I am about fifty pages into Introducing the Missional Church, and thus far it appears to be the comprehensive, yet very accessible introduction of the topic that has been greatly needed. There are two specific positions the authors take in chapter one that I appreciate.

First, they present a very evenhanded critique of “attractional vs missional.” They write:

The assumption of the attractional imagination is that average people outside the church are looking for a church and know they should belong to one, and therefore, church leaders should create the most attractive attractional church possible. The mission, then, is to get people to attend. This story is still repeated over and over again across North America. It’s not that we shouldn’t be attractive for those looking for a church to attend; it’s that this has become the primary focus of churches, and as a result they miss what the Spirit is up to in the world. . . .

There is nothing wrong or bad about attracting people to attend the various, meetings that a church holds. We are not advocating an either/or imagination that demands that we move from attractional to missional. That would be a sign of poor leadership. If we are good leaders in a church that is good at what it does, then we will attract people, and that is good. We are simply saying that the attractional pattern is not the goal or the primary call of the church. . . .

A missional imagination is not about the church; it’s not about how to make the church better, how to get more people to come to church, or how to turn a dying church around. It’s not about getting the church back to cultural respectability in a time when it has been marginalized. All of these are good things, but they aren’t the focus of a missional imagination. . . .

God is up to something in the world that is bigger than the church even though the church is called to be a sign, witness, and foretaste of God’s purposes in the world. The Spirit is calling the church on a journey outside of itself and its internal focus. Rowan Williams, archbishop of Canterbury, summarizes this imagination in this way: “It is not the church of God that has a mission. It’s the God of mission that has a church.” He is saying God is at work in the world to redeem creation, and God invites us to participate in this mission. . . . Rather than the primary question being, “How do we attract people to what we are doing?” it becomes, “What is God up to in this neighborhood?” and “What are the ways we need to change in order to engage the people in our community who no longer consider church a part of their lives?” This is what a missional imagination is about.

Secondly, I appreciate the author’s belief that there is no missional church “formula” or “model.” Again they write:

The local churches the Spirit will shape on these unknown waters will come in many different forms: new, developing churches and old, traditional congregations; large, small and medium churches; denominationally connected and independent churches. There isn’t one specific form, predictable pattern, or predetermined model. On these new waters we become pioneers who are creating new maps shaped in, with, and for the contexts and communities into which we have been called. Here we will learn to experiment and test ideas. Some will work; others will fail. Through trial and error we will imagine new ways of being Jesus’ people.

– Introducing the Missional Church: What it is, Why it Matters, How to Become One by Alan J. Roxburgh and M. Scott Boren