what is everyone doing, exactly?
Recently, in pursuit of finding other missionary blogs where I might glean some like-minded perspective, I came across this clearinghouse: http://www.alifeoverseas.com/missionary-blogs/ I began reading a few posts from the 160+ missionary blogs listed there. What I found consistently (this is not the scientific method here, folks), is that missionaries have a hard time living and ministering ANYWHERE that is not "home." Haiti, Bolivia, Thailand, Kenya...all hard. I found many missionary bloggers who confessed depression, anxiety, and a general sadness at missing friends, family, and the conveniences of America. They would try to speak positively of the difference they were making in their second culture, all the while confessing that they were worried about the impact the missionary lifestyle was having on the children. Pretty much all of the blogs I read were thanking supporters for their giving, all the while making it clear that their budgets were still not being met. This means these missionary families must be cutting back somewhere...either on food, clothing, transportation needs, or some other thing that most likely is not a "luxury" by American standards. And yet in the midst of all this "cutting back," they are still seen as rich in their towns, villages, or countries where they serve, merely because they are white and American. This is disconcerting for simple, middle-class Americans, who most likely gave up a $40,000 a year job, small home and two used vehicles to move to a country where they are now seen as "rich." As we all know, these people were not rich in the least by American standards, yet they will never shake this identity in the lands where they are attempting to minister.
And it causes me to ponder, what is everyone doing, exactly? Is our "rich," white, American presence really effective in countries where people will never relate to us? What does a missionary to Haiti do when he encounters statistics like these?:
Population: 8,681,000 (666 persons/sq mile)
Life expectancy: 49 years
Yearly income per capita: $400 (poorest in Western Hemisphere, 3rd poorest in world)
Literacy rate: 45% (95.5% in US)
Persons per physician: 10,041 (385 in US)
Infant mortality per 1000 live births: 105 (7.5 in US)
Maternal mortality per 100,000 births: 1000 (12 in US)
Yearly health care expenditure per capita: $27 ($2765 in US)
How does he/she relate to those being ministered to? Is the Jesus I bring with me seen as the Jesus of the rich, white, American? I cannot promise that Jesus will make their financial state better, their health state better, their young mothers and babies not die so easily, or their lifespan be longer. So will they reject Him? Maybe. And if they do reject Him, has my time there been wasted? Have I sacrificed too much? Aren't I better suited to minister to people more like myself? More...white? More...American? More...middle class? How do I communicate the one thing I can't get wrong, because eternity is at stake, when I can't even fully speak the language?
This can hurt,...cause pain, as I really think about it. Is cross-cultural ministry really effective? I think about this a lot. And when I say a lot, I mean every day. Does God want us to stay within our own countries to spread the gospel? Does He want us to go short-term to teach teams in other nations so that then they can go out and spread Jesus in ways that are culturally effective and relevant?
Well, I don't have all the answers. I know Jesus told the disciples to " Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” This sounds like compelling proof for cross-cultural missions. "All nations" would mean, well...all the nations of the world. And at that time, that would most significantly have meant Gentiles. Different languages? Yes. Different cultures? Yes. Different socio-economics? Yes. Different skin color? Yes. All nations. All kinds of people.
And who should go? Same answer. All nations. Every language that has a witness. Every skin color within Christendom. Ever socio-economic group within Christendom. For in the end, we all must give an account of how we responded to this commission. Did we go? Did we pray? Did we give? Did we try to promote the worship of Christ in the nations? Once a "nation" has been baptized and taught, it too is now added in as part of the "going" group, for it now must heed the words of Christ. And we are seeing this! Amazingly, the "heathen" countries I once cried over as a child are now sending missionaries out...even sending them to the U.S.A.! This means they are truly being discipled...when they themselves begin to respond by going out to preach, teach, and baptize.
Well, this conversation isn't finished. I'd LOVE to hear from you, readers. What does the Great Commission look like for you? What do you think is the most effective way to reach other nations? Do you think short-term missions are effective? Are long-term missions better? Should the goal always be to train up national Christians? I thank you in advance for your thoughtful responses.
And it causes me to ponder, what is everyone doing, exactly? Is our "rich," white, American presence really effective in countries where people will never relate to us? What does a missionary to Haiti do when he encounters statistics like these?:
How does he/she relate to those being ministered to? Is the Jesus I bring with me seen as the Jesus of the rich, white, American? I cannot promise that Jesus will make their financial state better, their health state better, their young mothers and babies not die so easily, or their lifespan be longer. So will they reject Him? Maybe. And if they do reject Him, has my time there been wasted? Have I sacrificed too much? Aren't I better suited to minister to people more like myself? More...white? More...American? More...middle class? How do I communicate the one thing I can't get wrong, because eternity is at stake, when I can't even fully speak the language?
This can hurt,...cause pain, as I really think about it. Is cross-cultural ministry really effective? I think about this a lot. And when I say a lot, I mean every day. Does God want us to stay within our own countries to spread the gospel? Does He want us to go short-term to teach teams in other nations so that then they can go out and spread Jesus in ways that are culturally effective and relevant?
Well, I don't have all the answers. I know Jesus told the disciples to " Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” This sounds like compelling proof for cross-cultural missions. "All nations" would mean, well...all the nations of the world. And at that time, that would most significantly have meant Gentiles. Different languages? Yes. Different cultures? Yes. Different socio-economics? Yes. Different skin color? Yes. All nations. All kinds of people.
And who should go? Same answer. All nations. Every language that has a witness. Every skin color within Christendom. Ever socio-economic group within Christendom. For in the end, we all must give an account of how we responded to this commission. Did we go? Did we pray? Did we give? Did we try to promote the worship of Christ in the nations? Once a "nation" has been baptized and taught, it too is now added in as part of the "going" group, for it now must heed the words of Christ. And we are seeing this! Amazingly, the "heathen" countries I once cried over as a child are now sending missionaries out...even sending them to the U.S.A.! This means they are truly being discipled...when they themselves begin to respond by going out to preach, teach, and baptize.
Well, this conversation isn't finished. I'd LOVE to hear from you, readers. What does the Great Commission look like for you? What do you think is the most effective way to reach other nations? Do you think short-term missions are effective? Are long-term missions better? Should the goal always be to train up national Christians? I thank you in advance for your thoughtful responses.
I think that short term missions are not to be sneezed at, but they only plant seeds. (One of the reasons my parents pulled out of YWAM, as I recall, was that there was no discipleship structure. You went around "planting seeds" but nobody followed up... no churches were formed.)
ReplyDeleteI figure that mission is most effective when people within the culture are doing the ministry. But obviously, at LEAST at the beginning, you NEED cross-cultural missions. Otherwise, how is anyone to hear the Gospel in the first place?
Good input, R. Yes, obviously at LEAST in the beginning we need cross-cultural ministry. I love John Piper's statement that "Missions exists because worship doesn't," meaning that Christ is not yet known and exalted among all the "nations" (tribes, tongues...). Obviously this is a hot topic for me personally because I'm trying to weigh what we are doing here, in an English-speaking nation that has over 1200 churches in an 84 square mile space. The financial upkeep for us to be here is much, much higher than it would be in most other nations of the world, including, of course, our own U.S.A. This is hard to grapple with.
ReplyDelete