|
 The
word means, basically, a sending forth, and the mission of the
church is to do what it is “sent forth” to do — its
assigned work. A “missionary” would be one who is sent forth
— the word “apostle” being about as close as any greek
derived term. “Apostle” is used in a special sense (the
twelve) and in a more general sense in the N.T. (See “apostle”
in Vine’s Expository Dictionary.)
No
doubt this is the origin of the application of the word to men
sent into foreign countries to preach the word. But a strange
metamorphosis has taken place. “Sent” to preach Christ, and
cause people to obey the commands of the gospel for the
remission of their sins, a “missionary” was still a
Christian in all his relationships of life, and showed his
concern for social, civic, economic, and ‘ocher problems of
those whom he sought to teach. He sought to help the less
fortunate in these fields — incidentally — subordinate
to his “mission,” although having its own importance.
Gradually
the incidental and subordinate grew in importance. Backward
countries encouraged "missionaries” who would teach
school, operate hospitals, teach agriculture; and this opened
doors that had been closed to “gospel preachers.” Opened
them for schools, etc., NOT for preaching. Now the preaching had
to be done “On the side” — incidentally and subordinate to
the secular functions.
And
as the “social gospel” concept grew, and even in the “States”
became the dominate characteristic of local church work, it
became commonplace to think of a
|
|
“missionary” as one who supervised a “compound”
or “station” for secular education, medical treatment, etc.
He had to be well qualified for this. His ability to preach the
gospel was of little importance — he did little or none of it
anyhow.
Recently
I noticed a report in the Christian Chronicle regarding one of
“our” (liberal) missionaries. Quote: “In 1961 he went to
Africa as a missionary. He taught school and sponsored a Boy
Scout troop that excelled in trailing and tracking... From July
1967 to August 1969, — was in Nazareth, Israel, as a minister.
He served as superintendent of Galilee Christian High School, an
accredited high school open to all religions and nationalities
... He did a detailed study of Biblical places and took hundreds
of slides and became quite proficient as a guide of the Holy
Lands.” I know little about the man, but I know that whoever
wrote that report pictured that man as anything but “one sent”
to save men’s souls.
The
apostle Paul went (1) to turn souls to Christ, and (2) to
strengthen and confirm the disciples. Whatever else he did (and
I do not doubt his well - rounded interest) it was of such
secondary importance as to call for little or no mention. He was
a “queer” missionary indeed, by today’s standards.
Failure
to put spiritual matters first in our dealing with others, is a
pretty good indication they are not first in our own life. Isn’t
it time we go where and for what we are sent?
[Previous
Article] [Next
Article]
|
