Amateurization vs. Professionalism

The Cutting Edge of Missions in a Flat WorldPart I: Amateurization vs. Professionalization of Missions
David Wesley, Nazarene Theological Seminary
April, 2006

My first reaction when I read Thomas Friedman’s book, “The World is Flat” was that he was looking at the world through the lenses of someone who was in love with technology, and that the world he described was the world of the wealthy Americans who stayed in nice hotels and had technological gadgets which most people could not afford. On a second glance at Friedman’s thesis, however, I realize that although the majority of the world may not own the same technology, the interconnected nature of our world is a phenomenon of globalization which is rapidly bringing people and cultures of every economic echelon into an increasingly interdependent relationship.

Several of the most recent missiological books which have been published within the last year deal with this same dynamic of globalization and what that means to minister in a “flat world”. This short paper is the first in a series in which I would like to dialog about the implications of these global trends on the miseo dei to the Church of the Nazarene.

A growing area of study in missions today is the issue of short term missions. This can be seen in the increasing number of people who are involved in Work and Witness, Mission Corps, and other aspects of short term missions which are organized by World Mission. Without doubt, this trend has made a great impact on the Church of the Nazarene as well as many other denominations. The results of this shift can be seen in the emphases which are made on college campuses and at denominational gatherings. In the past, the emphasis was on young people called to a career as a missionary. A growing emphasis is on young people going on a short term mission trip of two weeks to six months. The fact that the world is now “flat” has made this phenomena even more prevalent, and some have labeled this movement “the amateurization of missions”. Amateurization in this sense does not so much refer to an inferior or less professional manner to approach missions, but to those who participate in mission activity on a short term basis, instead of approaching missions out of a call to a lifetime vocation.

Ralph Winter, founder of the US Center for World Mission, Pasadena CA speaks of the “re amateurization of missions”. He calls it re-amateurization as he recounts the history of the great number of students who volunteered for “foreign missions” toward the end of the nineteenth century.

The Student Volunteer Movement came out of a time of great enthusiasm and commitment. This was a time in the U.S. when there was a great spiritual awakening and desire to expand the gospel to all people. The difficulty, according to Winter, is that they ignored the insights of earlier missions workers. They made serious mistakes that resulted in many unnecessary deaths among missionaries and a demoralization and spiritual decline among national pastors. This amateurization set missions back instead of propelling the work forward. David Hesselgrave, author and leading spokesman for evangelical missions says that it took forty years to relearn the lessons that had been so quickly forgotton. (Paradigms in Conflict p.204).

As we look at the current trends in missions today and we can see similar enthusiasm and popularity of missions as there was during the time of the Student Volunteer Movement. The difference in the current movement and the movement of the SVM is in the definition of missions. Missions, according to Winter has become “any Christian volunteering to be sent anywhere in the world at any expense to do anything for any time period.” - Although this is a fairly recent phenomenon, Winters asks if this is a wave of “re-amateurization” of missions.

In a later, 1996 article, Winter states that people who are currently involved in missions tend to be steered in one of two directions. Winters says that they go either over prepared, or they go with little or no preparation at all. Either places the missionary as well as their ministry at a “decided disadvantage.”

Over preparation comes from an over reaction to amateurization which assumes that more education will make a person a better missionary. As a result, people build up enormous debts which they must pay off after graduating, and by the time they arrive on the field their minds are too old to master either the language or the culture.

In the second situation, to avoid educational expenses and time, many missionary candidates forego any theological or missiological education. They arrive on the field young enough to learn the language and culture but without the theological, hermeneutical and missiological tools, they have difficulty interpreting culture or understanding the theological and missiological application of their role in ministry. Undereducated missionaries lack the broader knowledge and experience needed to work effectively and so their work is usually short lived.

Both scenarios tend toward the same result, the re-amateurization of the missionary enterprise. Work too often is carried on by missionaries who lack what they need to be effective, either because they have invested too much of their lives in education or too little. Winter’s solution, which is echoed by many leading missiologists, is to encourage earlier candidacy and earlier training in language and other needed tools. The result of this would imply a more integrated system in which mission students become involved in the actual practice of missions simultaneous to their educational process.

The cutting edge of missions is not a return to the “re-amateurization” of missions. It is, however, in the internationalization of missions which integrates practice with solid foundational knowledge. This movement toward the internationalization of missions is fueled by the “flattening” of the globe in which missions is “the Gospel from everywhere to everyone” . The phenomena of people from every part of the globe desiring to participate in the “Miseo Dei” has a long history that didn’t just happen in a vacuum. It is the fulfillment of the goals and prayers of long-term missionaries who have consciously fostered the formation of national church leadership with a passion for missions in the non-western world. Since the earliest days of cross-cultural ministry, missionaries have given their whole lives to planting churches that are equipped to fulfill Christ’s commission.

God has used the efforts of “traditional” missions in such an outstanding way that today the numbers (and perhaps the spiritual vitality) of the non-western church outstrip that of the West. Possibly the main reason “traditional missionaries” have been so effective is because they have taken the time to learn the culture, cultivate trust with nationals and learn the language well. The patient endurance of long-term missionaries is a critical factor in their success. I would like to suggest that the cutting edge of missionary strategy is still long-term missionaries working together with national churches to win the rest of the world. As we work in interdependent collaboration, we model the unity that God intended for His church and we become more effective in the task of world-wide evangelism.

God’s call to “go” must continue to be answered in every culture and era. If we ever dilute that call to simply “send money,” or merely travel during our vacation time, we will lose our sense of God’s heart for “incarnational ministry” to the world. Our missionary vision will be reduced to fund raising and mission tours. Of course we must help national churches to fund their ministries. But we need to help responsibly without creating an unhealthy dependence that robs churches of initiative and ownership in their missionary outreach.

In a changing, flat world, we are forced to ask ourselve vital questions about the “miseo dei” and how we carry it out. Without doubt, God is raising an army of Nazarenes who are giving their finances, their vacations and are willing to go for weeks or months at a time. This dymanic is making a great impact on many people, and we must continue to find ways to equip these people for more productive ministry. The vital cutting edge of missions however, is in those who are sent from every culture working together in an interdependent relationship who form the most powerful strategy in missions. Globalization will continue to change many aspects of our world. These changes will be social, economical, anthropological, and technological. The cutting edge of world evangelism, however, hasn’t changed in the last 2000 years. God still calls, and sends people to live incarnationaly in order to carry out His commision in an ever flattening world.

The implications of Wesleyan Intercultural Studies in a ‘Flat World’:

David Wesley, Nazarene Theological Seminary. February 14, 2006


A current and popular understanding of Missiology is that it is a way of doing theology. This understanding takes my cultural perspective of scripture and theology and applies it to culture and context. The questions that I would like to address in this brief time involve the “doing of theology” within the changing and diverse global context in which we live. In addressing intercultural dynamics I hope to find a balance between low context theory and high context pragmatics. Both extremes are dangerous and detrimental to the Kingdom of God. In combining the two you could come to several possible solutions. Our goal for students is that they understand the theoretical background of missiology (scriptural and theological) and how to apply that to a variety of contextual situations.
There are key questions that we, as a denomination must ask ourselves.
• Where do we a Wesleyan Church fit in God’s global plan?
• What are the future challenges of mobilizing the church in the West?
• What roles does a Western Church fulfill when we find the Great Commission being undertaken by a worldwide church?
• How can students of theology become learners who contextualize good theological and hermeneutical practices within a global context?
The title of this address,” The implications of Wesleyan Intercultural Studies in a ‘Flat World’”, may have lead you to believe that I am geographically ignorant. I am using the term “flat world”, however, in the same sense that Thomas Friedman uses it in his book “The World is Flat”. Friedman’s thesis is that in 1989 a series of events began which that have rapidly moved us toward globalization. Globalization is evidenced through an interdependence and interaction in such a way that the world seems smaller. Although Friedman’s book is written within a geopolitical and financial framework, it has enormous implications for the Christian Church. I have chosen this framework intentionally because it addresses the changing character of Missiology.
My discussion here is not the larger context of the Miseo Dei.
Scripture from Genesis to Revelation indicates that God is not a local, tribal, God but the God of all creation. From Genesis 3 onward, scripture points toward God’s “salvage operation” for all the nations- this is the overarching theme of scripture. In Genesis we see God’s plan for salvaging all nations through Abraham. Even in Revelation 22, we can see the Miseo Dei as God restores fallen creation as “all things are made new”; everything in between shows God’s compassion and redemption. God’s plan of salvation is carried out through missions. Throughout all of scripture, one can see, over and over again, God’s compassion for the Gentiles, and the “foreigners”. Throughout all of church history, beginning with the Christian Church of the first century, the church has sent missionaries to reach “all nations”.
Missiology as an academic discipline, however, has more recent roots. Missiology has been a major part of Catholic Seminaries for some time with emphasis on theology and history. (Only recently have the humanities, such as anthropology, been included.). A major shift in missiology for the evangelical church came with the formation of the school of world mission at Fuller Seminary (1965). Donald McGavern wanted to “re-train” missionaries with a focus on evangelism that lead to church planting. He wanted Fuller to be a seminary where they could form a school of mission. Peter Wagner, Ralph Winter and others were invited to be a part of the team. Ralph Winter emphasized the need to move missiology toward being an academic discipline. As a result, Fuller formed a school of mission and the American Society of Missiology was also formed. Shortly after the formation of the “School of Mission” at Fuller, other seminaries developed schools of mission with similar objectives. I find it incredible that Paul Orjala, in 1964 (a year before Fuller formed their school of mission) was forming a new school of mission at NTS with a focus on “re-tooling” missionaries for evangelism and church planting that was consistent with our holiness tradition. Today we can be thankful for those such as Paul Orjala who pointed toward the future and played a key role in pioneering the field of Missiology within the Church of the Nazarene.
The particular issue that I would like to address today is that of the implications of Wesleyan Intercultural Studies in a ‘Flat World’. If we define Missiology as a way of doing theology we must ask ourselves how we can do Wesleyan theology within a changing global context. I would like to present what I perceive to be the major challenges for Wesleyan missiology today
The question of The role of the Western Church in world missions is, in my opinion, the greatest ecclesiological and missiological issue that faces the West. The issue becomes increasingly important as the church de-westernizes. What is the role of the “church of the western world” in advancing the Gospel?
After an honest reading of Philip Jenkins’ book, “The Next Christiandom: the Coming of Global Christianity”, as well as Samuel Escobar’s book, “The New Global Mission : The Gospel from Everywhere to Everyone” , one could conclude that churches north of the equator will, within a very short time, have little or no part in the global, Christian Church.
In the words of Samuel Huntington the world is divided into the “West and the rest” (Huntington, p. 183). I ask, once again, how can the Western church best serve God’s global purposes?
In October I attended a meeting of Nazarene Educators in Campinas Brazil. With great admiration for the missionaries who established the Church of the Nazarene in Brazil, a Brazian leader described the lasting influences they had on the current objectives of the Church in Brazil. He told the Brazilians present that they should not forget the names and the influence of these missionaries. It is interesting to note that The Church of the Nazarene was established in Brazil close to the same time that the Nazarene Church was established in South Korea. It is also fascinating to see the many similarities between the two areas today. The work began in Korea in 1948 and in Brazil in 1958. Both of these areas had developed significantly during the sixties under missionaries who were heavily influenced by Peter Beyerhaus and Henry LeFever’s book, The Responsible Church and Foreign Mission. The three-self theory (self-government, self-support, and self-propagation) is developed in this text. Today, the Church of the Nazarene in Brazil, as well as South Korea, is financially strong and has a tendency toward independence. In Jenkins’ work the fourth “self” has been implicitly added to include “self-theologizing”, wherein theology is developed according to the respective cultural context. This brings up other issues that relate to the contextualization of theology which is beyond the scope of this paper, but is a major issue the church must address.
All of this leaves us with some very difficult questions in respect to an “international church” and how it should function in a “flat world”. The work of Beyerhaus and LeFever has been a great contribution to mission development and has moved us away from paternalistic patterns. Paul Orjala’s 1964 induction address provides remarkable insight at this point. Orjala says that the three-self theory should be seen as a method and not a goal. I would add here that the goal is not independence, but rather interdependence in which the church in any world area is not in a paternalistic relationship with the church in the United States, but rather joins as interdependent partners with the rest of the globe. Interdependence, of course, has great implications for the “western church” as well as other areas. A key element in a “flat world” is that of interdepence”, which is not only a geopolitical reality, but it is an ecclesiological and missiological reality as well. For the western church this means that the Kingdom of God cannot be painted in nationalistic tones of red, white and blue. The Wesleyan Churches’ commitment to the Kingdom of God and relationship to the greater global church must supersede any national identity or any political agenda.
For the western church an interdependent relationship will mean taking the posture of a servant. For the emerging church of the south, interdependence will mean sacrifice and a vision beyond “self” to “others” in which they are called on to collaborate in the miseo Dei rather than acting as independent, nationalistic mission agencies.
Being part of God’s global mission in a “flat world” implies many changes. True global partnership means being willing to redefine our roles. Missionary teams will become multi-cultural, international and non-western. Missionaries and local leadership will need to work in collaboration in setting strategies and finding ways to serve those strategies. Financial management will mean balancing the desire for good stewardship against our Western propensity towards paternalism and the non-western temptation towards dependency.
A second challenge which must be addressed as to living in a “flat world” is that of Religious Pluralism. For those of us old enough to remember, mission services of the past were often defined by the song “We’ve a Story to Tell to the Nations.” Despite the obvious imperialistic overtone of the song, it reflects the core conviction that Jesus Christ is unique, and His divinity compels us toward evangelism and outreach.
The spirit of this age does not necessarily accept this belief. The impact of post-modern relativism puts pastors in front of people every Sunday who are asking, “Do we really have a story to tell to the nations?” “Is there any thing unique in Christ that constrains us to make such bold claims?”
Pluralsim is one of the greatest theological challenges facing the church. Tim Dearborn, writing in “Christ, the Church, and Other Religions” states it this way: “Every local church – whether in Kansas City or Kinshasa , in Toledo or Tokyo , in London or in Latvia – will serve in a religiously pluralistic environment” (Stackhouse, p. 139). Pluralism is not a philosophy reserved for the classroom; it’s the worldview of the common person.
The idea that Jesus Christ and Christian faith is unique – a basic motivation for global missions – is far from acceptable in a world that responds “all of the above” to questions of truth. The spirit of our “post everything” age leans away from the proclamation of the deity and uniqueness of Christ. If the implications of scripture about Christ and eternity are true, there are enormous implications for missiology and evangelism.
In the face of global pluralism, the church must proclaim Jesus Christ with theological integrity, critical contextualization and, above all, with an open and transparent spirit.
The challenge of pluralism obligates us to evaluate our training: do the missionaries and leaders of our churches really understand the beliefs and worldviews of other religions? Are they capable of dialoging about these differences?
Tim Dearborn, again writing in “Christ, the Church, and Other Religions”, observes that “Without a basic comprehension of other’s beliefs, our encounters will be characterized by prejudice, paternalism, and pride” (p. 139). We must be willing to interact with other faiths believing in the uniqueness of Christ, but willing to listen, to learn, and to dialogue.
Globalization – is the third challenge. What does Christianity look like in a flat world? In The Next Christendom, Philip Jenkins points out that, “Over the past century…the center of gravity in the Christian world has shifted inexorably southward, to Africa , Asia , and Latin America . Already today, the largest Christian communities on the planet are to be found in Africa and Latin America. If we want to visualize a ‘typical’ contemporary Christian, we should think of a woman living in a village in Nigeria or in a Brazilian favela” ( Jenkins, p. 2).
David Barrett states that as of 2000, only 39% of the world’s one and a half billion Christians live in the industrialized West. Barrett further predicts that by 2025, fully 70% of Christians will live in Asia , Africa , Latin America , and Oceania . (Cited by Ian Douglas, “Globalization and the Local Church”, in Stackhouse, p. 203).
Some believe that globalization leads to greater cohesiveness and integration. Others view globalization as homogenization in which the “rest of the world” begins to look and act like the western world. I agree more with those, however, who think that globalization more likely will lead to greater fragmentation.
Samuel Huntington says:
“The dangerous clashes of the future are likely to arise from the interaction of Western arrogance, Islamic intolerance, and Sinic [Chinese] assertiveness.” (Huntington, p. 183)
We serve a global church with a global commission in a globalized world. What will it mean? Will having North American citizenship hurt or help?
Territorialism is perhaps our greatest anthropological challenge. In recent history there has been a growing resistance to Westernization which has given impetus to a renewed nationalism in many parts of the world. This nationalism, as we have seen is often attached to religion such as Buddhism in Sri Lanka, Sharìa Islam in northern Nigeria, or communion tables draped with the American Flag in the USA. Territorialism is a growing trend which posses a great anthropological challenge for missions as we seek ways to relate to others.
In recent history we have seen what happens when ethnic specific religion degenerates into tribalism and racism as we have seen in the deaths of hundreds of thousands in Rwanda and Burundi.
Our global society is not a post-religious society. The world is fueled by religion.
If anything Rwanda reminds us, especially as Wesleyans, that that the great commission is to make disciples, not just converts, and that these disciples must grow deep in understanding Jesus’ mandate to love and forgive our enemies. The disciple in a territorialized world must not only be taught to look upward to Jesus but also outward in love to those around them whom Jesus loves. If any group has reason to minister in terrorized and war torn sections of our globe, it is the Church of the Nazarene! If any doctrine has reason to be clearly seen in such a world, it is the optimistic, radical doctrine of holiness!
Tribalism challenges us to build up holy disciples who know how to break down the barriers, the “dividing walls of hostility” through Christ.
Concluding Observations:
In the context of these global challenges, what are the localized, specific issues that we face in the seminary and the global church where we serve? I’ve identified five for your consideration.
#1. Short Term Missions and the “amateurization of missiology”:
Short term missions are an exploding phenomena which is making an enormous impact on the mission efforts of the church. There is an increasing need for North American Pastoral staff to understand the mission endeavor of the church so that they can exercise wise and informed leadership in this emerging trend. There is also a need to develop courses which will facilitate youth pastors, pastors, and missionaries whose responsibilities involve working with visiting short-term mission groups. Closely related to short term missions is the rapidly increasing number of individuals with resources but little or no intercultural awareness who are taking the task of missions into their own hands. Recent examples of this are Rick Warren’s “Purpose Driven Rwanda” and “Prayer of Jabez” author, Bruce Wilkinson’s failed effort to establish an orphanage, and Disney type park in Swaziland primarily due to a lack of intercultural awareness. At the present this is an under-studied area of missiology which needs development.
#2. A Global, Wesleyan Missiology
There is a need to “retool” our current missiology in such a manner that missiologist from outside the U.S. can work together with missiologists within the U.S. in developing a global, Wesleyan Missiology and understanding of mission. There are a growing number of centers for Nazarene mission education and training outside of North America, a growing number of Nazarene missiologists who are not North Americans as well as Nazarene missionaries/missiologists who have a wealth of experience and understanding of the mission of the Church of the Nazarene in a Global context. It is my prayer that we can develop an interdependency in which we can learn from one another and work together toward common goals of being transforming agents of God’s Grace. My vision is that NTS will be a catalyst in forming a global consortium of Nazarene Missiology.
#3 Managerial Missiology:
One of the recent criticisms of current western missiology from Latin American Missiologist, Samuel Escobar is that missiology from “the west” has become too managerial. His primary argument is that missiology from “the west” relies on secular managerial techniques of strategic planning more than spiritual/theological models of mission. Escobar, in my opinion, overstates his case, but he does have a valid point in that our strategy should be primarily driven by our theology and our understanding of scripture, not by the pragmatic. Our theological understanding of God, of humankind, and of faith should form every practical aspect and every strategy of mission. If missionaries are driven by the pragmatic, we will have no filter to evaluate trends of church expansion which have enormous theological implications. If our practice is driven, however, by our Wesleyan Theology in the Church of the Nazarene, I truly believe that the practical results will the transformation of thousands of lives as we partner with God in His mission to “break the power of cancelled sin, to set the prisoners free”.
In a time when many mission organizations are focusing strictly on mission training, we must seek a balance in which our theology is missiological and our missiology is theological. The implications of this for NTS is that students who are preparing to serve in intercultural settings must have a solid theological as well as biblical perspective which will focus their missiological understanding of mission as “doing theology”.
#4. Intercultural Studies
One of the outcomes of a “flat world” and the interconnectedness of the world is that the definitions for missiology have become somewhat vague. In the past, we have relied on what has been termed “salt water missiology” in which a missionary is not a missionary unless they cross over saltwater. The result is that an increasing number of people will go on short term “mission trips” to a Spanish speaking country to do missions, and return to the U.S. where there are 41 million Latinos (that is a higher number than the number of Canadians living in Canada) and not see the need to minister to them since they are next door. New terminology should, perhaps be developed to identify those who are called to specialize in ministry which we have historically called “overseas” missionaries. NTS must also be a leader in preparing the growing number of those who will minister outside of their passport culture. NTS cannot, however, assume that those ministering within the U.S. can avoid issues of intercultural ministry and religious pluralism. Intercultural studies must be in integrated part of a theological education which prepares people to minister in a flat world. A person who does not understand the intercultural nature of our context, does not understand our global society. I propose that our “missions” program not be strictly “Mission studies” but rather intercultural studies for several reasons:

1. The increasingly used term “intercultural studies” is more relevant to Nazarene Theological Seminary’s commitment to understanding and practicing mission and evangelism ‘in context’.
2. The term “missiology” is not widely understood in the academic community and connotes, for some, an academic provincialism.
3. There is an international political agenda behind the increasing reference to “Intercultural Studies.” The unfortunate legacy of colonialism means that some governments reject visa applicants with degrees in “Mission” or “Missiology,” while being much more favorably toward applicants with degrees in “intercultural studies”.


#5. Toward a model of learners, partners and servants.
The Western Church must commit itself to being global learners. “Western arrogance” will nullify its’ Christian effectiveness; therefore, the Western Church needs to reaffirm its’ commitment to humility. The Western Church needs to listen and learn.
• From Christians in Cuba or China who can teach us much about carrying the cross daily.
• From Christians of the third world, who can teach about finding ones identity in Christ, not things.
• From Christians in the Middle East and North Africa, who know about staying faithful under the pressure of dominating Islam.
Besides being global learners, we must also commit ourselves to being global partners. I have already mentioned the implications of an interdependent global church. I would add here, that as a seminary with a mission to be a global theological resource we must continue to find ways to partner with the global church in learning and in offering resources.
The globaIization of missions will mean a deeper commitment than ever before to mission efforts that are multi-cultural in composition. This will mean that, as Patrick Johnstone observes, “Much greater sensitivity to multiple missionary cultures as well as target cultures will be an essential component of training and orientation on the field (Gree nlee, p. 189).
Finally as learners and partners we must also be global servants. This was the heart of Paul Orjala’s 1964 induction address, in which we see the dramatic shift away from the missionary being over the national church to serving alongside the national church. Even with the best strategies and techniques, we will not change the most difficult parts of our world if people cannot see Jesus in our methods and our message.


