Is Church Growth In India An Obstacle In Reaching The Masses?

In the most recent issue of Christianity Today, Tim Stafford writes about church growth in India. The premise of his article is that the growing church is primarily among the Dalits (formerly known as "outcastes" or "untouchables,"), Other Backward Castes (OBC's) and tribal people. Stafford’s article seems to lose focus as he ends up talking about a mission hospital in the North as well as the large population of Christians in the Northeast. There are interesting statistics but, like so many such articles, numbers are sometimes guesstimates rather than reliable data. I always appreciate, however, the focus on India and missions and encourage my readers to go to this CT link as well as the YouTube clip.

My problem with this, and so many articles about church growth in India, is that it misses the larger issue of Christianity in the sub-continent. Eighty percent of the population is Hindu, fifteen percent are Muslims. Reporting that there are possibly 70 million Christians in the country, though impressive and certainly something that we Christians rejoice over, still ignores the reality that MOST of the Indian population is not being reached and there is no real strategy on how to penetrate the Hindu, Muslim, Jain or Sikh population.

One of the comments to Stafford’s article sums up the problem…Hindu’s see Dalit conversion as exploitation and a Western approach to human rights. My landlord in Delhi for four years had a disdain for Christian evangelists, as he perceived their efforts as manipulation, not a seeking after truth. Even if an upper caste Hindu, successful business professional or an educated Indian was interested in the claims of Christ, they would turn away from further investigation because the face of Jesus, as a group of Christians professionals once confessed to me, is an image of a Dalit.

The only way that Christ will be accepted by the masses in India is through a truly contextualized approach, i.e. Christ following Muslims reaching Muslims, upper caste followers of our Lord being a witness to their Hindu friends and family. Progress on this front is happening, but at a much slower pace.

Jesus was more popular with the outcastes (tax collectors, lepers, the blind) than the acceptable and respected religious leaders of his day. Some things don’t change. The caste system in India is a cultural prison that the privileged will always embrace over honest dialogue. While we are grateful that Christ is indeed the answer for the oppressed, understand that progress among the few does not translate into a mass movement to all.

The Best Of Kenyan Music

If you like Kenyan church music you'll love this. The first church we established West Pokot the Makutano back in 1976 is still going strong.

African History: Pokot, Turkana and Karamonjong

Sitting in a café in Kitale yesterday I overheard the discussion of some wazungu (white people – Americans). One man was with about 5 college age kids talking with two middle aged single women. While sipping my chai (tea) I surmised that the young people group was part of some university summer team; the two women were missionaries. Both of them talked extensively about Pokot, a semi-nomadic tribe 200 kilometers away. The women talked about the primitive conditions they lived in while the leader of the college group explained that they would be spending the night in a town called Kachelipa and it would be more like camping.

As they talked about the Pokot and their ministries I wondered if any of them had read or heard of “The Social Structure of the Kara Pokot and Its Implications for Church Planting,” written by yours truly, and that much of the research was done when I was living in a mud hut down in Kachelipa.

When I first began working in Pokot, back in 1976, there were very few missionaries of any kind working in those remote areas. I am not suggesting I was the first, as the African Inland Mission and the Roman Catholics arrived in some places before I did. However, in some places where I worked those group were not serving and I was, indeed, the first mzungu to work in certain areas in the bush of Kenya.

I left Kenya as a resident in 1989 and now serve as a non-resident missionary teaching anthropology, cross-cultural communication and church planting in places like Kenya, India and Ukraine. Of the three components of missiology one is history (the other two being theology and anthropology). I challenge my students to know the history of the people they are working with so you will have a better understanding of their present in light of the past. To ignore history, including church/Christian history, among the people we are working with leads to assumptions that are possibly incorrect, i.e. the people have never heard the Gospel. The first documented publication on the Pokot was printed in 1911. To assume, 100 years later, that the Pokot is a new venture is classic example of missing the point due to poor historical study.

Ironically, speaking of history, yesterday I met John Wilson, an 84-year-old man who has lived in Uganda and Kenya most of his life, 16 years living among the Karamonjong people. My time with John was brief but he has a fascinating collection of material culture from the tribes of Turkana, Karamonjong and Pokot. Typing away on a manual typewriter in his dusty Treasures of Africa Museum (reminding me that one person’s junk is another person’s treasure), meeting Jack was like peering back to the days when the semi-nomadic’s of Kenya were untouched by modernism. If one is working with these pastoralists it would seem worthwhile to spend some time with people like John, or Father Anthony, the Catholic priest who has lived in Kacheliba for 40 years.

History is one of those subjects that many in America care little about. However, no matter where you serve in this world, spend some time learning about the past. Find that old man or woman, who may seem eccentric and perhaps senile, and mine for nuggets of days gone by. Who knows, they may be sipping tea in the backside of some café.

New Missionary Training Program: BYOTP

I received a call from a couple going to Haiti yesterday. They belong to a small mission organization that has an orphanage in that country and know they need some training before going to the field. They have five kids, can’t afford to uproot their family and go to school, so they contacted me. My advice was for them to find at least five people who needed training and I would be willing to set up a training program. After the call my thoughts took on more definition and I came up with BYOT (Build Your Own Training Program – not Bring Your Own Toilet Paper).

People need flexible training options. I firmly believe that my instruction program in how to understand cultures can make any person at least 50% better if they have had some education or field experience and can 100% better missionaries if they have had no training at all. Give me 15 days and I can open a world of awareness that will stay with people for the rest of their lives. Sounds like an Info Commercial, but after 35 years in missions, training hundreds of missionaries in over 30 countries, yeah, I believe I can stand by that claim. Why? Because my training leads people to understanding culture and help people ask the right questions. I don’t give answers, but I lead people on how they can discover the answers by knowing the right questions AND, most importantly, not make assumptions.

