EMQ » Jul – Sept 2025 » Volume 61 Issue 3
Summary: In 1973, Ralph Winter introduced the terms modality to describe the local church fellowship and sodality to describe what we now call parachurch ministries. Winter explained why both are valid and necessary but offered no model nor description of how they should work together to fulfill God’s global purpose. This article specifically challenges the church to work as one body and offers a model that centers on God’s purpose.
By Sara Salloum
The concept of two redemptive structures within Christianity was presented by Ralph Winter at a conference in Seoul, Korea in 1973. The beginnings of these structures date back to the early church when Paul visited existing established synagogues to share the gospel. Where no such fellowship existed, “he established brand new synagogue-type fellowships of believers as the basic unit of his missionary activity.”i
Winter described the New Testament church as “built along the Jewish synagogue lines, embracing the community of the faithful in any given place.”ii This congregational structure “is a prototype of all subsequent Christian fellowships where old and young, male and female are gathered together as normal biological families in aggregate.”iii He used the term modality to refer to this first structure.
However, Paul was also sent out from the church at Antioch with a small team that was economically self-sufficient when necessary. It was dependent, from time to time, on the church from Antioch and other churches. But most of the activity was determined within the apostolic band, essentially self-directed.
Winter went on to describe this “second, quite different structure … of the evangelistic outreach” which he called the “missionary band” structure.iv Winter considered this second structure “a prototype of all subsequent missionary endeavors organized out of committed, experienced workers who affiliated themselves as a second decision beyond membership in the first structure.”v He used the term sodality to refer to this second structure.
Understanding the Two Structures
The term modality refers to a “quality or state of being.”vi In the context of the church, the modality structure refers to the local church body, a broad, inclusive community open to all believers. Its main functions include worship, teaching, pastoral care, sacraments, and general Christian life. The modality structure includes congregations, denominations, and institutional bodies.
The term sodality refers to “an organized society or fellowship.”vii In the context of the church, the sodality structure refers to specialized groups focused on outreach, missions, and evangelism. Its main functions include church planting, evangelism, global missions, and specialized ministries. The sodality structures include missionary organizations and parachurch ministries like student and campus ministries. Typically, these structures operate independently from any local church modality though some of them may be affiliated with a particular denomination.viii
Winter described the complex history of these two structures. His concern dates back to the Protestant movement in its early days when the focus was placed squarely on “a full-scale renewal movement on the general level of church life.”ix Even the Pietist movement of that time “dropped back to the level of biological growth; it reverted to the ordinary pattern of congregational life … and in most cases, rather soon became ineffective either as a mission structure or as a renewing force.”x
It was almost 300 years later that independent mission societies took on the role of advancing the Gospel message. However, this renewed sodality structure has endured a history of rivalry and misunderstanding from its modality sister. Winter expressed his goals to help both structures understand one another and cooperate.
It is our attempt here to help church leaders and others to understand the legitimacy of both structures, and the necessity for both structures not only to exist but to work together harmoniously for the fulfillment of the Great Commission and for the fulfillment of all that God desires for our time.xi
Since Winter’s address, we continue to hear voices that insist that the modality structure is the more valid. Nothing further is needed because the church itself is God’s purpose, not the means for a greater purpose. Galli supports this position in his interpretation of Paul’s letter to the Ephesians:
God’s first and primary purpose was to create a people for himself, who would live with him “holy and blameless in love.” Before and above anything else, he thought about a people he would adopt as family, who would be brothers and sisters of Jesus his Son.
He did this not for some ulterior motive, so that this family would then go out and do something even more important. … It appears that for Paul, the family of God—the church—is not a means but an end. [emphasis added]xii
Galli seems to suggest that the modality structure is all that is needed.
Today, the term parachurch is often used to describe sodality forms. This suggests they are outside the scope and meaning of church, which is better understood as a congregation or denomination. Blincoe suggests that “the use of the phrase para-church organization for the second structure, the sodality, may even be questioned, if neither structure is any more normative, any more church, than the other. Why not call churches para-missions?”xiii
What Is the Church?
Structures, physical or otherwise, do not define the church. Paul states clearly that the church is the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:27). The church is living and active with Christ as its head. The church was never intended to become an institution in and of itself, nor solely for its own benefit.
