WHY DO GOOD CHURCHES SEND BAD MISSIONARIES?
STATEMENT
Churches should take the lead in global missions by properly assessing and equipping prospective missionaries instead of deferring this responsibility solely to mission agencies. In this task, churches should emphasize a candidate’s qualification, vision, and preparation over and above subjective call.
Article Written by Blaine BoydA young couple, fairly new to the church, asked to meet with the elders. Much to the elders’ surprise, the couple informed them that they were going to be missionaries. They applied and then were assessed and approved by a mission agency. Now here they were, asking for their “home church” to sign off on becoming their “sending church.” With a simple affirmation from the elders, the church could send some of their own to labor for the gospel among the nations. How exciting! Right?
Wisely, the elders pushed pause. They could sense that this couple loved Jesus and cared deeply for the nations. But the elders had no reason to believe the couple was gifted for ministry. Were these people evangelistic? Were they fruitful disciplers? There seemed to be no reason for answering these questions in the affirmative. The elders also couldn’t identify anyone in a discipleship relationship with either of them. Though they certainly didn’t seem disqualified, but there was no reason to affirm that this couple was both called to and equipped for the missionary task. So the elders reasoned they could reassess the couple in a year or so.
Who Sends Missionaries? Churches vs. Agencies
Here’s the sad reality: the most unusual thing about the story above is that a group of elders would ever question the process. It’s extremely common for prospective missionaries to pursue international ministry without their church’s counsel. This makes at least some logical sense. After all, aren’t mission agencies the experts? Shouldn’t they know what it takes to be a missionary? Aren’t they the proper entities to assess, approve, and send a missionary? While this might seem logical, it isn’t what the Bible teaches. Mission agencies are not in the Bible. The local church is. Therefore, local churches are responsible to send missionaries.
Mission agencies can certainly partner with a church’s efforts to obey the Great Commission. In fact, the good ones, the ones worth supporting, usually do. However, we should never allow those mission agencies to usurp the authority and responsibility of the local church.
Paul was an apostle called by Christ to be a missionary to the Gentiles (c.f. Acts 9, 26:15–18). He was also sent out by the local church. In Acts 13, Paul gathers with the church in Antioch and the Holy Spirit set apart him and Barnabas for mission work. Luke reports that the local church “laid their hands on them and sent them off” (Acts 13:3). The laying on of hands communicates a sense of blessing and commending. It acknowledges the church’s authoritative recognition of the Holy Spirit’s call upon someone. We see something similar with the recognition of elders in 1 Timothy 5:22. Laying hands on a missionary is the church’s symbolic affirmation of a missionary’s qualification and preparedness.
Assessing Prospective Missionaries
If the church sends missionaries, then the church should also assess those missionaries. Determining someone’s readiness for mission work requires more than applications and interviews. Their readiness is demonstrated in their community and local church. The best agency assessor in the world can’t have a front-row perspective on that.
Time for another story. A young family was living overseas, mostly for adventure and experience. While they lived there, they developed a heart for preaching the gospel to those who haven’t heard the truth of Christ. They returned to the US to find an agency and be sent out intentionally. In the process, their local church noticed some concerns with their marriage. Their elders convinced them to slow down and work on their marriage before launching out. This delayed their launch by over two years but likely saved them from inevitable conflict In other words, it was an unquantifiable blessing. This family had all the missionary zeal you could ever hope to see. But they weren’t ready.
So how does a church determine who is ready? It must look for qualified character, a clear vision for biblical ministry, and adequate preparation.
1. Qualified in Character
Unfortunately, stories of moral failure among missionaries are not unusual. Like all Christians, missionaries continue to battle the flesh wherever they go. Because the mission field is an incredibly stressful environment—a spiritual pressure cooker—weaknesses and idols of the heart are quickly exposed. That’s why character must come before competency.
Scripture provides a helpful framework for prospective missionaries in 1 Timothy 3. Here’s a good rule of thumb: if a person isn’t qualified to serve on staff in your church, then do not send them overseas.
Not all missionaries are men who plant churches and serve in elder roles. And praise God for the many single women who have laid down their lives to serve Christ and His gospel globally! These women, and women who serve alongside their husbands, ought to meet the qualifications of deacons, which are very similar to the list for elders (cf. 1 Tim. 3).
The bottom line is that missionaries are serving the church and its mission, and we should expect them to reflect the character of Christ.
