Who’s your team? Navigating the Surprising Struggle for Missionaries
STATEMENT
When establishing or joining a missionary team, the sending church and the missionary must prioritize clarity on the team’s purpose and agreement on theology, missiology, and methodology. This helps to maintain unity and encourage longevity.
Integrating new missionaries into a team requires particular care and thought. It is essential to foster a culture of spiritual discipleship and friendship among workers. This builds trust among different backgrounds and personalities and avoids conflict, especially in cross-cultural settings. Clearly defined roles and expectations minimize misunderstandings and provide clarity on how the team can contribute to the ultimate goal of establishing and serving local churches.
Mission agencies should consider policies and practices that help missionary teams be more aligned in these areas. Sending churches must continually evaluate the ongoing health of missionary teams.
We could hardly contain our excitement. My wife and I spent years preparing for this moment, and there we were, in a new country halfway across the world, far from everything familiar.
Sure, there were some red flags. The team on the field was rapidly decreasing, and there were rumors of team conflict. But I was sure these things would resolve themselves; we were all Christians, after all. Not only that, but we were Christians on a mission together. Surely, our united mission would dissolve all theological, methodological, and relational differences. My excitement was matched only by my naivety.
It soon became clear that the mission agency’s understanding of the nature and methods of missions was at odds with my convictions. We were misaligned. The ship was heading in one direction, and I couldn’t correct the course. At the same time, the team's history of dysfunction only exponentially increased as we walked through a series of crises. The team's theological differences and relational dysfunction eventually made it impossible for us to continue. With great heartache, we resigned.
That team is mostly dissolved now, but I deeply love and respect each of those former teammates. The team’s dysfunction does not undermine the fact that these are my dear brothers and sisters in Christ. But much of the heartache we experienced could have been avoided if I had been more cautious in my decision-making before we went to the field.
The rest of this article offers some things to consider when establishing or joining a missionary team. A healthy team aims to be a group of biblically qualified missionaries united by a common purpose of establishing and building healthy local churches with shared theological, methodological, ecclesiological, and relational commitments.
Unity and Clarity on the Mission
There are no direct commands in the Bible about missionary teams. However, Jesus sent out the disciples (Mark 6:7) and the seventy-two (Luke 10:1) two by two during his earthly ministry. In Acts, Paul is almost always accompanied by companions and coworkers on his missionary journeys. There is wisdom in working as a team in missions. The wisdom of Ecclesiastes (Ecclesiastes 4:9–10) may apply to missions: “Two are better than one because they have a good reward for their toil. For if they fall, one will lift up his fellow. But woe to him who is alone when he falls and has not another to lift him up!” Plurality provides accountability, encouragement, protection, and increased effectiveness. The lone ranger approach is dangerous at many levels.
It is wise to join a team if you are united in a shared understanding of the mission and the task. In 1 Samuel, Jonathan and his armor-bearer together routed a whole garrison of the Philistines. They acted with great courage and faith in God. Jonathan looks at the Philistine warriors’ outpost and says, “Come, let’s go over to the Philistine outpost… perhaps the LORD will act on our behalf. Nothing can hinder the LORD from saving by many or by few (1 Samuel 14:1,6 NIV). The story goes on to describe the dramatic and miraculous victory.
The story of Jonathan and his armor-bearer gives a picture of unity in mission. Jonathan knew the mission. He had to climb the hill and take down the enemy with the strength that God gave. His armor-bearer agreed completely. “I am with you heart and soul,” he replied to Jonathan. Their hearts were united in the mission and how to accomplish it.
This is the type of unity and moral clarity about the mission and method that missionary teams need. Our battle is not against flesh and blood, but the principle is the same. A shared understanding of the nature of the task is crucial for collaboration and teamwork. The risen King Jesus has given us our marching orders (Matthew 28:18–20). In the Bible, we have also been given commands, examples, and patterns of how these marching orders are to be carried out. This is why defining the mission and methods biblically is crucial.
Clarity on the biblical definition of the missionary task and method has the power to unite a team in faithful service. This pleases the One who enlisted us (2 Corinthians 5:9; 2 Timothy 4:2), but the opposite is also true. A lack of clarity cultivates disunity, confusion, conflict, and ineffectiveness. Unhealthy collaboration due to a lack of clarity leads to silos where each member of the team is pulling in a different direction. It also creates competitiveness and divisions among the local believers and churches.
Choosing an Agency and Team
The sending church is strategically positioned to help a missionary join a mission agency and team closely aligned with their theology and mission strategy. For example, what does the agency and team say about the role of the local church? Is speed and rapid growth emphasized? Are gospel proclamation, evangelism, discipleship, and the local church the priority? Or is the methodology driven by holism [1]? Does mercy ministry (relief and development) or a business platform play a part in the strategy? If so, what is its role, and how does it fit the team’s stated purpose?
These are complex issues. But a sending church and missionary should not simply outsource the responsibility of finding clarity in these and other areas to a mission agency. An ideal agency would consider policies and practices that help missionary teams be more aligned in these areas. Unfortunately, this is not always a reality. Many agencies minimize the importance of theological convictions when sending missionaries to join or establish a team. For pragmatic reasons, there is often a “lowest common denominator” approach to theological convictions. This sets the new missionary on a collision course with the team and the agency if they have different convictions about things such as insider movement methodology, church planting movements (CPM), and egalitarianism.
Theological triage [2] is a helpful tool for sending churches and missionaries to discern if there is theological alignment. Theological triage borrows an analogy from the medical profession. When a person is admitted into a waiting room, they are put through “triage” to determine the seriousness of the medical emergency. This is also the case with theological triage. While all doctrine is important, theological triage helps emphasize the essential doctrines and clarify areas where collaboration can be maintained even when there is not complete agreement.