The details of BYOTP is on the website. I will give more information on how it works to those who contact me through email. I prefer 15 days, but if a person only has one week, we can give them a crash course that is better than nothing. Build your own training program, but by all means do something. Going to the field without any preparation is harmful to the missionary, family and people they work with.

Measuring Meaning

Rich Strahm, who invited me to teach a class on “Response To World Religions,” asked me how I felt about teaching so few students? A former missionary to the Philippines, he and his wife have been working in Ukraine for the past 10 years. His vision is to mobilize Ukrainians for cross-cultural work and the missions program at the Kiev Theological Seminary is relative new. It’s a work in progress, but he is involved in a noble calling.

Before I made the commitment to teach I was aware it was not a large class. Unfortunately it was smaller than expected as some of the students in the program didn’t show up. How did I feel about teaching to a small class?

First of all, the size of a class or meeting has never been a criterion for me. I realize that many pastors in the states thrive on big numbers; it gives them meaning. I remember an Indian pastor who told me that if I moved to Chennai I could have big seminars. I told him I am more interested in finding the place of need, which to me, was in Delhi where the church was much smaller and I was not interested in a hall full of those who have ample opportunities to attend seminars. My colleagues in Kenya criticized me when I decided to work in the bush among two tribal groups, Turkana and Pokot. They thought the size of those tribes, about 250,000 each, spread over a vast desert was not strategic; they preferred working in the cities where the numbers were greater. However, I countered, no one was working among the semi-nomads whereas there were plenty of mission activity in their region. Numbers is not always a gauge in who and where one should work.

Second, the quality of those attending is more important to me than how many bodies there are. People preparing for cross-cultural work will always be a smaller group, but they are usually the most dedicated. I am not suggesting that those who take the theology courses are less godly or committed, but those who seek to serve Christ in another land among a different people than their own, usually, not always, have a depth about them that is unique and profound.

Third, though I never know who God will use in His work, I believe my teaching is a part of moving people toward His purpose. In the short time I have been working in Ukraine, one brother is now serving in Syria and another is working among the Gypsies in his country. It’s how God surprises that is more important to me than the guarantee of an audience.

Do I wish I were teaching before 50 rather than 5? Certainly. But consider those who were in my class: One lady and her husband are working in the Far East part of Russia, near Japan and North Korea. Another girl is from Kazakhstan, whose family came out of Islam. One guy is studying Mandarin and has been working with Chinese students in Kiev. He plans on moving to China after his studies. Another young lady has a desire to serve in India.

The measure of meaning cannot be only the expense of a plane ticket or the size of the class. For me it’s the heart of those I am privileged to teach, not how many listen to my words.

Repent, Believe, Follow: Worldview In Words

If you ask a Russian about his conversion he/she will generally talk about the day they “repented.”

Ask that same question to a North American and they might very well say it was they day they believed, got saved or trusted in Christ. (Interesting thought…you “trusted”?)

Muslim background Christians in Iraq might frame their conversion as becoming followers of Isa (Jesus), meaning that they might maintain much of their cultural belief, but rather put their emphasis on following Jesus rather than Muhammad.

The difference in Russians, Americans and Iraqis in their confession of faith is more than mere semantics. The distinction lies at the core of who they are as a people and how they express their decision of faith. Russians and Americans are “guilt” cultures. For a Russian or Ukrainian, salvation is less about faith than it is about repenting for one’s sins before a Holy God.

Individualistic Americans, while guilt driven, take a softer approach to their conversion, as though they were doing God a favor in “trusting” in Him. Trusting is a good thing for Americans as it acknowledges that we trust God more than we do ourselves and, for a self-sufficient driven society, that's a big deal.

Muslims and Buddhist are “shame” cultures. Family and clan ties run deep. It’s the holistic dynamic of the society that is all-important therefore being a follower of Jesus is done with deliberate hesitation. Being baptized, while a big deal for guilt cultures, is seen as bombastic to those who want to maintain harmony and equilibrium in shame cultures. To cause shame on family members for ones individual decision is not seen as courageous but rather selfish and arrogant, two offences that is unpardonable in such societies.

Words have meaning within context. In studying culture, learn what words mean to those who speak them. Repent, believe, trust, submit…these are the keys to understanding the worldview of others.

What Matters Most

In speaking on science and religion, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes stated, “Science makes major contributions to minor needs whereas religion, however small its successes, is at least at work on the things that matter most.”

As I prepare for another two weeks away from home to teach a small group of missionary students in Ukraine I need to be reminded that, no matter how small the task may seem, what we do as missionaries does have meaning. In this world of materialism, even the church is caught up in that which they can seen or touch. As I pack my bags I think of the countless hundreds of my colleagues who are laboring with little fanfare under difficult situations. I am thinking of a brother in Uzbekistan, who wrote,

“The day before yesterday I was driving home and my wife called and told me to come quickly. There was a crowd of people at the gate who wanted to come inside. My wife shut the gate and would not let them in and they acted like they were going to break through the gate. They started yelling at her and shouting threats against her. Only a couple of these men presented identification. It was at this time that I arrived home and saw what was going on. They told me to open the house and I asked the police officers to present a warrant before I would let them inside. After a few minutes one police officer showed me a written complaint from people in our neighborhood. The complaint stated that there was a Christian family in the neighborhood and that the Christian man was poisoning the rest of the neighborhood with his beliefs. It said that they didn’t want a family like this living in their neighborhood. I could not see who filed the complaint and when I asked for a copy of it I was denied.