Conclusion:
I thank the Lord for great people such as Francis Xavior, William Carry, Paul Orjala, and others. They have made a great impact on the global church. Today, however, is our day. This is our generation to boldly join Christ Himself in praying “Thy Kingdom Come”. My prayer for all of is that we will passionately teach, preach and live in such a manner that our world will be transformed by Jesus Christ.





WORKS CONSULTED OR CITED

Bonk, Jonathan, ed. Between Past and Future: Evangelical Mission Entering the Twenty-first Century ( Pasadena , CA : William Carey Library, 2003).
Borthwick, Paul, Address made to pastors and church leaders at the URBANA 03 student missionary convention., December 30, 2003.
Cox, Harvey. Fire From Heaven, (New York: Addison-Wesley Press, 1995).
Escobar, Samuel. The New Global Mission : The Gospel from Everywhere to Everyone (Christian Doctrine in Global Perspective ( Downers Grove , IL : Inter-Varsity Press, 2003).
Friedman, Thomas L. The World is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2005)
Guder, Darrell L. Missional Church: A Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998).
Greenlee, David, ed. Global Passion , ( Cumbria , England : Authentic Publishing, 2003).
Radi, Bruno and Bustle, Louie . New Solutions .
Jenkins, Philip. The Next Christendom: the Coming of Global Christianity ( Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2002).
Huntington, Samuel P. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of the World Order (New York: Touchstone, 1996).
Sanneh, Lamin. Whose Religion is Christianity? The Gospel Beyond the West ( Grand Rapids : Eerdmans, 2003).
Seminary Tower, Nazarene Theological Seminary, Summer 1965. pp.14-18

Stackhouse, Max, Tim Dearborn, and Scott Paeth, eds., The Local Church in a Global Era: Reflections for a New Century ( Grand Rapids : Eerdmans, 2000).

What's Wrong with the Label "Managerial Missiology"

Levi T. DeCarvalho

Levi T. DeCarvalho, Ph.D., is a member of the Training Department, Latin American Division, U.S. Center for World Mission.

A new label has recently been proposed in the field of mission studies. I am referring to the epithet "managerial missiology," which—to my knowledge—was coined as a way of criticizing the kind of missiology that has been produced by the "Pasadena think-tank." The epithet is unfortunate for several reasons, some of which I discuss below ….
Christianity Today recently reported on a missiological consultation held in Iguassu, Brazil, in October 1999, where the term "managerial missiology" dominated the intense debates, under the guidance of William Taylor, WEF’s Missions Commission head. David Neff reported:
Peruvian missiologist Samuel Escobar was unable to attend the consultation . . . But in a paper discussed at the meeting, he criticized the ‘managerial missiology’ practiced by certain North American groups. ‘The distinctive note’ of this approach to missions ‘is to reduce Christian mission to a manageable enterprise,’ Escobar wrote. Practitioners of this approach focus on the quantifiable, measurable tasks of missions and ask pragmatic questions about how to achieve goals. Escobar called this statistical approach ‘anti-theological’ and said it ‘has no theological or pastoral resources to cope with the suffering and persecution involved because it is geared to provide guaranteed success.’1
The other two names most readily associated with the use of the term (and who admit to having borrowed it from Escobar) are James Engel (Escobar’s colleague at Eastern Seminary) and William Dyrness (a professor and former dean of Fuller Seminary’s

own School of Theology). Neff states, somewhat paradoxically:
This managerial approach is ‘a major leap onto the secular stage of strategic planning,’ according to a monograph from retired Eastern College professor James Engel. In the event’s opening address, consultation director William Taylor quoted extensively from Engel, who was among the first to foster evangelical adoption of marketing principles.2
The critics associate the proponents of "managerial missiology" with the plans fostered by selected agencies to evangelize the world by 2000 AD. Following Escobar’s lead, Engel and Dyrness have published the controversial Changing the Mind of Missions: Where Have We Gone Wrong? (Downers Grove, IL: Inter Varsity, 2000, 192 pp.), which has elicited some strong criticism from David Hesselgrave and Ralph Winter, among others ….
Pejorative Use of the Word "Managerial"
It appears to me that the word "managerial" is being used in a pejorative way. This is most unfortunate since a whole group of Christians who try and develop their God-given managerial gifts for the advancement of God’s Kingdom find their vocation placed under such negative light. Management is one of many gifts of the Spirit. Time and again Scripture instructs the believers about the use of their managerial skills….
Reductionist Understanding of Missiology
Labeling the kind of reflection that has come out of Pasadena as "managerial missiology" is reductionist in terms of an intentionally negative categorization of missiological studies. The so-called "Pasadena group" or "Pasadena think-tank" represents a wide variety of field experiences. The theories or models that have been proposed by both Fuller Seminary’s School of World Mission and the U.S. Center have been tested by that most demanding group of Christian witnesses, namely, the multiethnic group of students and practitioners who have taken these ideas to bear upon their field contexts, and have critiqued and criticized them in papers and dissertations for more than two decades now ….
All in all, we must be grateful for the criticism leveled against "managerial missiology." We have been forced to rethink our assumptions, values, and commitments – in short, our worldviews ….
I would propose that we convene a consultation to discuss the relationship between missiology and management. It is high time we made a sober analysis of the interplay between the methodologies we have proposed in the light of the biblical principles of stewardship in church and mission. Theologians, missiologists, mission practitioners, mission agencies’ CEOs, and management experts (such as those I quote from in this paper) should be invited to participate in the debate. The ideal place to do that would be the U.S. Center, in my opinion. Since we have been particularly (often indirectly) criticized, we should be at the forefront of the debate ….
1,2 Christianity Today 43(14): 28, December 1999.
This article was excerpted from a longer
article, by the same name, that appears in issue
18:3 (fall 2001) of the International Journal of Frontier Missions (IJFM). To read the full article, or to subscribe to the IJFM, see the IJFM Web site at www.ijfm.org or the IJFM advertisement on the back cover of this issue of Mission Frontiers.

Leadership: Strategic Stumbling about in Search of Surprises

Leadership:
Strategic Stumbling about in Search of Surprises

James E. Plueddemann

Precise long range planning isn’t difficult. It’s impossible!

When you came to grad school, some of you had a long range plan. Some of you graduated to a specific ministry. Others have a general sense of direction and a few ideas about next steps. It’s exciting to receive letters from alumni telling of they you are putting their vision into practice. But alumni often comment about the many surprises in ministry. Life is filled with unexpected frustrations. We never taught you how to work with dictatorial leaders, or with “stuck-in-the-mud” organizations. Many of you are stumbling about.

