An Opinion
by
Sylvia Dooling
How many times have you heard someone suggest that we should stop talking
about theology and start doing mission. That’s because the popular notion is
that while doctrine divides, mission unites. But is that true?
It is true only if we share a common understanding of what mission is.
Now, let me be clear. I am not writing this editorial to promote one kind of
mission over another to suggest that my definition of mission is correct,
and that other’s are not. All that I am hoping to accomplish in this essay
is to make it clear that when Presbyterians use the word, mission, they do
not all mean the same thing. And, because they don’t, when you choose to
become involved in mission, or to contribute to mission, you bear the
responsibility of making some informed decisions.
For example, the theme of the latest edition of _Horizons_ magazine
(November/ December 2002) is ‘Presbyterian Women in Mission,” and I read it
with interest and enthusiasm. It relates some fascinating stories about how
women are reaching out to their own communities and around the world to
involve themselves in mission.
Some of the projects that _Horizons_ describes are about acting
compassionately toward people in various kinds of need. Others are about
efforts to establish justice in areas of the world where people are
suffering injustice including the United States. These first two examples of
mission may or may not be distinctively Christian. That is to say, they are
projects that Christians and non-Christians can do together.
However, some other mission projects described by _Horizons_ are
transparently Christian. What I mean by that is that they are not only
concerned about compassion and justice, but are also deliberately
evangelistic. They combine acts of compassion and justice with the
proclamation of the Good News about Jesus Christ. They engage in the
delivery of medical services, education, clean water, and a variety of other
desperately needed things but accompanying the deeds are words that invite
people to know and serve Jesus Christ.
My point is that not all mission that is undertaken by Presbyterians is
explicitly Christian or openly evangelistic. Further, not all Presbyterians
believe that is should be. Clearly, we Presbyterians are not of one mind
when it comes to the definition of mission.
For example, in her ‘Ask Jane” column in the most recent edition of
_Horizons_, Jane Parker Huber states that there was a time in the 19th
Century when ‘many had the overwhelming conviction that Christianity was the
only and ultimate truth Other religions were to be destroyed completely if
possible, or at the very least superceded.”
In telling us that, Ms. Huber seems to be saying that she does not believe
that is what mission should be about today that she has a different
definition of mission than did the missionaries of the 19th century.
Now, you may or may not agree with Ms. Huber. For example, you may believe
that Christianity does present an ultimate truth that supersedes all other
religions. And, if you do, your conviction will make it difficult for the
two of you to do mission together. In this case, mission may not unify at
all, but may result in even more division.
Now, I genuinely appreciate reading about all the ways in which Presbyterian
Women believe that they should be engaged in the missionary mandate of the
church. The editorial staff of _Horizons_ has succeeded in presenting us
with a variety of definitions of what it means to do mission. You may agree
or disagree with all of their definitions, or you may not. But to the extent
that _Horizons’ _definitions of mission may be contradictory of one another,
it becomes your responsibility to figure out which are faithful and which
are not which you can support with your time and money, and which you
cannot. And that means asking thoughtful and probing questions of anyone and
everyone in the church who asks you to support their particular mission with
your time, talents, or money.
It’s not disloyal to ask questions. It is not disloyal to satisfy yourself
as to whether or not the mission projects that you support are doing things
that you think need to be done in the way that you think they should be
done. Rather, it is good stewardship. It will require hard work of you,
perseverance, and the realization that you may not be able to support work
that your brother or sister in Christ believes to be reasonable and
necessary.
Unity will not be attained so easily. When you think seriously about them,
slogans stating that theology divides while mission unites are silly. Why?
Because we cannot do mission responsibly without struggling first with some
basic questions of theology. Who, in fact, is Jesus Christ? What does it
mean to call him Lord? What does it mean to give a cup of cold water in his
name? Who are the least to whom we are to minister?
The chicken and egg question is unavoidable. Is anything we do mission? Is
all that counts sincerity? Or, must we build the missionary enterprise on
the foundation of our theological convictions?
For Voices of Orthodox Women, the answer is clear. Theology comes first, and
mission will unite us only as we come to common understandings of who it is
that we serve, why it is that we do what we do, and what it is that is our
message.