Later, Shukurov, the head of our neighborhood, came to our house and began shouting that in this neighborhood it is unacceptable to not be Muslim. When I tried to calm him down he started swearing at my wife and children. Then, he began to threaten us with eviction from the neighborhood.

Please pray for the safety of my wife and children. Every two months the police check my passport and documents and I notice them writing down information about my wife and children. They confiscated my passport as well. Pray for wisdom and also for my court date. Thank you very much for your prayers and encouragement. This is now the most difficult time: the period of waiting.”

To you who pray and support missionary endeavors, may I encourage you to remain faithful in the vital role you play in world evangelism. To my fellow cross-cultural workers, may we take courage in what we do, knowing that even though the successes may seem small, we are working on what matters most.

Missionary Tithe

For the past couple of years a mission organization has asked me to speak at their candidate school and I am asked to speak on what people need to when they get on the field. I have entitled these talks, “It’s Tuesday, Now What Do I Do?” In addition to what people need to do the first 12 months they are on the field I have a list of things new missionaries should not do! In this category I touch on the sticky issue of the missionary tithe.

At the outset let me state clearly that I am well aware we are not under the Mosaic Law and the tithe is not applicable for New Testament believers. Nevertheless, I grew up believing that giving ten percent is a good yardstick to gauge Christian stewardship. The little Baptist church I attended in Gardena, California drilled into me that a Christian should give, at a minimum, a tithe or we might be guilty of holy theft, i.e., robbing God! So, from the proceeds of my paper route, for every quarter I collected (yes, that was the months subscription in 1959) two and half cents of that two bits belonged to God. To this day I still remember the pride I took in placing my “tithe,” usually about a dollar and half, in an offering envelope each month. It’s one of the really great spiritual habits that were formed in my childhood. I still enjoy giving to God’s work.

When I arrived in Kenya as a missionary many years later there was a discussion among my colleagues on where the missionary tithe should go? I must admit, I have vacillated on this issue over the years. My friends on the field were adamant that the tithe should be given to the local church that a missionary was affiliated with on the field. I do indeed believe that the local church should receive the tithe, but the problem I had with that theory was that it gave a false impression, especially in developing country like Kenya, of how well that local assembly was doing.

Working among semi-nomadic tribes of Turkana and Pokot, the offering of 50 church attendees wouldn’t be enough to buy a half-kilo of beans. If, however, I put in my tithe then the church was almost self-supporting, able to pay the pastor a salary and going a long way in constructing a sanctuary. And, while my fellow missionary friends seemed to have no problem with reporting such church growth, I had a big problem with it. In addition to falsifying an autonomist national church to donors back home, the local church itself operates on a bogus assumption. Forty cents given by the congregation and forty dollars provided by the missionary is not congregational solvency, it’s an ecclesiastical ponzi scheme.

Additionally to be misleading, a missionary’s tithe sucks the life out of motivation for local Christians in the assembly in getting involved in their home church. There is no incentive for the national member to give to the church as their attitude is, “If it’s really important, the missionary will take care of it.”

I came to the conclusion that a missionary should not give a tithe on the field but to his/her home church back in the U.S., Korea, Philippines or wherever that missionary is from. Apart from the reasons mentioned above, I am coming to believe that the issue of money control is a sin against God.

We all know or have heard of people who withhold giving when they are offended or disagree with how money is spent by their local church. I do not see in Scripture where the Lord’s followers are given that power. I believe we have an obligation to give to the Lord’s work and I have a conviction (like Paul, I don’t speak by command but by persuasion) that my giving should not directly related to how it benefits me or, in the case of a missionary, my ministry. As a result of that persuasion, as a missionary on the field until today, I give to the local church of my membership, not my residence.

While a resident in Kenya of course I supported and raised money for many projects. But I never propped up a church with a false regular tithe. Indeed, I went out of my way, to the dismay of many African congregations, NOT to support their local church because I wanted to disciple them in the great gift of giving and not rob them of that joy, though they were not particularly happy with this aspect of spiritual growth.

To this day my wife and I tithe to our sending church. We also give weekly to the church we attend as well as to certain missionaries we support. And by the way, this is out of our salary, not from our organization. I think it’s unseemly for mission heads to tithe to their organization for the benefit of their own ministry.

Our gifts should be to God freely. If our giving is so we can control how the money is used I think we are not only cheating Him, but ourselves as well. That’s my opinion, but no doubt some would disagree.

The Mari People of Russia

During Soviet times the city of Yoshkar Ola in the region of Mari El was “closed,” to outsiders. Because of the sensitive work of military projects, only Russians on special assignment could enter the area and, of course the residents were locked in. After church recently, myself along with my colleagues, visited a small Mari village ten miles outside Yoshkar Ola.

The living area of the home we visited is sandwiched between the car garage on the right and a storage/utility courtyard on the left. The first floor of the house is the living area, wood plank floor, small couch, dining room table, refrigerator and bookcase. Gas and water pipes run across the walls, as well as electrical outlets. The cooking stove was in another room below the platform living space; a staircase leads up to the sleeping area. The window sill had an assortment of potted plants and as we looked across the street we were told that the snow was so high this year that they could step outside their window and walk across most of the village.

The Mari people of the Volga region of Russia have a population of roughly 500,000, a Finnish-Ugric people who are sometimes characterized as the last practicing European pagans. The Joshua Project states that there are few, if any, evangelicals among the Mari, but we were honored to have Sunday lunch (buckwheat and liver, potatoes and mushrooms, bread, pickles, cheese) with a Mari family who were believers and attend a local Baptist Church in Yoshkar Ola.

As a quasi-anthropologist I am fascinated with the culture of the Mari. Within this people group there are clans divided between the “low” (those who live in the Volga Valley) and “high” (hill) Mari population. The wife of the family proudly brought out a traditional dress of their clan and, in times past as well as traditional holidays today, clans are indentified by the different patterns of dress. I asked about marriage restrictions between clans and they said there wasn’t any, but I still wonder as all cultures have incest boundaries.