Unqualified missionaries wreak havoc on the field. A thin assessment process will affirm a woman known by her church for divisiveness. She’ll make it overseas and onto an East Asian team and, guess what, she will bring her divisiveness with her. As a result, significant amounts of time and energy will be diverted from gospel work. The sending church must lead the way on a missionary’s character assessment. Character is more likely to observed over years, not days or weeks. Agencies may help the assessment process. They may know what specific questions to ask. But they cannot replace the sending church.
2. Clear Vision of Biblical Ministry
A woman told me she was going to move to the Middle East. I asked what she was planning to do there. She wasn’t sure; the Lord would show her when she arrived. I asked who was sending her; a mission agency, she told me. I asked about her church’s involvement. She told me she went to three churches, so they were only minimally involved in her plans.
Yikes, red flags were everywhere!
How can we know that someone is qualified and prepared for missionary work if they don’t have a clear vision for the work? The church shouldn’t send people on Christian adventures. “I will figure it out when I get there” is a bad stewardship of a church’s God-given resources.
A clear vision is more than just knowing the goal; it is also knowing how that goal will get accomplished. For example, a missionary who wants to plant churches needs to have a strategy. Is the strategy biblical? Many mission agencies have solid theology and clear missiology, but some take an “anything goes” approach to strategy. Sure, some missionaries of “anything goes” agencies might be doing faithful biblical missions, while others aren’t. Put simply, a sending church needs to assess the agency, too.
Sending missionaries without a clear and solid, biblical vision is a gamble. Those sent into these agencies without that vision can easily fall into a pragmatic, “whatever works” mindset. And we can certainly agree that gambling is not good stewardship.
3. Prepared for Missions
A prospective missionary can have the necessary character and biblical vision for missions but still not be ready. Not everyone is prepared for the work. Some people simply don’t have the gifts to do it. Some people aren’t equipped for it. Remember our couple from the opening story. It wasn’t their character or vision that was lacking. They were simply ill-prepared.
A good rule of thumb is if a person is not making disciples in their home culture, then they won’t make disciples in a foreign culture. Simply taking the title “missionary” doesn’t magically make someone fruitful in ministry. We set up young missionaries to fail when we expect them to be effective in ways we’ve never seen them be effective in our church.
Sometimes, this is a gifting issue. If so, we should have the courage to have hard but loving conversations that discourage them from pursuing mission work, at least for a time. Often, the person needs more discipleship. Maturity doesn’t happen automatically during a mission agency’s orientation month.
We’re all eager to see people sent to the nations, but our eagerness shouldn’t eclipse prudence. Prudence will often say, “Slow down!” We need to do the hard work of thoroughly preparing prospective missionaries for the task. This preparation might include working on practical skills, theological training, or character development. Regardless, it will take intentionality and effort.
The Danger of “Calling”
What about the evangelical trump card? You know, when someone says something like, “But God is calling me!” Who wants to disagree with God? Churches are often afraid to question this kind of certainty. But if a person is unqualified in character, unclear on biblical mission, and unprepared for the mission task, then we can be confident that God is not calling them—at least not yet.
While preparing to go overseas, people frequently asked about my “calling” during fundraising events. They were surprised when I told them I understood my calling to missions when my local church elders affirmed me and laid hands on me. Through this, I was confident that God was calling me. This doesn’t mean my desire to go was unimportant throughout the process. It would be foolish to send someone who didn’t have a zeal for the nations. But zeal cannot be the predominant factor. Yes, churches should foster zeal, not squash it. But it is better to subdue an untethered zeal than send a zealous but unqualified missionary. Sending someone prematurely to the mission field is dangerous both to their soul and the witness of Christ.
Conclusion
No church intends to send bad missionaries. The key to sending good missionaries is for the church to take hold of their responsibility for sending effective missionaries. This duty lies firmly with the local church, not only mission agencies. While agencies can be helpful partners, they should never overshadow the church's biblical authority and duty to carefully assess and equip prospective workers. By thoroughly evaluating a candidate's character, clear vision for biblical ministry, and proven preparedness—rather than depending on subjective notions of "calling"—churches can make sure that those they send are truly ready for the rigorous and vital work of global missions. This thoughtful, deliberate approach safeguards both the well-being of missionaries and the integrity of the gospel witness among the nations, ultimately advancing God's kingdom with wisdom and faithfulness.
