The paradigm in which I was indoctrinated saw “missions” as something that was done somewhere else by people who were specifically called to leave their homes and do evangelistic and philanthropic work in strange and exotic places. The denomination had overseas, domestic, and state mission boards who were responsible for this work. The role of those of us in local congregations was to pray for the missionaries, learn about their work, provide the funds for them to pursue their ministries, and give them a platform to tell us about what they were doing. There may have been a few local mission opportunities such as a “rescue mission” for the down and out, but we more often supported this type of ministry with donations than with personal involvement.
Somewhere along the way, this paradigm started to break down. There are several reasons for this.
First, on a positive note, more Christians became involved in hands-on mission service. In my circle, it was the Baptist student ministries on local campuses that began this movement by sending young adults on summer mission service--both domestically and internationally-- and beginning to use school breaks for mission team projects in the United States.
Second, also on a positive note, was the emergence of a broader understanding of the purpose of missions. This was clearly articulated by Southern Baptists at Mission 70, a collegiate missions conference in Atlanta in December 1969. Both traditional and social action-oriented ministries were highlighted for Christians who wanted to make a difference in the world. Helping the marginalized in society was added to the emphasis on evangelism and church planting.
Third, also a positive, was the increasing involvement of laity from congregations in personal service involvement--locally, nationally, and overseas. Usually these lay persons assisted embedded missionaries to expand or strengthen their work. This broadened lay understand of other cultures and service possibilities.
Fourth, when the largest Baptist denomination in the South began to splinter (over doctrine, cultural issues, or power--you take your choice), many local congregations began to distrust how their mission dollars were being used. Generally, this led to congregations either cutting their missions giving or diverting it to other organizations, including new denominational structures such as the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship and the Alliance of Baptists.
Fifth, and a consequence of number four, churches began to choose the mission efforts they would support through donations, personal involvement, and partnerships. Some of these were denominationally related and some were not. Denominational agencies might even go directly to local churches and ask for support, ignoring traditional denominational structures. A growing number of churches have become denominations unto themselves with multiple campuses and their own domestic and international mission programs.
Sixth, across the board, dollars and church involvement in denominational mission programs declined, leading to restructuring, reassessment of priorities, budget cuts, and loss of personnel.
Today we live in a missions bazaar where each church (especially among Baptist congregations in the South) can wander around to pick and choose the missions endeavors of which they will be a part.
The result is not entirely bad. Rather than “farm out” their mission involvement to others, churches have the opportunity to assess their own unique gifts and resources and seek the leadership of the Holy Spirit in making choices about how they will do missions today. This is a more organic approach that requires time, prayer, and effort, but it also enhances engagement and innovation. With change comes opportunity.
Comments