As a missiologist I am interested in what cultural boundaries can be crossed in presenting the Gospel. The Tatar people, the Mari neighbors to the east, are resistant to Russians but are more welcoming to Ukrainian’s. The Mari’s have no problem mixing with Russians but do not easily interact with Tatar’s. The pastor of the Baptist church we attended on Sunday was from Moldova.

With less than .20% evangelical Christians among the Mari, I felt privileged to be in the home of a Mari Christian family. Through rough translation we learned the eldest brother (center) came to the Lord first, who in-turn led his brothers (our host, left). While the church worldwide spends a lot of energy on programs the reality is that most people who come to Christ through family lineage and friends.

Crossing cultural boundaries in presenting the Gospel is a study of people groups. Through my partnership with Craig Ludrick and CLDI we are making in-roads in facilitating the church in understanding that the Great Commission is not just to the nations, but to every ta ethne groups in the world.

People Group Thinking: Dividing The Church?

In last weeks discussion with pastors in southern Russia I was confronted again with the sticky issue of people group thinking. I feel strongly in what Donald McGavran stated three decades ago that, “People will not easily cross cultures to hear the Gospel.” So when I talked to the Russian and Ukrainian pastors about doing outreach exclusively among the Tatar, Chuvas or Mari there was an almost immediate negative reaction. Of course, this was not the first time I heard such protests; it’s a common disagreement in my class. The argument is that the church should not be divided and that, indeed, to divide people among ethnic lines not only borders on prejudice but also is anathema to the unity of the Body of Christ.

It takes me several hours to explain my reasoning of outreach to specific people groups. I am not advocating dividing the church, but I am making an appeal that, before conversion, people naturally associate with people of their same ilk. Even after conversion human beings like to be with their own kind. I call it the “birds of a feather flock together” effect. Even in the conference last week I used the diverse group in attendance as an example. I pointed out that during breaks or over lunch usually, not always, Russians gather around other Russians, Ukrainians sit with other people from their own country and, yes, Americans sit around the same table. We don’t exclude people from sitting with our own kind; we just are more comfortable being around people who share a human commonality.

If there is a cultural barrier in a city or town, and believe me there is in every place on planet earth, people who are not yet followers of Christ Jesus will have a very difficult time crossing into a social environment of people who are not like them. This, I found out this past week, is certainly true among the Tatar’s, a culturally Muslim population in the Volga region of Russia. There is a long and sad history between the Tatar and Russian’s. Ivan the Terrible, the Czar of Russia who lived in the mid-1500’s, was brutal in his reign against the Tatar’s, forcing Christianity on them by the point of a sword. Though many of the Tatar are secular and do not practice their faith the words “crucifix” and “baptism” are expressions of deep emotional offense. Even the best Russian Christian has a difficult time winning over the cultural barrier of history.

Thus, my suggestion that, rather than trying to bring Tatar’s into a Russian assembly, they should find ways of outreach which will make it easier for them to hear the Gospel. In my short time with the pastors I learned also that Ukrainian’s working among the Tatar has a more favorable audience than Russians, though they, too, must steer clear of the offensive language of the cross.

I am not at all sure that I convinced many of the importance of reaching people of other cultures on their own terms. Christianity has a long history of having only one model of doing church; meeting collectively on Sunday and supposing that anyone and everyone is welcome to attend. And, even though I know that is God’s great design for those who follow Him, I still maintain that humanity will not easily cross cultural boundaries to hear the Gospel. I am not proposing we divide the church, but I am suggesting that we understand culture and its implications as we tell those outside His marvelous grace.

Control

Everyone knows a “control freak.” These people live their lives directing other people on how they should live, act or speak. It’s the housewife who is always in a bad frame and makes everyone else in the household subject to her moods, rants and raves until she gets her way. It’s the husband who criticizes and degrades his wife and children. It’s the boss, or superior who has just enough leverage to make those in the workplace miserable but not necessarily more productive. Controllers perceive themselves as being decisive and important, but in reality they are just selfish.

In anthropology the study of “social control” looks at both formal control (laws) and informal control (shame cultures, family structure and religion). Understanding social control gives insights on how people make decisions, which is vital in helping people in cultures make a decision to be a follower of Christ.

Religion has a strong control component. Pastors, priests and witchdoctors often use the fear of supernatural retribution to manipulate and control their followers. Whether the issue is wearing a burka, paying a tithe or not drinking alcohol, behind every rule there is a controller to enforce the rules. Controllers get addicted to their power and often abuse those under their authority. A classic example of control is in the following story.

At the end of one of teaching sessions in India a young lady raised her hand and asked this question.

“At my baptism my pastor gave a word of prophecy for each person baptized that day; everyone except me. I have been troubled for many years because I did not receive a prophecy. Do you think I should be re-baptized?”

As this student told me the story you could see the anguish she was feeling, almost to the point of tears. Almost every day her relationship with God has been negatively affected because of that day when the spiritual controller in her life did not bless her at baptism. I felt sadness for this dear girl, but even more, I felt anger. How tragic that some people have such power over others that they can make them feel alienated from God.

Control is a reciprocal relationship. The boss, wife or pastor can only wield their control to those who allow it. There are many people who stay in an abusive marriage, church or place of employment because they feel they have no recourse. If they do challenge the controller they fear being fired, excommunicated or divorced, a price they feel is too high to pay so they acquiesce.

Not all control is wrong and, indeed, a certain amount of control is needed in families, religion or companies to function properly. If there is no authority and control then the environment is left to chaos and anarchy. There is a fine line between leadership and controllers.