I’ve talked about a gracious revolution in missions, but we are vague about specific plans and precise objectives. I’m delighted if you are excited about a vision for healthy churches and growing Christians. Our hope is that you will have a passion for people and for the church as well as convictions about how to promote healthy development.
What is the difference between a leader and a manager? Managers seek to set precise goals, design predictable programs, and try to control the process. But the process of ministry are difficult to predict, and almost impossible to control. Managers concerned with efficiency are concerned with detailed and precise long-range planning.
Leaders have a compelling vision, they have goals, but they seldom are sure of precise outcomes. They recognize success when they see it, but aren’t sure what it will look like ahead of time. Leaders and managers frustrate each other.
Many books by management experts proclaim that the first thing a person needs is a measurable goal. They say “If you don’t know where you are going, you may end up some place else.” Some management consultants teach the need for precise long-range goals, divided into short-range goals and then put on a time chart They say you can not plan unless you have precise goals. But leaders disagree. They say if you have precise, predictable goals you are aiming at something of secondary importance. Peter Drucker writes: “the non-profit organization exists to bring about a change in individuals and in society.”
1. The most important goal is to glorify God and help others come to Christ and progress in their pilgrimage toward Christlikeness. Such goals are imprecise and will not be fully accomplished this side of the Jordan River. It is impossible to predict how much progress pilgrims will make in the next few weeks or few years. But when we see growth toward maturity we will recognize it and rejoice. We cannot predict where the path will lead, but we know where it will end.
2. The means for facilitating Christlikeness are also out of our control. We are involved in a spiritual struggle with forces not made of flesh and blood. The best teacher plays only a minor role in the process of Christian maturity. Spiritual growth comes only by the grace of God, not by precise methods. We need to be committed to the methods God uses to bring us to himself.
Tom Peters, famous for the book In Search of Excellence, writes in a recent article:
Plans? Goals? Yes, I admit that I plan and set goals. After I’ve accomplished something, I declare it to have been my goal all along. One must keep up appearances: In our society “having goals” and “making plans” are two of the most important pretenses. Unfortunately, they are dangerous pretenses -- which repeatedly cause us to delay immersion in the real world of happy surprises, unhappy detours, and unexpected byways.
Meanwhile, the laurels keep going to those mildly purposeful stumblers who hang out, try stuff with reckless abandon-- and occasionally bump into something big and bountiful, often barely related to the initial pursuit.”
Carol and I challenged the dominant management model in our book Pilgrims in Progress.
Too often, business-oriented management theory dominates Christian views of leadership. According to management theory, leaders need specific, measurable goals. “If we aim at nothing specific, we’ll hit it every time.” Or, “what gets measured gets done.” But precise goals are alien for pilgrims who are facing unpredictable dangers on the road. There are too many precarious experiences along the path. Pilgrims must have a strong sense of direction and destination, but they are not specifically sure where the path will lead in the near future. Leaders who get bogged down with measurable, short-term objectives often miss unfolding opportunities that arise around them. By definition measurable and predictable goals are not eternal! We are headed to a heavenly city. We are concerned with the inner character development of pilgrims. We are fighting for the souls of people. The most important things in life and in eternity are not measurable: “So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal” (2 Cor. 4:17).
Yet pilgrim leaders don’t lack vision. Effective leaders must have an obsession for the glory of God and a passionate love for other people. They have a picture of how eternity can be different because of God's influence through them. They have a strategic vision for eternal goals and they know how to respond to the opportunities unfolding around them in light of that vision. Christians may achieve excellence as managers and administrators and yet damage pilgrims. Good management can be a useful tool, but management should never be confused with leadership. Pilgrim leaders are people with a passionate love for God who use their spiritual gifts for developing other pilgrims.
Pilgrim leaders are also concerned to stir up a clearer sense of vision in other pilgrims. They study God’s vision as explained in the Map of the Word. Their focus in not on short-term activity, such as “covering” a certain amount of material, but on the long-term development of people for the glory of God (pp. 71,71).
Pilgrim missionaries who are deeply committed to promoting the development of people for the glory of God are not afraid to stumble about. But the stumbling is not random or irrational -- but purposeful. We need to plan with much common sense and clearly focus on a vision. But for some reason, God intended life to be unpredictable -- at least from our perspective. We long to be in control of results. But while God gives us a significant task, he does not allow us to be in control of our own lives or want us to control the lives of other people. And yet our stumbling is not aimless or purposeless. We stumble about led by the unseen hand of a loving Father who delights in giving us joyful surprises.
“Since future victory is sure, be strong and steady, always abounding in the Lord’s work, for you know that nothing you do for the Lord is ever wasted” 1 Cor 15: 58.

Agenda for a Gracious Revolotion: Repositioning Missions in the 21st Century

An article from the SIM webpage by Jim Plueddemann, former SIM International Director

