So let me give you my story:

My wife and I moved to the Philippines in 2004. In my wife’s case, she was moving back after 24 years living in the United States. Anyway, for many years (early 2004 to mid-2021) we spent 10-12 months a year in the Philippines doing ministry. For all of those years we received at least some financial help from supporters. So we had supporters; we were serving full-time in Christian cross-cultural international ministry. Most would say that we were missionaries.

Since 2021 we have spent more than half of our time in the US. Part of this is because of taking care of some medical issues. Part of it is that my wife’s medical insurance (Medicare) does not work in the Philippines (except that it can be utilized as being ‘on travel’ if out of the country less than 6 months). Another part of it has been addressing broader family concerns. Still, we receive support. We have full-time roles in the Philippines that continue even when we are out of the country. We continue to do a lot of our ministry work online when we are out of the country. I think we still can and should be considered missionaries.

But where is the line? First, I will say that I am using the term “missionary” as it is generically used. I am not speaking of unique sectarian definitions. For example, the Mormons have a very distinct definition within their religion. We are not Mormon and so would never consider using their definitions for pretty much anything. No, I am referring to how the typical Christian (or at least Protestant) might use the term… with all the good and bad baggage associated with it.

But what if we are only in the Philippines a month or so a year— would we still be missionaries? STMers? Religious tourists?

We are independent missionaries in the sense that we have not been sent out by a mission agency/society. We were sent out by a church. But if the sender no longer identifies as sending a missionary, does their status change? I have known missionaries who have become completely cut off from their sending church. In one case, the sending church got a new pastor with some different (very wrong-headed in my opinion) views of what missions is, and immediately cut ties and support to them. They still continued their (very valuable) work. Another was sent by a church that was more of a releasing (commission, pray over, and forget) church. That person also continued serving many years in this status. I have known others who were sent out by one of the largest mission agencies in the world. This agency cut off a number of missionaries for reasons that seemed good to them. I have opinions on it, but that does not change anything. Many of those did not go home. Some switched sending organizations, while others stayed as independent missionaries.

I have heard others say that the callings of God are forever, so one never retires or leaves being a missionary. This is a (dubious in my view) view of ministry, but even if it is correct, it is also unhelpful. If a person has left the mission field and stopped doing mission work, they, de facto, are no longer missionaries, regardless of whether others see them still in that role (de jure).

Being from an open worship, congregationalist, independent church background, part of me wants to say that calling oneself a missionary is personal— between the person and God. However, I have met people who call themselves missionaries who I feel really should not use that term. There should be some form of accountability when it comes to that term. The sender does matter… but I still have seen some that have decided to retire in their mission field region. Some in that retirement mode, free from official oversight, still serve God doing work that is the same as what missionaries do, but do so without the official recognition.

When I started working on this post, I thought I might list a bunch of criteria, or perhaps benchmarks. I might even consider a Venn diagram or something. However, upon reflection, I think that the answer is very personal. In our case, we are in our 60s. We are still young enough and strong enough to keep going for several more years However, matters “back home” are pushing us to limit our time in the mission field. Balancing that is the fact that in the era we now live, a lot of our work can be done from a distance. We could, if we desire, even maintain leadership roles in our organizations from a distance.

When I look at it that way, it is less about what labels we should use, it is more about what roles should we play. Recall the 4Ps of mission work. Pioneer, Parent, Partner, Participant. With some of our mission work (like Bukal Life Care, DPDM, Divine Love Kids Club, CPSP-Philippines, and such) we started out as pioneers— blazing a new trail. Then we moved to a parenting role, where we oversaw the work of others. However, in recent years, we have moved more toward partnering, where our leadership roles are more limited.

Perhaps it is more useful not to say “When is one is no longer a missionary?” and replace it with, “When does one move from the first thre “P’s” to being a “just” a participant (one in the crowd) in mission ministry?” I have long felt that St. John the Apostle is the same person as John the Elder in Asia Minor. Do I know this? No, but the Didache does speak of people switching ministerial roles in the greater church. Prophets can become bishops, for example. In the Bible, Philip shifted from a Deacon role to more of an Apostolic role.

I put the word “just” in the previous paragraph in quotations because I don’t believe being a participant in ministry deserves such a limiting term (just), but recognize that people see it as limited or lacking value.

As my wife and I are slowly transitioning toward a less “feet on the ground” role in overseas missions, we need to find new types of ministries and new roles in these ministries. That is challenging, of course. But it should not be demeaned or feared. Truthfully, transitioning to new roles suggests that one has successfully done the front end work (pioneering, parenting, and partnering). I have seen some missionaries who never really got those early things set (I cannot judge if that is good or bad… not my role). I have also seen some missionaries who could not let go. They wanted to stay a ministerial parent, even after their ministerial and spiritual “children” became all grown up and ready to move off as God would lead them. Maybe that is the question to dwell on instead.

“When does one get stuck too long in a specific missional role?”