necessarily church.
I don't agree:
- I believe the Bible teaches that church is both an organic/spiritual and an institutional entity. I believe that the organic gathering of God's people is sufficient to be a church, but is not necessarily a church unless it is declared to be so.
- I think that provided parachurches keep reinforcing the fact that they are not churches, there need be no threat to the local church.
- I think mission organisations, Bible College, denominations, small group Bible studies are all examples of other parachurches. Uni minsitry is as legitimate as these.
