Lessons Learned the Hard Way in Missions

Transcription

1 Lessons Learned the Hard Way in Missions Global Missions Conference July 20-23, 2005 Glover Shipp, D. Miss. Former missionary to Brazil and past managing editor of the Christian Chronicle Introduction A. Missions have a bad rep in many circles, conjuring up the mental picture of some strange person denying all of the perks of modern life and spending decades in a jungle or savannah, putting western clothing on the natives and building schools and hospitals. When the subject comes up of our family s having spent 18 years in Brazil in mission work, some people look a bit puzzled. Why would an educated person like you spend that many years in the Brazilian jungle? In the first place, we didn t do much work in jungles. We lived in a city which has 5 million people and is quite advanced in many ways. We built no schools or hospitals, but rather, did extensive publications work that is still reaping results there and in other countries. We planted churches, most of them urban and some of them reaching 300 or so members. B. From the late 1800s on to at least World War II, the image of the paternal missionary, trying to civilize the ignorant natives, held somewhat true. For the most part, thankfully, that is no longer true of missions. C. But before we continue along this line, let us take a brief look at the history of Christian missions. Missionary evangelism has gone on in since the days of the apostles. Paul was a good example. He was an urban evangelist, planting churches in key cities of the Roman Empire. He had a strategy and goals. He worked with a team of colleagues and was seldom alone. He normally went first in a city to his fellow Jews and when they rejected his message, he turned to the Gentiles. He didn t stay long in any one place, Ephesus being the longest, but kept moving on and breaking new ground for the Gospel. He adapted his message to his audience, such as in Athens. He left a string of churches, organized with elders, from Antioch of Syria to Greece and perhaps farther afield. He kept in touch with these churches through follow-up visits, sending co-workers to them and writing letters. Some leaders and so-called leaders were false teachers, whom he severely condemned. Many others he commended for their sacrificial service. D. Down through the centuries mission work has always gone on, some of it very successful and some a failure. Many died for their faith Ramón Lull for instance, who was martyred for his attempts to preach Christ to Muslim leaders. By his time the church existed from England to India and beyond. As it grew, it became politicized, taking on trappings of the Roman Empire and modifying its doctrine. It still sent out missionaries, but these were largely from monastic orders, to spread what had become Catholic doctrine. Their efforts, often closely linked with military conquest, turned much of the world, such as Latin America, Catholic. E. When Protestantism began to send out people to other countries, it generally had the Catholic mentality of paternalism the priest, padre or pastor civilizing their converts and making them dependant, as little children, on the church and its missionaries. F. In the nineteenth century the Restoration Movement began to send out missionaries, largely for life and largely using the Protestant paternalistic approach. Missionary compounds were erected, homes built, schools and farms started. The missionaries were the Western fathers, running the entire operation, much of it in Africa and most of it rural. They did much good and served for decades, suffering privation in many ways. They were real heroes of the faith. But they often left a westernized church, dependent on Western money and without much real national leadership. Reuel Lemmons once spoke on the topic, The Ghost of Past Failures. He traced the history of all known missionaries of churches of Christ up to World

