Collective Impact: A Changing Mission Paradigm

Collective Impact: A Changing Mission Paradigm

The above link is a recent article which I wrote for Didache Journal. This reflects some work that I am doing related to an emerging paradigm in missions.  I welcome your thoughts and ideas.

The Church's Welcome Mat

by David Wesley

To find a balanced and Christlike response to the social challenges of our society is not easy for churches and pastors.  As a missiologist I often think about how the church interacts with "others" who do not consider themselves part of the church. Missionaries often deal with these issues as they interact with cultures other than their own.  The term often used for addressing these issues is contextualization.  Anthropologist, Paul Hiebert talks about three ways that Christian mission addresses "others".  One is uncritical contextualization in which there is no critique of a culture or religion.  Anything different is just accepted as good.  This really does no one any good since there are destructive and unhealthy things as well as good things in any culture. A second approach is no contextualization in which the Christian missionary thinks that anything that is different than their own cultural view of Christianity should be rejected or changed. Obviously, this is also unacceptable.  The third view of contextualization according to Hiebert is what he calls critical contextualization in which a person takes the time to listen and understand the "other" and to enter into real dialog in which both parties look to Christ together in a spirit of love and relationship.

As churches in the U.S. find themselves in a changing environment, there is a need for churches to think like missionaries who do the hard work of understanding others and being a christian witness with their lives and actions.

A good example of this is in the following video clip in which Bill Hybels describes their approach to homosexuality:

The attached video is an interesting example of intentional prayer and also an interesting example of 12 Presbyterian Churches that work together for Bible Translation in Cameroon in a form of congregational mission.

COLLECTIVE IMPACT AND MISSION

Some issues are simply too complex to solve with any single approach.  Global humanitarian issues such as the HIV/AIDS crisis, large scale starvation, and drought are such issues.  Likewise, local issues with similar complexity cannot be addressed with a single approach.

There is a growing effort in the social sector to address complex issues in the U.S. such as vulnerable families with children, high school dropout rates, and related areas through what is being called “collective impact”.  An interesting phenomenon that I am noticing is that some congregations are beginning to take a similar approach to missions.  I have especially noticed this as churches are working to address the earthquake crisis in Haiti as well as the HIV/AIDS crisis throughout the continent of Africa as congregation’s partner with relief organizations, local Christians, government granting organizations, and a variety of other sectors.

Collective Impact, has been defined as “the commitment of a group of actors from different sectors to a common agenda for solving a complex social problem”[1]

Collective Impact is distinct from practices in the social and business sector which has practiced a paradigm of “isolated impact”.  The false notion of isolated impact is that a single organization can create large-scale, lasting impact on its own.  In the church this happens as denominations and Christian groups assume that they can make a large-scale, lasting impact on their own.   As they realize that many problems are more complex and systemic rather than mechanically solving a problem, many efforts have resulted in large scale expense efforts (human as well as financial) with limited or negative results.   The emerging paradigm of Collective Impact has not been applied to international missions to this point, but I would propose that an approach to holistic missions to address the complex social issues which Collective Impact is being utilized to address is an interesting option which has merit.

As I work to find some conditions that offer hope for meaningful results in congregational partnerships I find many similarities in the conditions which give success to collective impact approaches[2]:

1.       Common Agenda:  All participants have a shared vision for change including a common understanding of the problem and a joint approach to solving it through agreed upon actions.

2.       Shared Measurement:  Collecting data and measuring results consistently across all participants ensures efforts remain aligned and participants hold each other accountable.

3.       Mutually Reinforcing Activities: Participant activities must be differentiated while still being coordinated through a mutually reinforcing plan of action.

4.       Continuous Communication: Consistent and open communication is needed across the many players to build trust, assure mutual objectives, and appreciate common motivation.

5.       Backbone Organization: Creating and managing collective impact requires a separate organization(s) with staff and a specific set of skills to serve the backbone for the entire initiative and coordinating participating organizations and agencies.

Isolated Impact vs. Collective Impact

Isolated Impact	Collective Impact
Funders select individual grantees that offer the most promising solutions.	Funders and implementers understand that social problems, and their solutions, arise from the interaction of many organizations within a larger system.
Nonprofits work separately and compete to produce the greatest independent impact.	Progress depends on working toward the same goal and measuring the same things.
Evaluation attempts to isolate a particular organization’s impact.	Large scale impact depends on increasing cross-sector alignment and learning among many organizations.
Large scale change is assumed to depend on scaling a single organization.	Corporate and government sectors are essential partners.
Corporate and government sectors are often disconnected from the efforts of foundations and nonprofits.	Organizations actively coordinate their action and share lessons learned.

From a descriptive perspective, what I am noticing in congregational partnerships is a move away from isolated impact and a move toward collective impact. In ways that are probably similar to the business sector, there still exists a large degree of isolation, or organizations which are all working together but not entirely collectively.  To a large degree, however, there appears to be a movement toward congregations which are engaging a cross section of organizations to address major global issues.  This movement has various implications for congregations, for mission agencies as well as those with whom they partner.  Beyond that, for organizations which have moved strongly toward a model of church growth in which the measure of success is building the isolated organization, a collective impact model which focuses on the common good regardless of return to the organization will pose challenges to existing structures. 

---

[1] See www.fsg.org/OurApproach/WhatIsCollectiveImpact.aspx downloaded 4/9/2012

[2]  The list as well as comparisons come from HanleyBrown, Fay Kania John and Kramer Mark. 2012. Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work: An in-depth look at how organizations of all types, active in diverse settings, are implementing a collective impact approach to solve large-scale problems. In Stanford Social Innovation Review. Downloaded April 9, 2012 from http://www.fsg.org/Portals/0/Uploads/Documents/PDF/Channeling_Change_SSIR.pdf

Bearing the Burdens of Those Outside the Gate: Another Story of Lent

By David Wesley

“Come, all you who are thirsty, come to the waters; and you who have no money, come, buy and eat! Come, buy wine and milk without money and without cost – Isaiah 55:1-3

