What is the Mission of the Church Review

DeYoung, Kevin and Greg Gilbert, What is the Mission of the Church, (Wheaton: Crossway, 2011).

A firestorm of critique may await the publication of this book, due the increasing popularity of social justice in today’s churches. Some indeed might be stretching their fingers, getting ready to write a heated review of the book. But even if there is disagreement in some of the points, this is a topic that needs to be thought out more carefully and biblically. I think D&G have started that conversation.

Summary

In What is the Mission of the Church? Kevin DeYoung and Greg Gilbert (D&G) argue that the unique and main mission of the church is making disciples. Their concerns are that good behaviors are sometimes commended using the wrong categories, that churches sometimes put hard “oughts” on Christians, and that with the emphasis on social problems and renewing the city, the main mission of the church is being lost.

In Part 2 they cover five larger theological categories that are helpful to the discussion of the mission of the church are understanding 1) the overview of the Bible 2) the gospel 3) the Kingdom 4) social justice 5) shalom and the new heavens and the new earth.

What is the church supposed to do in light of all this? D&G acknowledge that we are all to be zealous for good works. This book has not been to discourage good works, but rather to put good works in the framework of the Christian life. They argue that it is not illegitimate for the church to do anything other than evangelism. The church can adopt a local school, revitalize a park, as long as it furthers the mission of bearing witness to Jesus and making disciples.

In other words, the church should run their programs through a decision making process that reveals whether are spending their time and resources that more directly, rather than less directly further its central mission. “Ultimately, if the church does not preach Christ and him crucified, if the church does not plant, nurture, and establish more churches, if the church does not teach the nations to obey Christ, no one else and nothing else will. And yet, many others will meet physical needs” (126).

Critique

Overall, the thesis of the book persuasively argued. Where disagreement might come up in the peculiarities of the arguments, not so much the main thrust. Such as is their definition of the gospel and mission wide enough etc…

Helpful Distinctions

I could spend this entire review on the exposition and proposals that DeYoung gives on the social justice texts. I could also mention the centrality of the gospel, the helpful discussion of the kingdom, and shalom. But more than these, there were a number of helpful distinctions that D&G made in the midst of the arguments that were the most formative in my thinking. They are the following.

The first distinction that they made was that there is an assumption that whatever God is doing in the world, this too is our task. But D&G assert that we are not called to partner with God in everything he undertakes. Our mission is not identical with God’s mission. We are not called to participate in the slaying of wicked. We are not to die for the sins of the world. We are not going to pronounce the final judgment on mankind. It is better to locate our responsibility in the specific tasks we have been given rather than in the work we see God accomplishing.

Second, I thought the DeYoung’s chapters on social justice and his application were probably the highlight of the book. Here he shows that poor in Scripture were usually the pious poor. They are the righteous poor, the people of God oppressed by their enemies yet still depending on him to come through on their behalf. He also notes that almost all the references to caring for the poor in the Bible are references to the poor within the covenant community (94). He helpfully proposes that the social justice discussion would be less controversial and more profitable if we stopped talking about social justice and started talking about love (102).

Third, the distinction between unimportant and ultimately important. Good works for the church falls somewhat in between, like in the really really important category but not of ultimate importance. It may sound like an elementary distinction, but I can already see how this distinction is valuable.

Fourth, the distinction between the corporate local church and the individual Christian. The church is not called to do everything the individual Christian is called to do.

Minor Disagreements

First, I think they underplayed in-breaking of the kingdom of God and its effects (73). In other words I think the parables do imply some sort of growth. They interpret the parables in Mark 4:26-34 as Jesus saying “the kingdom will start out with small beginnings but at the close of the age have cosmic significance.” I don’t disagree with the statement above, but the even that statement implies growth. The parables about the seeds not only inform about the kingdom, but inaugurate it and act. These stories were meant to invoke action, as most good stories do. Now of course these parables do not specify how it grows, but Jesus is telling this parable to both show that he is the one inaugurating this in-breaking and to send them out as ambassadors for this kingdom. But D&G, at times, seem to want to take our role completely out of the process. It seems to me to be the same type of logical mistake as taking the doctrine of grace, and then saying we can act however we want.

Second, a related to the above, I felt like they were a little pessimistic about what Christians can do in the world and how much we can and should cooperate as vice regents with our King. There was not much discussion of what it means to be salt and light in the world, and the paragraphs on the cultural mandate seemed to push too far into saying that we are merely here to preserve this fallen world, rather than fill the world with his faithful presence. Both Rodney Stark and Alvin J. Schmidt have interesting books on how Christianity has fueled great advances in society.

Finally, they kept assuring us they were not being negative and preaching against social justice, but in the end it was really a book challenging modern notions of social justice and the way the church relates to this topic.

Conclusion

The authors were careful and nuanced in their argument, the advice is balanced, and most importantly they want to do the church good. Although I may have some minor disagreements with some of their points, overall they are on target even though it might not be popular.

As I told my wife after I read the book, “Everyone who is in church leadership should read this book.”