// December 30th, 2009 // No Comments » // Doctrine, Life
from TheResurgence - by Ed Stetzer [June 9, 2006]
I have been captured by the term “humble orthodoxy.” It well expresses my own understanding of the gospel-that I have a humble certainty that God and His word are true. When Josh Harris used the term at the recent Resurgence conference, I was challenged and encouraged. True orthodoxy is not subject to the whims of cultural acceptability; it is humbly submitted to the word of God. It is not humble to question what scripture makes clear.
Let me suggest that we also need a humble missiology. Missiology is central to how we reach people in culture. Yet, it seems that some are using missiology for the wrong reasons as of late… to justify a change to the gospel rather than finding ways to more accurately communicate it. Others contend that culture does not matter and anyone who desires to be culturally relevant must be compromised.
So, how can we have a more humble missiology that is both biblical and culturally appropriate in western society? Let me make a few suggestions below.
Be Humble Toward Others
When it comes to issues of contextualization, everyone thinks that they have it just right. Everyone that is less contextual than you are is too traditional and everyone who is more contextual than you is compromised. Tim Keller explains this much better than I do. Listen to his lectures found here. (And what a tremendous example of serving the church when a seminary gives away its lectures to the church-thanks Covenant Seminary and may your tribe increase.)
The fight over what “missional” means is a good example. There are a slew of new books coming out with missional in the title… and each may have a slightly different variation on what it means. Fine. But my concern is this: too many think that we have just now discovered what missional is-and nobody knew it until the under-40-post-seeker-crowd came into prominence. That shows a great lack of humility toward others who have sought (and I believe often found) the best ways to structure their lives, ministry, outreach, and church based on the culture they were in. That does not always look like a trendy church in an art community-sometimes it looks like a brick church in rural Mississippi.
That’s why I love all kinds of biblical churches-not because they all do everything right. Instead, because I can learn from most, encourage others in ways they have not considered, and bless all forms of scripturally sound church.
Be Humble Toward History
Missiology is not without its faults. There was a time when great debates took place around it-and I believe that time is coming again. And, to be fair, missiology has led theology astray on more than one occasion. A humble missiology listens to history and learns from the mistakes of the past.
There was a time when many focused on the mission of God at the expense of a biblical view of church. They taught that the work of God was bigger than the church… and they were partly right. But the result was overwhelmingly negative (see the history of “church and mission” here) and we must not let an unbalanced missiology lead us there again.
When the church became a side note in God’s redemptive plan, the gospel was soon lost in the rush to “find God” in every movement toward justice, spirituality, and meaning. I fear we are headed there again-and I think the two biggest issues for evangelicals in the next decade will be ecclesiology and missiology. Let’s humbly remember our history that mission without solid theology and biblical church leads to no mission at all. See a brief article I wrote on that here.
For example, the word “mission” replaced “missions” in most ecumenical circles about 50 years ago. The result was not good. Soon “mission” or “mission dei” became the buzz words. But, the word is not used much anymore in those circles. Why? Because “mission” became an expression of the “mission dei” rather than the “missionary posture” and soon the “mission of God” was everything-except evangelism and church planting. Simply “being” rather than “telling” became the focus and within a few decades once fervent missionaries folded their ministries into the World Council of Churches.
The mission of God is about “being” the gospel; the mission of God is about its truth. Humble missiology learns that without a biblical foundation and understanding of proclamation there is soon no mission.
Be Humble toward Scripture
Missiology is a sub discipline of theology. Yes, missiology has been, for too long, the great missing piece in the theological discipline (and still not integrated into most theological curricula). The reason is simple: everyone assumed we lived in Christian America and thus we did not need missiology. Now, we see that we do-not because North America is more lost (though it is) but because we are missionary by nature. How did we discover this? In scripture. Jesus sends us to people in culture; Paul and others modeled engagement in culture; and the church today must be obedient and reach people in culture.
Scripture must be the guide, the focal point, and the stack pole for our missiology. If, in the name of missiology, we abandon biblical fidelity, culture has become our master and not our mission field.
Be Humble toward Ecclesiology
Missiology must be more humble about what the church “is.” In the name of cultural relevance, we must not forget the importance of church… and many are today. It does not mean that every whim or preference is biblically mandated. Too often our focus is on our preference or a preference to what “feels” right. We have lots of “biblical” reasons why church should be done the way we prefer. Instead, we need to see that scripture has much to say about what a church is, how it functions, and why that matters. It takes humility to see and understand the difference.
The church matters and it matters that we understand church. A humble missiology is always tied to a biblical church. Why? Because it is the church that God has chosen as his instrument to make known his manifold wisdom (Eph. 3:10). Church is the instrument; missiology is a tool that makes it able to reach people effectively.
Be Humble toward Western Values
Some who are calling for us to use missiology as a tool for reaching the West seem to have determined that only our western sensibilities should be considered. The reality is this: the debates that we are having about missiology here in North America would seem odd indeed to many of the non-Anglo people already doing missions around the world. This white English-speaking phenomenon of leaders questioning the nature of scripture, the reality of hell, the appropriateness of homosexuality, the nature of atonement, etc. is not what I see as I have trained around the world.
For example, I have the privilege of consulting with the Anglican Mission in America. Here is a group of evangelical Christians who have found that their American counterpart has largely abandoned the gospel in the name of cultural relevance. Where do these evangelical believers go? They go to the orthodox Anglican Bishops from Africa and Asia who sponsor and send them to reach people in America. Missiology that needs to be re-evangelized from the two-thirds world is not real missiology-let’s be humble and listen to our brothers and sisters who are reaching the world with an orthodox gospel while the North American church is dying.
Submitting to a world that is much more orthodox than much of the North American church is a humble missiology.
Conclusion
I love missiology… I believe it is a key in reaching North America. But, it is important to remember that there is good missiology and there is bad missiology. And, we should all be concerned that there is much theological revisioning in the name of missiology today. Let’s have a humble missiology that is a servant to the scriptures, roots itself in the church, and focuses on the glory of God and not the elevation of man. That’s a humble missiology.