I am ending my time in Africa and will be going home on Monday. So far I have interviewed more than 100 people including ministry leaders of incredible ministries in a very complex context, those who care for sick and dying as well as those who are sick and dying, those who give out of abundance as well as those those who give out of scarcity, those who submit their life in worship to God as well as those who believe that they can control power through magic, those who live in Africa as well as those who live in the U.S. Needless to say, I will be working through all that I have collected for some time. During my data gathering process, I was interesting in a water well focus that has a fascinating long and involved story which I will not explain fully here, but the short version is that much needed, solar panel water pumps are being established in Swaziland through the collective work of an engineer from a U.S. church who came to Swaziland with a volunteer church group, a South African businessman working in Swaziland, a U.S. based grant writer and developer, funding from Coca Cola, and a network of Nazarene schools and clinics. These much needed solar powered water pumps are being installed throughout Swaziland and will undoubtedly make a long term impact on primarily the rural areas of Swaziland. Early in my time here I spent a day visiting several of the sites where the pumps had been installed. At one of the sites I noticed that the pump was connected to a medical clinic and a school. When I spoke to a person at this site, I asked “does this well provide water for the whole communitty?” He said “no, only for the school and clinic. This is our water”. When I got back in the car I asked the person who was with me, who had written the grant for the wells, if there was danger of this well running out of water if the community had access to it. She said, “this well would provide twice over sufficient water for the whole surrounding community. The people who managed this well were functioning out of a mindset of scarcity”. A couple of weeks later, I was at a church in a rural community to see a child development center which the church had developed and which a church in the U.S. was building a partnership with. When I had interviewed the pastor of this church, she told me that the people of her church had been caring for a large number of children in their community whose parents had died of AIDs related illnesses. The number of orphaned children they were caring for was near the same number as people in her congregation. She explained that up to now the people of this rural community would take food from their homes and take some of their own children’s clothes in order to care for these children. During my time at this church I had an interview with three young women who are a part of the church. One woman was the cook for preschool, who cooked meals for the children outdoors in a large cast iron pot over a wood fire. One of the women was a teacher in the preschool for the children and the other was a member of the church who helped with the preschool. We sat on wooden benches with no backs underneath a large shade tree for the interview. They explained to me that the church had a child development center with a pre-school to help children in the area who are very poor and many are orphans. I then asked them about the water well which their new church partner from the U.S had helped install just the day before. I noticed that there were various spickets for water outlet. There were eight are in the garden areas, there are 4-5 throughout the property and one just outside the property. I thought this was interesting after visiting the other location a couple of weeks ago that wanted to keep the water for themselves. One difference was that the one I saw earlier was not connected to a church but to a medical clinic and school. The earlier one said that they would not provide water for their community even though that had plenty to do it. It was a scarcity mentality rationale, so I thought that it was interesting that this church had deliberately placed one outlet outside of their property. I first asked them who decided to put the water spicket out side of the property. Was it the church from the U.S., their pastor, the contractors, or someone else? They said that the church committee made that decision. I asked, “why did you put water access on the outside where everyone from the community could use it instead of putting it on the inside where they could control how much was being used?” The three of them laughed at me like that was a stupid question. They said “we put it outside because we are Christians. We didn’t make the water, God did. If we kept it to ourselves, we would not be Christian. We have to share with those around us”. That same attitude could be seen as they took from their own limited resources to provide food and clothes for an overwhelming number of orphaned children. This is the same spirit that I have seen over and over again. As Christians provide medical care for witchdoctors, as churches provide assistance to those outside. In every case, it isn't a question of whether you are a potential client for my church, but rather, living into an authentic Christian identity. During this season of lent, I am reminded of the same thing that I have seen over and over again here in Swaziland that we are called to bear one another’s burdens, just as Christ bore our burdens. I am reminded that giving sometimes comes out of abundance, but often comes out of our identity in Christ. I am also reminded that the church does not exist just for the needs of those inside the fence, but we are called to be Christian as we provide for those outside the fence as well.

An African Story of Lent

by David Wesley

I am in Africa during most of the season of Lent and somehow that seems fitting and unfitting at the same time. It is unfitting because the landscape as well as the people around me are beautiful. I am not suffering, I am able to stay in a comfortable place, and I am getting to do exciting research. It is fitting, not because I am having to give up things (other than my family) in order to be here. It is fitting, however, because I have been able to witness a very Christian tradition of bearing another’s burden.

Last night I had dinner with some friends here in Swaziland. Over dinner one of the North American friends said, “I have a theological question, why would God give me such a spirit of compassion for suffering and yet He didn’t give me the ability to fix the suffering that I see around me.” She made this comment after she had spent the day working in the hospital where she had seen children who were abandoned as well as challenging situations in the hospital. That is probably a question that nearly every North American who comes to places with overwhelming challenges such as the highest HIV/aids epidemic in the world.

This past week I spent some time with the Swaziland HIV/AIDS Task Force with the founders, Mary Magagula and Evelyn Shongwe, who work with a team of almost 200 volunteer caregivers providing home-based care to those primarily dying of AIDS. The Task Force encourages communities to form co-ops for gardens and have 95 children supported through child sponsorship.

Upon arriving at the office there were seven large (and very heavy) nylon bags which were part of what we were going to take to each home. Each back contained large bags of meale, peanuts, beans, rice and cooking oil. These are staple products which can be easily prepared, can go a long way in preparing food, and according to Evelyn have high nutritional value. I helped load the bags into the back of the 4X4 truck and we heading toward the area where we would make home visits. Along the way I interviewed Mary and Evelyn.

After a 30 minute drive on pavement we arrived at a marginalized community on the mountainside of Manzini. We left the paved road onto a deeply rutted dirt road for a ride that was similar to a bucking bronco. At points the ruts were extremely deep and the heavy vegetation made the roads very narrow. Evelyn and Mary pointed out that these communities are extremely difficult by vehicle but for people who are struggling with severe illnesses, it is impossible for them to find medical help.

The first home that we visited was a cement structure with a tin roof. A 2-3 year old girl with a frilly red dress that was torn in several places and with a very runny nose was standing in the doorway to greet us. It is difficult to describe, but there was the same dynamic in every home we visited. These were all homes where people are in the process of dying soon under difficult circumstances. In every case, Evelyn was like a light coming into a dark room. She has a jovial spirit in which she brought a sincere and appropriate laughter to these situations. As we entered the house I noticed the cement walls with peeling paint and at all of the electric outlets the wires were hanging loose. The house was, however, incredibly clean and well kept. Near the door of the house was the woman that we came to visit who was HIV positive and also had TB (which was the case in nearly all visits that we made). She was lying on the floor on top of cushions that had been taken from the couch and placed on the cement floor. The woman was skeletal and could hardly move or speak. Her grandmother who brought her to her house along with her daughter greeted us and was grateful to have visitors. Evelyn and Mary gave the family blankets and hats which people use although it is around 90 degrees. They also gave them food which is helpful for people who are limited by finances as well as mobility. Mary and Evelyn also have a sub-nursing level of training which is recognized by the government – in every visit they went through a chart that was kept at the house related to the medications that people took and when they were taking them. The medication was very basic pain relief with medications for stomach issues, skin care for drying skin, etc. In everyone of these home visits, Evelyn and Mary would hold people’s hands, hug them and demonstrate a sense of solidarity with people who were going through a very difficult process.

As we drove along, I asked the women if they had fear of contracting sickness or diseases through such contact with people. Evelyn laughed at me and just said, “and what would that matter, we still have to do what Christ told us to do”.

I cannot help but think that the attitude of Evelyn and Mary is not really abnormal for Christians. The attitude to preserve ourselves and hoard resources is what is abnormal. Evelyn and Mary are simply living out their Christian identity.
This identity can also be seen in an interesting piece from the second century:

Martyrs, Who Died in the Great Pestilence in Alexandria
From Eusebius, Hist. l. 7, c. 21, 22, p. 266.
A. D. 261, 262, 263.