2 War II. He found no trace of their work left after the war, with the exception of the remains of J.M. McCaleb s efforts in Japan and some of the mission in southern Africa. After the war a new surge of missions took place, most of which is still bearing some fruit today. G. Since World War II we still make some of their mistakes and add to them our own. What are some of these? Mistakes Made in Missions A. Not making missions a priority in our church and personal life, giving it low priority in the church s planning and budgeting. We fail to see that missions are at the heart of the entire Bible. Coupled with this failure is blindness to most of the world. American Christians, like Americans in general, fail miserably when tested on questions of world geography and history. This blindness to other peoples has resulted in the vast majority of the world s population knowing little or nothing about Christ. Once in Catholic Brazil we were traveling in the Interior of the country and met a man whom we asked, Sir, do you know Jesus? His answer was, I m not sure. Does he live around here? How many multiplied millions of people might answer in the same way? They have not heard and will not hear, unless someone is sent to them with Jesus and His saving message. B. Going into missions casually or precipitously. Someone comes along with a good story and slick presentation, so we buy it. Or it may be that an influential member has a friend or family member who wants to go on a mission. So we buy into that particular program without adequate investigation or research. Careful study of a field, its relative receptivity, culture or cultures, the preparation of the missionary, the cost of serving there and other factors should go into the all-important decision about where and when to spend mission dollars. As long as they support a missionary and receive occasional reports from the field, many congregations are content with their mission work; let us say, with mediocrity. Their goals for missions are unclear, they send people to the field or support those on the field who may have no business being there, or they engage in a title mission work so as to appear to be mission-minded. Some even are jackrabbit churches, jumping from one supposedly hot mission to another, rather than being a marathon church which stays the course. C. Sending out a missionary or missionary family alone to a field. Unless the missionary family is surrounded by teammates, it has no moral support readily available on site. An old pro family can perhaps do this, but as a rule a family new to missions will not survive long. D. Americanizing the mission. When we went to Brazil we studiously attempted to avoid strictly American methods. We didn t fully succeed, because no one of us can totally divorce himself or herself from our cultural and church background. A church friend who lived for many years in Japan and married a Japanese, came back to the States and was confused by so many practices he saw in the churches good, perhaps, but strictly American. His wife, who is struggling over her decision to become a Christian, has trouble divorcing what is Bible from what is cultural in our churches. We saw this in Brazil, also. I returned there on a campaign two or three years after leaving the work there. One good brother confided in me that he was concerned over something that had changed in worship since our departure. He said that they didn t always have a prayer before the contribution. I tried to explain to him that the prayer, and even a contribution taken during the worship, were conveniences and not commandments. We are to lay by in store on the first day of the week, but how this is done is more traditional and cultural than it is biblical. American style of worship had crept in, even though we didn t intend for it to do so. I left him confused, regrettably. E. Offering material enticements. One mission I know of gave out countless tons of USAID foods to the poor. Countless poor people flowed into the church, but when the surplus food program gave out, most of these converts disappeared. All over the world young, ambitious people seek a way to obtain

3 American dollars, get to the States and receive a great education. If we facilitate their study here, on the basis that they will return to their homes as educated Christian leaders, we are doomed to disappointment in many cases. The chances are that they will never return permanently to their homelands after a taste of the good life here. A patrón mentality of doling out money, food and other material goods does not normally build strong, independent churches. Nor does its opposite, a fraternal mentality from the start. In some cases missionaries have gone to the extreme of making no decisions for the work. They expect men still wet from their baptism to begin making decisions and leading the church. We wouldn t do this here. Why should we try it on the field, where converts normally have far less background in Bible than converts here may have. F. Becoming involved in causes that do not relate directly to evangelism and church maturation. There is the constant temptation on the field to get into worthy social or political causes, or even to venture into some business enterprise. All of this may be good, but can dissipate the energies and goals of church planting and developing. Political activation is a sure way of being expelled from the country. The Jesuits are a prime example. This monastic order became the military arm of the Catholic church in some regions. There is much need for better schools, better health care and so many other conditions, so missionaries can find themselves involved in these to the point of losing sight of their major purpose for being there. Teaching English as a second language, for instance, is a worthy cause, but only if it can be related to evangelism. Teaching in a school or university is laudable, but only if it is conducive to evangelism in some way. G. Doing no in-depth study of the science of missions, diverse world views, cultural differences and cross-cultural communication, for starters. Our mission team to Brazil was prepared, in a small way, on some of these points, but on others, no. We were going to a large city, but really knew nothing about urban anthropology or evangelism. It took many years of trial-and-error to work out methods that were reasonably sound and successful. If missionaries are often not well prepared, consider how ill-prepared their home mission committee and elders are. The elders of our sponsoring church were wonderful, visionary leaders, but I felt that only one or two had a real grasp of what we were trying to accomplish on the field. H. Having no missions policy or structure. When I worked with Bob Waldron at the McCaleb Institute for Missions Education at Abilene Christian, we hammered out a model missions policy statement for churches to apply. This was almost unheard-of at the time. Without a policy and structure for missions, a church may fail to set up goals with its missionaries. In how many cases have missionaries been supported for years with no end in sight; no point at which the work becomes self-sustaining and self-governing. As a missions coordinating elder, I meet with our missions committee. It has worked out, at the request of the elders, a plan to see all of our mission works reach self-sustaining status within seven years, extending that point three more years if necessary. I m seeing that this doesn t fit all of our fields. We support Reuben Kapaale in Zambia. He doesn t work just with a congregation, but with a region, training leaders and helping them plant new churches. How can we say that his work has reached independence in seven years? We have others like him, who help churches in a wide region. Some of them are older, some are very young. At what point do they all reach maturity? Yes, we need a plan and goals, but they must be flexible, depending on the individual workers and situation. I. Inadequately supporting missionaries. Our family was adequately supported during our stay in Brazil, but others were not. They had to return home to raise more money or just return home disenchanted. If a missionary family goes to a large city, his expenses may be even higher than in a city here. Yet, we often still have the poor missionary mentality he should get along on a meager salary, since he

