by Edward C. Pentecost
Faith mission boards’ traditional purpose of establishing autonomous churches may be self-defeating, says this author. He calls for new goals and methods in the light of national church development, so that the churches become the instruments of outreach.
Faith mission boards’ traditional purpose of establishing autonomous churches may be self-defeating, says this author. He calls for new goals and methods in the light of national church development, so that the churches become the instruments of outreach.
Recently I have been studying many faith mission boards’ statements of purpose and trying to think through their philosophies and practices. It was no surprise to find almost all express the same intent, that is, almost all are working with the declared purpose of establishing local churches.1
To summarize, let me indicate the basic steps: (1) To evangelize; (2) To raise up disciples; (3) To prepare leaders; (4) To plant the church.
THE FUNNEL
I call the above the "funnel" philosophy. It strives to offer the gospel to as many people as possible. It attempts to win the responsive, disciple the converts, and select and train the leaders in order to establish the local church. When the church is under the leadership of a national pastor, and is capable of self-government and self-support, then the missionary has reached his goal and accomplished his purpose.
The methods of evangelism have been numerous: mass evangelism and individual evangelism; the use of radio, medicine and literature. All have centered in one basic philosophy and the attainment of one goal: that out of proclamation and through witness, God will bring men to himself and some will be saved. Those then who are saved form a new church.
As the evangelism proceeds, the ministry of the missionary often turns to discipleship. He instructs the few who are responding and willing to hear the matter further.
At this point the evangelistic outreach often receives its first cutback, because the individual who has been involved in it now undertakes a new enterprise, and something has to give. The logical step is for the missionary to turn his attention to the preparation of those who are willing to study and with them begin to build the new congregation. He seeks out the natural leaders and builds his life into them.
Consequently, in many cases the missionary has become engaged in a ministry of a local church nature. He has served as the pastor, assisting the new and struggling group to "get on its feet. " Many are the instances where a missionary has labored hard and faithfully, waiting for a young man to mature or to return from his schooling to "take over" the work, but he has been crushed when the individual did not mature, or the other did not come back.
Some call this the "brain-drain" or "leadership- drain" which has been so counter- productive to the final goal of building the church. Too many small, local, and autonomous groups have suffered because the natural leaders went off to school and never returned. In the meantime the missionary stands firm and continues his ministry to the few dependent and faithful of the congregation. But when furlough time comes the, climax is reached and a break is unavoidable.
Where there are personnel available, the missionary will be relieved and another one will step in to "hold the ropes" while the needy one receives a well-deserved rest.
In many cases circumstances prohibit the return of the missionary to his field of service and he may find his new ministry to be teaching in the U. S. Here Bible colleges present opportunities and the missionary’s experience peculiarly prepares him for this position. In such a setting his teaching, based on his philosophy and experience, is a perfect set-up to continue the "funnel" pattern: Missionaries are sent out to evangelize, to disciple, to train leaders, in order to plant a church.
This funnel pattern is developed from the premise that accepts the church as the ultimate. It conceives of the individual convert as the first link in accomplishing the goal of establishing a local assembly of believers, which is the ultimate. In practice the result is that many, very small, struggling, and weak congregations are formed and asked to carry on by themselves as independent, autonomous groups.
When we consider the American missionary who has come from a so called "Christian" society where Christianity is accepted as a way of life but is not very satisfying to the soul, we recognize how easy it is for him to accept a small, independent, and autonomous body as something satisfying that offers him the close fellowship for which he longs. He wants to get away into the secret of a warm communion of believers. He enjoys that small, intimate, week-end retreat with fellow Christians. The church is his goal and ideal.
Likewise, the individualistic U.S. society allows each individual the right to decide and act for himself. But it is not so in many other countries. Many other societies are group-oriented and non-Christian if not anti-Christian. To be individualistic is to be ostracized and made an outcast from one’s society. To belong to a small, independent group is to be disdained.