A voilent pestilence laid waste the greatest part of the Roman empire during twelve years, from 249 to 263. Five thousand persons died of it if one day in Rome, in 262. St. Dionysius of Alexandria relates, that a cruel sedition and civil war had filled that city with murders and tumults; so that it was safer to travel from the eastern to the western parts of the then known world, than to go from one street of Alexandria to another. The pestilence succeeded this first scourge, and with such violence, that there was not a single house in that great city which entirely escaped it, or which had not some dead to mourn for. All places were filled with groans, and the living appeared almost dead with fear. The noisome exhalations of carcasses, and the very winds, which should have purified the air, loaded with infection and pestilential vapors from the Nile, increased the evil. The fear of death rendered the heathens cruel towards their nearest relations. As soon as any of them had caught the contagion, though their dearest friends, they avoided and fled from them as their greatest enemies. They threw them half dead into the streets, and abandoned them without succor; they left their bodies without burial, so fearful were they of catching that mortal distemper, which, however, it was very difficult to avoid, notwithstanding all their precautions. This sickness, which was the greatest of calamities to the pagans, was but an exercise and trial to the Christians, who showed, on that occasion, how contrary the spirit of charity is to the interestedness of self-love. During the persecutions of Decius, Gallus, and Valerian, they durst not appear, but were obliged to keep their assemblies in solitudes, or in ships tossed on the waves, or in infected prisons, or the like places, which the sanctity of our mysteries made venerable. Yet in the time of this public calamity, most of them, regardless of the danger of their own lives in assisting others, visited, relieved, and attended the sick, and comforted the dying. They closed their eyes, carried them on their shoulders, laid them out, washed their bodies, and decently interred them, and soon after shared the same fate themselves; but those who survived still succeeded to their charitable office, which they paid to the very pagans their persecutors. “Thus,” adds St. Dionysius, “the best of our brethren have departed this life; some of the most valuable, both of priests, deacons, and laics; and it is thought that this kind of death is in nothing different from martyrdom.” And the Roman Martyrology says, the religious faith of pious Christians honors them as martyrs.
In these happy victims of holy charity we admire how powerfully perfect virtue, and the assured expectation of eternal bliss, raises the true Christian above all earthly views. He who has always before his eyes the incomprehensible happiness of enjoying God in his glory, and seriously considers the infinite advantage, peace, and honor annexed to his divine service; he who is inflamed with an ardent love of God, and zeal for his honor, sets no value on any thing but in proportion as it affords him a means of improving his spiritual stock, advancing the divine honor, and more perfectly uniting his soul to God by every heroic virtue: disgraces, dangers, labor, pain, death, loss of goods or friends, and every other sacrifice here become his gain and his greatest joy. That by which he most perfectly devotes himself to God, and most speedily and securely attains to the bliss of possessing him, he regards as his greatest happiness.

A part of our true Christian identity is not necessarily the ability to fix all of the problems around us by helicoptering in as I have done this month. The true Christian identity, is an identity of lent as I have seen it in many African Christian brothers and sisters such as Evelyn and Mary and many other. It is the incarnational presence of Christ which chooses to actually bear on another’s burden.

That identity leaves me and other North Americans who come in for a short time in a difficult position. John 1: 14 says, the word became flesh and dwelt among us. Phil. 2 says that we should have the same mind in us which was in Christ Jesus who although he was God, he humbled himself and became obedient even unto death on the cross. At best, I cannot really fix all of the suffering around me and perhaps that really isn’t my calling. I can, however, open my eyes while I am here and learn from some amazing saints and I can come along side them as together we live into the mission of God for us both. More importantly I have to ask myself some difficult questions about how I bear the burdens of those who live in my own home town, even at my own risk and in doing so, live into my Christian identity.

I am finding that there are so many things to learn from the amazing Africans. The picture above is a picture that someone sent to me yesterday of an African brother who asked if he could pray for me. I have been prayed for many times in my life, but never quite like this. The picture looks like I am praying for him, but he is definitely the one praying for me. I am thankful today that a brother from whom I have so much to learn walked together with me to the presence of God. In the words of the umbuntu philosophy, “I am because of who we are”. Our identity is found in who we are together and as we bear one another’s burdens.

Can Mega Churches be Missional?

In a few weeks NTS will host a group of pastors who pastor churches of more than 1,000 per week in worship. Part of the conversations that we will be having together and which I will be leading is related to the changing nature of mission involvement particularly in large churches that are forming long term partnerships. There has been considerable discussion in recent years as to whether a mega church can actually be missional in nature. Over the next few weeks leading up to these meetings on October 10-11th, I will be posting resources on this blog related to an interesting emerging phenomenon in which mega churches particularly have a connectional nature within the congregation which leads to new patterns of mission engagement. I am posting the following video as a lead off piece for this discussion since it brings the argument related to mega churches and missional to the forefront.

Ed Stetzer & Dave Fitch - a missional conversation Part II from Medri Kinnon Productions on Vimeo.

I Come From Everywhere

People who decide to become lifelong, career missionaries or to spend long periods of time in a new culture because of their business often have children who accompany them. As those children grow up, many times in a variety of cultures they often become global citizens whose view of the world is shaped by their experiences. While there is a real danger to stereotype third culture kids since they grow up in vastly differing circumstances and since they are unique persons, one of the common traits of many people who grow up in a variety of contexts is a feeling of connection to the world, but a struggle to find a sense of belonging. The following is an interesting video clip which gives this perspective of adult third culture kids.

Advice (part 3)

DW: As I think about issues which all of you as well as Paul Orjala have wrestled with as Nazarene missiologists, I am amazed that in the 1970’s and 1980’s you were often ahead of your time in addressing issues which did not follow the trends of the church, but which pushed the thinking of the church forward into the mission of God. As a point of wise advice to younger missiologists, what would you consider to be the most pressing or important issues that missiologists today should be looking at?

FC: Item one. Listen. If you do not have the ability to listen, you will not be a good missiologist. Listen to the world. Listen to national leaders. Listen to learn the subtleties of culture and life. Listen to the church. Listen to your heart.
I really do believe that one can read books, theorize about great issues, debate fine points. All that is well and good. But without listening, you can't develop the real context for that information to be of much use.
Item two. Don't expect to be listened to. Church bureaucrats tend to get caught up in their own world of process and detail and not listen to reasons why this or that decision may be missiologically off base. Don't let that unduly frustrate you. In time, and with persistent good heart and good faith, the truth will pop out and became plain to decision makers (at least, most of the time!)

LB: I would add that one must be incarnational in order to truly understand the culture. Having said that, however, being a good missiologist is more than understanding missions and culture, it is moving the church to engage in God's plan of the Great Commission.

FC: Item three. Stay current. It is hard to keep up with the trends, the ideas, and the rapid pace of the world. But a missiologist has to have one foot in the past and one foot in the future. Perspective is everything. Staying current is NOT adopting the latest fad or buzz word.
Item four. Remember that it is the local church that is the primary unit of the Body of Christ. Everything must flow from that, or connect to it. Missiologists cannot live in isolation in either an ivory tower or on Mount Athos.

LB: This is true

CG: Paul Orjala was one of the founders of the American Society of Missiology. During my very first year at NTS, Paul took me to an ASM meeting to hear Andrew Walls--I still have my notes from that meeting. Paul was also active in the Association of Evangelical Professors of Mission. I was at the meeting of AEPM when a letter was read from Donald McGavran suggesting that the name be changed to Evangelical Missiological Society, which was voted. I later served as an officer in both the ASM and EMS. Orjala was a model missiologist in many ways--even in more recent years some of the older members asked about him at ASM meetings. He understood both Franklin's injunction to listen, and Louie's advice to "be", not just to talk or philosophize.
Franklin also makes a good point that Church leaders may not always listen to you. He, Orjala and others had quite a time convincing the church that young people should be allowed to travel overseas! Strange as it may seem in 2011, it was a radical idea back then! But a good missiologist should always be casting a vision for the future--"possibility thinking" for the next century. When I first proposed to a group of African students that some of them should become missionaries,they could hardly wrap their minds around that. But some of the students (Wellington Obotte, Cosmas Mtowa, and others) have done just that. What's next? Could we dream of ALL General Superintendents being from nations outside the USA? Or of having only Regional Directors, with no GS's? Of GMC being located in Sao Paulo or Johannesburg? Of being able to persuade Americans to "bankroll" mission without being in control?
Finally, remember that missiology is exciting, but it is not just about theorizing. I support both Franklin and Louie in their statements reminding us that the local church is the primary unit of the body of Christ.

DW: Thank you, friends. It has been good chating with you.

CHANGE

Part 2 of porch conversation with Franklin Cook, Chuck Gailey, and Louie Bustle.

DW: Let’s talk about change. Historically there are “hinge” events, people or movements which change the course of missions. In 30 years from now, what do you think people will look back on and say were the “hinge” moment(s) in Nazarene Missions between 1965 and 2010?

