I’m not talking about finances; that is for another article, for another time. In other words, by what means does God choose to accomplish His mission for redeeming man back to Himself, that man might worship Him forever? Yes, God has chosen man to be His mouthpiece through the preaching of the Word of God, but more specifically, His means is the church. We know it as the “Great Commission,” and it did not come without the power needed to accomplish the task. “But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.” Acts 1:8. The church was not only given the assignment, but was given the authority, or power to do so.
I want to be careful how I say this, and I certainly do not wish to offend anyone, but the assignment and the power were not given to the mission board, it was given to the local church. It is not my place, or my desire, to be critical of mission boards, or suggest they haven’t filled a void that was, and is, necessary to be filled, but that void only exists because the local church has failed in their assignment. Of course I’m not speaking of every local church, but generally speaking, for most, their focus has become so “Jerusalem” minded they have found it easier to outsource the “uttermost” part of the Great Commission. Bible colleges have focused on having the choice of either Pastoral Major or Missions Major, but have come short of properly training those for the pastorate how to send those for missions. Therefore most pastors lack the understanding and knowledge of the process involved in sending out a missionary that has been called by the Holy Spirit, to be separated unto a specific work in a foreign land. The result is that when God does call out a member of the congregation to do a specific work in missions it seems logical to default to sending them to a mission board.
I’m not suggesting that mission boards should be abandoned, because they are providing an essential need. However, consider the people resources, and the finances, that are consumed with the hundreds of mission boards that exist in the United States alone. Often times the most productive missionaries are brought off the field to be directors and fund raisers for the mission board. Moreover, the duplication in facilities, office staffs and equipment is enormous. Isn’t there a better way? I believe there is. Consider the idea that individuals, with the knowledge and experience, assist the local church to do their assignment. I know what many will say, “That is exactly what our mission board does.” That may be true, but answer the following questions: Why must there be a separate entity? Who handles the finances? Which entity is the missionary solely responsible to? Why is the missionary treated differently than other church staff? I think these are legitimate questions, and I certainly don’t have all the answers. However, this is why there is a great need for specific training to help churches and missionaries fulfill their God given assignment. What we need is training from those who have the knowledge to come a long side the pastor and missionary to help them understand and implement the details involved for a missionary to be sent out from their local church. I also realize that every local church is not going to be where they need to be spiritually or organizationally to attempt this effort on their own, but perhaps more could if the assistance was available.
Another huge benefit to the local church sending out their own missionaries is the mutual blessing for the missionary and the church. It engages the congregation directly into the work of missions in a much greater way. The local church of the missionary is usually where their family and friends serve and will likely be part of a support team that is vital to the missionary’s success. Acts 13 is the best model we find in the Scriptures for the “sending out” of missionaries, and it was from the local church.
The mission effort isn’t just for the few called to do specific works, but every member is called to participate at some level. For the local church sent missionary this scenario is more likely to be experienced.
I know the process isn’t easy. It is far easier to simply send the missionary candidate to the mission board and not be encumbered with the details, but God’s best way is usually the harder way. I would suggest that mission boards could play a vital role in the education and facilitating process in a movement to redirect energies back through the local church in helping them do that which only they have been given the assignment and the power to do.
