Why the Missional Movement Must Not Fail

In 1888, the intrepid Norwegian explorer Fridtjof Nansen made the first crossing of the previously impenetrable island of Greenland. He was only 27 years old. Other more famous explorers like Adolf Erik Nordenskiöld and Robert Peary had previously attempted the crossing, setting out from the inhabited western coast and trekking eastward for about 160km (100 mi), before being forced back by the freezing mountainous conditions.

Nansen tried a different and more treacherous strategy. He started from the wild and uninhabited east coast and undertook a phenomenal one-way journey towards the populated west. It meant that he had no line of retreat to a safe base; the only way to go would be forward, a strategy that suited Nansen’s dogged personality completely.

His ship struggled to make landing on the craggy east coast, but once finally unloaded, Nansen and his crew of five others set off westward.

There was no plan B.


If any of his crew complained about wanting to give up, he could honestly tell them the only option was to press on toward safety.

It feels like that to me with those currently baulking at continuing the missional conversation. I hear some complaining that the results aren’t commensurate with the talk (whatever “results” might be in this situation); others suggest the missional movement is all a bit passe now; some publishers don’t want authors to use the word in their titles.

But I find myself, like Fridtjof Nansen, asking, “What’s your plan B?”

What are we going to turn back to? Hasn’t the church tried every iteration of the business-as-usual model? Church growth theory. The contemporary worship scene. The charismatic movement. Neo-Calvinism. Better worship, better preaching, better small groups, more spirit-led ministry, more Bible teaching, more this, more that.

And all the while, sadly, the church continues to decline, dramatically in some places, less so in others.

In Britain, the scale of the Church of England’s atrophy was starkly set out by figures presented to its general assembly recently that show church attendance will continue to fall for the next 30 years.

In the US, the Southern Baptist Convention continues to experience a membership freefall, prompting some to ask whether America’s biggest denomination is on the slippery slope to extinction. Even the megachurches – the exemplars of church growth theory – aren’t reversing the decline. In the US today there are more megachurches than ever before, but there are less people attending church than ever before. It’s just not working.

So if we abandon the missional paradigm, what’s your plan B? Even more better worship? Even more better preaching?

It’s like we’re halfway across Greenland and there’s no way back. There’s no hope back there. The only way is forward. The only way, as far as I can see is for the church to embrace its missionary vocation and to allow the mission of God to shape and catalyze all that we are.

The missional conversation isn’t a fireside chat about new forms of worship or a more attractive model of “doing church.”


It’s a revolutionary manifesto about God’s people finally coming to see themselves as a sent people – not merely sent to drag others back to a church service, but sent into every nook and cranny of contemporary society to alert everyone to the beautiful, peaceable, joyous, constructive reign of King Jesus, and to sow the values of that reign into the culture we find ourselves in.

This has implications for worship and discipleship, but also for business, politics, town planning, the environment, farming methods, proper use of resources, art, architecture, healing, education, and more. The church has no plan b. It must not retreat from the world, but should be a bridgehead into it.

Tom Wright once wrote, “If it is true, as I have argued, that the whole world is now God’s holy land, we must not rest as long as that land is spoiled and defaced. This is not an extra to the church’s mission. It is central.”

Let’s not listen to the voices complaining about the missional movement. Let’s resist the temptation to turn back to the old formulas that seem safe, but which we know no longer work. We need to stay the course until every Christian – ordained or lay, female or male, rich or poor – knows themselves to be a sent one, contributing to the restoration and renewal of all things and pointing others to Jesus.

I’ll leave the last word to the undaunted Dr Nansen:

“Never stop because you are afraid. Never keep a line of retreat: it is a wretched invention. Sure, the difficult takes a little time; but the impossible only takes a little longer.”

Share to:

Subscribe to my blog


The views expressed are my own and do not necessarily represent the official views of Morling College or its affiliates and partners.

Latest Blogs

Picturing the Resurrection

The best paintings of the resurrection don’t include Jesus in them. At least it seems that way. Seven years ago (was it really that long??)

The Perfect Ash Wednesday Picture

What an eccentric painting this is. Carl Spitzweg’s 1860 painting Ash Wednesday depicts a clown, dressed presumably for Mardi Gras, languishing in a dark and

The Fierce Mother Heart of God

My three-year-old grandson Jarrah has been unwell recently. Really unwell. He has been seriously ill with what we’ve now discovered was a horrible combination of

12 thoughts on “Why the Missional Movement Must Not Fail

  1. Such a refreshing voice

    1. Most of the missional movement is not focused on disciple making and therefore it to will fail. it is Jesus’ style disciple making, not the missional movement that is the only viable future. Saying that the missional movement will affect worship and discipleship shows a minimalistic view on discipleship that will not do …

      1. Bobby,
        Pretty sure discipleship follows mission… we follow Christ as Father, Son and Spirit sent Him into the world. God’s very essence is mission; obviously becoming and making disciples is important, but it follows a recognition of ourselves as God’s people sent into the world.

        1. I agree with David. The missional conversation is rooted in a belief in the universal reign of the triune God and our responsibility to alert others to it by word and deed in every aspect of our lives. To achieve this magnificent task we need a different kind of disciple. I agree the movement will fail if we don’t disciple people well, but I think the paradigm comes before the practice. Giving people a vision of God’s mission that transcends mere recruitment and contributes to the restoration and renewal of all things is primary.

          1. Thankyou, thankyou, thankyou Mike! This is what my soul has been yearning to hear, as I grapple with the internal disjunct in my 2-fold roles, between ministering within a traditional context, at the same time as ministering in a completely new context as a pioneer/church planter. Thankyou for helping me to articulate what I have intuitively known – that we have forgotten what it is to see ourselves as ‘sent people’. Your words have lifted me today!

  2. Truth from a fearless voice.

  3. No turning back.

  4. To die upon this hill; to live for but eternity in the Kingdom!!

  5. Yes, yes yes, wish more people could see this.

  6. Press on I will!

  7. I see that a lot of missional approaches are not the same as the ultra simple model Jesus set up of finding a person of peace and discipleship. Sure some “missional practitioners” may be doing this, but many are not. They are overlapping but not implicit.
    I feel that the missional movement is entirely focused on a western context, without noticing what the Holy Spirit is doing around the world. As Wolfgang Simson would say, “Do what God is blessing.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *