DO YOU KNOW WHAT YOUR MISSIONARY IS DOING?
STATEMENT
Churches should support biblically qualified missionaries by understanding the missionary’s ministry goals and philosophy and by partnering with them in the ongoing challenges and joys of the work.
Article Written By Brian Parks and Leeann StilesLet’s say you are the owner of a company that makes widgets. If you wanted to open a new widget manufacturing facility in a different country, how would you decide who to send to run your new facility? Your ideal leader would need to know the business thoroughly, understand how to build and direct the new plant, and be willing to stay in close touch with headquarters about their progress and results.
Now, think of a task that’s much more important than building widgets in foreign countries: evangelizing and planting self-sustaining churches among the world’s least-reached peoples. Who should a church send and support in these efforts? Only the most qualified, spurred on by the best ongoing care and support.
Churches are the anchor point in the “sending chain” of missions. Let me explain. Churches win people to Christ and disciple their flock into maturity (Eph 4:12–16). Likely candidates for missions work are identified (Acts 13:1–3) and are eventually connected with a mission agency. The agency then usually pairs them with a team on the field and the newly minted missionary begins ministry. That’s the “sending chain.” Each serves a vital role. But the church’s role in deciding who they send and how they’ll support the work is critical, and it’s often where the most significant mistakes are made.
I met a good friend who was a missionary in the Middle East for years. He had just spoken at a missions conference for a large church in the US. I asked him how it had gone. He furrowed his brow and said, “You know, it’s a wonderful church. The people there love Jesus. The church staff are on point when teaching the Word of God. Many have come to Christ because they proclaim a clear gospel message.”
“That sounds wonderful,” I said, “But you seem to have some reservations?”
“Well,” he said, “The missionaries they support are fine people; some live sacrificial lives in hard places. I suspect that they are the type of people who would be elder-qualified, according to the Scriptures. But Brian, they are locked into bad methods of missions. Some are producing translations of the Scriptures that twist the meaning of God’s Word to satisfy local culture; others are encouraging converts to stay and worship in the mosque as a witness to other Muslims and one missionary claimed to have seen fantastic numbers of converts, but that missionary seemed to have a weak understanding of conversion. All the missionaries seemed good-hearted. But frankly, I came away depressed. I don’t know how to speak to churches about the bad practices they’re supporting on the field.”
I understand his frustration. I've encountered many such missionaries in my 21 years in the Middle East. I’m eager to give these people the benefit of the doubt; after all, they’ve picked up and moved their family overseas at a significant cost for the sake of the gospel. And yet, unless churches make sure their missionaries are clear on the gospel, understand a biblical definition of conversion, and can define a church, then they are in danger of supporting work that celebrates and advances unbiblical philosophies of ministry. Being a Christian and having good intentions is not enough. Misguided missionaries do far more harm than good.
This can be avoided if the sending church understands its own philosophy of ministry, which will help them to send the right workers and provide the right kind of ongoing support.
What Can Be Done
For effective missionary deployment, the sending church's leadership must be confident in the prospective missionary across three critical areas: character, convictions, and competencies. Although these are explored in earlier parts of this book, this chapter focuses on how sending churches can best oversee and care for their missionaries. Thus, it's vital to reiterate why these categories are not only qualifications but are foundational for establishing trust that the missionary will consistently demonstrate good judgment and discernment on the field.
Character
The first missionaries the early church sent out were two experienced elders of the church at Antioch, Paul and Barnabas (Acts 13:1-3). So, the character qualifications for elders in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9 and the qualifications for deacons in 1 Timothy 3:8-13 are good places to start. Missionaries should be mature in their faith (Ephesians 4:13) and evidence the fruits of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-24) in abundance. All missionaries need not be elders in a church before they leave for the field, but elder-qualified men should lead mission teams. Though we suggest using the passages about elder and deacon qualifications, we know the mission field also needs qualified women. Women working in the missions field should have the character qualifications of an elder or deacon. Churches should ask, “Would we want this missionary candidate taking a leadership position in our church?” If the answer is “probably not,” then it begs the question, “Why are you sending them to the mission field?”. With the stresses and strains of cross-cultural ministry, we need people of greater character in missions rather than those of less mature character.
Convictions
Missionary candidates must know Scripture, sound theology, and grasp a biblical philosophy of ministry (2 Timothy 2:15). Here, we should start with the basics. Is the candidate able to explain the gospel clearly from Scripture and refute distortions of the gospel? Do they have a biblical understanding of conversion and the church? Does the candidate know where to go in the Bible to address the myriad issues believers and non-believers will likely ask about them? Have they demonstrated commitment to a solid ecclesiology? A missionary without sound doctrine and theological understanding is like a warrior without weapons and armor! And the best theology won’t lead to gospel fruitfulness if it’s not employed using an orthodox philosophy of ministry.
Competencies
Do the candidates have the necessary ministry skills (Colossians 1:10; 1 Timothy 2:8-10; 2 Timothy 2:22-26) to carry out the philosophy of ministry for their particular missionary work. Have they been fruitful in a similar kind of ministry in their culture? Have they led people to Christ and discipled them toward maturity? Do they eagerly involve themselves in cross-cultural ministry where they live now? A missionary candidate who doesn’t have a track record of fruitful ministry in their own culture is unlikely to miraculously become fruitful simply by being commissioned and taking a long plane flight to distant lands.
Of course, specific training might be needed before a missionary candidate is qualified to go to a particular mission field. I knew a young woman in one church who shared with me that she had a calling to go and minister to the people of North Korea, one of the most closed countries in the world. But she didn’t know Korean and hadn’t ever tried to learn. She’d never been to northeast China and didn’t know the first thing about the region's culture. It was wonderful that this young woman had a heart and desire to see the gospel spread in North Korea, but she would have needed lots of specific training before it would have been prudent to go.
Is the Mission Strategy Biblical?
The reason these three areas are important for “knowing what your missionary is doing” is that there is a high level of trust required of a sending church for their missionary.
This is perhaps the least understood component of a competent missionary. Churches must send men and women who can reject unsound philosophies of ministry that are currently employed in missions. Ordinary church members or even church elders might not know about many of these without significant reading and help from experienced missionaries. Mission strategies like the insider movement, rapid church planting movements, and various ways employed to reach “oral cultures” are damaging. Both a sending church and a missionary candidate need to have some convictions about these practices before they choose an agency and certainly before they leave for the field. These convictions should be formed alongside elders and trustworthy missiologists. Churches and candidates should avoid mission agencies and teams that use the strategies and philosophies they believe unsound. This seems obvious, but it’s followed less often than you think.
I once attended a regional conference for missionaries. A researcher presented a paper in which he interviewed Muslim converts about what was most crucial in their coming to faith. The top two survey answers were reading the Bible with a Christian and having a personal relationship with a Christian. And yet, the leaders of the conference persisted in saying that the most important thing for workers in the region to focus on was to pray for Muslims to have more dreams and visions of Jesus. I was dumbfounded. These workers were being taught to chase deficient and unbiblical strategies. Meanwhile, our ministry was seeing much fruit because, month after month, Christians were simply engaging people in Bible study in the context of a relationship.
Staying Informed and Involved
This might surprise a sending church to hear but it’s true: once a qualified candidate has been commissioned and sent, the sending church’s work is just beginning. They need to pursue regular communication with the missionary so that they can hear about the challenges being faced, specific prayer requests, and the ministry work. Timely and transparent communication is essential to help the church stay informed and involved. It also keeps the missionary accountable for working in the ministry “as unto the Lord” (Colossians 3:17). Often, a missionary’s team and, if possible, local church on the field becomes their primary source of pastoral care and oversight. That’s good and right! But the sending church should never abdicate their responsibility of ongoing care and connection. When either the missionary or the church becomes complacent in communication, the lifeline of support and prayer that flows in both directions becomes strained and weak. The Apostle Paul regularly returned to Antioch and other supporting churches to report about the ministry; a faithful missionary in our day will want to do the same.
That being said, sending churches are often unsure of how to help from so far away. Here are some beneficial practices that sending churches can employ:
Carefully planned visits from pastors or qualified lay leaders to observe and encourage the missionaries while on the field. Coordinate your visits so that you avoid busy times for the missionary.
Working to understand various issues in mission strategies. Go beyond the superficial, take a deep dive into modern missionary strategies and be able to evaluate strategies biblically.
Educating church members on how to be in touch with and care for missionaries well. Make sure they understand security concerns and the communication protocols that go along with them.
Employing creative ways to let missionaries tell ministry stories for the church. Zoom and recorded video can be a big help here.
Working hard to understand the missionary’s life, challenges, and ministry
Make sure to develop a good relationship with the field church so that when problems arise (and problems always arise) you can hear two sides to the story.
Periodic messages and emails letting your missionary know you are praying for them
Carefully choosing how many different missionaries the church supports so that the church is maximally invested in fewer ministries rather than minimally spread out among many.
Being thoughtful when planning in-person visits to your church- these are an important connection between your congregation and the missionaries you support. Think through how often you should require a visit so that you establish a good relationship yet aren’t taking the missionary away from their work too often. You’ll also need to balance maximizing the time they are with you without exhausting the person and/or family. Be sensitive that they have other churches to visit as well as family to see.
What if you have concerns about the work of a missionary already on the field?
Say you’ve connected well with a missionary your church supports, and become aware that their philosophy of ministry is out of line with your church’s convictions. Don’t be surprised; many missionaries go to the field without a strong missiology! This is a difficult issue needing much discernment. On the one hand, they are living sacrificial lives in challenging places. They love the Lord and earnestly desire to see people come to Christ. On the other hand, their methods seem based on an unbiblical understanding of conversion, discipleship, or ecclesiology.
Each situation is unique, and there isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution. But here are some guidelines to consider:
In your quest for healthy missions practices, remember that your missionaries are brothers and sisters in Christ. Pray for them and be concerned for their spiritual well-being.
Study up on the philosophy of ministry that concerns you. Read material from trusted sources and seek wisdom from missionaries familiar with those methods.
Ask questions gently, but do ask many to make sure you understand their thoughts and reasoning, what influences them, and the challenges they are facing in ministry.
Consider whether this is a matter of training. For example, would it help the missionary to learn more about what makes a church healthy or to grow in discerning true conversion? Are they open to that? This could happen in their location, but perhaps they would benefit from some time off the field and under the leadership and teaching of your church.
Find out if there are other missionaries nearby who have a ministry you would consider healthy and biblical. Could you encourage your supported worker to learn from them and pursue a similar strategy?
If you and the missionary cannot agree on their work, do your best to end the partnership amicably. Kind but clear communication is essential.
Missions often requires patience and long-term faithfulness. Missionaries can succumb to the fear that their partners will only want to hear about the “breakthroughs” and the “good news.” But transparent, pastorally driven relationships between the supporting church back home and the missionary on the field will teach congregations to have a realistic understanding about missionaries and their work.
The goal of missions is to make disciples of all nations. Jesus has entrusted this eternally valuable task to his church (Matthew 28:18-20). If church leaders are biblically qualified, then surely those who take the gospel to the nations should be as well. And once they arrive on the field, churches and their missionaries should partner well to share in the challenges and joys of taking the good news to the world.