FC: I have often reflected on "hinge events" but back to 1898, not to 1965. Every time I come up with a list of hinge events, or turning points, it is a bit different. Since you have given 1965 as a date, I am going to "fudge" a bit and go back to 1945, the end of World War II.
1945 to 1960 was a period of "recovery" from the War. After being unable to travel, there was a rush to deploy many new missionaries. In 1958, the BGS decided to commission 50 missionaries to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the denomination. This did not prove to be a positive decision because the quality and training of that number was not sustained, and there was no strategic plan for proper use of that number of missionaries.
1960 was the first hinge point. This was the election of George Coulter as WMDirector. He came with an entirely new point of view and had a unique ability to build morale and team esprit 'd corp. He initiated for the first time a program to actually train missionaries in a systematic way.
During this time, Dr. Paul Orjala emerged as a missiologist in the denomination, perhaps the first so trained. He was utilized for many of the early training efforts. Dr. Coulter wanted to shift from a "haphazard" approach of missionary deployment to a more professional corp of missionaries.
1964 was a hinge point. Nazarene Evangelistic Ambassadors was created which for the first time utilized college personnel under World Mission sponsorship. As odd as it now seems, then it was considered a risky innovation to put college age personnel on the field.
This program evolved in to Student Mission Corp (first called the Youth Assistance Missionary Corp) which then evolved in to Youth in Mission, and before long, short term and volunteer work became a norm, not an exception.
1972 was a hinge event. In Florida, immediately following a General Assembly, the first gathering of "national District Superintendents" was held with the World Mission Director without the presence of any missionary personnel whatsoever. This was considered revolutionary at the time because it gave World Mission direct and immediate contact with the national church without interpretation by a missionary. It represented a huge shift in thinking.
1974 and following were hinge events. The denomination declared that we would be an international community of faith. While this had been assumed by many, and while most did not really know what this meant (perhaps we still don't!), it was, at least, an official declaration. The management of this led to the development of Regions and regional offices, a process of regionalization which has elements of Federation. One can almost divide Nazarene missions into two parts, pre and post Regions.
1981 might, and I emphasize might, be considered a hinge event. In that year the General Board reorganized itself (some say not for the better) in creating a series of departments, which, in turn, filtered down to the global church. The downside was that this structure tended to silo ize the church and led to greater and greater "bureaucratic" development. During this time we became much more interested in process than in mission.
1994 is a hinge event. This was the election of Louie Bustle as WM Director. This was the first time a "field experienced" person had assumed this role. He came in with the perspective of a missionary and a regional director rather than a USA district superintendent.
But more importantly, Dr. Bustle brought with him a focus on evangelism, multiplication, and decentralization. These were all things which needed to happen to spur growth of the church and a new philosophy of missions. A side effect was to shift from a role of World Mission as being a "missionary deployment agency" to a "church development agency." The implications of this are huge.
There were, of course, other hinge events, such as the 1989 fall of the Berlin Wall which changed politically the world forever and opened new vistas of opportunity for the denomination.

CG: I agree with Franklin that the arrival of George Coulter as WMDirector in 1960 was a significant event. I recall that, as a University graduate student, my impression of Nazarene missions changed from "drab and old fashioned" to "contemporary" when the first letter I received from George Coulter was on newly designed, aesthetically pleasing stationery!
But to me the really major mid-20th century "hinge event" would have to be Paul Orjala's 1964 establishment of the missionary training program at NTS. If one looks at the growth curve of global mission in the church, you can graphically see the impact of Orjala's life and teaching on missionary candidates and subsequent dramatic growth overseas. Of course, several years elapsed before the students that he had trained graduated and had completed their pastoral/practical 2-3 years of experience. His early relationship with Donald McGavran (before he landed at Fuller) catapulted the Nazarenes to the forefront of the "infinite multiplication" of churches. In fact, the very first course in church planting in North America was taught by McGavran at NTS at Orjala's invitation. So, to me, Paul Orjala's recovery of NT principles of church multiplication, and then teaching those principles to a new generation of missionaries would have to rank as the number one "hinge event".
A related, significant event of the 20th century would be the February, 1994 election of Louie Bustle as WMDirector. Bustle was the first of Orjala's students to become Director, and the impact of this fact cannot be easily overestimated. Franklin has already pointed out that Louie came to office as a "field" person with hands-on experience. His philosophy of mission has been, and is, deeply influenced by Orjala's emphasis on indigenization and multiplication.
I would agree that the 1972 meeting of District Superintendents in Miami without missionaries present was important in casting a vision for a global church, and that the development of Regions was also highly significant.
LB: Chuck is correct on Orjala. Paul brought us into a whole new concept of missions. Wyncoop exposed me to a new way to view missions but it was Paul who infected me. We have been building on Orjala’s concepts ever since.
More than anything, missions is about listening to the Spirit and dreaming together. God does the rest.

FC: Chuck has rightly pointed out the importance of Paul Orjala and the initiation of the missionary training program at NTS. As with all things, there is always something which precedes certain developments.
I arrived in the World Mission office in June of 1961 to join a very small staff totaling 7 persons. Virtually on my first day in the office Dr. Coulter came in to talk about candidates. He had assigned this responsibility to me along with several other assignments.
He wanted me to start a quarterly publication for candidates, initially called The Missionary Beam." He wanted to dig into the pre computer list of names, and I discovered there were less than 400 total contacts in the files at that time. Twelve years later we had increased this to almost 2,000 contact names with a new system of application. He wanted to start a "workshop" program for furloughing missionaries followed by an "institute" program for newly appointed missionaries.
At the same time Paul Orjala was proceeding with his doctoral studies and became the lead teacher at the workshop and later the institute. This really set the stage for the next step in his career, NTS. I was told that at the time General Superintendent Hugh C. Benner strongly opposed the notion of Paul coming to NTS on the theory that the Orjala's were needed in Haiti (which they certainly were!)
It is always interesting to trace historical lines and to see how events, even hinge events, connect.

DW: Just a side note to add to this conversation. I was thinking about the turning points for mission in the CON, and thought it was interesting that we did not talk about movement toward a grass roots led mission which began with Men in mission and the move toward sending college students in the late 60’s. The CON was one of earliest to move in this direction. Today, short-term mission is huge both in the CON and beyond. Ralph Winters has said that this is one of the most drastic mutations of missions within the past 100 years. More money is spent each year in STM than traditional missions, especially if you include the amount spent on full time missionaries whose primary or secondary role is working with Work and Witness, Youth In Mission, etc. I am in the middle of research right now related to how STM is morphing into what I call “congregational mission” in which whole congregations are engaged in a long term focus such as Bethany First in Swaziland. In a survey I conducted about 6 months ago, I found that the majority of Nazarene churches over 500 in worship or attendance have this type of partnership and that the majority of those that don’t are projecting to begin partnerships within the next five years.

I think that the move toward lay-missions was a huge turning point for us. Whether it was good or bad, is yet to be seen and depends on how we address the issue. A discussion amongst missiologists now is how we can utilize the tools of missiology to make this a positive movement for the church. A major discussion is also about how we prepare long term missionaries to be brokers between two cultures. This is just my opinion, but the greatest challenge ahead for those of us who educate as well as those of us who administrate is to find healthy patterns of “north-south” interdependent relationships in which we work together toward a common mission. Paternal relationships or sponsorships are probably the norm right now in most of these partnerships. We have to find ways to change this into healthy relationships.

LB: You may know this, but during the 60’s, leadership did not want laymen to go to the field. I remember a man from Michigan who was a builder who wanted to volunteer, but was not allowed to go. Finally Dr. Phillips told him to write to missionaries in Trinidad and to me in the Virgin Islands. He didn’t get a response from Trinadad so he came and helped me build several buildings and taught me how to build. That was one of the very first examples of Work and Witness.

FC: I had never heard the Michigan builder story that Louie refers to here.
Dr. Phillips may have halted this, but I remember a time, when volunteer college kids had caused some difficulties and the missionaries there were raising a ruckus about it, he defended the program and the concept and in essence saved the idea.
I would say that it was a compliment to Louie that Phillips wrote him about this builder and reveals a great deal of trust that already developed with Louie and Ellen to "handle" the situation.
Interesting to know how these things develop.

CG: Volunteerism has been a very significant event in the CON. Work and Witness began as "Men in Mission" under Paul Gamertsfelder (Central Ohio). He asked several times to take men to the field, but E.S. Phillips denied the request. Men were allowed to vote in the NWMS as early as 1952, but it was not until Jan. 15-25, 1974 that Gamertsfelder was allowed to take a group of men to Panama. He had asked to take a group previously, but was denied by E.S. Phillips. However, in 1972 Gamertsfelder became the first man to be elected to the general NWMS Council, and I believe that gave him the necessary "clout" to get permission for the trip. I have documented these origins, as well as the beginning of Mission Corps (NIVS) in an ANSR paper which I gave in 2002--you can find it on the CON website (Click on ANSR in the CON A-Z Directory, then click on Documents by Date, then "2002" and Gailey). I also briefly outline in the paper how NIVS developed out of W and W. Paul Gamertsfelder is still living, and I was privileged to speak at his retirement dinner from the Central Ohio NMI Council a couple of years ago.
As far as a major "turning point", I think it depends on the perspective as to whether or not we are talking about the growth of the church overseas. I think the reason why none of us mentioned this volunteerism is because, as you say, David, most of these partnerships have been paternal in nature, and thus not directly related to the seismic change in CON growth. Winter was right is saying that volunteerism has been "one of the most drastic mutations of missions", but many missiologists question the immediate benefit of such a mutation to the local churches overseas. Franklin has reminded us that all that we do should center on the local church. Of course, these volunteer efforts do inspire and benefit the sending churches, so it can be argued that they indirectly benefit WM. If, as you say, we could turn more of these volunteer encounters into "healthy relationships" that would be a boon.

DW: In relation to your last statements, Chuck, I think this reflects a changing perception of missions that really began during the 60’s and 70’s and which has taken force in the past 5-10 years. My opinion is that there is a major turning point not only in the U.S. but globally in which mission is not limited to the “professionals”, but a turn toward mission being the nature of the church which engages the whole church in the whole mission, and which includes those who are long term missionaries. I saw this when we lived in South American and again this past year in Africa.

FC: The references Chuck makes to the role of Paul Gamertsfelder are certainly correct. He was really the godfather of the whole notion of men getting actively involved as volunteers in mission(s).
I am wondering if Dr. Phillips was hesitant in putting the brakes on laymen going to the field in groups, vs. ministers or elders. He had a clear distinction in his mind between clergy/lay in the local church and talked to me often about the fact that "clergy need to be in control." Sometime along in the early 70"s or late 60's I facilitated a large group of pastors from Colorado going to Panama and Dr. Phillips was fully in support of this venture. So, I am wondering if the issue for him was the clergy/lay issue.
One other little antidote on "men in missions." I was a very young page at the 1952 General Assembly when the resolution to include men in NWMS came up. Dr. E. O. Chalfant (Chicago Central DS) got up and made a speech against including men. The tide was about to have the resolution defeated when Louise Robinson Chapman came to the platform and made an impassioned speech in favor of including men in the organization. And that was the end of the debate. She carried a very big stick. It passed.

DW: This is a fascinating conversation. I am interested in the paradigm shift of missions from above to missions from below. This is a move away from strategies which we develop from the leadership of mission that opens the possibilities and the finances for mission to expand to a more organic approach which begins in the local churches. Louie and I saw this at the conference in South Africa as leaders from the whole region were pushing toward a move that would engage the whole 500,000+ Nazarenes of Africa in mission instead of just a select few. We are also seeing this from the U.S. and other areas. This is huge! It represents a major paradigm shift that hasn’t been orchestrated, but is just happening. The needed strategy from above will be to find ways to engage this movement in biblical theological ways to avoid folk theologies and repeated paternalistic patterns. (My opinion is that the best strategy will be an integrated strategy which networks long term missionaries, leadership, local churches and resources beyond the church. )
The Church of the Nazarene was ahead of other denominations in engaging lay people in mission in the 60’s, and my thoughts are that this has opened the door for what we are currently seeing, at least from the U.S.

I would like to pick up on this topic in a few weeks to look at current changes in mission which will affect how the church engages in mission in the present and near future.

Missionaries

This week’s porch conversation is with three friends who have been a part of some of most formative and changing years for Nazarene missions. Along with the late Dr. Paul Orjala, and perhaps H.F. Reynolds, these men represent some of the most strategic and missiological thinkers in the Church of the Nazarene. It is no exaggeration to say that the current health and vitality of the Church of the Nazarene beyond the U.S. is largely due to the vision that God has placed in these three. It is an honor to have these gentlemen join me for this conversation.

Dr. Louie Bustle is the current Director of Global Mission and has served as South America Regional Director as well as missionary. Dr. Franklin Cook has served as the Regional Director for the Eurasia Region, Editor of the official Nazarene publication, Holiness Today, missiology professor at NTS and a multitude of consulting and leadership roles. Dr. Charles Gailey has served as a missionary in Swaziland as well as professor of missiology at Nazarene Theological Seminary and author of texts related to missiology.

DW: Let me begin by thanking you for accepting my invitation to participate in this conversation. You are good friends as well as leaders who love and respect the church and yet think creatively about God’s mission and the church.
As a beginning point, let’s talk about missionaries. Without doubt, missionaries have always worked within the framework of society in which they were brought up and there have been times when missionaries have been colonialistic and have not made the most positive impact. In my opinion, the real story, however, is about missionaries who have been incarnational and who have invested their lives, including their family and their careers to follow the call of God. Can you talk about this a little?

FC: My experience with missionaries began at the age of 10 months. My parents, missionaries to India, were my primary examples of what missionary life was like, and many of my later ideas have roots in what I saw, and experienced, during a time of the British Raj in India.

My first reflective observation is that the majority of missionaries were incarnational and for the most part, lived out their work according to their understanding of the message of the Gospel in a primarily non-Christian environment. True, some may have had colonialistic ideas, and without doubt many errors were made in judgement. However, one can only understand and analyze these in retrospect. At the time, the actions taken and the decisions made were considered ethical, proper, and Christ-like.

My second observation is that missionaries are creatures of their times and generation. The missionaries of the immediate pre and post World War II era were very much so, as indeed are the missionaries of today. I later realized that missionaries also carry with them "cultural baggage." In India, as a child, we had missionaries from many places, Scotland, England, Pennsylvania, California, Ohio, Massachusetts, Oregon, and elsewhere. At the time, they all seemed to blend together in my childish mind. I now realize that in fact each brought with them a different strand of the fabric. It is the composite of the whole that established the Church of the Nazarene in India, rather than the ideas of any one nation, or region, or area, becoming the sole standard.