We don’t go to church. We are the church. All of us who follow Christ as Lord are essential to the body. Nothing should separate us from one another because we are of one body, the church.
As one body, we share one purpose. The church has a God-given purpose for its existence: to make disciples of all nations (peoples). This has been God’s global purpose since before creation (Matthew 28: 18–20). Jesus clearly commanded the church to go into all nations (peoples) and share the gospel. That is the existential purpose. Everything in the Bible points to that purpose. Everything that the church teaches and does should be so that God will be glorified, and the gospel proclaimed. As J. Oswald Smith asserted, “Any church that is not seriously involved in helping fulfill the Great Commission has forfeited its biblical right to exist.”xiv If its purpose is diminished or ignored, the church risks spiritual decline.
Winter suggests that missionary endeavors are “organized out of committed, experienced workers who affiliated themselves as a second decision beyond membership in the first structure.”xv This should not be the case. As the church has one existential purpose that must be supported by both structures, there is no second decision to be made.
The church is one body with one existential purpose. The only decisions that remain are how to fulfill that purpose. The sodality teams are still members of the churches that send them. Likewise, the local modality churches are still responsible for supporting those they send. Sodality structures provide invaluable resources, extensive experience, and proven processes to prepare, train and support those who go. They do not replace the modality function. They add to it.
Structures within the church are both biblical and necessary to enable the church to fulfill its purpose. Many of Paul’s writings address how the church should function and how different parts have different gifts and roles (1 Corinthians 12:4–31).
Structures are meant to support the church in a unified way by providing stability. In the body of Christ, structures can be understood as the skeletal frame that holds the church together while the body grows and moves. Different parts of the body require different skeletal structures to function well. But it is still one body, the church.
An Integrated Model
Rather than understanding modality and sodality as different, separate structures, we should view them both as essential supports of the church’s purpose. Alan Hirsch defines church as,
A community of God’s people that defines itself, and organizes its life around, its real purpose of being an agent of God’s mission to the world. In other words, the church’s true and authentic organizing principle is mission.xvi
As shown in figure 1, the church’s true and authentic organizing principle of mission is God’s global purpose. God’s purpose is at the center, and both structures and their activities revolve around it. Both are necessary in support of the other in achieving that purpose.
Figure 1: Working as One Body
As a modality, the local fellowship of believers teaches and disciples their members so that some will go out as sodality teams to share the gospel and plant new fellowships. These new fellowships grow into new modalities to send out more sodality teams. This ongoing process generates both growth and movement toward God’s global purpose.
As a sodality, the team of mature believers shares the gospel and plants local fellowships where none exist. Additionally, they report back the things that God is doing to their sending modality churches as they, together, obey God’s commanded purpose for the church. Such reports nourish the church, encouraging it to continue its teaching and discipleship so that more will go out.
This model depends on the centrality of God’s global purpose for both functions. Without strong connections with sodalities, local churches become more inward focused, concentrating on maintaining their existing mode. Without active engagement in God’s global purpose, local churches risk a decline in spiritual vitality and growth. Likewise, without strong connections to modalities, sodality teams become isolated and under supported, both spiritually and financially. A more symbiotic relationship is needed between them.
By focusing on God’s global purpose and the church’s one body, including both modality and sodality structures, we can begin to build the model in practice. The first step is to recognize the excellent examples of modality and sodality already in place.
There are local churches that are well resourced with pastors, teachers and ministries that are effectively creating fully devoted followers of Christ. They provide Christ-like fellowship and minister to one another and to their local communities. But, with some exceptions of very large churches with sodality-trained staff, very few can successfully direct or undertake sodality ministry.
Fortunately, there are many mission and outreach organizations that have developed expertise, resources and processes to select, train, send and support those who are called to go out as sodality teams. Yet, they need modalities to prepare people to go out and to support them in their work.
The church needs these two structures to form a committed, symbiotic relationship. Such a relationship is based on three critical factors:
-
- Shared acknowledgement of the church’s existential purpose
-
- Mutual understanding of one another’s value and importance to achieve that purpose
-
- Shared commitment to fulfill God’s global purpose by working together
Local churches need to intentionally identify, support, and send people out from their fellowship to join sodality teams who are committed to go and live among people with little or no access to the gospel. Local churches need sodalities to help them develop effective strategies for global engagement.
