Missional Viewpoints 4: Mission as Transformation

In what ways is transformation a metaphor for mission, and how does this affect our understanding of mission and the way we approach it?

Transformation is a key element of mission – and it’s also one of the big indicators that our missional work is having an effect.

But what if rather than looking at transformation as a result of mission, we looked at transformation as a metaphor for mission itself?

Transformation is when everything changes

Transformation is about change, whether that change is slow and longterm or rapid and sudden. But change needs to happen before that change becomes transformation? We can all talk about biblical figures or communities which were transformed by an encounter with God, but what does that mean?

Perhaps it’s useful to understand transformation like this:

Transformation is when a system/society’s “formational” principle shifts (trans-) from one central narrative or principle to another.

So, using this working definition, transformation can be a cultural shift where the very centre of a culture or society – the values and story which has formed and shaped it – is replaced with a different, hopefully better, understanding.

The same definition could apply to the individual – where the story or narrative and the values at the very centre of their worldview shift to something different.

Sounds a lot like mission.

Mission as Transformation

So, using transformation as an image, we can understand the Mission of God as an individual or cultural shift, replacing another central story with God’s story as the story their identity and life is built on.

We can also understand this as a paradigm shift.

Radical change or gradual change?

So, the result of transformation is clearly a person or community that looks radically different than before, based on an entirely different set of values. But does that change need to be sudden, or can it happen gradually?

One argument would say that a paradigm is like a planet with its own gravitational pull – so unless there is enough thrust to break out of the gravitational pull of the old paradigm, we can never make it far enough to reach the new before being pulled back to the old one again.

So, therefore the changing force needs to be strong enough to break free entirely of the old paradigm. However, on breaking free of the old paradigm – the attractional pull of the new should be enough to draw us in even if there is no force left from the initial pull.

The force is in the reaction

So, therefore, the intial force for transformation isn’t necessarily in the attractional force of a new better paradigm, but in the reactional force away from the old. It isn’t in the reconstruction of something new, but instead in the deconstruction of the old – which must be forceful enough to break free of the old.

Then, once adrift of the old, we are free for the attractional force of the new to slowly draw us towards a new way of living and being.