New Hope: What Are We Doing Here?

Why we use the Term “Broadcast” in the Vision Statement (Part 2)

Someone once said, “Missions exists because worship doesn’t,” that someone being John Piper. (“Hey, I’ve heard of that guy.”) It made so much powerful sense to so many that it quickly became a battle cry for missions in our generation. Let me quote the full statement. It’s worth knowing.

“Missions is not the ultimate goal of the Church. Worship is. Missions exists because worship doesn’t. Worship is ultimate, not missions, because God is ultimate, not man. When this age is over, and the countless millions of the redeemed fall on their faces before the throne of God, missions will be no more. It is a temporary necessity. But worship abides forever.” (Taken from John Piper’s  Let the Nations be Glad!)

Therefore the question has emerged again for us from a thoughtful and passionate member of our congregation: “By using the term ‘broadcast,’ are we not seeming to set missions over worship.” To my mind, that is a very important question for us all to understand the answer to. So, after finishing a reply I asked permission to release it as an open letter to New Hope. My response is as follows….

“First of all let me say how encouraged I am, and I'm sure Chae is, by the level of thought, heart, and serious desire for obedience that is all over your email. I think Chae brought to light a lot of the relevant considerations for myself as well. But let me approach it once more with you. Out of a pretty complex issue two primary concerns emerge for me: one theological and conceptual the other functional and literary. On the theological side, I tend to agree with that man who said, "Missions exist because worship doesn't." Worship is the goal for which missions exists. So worship is primary and missions is secondary. Worship is the goal and mission is the means. It would be bad for a vision statement to get that reversed and, as you said, "place missions over worship." I wouldn't join that church either.

However, consider something about what that statement, "Missions exist because worship doesn't," assumes and implies about the nature of worship. Worship must expand. Worship is not satisfied to not exist somewhere. Wherever God is not being worshipped, and idols are, the very nature of worship is jealousy. Worship, like the God it seeks to reflect, is an all-consuming fire. If it isn't it isn't worthy of an infinitely glorious God; it isn't Christian worship.

There is also a secondary implication packed into that statement, "Missions exist because worship doesn't." Missions exist because worship doesn't (i.e. exist) in people. Missions itself is not the goal but neither is it to get the "rocks to cry out" (Lk 19.40) or "trees to clap their hands" (Is 55.12). Creation praises God without missions. People don't. So missions has both God as subject and people as object. Worship is the goal but if people are not reached, worship will not rise to God.

This is why in one vision attempt, "'NHF exists to magnify (worship) the majesty and mercy of God" I had to add a clause later "to all people." This is where I hit the literary problem. All the clauses in our vision statement rest on a primary clause, "NHF exists to....." As soon as we hit the first preposition “in--the entirety of our lives," we've moved into qualifications. If we leave the main clause as "NHF exists to--magnify, radiate, etc.--the majesty and mercy of God." it sounds like this is something that we can do by ourselves--others are optional. It leaves worship with a point of origin (me/ us), a content (the majesty and mercy of God), but does not necessitate a second point of resonance. Missions exists because the God it worships loves people. He desires (far too weak a word) to give the enjoyment of His glory to more and more others. "Broadcast" was the only word that seems to necessitate in the hearing imagination all three: transmitter, signal, and receiver.  That's good Trinitarian thinking: us, God, others.

If we joined "NHF exists to broadcast" with "the gospel," or "the salvation of God," etc. that would be true, but also present an insurmountable deficiency.  Now that would be missions over worship rather than missions for worship. If however we take as our statement prime, "NHF exists to broadcast the majesty and mercy of God...," well that remains my best effort to reflect back in vision form: "Missions exist because worship doesn't."
I hope that helps some. As you can tell, I'm writing at 4am. It may not be totally cogent. We can talk more face to face if you like.

God's glorious love to you,
Edward”