The word ‘missional’ has been tossed around quite a bit in Christian circles lately, but by the looks of it, few have actually grasped its meaning. The only action I’ve seen taken missiologically is a small sign near the exit of a local church saying, “You are now entering the mission field.” This is actually a good reminder, and a good first step in a positive direction. But we have a long way to go before we put this truth into action.
To be missional means that we begin to understand that every Christian is a missionary, not just the pastor or people in the missions department of our local church. We must begin to see ourselves as Christ’s ambassadors (2 Corinthians 5:20). According to the dictionary, an ambassador is:
- an accredited diplomat sent by a country as its official representative to a foreign country.
- a person who acts as a representative or promoter of a specified activity.
We are Christ’s representatives here on earth, sent by Him with a great commission! Many in the Church today must think that God saved us so that we can sit around in a comfortable building and become more immersed in what Dan Kimball calls the Christian subcultural “bubble.” But Christians have been commissioned and have a great purpose and duty to fulfill! God is pleased to use us to fulfill His mission (hence why we co-labor and cooperate with Him in His mission – thus our commission).
Being missional means we stop thinking of the church as a place we go on Sunday, but rather realize that it’s something we are every day of the week. We must form meaningful relationships with nonbelievers and stop thinking of them as only evangelistic targets. I can’t tell you how many times I hear people sharing their faith using evangelical ‘gimmicks,’ giving a presentation rather than having a conversation. Jesus gave quality time to people because He loves them, Christians too often give limited time to nonbelievers because we are focusing more on them as a target than as people. People are messy. Loving people is not efficient nor easy. But it’s what we are called to do.
We must realize that we no longer live in a Christian culture, and we must approach our culture as missionaries approach foreign cultures overseas. This means taking the time to listen and learn from outsiders. Instead of building a local Christan subculture in your community, begin building a mission. The focus of the two is totally different. A local subculture invites people to come and see Jesus. A local mission goes out and shares Him wherever they go, equipping others to do the same and then sending them out as well. The subculture invites people to hear the Gospel message, the local mission brings the Gospel to the people with words and action (because outsiders won’t listen to a message with no action behind it). The local subculture dedicates its resources to creating a better atmosphere inside the walls of the local church, the local mission dedicates its resources to reaching outsiders and being the Church in the community.
At its core, missional is a shift in thinking. This shift in thinking is expressed by Ed Stetzer and David Putman in their book, “Breaking the Missional Code” (Broadman & Holman, 2006). Being missional involves shifting:
- From programs to processes
- From demographics to discernment
- From models to missions
- From attractional to incarnational
- From uniformity to diversity
- From professional to passionate
- From seating to sending
- From decisions to disciples
- From additional to exponential
- From monuments to movements
- From organizations to organisms
I pray that the Church will stop trying to find its fulfillment in more programs and models. Instead I hope it wakes up to its primary purpose, glorifying God by co-laboring with Him in advancing His kingdom – our great commission. We must be sharing the Gospel, the good news of Jesus Christ. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the Gospel is a person, not a presentation. You can only share a person through a relationship, not through an evangelical gimmick. This is some of what it means to be missional.
Check out the home page of Friend of Missional for a deeper understanding of what it means to be missional.
Some years back I had a head on conflict with a Pastor- and I have had additional conflicts since then with a few of our misguided LCMS Pastors who falsely apply Matt 28 to Pastors only- note > – and some ministerial misfits still do.
I contacted our CTCR (Doctrinal Review Board- if you will) head Dr Sam Nafzger about it and asked for a FAQ to be put on our synods website. I might suggest you file this away for future needs, You never know……
http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=6472
Who is the Church?
Q. Is it teaching false doctrine to say that passages that discuss the ministry, such as Matt. 28:18-20, John 20:19-23, 2 Cor. 5:17-21, apply only to pastors? Yes or no? Is it true only a pastor can be a missionary? Yes or no? I am asking for the official LCMS position.
A. In response to your question, let me call your attention to the following paragraph from A Brief Statement of the Doctrinal Position of the Missouri Synod, an official doctrinal statement of the Synod adopted in 1932:
“30. The Original and True Possessors of All Christian Rights and Privileges — Since the Christians are the Church, it is self-evident that they alone originally possess the spiritual gifts and rights which Christ has gained for, and given to, His Church. Thus St. Paul reminds all believers: “All things are yours,” 1 Cor. 3:21, 22, and Christ Himself commits to all believers the keys of the kingdom of heaven, Matt. 16:13- 19, 18:17-20, John 20:22, 23, and commissions all believers to preach the Gospel and to administer the Sacraments, Matt. 28:19, 20,; 1 Cor. 11:23-25. Accordingly, we reject all doctrines by which this spiritual power or any part thereof is adjudged as originally vested in certain individuals or bodies, such as the Pope, or the bishops, or the order of the ministry, or the secular lords, or councils, or synods, etc. The officers of the Church publicly administer their offices only by virtue of delegated powers, and such administration remains under the supervision of the latter, Col. 4:17. Naturally all Christians have also the right and the duty to judge and decide matters of doctrine, not according to their own notions, of course, but according to the Word of God, 1 John 4:1; 1 Pet. 4:11.”
In this paragraph you will note that the Synod cites John 20:22-23 and Matthew 28:18-20 as proof texts for the doctrinal position of the Synod that “Christians are the Church” and that “they alone originally possess the spiritual gifts and rights which Christ has gained for, and given to, His Church.” Rejected on the basis also of these texts is the teaching that “this spiritual power or any part thereof is adjudged as originally vested in certain individuals or bodies, such as the Pope, or the bishops, or the order of the ministry….” [emphasis added]. Thus, it would be contrary to the doctrinal position of the Synod to hold that such texts “apply only to pastors.”
