Reflections on "mission" and "mission in unity"

from the ecumene. A perspective by Rev Jacques Matthey, executive secretary and officer of WCC’s Commission on World Mission and Evangelism (CWME).

I - Mission

1. Holistic understanding of mission

As most if not all churches and bodies represented in this consultation, CWME refers to a holistic vision and definition of mission. There is no single word which can encompass the richness of the church's calling to be and live out Christ's mandate in the world. Usually, thus, holistic is used in polemic against one or the other limitations of the missional calling of the church.

In the context of this consultation I would ask the following question: In our efforts at partnership with other churches, in our challenge to the structures of injustice and our solidarity with the oppressed, in our longing for a more respectful relationship with creation, in short, in all that we rightly consider "mission", how do we enable people to relate personally to God and see themselves consciously as called to live within the realm of God's grace, manifested and made visible in Jesus Christ and powerfully present through the transforming Holy Spirit?

2. Missio Dei
Mission is God's mission and not ours. Since the fifties this is ecumenical consensus. We do however not any more consider missio Dei and missio ecclesiae as opposites, but we relate them. The theme of the forthcoming Athens mission conference is a case in point: “Come, Holy Spirit, heal and reconcile” refers to our longing for God to be faithful to God's mission and let us experience reconciliation in personal and societal life. To heal the world is not in our hands, it is God's mission. We urge God to transform us and reality and at the same time express our confidence and hope in God’s future through this prayer.

However within God’s mission, we are “Called in Christ to be reconciling and healing communities”, as the subtitle of Athens affirms. This is the mission of the church and of all those who recognise themselves as participating in God's mission. It is formulated as a potentially viable ecumenical strategy in world mission. The strategy is to strengthen and multiply communities in which the beatitudes are lived - following Matt. 28. It's a central, yet limited task, within missio Dei.

Here however there is also a problem. Whereas we continue to affirm that God's overall mission in world and creation is the framework for our own life and action, we must not fix God in specific religious or political options and movements, including Christian ones. What do we know with certainty of God's detailed purposes? To speak of God's mission we must open ourselves to discover God’s presence whenever this grace is given to us. We will however not be able to make sense of the terrible consequences of the HIV/AIDS pandemic or the Tsunami wave with a bold affirmation about God's graceful mission in the world or God’s will for shalom. Even the famous "signs of the kingdom" are not clear: Evil persons can do good. Solidarity alone does not prove the presence of God's grace. Our interpretation of God's mission will always remain ambiguous.



3. The essential role of the local church
This is consensus, in ecumenical missiology. That in particular Protestants lack the vision of the church universal is however a serious theological liability on which several studies and writings of the Mission in Unity programme have pointed in a welcome manner. Protestants need the contribution of other denominations to reach an ecclesiology faithful to the Bible, and the tradition of the first churches.

Affirming the essential role of the local church is not without difficulty. If we analyse mission programmes, the term "local church" refers usually to communities linked to those with whom we already are in partnership. Evangelicals are well-known for counting only “theirs” as real churches. But in how many of our programmes do we take the existence of charismatic, Pentecostal or even neo-Pentecostal churches seriously as part of the "local church" (not to speak of the Roman Catholic Church)?

The question of the primacy of the local church in mission is indeed difficult, because we need criteria for discernment and know well that ecclesiology is one of the most debated points in ecumenical discussions (Faith and Order).

4. Processes of healing and reconciliation
In recent times, churches and Christians have increasingly pointed to the richness of Christian traditions for reconciliation in society. I think there is much to share on this, drawing on the tradition of non violent approaches to conflicts, as well as the importance of forgiveness, repentance, justice and other core elements of Christian traditions and liturgies. My concern lies with the credibility test. If we affirm that mission is linked to reconciliation, we lose credibility if we cannot show how we apply this gospel in priority to two major inner-Christian conflict areas:

a) the classic divisions between churches and the difficulties to move beyond denominationalism.

b) the division in mission typical of the last century, between the ecumenical movement and Christians or churches which see themselves as pertaining to evangelical or pentecostal-charismatic mission spiritualities. What does reconciliation mean for mission movements? How can the wounds created by history be healed? Who needs to be considered "victim" or "perpetrator" and what does restorative justice mean? It will be difficult to pretend having competence in reconciliation if we can’t apply it to our internal conflicts.


