Missional Church: Working Definition

For the Health of the Church: NAE proposal

Thu, 23 Oct 2008 13:04:30 CDT

Missional: Other Voices

by Jeff Jeremiah

I attended the Board meeting the National Association of Evangelicals in Eden Prairie, Minnesota on October 9. One of the items presented to us was a proposed "For the Health of the Church," drafted by NAE President Leith Anderson, George Brushaber and David Neff.

The proposal spoke of the possibility of a "renaissance of the evangelical church" in the early 21st century, and addressed positive factors and serious roadblocks before American evangelicalism. While this is being written for a broader audience than the EPC, I think many of us can identify with and understand the opportunities and challenges noted.

Factors that indicate the time could be right for a "renaissance of the evangelical church" include:

Church planting has a new appeal and urgency for evangelicals. Unprecedented financial wealth resides in the upwardly mobile evangelical church and the "generosity" emphasis of stewardship. A cadre of strong young leaders of evangelical conviction is coming into places of influence. New media and technologies are available to carry out evangelism and the nurture and training of Christ-followers. Demographic diversity gives large opportunities among ethnic and immigrant groups and communities of color. Evidence of more cooperation and partnerships between churches and para-church organizations. Public and media discussion about who evangelicals are allows a re-branding that maintains both the integrity of our convictions and a more effective way to express and live out those convictions. A new spirit of collaboration among many evangelicals who have wearied of the intramural attacks and sniping.

Among the serious threats and roadblocks before evangelicals:

Religious pluralism and multiple faiths compete with the Gospel in every neighborhood. Materialism and consumerism affect evangelical Christians to the same degree as their neighbors, and most are in an acquisition and accumulation modes of pre-stewardship. Resistance to change and innovation is high in many churches and many have become more culturally and generationally exclusive. The cycle of rise and decline common to most organizations is tightly gripping many churches and agencies, and they find it hard to make wise decisions of resource stewardship. Church growth is still not yet fully linked with effective discipleship strategies. Ethnic and cultural diversity is still unresolved in many evangelical churches. New forms of competition and quarrelsomeness are evident. Turmoil and change in print and broadcast media are painful to many ministries, and generational differences in media usages are bewildering to leadership.

I trust we can affirm the proposal's conclusion: "We hope to give the evangelical church and those of us who love and serve within it a new vision, a new boldness, a new confidence, a new determination, a new strategic plan, a new urgency and a new dependence on our gracious and almighty Lord."

Another Look at the Mission Field

Thu, 09 Oct 2008 08:54:52 CDT

The working definition of a missional church that we approved at our 2008 General Assembly states that a missional church is one "That believes that the United States has become post-Christian and is now a mission field" (emphasis added). Many of us who came of age as evangelicals in the 1970's and 1980's have responded, "I've always considered the U.S. a mission field," and have resisted this statement that the U.S. is now a mission field."

If it is given that the U.S. has always been a mission field, in the twenty-first century that mission field is 1) growing and 2) different from the mission field of twenty years ago.

Growing
In the March 6 edition of EPNews, I reported on the findings of the Pew Report's "U.S. Religious Landscape," which included the following:

American Protestantism is waning. With only 51.9% of those surveyed identifying themselves as Protestants, the U.S. is on the verge of becoming a minority Protestant country. The fastest growing segment of the population is those who identify themselves as religiously "unaffiliated" (16.1%). More than a quarter of American adults (28%), have left the faith in which they were raised in favor of another religion, or no religion at all." If switching from one Protestant tradition to another is included, 44% of the population is no longer tied to the religious affiliation of their youth. One in four of those aged 18-29 claim no religious affiliation at all. . Future directions: Young adults ages 18-29 are much more likely than those 70 and older to say that they are not affiliated with any particular religion (25% to 8%).

Different
The Long Range Planning Committee's White Paper says, "Once upon a time, Americans generally thought of themselves as a part of God's story unfolding on the face of the earth. ‘God' of course, meant the Judeo-Christian God. The Bible was a part of everyday life, even in the schools, and church was taken for granted."* Though they were not followers of Jesus Christ, most of the American population generally understood and affirmed basic Christian truth.

As the saying goes, "That was then, this is now."

In the post-modern, post-Christendom 21st century, a growing number of Americans are unfamiliar with the basics of the Christian faith. We can no longer assume that those we share Christ with have the same understanding we do of words such as God, salvation and Jesus Christ. In addition, many who are not familiar with orthodox Christianity assume they know all they need to know. David Dunbar writes that many non-Christians assume that "evangelical (and fundamentalist) Christians are an angry bunch of people who are at war with mainstream American culture." In their eyes, "we are defined primarily by our stance against abortion and homosexuality."** This antagonism makes it almost impossible to "gain a hearing" for Christ with them.

Has the U.S. always been a mission field? Yes. In the 21st century, is it a different mission field than twenty years ago? The missional understanding of our church and culture says, yes.

* "Toward a Stronger Future," A White Paper by the Long Range Planning Committee of the EPC, (2006), page 3.
** David Dunbar, "What's the Big Deal?" Missional Journal (March, 2007), page 3.

Missional as a "Post-" Movement

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 13:24:08 CDT

The working definition of a missional church that the Evangelical Presbyterian Church approved at its 2008 General Assembly states that a missional church is one "that believes that the United States has become post-Christian and is now a mission field" (emphasis added). Knowing that the term "post-Christian" has drawn an unfavorable response from some, I'd like to address another term, post-Christendom. Post-Christendom is used synonymously with post-Christian, and is written about extensively in the missional literature I've been reading.

Christendom asserts that the church enjoys a central and dominant place of influence and power in western culture, or, that western civilization is "Christian."* (Ed McCallum writes in the "Missional Primer" that Christendom is a synthesis between the church and state that began to emerge with the official toleration of Christianity via the Edict of Milan in A.D. 314). This synthesis was complete with the coronation of Otto I as the Holy Roman Emperor by Pope John XII is A.D. 962. With the ascendancy of Christendom, Christianity moved from one of many religions to the dominant religion in Western civilization.

For centuries, the institutions of western culture "Christianized" people and discouraged (and even stigmatized) non-Christian belief and behavior. On an individual level, to be "Christianized" meant that people who were not Christians are familiar with the Bible and its message, affirm the culture's affirmation of Christian belief and behavior, and are favorably disposed to the Gospel. Though people were "Christianized" by the culture, they were not regenerated or converted by it. The church's job in Christendom is to challenge people to enter into a vital, living relationship with Jesus Christ.** In this setting, churches are able to assume that a significant stream of non-Christians who are familiar with and favorably disposed to the Gospel will continually come to church in search of the salvation that is found only in Jesus Christ.

The word "post-" means "beyond" or "following after." "Post-Christendom" means that the time of Christendom, in which Christianity enjoyed a dominant place in western culture has passed. Is it still a factor, an influence in society? Yes, but it no longer enjoys a prominent place in the West, especially in larger metropolitan areas. We find ourselves in a similar position to first century Christians: we are on the fringes of our society, and we cannot assume that people know the Christian message, are open to the Gospel, or even that we will be talking about the same thing when we use a word such as "God."

Missional writers argue that in this new, post-Christendom setting, the western church needs to develop a "missiology" of western culture, in much the same way it has done effective missiology for mission to non-Christian cultures around the world. A missiology of western culture means rethinking and reformulating what it means for do worship, discipleship, community and service in a reformed and evangelical way and to engage effectively with people in post-Christendom society.

* Craig Carter, Rethinking Christ and Culture: A Post-Christendom Perspective, (Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press, 2007), page 6.
** Tim Keller, "Missional Church," page 1.