Mission agencies, including campus ministries, need to intentionally engage with local modality churches to encourage participation in sodality teams. Just as Paul and Barnabas returned and reported to the church in Antioch, sodalities need to include local churches in the sodality experience. The goals of such engagement are:
-
- To reinforce the church’s focus on God’s global purpose
-
- To report and celebrate God’s global activity
-
- To sustain (or rekindle) the church’s passion to reach those without access to the gospel
-
- To connect the church here with new churches there
Operating independently from each other, neither will succeed in fulfilling God’s global purpose. Together, imagine how the church might accomplish it … and how quickly.
A Personal Story
In the 1990s my husband and I were members of a local church in Rochester, New York. As a modality, the church offered excellent teaching and meaningful fellowship. To better engage in God’s global purpose, the church intentionally established relationships with various mission agencies and para-church organizations. As a result, we had many opportunities to learn the ways God was working out His global purpose through sodality teams beyond our local community.
Over time, we began to consider new ways God might desire to use us for His global purpose. At first, we focused on praying and on providing financial support to some sodality teams. We followed their lives and ministries closely and experienced a deeper connection to God’s work in the world.
Eventually, God directed us to go out and to join the sodality work of a missions agency. Our local church supported our decision even though we both held important leadership roles. The hardest part of going was leaving our church family.
More than 25 years later, we continue to work with sodality teams. We have led sodality teams in east Africa and in the Middle East. We communicate regularly and often visit the local church we left behind in Rochester, New York.
Overall, the committed relationships between our local church and sodality teams have enabled the church to send out over 100 teams and to set aside 30% of their annual budget to support those teams. Through these intentional partnerships, the modality and the sodalities offer essential functions, experiences, and resources to the joint effort of advancing God’s global purpose. As a result, both are encouraged, challenged, and blessed beyond what they could accomplish or experience alone.
I think Ralph Winter would be pleased.
Dr. Sara Salloum obtained her MA in Christian Thought from Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary and her EdD in Educational Leadership from the University of North Carolina Charlotte. She has over 25 years of experience in cross-cultural ministry and is passionate about mobilizing the church to reach those with little or no access to the gospel. She also serves as the Adult Education Specialist and Instructor for Perspectives USA.
[i] Ralph Winter, ‘The Two Structures of God’s Redemptive Mission,’ Missiology 2, no. 1 (1974), 122.
[ii] Winter, “The Two Structures,” 122.
[iii] Winter, “The Two Structures,” 122.
[iv] Winter, “The Two Structures,” 122.
[v] Winter, “The Two Structures,” 123
[vi] “Modality meaning,” n.d. Merriam Webster Dictionary, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/modality
[vii] “Sodality meaning,” n.d. Merriam Webster Dictionary, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sodality.
[viii] One example is the International Missions Board (IMB) of the Southern Baptist Convention.
[ix] Winter, “The Two Structures,” 131.
[x] Winter, “The Two Structures,” 131.
[xi] Winter, “The Two Structures.”
[xii] Galli, “The Unfortunate Pedigree of the Missional Church,” Christianity Today, June 5, 2019, https://www.christianitytoday.com/2019/06/unfortunate-pedigree-of-missional-church/.
[xiii] Robert Blincoe, “A Protestant Problem so Intractable that a Solution Has Never Been Offered,” May 14, 2023, https://robertblincoe.blog/10774-2.
[xiv] J. Oswald Smith, AZ Quotes, accessed April 16, 2025, https://www.azquotes.com/quote/662207.
[xv] Winter, “The Two Structures,” 123.
[xvi] Alan Hirsch, The Forgotten Ways (Brazos Press, 2009), https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/221084-the-forgotten-ways-reactivating-the-missional-church.
EMQ, Volume 61, Issue 3. Copyright © 2025 by Missio Nexus. All rights reserved. Not to be reproduced or copied in any form without written permission from Missio Nexus. Email: EMQ@MissioNexus.org.
