Missiology Discussion

Over the last few days I have been reading MissionShift: Global Mission Issues in the Third Millennium, a series of missiological essays edited by David J. Hesselgrave and Ed Stetzer.  Today marks the beginning of a missiological discussion taking place in the blogosphere using this book as a jumping off point.  You can read Hesselgrave’s “Second Thoughts” post HERE.   Over the next few weeks I hope that you’ll read my posts here and follow the discussion at edstetzer.com.  This week’s discussion is about “Mission, Described and Defined.”  Looking forward to seeing the fruit of this online dialogue.

Better Together

A few years back I worked at a coffee lover’s paradise…Starbucks.  I have always enjoyed the flavor of coffee, and I needed some extra money, so I applied.  After I was hired the larger world of coffee was opened to me by Christy, my shift supervisor and trainer.  She taught me about the different regions of the world where coffee comes from and how the geography of those regions infused distinctive characteristics into the beans.  As part of my training I had to sample various types of coffee and record my reactions and thoughts in my “coffee passport.”   In order to be a fully certified barista I had to complete the entire passport, signaling that I had tasted every coffee in Starbucks lineup.

Whenever we sampled coffee we also sampled the pastries that we sold.  This served two practical purposes.  The first was to allow those of us who worked behind the counter to have free pastries.  The second and more important was to help us gain first-hand knowledge of what pastries paired best with each type of coffee so we could suggest the appropriate pastry to complement the coffee of the day.  At first, I thought it was silly that eating a certain kind of pastry would enhance the flavor of the coffee until I started the tastings.  It was amazing to me that Café Verona tasted so much better when paired with chocolate.  I guess the lesson is that some things are better when paired together.

Five Missional Pairings

As I read the grand essay “Mission” Defined and Described by Charles Van Engen and the responses in the book it occurred to me that there were several ideals or concepts that needed to be paired together to understand what a biblical, Christ-centered mission for the Church looks like.  So here I am sharing with you five missional pairings (in no particular order) that help shape the church’s mission.

Pairing #1: Church and Kingdom

During my days in the Church I have been impacted in significant ways by the church growth movement.  Though I don’t believe I ever heard anyone explicitly say it, I came to believe that the mission of the Church is to grow the local congregation.  Of course, this was to be done with attractive programming, expanding facilities, and evangelistic efforts.  There is nothing inherently wrong with these ideas.  However, I somehow missed out on seeing the bigger picture.  I did not realize that God had a mission that was bigger than my church and more comprehensive than just seeing souls saved in our community.

As I have read the Gospels I do not find Jesus touting a mission to create or grow a church (though he does say that “he will build his church”).  Rather, Jesus comes proclaiming that the good news is that Kingdom of God is near (Mk. 1:15).  This kingdom focus seems to suggest a bigger agenda than just establishing the Church.  Yet, one cannot purely focus on this kingdom message as if the Church does not matter or is not important.  On the contrary, the Church has been established as the missional community that embodies Christ and his cause in this world.  For this reason, any discussion of mission must connect the Church and the concept of the Kingdom.  The Church exists to help the Kingdom vision to be fully realized.  This is why Jesus taught his church to pray: “Your Kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven.”

Pairing #2: Worship and Going

In my experience congregations often focus on one of these two biblical ideas, but the two must be kept together if mission is to be effective.  Some congregations turn their attention solely on God, worshipping him and seeking to grow closer to him.  This paradigm is fueled by the idea that if we get close to God, he will pour out his blessings on us and the church will grow.  They stand on Jesus’ promise in John 12:32: “And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself”.

Other congregations focus solely on evangelism.  This often leads to one of two ministry emphases: seeker sensitivity that reserves worship for other times when only the believers are present or social action that turns the church inside out to meet felt needs and work for social justice.  Again, there is nothing inherently wrong with either of these evangelism pathways (of course, some churches have already mastered the art of pairing going with worship).  Yet, in some of these churches connecting with God has taken a backseat to connecting with the lost.