My third observation is that missionaries were at the time long-termers. They left their home areas and families, many with no expectation they would ever return to their homes. If circumstances were good, a seven, even a nine year term was the norm. This was later reduced to five, then four. Missionaries went expecting to spend a life time in one area, with one primary language and cultural target group to learn. Life tended not to be mobile but stationery. In fact, the mission was called the "mission station" (an oxymoron if ever there was one).
My fourth observation is that some missionaries had an instinctive ability to relate to the issue of building relationships with indigenous persons, and thus to a developing indigenous church. Others did not. They did not fit, did not feel comfortable, did not adapt. God chose to build His church, sometimes in spite of rather than because of.
Finally, as an MK (missionary kid) I feel fortunate to have been able to experience and observe (and later analyze) the entire missionary experience. It has been almost all positive.

CG: Good missionaries have usually been knowledgeable amateur anthropologists. They learn the language and study the culture of the people where God (and the church) has placed them. They couple this knowledge with a strong devotion to Christ and commitment to His call, which enables them to become effective missionaries. A good example from the earliest days of Nazarene missionary endeavors is Harmon Schmelzenbach and his wife, Lula. They studied the language so earnestly and intensively that Harmon nearly had a breakdown. They learned the culture so thoroughly that, after buying the farmhouse, they did not live in it (as colonialists would have), but rather made repeated attempts (and long journeys) to ask the reigning Queen Mother for permission to do so. This resulted in them having to live in the wagon for a year or so (and, after the arrival of Miss Innis, Harmon slept under the wagon!) so as not to offend the cultural leaders. No wonder that the current government of Swaziland is considering making Harmon's "prayer rock" a national monument. Harmon and Lula were incarnational missionaries. They did it right.

Of course, "doing it right" does not guarantee immediate results. The Schmelzenbachs labored for three years before the first two persons (mother and daughter) accepted Christ. I interviewed the daughter before her death--she explained that the Schmelzenbachs high standards of holy living had influenced her mother to come to the Schmelzenbachs and say, "I choose Christ". Harmon and Lula were incarnational missionaries who established a strong foundation for the Church in Africa--today there are over half a million members!

365m students (part 2)

The following is the second half of the conversation with the students who are in Brazil, Croatia and Northern Ireland.

DW: In what ways will this year in Ireland/Brazil/Croatia play a role in what you do in the future?

CROATIA: It will inform the way we approach, interact and live within the world. There is a broader perspective of life informed by being able to live outside of a context familiar to you enabling you to be more of a world citizen.

IRELAND: God has placed me in multiple situations where he continues to draw me into cross-cultural ministry. I do not know exactly but I would love to live and serve overseas, this year has further confirmed this in my life.

BRAZIL: Over the last couple of weeks we've randomly talked to each other about how cross-cultural experience have a transformative aspect. These transformations sometimes aren't evident to you until weeks or months after you have returned to your 'home' context. Incarnational living is about intentionally allowing God to transform every area of your life to look like Christ's. Just as we have chosen to live and learn in this Brazilian context, we've chosen to continue to pursue the incarnational lifestyle that is guided by the Holy Spirit not matter our future circumstances. Our future will be forever formed by what we have experienced and learned during this program.

DW: What advice would you give to new students who will be starting their 365m year in just a couple of months?

CROATIA: Be open. God and His Spirit move in ways beyond anything you can imagine so be open to that. Rather than setting a lot of goals and things to achieve make sure you balance it with letting yourself learn as new things open up to you and through means you weren’t expecting.
Be patient. Learn with graciousness in the hard times and thankfulness and praise in the great times. There are a lot of both, but they work together to produce valuable lessons and growth.

IRELAND: Go with an open mind. Nothing will work out perfectly but something better will happen. GOD will reveal himself to you more fully as you allow the situations of life to come at you, REMEMBER you NEED an open mind. Let yourself be surprised!

BRAZIL: Here are some of the quick things that come to our mind, and are in no particular order:

- Stay open, in other words be flexible!

- Be adaptable! I (Liliana) remember the first couple of weeks being here and being frantic about not having a full schedule. I’m very thankful for Scott who always lovingly reminded me about adaptable by saying, “It’s just fine Liliana, we don’t have to know everything about what’s going on. It’s okay.”

- Which brings us to another important reminder, don’t have your own agenda! Yes, having a general direction in which you are going is great, but ultimately everything you're taking part of now is originally on God's agenda, so let the Holy Spirit FLOW!

- Don’t be scared of people; just because they look and speak differently doesn't mean they are out to get you!

- So that leads us to the next reminder: try your best to separate from your group and interact with others, even if you can’t communicate directly - who else better than native speakers to help you improve in your pronunciation! After being here for 9 months people are so happy to know that we can communicate with them! It makes a real difference with building relationships!

- Pray, read the Scripture, fast and then keep doing it some more!

- Don't be afraid to openly share about everything that you are feeling, going through, experiences, etc. with your teammates. You're on the journey together - there's no need to feel lonely when God has provisioned support!

Front Porch Conversation with 365m students (part 1)

This week’s porch conversation is with three groups of NTS students who have spent this year in an innovative new program at NTS called 365m. The Brazil cohort includes Liliana Reza and Scott Brubaker. The Ireland cohort is Hannah Beers and Dustin Wine, and the Croatia cohort includes Jerry Romasco, Hope Brock, Emily Humble, and Brittany Argabright. It is a great honor for me to work with such a great group of leaders.

DW: You have now been in 365m for 10 months and are soon to return to NTS for the summer module courses to wrap up your year of learning in context. This is a new aspect of learning for us at NTS. Tell me how this learning experience has been unique for you.

BRAZIL: Living with people of another culture as you are learning changes everything. 365M is not just another ministry experience it has been an invitation to mold my perspective and lifestyle into that of Christ's. It's more than putting theories into practice, it's coming to fully grasp and experience today's realities alongside God's people." - Liliana Reza "365M has been a life awakening and completely transformative learning experience. 365M took me beyond statistics and theories. It put names and faces to real life stories of brothers and sisters.... When will you ever have the opportunity in the classroom to participate with the church in after-school programs in Sao Paulo, community outreach in the favelas of Rio and make home visits to the river communities in the Amazon or work with evangelism groups in the dry lands of the Brazilian Northeast?" - Scott Brubaker

IRELAND: Learning in another culture brings to light certain issues or situations that are limited in our parent culture, we don't necessarily see as clearly as we could because we know what is going on. I think learning with people who see the world from a different angle is a valuable lesson. We are all different and see the world/ministry/life in a unique way.

CROATIA: 365M has been unique from other means of learning because it has moved us beyond theory. Other times we study, think and create thoughts based upon our ideas and revelations but often far removed from the actual situations. Here, we are no longer in theory. The situations, lessons, ideas are a result of being here and what is happening in our actual lives.

DW: How has this year affected you spiritually?

CROATIA: Each of us have experienced so much spiritually. There has been everything from moments of questioning God and crying out to him to drawing closer and experiencing incredible growth. We have felt God stretch us as individuals and as a community. We have learned how to experience faith in deeper ways and in a different context.

BRAZIL: We have come to experience and understand the sovereignty of our God. We could see the Lords care even through all the unexpected changes that we went through; His faithfulness was always right on time. God provided a community, encouragement, but above all the Holy Spirit. Pastor Manuel and Lidia Lima really stretched and reminded us what it means to live by the Spirit. We couldn't have asked for a more beautiful, encouraging and devoted example of incarnational living than them. With Pastor Manuel we went to visit a city on the Amazon River named Paritins. One day we headed out to do evangelism work in the neighboring river communities with some members of the local Nazarene church. Pastor Manuel kept reminding us that the Holy Spirit was not only with us, but was also guiding. He shared with us a Scripture passage from Acts 16: 4-10 that weekend. That scripture became alive in everything that was done and said. God was leading. We wish we had more time to explain, but we will have to share that story another time. As we reflect on our time here; the testimonies, meals and experiences shared with the people of Brazil, we have learned about the loving urgency of relying on the Holy Spirit that we should always have as imitators of Christ.

