A pastor friend of mine sent me a book to review. Fortunately it was a book that was only 80 pages in length and lots of white space so I was able to go through it quickly. The author, who is the head of a missionary sending agency, was proposing a new missiological method for church planting; one that proposed universal rapid church growth. Though it has merit, there really wasn’t anything remarkably new and was short on particulars, but then again, what can you expect from a book that can be read in a couple of hours. I reviewed this book on the heels of finishing a study on the Enlightenment which today philosophers call Modernity and their mechanistic view of reality. Most people in my generation grew up with this mechanistic worldview, which believes if we just find the right formula or technique we can solve problems and can create programs that will be efficient, profitable and give good return on investment. Hiebert asserts that (1) techniques led to division of labor with an increasing number of specialists who are experts in their field but know little of the overall process involved (2) requires quantification (3) is amoral focusing on the “how” not “why” (4) efficiency and profit are the supreme value (5) turn everything into goods that can be produced and sold.
My cautious reaction to the book my friend sent me, which really does have some good thoughts, is due to my own epistemological shift as a moderate post-modernist. I’ve seen and tried so many techniques down through the years that I weary with another how-to approach to world evangelism. I sympathize with churches and donors who have a heart for the world and who are frustrated with missionaries who seemingly spend a lifetime on the field with little to show for it. However, the answer to the needs of a world without Christ has never been nor ever will be reduced to a technique, whether it be power-encounter, Jesus Film, prayer walks or Short-Cycle Church Planting. The world is too diverse, issues of politics and religion too complex to suggest that mechanistic formula will bring about mass conversions and multiple church plants. My post-modernism tells me there isn’t a single answer. That doesn’t mean that we should ignore new ideas and new techniques, but my view is that success in missions will only be created within the context of the field, not an overlaid formula from the West.
3 comments:
Richard, would love to interact on this book. We are cautiously exploring the ramifications of this model. One thing I am glad for is this: an agency with a rich tradition is willing to try something new to get the job done.
Always good to read your blog!
Chris
Hi Richard,
As a post-modern missionary who questions using western formulas in foreign cultures, what do you think about the reverse: utilising effective evangelism programs used by missionaries (The DAWN strategy, e.g.) and incorporating them into western church-growth programs.
In my book "Fantastic Evangelism, The Whole Church Reaching the Whole Harvest" my thesis is while church-growth is exploding in many formerly unchurched countries in the world, church-growth in America is in a definite decline(According to reports the western church is shrinking at nearly 3 million attendees a year); therefore it stands to reason, America should model their evangelism practices after systems proven to be successful; such as those in Russia, Asia, India, Africa etc.
What do you think?
Steve Wallace
Steve,
Possibly. I'd have to read your whole argument to gain perspective. Generally the context is more important than the method so no matter what is used, in the US or in Africa, church growth is successful because of the dynamics in the country, not necessarily the form being used. Second, DAWN and SCP are philosophies which stress vision more than strategies. They have their strengths, they have their weaknesses.
Looking fwd to reading your book.
Post a Comment