For example, first-order doctrines are doctrines that all Christians must believe: doctrines such as the Trinity, the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ, and justification by faith alone. Second-order doctrines are those that would make it challenging to covenant together in a local church or collaborate in church planting if there is disagreement. This area usually includes things like baptism and complementarianism. Third-order doctrines are important but do not hinder church planting collaboration or covenanting together in a local church. These typically include doctrines such as views concerning the age of the earth and the interpretation of the millennium in Revelation.
Triage helps clarify important theological issues. However, knowing if theological convictions impact actual practice and method is essential. After I arrived on the field that first term, I realized that the mission agency had different practices and convictions about complementarianism than what was written in their official documents [3]. In conversations, they insisted that complementarianism is a third-order doctrine. They said my conviction that God’s design is for qualified men to be the elder-pastors shouldn’t impact church planting and mission collaboration. So, I was asked not to take a position on complementarianism in my teaching and church planting. They asked me to violate my conscience and go against a clear command of Scripture.
I mention this to highlight the need to go beyond what is written on paper. To see the team's actual practice, the prospective missionary and representatives from the sending church may consider visiting the team to get a closer look at the ministry in action.
Missions and Conflict: An Inescapable Reality
A sending church can help the missionary navigate these complex dynamics and find a good team. But no matter how good the fit is, the team will face conflict.
The most preventable reason for missionary attrition is relational dynamics and conflict within mission teams [4]. This may shock someone who has never been on the field, but it’s well-known to long-term missionaries who’ve seen or experienced it repeatedly. And look at what happened to the first missionary team recorded in Acts. Paul and Barnabas were set apart for the missionary work by the Holy Spirit and the Antioch church in Acts 13:1–3. Their first missionary journey was Spirit-filled and fruitful. But things broke down at the beginning of Paul and Barnabas’ second missionary journey. Barnabas wanted to bring along John Mark, who had deserted them on their first journey. Paul refused. Acts 15:39 succinctly says, “And there arose a sharp disagreement, so that they separated from each other.”
Paul later wrote, “Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never ends” (1 Corinthians 13:7–8). He also urged Christians to be “eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Ephesians 4:3).
Paul wrote these exhortations, but his own team splintered before his second missionary journey. It is interesting to ask a room of people who know the narrative well, “Who was right, Paul or Barnabas?” Often, the answer is split down the room. Perhaps there is a slight preference for Paul’s side because, let’s be honest, who wants to disagree with Paul? The first missionary team in Acts did indeed splinter under conflict. It was a foreboding moment for the future of missions. The fate of the first missionary team underlines that even the best mission teams can have conflict.
Jesus promises to be with us as we make disciples of the nations, but we also bring our weakness and sin with us. Unchecked, sin will always tear down. Not only that, but these particular sinners work in a high-stress, cross-cultural environment. This situation can be like a pressure cooker, especially for missionaries who often have strong personalities. Conflict is inevitable when strong-willed people work together in any stressful context. In addition to sin and strong personalities, there is the reality of spiritual warfare. One of Satan’s schemes is to use conflict within missionary teams to derail the ministry (Ephesians 6:11).
One of the best solutions to minimize team conflict is for team members to know each other well before going to the field. Ideally, they would have worked together in ministry. I know of teams in the Middle East and Central Asia that have followed this model. Churches and mission agencies should consider recruiting and facilitating teams that form pre-field.
This isn’t always an option, so what else can be done to reduce disunity? Conflict can be mitigated if the team establishes a healthy atmosphere of trust and love based on the “one-another” passages of Scripture. Individuals work to show mutual respect and “outdo one another in showing honor” (Romans 12:10). Fostering this culture of discipleship and friendship among workers is essential. Since sinners will come with conflict, mission teams should take steps to mitigate strife. Teams need avenues and plans in place for handling conflict when it arrives. The most obvious resource for dealing with conflict is the local church or churches to which the team members submit.
Before joining a team, sending churches and their missionaries should ensure these things are in place. Knowing beforehand the roles and expectations for life, ministry, and family helps both the prospective missionary and the team. Clearly defined roles and expectations minimize misunderstandings and clarify how each team member can contribute to the ultimate goal of establishing and serving local churches.
Conclusion
The Bible is “breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16–17). This applies to mission work as well. The Bible defines the task, the method, and how we relate to others. While the Bible doesn’t directly speak to missionary teams, it equips us for working on teams in a way that honors God. He has defined the mission, and we are to work for the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace (Ephesians 4:3).
Footnotes:
[1] Holism in missions refers to an approach that embraces evangelism/discipleship and social responsibility equally. It affirms the importance of expressing the love of God and neighbor through every means possible, including caring for the poor or pursuing justice for the oppressed, in addition to gospel proclamation and church planting.
[2] Albert Mohler, “A Call For Theological Triage and Christian Maturity” (July 12, 2005). Online: https://albertmohler.com/2005/07/12/a-call-for-theological-triage-and-christian-maturity. Accessed November 3, 2023. See also Finding the Right Hills to Die On by Gavin Ortlund, Crossway, Downers Grove, 2020.
[3] Not long after we resigned, the agency changed its official statement on polity to reflect its practice.
[4] Akin, P. (2017, May 25). The Number One Reason Missionaries Go Home. TGC https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/the-number-one-reason-missionaries-go-home/
Kocman, A. and Dunford, S. (2019, March 4). Team Conflict the Number One Reason Missionaries Go Home. ABWE. https://abwe.org/blog/team-conflict-number-one-reason-missionaries-go-home/
