The Gathering, Equipping and Mission Structure of the Church.
Their significance to mission today

Article by Kirk Franklin, Wycliffe International

Introduction
Biblically and functionally, the church has what is necessary, including the organisation and the means, to accomplish God’s mission in the world. The church is God’s instrument for reaching the nations. This body is an organised group of Christians exhibiting distinct principles of worship and service. Within this body are many interconnecting parts. There is a biblical, historical and contemporary basis for the identification of three such parts which in their own right are internal structures in the church. These are a) the church as the gathering of God’s people; b) the church as the training and equipping centre; and c) the church as the sending function of God’s people.

1. The church as a structure: The gathering of God’s people

The biblical framework for structures operating within the church comes from Ephesians 4:16 where terminology of a body is used, ‘He [Christ] makes the whole body grow and build itself up in love. Under the control of Christ, each part of the body does its work. It supports the other parts. In that way, the body is joined and held together’ (NIrV). It is only as each part of the church body is working together properly that the entire body receives the support it needs and can grow as God intended. The church is a group of intertwined structures designed by God to carry out his mandate – the Great Commission (Matthew 28:18-20).

a) The Old Testament structure
Israel’s initial meeting place of worship was the tabernacle, the sanctuary of the congregation, the tent of Jehovah where he dwelt. At first it was moved from place to place before finally being located at Shiloh. The tabernacle included a function of training for the Gentile nations through object-lessons about Yahweh. The Hebrew term qahal had the meaning of an assembly or community that gathered for the religious ceremonies as well as serving as a witness to the nations (Genesis 28:3, 1 Kings 8:14).

King Solomon built the next structure, the temple. In all essential points the temple followed the model of the tabernacle. It consisted of three parts, the porch, the holy place, and the holy of holies. Through these structures the congregation met and God ruled. However it was not what was visible but that which was invisible, ‘the rule of God which in fact constituted the congregation’ (Cotterell, 1981: 28).

b) The New Testament structure
The New Testament era saw the Jews worshipping in the synagogue. But the congregation that emerged after Pentecost was referred to as the ekklesia. This Greek term referred to the gathering of Israel in the Old Testament (Acts 7:38) and the congregation of Christian believers in the New Testament (Ephesians 3:10). This was the assembly of people gathered together to worship God and serve him. There is never the sense that its use was about a physical meeting place.

However, the New Testament church did gather in physical locations including the temple courtyards, Jewish synagogues and private homes of believers (Acts 5:42). Prayer, reading of Scripture (James 1:22; 1 Thessalonians 5:27), baptising new believers, collecting tithes and offerings, teaching, outreach and celebrating the Lord’s Supper were all part of these gatherings.

When Christ was on earth, he indicated his church would be founded upon his death, resurrection, and ascension. The arrival of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost (Acts 2:1-4) commenced the era of the church – an era we still live under. Speaking to his followers after his resurrection, Jesus commissioned the church to make disciples and teach them everything he had taught (Matthew 28:16-20). The book of Acts is the story of the early church’s struggle to be loyal to this mandate.

c) The contemporary church situation
As time has moved on, the contemporary church as we know it today is at a crossroads and its survival is at stake in many post-Christian countries in the western world. The church is grappling with its moorings and its mission in a post-modern world. An inward-looking focus creeps in and steals the church’s passion for mission, for looking beyond its own boundaries. The church must regain a missional focus that mobilises the entire congregation for mission – an outward focus on proclaiming the gospel and providing compassionate acts of service in Christ’s name.

Furthermore, this is an age of closer partnerships with all within the family of God. No one church or Christian organisation has the resources and means to complete the Great Commission. Rather as called for by the Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization’s Manila Manifesto, there is a need for close cooperation within the body of Christ. ‘We affirm the urgent need for churches, mission agencies and other Christian organizations to cooperate in evangelism and social action, repudiating competition and avoiding duplication’ (LCWE).

2. The educational structure of the church: The training of God’s people

a) In the Old Testament
In this era, education was informal and carried out by parents who taught their children at home. The purpose was to know God and to live together in community (Luke 2:52). God was the master teacher (Isaiah 30:20-21 ‘the Lord will be your teacher’) and he taught by word and example (Psalm 78:1 ‘my people listen to my teaching’; Deuteronomy 8:2-3 ‘he tested you to teach you’). In the inter-testament period, synagogues and their associated schools were established where the teacher (rabbi) taught religious truths to the boys.

b) In the New Testament
Parents sent their sons to schools that were associated with the local synagogue where they learned to read the scriptures. For parents who wanted their sons to receive more training, they had to travel to Jerusalem to study under several notable rabbis.

