What is ‘Christian Missions’?
Pt. 1, “What is a Missionary?”
by John Ambrose
Imagine the scene. I’m sitting in my apartment. Sweat is pouring off of me. It’s about 100 degrees… inside. There’s no central air conditioning. I’m in Southeast Asia. I’m a missionary. I have experienced hurt and loss and joy and rejoicing on levels I never expected. After a long day working with an unreached Muslim people group, I try to relax with a good book. I have heard of a woman who dubs herself “The Very Worst Missionary”. That is also the title of her book (not an endorsement). I’m about to settle down to the story of someone who knows my experiences well. Maybe my escapism will include some camaraderie - that mutual sense that you’re in the trenches with someone else. The reminder you’re not alone.
I was wrong.
The title of her book was self-deprecating, but nearly accurate. I had to wonder how her experience differed from my own (spoiler alert: not only is her message one of the wastefulness of Christian missionaries, but the vanity of Christianity itself). Because, if it didn’t, I would be in trouble.
I write this story as a preamble to why I’m writing this article (or series of articles).
According to the Barna group, 48% percent of churched Christians say they’ve never heard of the “Great Commission”. That is insane. (To be clear, this is the title we give to Jesus’ words to his disciples in Matthew 28:18-20 to make disciples of all nations.). This probably means that we are entering an era, where Christians are thinking less about the world around them and more about what they will be doing this weekend. That’s scary… because that’s exactly how the rest of the world thinks - those that don’t know Jesus.
Here’s another daunting statistic: on average in the world, if a Christian makes $100,000 this year, they will give $1.70 to missions among people who have no access to the gospel (we call this “unreached”'; more on that in part three).
But the gospel is good news, not scary statistics. And I suspect that some of the worst statistics are the product of Christians who simply don’t know. So, I thought this would be a good place to clearly present the issues.
Over the series of four articles, I’m going to be looking into “What is Christian missions"?”
Here, in parts one and two, we’re going to be answering the question, “What is a ‘missionary calling’?”
This means we’ll have to define “missionary” and “calling”.
Let’s use this space to answer, “What is a missionary?”
What is a Missionary?
Search your Bible and you will not find the word “missionary”. Strange, since it is such a well-known office of Christianity.
You won’t find the word “Pope” either. Protestants will take this absence and say it is wrong to assume that Peter was the first Pope. But if we base this on its absence, do we have to eliminate missions all together?
The difference between these two words is that “missionary” is in the Bible… kind of.
“Mission” comes from the Latin word missio, meaning “to be sent”. This is the same as “apostle,” which means “one sent out” in Greek.
So, in a direct sense, “apostle” has the same meaning as “missionary”. Here’s where it gets confusing. I won’t go into a long description but, despite what you may think or may have heard, there were more than 12 Apostles in the New Testament (see Barnabas called “apostle” in Acts 14:14; Paul often refers to himself as an apostle, e.g. 1Cor 1:1). Those 12 were certainly unique for various reasons, but people being sent out by Jesus were not limited to the so-called Twelve Disciples (Apostles). Others were meant to go.
And if we do some simple Bible studies and connections, we will realize that we, too, were meant to be sent out by Jesus to accomplish His mission.
Is Everyone a Missionary?
Next question: “Does that mean every obedient Christian is a apostolic missionary?”
No.
That is some bold confidence, I know.
I have seen countless churches with the “You Are Now Entering Your Mission Field” plaque across the threshold as you walk from the sanctuary to the wild outdoors. I would argue that this is not the case.
Stephen Neill says a version of this: “If everyone is a missionary, then no one is a missionary.” I would disagree with this statement some but agree with his point. If the grocery store is the mission field, then why do I pay people to go to Pakistan? If my hot yoga studio is a mission field, then I don’t have to give money to a stranger that comes to speak at my church once every 3-5 years.
Therefore, for the sake of efficiency and maintaining a consistent conceptual meaning for missions, I will make a definitive statement and then back off a bit.
A missionary is one who goes, cross-culturally, with the express purpose of planting churches (among unreached peoples) with the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Does your church-supported missionary in Mexico qualify? Probably not, if we include the idea of “unreached”. That is why I include it in parenthesis. But, sure, he is a missionary in Mexico (confusing, I know.)
I’m not a purist. I don’t mind if we call CRU staff members “missionaries”. I would, however, argue that a Korean who goes to plant churches amongst an unreached people group is a separate category and the ideal form of missions.
My point, then, is that there should be a distinction. If you want to be called a missionary for moving to the next town to attend a church-plant, then you need to have a separate category for that Korean. Maybe she could be called, “a cross-cultural missionary to the unreached”. That’s a mouthful. Thus, the reason we had to agree to the extra-biblical definition above.
A missionary is someone who takes the gospel of Jesus to a culture that is not their won, often learning a language that is not native to them to plant churches, ideally amongst an unreached people.