My response to my student was that, while she is to respect her pastor and those in authority, no man has the power to bless or curse. That authority belongs to God alone.

Keeping the Cynical Heart in Check

The other day a friend wrote me with a question. This person for many years was in the business world, and now is on full time staff of her church. She asked, “After so many years in ministry, how do you keep from being cynical?”

My answer was simple; I have been and remain cynical. Not only of the ministries of others, but mine as well.

I have been in full time ministry 41 years, first as a pastor in Texas, then a pioneer church planter in Kenya and now, over the past 20 years, a teacher and consultant for cross-cultural workers in several countries. I’ve seen a lot – the good, the bad and the ugly.

But wait, church work, missions and Christian ministry are not any different from any other profession touched by man. Companies are rife with waste and mismanagement; business leaders, government workers and the secular workplace are not immune from sloppy or unethical practices. I would suggest that, all things being equal, there are more reasons to be cynical of those who work outside of ministry. Churches, pastors and missionaries are an easy target for criticism because, in the mind of some, ministry should be above reproach, no, indeed perfect. There is a bit of arrogance by some outside of ministry work that somehow they “earned” their money and those in ministry are on the dole from the hard labor of working people. Though they, like all of us in this world, depend on others for their job, contract or subsidy, those who are in ministry should be more accountable.

How does one keep from being cynical in doing God’s work? I thought about this last week when in Ukraine. It was cold, I was tired and wondered, again, what is this all about? Is the work I do pleasing to the Father, or am I just doing this to justify my existence in ministry? In the grand scheme of things I wonder what impact my little efforts are having in a world of secularism, polytheism and Muslim radicalism. Cynical that anything I, or anyone in this world does, I found myself cynical of God’s management in all of this.

And then I read Hebrews chapter 3. The children of Israel were cynical of God and the leading of their pastor, Moses. As a result of their cynicism they allowed their heart to become hard, turned away from Him who delivered them from slavery and followed other gods. As a result of their cynicism they did not enter in God’s rest. Chapter 3 is all about warning against cynicism and trusting God, in spite of the situation we find ourselves. Why or how God works is not for us to judge.

Hebrews 3 is a reminder that we are not to micro-manage God. The Israelites didn’t like the way God was leading so they turned to other gods for a more hands-on approach for their lives. I can quit tithing to my church because I don’t like the way they are using “my” money; I can discontinue doing my ministry as a missionary, quit making appeals for donors to support our efforts in world evangelism because I can’t see its impact in reaching the 3.6 billion who have never met a Christian. Or, I could change my strategy; doing ministry that appeals to the fashion of present day missions that is tailored for more bang for the buck; gaining the approval of others rather than keeping to the task I believe He is leading.

When the heart becomes hard due to cynicism one will never know God’s rest when the really tough trials of losing a child or grandchild in a tragic accident, or losing every material thing in an instant due to natural calamities. We don’t have, or will we ever have, all the answers. And, while I will continue to be cynical of motives and ministry, there is a balance of the heart that must be guarded. I won’t follow other gods because I think I am wiser than Him. Skeptics die in the desert, those who continue to follow Him will enter His rest even while they are in the desert.

How Long The Road

Eighty-five degrees inside combats the sub-freezing air outside. It’s stifling and I long to crack a window, but I can’t. The swaying back and forth is both comforting and a bit nauseating. I feel the need to lessen the pressure on my bladder, but to do so means crawling down from my perch and stumbling, partly because of drowsiness, partly because of the swaying, down the hall into a gray and filthy toilet. The heat coupled with physical pressure in my lower abdomen win over my desire to just ride it out until daylight. I swing down between cots, hoping I don’t step on the two Russian women sleeping below and wonder why these rides can’t be, like in India, gender segregated. Having successfully competed my self-imposed assignment, I swing back up on my perch asking myself how many more years can I reasonably expect to perform such gymnastics?

Missions is more than merely presenting the Gospel to pagans. Paul, who slept to the sway of waves as a prisoner on his way to Rome, would understand. He, who had no place to rest his head, the One whose mission was redemption of those far away from God, certainly can relate. Skeptics of missions, those who scoff at the thought anyone should financially support someone to “see the world,” perhaps should experience the romance of sleeping on a bed of where the tailbone and hard wood is separated by a half-inch of foam or cotton mat. It wouldn’t make them a believer in the Great Commission, but it might dispel myth that this stuff is a luxurious cruise.

Back on my perch I am comforted that in just another five hours this leg of the journey will be over. Temporarily satisfied with my situation, I plug in my headphones to listen to my great uncle (not really) Clive Staples, lecture on apologetics and slowly succumb to the swaying and drift in a semi-conscious slumber. When I wake I will be in Livi, some mountain city near the border of Poland. Three days later I will make this trek again, the night train back to Kiev.

(This travel update sponsored in part by Beans4good.com)

Anthropology of Religion: Polytheism and Animism

Polytheism is the belief or worship of many gods/goddesses. Pantheism is the belief that many objects could possess certain powers, e.g. a tree, animals, river. Animism concludes that spiritual powers reside in inanimate objects like the wind, rock or clouds.

In all religions we find animistic practices, even in monotheistic religions of Christianity and Islam. In a India, a polytheistic religion that claim there at least 330 million deities, one can easily see a combination of practices of animism and even pantheism, as show in these clips below.

The first is a shrine, built to a deity, which I filmed on the side of the road outside the city of Nagpur.

In the center of Kota, Rajasthan there is a tree, which the people seemingly believe has some spiritual significance. Not only do they have garlands of devotion on the tree, but also have pictures of the greater gods of Shiva and Vishnu tacked to this tree.