Once Jesus began his earthly ministry, much of it was spent investing in the lives of his twelve disciples. This use of Jesus’ time was incredibly significant because by doing so ‘the incarnate Christ was choosing, training and sending forth a band of apostles’ (Newbigin, 1988: 73).

Thus, the disciples were Jesus’ trainees. They were with him wherever he went and were witnesses to his mighty works and teaching. They regularly asked him questions about his ministry and the Kingdom of God.

At the birth of the New Testament church, Paul is credited for mentoring Timothy and Silas. Through his missionary travels followed up by his letters, he taught doctrinal truths not only to his band of missionary disciples but also the churches in Rome, Corinth, Ephesus, Galatia, Thessalonica, and Colossi.

c) The contemporary scene
As a result of the Enlightenment, theological education became relegated to the seminaries and Bible colleges. For some this means their emphasis has been on academic qualification above spirituality and the application of what is taught. This has resulted in some not having ‘a good record in the past of making themselves accountable to the end-users: the churches, ministries and mission agencies with whom their graduates serve’ (Johnstone, 1998: 176)

However a shift is developing in the arena of formalised biblical training. While seminaries and Bible colleges have been developing at a rapid rate around the world (including offering their courses online or by distance), many larger churches are deciding to formally train their own people. Some suggest there needs to be ‘a shift from traditional, academic-based accrediting systems to church-based assessment procedures’ (Reed, 1992: 6). This change includes empowering local pastors to become resource scholars and mentors. Perhaps the curriculum needs to shift from being based on systematic theology ‘to biblical theology and theology in culture, relevant to the belief framework of a given culture’ (Reed, 1992: 7).

3. The mission structure within the church: The sending out of God’s people

a) In the Old Testament
The Old Testament does not give a mission structure within the gathering of Israel. ‘There is… no indication of the believers of the old covenant being sent by God to cross geographical, religious, and social frontiers in order to win others to faith in Yahweh’ (Bosch, 1991: 17). Yet Israel was expected to be ‘a witness to surrounding people’s of God’s living presence’ (Senior and Stuhlmueller, 1983: 141). Israel often failed in this expectation because of its fear of religious pollution from pagan neighbours or suffering from military defeat and humiliation.

However, there is a clear indication that God’s will was for the nations to know him even though Israel did not call the nations to faith in Yahweh. The problem was that God’s ‘chosen people never seemed to catch God’s vision and purpose – or if they did, they didn’t move from vision to action’ (Terry, Smith, Anderson, 1998: 61). Therefore it was solely God who was the agent of mission, working often in spite of the disobedience of his people.

b) In the New Testament
The concept of mission arising from the New Testament church had its roots at Antioch. Those who went out to do missionary activity, such as Paul and Barnabas (Acts 13:1-4) ‘were the most experienced leaders who knew how to establish churches’ (Reed, 1997: 141). They of course did help new missionaries such as Silas and Timothy.

The gifting of these missionaries was confirmed by the leaders ‘with whom they served and were commended to a specific work, to which they reported back to the sending church (Acts 14:25-28)’ (Reed, 1997: 142). The church maintained its involvement with its missionaries by sending people and finances to assist in the effort (Philippians 1:3-6).

Paul cooperated closely with the local churches in Antioch and Jerusalem. He saw the missionary mandate as one given to the local church which in turn commissioned Barnabas and him to give it initial leadership. The two returned to Antioch after the first missionary journey (Acts 14:26) and ‘gathered the church together’ to make their report’ (v 27). This demonstrated the accountability that Paul and Barnabas established with the sending church.

c) Within the contemporary church
Does mission commence with God or with his church? The missiological concept of missio dei (the mission of God) ‘makes necessary and under girds the “mission of humans” ’ (Terry, Smith, Anderson, 1999: 11). Therefore we can conclude that mission starts with God – Christian mission is God’s mission.

A brief glance at missionary history finds no mention of a missionary society operating within the New Testament church. By the time of Constantine the church became the state church, and had no missionary interest. The monastic movement was born out of this oversight. Then missionary activity was in the hands of the Roman Catholic orders. By the end of the Middle Ages, it was often colonial powers (e.g. Portugal and Spain) which sent out missionaries. The situation improved for the Roman Catholics by the 19th century when the popes developed interest in missions.

The Reformation churches had minimal missionary involvement for almost three centuries. The effort of the 16th and 17th century missionaries was done without any official church participation. It was individuals, kings or colonial powers that saw the formation of various missionary activities. The 18th century saw the Moravian missionary push. Missionaries in the late 18th and early 19th centuries such as William Carey, Adoniram Judson and Hudson Taylor formed their own societies in order to be obedient to God’s call to be missionaries. This process gained momentum especially in the US in the 20th century with 75 mission agencies being formed. Since then the growth of independent mission agencies has not abated with hundreds being formed in western countries alone.