Often in the midst of a group-oriented society, where people need a sense of "belonging," churches are formed with very few members. More often than not, they include very few men and they are often not community leaders.
The majority of church members are women and children. Very few family units come in. Yet, the missionary feels he has accomplished his purpose when he has planted a church.
The nature of the problem is seen in questions often asked by missionaries: How many people do you need to form a church? Can a church be formed when there are no men qualified to serve as elders? How many elders do you need to form a church? When should the missionary drop out of the church? How far can the missionary let the church go before he steps in to correct a wrong move?
The history of missions also sheds light on the matter. Some indigenous church groups have tried to maintain their independence and autonomy. Most of them have not grown nor been influential in outreach. They ultimately are forced to grapple with issues. They begin to ask: What is our reason for existence? What are our distinctives? Why should we exist as a body related to a foreign mission instead of uniting with other believers within our own country? And as soon as these questions are answered there is by necessity a new "denomination" formed. Through this development loyalties often become tensions and tensions lead to breaks.
The greater movement has been toward the formation of a national body formed for fellowship and mutual support. At times governments have dictated the formation of associations or alliances. In other cases mutual interest and spiritual affinity have drawn groups of believers into fellowships. As a result, a general pattern has emerged in which within each continent or geographic area there have been formed national fellowships of believers. They have been faced with new questions. They have been called upon to formulate their own distinctives and to determine their own courses of action.
The whole matter of the formation of these new associations is an unavoidable grouping and is a continuation of the history of the expansion of Christianity. Relationships are developed; tensions are faced; distinctives are determined; courses are set.
To some degree, at least, denominational mission boards do not face the same issues. To a greater degree the newly formed bodies among them become affiliated with the mother denomination and the newer churches have a sense of "belonging" that the faith mission churches do not have, especially since so many of the faith missionaries reject the idea of their forming a new denomination.
Thus, the unique philosophy of the faith missions to establish local, autonomous churches as their goal may be self-defeating. Many missionaries are becoming concerned at this point, feeling that the national church has lost its vision for evangelism and winning the lost.
Faith missions need to reconsider their goals. The traditional goal was really an immediate goal, set quite properly as an initial goal, but it now needs to be reconsidered. The "funnel" philosophy leads to a dead end. I am quite prepared to recognize that it was necessary to evangelize, to disciple and to train leaders, in order to establish the church in every land. But mission boards do not need to remain at that point and keep feeding into the funnel. The immediate goal needs to give way to a long-range goal.
THE INVERTED FUNNEL
Let me suggest another pattern. Let’s turn the funnel upside down. Let’s invert the funnel and send the church out to evangelize.
In my recent studies I came upon some faith missions that decided to invert the philosophy,2 beginning with the church as the agent instead of the individual. The individual becomes the goal instead of the church, for example: (1) To establish the church; (2), To raise up disciples; (3) To make Christ known; (4) To all the people.
Some today are saying that since the church is now formed in every country we declare a moratorium on missions. Why not, if the goal has been reached? Nothing could be farther from the scriptural plan or truth.
As we think of the inverted funnel pattern, we recognize that some have expressed it as a circle and others as a chain reaction. It all centers around the church planting the church, which in turn plants another church. The local church becomes the body for outreach.
Because the Body of Christ does exist in the world, our concept of missions no longer has to be that of an individual out in some isolated place trying to win a few individuals to bring a church into being. Missions can now move into a concept of Body outreach to every individual.
God is interested in every individual in the world. Let’s think of the individual as the end of object, not the beginning. Let’s think of the church as the beginning, not the end! Let’s think of the church as the place to begin to reach out to every individual in all the world. Let’s make the church the dynamic party, not the missionary. This philosophy sees the church as the initiator and means, the individual as the end. Is this not the teaching of Ephesians 4:11, 12, "and he gave (gifts) for the perfecting of the saints for the work of the ministry?"
