Is your church purpose-driven or missional? Or can it be both? It’s interesting how the conversation about these two major concepts is intensifying more than 13 years after Pastor Rick Warren started the purpose-driven ball rolling with "The Purpose-Driven Church."

Actually, missional is much older, originating with Karl Barth in 1932 and getting a discussion boost from Bishop Lesslie Newbigin  20 years later. Still, it has come under considerable discussion since the first modern book on the missional topic about 11 years ago.

Today, thousands of church leaders are still determining the implications of giving their congregations a missional flavor. Leadership Network consultant Reggie McNeal says one thing it doesn’t mean is slapping a label on an annual mission project and thinking that justifies calling your church "missional."

"We’re going to shift to an incarnational mindset," he said at a conference earlier this year. "Missional is not a program. You can’t operate a missional church without missional people."

Different or similar?

Still, can a purpose-driven church be missional? Church Central Publisher Tom Harper commented in a recent Twitter post that the two seem more similar than different. That prompted one reader to respond: "I am not sure they are all that different…correctly fulfilling your purpose will include being missional in my mind."

In my mind, there is a difference. A church can be purpose-driven, focusing on the five concepts Warren reminded millions of—that we exist for the purposes of worship, fellowship, discipleship, ministry and mission.

Those are admirable purposes, grounded in biblical principles. Yet, there is no guarantee that a church following a purpose-driven model will take the steps of ministry and mission into the community.

Case in point: the recent blog I wrote about the differences churches can make to stem their communities’ high-school dropout problem while many fret over the church dropout problem among young adults.

Purpose-driven to missional

Still, some think that the purpose-driven ethic can be used to become a missional and emergent church—particularly Florida pastor Michael Carey. His Purpose Driven Presbyterians Network received publicity several years ago for its implementation of Warren’s principles.

In a recent article, Carey commented that some leaders wonder whether the missional and emerging movements have supplanted the purpose-driven approach as the best way to re-tool a congregation for life-changing ministry.

Arguing that isn’t the case, he points out that each of these movements are important voices for reshaping local congregations.

And, since the purpose-driven concept was developed for a modern, baby boom generation that valued clarity, it is legitimate to ask whether this approach is less useful for those seeking to reach younger adults, Carey says.

However, he calls such disregard short-sighted, saying purpose-driven’s significance is not a program or seminars. Rather, he calls it an attitude of reaching people "where they are" so the church can be Christ’s catalyst in "taking them where they ought to be."

"It is a commitment to change church culture whenever it becomes apparent that there are better ways to help persons experience the five biblical purposes, along with awareness that spiritual development is developmental," Carey writes.

The challenge ahead

He says much more than I can address now, but this much seems clear: rethinking and redesigning church in this rapidly-shifting age is a tough challenge that won’t happen overnight. And, as McNeal points out, it means more than slapping a fresh label on old programs.

Yet, the fact that so many leaders are involved in the conversation and the working out of God’s purposes in today’s world is exciting. What about you? How are you trying to reinvent your church?