Exploring New Training Ventures in India

My last trip to India was an exploratory trip. I have certain schools and organizations I teach at every year and those relationships were developed by my teaching there one time, just to begin the process of partnership. I scheduled these two trips for the express purpose of exploring what other schools or organizations I may partner with in the future.

The first stop was the Emmanuel Theological Seminary in Kota. This ministry is unique and has a rich history. Started by M.A. Thomas many years ago (he passed away December 2009), MA's vision was strongly for orphans. At one time they had over 2,000 orphan kids but persecution hit in 2006 and they are just now recovering.

I had the distinct privilege of teaching in their seminary at the invitation of one of my former students at SAIACS. Shibi was/is a brilliant student and I know she is going to be a great teacher and asset for any church or mission organization.

What made my second trip was without a doubt the students of Mission India Theological Seminary. Even though it was the end of the semester and they had more thoughts about going home than studying, they made my time outside of Nagpur a success.

There are a lot of good ministries in India. Knowing who we can partner with on long term basis is often difficult, but these trips at least help me determine God leading.

Vision Leadership: When Is It Too Big?

I have been working with Indian churches, agencies, colleges and seminaries for nearly 19 years. People in the states often ask me about this or that ministry on the sub-continent. I am guessing they want to know if the leader is ethical, honest and if the ministry is effective. This evaluation is specific for the Indian context, though it can certainly apply to other ministries in the other countries as well.

CAN THERE BE TOO MUCH VISION?

I asked this question recently to a board member of a significant ministry in Asia. He seemed to be genuinely surprised with the questions and answered with an emphatic “No.” The president of the organization is a gifted visionary leader and the ministry is extensive. While I celebrate visionary leadership, often, in my opinion, the vision is greater than it is able to sustain. Strength over used becomes a weakness. Vision without a means to make the vision a reality becomes a burden.

I speak from experience as I once worked for a visionary. This person is extremely gifted and his vision was insightful and even cutting edge. His foresight, however, was never able to translate into viable and efficient mission organization. I see this repeated numerous times in India. A vision of grandeur that is common here includes starting churches, training schools, colleges, orphanages (is there any India organization who doesn’t have an orphanage?), hospital, clinics and social programs to serve the poor. Any one of these things is good within themselves. The vision becomes a liability, however, as it is unsustainable. Great vision that is untenable are primarily for two reasons.

Peter Doesn’t Have Enough for Paul

The first reason for vision failure is the matter of finances. Unless the organization has a powerful fund raising system it will struggle to keep the many programs afloat. Sadly, a lot of vision ministries rob Peter to pay Paul, i.e. to keep the clinic functioning, money for the orphanage is short-changed. To pay for the school, the evangelists, who are on a stipend, don’t get paid. Several of the multifaceted operations I have seen are poorly run, with staff not being paid an adequate wage, buildings are in disrepair and even the food for students is poor. If the vision isn’t properly funded then it shouldn’t be in existence, at least, that’s my opinion.

The cynical part of me (which often dominates my thought processes) thinks that the vision for multiple programs is a scheme to draw funds from different streams. One hook catches one fish, many hooks will catch a mess, or so the theory goes. While potential donors may not be keen on supporting evangelists, they are all about “brick and mortar,” and willing to pay big bucks to donate to something they can see and touch and perhaps have a plague honoring their donation. In some cases Peter is the building project (church, or school), but Paul (the radio ministry) will survive, thanks to Peter’s windfall.

Only Chameleons Can See In Two Directions

The second problem I see of too great a vision is a divided focus. If you have too many hooks in the water (staying with my fishing metaphor), there is a tendency to look at the line that has a “nibble” while ignoring other lines in the water.

Some years back I was asked to teach in a particular college. After completing my assignment I told the principal I probably would not return to teach. Why? Because the president of the organization did not see the seminary as a priority. He certainly believes in higher education, but the many other ministries consumed his time. The result was the school was not well organized, the students were in a state of confusion and the staff grumbled about the lack of resources and bickered among themselves on who was in charge. And, since no decision of any consequence could be made without the presidents permission and he was engaged in other things, the whole campus had a feel there was no real importance in what they were doing; they were was just a part of the vision ministry and staff and students were there merely to do their job. A divided focus is a precursor of apathy.

On the positive side, I have been with organizations that had only one thrust -- church planting, training or education. Because these groups do one thing well, which is a vision within itself, the programs are effective and efficient. These ministries have their financial challenges, to be sure, but it does not have the feel that they are on the brink of disaster that I see in the programs that are trying to do everything under one grandiose vision.

The story is told of Cam Townsend, who was the founder of Wycliffe and whose vision was to do one thing well. Because of Townsend’s vision, SIL has translated the Scriptures into hundreds of languages. Personally, I am drawn to one vision done well than I am of a multifaceted vision that is done poorly.

In God’s sovereignty He can make even a sow’s ear into a silk purse, though He is unlikely to do so. It is true in multifaceted missions that orphans have come to Christ, churches have been planted and people do earn degrees in their colleges. However, I am concerned that the church in India, and indeed in many parts of the Christian world, that their divided focus in ministry makes it less likely that they will reach their nation with the message of Jesus Christ and His salvation. The vision that is a mile wide and an inch deep is not a strategic hope for a lost world.

God On Trial

Riding the train from Delhi to Rajasthan, a delightful retired couple from London shared my cabin on the Golden Temple Mail. They were on holiday, their second trip to India. In the course of our time together the subject of God came up, which is often the case when people learn my subject as a teacher.

“A few months back,” the woman said to me, “my grandson had a lump on his arm which turned out to be a tumor. I was furious with God and told Him I would never speak to Him again if my grandson died. It turned out that the tumor was malignant and of course I was quite relieved.”