II - Mission in Unity and the future

Terminology
For CWME, “mission in unity” is a term which must be reserved for ecumenical or inter - denominational efforts. Speaking of "mission in unity" cannot mean the creation of Protestant church or mission councils, nor a covenanting among Reformed churches only, but must aim at creating or reinforcing wider ecumenical mission approaches, at local or international levels.
Using the term “unity” in the context of inter - Protestant cooperation bears the risk of reinforcing denominational thinking (in the large sense of Protestant, including here Lutheran, Reformed, congregationalist, etc.).

Some thoughts on the future
As you know, a process of "reconfiguration of the ecumenical movement" has started. It is an attempt at re-shaping the links and improving the cooperation between the multiplicity of partners, in order to take the changing face of Christianity into account, as well as financial and sociological developments. The following questions are of relevance for this consultation:

- what is best studied and coordinated at interdenominational and world level?
- what is best done at the level of a worldwide denominational organisation (a Christian World Communion e.g.) or in bilateral discussions?
- what must be done at a regional level (Europe, or Africa) and so e.g. in CEC or AACC?
- what is best done at the level of the churches themselves or of groups of churches in mission or mission bodies (CWM, Cevaa, UEM, ACO Fellowship, Mission 21, CANACOM etc)?

The question we must wrestle with is about the level at which it is best to share our experiences and theologies of mission. I believe that for the major questions linked to the missionary mandate, studies and encounters are best done at world and ecumenical level. The differences in missiology one can discover in recent study processes at denominational or regional levels are usually not linked to the denominations or the regional contexts.

At denominational level, study on mission makes sense only if typical questions related to the denominational identity and tradition are addressed, or if a confessional body was specifically qualified for one specific approach. I expect from LWF and WARC to help all churches to struggle with the implications of justification by faith alone, or sola gratia, for the understanding of the significance of other religions in God's mission. The LWF mission document has some good sentences on that, but should have elaborated more, because of its essential significance for a contemporary interpretation of Paul. Most of what I have found in the recent studies and texts did not show significant differences from what could have been reached in ecumenical discussions. With the exception of affirmations related to ecclesiology, differences are not of denominational nature.

In terms of praxis and of operations, I remain of the opinion that networking or organisational integration between various churches and/or mission bodies (like several of the organisations represented here) makes sense, as long as it is not done at the expense of others (by excluding e.g. Roman Catholics or evangelicals or even other churches of the same denomination, but not belonging to the “family”).

Instead of a conclusion
I consider the coming date of 2010 to be crucial for mission in unity. There are two parallel, but different processes which must concern us:

The 2010 horizon provides an opportunity for an intentional dialogue with those organisations and churches of evangelical or charismatic spirituality and with more conservative missiologies (some of them referring to another centennial, of the Azusa Street revival, in 2006). At least some of them do now also formulate mission as including social and political involvement. We have not yet shown how we intend to make the message of the gospel known and multiply the practice of its life-style where it is not yet a priority. We don't want world evangelisation to be done the conservative evangelical way. What do we propose as alternative? It is not sufficient to refer to political advocacy or solidarity with the poor to solve even the poor peoples’ questions of their relation to God.

Second, 2010 is the opportunity to evaluate hopes and frustrations in terms of church unity since 1910. This would allow to link the present search for a reconfiguration of the ecumenical movement with an evaluation of the last hundred years in terms of ecumenical achievements.

In both cases, 2010 will have “mission in unity” as a central concern, provided we do not limit it - as was the case in 1910 - to inner-protestant cooperation in mission.

Jacques Matthey, Mission Study, CWME/WCC