Question. The user’s Unificationist Worship Leader’s Guide (2026-05-20 working draft) presupposes a Sunday service whose primary purpose is evangelism — winning visitors to True Parents — and derives song criteria, jargon policy, guest-handling, and testimony format from that premise. The same document acknowledges the pastor at MFC is “looking for direction” and the user is “trying to figure it out with him.” So: is the document a proposal for what the pastor’s vision should be, or is it derived from a pastor’s vision already settled?
Why it matters. The worship-leader role is logically subordinate to pastoral vision: “what does the pastor want for the service to be” is prior to “what songs should I pick.” If the pastor lands on a different vision than the worship-leader’s guide presupposes — e.g., Sunday-as-family-cultivation rather than Sunday-as-evangelism-engine — the entire criteria framework needs rework, not just the song picks.
Possible pastoral visions for MFC’s 10/11am, each producing a different worship-form:
- Evangelism-engine (the document’s working premise) — Sunday is the conversion site; song-set scaffolds an evangelistic encounter. Implies Profile A or B-primary visitor design (see which-visitor-profile-is-mfc-sunday-service-designed-for).
- Family-cultivation — Sunday is the weekly harvest + equipping of blessed families for the M–Sat tribal-messiah work. Visitors are welcomed but not the design target. Maps to sunday-service-as-harvest in the strict sense.
- Deep-theological — Sunday is catechetical (DP study, scholarly preaching). Boston model. Visitors find this if they want it; not designed around them.
- Pastoral-encouragement — Sunday is “what people need to hear” in simple terms; comfort and exhortation. Common American small-congregation default.
A worship leader can support any of (1)–(4) with a different song corpus. The current document is committed to (1). If MFC’s pastor actually lands on (2) or some (1)+(2) hybrid, half the criteria framework needs revision.
Current best guesses. Working answer: the document is a proposal for the pastor’s vision, not a derivation from one already settled. The collaborative work with the pastor is upstream of any final framework. The honest move is to make this explicit:
- Distinguish in the document what the worship leader proposes the pastor’s vision should be vs what the pastor has actually committed to.
- Sequence: clarify pastoral vision → settle visitor profile (see which-visitor-profile-is-mfc-sunday-service-designed-for) → revise song criteria → re-evaluate retire/keep judgments on Heritage.
- If pastoral discernment takes months, the worship-leader can pilot a song-corpus aligned to a working hypothesis while remaining explicit it is provisional.
Source. 2026-05-20 worship-leader grilling session, in response to the document’s acknowledgment that the pastor is “looking for direction” and the user is figuring it out with him.