The link above contains a very concise explanation and history of the term “missional” from someone in my tribe, the EFCA.
Reactions? Is this assessment correct? What’s missing, if anything, from the author’s take on missional?
Personally, I’m thankful for the article and especially the following paragraph. “The missional conversation goes much deeper than strategy. In fact, most advocates of the missional church idea are opposed to programmatic or formulaic approaches. Rather, the core concern and motivation is a rediscovery of the biblical teaching of the Church as a missionary people.”
Amen and amen. Shout it from the rooftops. Too many people peg missional as strategy alone. It’s not. It’s an identity. I am missional because God is a missionary God. Through the redeeming work of Christ every believer is, de facto, a missionary like God himself and Christ his sent one. And what is this mission of ours? It’s the Holy Spirit directed spontaneous expansion of the Church among the nations, to the glory of God and the joy of His people.
I just wish more churches would contemplate the Bible’s theology of “sentness” instead of casually going about business as usual. Much is at stake. The fields are ripe for harvest. What we believe matters greatly and deeply affects how we express this cherished entity called the Church.
I believe the default posture of the believer (therefore the church too) is one of being centered on Christ and sent by him. If we lack sentness about our lives we just might lack the fullness of Jesus in our lives. Jesus on tap yields sentness. May Christ reign supreme so that his church lives sent!