The Church and the Missional Organization

Prerequisite reading: What Is Your Picture of the Church?

The choice of “ekklesia” as the designation of the Christian community suggests that the New Testament believers viewed the church as neither an edifice nor an organization. They were a people—a people bound to each other through Christ. –Stanley Grenz

Most professing Christians do not realize that the central concepts and practices associated with what we call “church” are not rooted in the New Testament, but in patterns established in the post apostolic age. –Jon Zens

There is a thing called the church. The ecclesia (or ekklesia). We did not create it and we do not determine who is in or out. It comes through the gospel. It is the Spirit of God who baptizes each of us into the Body of Christ—the church—when we accept the free gift of Jesus’ sacrifice. When we gather and exercise the gifts each of us are given—led by the Spirit—Christ manifests in different ways than we see when we are alone. He leads as the head of the Body.

Where two or more are gathered in His name He is there with them.

This body is marked by mutual submission and service to one-to-another. There are no titles or offices in the ecclesia but its members vary greatly in terms of spiritual maturity and ability to operate in their gifts. Participants desire the fruits of the Spirit and are drawn to others whose lives and work produce fruit, especially those with proven character and wisdom gained by living as a disciple of Christ. Participants often ‘dive under’ more mature believers and willingly submit and receive. The mature believer serves those who follow them in humility as a good parent, and lives in submission to others. If many submit to one person, that person accepts it as a greater responsibility and service. In this way leaders emerge because of who they are and the movement of the Spirit. In time they may be recognized as elders, guardians or even city fathers. They are often known by their core gift mix as a pastor, teacher, evangelist, prophet or apostle—but this is a descriptor of practice, not a title or office.

Also, in this body there is no limit to the number of leaders. It is an organic, growing entity with Christ as the very real, active and present head, leader and chief priest.

This is the true ecclesia, organized only by the hand of God.

There is another thing, though, that we often refer to as the church as well: It is an organization, facility, or system of governance. It may or may not be part of a denomination or association unified by similar distinctives as separate from other organizations. Large and small in number of participants, most of these organizations have titled offices with specific responsibilities and authority. Larger organizations have multi-tiered hierarchies organized toward providing services and achieving missional objectives. Participants with leadership gifts often desire and pursue volunteer or vocational leadership positions in the organization. It may also have a set number of governing trustees generally selected through nomination and election or appointment.

I suggest that a better name for this entity that we commonly refer to as a church is ‘missional organization’. They are hierarchical organizations that serve the church (ecclesia) and that act as vehicles for the church to strategically impact the world, though they themselves are not the church. Yet they’re valid and helpful, and (can) serve the church by functioning properly.

The structure of most missional orgs reflect this reality. A board or group of trustees commission and oversee an organization that provides services to other believers and the world. The problem comes, though, when this organization is generally perceived by those inside and outside it to be the actual church—the ecclesia. And the leaders of this organization are equated to the leaders in the ecclesia that we read about in scripture. In truth, a leader in the ecclesia can also be a leader in a missional organization—and may it always be so. But leadership in a missional organization does not equate to leadership in the ecclesia and encountering a missional organization does not equate to encountering the ecclesia. They are two different things, two different systems, two different hierarchies, two different patterns.

Unfortunately this is made more confusing because we have repurposed the names for leaders in the ecclesia: pastors, elders, overseers, etc.—to be used for leaders in our man-made, top down organizations as well.

For example: a pastor in the ecclesia is one who cares for the souls of others. They are a shepherd and servant that spends untold hours out in the pasture living and eating with the sheep. Their focus is on caring for people and helping them discover their gifts and place in the body of believers. Many pastors in missional organizations shepherd programs, strategies, budgets, and deploy armies of staff and volunteers toward specific objectives. Or they are charged with regularly teaching large numbers of people in lecture or seminar environments. Or they are point people to provide services when someone is in crisis. We have, at best, repurposed the name of a key role of service in the body and at worst redefined a very important word, distorting its understanding and operation in the body—making it a professional service or a hierarchical title on an org chart. This has a negative impact on the recognition and engagement of many with a shepherding gift-set in the body and their orientation to and deployment in the body. They may think, “I can’t be a shepherd/pastor–I have no position in an organization. How could I possibly call myself that?” when God has designed them to give just that kind of caring service to those in their arena of influence.

This does not mean missional organization pastors are not attentive or caring, but in general, people occupying an office are given a ‘pastor’ title because they’re charged to execute specific tasks, not necessarily because of the gifts and competency they have as a shepherd. This one fallacy in terminology extends the human-created clergy/laity divide and leaves dormant a legion of people gifted to the ecclesia to be fully functioning, life-giving pastors. We would be much better off to use other leadership and positional titles in missional organizations and not repurpose, redefine and limit the use of roles identified in the Bible. Better someone was identified as the CEO or Head/Senior Leader of a missional organization than the confusing, borrowed titles we tend to see today.