I leaned forward and replied, “Why is it we always blame God?”

As a gift for Christmas my eldest daughter bought me a CD, the audible version of God in the Dock by C.S. Lewis. Lewis rightly wonders why is that God is in the dock (on trial, standing as a war criminal at The Hague) and not man. Why must we prove He exists, why He allows wars, suffering and death? Ancient man never thought of putting God on trial, indeed, they understood that a Holy God had them in the dock. Only modern man, it seems, feels the need to accuse his Creator.

As it would happen, I am preparing for a class I will teach later in the year in Ukraine on religions of the world and the Christian response to those religions. Not only must I make a case for God, beyond that, the God of Christ as the only true and living God. It’s not God in the dock, but a defense to the claims that Jesus is unique, not comparable to the other faiths of Islam, Buddhism or Hinduism. As Christians we are allowed to ask questions and explore the mysteries of Christ, but not to put Him on trial.

Then, earlier this week, I was reading my Facebook page when I saw a note from a former colleague. His message was short but heart stopping as he informed us that he and his wife received a call that all parents fear; their 16 year-old son was tragically killed in an auto accident. Condolences are pouring in. I was bewildered by one note from someone who, for some reason, felt the need to let everyone know (it is an open forum after all), how devastated she was and how she cried and cried though many miles away on a trip. How is it that when grief comes, even when it does not touch us personally, that somehow we make it about ourselves?

My friend’s response to their tragedy reveals a spiritual foundation we all long for. “God gave us our son Andrew, for 16 years,” he said, “for which we are deeply grateful.” Is this parent in denial, placing a spiritual façade over his pain? Will he not ask the question to God, “Why”? Surely. However, those who have ever experienced His grace will resist putting God on trial. Like Job we must readily embrace the storms of life as we readily and joyfully accept His blessings. He is too good to do wrong; He is too wise to make a mistake.

God should not be placed in the dock when we feel loss or dismayed living in a world that groans daily. Rather than blame God for misfortune may we turn our anger to the one who is the author of confusion, sin and hopelessness. As for God, His ways are a mystery. Not understanding His ways does not give us the right to place Him on trial and answer to us.

Haircut Culture

There are perks in every adventure. Today I did the one thing I always enjoy doing when I go to Delhi….get a haircut.

I know this sounds odd but I hate getting a haircut in the states. The barber or hair stylist never know exactly how to do it, seem to be offended when I make a suggestion, charge me $12 or more and expect a tip. I started going to a barber college in my town where, they still don’t know what they’re doing, but at half the price. My tip goes to some struggling single mom, high school student or kid who is not on the fast track toward a university degree.

In anticipation of my journey to India I let my hair go way beyond the need for a trim to coincide my arrival in Delhi. I found a guy in a Muslim basti (some would call it a slum, more likely a term for poor neighborhood) who is a master at his craft. He knows exactly how to cut my thinning dome and I never have to worry what it will look like when he is through lowering my ears. We don’t speak as I don’t know Urudu and his English is limited. He tops off my trim with a strong massage to the scalp, neck, shoulders and arms. All of that for the grand price of $.70. I usually give him an extra $.30 cents for a job well done.

As I sit in the dark small two chair shop I think about how, as a Christian, I am surrounded by community of Muslims on a narrow street in the heart of a Hindu city. The feel of my haircut adventure is part of the appeal. The foot paths that snake through the village, all the men with beards and prayer caps; women in full covered and black veiled dress, the sounds of kids playing and the blaring call to prayer over a loudspeaker makes my haircut more than a grooming exercise but a cultural experience.

It will be three weeks before I return to Delhi, but you can bet I will be making my way to the barber in Nizamuddin before I fly home. Partly because I want to avoid, as long as possible, the barber college back home. But mostly because I enjoy the culture of the Muslim barbershop and the bonus of getting a great haircut at a great price.

2010 Training Report

Each year I send out a report on the work of Lewis Cross-Cultural Training, Inc. Click on this link to read the 2010 ministry.

If your church or organization would be interested in cross-cultural training and discipleship, please contact us.

It Takes A Team: Making Up Positions To Have Something To Do

It’s an old problem in missions, trying to create a position for someone so they will have something to do when they leave the field or retire. In the old days, before schools tightened up their academic requirements, you would often see retired missionaries teaching in Bible Colleges or seminaries. It didn’t make much difference if they were qualified, had the gift of teaching or that their subject was even relevant to emerging missions, they were given a position so the school could (1) fill needed staff positions and (2) allow the missionaries to maintain their support and therefore not a financial burden on the school. Returning missionaries also was good to fill office staff, cheap labor for mundane busy work.

Today’s mission organizations, at least a few that I know, find positions for people to serve, whether the job is relevant or not. Some family gets burned out overseas and so is given a post as a regional director (Asia, W. Europe, E. Africa, etc.). The family lives either in a different country or, more likely in the U.S., and manages others on the field. And how do they manage --- MEETINGS. Strategic meetings, team family retreats, meetings to plan other meetings, conference meetings, all in the name of efficiency, effectiveness and tactical.

I have been around organizations long enough to know that most meetings are just busy work, at best. One-year goals, quarterly reviews make the manager feel like they have a role, make the organization feel like they are holding people accountable but seldom translate into concrete action. If a missionary is a worth his/her salt they are usually self-motivated and they don’t need a manager tell them what or how to do their work. In some cases the manager isn’t qualified to direct people because they weren’t all that effective themselves (I know of one organization where the president was a first-term dropout, never planted a church and had conflict with his colleagues on the field). Goal setting is important but the people who actually do the work, in my opinion, don’t need approval from someone else to move forward.

