01/22/2022
This is good reminder, and what Iona has been trying to be in Vancouver. Never perfect, but aimed at this trajectory. Thanks Bishop Todd!
Why has missional become an adjective?
There is a lot of misunderstanding and misuse surrounding the term "missional." But the missional movement generated by Darrell Guder and his colleagues is substantive, and I’d like to give it a fresh hearing.
The missional movement, as it became known, sought to convince the church that: North America is a mission field; and that God is the initiator of missionary activity; and the church is a missional body via God’s purposes in election, calling and vocation—and therefore does mission, and in doing so must take on the mindset of a missionary.
As Jurgen Moltmann says: It is not the church that has a mission of salvation to fulfill to the world; it is the mission of the Son and the Spirit though the Father that includes the church, creating a church as it goes on its way.
The missional movement has been criticized for being too utilitarian, monochromatic, marginalizing, and ineffective. I see the minuses. I also see the pluses. I think of mission as the never-ending struggle of discernment leading to action for the good of others.
To be missional includes evangelism, but it also calls the church to join God in the whole kingdom work of healing, deliverance, deeds of justice and public worship. As Leslie Newbigin describes: "Ecclesiology reminds us that the church is the sign, foretaste, instrument and witness of the kingdom of God. The church is the primary means through which God loves the world."
The missional movement meant to express a kingdom-based alternative society. In it, Christian churches would stay connected to the world as a non-anxious presence, without sharing its values, practices and telos. The kingdom of God is active in the secular world, not just in heaven or in the church. Thus the church works in the world with a God who is always already there.
