The following article is from the October 2026 MIT Monthly newsletter. If you would like to sign up to receive this newsletter from the Missional Initiatives Team, you can fill out this form.
Defining Missional
By Cam Roxburgh, VP of Missional Initiatives
What’s at Stake?
For the past 30 years, many followers of Jesus have both embraced and tried to live into what it means to be missional. The problem has been “defining” missional.
Those who were part of the original Gospel and Our Culture Network have become so disenchanted with the watering down of the term they are abandoning it altogether. Over time, many have brought a reductionistic perspective to the term that has clearly departed from a theologically rigorous understanding.
There are three major issues that we must alert ourselves to or we will also be guilty of changing the meaning of the term and, thereby, bearing false witness to God.
- What did the original authors of the term mean when they first used it? We must take into account the meaning that the term had for those who first used it.
- It is about God (missio Dei). We must be careful not to reduce the term to being about us. It is his mission, which he invites us into.
- It is about God’s identity (nature), not just about his or our action/activity. To reduce it to activity is a complete misunderstanding of God and of his nature.
What Have Others Said?
It may help to look at what others have said. Thanks to ChatGPT for the time saving, but please note an editorial comment or two by me in some of the definitions.
- Darrell Guder (Missional Church, 1998) – “With the term missional we emphasize the essential nature and vocation of the church as God’s called and sent people.”
- Lesslie Newbigin (Open Secret, 1995) –“The church lives in the midst of history as a sign, instrument, and foretaste of the reign of God.”
- Christopher Wright (The Mission of God, 2006) – “Our committed participation as God’s people, at God’s invitation and command, in God’s own mission within the history of God’s world.”
- David Bosch (Transforming Mission, 1991) – “Mission is understood as being derived from the very nature of God.” Later, he stated a summary of Karl Barth and others teaching in saying, “It is not that our church has a mission, but rather that God’s mission has a church.
- Michael Frost and Alan Hirsch (The Shaping of Things to Come, 2003) – “A working definition of missional church is that it is a community of God’s people that defines itself, and organizes its life around [. . .] God’s mission to the world.” (Editorial: as we move into the 2000’s, “missional” is gaining in popularity, but it is also beginning to show signs of moving towards what the church does rather than who God is (and who his people are). At least, my two brothers here get the communal aspect correct, as well as recognizing that it is God’s mission. But you can hear the fraying of the fact that it is about identity and not activity.)
- Ed Stetzer (Planting Missional Churches, 2006) “Missional implies taking the approach of a missionary—being indigenous to the culture, seeking to understand and learn, adapting to the mission field.” (Editorial: now we see even further movement away. Missional in this book, and even in the title, has become a model of church and is based on the activity of the individual. This was a huge part of the fraying of what the term actually meant to those who first used it. This kind of language is guilty of bringing about an activity without the formation of a people.)
We could spend even more time in looking at the migration of the word over time as we get closer to today’s date. Many have come to view the definition of missional as being closely related to what was the emerging church. This could not be further from the truth, although at times, there are reasons why people end up there. Please do not put missional and emerging anywhere near each other.
What I Am Trying to Say. . .
During my time on the NAB Executive Team, I have tried to alert us to the shift in language and, therefore, the shift in meaning and the theological implications. It is not just a simple refocusing on the way we use the term; it is a fundamental shift in how we see God.
I have stolen from many of the above to try and define it. Newbigin and Bosch, in particular, but heavily influenced by Guder and the Gospel and our Culture Network. We have consistently stated that a missional church is one that understands there is “a renewed theological vision of the church serving as a sign, servant/instrument, and foretaste of the Kingdom.” From my very first talk at the 2012 Triennial in Orlando, Florida, I have focused on 1 Peter 2:9 for a complete understanding of what missional is all about:
- Genos (Chosen People) – Our identity is in Christ and in community. This identity in itself is part of what it means to be missional.
- Ethnos (Royal Priesthood / Holy Nation) – Our character is being formed to become like Christ in every aspect. It is not possible to be missional without having our character shaped into the likeness of Christ.
- Laos (God’s special possession) – Our vocation is to join with Christ in the redemption of all things. Being missional means we join in with what we see the Father doing.
In light of the brief commentary above, let me end by giving my definition of what it means to be a missional church.
The church is a missionary community of God’s people who find their identity in Christ, are continually becoming more like Christ, and participate with Christ in what he is doing in the world.