We need a gracious revolution in our thinking about world missions - not an angry, destructive revolution, but a loving revolution. We aren't likely to be effective in the 21st Century just by becoming more efficient within the old patterns. Merely refining the old paradigms is, as they say, like repositioning deck chairs on the Titanic.
A paradigm is like a map; a metaphor for understanding and interpreting the world. The map helps us find our destination and shows us how to get there. But imagine the confusion and frustration if missiologists are studying the wrong map. Working harder, smarter or faster will not help if we are using a map of Lagos, Nigeria, to find our way in Cochabamba, Bolivia. My hypothesis is that many missiologists are subconsciously using the wrong mental map, making it difficult to obey Christ's Commission.
A gracious revolution is needed by mission boards, churches, training schools, and mobilizer organizations. Since these institutions reinforce one another, they either support the old metaphors or they work together to bring about a paradigm shift. Let us work together for a gracious revolution in the 21st century.
The metaphors that shape our understanding of missions have a powerful influence on the theory and practice of missionary planning. Metaphors are often unconscious, or at least not clearly defined in our minds. Yet these hidden pictures predispose us to be attracted to certain values and strategies for missionary planning. Our mental metaphors reflect our fundamental values.
The problem with hidden metaphors is that we tend to accept them uncritically, because they lie below the level of our awareness. These hidden metaphors influence us more than we know, and we are often controlled by metaphors that are inconsistent with a biblical view of missions.
Personal Note: As I describe three common mission paradigms or metaphors, I admit that for the sake of emphasis, I may be describing extremes. I don't want to antagonize sincere missiologists, but I wish to stimulate honest reflective dialogue. I do not believe I am creating a "hollow man" argument, because at different times in my life I have embraced each of the three metaphors. Based on my own personal pilgrimage, I believe that the first two are inadequate and have the potential to hinder the cause of Christ in world missions. I am still a learner and will be grateful if this paper stirs up helpful conversation.
Factory paradigmThe industrial revolution shaped the dominant paradigm of world missions - an assembly line in a huge factory. The factory metaphor reflects a behaviorist model, and places a high value on precision, quantitative goals, predictability, efficiency and control. It causes planners to set goals that can be measured readily. Their plans state exactly what the final result will look like, when it will be accomplished, and how much it will cost.
Such a mindset affects the way one looks at the task, at strategies, at leadership, at theological education and at evaluation. When we aim only at what we can measure, we tend to ignore the most important goals of love, character, discipleship and holiness, which we cannot predict or quantify without falling into legalism. Factory thinking forces one to aim for goals that can be accomplished in a specific time frame, and inhibits real vision of qualitative development inside of people, in the church and in society. The factory metaphor is the most common paradigm for many schools of missiology and church mission committees. While the model has many good points it also has dangerous flaws. Fortunately, most factory-minded missiologists also have a genuine love for the Lord and a deep passion for the church, which produces qualities of character inside people, despite an inadequate worldview. While the factory model has been helpful in defining parts of the task, far too often the assembly line mindset produces lukewarm churches.
Wildflower paradigmIn reaction to the factory model, a more intuitive paradigm has been gaining strength. This model emphasizes personal experience, emotions and dramatic demonstrations of God's power. While it may provide a healthy corrective to the factory metaphor, it may not be fully integrated with biblical reflection and may blindly build on insights from existentialism and Freudianism. An appropriate metaphor might be the wildflower.
Wildflower missionaries often prefer a "go-with-the-flow" approach to missions -- so embedded in the existential present that they have no time for future planning. They may even assume such planning is unspiritual. Whereas mechanistic thinkers manage by objectives, these manage by interruption. Wildflower missionaries have many strengths, and they bring spiritual vigor to missions because of their flexibility and people orientation. The danger is that they may wander from biblical Christianity and become inward-looking and self-centered, failing to plan strategically for world outreach.
Seldom have two paradigms existed side-by-side with so little critical reflection on their inherent conflicts.
Pilgrim paradigmA better mental map is the metaphor of pilgrimage. Pilgrims have a visionary goal and a sense of direction, but they realize that the path often leads through rugged mountains and foggy swamps, bringing unexpected joys and sorrows. Pilgrims travel together, helping one another follow the map of the Word of God. Because pilgrims have a sense of direction, they are better able to decide if an event is an unfolding opportunity or a side-tracking interruption. Missionary pilgrims aren't surprised by difficulty and ambiguity, but they are motivated in their service by a vision of the Kingdom. They depend on the help of other pilgrims, and come to know and trust the map of the Word of God.
Pilgrims realize that they are involved in a life-long journey of discipleship which begins when they come to Jesus and ends only when they see Jesus face to face. Pilgrim missionaries are disciples of Jesus who go into other cultures to help people become life-long students of Jesus, growing to be like their Teacher.
While I do see excellent examples of the pilgrim paradigm in SIM and in other missions, I'm afraid there are still too many who are following the less effective metaphors. In this paper I will suggest twelve agenda items for a gracious revolution and will include some examples of what we in SIM are trying to do bring about change. We need a gracious revolution as much as any mission.
Agenda for a gracious revolution
1. Vision The pilgrim missionary is driven by a vision of what God could do for people, for the church and for society. Pilgrims invite lost people to join them on the road to Christ, involve them in a community of believers, and help them to become all God intends them to be. They challenge them to follow the map of the Word and to become life-long obedient students of Jesus.
It might be that the most important agenda item for world missions in the 21st century is a rekindling of vision. When my predecessor turned over to me the job of International Director of SIM, he gave me a bumper sticker that is still tacked over my desk. It reads, "The Main Thing is to keep the Main Thing the Main Thing." I fear that we might lose sight of the main thing in missions. We are becoming more efficient and technologically competent at doing secondary things.
Rather than seeking mere numerical growth, we need a vision for a glorious church, without spot or wrinkle or any other blemish, holy and without fault. Instead of aiming to complete a precise task by a specific date, pilgrim missionaries have a vision of what people might look like if they would enroll as life-long students in the school of discipleship and would more consistently display the fruit of the Spirit.
The pilgrim metaphor is developmental in that the vision is for people and churches to grow into wholeness. Development is an inner process that has external (though unpredictable) indicators. The vision is not for mere behavior changes that can be predicted and controlled, but for holy lives that bring glory to God. It is a vision of the growth of the Kingdom of God.
The daily pressures of missionary life tend to squelch vision. It is easy to become so overwhelmed by culture shock, limited language ability, and the frustrations of heat and dust that dynamic vision seems like a distant dream. On the sending side, even the most mission-minded churches will become stagnant unless the passion for Christ's kingdom is renewed for each generation. Both missionaries and sending churches urgently need a rekindled vision of how all of heaven and earth can be influenced by God's blessings to the nations. Such a vision will keep us going in a suffering world with courage, enthusiasm and excitement.
Case Study:During the past several years we have been conducting vision seminars in our candidate classes, leadership development courses, field conferences and regional consultations. In all these settings we ask the question, "If God were to richly bless your ministry, what difference would it make in the church and in people?" We spend time on our knees seeking the Lord's vision for us and reflecting on our faith-driven pictures of the future. We ask, "What does the Lord want His church to be in the future?" We look for results that will make a difference in this world and last throughout eternity.
When Directors report, they talk about their vision and the indications they see that the Lord is fulfilling that vision. While we encourage after-the-fact numbers to describe results, we focus on inner qualities that describe pilgrims marching toward a vision of the future. We ask, "What difference does our ministry make in the lives of people, in society and in the church?"
I encourage our missionaries to humbly pray that the Lord will give them eyes of faith to see the eternal results that God can accomplish through their ministry. I challenge them to ask the Lord for a sense of direction and for qualitative goals they can set by faith. I suggest they prayerfully write out the answer to the question, "If the Lord richly blesses my ministry in the next five years, what might it look like?"
I want missionaries to paint a verbal picture of desired spiritual, eternal results in people and in the church. Too often missionaries look only at programs. They have a vision for using radio, literature or theological education by extension, and they describe their vision in terms of numbers and activities. While successful programs are good things, we need to force ourselves to ask, "What are the developments in the hearts of people and in the character of the church that will change the world and endure through eternity?" Such thinking leads to a big vision of what God could do to bring people and the church to maturity.
It is also good to reflect on more specific parts of the big vision. "If the Lord would bless your Sunday School class or your market evangelism, what might be the eternal results?" I encourage couples to prayerfully reflect on what their marriage might be if the Lord would richly bless them.
How might a vision for Quechua ministry in Bolivia be expressed? I picture the Lord blessing this ministry and hundreds of thousands of Quechuas coming to Christ. I have a vision of what a difference the Gospel might mean for family life and social systems. I see pastors who love the Lord, love people and have the ability to teach what the Bible means in their cultural context. I see lay people actively involved in their churches and reaching out to their communities. I see Quechua missionaries crossing cultures for the sake of the Gospel. The hopes and dreams go on and on.
2. Strategy It is not enough to have a vision. Strategic plans (or action steps) are necessary. In a world of constant change and uncertainty, vision provides a foundation for pilgrim missionaries who dream of creative, innovative, and even audacious strategies.
