No matter how many times I try to explain our ministry it
never seems to quite click with so many people. The reason is because it so different than most
teaching/discipling programs that is associated with church or missions. I could say I teach missions, but that
would only tell part of the story.
I could say I teach cross-cultural studies and anthropology, which is
true, but what does that mean?
This week I am in Nepal teaching at the Kathmandu Institute of TheologyK(KIT). It’s an
extension campus, not affiliated with any denomination working on accreditation
through other academic programs.
The students are already in ministry as pastors or working with
Christian organizations. They are
overwhelmingly bi-vocational, working outside jobs for their daily bread. KIT has a nominal enrollment fee and depends
on professors, like myself, to provide their own transportation, accommodations
and food. I don’t usually take
these types of assignments but glad I did for this project.
In each teaching assignment, whether it be for a DMin class
or a non-formal training venue, I ask my students to find a group of people NOT
from their caste, tribe or linguistic group, and do a research project on that
people group. In their paper they
are to learn about the people’s religion, customs, history and even economics. From that research paper they are to
come up with a strategy of mission to reach those people. Because I am with a class between two
to three weeks and, because the scarcity of library research, the papers are
not very comprehensive. In spite of the limitations due to time
and resources, I still believe this class is significant.
1. It opens the students to new ideas on who, where
and how to do ministry. Probably
90% or more of my students have never even thought about cross-cultural
ministry.
2. It gives them insight that they can reach ALL of
their community, not just people from their own ethnic background.
Last week I asked them to give me a one-paragraph
description of the people group they have chosen to do research on. Here are some of those groups described
the students.
a.
Tharu community
– “They are the lower class people and are like slave to upper class people.”
b.
Rauate –
“Almost naked people who live in the forest eating herbs and wild animals.
c.
Magar
– “Live in western Nepal, say they are Hindus but really animists.”
d.
Sherpa
tribe – “Live in the Himalayan, Tibetan Buddhist.”
e.
Chepan
– “Tibeto-Burman people numbering about 52,000. Often characterized as the poorest of the poor.”
f.
Nepali
Muslim community.
g.
Madhesi
Muslims.
h.
The Chhetri
and Brahmin. “They are mostly priests and businessmen.”
Will all of them really do ministry on these groups? Probably not, but at least by doing
research on these people they will be more aware of the community that is
around them. Perhaps God will
touch the heart of a few to give their lives to be missionaries to these
groups.
As I read the proposed project papers the Lord reminded me,
again, why I do what I do. Many
may not understand the purpose of teaching nationals how to cross cultural
boundaries to take the Gospel, but I am indeed grateful that he has allowed me
to do this unique and vital work.
