The Plight of the Single Missionary

“We don’t support single missionaries, so please call me back when you are married.”  That is the statement often heard by those whom God has called to the mission field and, yet, are still unmarried.

It is not the purpose of this article to cause offense concerning this issue.  Rather, after several days of contemplation, I believe it would be good to biblically examine such a position.  For those men who hold the position of not supporting a single missionary, please note that your position is between you and the Lord.  It is not my desire to attack your position.  However, it is my belief that it is always correct to reexamine one’s position in light of God’s Word, for the purpose of either validating the position or modifying it to fit within biblical parameters.

Our convictions, standards, positions, etc., must be firmly fixed in the Word of God.  While the Bible does not address every issue of life with a “Thou shalt” or a “Thou shalt not,”  there are biblical principles that govern all issues.  That is the reason Moses was instructed to teach the “commandments, the statutes, and the judgments” (Deuteronomy 6:1).  The “commandments” are the Law of God (i.e., the “thou shalts” and “thou shalt nots”).  The “statutes” are the principles of God’s Word.  The “judgments” are the consequences from God (i.e., for violating the commandments and statutes).  Thus, I would ask. . .Where is either the commandment or the statute for omitting single missionaries from mission support?  How is this position biblically justified?

Concerning this issue, it would be best to examine the Scriptures to see what God’s thoughts are on this matter.  The first example that comes to my mind is the Apostle Paul.  He was a single missionary.  It should also be noted that Paul, through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, wrote “For I would that all men were even as I myself” (1 Corinthians 7:7a).  He also wrote, “But I would have you without carefulness. He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord: But he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife. There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband” (I Corinthians 7:32-34, emphasis added).  In other words, the unmarried can serve the Lord with less difficulty, because that can be their sole focus.  It is abundantly plain that Paul stresses the preferred status of singleness for the sake of the ministry.

The obvious response to the above paragraph might be, “Well, that was the godly Apostle Paul, and young men of our day are not him.”  That is a true statement.  However, the Holy Spirit did not stipulate such a qualifier.  There are other single people who have the potential to be as godly as Paul.  There are some who may remember the late Percy Ray (Myrtle, Mississippi).  He never married.  While I feel certain that he had faults, as do all men, he was a powerful man of prayer.  Yet, he was single.  Yes, I know. . .He was not a missionary.  Throughout the annals of history, other single people can be found who were greatly used of God.

The words of Jesus should also be considered on this matter.   When He was speaking on the permanence of marriage, the disciples stated, “His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.  But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.  For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it” (Matthew 19:10-12).  Notice that Jesus did try to correct the disciples and say, “No guys, it is good to marry.”  Rather, He said that not everyone could handle that truth, but that some have chosen to stay single for the sake of the kingdom.  The Lord’s response seems to have been the foundation for Paul’s statement in First Corinthians 7:32-34. . .Single people can serve God with more focused committed.  Although marriage was instituted by God (Genesis 2), and endorsed by Christ’s attendance at a wedding (John 2), Jesus did not disagree with the disciples’s statement about it being good not to marry.

The first two missionaries from the early church should also be a part of this discussion.  In the thirteenth chapter of the Book of Acts, the Holy Ghost said, “Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them” (Acts 13:2b).  We do know that Paul was unmarried.  Although it is an argument from silence, there is no indication that Barnabas was a married man.  Yet, they were the first church-sent missionaries.  Did the early church violate a biblical principle by sending Paul out as a single missionary?  Of course not, they were obedient to the command of the Holy Spirit.

One argument that has been presented to me for the position of not supporting single missionaries, is based upon temptation.  It is suggested that the single person may be tempted in moral situations more, and less likely to deal appropriately with them.  Even if the argument were true, how does that negate the call of God upon their lives?  Did God make a mistake in calling them while their were single?  Did God “jump the gun” in calling them before they were married.  Obviously not.  Yet, even apart from the call of God, the argument is an untenable position to hold.  Most of us know of married people who have succumbed to immoral temptations.  Shamefully, it is not uncommon to hear about another preacher that has had several women scattered across the country.  It is the yielding to the temptations and, thus, disqualifying oneself that should be the grounds for non-support.  It should not be the  “possibility” of temptation.  If the “possibility” of temptation is a disqualification, then all of us would be disqualified.

Another argument that was proposed to me is based upon the potential of quitting.  This argument reasons, “Well, the single person may meet a potential spouse while on deputation and then become side-tracked and never reach the field.  If this happens, all of our support on that person was wasted.’“  Again, I would ask. . .Where is the biblical basis for this reasoning.  Personally, I have known married couples that have quit and never made it to the field.  I know of one couple that we finally quit supporting after five years of deputation, and with no idea as to when they would get to the field.  I know of another that has been on deputation for almost nine years.  (No, we do not support them).  It was not their marital status, but their lack of a work ethic, or either the lack of a call of God.  Yet, on the other hand, I know of single men who have raised their support in less than two years and are doing good work on the field.

A final argument that has been submitted is that, since missionaries do the work of a pastor on the mission field, they must be the ”husband of one wife“ (I Timothy 3:2).  There are two problems with this argument.  The first problem is a practical one, and is the problem of a double-standard.  If the proponent declares that a missionary is doing the work of a pastor, then why do they drop their support when they declare ”He is no longer a missionary, but he became a foreign pastor.“  Where is that line to be drawn?   The second problem is a biblical one, and involves the ”one wife“ requirement.  How is this translated into ”he must be married“?  It is true that, to be the husband of one wife, you must be married.  However, using proper hermeneutical principles would make it mean that, if he is married, he must be the husband of one wife.  Comparing Scripture with Scripture, we cannot declare with certainty that either Timothy or Titus were married.  They were, most likely, single pastors.  As with Barnabas, this is an argument from silence, but their close association with and mentorship by Paul would tend to indicate they were single men.  As we know, Paul strongly recommended the status of singleness.  He strongly recommended the status of singleness FOR the sake of ministry.  Jesus certainly acknowledged the same thing by His words in Matthew 19:12, “there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it”.  If that does not mean single pastors and missionaries, what does it mean?

I would submit that the position of not supporting a single missionary is a biblically untenable position.  The decision to support or not, must be based upon the evidence of being God-called and Holy Spirit filled.   A few years ago, I held the position of not supporting any single ladies for the mission field.  I also did not support any ”support“ ministries (i.e., printing, media, children’s ministries, etc).  This was because this was what I had been taught by others.  Yet, as I examined the Scriptures, I could find no biblical support for my position.  So, I changed my position.  That is a discussion for another article.  So, I will conclude here by asking that, if I have missed an important principle here, please comment and let me know.  Help me to understand why single missionaries should not be supported.

May the Lord grant insight and wisdom as this issue is examined in the light of the Scriptures.  May He also grant us the determination to remain faithful to the clear teaching of His Word, even when it means we may have to change our position.  May we be willing to grapple with difficult issues to make sure that our commitment is to His Word rather than our own preferences and understanding.  May we readily discard the ”philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ“ (Colossians 2:8), even the traditions of Godly men whom we respect, in favor of standing firmly on the Word.  May we strongly reject all positions, however well-reasoned and thought out, if they conflict with His Word.