When missionaries unwittingly work from a factory paradigm, they are tempted to aim at programs or methods rather than eternal results. For example, the vision for a theological school should be more than to double the size of the library or build a new chapel. Libraries and buildings may be worthy projects, but they are means to visionary eternal results. The vision is a faith-picture of Christlike qualities in students and the influence these graduates will have on the church and society. In the factory paradigm, the method becomes the vision. In the wildflower paradigm, daily activity is often unrelated to vision. The pilgrim knows that methods and programs need to be motivated by vision and result in changed lives.
Case Study:As the Lord shows us a vision of a vibrant Quechua church in the mountains of Bolivia, we see hundreds of thousands of Quechua being discipled into churches. They sing indigenous Quechua songs, use an easy-to-understand Quechua Bible, and the church leaders are equipped to help the church grow toward maturity in Christ. Since the Quechua live in hard-to-reach mountain areas, a missionary strategy might include partnering with the Quechua church to develop evangelistic radio. The mission might also recruit ethno-musicologists, and train people who can conduct theological education by extension. The strategy must grow out of the vision, and will be evaluated by the qualities it produces in the Quechua people.
3. Leadership All pilgrims are called to be both leaders and followers in the Body of Christ. The doctrines of the priesthood of all believers and of spiritual gifts mean that each pilgrim is responsible to lead by taking initiative to help others in the Body of Christ. Since no person has all the gifts needed for our shared pilgrimage, there are times when all pilgrims need to follow other spiritually gifted pilgrims.
Because pilgrims need each other and must work together, there is often a need for a person to coordinate the gifts of other pilgrims. A coordinator does not take the place of Christ, the true Head, but has special abilities to maximize the effectiveness of other pilgrims. The most appropriate style for the pilgrim coordinator is team leadership. The pilgrim coordinator needs to be proactive, pushing the process of visionary thinking and action, while trusting the insights of others.
The primary focus of factory leaders is to use the person to accomplish the task. Task-oriented leaders use a controlling style which tends to stifle the development of people, even though the control may be loving and gracious. Wildflower-oriented leaders seek to develop the person but often ignore the task. In contrast, the primary focus of pilgrim leaders is to use the task of world missions to develop other pilgrims. Case Study:We have tried to model team leadership in our International Director's Advisory Committee. I meet with this small group of leaders each Wednesday morning for prayer and planning. We help one another with problems and strive to make joint decisions on issues related to the mission. Twice a year we meet as couples for a week in a retreat center to do prayerful "blue-sky" planning and reflecting. If one of us were removed, there are few if any issues that would catch the others on the leadership team by surprise. I have written several articles on team leadership, both for the newsletter that's sent to all SIM missionaries and for my monthly letter to SIM's administrative leaders and governing board. It's gratifying to see the idea of team leadership developing in many of our ministry countries.
4. Evaluation Pilgrims use evaluation not to place blame for past failures, nor to encourage boasting, but rather to help missionaries do a better job the next time. Many results are serendipitous - wonderful but unexpected. Thousands of people in a resistant people group decide to follow Christ. Revival breaks out in a Bible College. A women's fellowship group catches the vision for supporting their own missionaries to a neighboring country. Spectacular results often come when least expected. Evaluation in these cases is not intended to transfer to humans the credit that belongs to God alone, but rather to rejoice in what He has done. Similarly, when results are discouraging, the purpose of evaluation is to figure out what might be done to improve the situation the next time, but not to assign blame for "failure."
Wildflower evaluation usually focuses on how people feel about themselves and on interpersonal relationships. It is non-threatening, but tends to be limited to evaluation of one's self rather than one's effectiveness in changing the world. Factory evaluation is often threatening because it measures specific outcomes in comparison to predetermined numerical goals. Setting goals too high may cause embarrassment if they're not achieved, so the temptation is to set non-visionary, easily-attainable measurable objectives. Thus factory-minded evaluation tends to stifle exuberant vision.
Case Study:We are in the process of changing missionary evaluation forms to qualitative descriptions of three questions: "What was your situation?" "What was your vision?" and "What did you do to get there?" We ask for indicators of results in the hearts of people, and look for ways to improve the strategy in the coming months. We are working on ways for SIM-related institutions to conduct regular self-evaluations called ministry audits. Our guiding vision for all evaluations is that they be developmental.
5. Evangelism John Bunyan's classic Pilgrim's Progress illustrates that evangelism is a necessary, indeed urgent, step in helping pilgrims flee the City of Destruction, enter the gate of salvation, and leave their burden of sin at the cross of Christ. The need for evangelism is greater now than any time since the beginning of the world. While Christianity has grown rapidly in the last 100 years, there are more people now outside the gate - due to population growth -- than ever before.
Evangelicals from all three paradigms place strong emphasis on evangelism. While factory-oriented missiologists have been somewhat mechanical in their approach, they have provided a valuable service in pinpointing areas of need and drawing attention to hidden and/or unreached people-groups. Wildflower-oriented missiologists have helped to emphasize the joy of the Lord for new believers and have encouraged greater creativity in expressions of worship. We acknowledge our debt to these streams of mission influence, and seek to be faithful as pilgrims in evangelism.
Case Study:Along with our related national churches, we regularly ask if there are unreached people groups in our areas of responsibility. Gracious, culturally sensitive invitations for people to come to Jesus have always been a highest priority. A high percentage of our missionaries are working with unreached people groups, and we continue to seek ways to enter some of the most needy areas of the world. Mergers with other missions have positioned SIM to have access to about half the people of the world. Our latest count shows approximately 10 million people attending SIM-related churches around the world.
6. Discipleship & Church Growth When pilgrims flee the City of Destruction, enter the gate of salvation, and leave the burden of sin at the cross, they are just beginning the journey of life. Evangelism is a most necessary and crucial step, but it is not the end. The most urgent need in world missions is helping pilgrims become disciples, learning to obey everything Jesus commanded. There may be as many as a billion carnal, lukewarm Christians in the world today. Think of the powerful effect a billion people could have if they would catch on fire for Jesus, loving and serving Him with all their hearts. Thus transformed, these pilgrims could evangelize their world and flood the earth with justice. Rwanda, Congo, Liberia, Colombia, China and the United States would become models of justice and peace. Racism, ethnocentrism and poverty would end as people begin to live out the fruit of the Spirit in their villages and neighborhoods.
Factory-oriented missiologists often pay too little attention to life-long discipleship. Growth in grace and in the knowledge of Jesus is an inner, qualitative process that is difficult to predict, control and count. It doesn't fit the factory metaphor. But just "evangelizing" the world is not the fulfillment of Christ's Commission. He wants us to make disciples who will obey everything He commanded. This is a life-long process, not a precise task that can be finished by a specific date. Church growth, as defined by logarithmic graphs and ten-year projections, has never been a New Testament ideal for a church. Such an approach may be one of the reasons why the church around the world has been described as an inch deep and 25,000 miles wide. Many factory-oriented missiologists tend to focus on the top inch.
Case Study:We have a long way to go, but SIM has a strong history of helping churches to become schools of discipleship for every age level. Some of our highest priorities are to provide the Bible in a language people can easily understand, to develop Sunday Schools, Women's Fellowships, Youth Fellowships, and in-service training for pastors. Some churches have practiced radical discipleship. One church in the jungles of Bolivia studied the Bible and caught a vision for sending and fully supporting missionaries from their church to Africa. A group of young people in Nigeria decided to be "serious" Christians and dedicated their lives to serve Jesus. They began a ministry called New Life in Christ, which has taken the Gospel to dozens of prostitutes and gang members. Students of Jesus must obey His command to go to the lost in their Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and the ends of the earth.
The ultimate goal of pilgrim missions is to help people in other cultures come to Jesus, love Him with all their hearts, obey everything He has commanded and become like Him. The Great Commission will not be completed until people from every language and nation join in singing the Hallelujah Chorus at the wedding feast of the Lamb.
7. Theological education Visionary theological educators see teaching as an opportunity for fellow pilgrims to spend time in what Bunyan called "Interpreter's House." Solid biblical content is taught as the map to help pilgrims find the right path, discover resources to win spiritual battles, and catch the vision of the ultimate goal. Teaching Bible content is a means, not an end. The implicit curriculum for the pilgrim educator is the development of a caring community of disciples learning to obey all Jesus commanded. Teachers and students alike are pilgrims being equipped for the journey.
Wildflower educators often downplay the need for formal education, or they emphasize personal experience over theological reflection and biblical interpretation.
Factory-oriented educators are preoccupied with behavioral objectives, test scores and outward compliance with course requirements. Competition rather than community becomes the implicit curriculum, and teachers are thought to be gurus who deposit pearls of wisdom into the empty heads of students. Too often, students from such theological schools merely "regurgitate" pearls of wisdom, rather than grow into a community of life-long disciples who interpret the Word of God in a culturally relevant manner that changes lives.
Case Study: There are about 18,000 students in SIM-related theological schools or extension programs. Many of our missionaries are involved in education for Christian workers. We have also worked informally to help promote renewal in centers of theological education. We have encouraged international accrediting in Africa and South America, helped to write the Manifesto for Renewal in Theological Education, promoted Theological Education by Extension, and helped to publish the writings of theologians from the 2/3-world. We have led seminars for theological educators from dozens of countries, urging a quiet revolution in theological education. We must persevere until the pilgrim model defines all our theological education efforts.