The other reason for creating a position is so that the organization doesn’t lose the needed revenue that the missionary support provides. Para-church groups live off the 10, 15 or 20 percent of the support that missionaries raise. Missionary attrition is an economic hardship for those in the home office, so to keep revenue stream flowing, agencies create positions for retainment, not necessarily because the person is qualified for the job or that is a position is needed or that it is vital to the ongoing work of the Great Commission. The mission director may say, “We really need this person’s valuable experience,” but behind that is that small voice is, “and we really can’t afford to lose the $700 a month his support contributes to our agency.”

Yes, there are some good people who for various reasons have had to leave the field and their expertise and giftedness are extremely helpful to the mission as a whole, just as there were gifted retired missionaries working in schools. But, like in business, where the Peter Principle often elevates people into positions beyond their ability, many people on home assignment are no more strategic than the meetings they design.

Before I left Kenya, where I served for 13 years, I approached my organization (which was not dependent on my support for their operation expensed) ad what role or job might be available to me if I returned to the states. I was told flatly that they didn’t have an opening for me and my choices were simple, stay in Africa or come home and resign as a missionary. I remained in Kenya until an opportunity to train missionaries was presented to me. By not providing a position for me I was forced to trust the Lord for His direction and, I was driven to make my own decisions. I assume that most missionaries who must or need to leave active service overseas follow the same pattern. For groups that feel they must create a position to retain personal and funds it doesn’t reflect well on organization. Growing agencies are known for their focus of ministry, not providing safety nets for those who leave the field.

Fashion, Symbols, Consumption and Piety

In a recent article in the American Ethnologist (2010:617-637), Materializing piety: Gendered anxieties about faithful consumption in contemporary urban Indonesia, author Carla Jones writes about piety among Muslim women and the wearing of the jibab (scarf and floor length dress). Jones describes the tension within a devout Muslim society and modernization, fashion and piety.

Since the events of 9/11/2001 Muslims throughout the world have been more aware of the symbols of their religion, not only within their own culture but also to the non-Muslim world. There was a time when young women considered wearing the jibab as something that was a necessary devotion to piety, sometimes forced upon them, most of the time merely an expectation by the norms of religious practice. Today the jibab and other symbols of Islamic religion is giving way to the market as entrepreneurs capitalize on the yield toward fashion and consumption while at the same time promoting fashion symbols as a means for piety.

“The Islamic lifestyle and the Islamic market segment encompass an almost limitless variety of goods and services. From CD’s and MP3 recordings of sermons, halal fast food and the Islamic finance to hajj packages, hajj gold, religious ringtones, themed weddings, gated Islamic housing communities, and even fesyen Islami (Islamic fashion, including socks, gloves and makeup), what one might generally gloss as religiously identified commercial offerings cover the spectrum from high to low consumer culture” (617).

One advertising company estimates that the halal (permissible/lawful) consumer market is at 1.8 billion people in 57 countries and worth $2.1 trillion in annual sales, $560 million of which is spent on cosmetics.

Piety consumption is certainly not only an Islamic market phenomenon. Hindus, Buddhist and most certainly Christians integrate commerce and faith as well. Go to the average Bible book store and you will see nearly as many trinkets (pictures, plagues, CD’s, DVD’s, wrist bands and bumper stickers) as there are books. Christians are more verbal with their faith than outward attire, but where there is faith there will be someone who can manipulate devotion into profit.

Manufacturing is the engine for economic growth, but so, too, are goods and services. If there were no religion, the world would still build and produce products. But, thanks to faith, there is, as Marx suggested, a link to religion, materialism, capitalism and consumption. The jibab, the plastic idol of Ganesh, yoga books and classes, the gold crucifix or the porcelain image of Mary; the edifices of the giant Mosques, Golden Temples and Cathedrals, all point to a capitalist transubstantiation to the Divine. Perhaps Jesus had no place to lay His head; Buddha may have renounced all human impulses and the founder of Jainism, Mahavira, may have rejected all creature comforts, including clothing. Nevertheless, the faithful still pay big bucks, yen, rupees and pesos to be fashionably pious.

Girding Up For A New Year

In Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes: Cultural Studies in the Gospels, Kenneth Bailey writes about the importance of “girding up” for service.

"The robes of the Middle East (worn by both men and women) nearly touch the ground. They were and are worn without belts. The hot climate makes loose fitting clothing the nearly universal preference. Any strenuous activity requires the wearer to tie a belt or rope around the waist to keep the bottom edge of the robe off the ground and out of the way. The Hebrews were instructed to tie up their robes on the ever of Passover in order to be ready to travel (Ex. 12:11). Elijah belted himself in preparation for running before Ahab’s chariot (1Kings 18:46) and Jeremiah was told to do so as he took up his ministry to the nations (Jer. 1:17). Ibn al Tayyib observes this practice in daily life around him and writes, ‘The person who wears a long robe, without a belt, is not equipped to travel or prepared to work’” (2008:369).

The parable in this passage of Scripture has a two-fold meaning. One is to remind us to be ready for the Lord’s return. Yeah, I know, we say that every year, but one day Jesus will come again, because he said he would (Jn 14:3). May we not be complacent or caught unaware, may we be vigilant, belted up, as we anticipate His soon return. Secondly, this is a passage that reminds us we must dress for success, sort of. Dressing properly, in this context, is dressing for work, to be engaged in service. People not dressed for success are slothful, not about the business of life.

It’s a new year that bears down upon us. Christmas with family, breaks from teaching is over. In a few days we sprint into a new decade

As I look at my 2011 calendar, travelling to India three times, Ukraine twice, Kenya and perhaps Russia, I realize that it’s time to gird up service, for work. May those who read this blog have a Happy New Year as you cinch up your belt for the task that God has given you to do.