What does such a concept mean practically? Missionary outreach will not be the work of a few foreign individuals trying to win some converts to disciple and to form into a new small assembly of independent believers. Instead, missionaries will work with the existing bodies within the different countries in an outreach of and by the Body. Missions becomes the very life force of the Body moving in outreach, with every member functioning to perform that end and accomplish that goal. The local church becomes trans-cultural; missions becomes the enterprise of the Body, not just of a few select individuals. Instead of by-passing the body of believers within a country and evangelizing as independent groups, mission boards adopt a new concept and approach of cooperation, support and understanding.
Some missionaries today are saying: "We are called to evangelize. If the local church won’t do it, then we must go ahead in obedience to God and do it. " By so doing they are multiplying small independent groups with a sense of independence even from the national body of believers within their own country. These missionaries need a concept that works through the church as God’s vehicle in the world, as his Body for outreach instead of through individuals to form a new isolated body. This requires cooperation with national believers for a program that will have the national church as its center and to which new believers will be drawn. The long-range goal of reaching every man is to be accomplished through the outreach of the national church. Missionaries can operate as members within the body, doing what they do best within the total framework.
Mission boards as well as missionaries must ask: Will we accomplish more by multiplying small, independent, autonomous groups that have to go through the same
struggle all over again, or will we accomplish more by working with that existing body which is the Body of Christ in order to see it grow to become all that it should become? Is our vision centered upon forming new local bodies as the end, or is our vision centered upon the end of seeing the church reach out in widespread and broad evangelism? What will accomplish most? What is God’s ultimate? Does God see the church as the end, or as the means?
Under the new concept proposed here, the missionary does not go out to plant an independent local assembly as the goal of his life. Rather, he sees himself as part of a team, joined as a co-laborer together with those of like precious faith who are assembled in another geographic area, facing a different cultural context and social structure, striving to reach out to the lost and bring them to the person of Jesus Christ. Personal programs give way to corporate enterprises. He becomes part of a beautiful mosaic. He sees the church as God’s instrument in the world to accomplish his purpose.
Endnotes
1. Central American Mission, Principles and Practices: The Central American Mission … constrained by the love of Christ and the hope of His coming, to obey His command to’ "preach the Gospel to every creature." Its aim is … to bring the inhabitants of Central America to a saving knowledge of the love of God in Christ, and to assist in the establishment of indigenous churches.
Sudan Interior Mission, Manual: The purpose of the Mission is to develop and encourage interest in missions; to train and send forth missionaries…to preach the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ with the aim of establishing churches which are self- propagating….
Unevangelized Fields Mission, Constitution and By-Laws: The Unevangelized Fields Mission seeks to carry the Gospel to those regions that are at present unoccupied by evangelical missions and to establish churches of the people as early as possible.
2. The Andes Evangelical Mission, Principles and Practice (1968): The AEM has been called of God to fulfill the following objectives: (1) The evangelization of the people of Latin America, in fulfillment of the Great Commission. (2) The establishment of the Church of Christ according to scriptural principles. (3) The training and development of leaders for the evangelical church. (4) The deepening of the missionary interest in the homelands.
The Andes Evangelical Mission, Constitution, Principles and Practice, 1972: The AEM has been called of God to fulfill the following objectives: (1) The building of the Church according to Scriptural principles, working through churches, societies and individuals to make disciples of Jesus Christ for the fulfillment of the Great Commission. (2) The training and development of leaders for the evangelical work. (3) The deepening of missionary interest, vision and outreach in all churches with which we are associated in home and other fields.
The Evangelical Alliance Mission, This Is TEAM, 1967: To make Christ known, to raise up disciples, and to plant the church.
In 1974 this was changed to: To plant the church; To raise up disciples; To make Christ known; To all the people.
—–
Copyright © 1976 Evangelism and Missions Information Service (EMIS). All rights reserved. Not to be reproduced or copied in any form without written permission from EMIS.
