Postby paul » October 19th, 2007, 8:46 am
The following is from an article by David Mays. My views of the Perspectives World Christian Movement would mirror these views. - Paul
“ The task Remaining, “ one session of the “Perspectives on the World Church Movement course, examines the great remaining barriers to fulfilling the Great Commission. IN each of the thirty sessions I’ve taught on this subject, “What is the task of world missions, the goal, the thing we work toward?”
By this time in the course, student have gained a common understanding of what fulfilling the Great Commission means. They may express it in different ways, but it usually sounds like “ an evangelizing, discipling church movement for every language, culture, and people. Or, as A.D. 2000 Movement put it, “ A church for every people and the gospel for every person.”
With a consensus on the goal of missions, I next ask, “What is missions?” This time, the results are not so consistent. Definitions of missions vary from the extremely narrow – “ planting churches among unreached people groups”- to the really broad –“loving people in the name of Jesus.”
Next, through a series of scenarios, I ask the class to vote on whether each classifies as missions. The first scenario is a clear E-3 evangelism situation of crossing three kinds of barriers to present the gospel: An individual goes to a foreign country, learns a new language, and witnesses to for Jesus among people who’ve never heard the gospel. Almost all agree that this is missions.
Step by step, the scenarios move away from other cultures toward our own, away from spiritual ministries and toward social ministries, and away from ministries to non-Christian’s to ministry to Christians. At each step fewer hands go up.
Finally I ask, “ If I take flowers to my ill Christian neighbor, is it missions?” Invariably a few in the class declare this to be missions. Their answers amazes me. That what mission’s is may vaguely relate to what missions seeks to accomplish seems illogical. The definition, in many scenarios, is unrelated to the goal.
But does it really matter, and if it does, why? It matter because this disjunction between the goal and the definition of missions may be partially responsible for the slow progress in ministering to the least evangelized in the world and for the local church’s declining vigor for world missions.
What Happened?
Stage1. The mission of discipling nations has been demoted from the primary task of the church to one of its many ministries called “missions.” It’s been reduced from a purpose, a primary reason for existence, to a program, one of the things we do.
Stage 2. Missions has traditionally consisted or cross-cultural ministry for spiritual purposes, that is, to evangelize and disciple the world beyond our community and culture. In many churches, missions now includes good ministries that (1) are primary social or economic in nature, with possible spiritual impact, or (2) serve our own community or culture. Cross-cultural outreach has been reduced from a program to one part of a program.
This shift from purpose to program is important because.
1. Much urgent ministry is required to evangelize and disciple the people of the world with least access to Christian resources.
2. Most un-evangelized people are separated from Christians by culture, geography, or language.
3. Most Christian resources are located in the North American church.
The American church’s full participation towards the great goal of world evangelization has become marginalized and diluted.
91% of Christian outreach occurs not in the least reached areas of the world, nor the marginally ares of the unreached, but rather in the Christianized world.
You cannot effectively love and minister to others when you are obsessed with protecting
and preserving yourself.