Lesslie Newbigin once said this:
An unchurchly mission is as much a monstrosity as an unmissionary Church.
Discuss!
Being Missional Without the Church?
Previous post: Francis Chan on Following Jesus
Next post: The Parable of the Hungry Girl
Hello. Some friends and I are planting a network of missional communities in Fort Wayne, Indiana, and this blog is where I reflect on the journey. Join the conversation!
{ 10 comments… read them below or add one }
There's a statement by someone who understands the centrality of the Church as the Body and Bride of Christ in carrying out His Great Commission. Discipleship means bringing His followers into the corporate fellowship of the Body with Christ as its Head, and into the relationship of the Bride with Christ as her Groom. This principle also applies to those on a mission, i.e., those ministering should be called by Christ and commissioned by His Church.
It seems that often times we confuse the organization of church with the body of the Church. Commissioning by the Body is not the same thing as being sent out by a church. The former is more organic and more powerful because it reaches past the lines that divide. The later is usually tainted with agendas.
Thanks for saying that, Maria. As a young Christian I was discipled by a godly man that I respected very much. He was a true father to me in the faith. His heart was always discipling, always building relationships. He always taught me that the church is not about the organization, but the relationships. I understand that 501(c)3's are formed for the purpose of serving the church, but then what has happened is that those organizations have taken preeminence over the body, so to speak (in my opinion). The orgs must always serve the body and not vice versa.
The mission starts out "Go ye therefore…" That's plural: the mission belongs to the Church, not to any dismembered member.
I guess I wouldn't count them equally. an unmissionary Church is the greater monstrosity. and unchurchly mission is laudable but incomplete. an unmissionary Church is not even laudable, it is to totally miss the point.
I think I agree, Geoff.
I can see this from both sides, because I see the need for organized church, but I also feel the hurt of so many that have left the church – sometimes due to its inflexibility, dogmatism, or worse, abuse. I feel the church is too harsh of those who pull back from an official church – calling them all sorts of things, including rebellious, "lone rangers," etc. But, the truth is often that they are seeking truer relationships and something more, and they don't see how to find it where they are. Is this even on the topic? I'm sorry if it's not. It's my own thread, I guess.
Yeah I think this gets at something Peter. What exactly is "unchurchly" mission? What does it mean to "leave" a church, etc…
By the way, I think you'd enjoy "Mere Churchianity" by Michael Spencer.
I see it more from Geoff's perspective. There is some gray space in the first line (unchurchly mission) but an unmissionary church seems extremely contradictory. Metaphorically, we could describe that attempt as country-club mockery of Christianity. The other type of failing metaphor is the "museum" church – their sole mission is to preserve the church and they do so by not proclaiming the Gospel (or only sharing to each other) and upholding their narrow traditions.
Love Newbigin though – must read more …
Great thoughts, Tim. Those metaphors really help.
Of course, part of it depends on what he means by "unchurchly," which we would only know if we read the book this quote comes from (I don't even know!).