In which I lead with a polemical title that appears to have nothing to do with what I'm linking to:
A good deal of what Fitch has to say could be said about all of American Christianity. I find that the propensity for American Christianity to transform itself into some kind of social engineering activist mode hard to ignore. "Mission" whatever it means, is a slippery term. Lots of people imagine "mission" to be something but it is often something added onto the great commission that is seen as the ultimate fulfillment of it in some form or another. What I mean by that is that liberal and conservative American spiritualities inevitably want to transform the declaration of the kingship of Jesus Christ into some kind of social gospel movement. Conservatives gripe about how liberals do this while turning a decidedly blind eye to how they hawk a social gospel all their own often, pardon the pun, with some hawkish tendencies. I'm not really anything close to a peacenik myself, even though I live in Seattle, but I am not convinced that the neo-Reformed are, at the end of the day less "on mission" than any other form of American Christian spirituality.
Remember a while back when I suggested that the popularity of the neo-Reformed movement had little to do with theological rigor and more to do with the promise implicit within its subculture to young men that it was possible to drink, smoke, and get laid while still being a Christian? Well, whatever "missional" is tends to have a comparable promise regardless of which variation of supposedly new and relevant missional this or that is afoot.
There are branches of American spirituality that use "missional" as a way to promise that you can still vote for Democrats or Republicans or what have you. There are branches of theology and spiritual tradition that let you decide that America totally sucks and you should wish you lived somewhere else just as there are corresponding branches that let you talk about the sincerely trinitarian beliefs of founding fathers. In either case my skepticism about mission is less about the great commission and more about whatever mission is grafted onto the commands of the Lord. We're very good at selling ourselves on the idea that WE are faithful and those other people are Samaritan traitors. It doesn't seem like the neo-Reformed movement is any less about mission than any other branch of Christianity in America. It's probably more mission focused than some but that doesn't mean we're clear about "mission" means. I'd need to read a lot more Fitch to know better what he means by "mission" but as an overly jaded 37-year old who has begun to suspect most Christians are doomed to reinvent the wheel any time they try to come up with something "biblical" or "missional" color my pessimistic about the actual newness of what is discussed.