This repurposing or re-defining key words (and the dissonance it creates) exists in other areas as well, as listed above.

The objective here is not to question the existence of missional organizations or disqualify the ministry efforts of their leaders and staff. To the contrary, we need these organizations to be unapologetically what they are, and be more effective than ever before. The objective is to elevate the entity of the ecclesia as distinct from the missional organization so that all believers can properly orient to life in the body and not confuse that life with missional engagement or the consumption of religious services.

Consider the following comparison.

The Ecclesia (True Church)	The Missional Organization
Has an inverted, non-hierarchical leadership structure. Greatest in the ecclesia is the servant of all. Authority is not positional and not assumed. People are looked to as leaders because of time-tested character and how they serve…and those that follow and choose to submit to what they see God doing in them.	Has a top-down hierarchical organizational structure similar to businesses and non-profit organizations. Authority is positional. People are looked to as leaders, almost exclusively, because of their organizational endorsement, and those who follow are carrying out the leader’s or organization’s objectives.
Operates on the basis that Christ is the functional head through the invisible guidance of the Holy Spirit through the believing community. As believers learn to follow the Holy Spirit day-to-day, God’s will is done in his way and in his timing.	Is sustained by some sort of leader/staff system and seeks to energize a laity or a defined audience. There is an expectation that top leadership will be guided by the Holy Spirit and will guide those they lead in fruitful pursuits.
Is non-liturgical and non-ritualistic. Ministry and growth requires personal, face-to-face relationships.	Often places a priority on programs, traditions, systems, and rituals.
Forges no link between personal salvation and the church; sees the two as inextricably intertwined.	May have a form of membership for organizational mission.
Cannot be sustained without the leadership of the Holy Spirit.	Is great at mobilizing large groups of people and can accomplish big things.
Is marked by mutual submission.	Is marked by limited participation in gatherings—most in attendance are primarily recipients of service and submit to key leaders.
Does not have offices to be filled or staffed. Members are not titled—roles are surfaced by mutually identified spiritual giftings. Not ‘Apostle Paul’ rather ‘Paul an apostle’. No cap on the number of fully empowered leaders. Invites believers to fully participate relationally and spiritually. Is never a building, service, denomination, or legal structure. Is the principle vehicle for the kingdom on earth Cannot be destroyed Is the hope of the world.	Leaders are appointed to roles or offices, and they are generally tasked with achieving specific objectives. Limited number of fully empowered leaders. Leadership advancement sometimes necessitates leaving the organization. Can be a tremendous evangelistic force and mobilize Christians to live outward focused lives Serves the ecclesia but is not the ecclesia. Helps point people to the kingdom but is not the kingdom Will someday cease to exist Can be a beneficial missional vehicle but is not the hope of the world

Again, this is not an attack on missional organizations. They have a vital role to play. I work in, give money to, and volunteer in such organizations. This is not even an argument to remove the word ‘church’ from the names of these orgs. But if our ‘insiders’, staff, and leadership think and operate as if our organizations are the ecclesia, we have an issue to address—we become usurpers. This will continue to be the default tendency, barring the conversations I’m suggesting here. Intentionality and leadership (by missional organizations and organic leaders, elders and city fathers) will be required to sustain this clarity, and to point toward life in the ecclesia as unique from service to operate and sustain the missional organization.

There is an elephant in the room. The reality is that the closest thing many of us (but certainly not all of us) have experienced to what Paul describes in Romans, 1 Corinthians, Colossians, and Ephesians is a bible study, prayer group, cell group or small group. The face-to-face, every member participating gathering where each person has a song, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Regular meetings where individuals give and receive gifts of the spirit that edify everyone present. These meetings are not planned teachings or performances, nor are they officiated by an intermediary—they are directly led by Jesus through the Holy Spirit moving in different members throughout the gathering.

This description can sound idealized, impractical, unsustainable, intimidating and even unappealing to many raised in missional organizations. The reality is, however, this is the ecclesia gathering of the Bible. What most Christians think of as ‘church’ is not a modern innovation or expression of the New Testament ecclesia, it is something else entirely.

The lack of these experiential gatherings as common practice is an unfortunate result of centuries of historical inertia and spiritual war. The good news is that there is an awakening happening in our city and organic, home-based, in-the-wild gatherings of the church are springing up. A key role of many missional organizations will be preparing and moving people toward life in the ecclesia.

The distinction between the missional organization and the ecclesia is vital. We orient ourselves and operate differently in each. To communicate inadvertently or directly that the missional organization is the true church is to rob believers of their fully functioning life in the body.

Let us become more like Christ. Let us learn to function even more as the Biblical church in our informal gatherings. Let us be even more on mission in our organized church communities. And let us be even more the unified body that glorifies God in the city—The Church of Cincinnati.

Take from this only what resonates in your heart and spirit.