IRELAND: Well think about a blender, then place everything you believe it in and the ways God desires to stretch you then hit full blast. I feel like God has challenged me to grow and to trust him in more ways than I could imagine. At first I thought it was going to be easy because God and I were doing great but as the year has progressed I realize that God desires more of me. He wants me to be reliant on him and him alone, he wants to share in my life, he wants to direct my ministry and most of all he wants to be center of my life. So, all I can do is trust him.

In a few days I will post the second part of this interview. For more information about 365m go to www.nts.edu/365m

THE PORCH

I live in an old part of Kansas City where most of the houses still have large front porches. In the summer it’s nice to walk around the neighborhood and hear people visiting with friends on the porch, or playing guitars and enjoying the evening. One time I even heard someone practicing bagpipes on their porch.

At our house, the porch is a great place to sit and delve into all kinds of conversations as we rock back and forth and sip on a cold drink.
During the summer months of June, July and August, I will be having several “summer porch conversations” with friends that I have invited to chat with me on my blog. I would invite you to join me and some friends for some good conversation during the the upcoming weeks on the front porch.

Value

My mom passed away just a couple of weeks ago. Since my dad passed away about three years ago, my siblings and I are now left with the task of going through their belongings and deciding what to do with them. My mom and dad lived a simple lifestyle so the things we are going through aren't the type of things that have large monetary value. As a matter of fact for anyone other than our family, most of the things are worn out and have very little value. One of those items is a huge family bible which sat on their coffee table and which is losing it's cover. The value of this Bible is huge for us. I can remember going through the pictures, which were my favorite parts when I was little and my mom explaining the pictures to us. I also remember family devotions and, especially at Christmas when we put a lighted candle on each side of the bible and we would read the Christmas story from Luke and then we would take turns praying. More than the words and pictures was the faith of my parents on which they staked their lives and which gave their lives a central direction. For this reason, the family Bible had incredible value.

The following is a fascinating clip of a group of people who receive the Bible in their language for the first time. Valuable? You decide...

The Kimyal People Receive the New Testament from UFM Worldwide on Vimeo.

Conferences and Congregational Mission

This week is a week of conferences. Tomorrow I leave for the M11 conference in Louisville, KY. http://www.ncnnews.org/nphweb/html/ncn/printerFriendly.jsp?id=10009886&sid=10000023 On Wednesday there will be a series of presentations and workshops related to the missional church. Missiologist, Craig VanGelder will be the lead presenter, and I will have one of the presentations after him. My presentation will be about the global changes which are moving us toward a paradigm change in missions which is congregation based more than denominationally based. As a part of this workshop I will present research that I have recently done in the Church of the Nazarene which demonstrates a shift in U.S. congregations which are embracing long term partnerships with congregations in other countries. In many ways this shift presents a need to rethink how we look at missions, but it also presents a sense of renewal for the denomination. If you will be at M11 I would love to have you join the discussion on Wednesday afternoon.

On Saturday, I will be in Chicago at the EMS (Evangelical Mission Society) where I will present a similar paper which deals with the bodies of literature which contribute to understanding congregational mission as a new paradigm in missions.

The Audacious Hope of the Resurrection

February 17, 2011

Tomorrow we will say “goodbye” to my mom. On Valentine’s Day, our family gathered around her bed in the emergency room of Saint Anthony Hospital in Oklahoma City. In the same way that she comforted us when we were little, we kissed her forehead, held her hands, rubbed her feet and sang to her as we said “goodbye”. Something seems wrong about even having the word “good” in Goodbye. I remember when we were missionaries and when we had to say “goodbye” to my mom and dad as we left their house to return to the field. Mamma and Daddy would be standing at their front door, holding one another and crying as we pulled away with grandkids that they would not see for another two years. Now I feel that we are left holding one another crying as mamma pulls away.

It is nearly unbearable to say this “goodbye”. Even at times when I may have thought that no one in the world believed in me or loved me, I always knew that my mom believed in me and loved me, not because of anything I could do or certainly not because I believed or valued the exact things she did, but she just loved me and believed in me.

So, tomorrow we will lay my mom to rest beside my dad at Rest Haven Cemetery with graves facing to the east, awaiting the day of the resurrection when the resurrected Christ for whom they lived and whom they longed to see face to face, will incredibly call them from the grave just as he called Lazarus and just as he will call me as well.

“Thanks be to father of compassion and the God of all comfort who comforts us in all our troubles” – 1 Cor. 1.

Whole Gospel, Whole Church, Whole World

The following clip is a video expression of a paper presented by Christopher Wright related to the 2010 Lausanne Congress:

The Global Conversation - Intro October 2009 from The Global Conversation on Vimeo.

Whole Gospel, Whole Church, Whole World

If you are interested in the full document on Congregational Mission with bibliography, please give me your email and I will send it to you as an attachment.

Congregational Mission In Context (Part 3)

1. EPISTEMELOGICAL SHIFTS

Congregational mission thrives within a changing epistemological framework in how we think of the church and how we think about location. Seminal work which describes this shift in postmodern culture was done by Paul Hiebert (1994, 1999) who described epistemological shifts in terms of bounded and centered sets. Hiebert describes a bounded set, as a grouping with well defined bounds. A centered set groups things on the basis of how they relate to other things. For the sake of this study, a congregation that is defined by location could be defined in terms of a bounded set. Missions defined by structure or agency could also be thought of as a bounded set. A bounded set framework would be a focus on church membership, or affiliation with a mission organization or a denomination which has location and structure. The societal shift, however, that is defined, not according to identity with a singular organization, but rather a common purpose, could be defined in terms of what Hiebert calls a centered set since the church would be defined by its center, the Triune God of Scripture. The trouble with the former, writes Hiebert, is that this may become too exacting and exclusive, while an advantage of the latter is that Jesus Christ becomes the focus of all that the Church is and does.

Although the popularity of congregational mission has come into focus primarily in the past ten years, the social and global shifts which foster an environment conducive to such a pervasive phenomenon have been in formation for much longer. Robert Wuthnow gives a sociological interpretation out of extensive research related to the changing epistemology in his book After Heaven: Spirituality in America since the 1950s. (1998). Wuthnow’s finding is that since the 1950s, Americans have shifted in their expression of spirituality from a focus on dwelling to a focus on seeking. According to Wuthnow, in the past, people primarily identified their faith by membership in a church that had a specific location. Because of social economic shifts, however, this general perception has changed somewhat. An example of this shift is that people produce less durable goods, and to a larger degree they produce a network of communication, or serve as brokers of goods or information. This shift from a focus on dwelling to a focus on seeking or networking is seen in how people perceive institutions. The older pattern, according to Wuthnow (8), was tightly bounded and hierarchical. Institutions were literally the building blocks of society. The newer pattern, however, emphasizes looser connections, diversity, and negotiation; practical activity takes precedence over organizational positions. Sociologist Robert Putnam makes a similar observation in his seminal book Bowling Alone (2000). Putnam describes the social shift in the United States away from membership in social organizations and away from what he describes as physical capital.

There is little doubt that many U.S. churches are making an epistemological shift away from the bounded sets of church as building and structure and toward a centered set which is relational and networking oriented. Although congregational mission is tied to the local church, it is the networking and relational aspects of the church and not the structure or theological identity that motivates them to volunteer and engage in mission. This ecclesiology driven by a desire for a common mission and/or relationship is crucial for understanding why there is such a large scale movement of congregations interested in mission that is relation and network based rather than mission that is top-down organization or structure based. A common thread found in research of the past 2-3 years is the strong emphasis on relationship networking which is a vital aspect of congregational mission as well as short-term mission (Bakker 2010, K.Priest 2009, Mickler 2010, Putnam 2010, Offutt 2009). The research in these studies also demonstrate a relational aspect through their ethnographic methodology.

