A decade ago, there was a groundswell of discussion and activity among global Christian organizations around how best to partner with China’s emerging mission movement. Many of the conversations concerned mobilization, training, setting up sending structures, and establishing business platforms in creative-access nations. Language learning, accountability, and spiritual formation were identified as essential to the future of the movement. Various models for collaboration were considered, many of which would form the basis for partnerships formed in the ensuing years.
Much has changed during this time. Thousands of Chinese believers have been mobilized through local efforts and participation in overseas conferences. The concept of indigenous sending agencies is no longer a far-off goal; scores of such agencies now operate inside and outside China.
At the same time, visions of Chinese soft power abroad opening up new doors for cross-cultural witness have been tempered by target countries’ mixed response to the Belt and Road Initiative. The relatively open atmosphere that allowed for increasing collaboration between China and the global community has given way to a more restrictive environment. Modes of working together that had become commonplace are no longer an option. Those that remain come under much greater scrutiny.
Much of the talk a decade ago highlighted the benefits of greater centralization as the church inside and outside China worked together to train and send workers. The reality in the years since has been a plethora of fragmented efforts—bilateral and multilateral arrangements that may, in hindsight, prove less sensitive and more sustainable, especially in the current environment.
With the tightening in China has come a new wave of emigration. The lines between sending and receiving, and between field and home, are becoming blurred as new churches, platforms, and institutions emerge and integrate with the global Chinese diaspora.
A Time to Reflect
This season of ferment invites reflection. It provides an opportunity to revisit past assumptions about how China’s church will, or will not, find its place within the worldwide mission enterprise, which, despite the ascendance of the church in the Global South, remains very much the product of Western priorities and methodologies.
In some of those earlier conversations, amidst animated discussions of strategy, goals, programs, and platforms, there emerged another voice. One seasoned leader asked to what end all this new effort was ultimately being directed. Could it really be summed up in slogans like “finishing the task,” “a church for every people,” or “completing the Great Commission?” Would success be measured in terms of workers sent, borders crossed, languages translated, converts baptized, and disciples formed?
Or was there more?
Pushing back against the undercurrent of “managerial missions” that seemed to be driving much of the conversation, he cautioned against allowing these metrics to determine the future course of the emerging movement.
We worship a God of information, strategies, structures, and programs, but these were meant to be the fruit of the Spirit, not the foundation of our work. We need to start with our purpose—glorifying Christ by abiding in Him, that Christ be found in us.
His exhortation was met with a chorus of “amens” and nods of approval. But soon the conversation drifted back to the more tangible realities of cross-cultural work. Quantifying geography, peoples, baptisms, and disciples produces reliable metrics, enabling processes to be managed and ensuring supporters that their dollars are being well spent.
Yet history shows that it is possible to go and make disciples and baptize and teach in ways that do not glorify God. While this does not in any way negate the centrality of these activities, it does, however, raise the question of what else is missing in the church’s witness.
What would it look like to operate with a different set of metrics? What if we were to take seriously the exhortation that, in the words of the leader cited above, “We have been purchased for this one purpose: to reveal to the nations ‘the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ?’” (2 Corinthians 4:6)
Balancing the Scorecard
In the secular business world, the balanced scorecard has become a common tool for measuring success across key domains. This tool pulls together information on financial health, the customer experience, internal business processes, and organizational learning and growth to create a multidimensional view of the business. Harvard Business School’s Catherine Cote notes that “the things that often create the most value are intangible and difficult to measure and track.” The balanced scorecard intentionally surfaces these intangibles, ensuring that what makes the biggest difference gets the attention it deserves.1
In missions, as in business, focusing solely on one or a few key metrics to the neglect of other less tangible measures can distort the outcome. The widespread adoption in the last century of Donald McGavran’s homogenous unit principle, for example, may have produced bigger churches, but in many cases it perpetuated economic and racial inequality, shortchanging the church of the radical unity and reconciliation that are intended to be its hallmarks (Ephesians 2:14-18).2 Isolating “Great Commission” activities as the core elements of mission risks neglecting other less tangible, yet no less essential, aspects of what it means to be God’s witnesses in the world.
As David Bosch cautioned in Transforming Mission:
It is inadmissible to lift these words out of Matthew’s gospel, as it were, allow them a life of their own, and understand them without any reference to the context in which they first appeared. Where this happens, the ‘Great Commission’ is easily degraded to a mere slogan, or used as a pretext for what we have in advance decided, perhaps unconsciously, it should mean.3
To the Praise of His Glory
Scripture is clear about the ways in which God is glorified in the lives of his people. In part two of this series, we will consider these in the context of the church’s witness among the nations. Since many of these qualities are far less tangible than the concrete activities usually associated with mission, they may be easily overlooked, or we may assume they are present when in fact they are not. Paradoxically, these intangibles become much more real in their absence. Then we begin to realize what’s missing, but by then it’s often too late.
- Catherine Cote, “What is a Balanced Scorecard?” HBS Online, October 26, 2023, https://online.hbs.edu/blog/post/balanced-scorecard. Accessed May 11, 2026.
- Brad Vaughn, “A Critique of McGavran and the Homogenous Unit Principle,” Patheos, February 20, 2024, https://www.patheos.com/blogs/jacksonwu/2024/02/20/a-critique-of-mcgavran-and-the-homogenous-unit-principle/. Accessed May 11, 2026.
- David J. Bosch, Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1991), 57.