I would further note that in the Synod’s official A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles (1973) the Synod states concerning “III. Mission of the Church”: “We believe teach, and confess that the primary mission of the church [emphasis added] is to make disciples of every nation by bearing witness to Jesus Christ through the preaching of the Gospel and the administration of the sacraments.” Specifically cited in the study edition of this statement as the scriptural basis for this thesis are Matthew 28:18-20, 2 Corinthians 5:18-21, and Romans 10:17.
http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=6472
Please do note this part: “[emphasis added]. Thus, it would be contrary to the doctrinal position of the Synod to hold that such texts “apply only to pastors.”
and mark them as false teachers………-DR
So why do we need this “missional” word anyway? It has always struck me as buzzword used to sell books and promote specific programs. Why can’t these topics be described and tought without creating a flase dichotamy in the church between the “mission minded” and the “mediocre Christians”. …cause that is really what labels have always done in the church in my experience: seperated the marginal from the exceptional. It is also my experience that it is also the people with pride in their own exceptionalism that are eager to draw distinctions between them and the rest of the church (“I thank you I am not like these other men…”). I think this is why no two missional gurus can agree on exactly what the word means.
This is what is so great about Lutheran doctrine. Every Christian is an ambassador for Christ through their various vocations. This is where the buzzwords and the current missional mindset miss the larger picture. They really are obsessed with programs and presentations from what I have seen. They see witnessing as something that has to be institutionalized, recorded, and fine-tuned. The irony is that when you insitutionalize outreach, you demotivate your Christian base. Christians who feel compelled or expected to witness by their church organizations become self-conscious and guilt-ridden. The moment you turn outreach into a work as opposed to a privelage, you destroy the effectiveness of your witnessing teams. I submit that they actually witness less than if they are just trained in the faith and left alone… left to allow their growing faith to express itself as the Spirit moves.
If you grab your average Chrisitan and ask them about their witnessing, you will find that they HATE the idea of talking about their faith. They are scared, frustrated, and ill-equiped. They are turned off by the very corporate-feeling institutionalism that missional programs only serve to exaserbate. The answer to this is not new mindsets or programs (which is just more Law), but the freedom to express their faith through the security and assurance of the Gospel.
This has been my own experience. If there is any strength in my witness at all, it is not because of a particular program or mindset. Those things never worked for me and only caused me to loath the Great Commission with a fervent passion. It was only through unrelated spiritual growth and maturity by the Holy Spirit that the good fruit of joyful witnessing began to grow. The greatest witness for Christ is not the well-trained, culturally aware salesman. It is the blind man whose miraculous healing compels him to tell everyone he knows about this Jesus who forgives our sin.
…maybe I’m way off here and you can set me straight.
Dick, that is outstanding. I saved that as a PDF with a link and time/date stamp.
Mike, you are spot on target – which is why you are linked to as a fellow missional Lutheran
Notice that in our vision statement (http://missionallutherans.org/about/vision-statement) we close with “keeping in mind that all believers are called to be full-time missionaries within their respective vocations.”
We are on the same page here. We are reminding the church that more programs only cause guilt manipulation, rather than the grace motivation that comes only through the Gospel.
Also note that our little mission statement on the top of the website says “Making the mission of God an unavoidable issue for the CHRISTIAN community.” The goal here is not so much reform within Lutheranism as it is reform within the entire Church (which includes Lutherans). We simply approach that from a Lutheran perspective on the Gospel and how Christ justifies us, which we feel is very important.
Dan,
No, I don’t think we agree exactly.
If you read the entire passage from 2 Corinthians 4 to the end of 2 Corinthians 5 you will notice that the Apostle Paul is calling himself (and his co-author Timothy a professional evangelist as per 2 Cor 1:1) are the “Ambassadors” in this sentence. It’s subtle since the “we” changes sense several times through the thought, but the phrase speaks for itself:
2 Cor 5:20 – “Therefore, WE are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through US; WE beg YOU on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.”
“You” here is obviously the Corinthian church. They are therefore not “We” in this sentence. “We” would be Paul and Timothy who are the called and ordained servants of God who have been properly trained and prepared for evangelism and pastoral duties.
You’re right, we don’t agree on the exegesis of that passage.
In regards to the above statement, “This is where the buzzwords and the current missional mindset miss the larger picture. They really are obsessed with programs and presentations from what I have seen. They see witnessing as something that has to be institutionalized, recorded, and fine-tuned,” the missional literature I’ve read is intentionally countering any obsession with programs and presentations (which is more in line with popularized church growth thinking) and is calling all of the church back to rethink our ecclesiology in light of how Scripture defines us. It is a calling to all believers to participate in God’s mission according to vocation/calling. It’s not about “us and them” or creating any kind of elite. The overarching theme from Genesis to Revelation is about a God on a mission who calls His people to join with Him in His work bringing His redemptive reign to bear on a lost creation. If we make the missional conversation into an elite club if insiders vs outsiders, we’ve totally missed the point. Missional theology is saying loud and clear, the crisis we face in the church today is theological, not methodological. If for no other reason, this is why a Lutheran voice needs to be heard in the conversation. This should never be about bashing the church, or cynical remarks about the Bride of Christ, but rather it should be a heartfelt call to the Church to truly be the Church Sent (John 20:21), as God calls us to be. It’s about the mission being grounded, rooted and sourced in the missionary God Himself, from whom our identity is drawn, and the coming consummation of His redemptive reign, which WILL come to pass. If “missional” ever comes to mean just another “add water and stir kit to make the church successful one more time,” to that degree it is not missional. Ecclesiology must always precede structure, organizations and programs.
Bingo Gaylan, right on!
Right on Dan. As an old friend, the late Corrie ten Boom would say: “you’re either a mission force or a mission field”. No middle ground.