Stephen W. Offutt’s 2009 PhD Dissertation focuses on El Salvador and South Africa networking. This ethnographic study, similar to C.M.Brown’s earlier dissertation (2007), included interviews of individuals on both sides of partnerships through 119 interviews with national pastors, and which also has a strong emphasis on the changing trends in evangelical congregations which are becoming more engaged in religious networks and what Offutt calls “the practice of moral entrepreneurship”. Offutt’s dissertation, unlike others focused primarily on two non-U.S. locations and explores the central role that symbols and networks have in the expanding and changing nature of “Southern evangelical communities”.

Steve Mickler’s 2010 PhD dissertation is primarily a qualitative ethnographic study of the affects that financial support from a Baptist Congregation in San Angelo, Texas has on three strategic partnerships in South Africa, Mozambique and Guatemala. Mickler conducted ninety-three ethnographic interviews and also includes considerable historical study of the giving trends of the congretation. Mickler’s dissertation maintains an ongoing tension between the assertions of Robertson McQuilken and others who propose that U.S. giving such as that in the congregational systems followed by Mickler will create paternalism and unhealthy dependencies on one side of the tension. On the other side of the tension, is the thesis of Robert Wuthnow, who argues for interdependent and relation based missions in contrast to the arguments of Philip Jenkins and others who propose an independent Christianity. Following both sides of this tension, Mickler points out that there are some very positive aspects of this partnership for both the U.S. congregation as well as the non-U.S. partners. He also points out that there are some signs of dependency and unhealthy relationships. In the balance of all of this, however, Mickler states “it seems clear from this research that the communities being server are indeed being helped far more than they are being hurt” (188) and in quoting Wuthnow (2010: 244), Mickler states that the local church partners also seem to be finding answers to Wuthnow’s question of “how to appropriately structure relationships between parties that differs in resources and power”.

An interesting approach to the question of power ,relationships and networking in short-term mission is the 2009 dissertation of Kersten Bayt Priest which works to “locate gender within STM…(109)” by following the ethnographic methodology described by George Marcus (1995) by first “following the people”, which in this thesis were women who engaged in short-term mission. This is a methodology of “following the people” is a methodology used in all of the ethnographic based dissertations that I encountered (Bakker 2010,Brown 2007, Mickler 2010, Priest 2010). Although Priest’s dissertation didn’t explicitly focus on the issue of congregation to congregation partnerships, her work has a contribution to make to this specific area of study since it is in dialog with much of the same literature of pilgrimage, tourism, short-term mission and congregational which contribute to congregation to congregation partnership studies. A consistent theme which is repeated in the interviews of Priest is that of relationships which are both bonding relationships within the women in the short-term mission groups, relationships with individuals in the location to where they travel, as well as relationships that the women utilize through their brokering for resources. In her analysis of the relationship between sacred pilgrimage and STM travel, Priest makes the interesting observation that unlike sacred pilgrimage, STM’s goal is not the geographical location, or even the journey, but rather the “perception that distant needy people are their destination. And within the span of a short-trip, those needy people are connected with and considered to be ‘family’” (185). This is a crucial component of relationship is included in other studies done on congregation to congregation partnerships (Brown 2007, Mickler 2010, Bakker 2010), and the common factor in these studies is that the desire for an authentic partnership is desired although difficult to achieve due to the complexities of financial and social distances between the congregations or groups. I noted earlier that Steve Mickler states that local church partnerships seem to be finding answers to Wuthnow’s question of “how to appropriately structure relationships between parties that differs in resources and power”. Janel Bakker’s dissertation research (Bakker 2010) is also optimistic that these type of “sister”partnerships break down many of these barriers. Kerten Bayt Priest’s research reflects this breaking down of barriers through women being the protagonists of STM endeavors. Priest describes how women who went on the trips find freedom to assume leadership roles that were not possible in their U.S. congregations. She also describes how this opened doors for women in the locations to where they traveled which would not have been possible with a gender mixed group. This finding is further supported by Robert Wuthnow (2010) who describes his findings that the social networks, such as women’s groups, or other networking formed within a congregation, resulted in greater relational networking through volunteerism beyond the congregation.

A recent dissertation which approaches a unique aspect of partnerships and which also reflects optimistic findings is Janel Kragt Bakker’s 2010 PhD (Bakker 2010) dissertation which is an ethnographic case study of twelve congregations involved in sister church relationships. Bakker focuses her study on the leaders and congregants who represent the North American partners and does not study the “Global Southerners”. The congregations which Bakker studied were chosen to cover a spectrum of theological and polity traditions. The study includes three Roman Catholic, three Presbyterian, three Anglican and three Baptist. Bakker states that “beyond the common quest for kinship with another community of faith in a distant locale, the stories of these twelve churches involved in sister church relationships vary greatly.”(153) Bakker makes the thesis that the current changing global dynamics give way to a changing paradigm in mission that is relationship based more than program based and instead of the northern and southern Christianity becoming more and more separated, she proposes that “companion congregation”, “twinning”, or “sister church” relationships present the potential for blurring the lines between donor and recipient which has often been a stumbling block to mission relationships between Christians from differing socio economic systems. Bakker’s dissertation also gives an extensive historical framework of mission practices and the theological as well as social influences which facilitated various movements including the more recent tensions between what has been referred to as “managerial mission” or the church growth movement, missional church, short-term mission and sister congregations.

Similar to the dissertation of Steve Mickler (Mickler 2010), Janel Kragt Bakker explores the challenges of patronage and exploitation evident in these types of relationships which need to be addressed. Her final analysis, however, is the same as Mickler’s (as well as Priest and Brown) that the potential and positive aspect found in these relationships far outweigh the challenges. Each of these ethnographic studies gives examples of relationships which were mutually beneficial through the partnerships formed. In one example of Bakker from an ethnographic case study of Trinity, an Anglican congregation partnering with Saint James in Haiti: “Respondents from Trinity unanimously argued that Saint James has made the greater contribution to the relationship, even though money flows in the opposite direction. Saint James’ intercessory prayer team—fifty persons strong—has been praying for Trinity daily for the past five years” (131).

Bakker answers some of the same issues raised in the research of Mickler related to possible challenges in partnerships. She makes the point that this new mission paradigm actually presents resolution to many of these challenges which are evident in colonialistic and program driven models instead of relational models.
The twelve ethnographic studies draw from congregational literature, and especially the methodology of Nancy Ammerman which “focuses on the accounts, artifacts, and activities that collectively build the culture of mission in participating congregations and parishes” (Ammerman,1998).

Bakker’s findings are consistent with the centered set theory of Hiebert (1999) as well as the findings of Wuthnow (1998) that congregations, for some time have been moving away from church and mission organizations as a locality (bounded set) and toward church as a common interest in relationship or mission (centered set). Bakker found a common strand in the twelve congregations she researched which circumvent denominational or larger regional bodies in the formation or continuation of their partnership relationships. In its place was the finding that “these partnerships were formed primarily on the basis of grassroots networking rather than denominational oversight. Sister church relationships function bottom up rather than top down through the chain of religious organization.” (156).

Epistemological shifts toward networking and relationship are closely related to social theory literature. Networking between people of a common congregation has been cited as the greatest factor leading to people within a congregation networking with people in other countries, as well as people outside of the congregation to procure support for mission efforts.