4 wants to sacrifice for the cause of Christ. Some sponsoring churches expect the missionary to raise his own travel funds, start-up funds, health insurance payments, vehicle, phone and the like. No arrangement is made for vacations, leaves or emergency situations. Some make no provision for any annuity for the missionary when he eventually returns home. J. Failing to visit the missionary family on the field. Our elders, as I have said, were wonderful men, but only three ever visited us in 18 years one of these twice and the other two once. We cannot know the work without seeing it, feeling it, tasting it and getting acquainted with other workers, both international and national. Joined with this is a lack of communication from the sponsoring church. Now with so accessible, frequent communication can and should take place, and it must be two-way, not just from the missionary. K. Inadequately monitoring the missionary s doctrine, behavior, health, family, work and general situation on the field. There have been far too many cases in which fellow missionaries saw a serious problem and passed this along to the sponsoring church involved, only to be told to butt out. People with deteriorating health, psychological problems, problems with co-workers, moral issues, family issues or doctrinal weakness have been left on the field far longer than they should have been, so their inability or bad example set the work back for almost light years. L. Giving insufficient transition time and support to returning missionary. Generally speaking, the missionary family returns home with essentially nothing no home, no car, no appliances, no furniture... We were fortunate in that our sponsoring church continued our support at a diminishing amount for about three years after our return. We were also fortunate in that a local congregation came to our aid with funds for appliances. This made a great difference in our ability to resettle. Some, however, are lucky to receive funds for their return travel and nothing else. Reestablishing themselves back home is a huge adjustment at best, without having to struggle just to survive the first few months or years. They need to be honored and supported, especially by their sponsoring church, until they can settle in to something else. Conclusion This lesson has been negative, for which I apologize, but that was the assignment I was given. However, I want to close on a more positive note. For, after all, many aspects of modern missions are very positive. Here are some practices that ought to cheer our hearts: Most missionaries go in teams or join teams on the field, thus giving and receiving mutual support and fellowship. Missionary candidates for the most part are given fairly intensive training. They also spend a few months with their sponsoring church before departure. This builds special bonds of fellowship between the missionary family and the sending church. Missionary families are brought home every two years or so for reporting and rest. One time we were four years between leaves. That was too long, both for us aznd our sponsoring church. Missionaries are supported better than in the past. This includes financial, moral and spiritual support. The missionary family knows that whatever the crisis it faces, its home congregation will be at its side in funds, prayer and even physical presence. Communication is vastly better, due to wireless phones and . Communication that used to take weeks can no take no more than minutes. When we went to the field in 1967, it was several days after our arrival there that communication got through to our sponsor. Now in the airport lobby of the worker s guest country, he or she can be in touch with home.

5 Mission resources and information about nations and peoples are much better than in the past. The Missions Resource Network, which coordinated this conference, has much material available. Colleges and universities have a wide variety of missions courses. Books by the hundreds are available. And now the Internet can provide instantaneous facts on every country and its current financial and political situation. All of this is to say that we are doing a more effective job of going and sending. The job is just beginning, however. Remember, the bulk of the world knows little or nothing about Jesus. The Hindu and Buddhist worlds include Him as just another god. The Muslim world denies Him as Son of God, crucified Christ and Savior. The Jews, as a whole, reject Him as the Messiah. The world in general is indifferent to Him. Our task is God-sized. Let us place it at the top of our church s priority list and go after it with the zeal of apostles.

6 Class Handout Mistakes Made in Missions Lessons Learned the Hard Way in Missions A. Not making missions a priority in our church and personal life, giving it low priority in the church s planning and budgeting. B. Going into missions casually or precipitously. C. Sending out the missionary or missionary family alone to a field. D. Americanizing the mission. E. Offering material enticements. F. Becoming involved in causes that do not relate directly to evangelism and church maturation. G. Doing no in-depth study of the science of missions. H. Having no missions policy or structure. I. Inadequately supporting missionaries. J. Failing to visit the missionary family. K. Inadequately monitoring the missionary s doctrine, behavior, health, etc. L. Giving insufficient transition support for returning missionaries. Positive aspects of missions Many go to the field in teams. Missionaries are given intensive training before departure. Missionary families are brought home every two years or so. Missionaries are better supported and equipped than in the past. Communication is vastly better. Missions resources are much better. We are more effective in going and sending.