Historically the development of mission societies happened because the church had an inward focus and largely ignored its missionary responsibility. These agencies developed in a parallel sense to the church and are often referred to as para-church organisations. The implication is that they are not part of the church. Concerned about this, the Lausanne Committee for Worldwide Evangelization stated: ‘independence of the church is bad, co-operation with the church is better, service as an arm of the church is best’ (LCWE).

A growing trend among progressive churches is their view that they are solely responsible for all mission activity. The starting point is a vision for mission that grows from within the church rather than external to the church. As this vision grows ‘a church discovers who God has created it to be and what God has directed it to do. Only when a church has such a mandate can it then engage in strategic partnerships and mission work’ (Holm, 2004: 24).

Increasingly the church is recognising that it is the agent for missio dei. The challenge for existing mission agencies (most of whom were formed in the years of the church’s lack of priority in mission) is to reform themselves to serve in partnership with the local church. Is it the beginning of the end of the para-church organisations in the original sense of the word – operating in parallel to the local church? Perhaps it is time to bury this term?

Chart : Summary of Three Structures of the Church

Three Structures:	Church Structure	Training Structure	Mission Structure
Key Statements:	The gathering of God's people	The sending out of God's people	The training of God's people
The Old Testament:	• Qahal: the assembly, community of Israel • The temple: the locus of the presence of God	• To prepare people to know God • Carried out through families	• God, the missionary with a heart for the nations • Israel as a witness to the surrounding peoples of God’s presence
The New Testament	• Ekklesia the gathering of the faithful • Founded on Jesus’ death, resurrection and ascension	• Synagogue schools • Jesus and his 12 disciples • Paul, Timothy and Silas • Paul’s letters to NT churches	• Churches in Acts (Antioch Acts 13) • Paul and Barnabas’ missionary trips
The Contemporary Scene	• Inward looking: maintenance • Outward looking: missional	• Seminaries and Bible colleges • Larger churches training their own • Pastors as trainers	• Mission agencies & societies • Local church-based missions

Three structures and Bible translation
A visual model that could be helpful in picturing the church as a grouping of three parts (gathering for worship, training for disciples and sending for mission) is offered below. Where these three parts intersect is the central theme of worldwide mission. Making the Bible available in the mother tongue is foundational to any form of sustaining mission. This has been proven over and over throughout church history.

However, the reality may be that while mission should be central, it is often an activity or focus on the fringe of the church. Unfortunately the implication then is that making the Bible available in the mother tongue is also seen as a fringe activity of mission. Surely that is not God’s intention for his church or his word.

Conclusion
The church throughout its history has included to various degrees the three structures of gathering, training and mission. While it can be argued that the church is to be central to the operation of these structures, in fact the history of the church shows that often the later two have been left to be led by para-church institutions. However at this point of church history especially considering the fact that the Great Commission is not yet completed, the local church should be more central in theological education and mission.

The church of the 21st century has a long way to go in achieving this ideal and requires the cooperation and partnership of all parts of the church that are concerned about the Great Commission.

Bibliography
Bosch, D. (1991). Transforming mission: paradigm shifts in theology of mission. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books.

Cotterell, P. (1981). The eleventh commandment. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press.

Holm, J. (2004). Church centered mission: transforming the church to change the world. Mall Publishing Company.

Johnstone, P. (1998). The church is bigger than you think. Fearn, Ross-shire, UK: Christian Focus Publications.

[LCWE] Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization. Lausanne Covenant and Manila Manifesto. (www.lausanne.com).

Newbigin, L. (1998). The household of God. Carlisle, UK: Paternoster Press.

Reed, J. (1992). ‘Church-based Theological Education: Creating a New Paradigm’. The Paradigm Papers: New Paradigms for the Post-modern Church. Ames, Iowa: LearnCorp.

Reed, J. (1995). ‘Church-based Theology: Creating a New paradigm’. The Paradigm Papers: New Paradigms for the Post-modern Church. Ames, Iowa: LearnCorp.

Reed, J. (1997). ‘Church-Based Missions: Creating a New Paradigm’. The Paradigm Papers: New Paradigms for the Post-modern Church. Ames, Iowa: LearnCorp.

Senior, D. and Stuhlmueller, C. (1983). The biblical foundations of mission. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books.

Terry, J.M, Smith, E and Anderson, J. (1998). Missiology; an introduction to the foundations, history and strategies of world mission. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

Back | Next | Menu | Close