The work of carrying the gospel to the lost, making and maturing disciples, and nurturing the growth of new churches requires far more than what pastors and other full-time ministry workers have to give. The mission entrusted to God’s people will only be accomplished as more and more members of the church embrace their own missional responsibility (Matt 28:18–20; Acts 1:8; 1 Pet 2:9).
Yet not only is such an every-member ministry a practical necessity, the work of mobilizing church members for mission is a biblical requirement. The Apostle Paul explains in Ephesians 4:11–12 that the Lord “gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ.” Whatever one thinks about the designations of apostle, prophet, evangelist and shepherd-teacher in this verse, the upshot of Paul’s message is remains clear: Leaders must equip the laity to live on mission.[i]
The longer I have lived as a missionary overseas, the more convicted I have become of this reality. A primary methodological focus for me now is how I can come alongside local churches and help mobilize their members to carry out the Great Commission.
Melvin Hodges, a twentieth-century missiologist, promoted such training for and mobilization of the laity. For those who labor full-time in ministry, his exhortation is well worth considering.
He contends, “We must provide for the training of the entire church rather than the exclusive training of a select few who will be devoting themselves to full-time ministry. We must in our training fill in the artificial gap that seems to exist between clergy and laity. The whole church functions as the body of Christ with every individual Christian having his place and his ministry. Certainly all are not called to be preachers or teachers, but all are called to work for God. The whole church is a functioning organism. How far we have drifted from this in our churches in America and, therefore, how difficult it is for us to inaugurate a New Testament pattern on the foreign mission field! We tend to give training only to some who will become ministers, thus sadly neglecting the entire body of Christ, the army of witnesses that God intends to bring the gospel to every creature. Can we let such immense manpower go to waste and still expect to succeed in our task?”[ii]
In the midst of equipping and training church pastors, let us be careful not to neglect the work of mobilizing the laity.
[i] I realize the term laity is a contentious one. Some refuse to use it, seeing it as an artificial moniker that creates an unhealthy gap between paid clergy and the rest of the church. Such frustration with the use of the term and its cognates is understandable. However, other terminological options remain problematic as well. Referring to the laity—in contradistinction to pastors—simply as church “members,” for example, could insinuate that pastors/leaders are not members of the church. While few people would argue such a claim, the terminological difficulty remains. Pastors are members of the church; thus, to restrict the term “member” to those not in leadership does not do much to solve the dilemma. Another possibility—considering that pastors are a subset of church membership—would be to refer to the laity via negative definition: “non-leaders” or “non-pastors.” Yet the practice of defining or referring to something in contradistinction to something else is not ideal, in part because it frames the reference in an overly negative light. Lay people are more than just “not leaders,” and to frame them as such diminishes their positive value in the church. Thus, again, the terminological dilemma remains.
[ii] Melvin L. Hodges, The Indigenous Church (Springfield, MO: Gospel Publishing House), 61.