8. Meeting Human Need Pilgrims are concerned about poverty, sickness, injustice and hopelessness because the Holy Spirit helps them to exhibit His fruit of love and kindness. Because we love people, we must be concerned about their eternal destiny as well as their physical and emotional hurts.
Both factory and wildflower-oriented missionaries also have a heart for helping people in need. But those who embrace the factory metaphor tend to see the task in terms of "doing things to people," like giving them pills, fertilizer, roads and wells. They tend to measure results in terms of statistics: economic indicators such as GNP, or the number of schools. Wildflower-oriented ministries tend to give aid based on the emotions of the moment rather than on the long-range development of people in need.
We must remember that all real development is human development - development of people into all that God intended for them. True human development springs from within rather than from outside. We can foster development but we can't control it, force it or numerically predict it.
Case Study:Even though we can cite many bad examples from our own past, we hope we've been learning from our mistakes. SIM has been at the cutting edge of good development theory for many years. In the last hundred years SIM has started many hospitals, hundreds of primary and secondary schools, and hundreds of dispensaries and medical training programs. We have been involved in famine relief and have used applied our best strategies to promote community development, agricultural projects and urban change. It is very fulfilling to see the churches we helped to plant catch the vision for meeting human need through their own development projects.
9. Mission - National Church Relationships Pilgrim missionaries have the task of planting and nurturing churches in other cultures. We plant churches, but we do not run them. Whereas a new convert is expected to be dependent on more mature Christians for awhile, dependency is a problem if it lasts too long. Missionaries need to get out of leadership positions in national churches as soon as possible. Developing churches tend to go through a stage of independence. They need to learn to be self-supporting, self-governing, self-propagating and self-nurturing. But an independent church is an oxymoron. How can members of the universal Body of Christ in one country be independent of the rest of the Body? The ideal relationship is one in which the national church and the mission agency work together in a loving and trusting interdependent relationship, with neither trying to dominate the other and with both fulfilling complementary functions. This is true whether the missionary goes from Canada to Ethiopia, or from Nigeria to England. The principles are the same.
It's hard for mission groups working from a factory metaphor to aim at a loving interdependent relationship. They are more interested in numbers of converts and precise time-specific targets. For example, they may say that when 20% of a people group have joined the church, then 95% of the missionaries need to be moved to a new field. Such a strategy may avoid some tensions of church-mission relationships, but it also misses the joy of cross-cultural discipleship and the excitement of partnering together to reach the rest of the world.
Case Study:SIM has at times had problems with national church relationships. There have been too many times when we have held control too long and have hindered the development of the national church. But there have also been times when we lost our identity as a cross-cultural mission and have fused with the local church. This has meant losing our distinct function as a cross-cultural mission. While relationships with the church are very different in each of our countries, the relationships are probably better now than they have been in many years. Space limitations prevent reporting on recent gatherings in which brokenness and reconciliation have brought deep healing and restored relationships. New agreements and joint ministries have grown out of trusting relationships.
An organization called Evangel Fellowship International provides a healthy forum for interaction among national churches and SIM. Leaders from SIM-related field churches meet every two years to pray, share stories, get to know one another, strategize and learn from one another. A few SIM leaders participate but do not dominate the agenda or the decisions.
10. Mission-Sending Church Relationships Sending churches and mission agencies have an interdependent relationship. Each needs the other. It is not healthy for a sending church to merely send the missionary and the monthly support and not be deeply involved in the care, encouragement and prayer for that missionary. Likewise, it is difficult, inefficient and usually ineffective for local churches to send isolated missionaries around the world. Mission boards not only provide logistic and spiritual support; they also give structure for field-based visionary planning and for accountability. For individual churches to send missionaries around the world would be like local towns sending their own soldiers into war, expecting them to report to the mayor of their home-town rather than to the field officer. Such a plan would not only be more expensive, it would create chaos on the front lines. Sending churches and mission boards are mutually dependent.
Churches and mission boards operating with a factory metaphor find an interdependent relationship difficult. Factory-oriented mission boards have a passion for control and may feel threatened by local churches wanting to take more initiative. Factory-oriented churches may feel threatened by the mission board and resent the fact that they use so much money for administration and don't consult them for every strategic move on the field. The pilgrim paradigm, though, driven as it is by vision, has a higher tolerance for the more ambiguous relationship of interdependence.
Case Study:SIM is learning how to listen to sending churches. While the missionary is the primary contact with supporting churches, we can learn much from listening to highly motivated mission pastors and committees. Recently leaders of SIM have hosted significant meetings with missions pastors and lay people from major missionary-supporting churches. The purpose is not to indoctrinate them about SIM, but to listen to their vision and problems and ask if there are things we could do to help them. Several major initiatives have resulted from these meetings. 11. Partnering with National Church Missions A primary reason why a mission needs to continue a non-controlling, interdependent discipling relationship with national churches is so we can partner together to reach places neither of us could reach on our own. The gospel will have much more power and credibility if it is preached by Bolivians together with Australians and Nigerians. It is difficult for a Muslim to say that Christianity is a Western religion when he is hearing the gospel from a team made up of missionaries from Japan, Canada and Ethiopia. An ideal model is for Christians from any country to be able to share the gospel together in any other country.
The factory metaphor places a high value on efficiency and getting the most results for the least amount of money. Advertisements in major Christian magazines challenge churches to simply send their money to support national evangelists because it is cheaper or more efficient. While in some situations churches in more developed countries should send money to support national evangelists, the process is loaded with danger. After years of such dependency, it's difficult for the national church to feel the responsibility to pick up the support of the evangelist if and when foreign funding is eventually cut off. Often the local evangelist does not feel accountable to the local church. Moreover, sending churches in the West lose the personal connection they would have by sending their own people to do cross-cultural ministry.
Case Study:An example of a healthy interdependent partnership occurs when Western funds are used to help initiate a missionary effort from a less developed country. For example, a few years ago the SIM-related church in Ethiopia had a vision for sending missionaries to other countries but didn't know how to begin. Dr. Howard Brant of SIM had a vision to stimulate the church in Ethiopia to send missionaries to India. The SIM-related church in India was excited about having Ethiopians help them with evangelism. SIM helped fund the training of ten Ethiopians and paid for their international airfare. The church in Ethiopia funded the living expenses of their missionaries, and the church in India provided housing while they were there. As a result of this six-month project more than 1,000 Indians professed faith in Christ, and about a hundred churches in India learned about Sunday School and women's fellowships and gained a rekindled vision for evangelism. The Kale Heywet churches in Ethiopia were ecstatic that the Lord had used them to make a difference in India through their support of their ten overseas missionaries.
In both Nigeria and Ethiopia, the SIM-related churches have more than 1,000 cross-cultural missionaries, primarily supported by local churches. The church leadership group called Evangel Fellowship International has a sub-committee called Evangel Fellowship International Missions Association (EFIMA), which exists to help the mission boards that grew out of SIM-related churches. Already, thirteen of the SIM-related denominations have functioning mission boards. The Lord has blessed us much more than we deserve.
12. RevivalPilgrims need continual renewal. It seems that the normal tendency is for missionaries, supporting churches and field churches to lose their way and fall into the Slough of Despond, to be tempted at Vanity Fair or chained in Doubting Castle or captured by the Giant of Despair. We become discouraged, and begin to fight with each other. Revival helps us to get back on the pilgrim path. Revival is not the ultimate goal for the church any more than getting back on the track is the ultimate destination of a derailed train. But without revival we get stuck with all kinds of problems for a long time.
Sending churches also need revival. Spiritually dying churches will lose their vision for missions even before the disease is diagnosed. Revivals have often given fresh impetus for world missions. The revival in Wales in the early part of this century had repercussions in missions around the world.Factory-oriented churches either try to control revival or are afraid it will become too emotional. Wildflower-oriented churches may think that the emotional ecstasy of revival is the ultimate goal, rather than a means for pilgrims to get back on the path of worship and service. Pilgrims seek daily revival -- asking the Spirit to use the Word to challenge and correct them when they stray from the path.
Case Study:We have set aside the ten days between Ascension and Pentecost for fasting, confession and obedience to the Word. We provide various resources to help our teams plan meaningful times with the Lord, both corporate and individual. Our model is the revival in Nehemiah 9, which was based on Scripture and included confession, worship, prayer and obedience. During these days of prayer, we use e-mail as the primary means of encouraging the mission family each day to continue to seek the Lord.
We also find that sometimes the Lord brings renewal during the spiritual life conferences held on each field every year. May the Lord graciously give us profound times of refreshing and revival.
Summary visionWhat might happen if churches, missions, and schools would catch a vision for a gracious revolution in world missions? Could it be that the 20th Century, a most amazing century of progress in missions, will be seen by historians as a mere prologue to the astounding growth of biblical Christianity in the 21st Century?
May it be so.