Keys to Becoming Local Church Centered in Missions, Part I

Almost all conservative evangelical churches have a foundational love of the Bible and missions. Or so they think. They have a lot of pieces of evidence: the annual missions sermon, the budget or missions pledge highlight, a Missions Committee, a missionary support list, or a world map with pins in it, to name a few. Leaders argue that they have been missions-minded for as long as they can remember.

Those same leaders would feel both blessed and bewildered by a young adult from the congregation asking the church to send him or her out as a missionary. Even Bible-loving, missions-loving churches don’t know how to do that. Enter the realm of MissioSERVE.

MissioSERVE helps and enables local churches to become healthy missions-sending churches. We want to introduce you to the biblical principles and practical means to do that. In this article, let’s consider the weaknesses of some common church assertions. Admittedly, doing so leads with negative statements. Yet, unless you see the negative side, you won’t be convinced that change is needed to accomplish the positive goal. This will prepare the ground for planting and growing local church-centered missions ministry.

The definition of missions:

1. “Missions is evangelism and discipleship.” This is weak. It is only one-third of the Great Commission. It allows for “missions” ministry to NOT be connected to the desired result of healthy and indigenous local churches. Biblical missions has a conscious and indisputable connection with the local church. It is NOT just evangelism and discipleship.
2. “Missions is humanitarian.” This is weak and misguided. While Gospel ministry will produce good for the recipients, humanitarian outpouring without the Gospel only improves human conditions on the road to hell. Even in humanitarian work, there should be connections to a local Gospel community. We call that a local church.
3. “Missions is whatever the missionary does on the field.” This has much potential for abuse and aimlessness. The missionary is not an authority unto themselves. Their goals and means should match their sending church’s biblically informed priorities.

The definitions of sending:

1. “The missions agency sends.” Unfortunately, we are swimming against the strong current of a century of misguided parachurch focus. Missions agencies promote the idea that their non-profit service organization eclipses the local sending church’s experience and expertise. Therefore, so goes the assumption, that local churches should just give people and pesos to them; they will take care of the rest. Not only is this an aberration of the biblical role of the local church, but it also results in failure and grief on the field, resulting in missionaries leaving. Local churches must not relinquish their biblical role as the primary sender.
2. “The missionary selects where they are sent.” This practice often means that the missionary, perhaps along with their organization, answers their ministry's who, what, where, why, and when and simply informs the “sending” and supporting churches. Granted, the missionary and agency are well-meaning in their independence. On the other hand, the local church’s ownership of the missionary, the agency, the field, and the ministry facilitates long-term steadfastness and success on the field.
3. “The agency sets the qualifications of being sent.” These days, typical agency sending sets a low bar for qualification. Their standards are rarely equal to a local church’s biblical standards for church leaders.

Other key definitions in jeopardy:

1. What is the Gospel? – Believe it or not, this definition is at risk because so many agencies and missions field ministry teams have adopted unbiblical substitute definitions for these terms. Local churches, which have remained biblically sound in other ways, have allowed missions agencies free rein for so long that basic definitions like these have become twisted and unrecognizable.
2. What is a Christian believer? If the local sending church doesn’t understand who a believer in their church is, it is no surprise that mission agencies can make up an even more creative answer.
3. What is a church member? Biblical membership in a local church is much more than “being a regular attender.”
4. What is a biblical church? A good answer to this includes several factors about leadership structure, worship activities, mutually committed membership, etc. Many agencies have fudged on this for the sake of accumulating better statistics.
5. What are the qualifications of indigenous church leadership? The Bible clearly describes qualifications for leadership. Modern missiology virtually ignores that.
6. What is the end goal of biblical missions ministry? This gets eroded by wrong definitions in other areas fueled by American business pragmatism. So, “end goals” are the statistics recorded using wrong definitions in other areas.
7. What are the acceptable and unacceptable principles and practices of cross-cultural ministry? Local sending churches must ask this question. There are indeed acceptable and unacceptable practices. The sending church has the right and obligation to know these and hold their sent missionaries accountable.

Wow! That may sting! How do you change to become a healthy sending church? Contact us. We want to help you and your local church aspire to and achieve that goal. Our Church Engagement staff would love to work with your church leaders to:

1. See your biblical role as a missions-sending church
2. Learn how to establish and teach the key principles moving forward
3. Make gracious and loving adjustments
4. Begin the process of equipping and sending your own people as missionaries
5. Enable your congregation to shepherd and delight in your church doing missions through your sent ones for His glory until every people on earth has a Christ-honoring local church.