Missions?

So I have been challenged recently to examine my definition of missions. The real question is are we allowed to call everything we do in the name of the gospel missions? With my recent involvement in the Missional Church movement I thought that by definition Christians are mandated to be on a mission at all times. But does this shift in modern church language reflect a redefinition of missions or has it created two distinct definitions for the same word? Or maybe there is a much deeper problem that faces the American church. I think it may be a problem of laziness. If I can go across the street and bring a neighbor who just had surgery a meal and call myself a missionary, I take a huge burden off of my shoulders. The act of loving our neighbors is noble and a command of Scripture, why do we feel obligated to attach the word missionary to those actions? Does that title make them more or less noble? In our struggle with pride it is easy to lose sight of the simple act of service. That the glory of God's kingdom is first and foremost our aim. True missions take the gospel to where it is not. That is our mission given by Scripture, to share the love of Jesus with the whole world, even the dangereous parts. It has to be our goal, to show the entire world the love that God has for them, and there is a role in that for each and every one of us. Losing our drive and passion for those that have never heard is a disease that will eventually spread to the entire body. We as the church need to stay focused on what God has for us. As I continue to process the definition of missions I would love to hear what you have to say. Please feel free to comment on this post.