Particularly about the choice of language.

His ministry, Walking Tall Wilmington, is still fledgling. This year’s budget of $30,000 comes from local businesses, churches and a United Methodist conference grant. Evans doesn’t take a salary but uses some of the budget to pay for his travel and the food he prepares. He has an eight-member board and about a dozen people he can call on to help him when the need arises.

But the article was very good.

"The idea is to shift from “working for” marginalized people to “being with” those same people. Instead of rushing in to provide food or housing or jobs or transportation, Christians practicing this approach stand alongside their brothers and sisters in need, befriending them and forming relationships. Theologians sometimes call this type of work a “ministry of presence,” but at its best, it is a gesture of Christian witness."

I have reread the article and am not seeing anything in it that suggests that he is a clergymember. That notion seems to be contrary to the approach and philosophy of the organization.

He presents as more of a semi religious activist. The services, if there are any, are performed by clergy but not by him. He may aspire to be clergy and exists in a sort of church or religious no man's land. But he does not have the credentials nor does he behave like clergy and it appears that he is rejecting the patrimonial, paternalistic hierarchy consistent with the clergy vs. flock relationship.

I think you have missed the point if indeed you did read the full article.

That might be the fault of the author, but the word ministry generally connotes a religious connection.

Clergy and layperson are generally mutually exclusive. Those who perform work in a ministry are one or the other. My dad’s church had several people who were referred to as layman/layperson/etc. it was a title that designated them as someone who performed work for the church, but wasn’t paid and couldn’t officiate ceremonies.

Gil knows better than all of you.

And with gil there's the added element of making sure religion gets extra credit for anything it does right - but blame shifted to "human nature" or "both sides" whenever religion gets it wrong.

And the devil has no greater tool than atheism. That's why more than a few religionists hate atheists even if they don't admit it. We are the cause of hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, AIDS, and teletubbies. Well more specifically their imaginary friend is the cause because he's pissed at atheists.

All those fine Christians who get creamed by Acts of God (so to speak) are just collateral damage.

A religionist would be afraid to make a show about such hellish freaks.

He may not be ordained, but.....

It's common in some Protestant denominations for laypeople to call any faith related activity a ministry.