Within the depth-psychology corpus and its allied literatures, ‘Mission’ occupies a complex semantic field that ranges from the soteriological and cosmological to the psychological and interpersonal. At its most expansive, the term designates a divinely or archetypally ordained sending-forth — the descent of a savior figure into the world to awaken, redeem, or reunite what has been lost or scattered. Hans Jonas’s analysis of Gnostic religion presents this with particular force: the savior must himself be saved, and the interchangeability of sender and sent defines the very logic of redemptive mission. Alongside this cosmological register, New Testament theology — especially as treated by Thielman — employs ‘mission’ in an ecclesiological sense: the disciples constitute a mediating link between divine unity and world, and the failure of their inner coherence imperils the mission’s success. Armstrong’s account of the Buddha introduces a third dimension: mission as universal religious program, unprecedented in the ancient world for its non-exclusivity. Across these positions, a persistent tension emerges between mission understood as external propagation and mission understood as inward transformation — a tension that depth psychology, particularly in its Jungian form, tends to resolve by insisting that authentic outward witness is only possible when grounded in a radical personal experience of the numinous. The term thus sits at the intersection of soteriology, individuation, and the psychology of vocation.