I am struck by the fact that the disciples in Matthew 28:16-20 were drawn to worship (v. 17) and then they were commanded to go.  These two ideas are better together.  A church cannot say that because they are focused on God they have no responsibility to go and connect with the lost world around them.  Nor can a church say that because they are going to a lost world that they can skip the worship piece.  Worship fuels going and going brings more people into the worshipping community.

Pairing #3: Local and Global

This was one area that Van Engen touched on as he talked about the Carey’s Great Commission definition of “missions.”  This understanding of mission, as Van Engen aptly points out, focuses on geography.  It is about Christians “going” to another part of the world to share the gospel with indigenous people, lead them to a personal relationship with Christ, and enfold them into a church and culture that looks similar to that of the sending agency (MissionShift, pp. 14-15).  This gave rise to McGavran’s critique and redefinition of mission away from the geography of going to the purpose of discipling.  This led to a missions focus on people groups, particularly those yet unreached (MissionShift, p. 16).  All of this to say that the church has been and needs to continue to focus on the global mission that is before us.  God so loved the world…the whole world…that he gave his son.  The church must strategize, invest, send, and go to the furthest reaches of the world to impact the global world with the message of Jesus Christ.

But we must not forget or overlook our local contexts.  The mission field has come home to our doorsteps.  Unreached people live in our neighborhoods.  We pass them on the street.  We see them every day.  This focus on global mission must not be a substitute to reach those who live right around us where we live.  These two contexts for mission – local and global – go better together.

Pairing #4: Connecting and Leading

I was provoked in my thinking by the introductory story of Keith Eitel’s response to Van Engen.  He tells of the missionary who engages in Hindu prayer so as not to offend the Shiva and then raises the important question of how far is too far in the Christian’s pursuit for relevance and connection with culture.  I am not prepared here to set down rules to be applied in every such situation, but I do think that one key principle that must be put forth here is that when Christians seek to connect they must do so with the intent to lead those they connect with to another place.  In other words, acts meant to communicate relevance and steps taken to connect with culture only have value for mission when they are paired with a commitment to lead the people of that culture to relationship with Jesus, a life directed by his teachings, enfolded into the Church, and sent out on mission.

Jesus came from heaven to earth to connect.  He entered into culture.  He conversed with people, ate and drank with them, attended their parties, and fielded their questions.  He connected with them.  Yet he did so with a purpose.  His intent was to lead them to receive his message so they could know his Father.  The Church must connect with culture so it can lead the people of culture to life in Jesus Christ.  Connecting and leading…a crucial pairing for the Church’s mission.

Pairing #5: Salvation and Mission

The mission of Christ, at least in North America, has been hijacked by an over-emphasis on personal salvation.  In particular, the idea that a magical prayer read from the last page of the gospel tract insures escape from hell and promises an eternity in heaven.  This basic evangelical message has propagated a self-centered faith where Jesus is my savior because I need him if I’m to escape eternal judgment and damnation.  Let me be clear here.  I am not suggested that heaven and hell are not real or that belief in Jesus has nothing to do with eternity.  I affirm those ideas and teachings of orthodox Christianity.

Having said that, I also think it is important to note that Jesus calls people to more than personal salvation; he calls them to be a part of his Church that is on mission in the world.  Right from the very first words that Jesus speaks to invite people to discipleship, mission is implied.  “Come follow me,” he says, “and I will make you fishers of men.”  The message is simple.  If you answer the call to follow Jesus the end result is that you will become a part of the corporate effort of all disciples to spread this message to all peoples.

This connects with Van Engen’s original starting point of the Church being sent into the world (MissionShift, pp. 10-12).  The Father sent the Son and the Son sends the Church in the power of the Holy Spirit to transform the world by leading people to personal transformation experienced through salvation, discipleship, and holiness.  These people are in turn sent out and the mission continues.  Salvation and mission are better together.

Other Pairings

Even as I’ve been writing this post other key pairings that shape the mission of the Church have entered my thinking.  Baptism and Teaching.  Listening and Proclaiming.  Enfolding and Sending.  What other pairings come to your mind?  And what’s your response to the ones I have shared in this post?  Looking forward to the discussion.

Bibliography

Hesselgrave, D. J. (2010). MissionShift: Mission Issues in the Third Millennium. Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group.