Needed: Academic Practitioners

A former student is working through his doctoral thesis and has asked me to read and advise. This DMin. candidate is a pastor in New Delhi and his thesis is about a migrant people group called the Awadi and how to best develop a strategy for ministry to those coming from the rural areas into the city. There is a lot I could comment on in this thesis as it is well researched and I believe it’s a significant contribution to missiology. Consider these things:

* 665 people migrate into the city of New Delhi EVERY DAY.

* 74% of the Protestant churches in India are located in South India, which has 21.70% of India’s total population, whereas North India, that has 43.75% of India’s total population and 4.21% Christians and has only 8% churches.

From this thesis, here is a snapshot of some of the issues migrants face coming into a city of over 13 million people.

"To supplement the family income, the whole migrant family is involved in work. Having no one to look after their children, they have no other option but to take their children with them to their workplace. The poor and unhygienic living conditions, and exposure to dust at the work site, result in children suffering from various health problems. Moreover, these children have no opportunity to obtain education. The result is underfed, malnourished and illiterate children."

While there is much to learn from the study, in reading over it the past couple of days the thing that has dominated my thinking is the value of academic/practical research.

We live in a world of programs. Everywhere I go I hear about programs for church planting movements, youth outreach and mission agency growth. Nothing wrong with programs per se, but most people see programs as an end in themselves. In my opinion, many of these programs are shallow, not well thought-out and, is an attempt to take a shortcut in reaching ministry goals. As this student points out in his thesis, to reach the Awadi there are no shortcuts in working with migrants in an urban ministry and several issues need to be taken into consideration, such as childcare, living conditions, education and medical needs. For the average church planter, pastor or mission agency they are not thinking about these things. Instead, the emphasis seems to be programs for more evangelists or for raising money to build a church building. I fear that some nationals start orphanages, have medical clinics or start a school, not out of a well-defined research study, but merely a program that seems to be attractive and might be a good idea.

When I was working in Kenya I spent a great deal of time living with and doing research with the Pokot tribe in the bush. It was through concentrated and academic study that a strategy of church planting was created. It has been my belief that the most important thing a practitioner can do is become a student of culture, especially the culture of the people they are working with. While the buzz among the church and in mission circles is about having a “people group focus,” there are few who take the time to do in-depth study on specific ethnic groups. My hat is off to this DMin. candidate/pastor for his diligence in pursuing this academic study. We need more practitioners like him. We need more sending agencies that will equip missionaries with more in-depth study before launching them out into ministry. We need more national missionaries and pastors to understand that the only way they will truly reach the unreached is to know people well. Globally, e need more academic practitioners

Blessed Are The Simple

This past week I attended the funeral of my 92-year-old aunt. By all accounts, Aunt Maxine was a simple person. She became a mother during the years of the Depression, raised four kids through WWII. Throughout the final proceedings marking her life and death, the one word I kept thinking about was unpretentious.

I work in country where people are forever trying to project an image of their importance. Impression is so pervasive in India that one of the major themes in my training is the importance of status and role within society. Of course pretentiousness is a global malady that infects people in all walks of life, be they truck driver, padre, educator or stay-at-home moms. There is a tension in all of us, I would think, to try and project an aura that we really are quite successful, smart, beautiful or influential. As I listened to Aunt Maxine’s grandchildren, tell stories about the plain woman lying in the coffin, their words were like a refreshing shower washing off the veneer of every pretentious person in the room.

Jesus said, “Blessed are the meek (humble), for they will inherit the earth.” That’s a tough philosophy to follow in a market economy. Everyone’s a salesman and the rules of today’s game are, to him or her, who projects the best image goes the spoils. If you are not the squeaky and annoying wheel, you will not get the oil. Those out there in front are those who make the noise, dress for success and have the whitest teeth. Humility? Forget about it. Meekness is weakness and a sure sign that you have no self-confidence.

Humility is not and endorsement for being stupid, dirty or lazy. I have met idiots who were as proud of their lack of education as pompous PhD’s are of their degrees. I have been around a group of morons who duke-it-out on who could out dummy the other in word and deed. For a person to be proud of their lack of accomplishments in life is not humility, it’s pretentious ignorance.

The balancing act of striving for excellence, being the best one can be in their station in life without projecting the air of self-importance is not easily achieved. I suppose the best way to fight pretentiousness is to resist the urge to compete. But can I get to the front of the line without elbowing my way or standing on my box of accomplishments and shouting, “Look at me!”? The line between meekness and self-importance is indeed fine. Perhaps the answer is found in the ancient writing of Solomon who advised, “Let another praise you, and not your own mouth; A stranger, and not your own lips.” In Aunt Maxine’s case, it was her family who rose up and called her blessed.

Jesus And His Church

One of the benefits of coming to the states for a few weeks is that I can get caught up on my reading. Living overseas it’s almost impossible to find good books on current thinking in missions or the church. It seems the theme of my readings lately has been on the emerging church.

If you are not familiar with the emerging church term it is primarily used by the emerging generation (people in their 20’s and 30’s) addressing the need to read and see the culture in which we live today. Christ, Christianity and the Church are not synonymous terms. In fact, as the new culture writers see it, Christianity and Church, sometimes, is often a barrier for non-believers in becoming followers of Christ.

The most recent of these books is Dan Kimball’s book, They Like Jesus But Not The Church. Though I have only read a third of the book thus far, it’s interesting enough for me to comment on. The underlying theme in Kimball’s work, and a common thread with all emerging church authors, is that to reach people with the Good News of Jesus we must emulate Him. This takes on two forms. First, Jesus was revolutionary in that His work was outside the established religion of His day. Though Jesus was a Jew and a student of theology (manifested in the Mosaic Law), His message was seldom to those within confines of the religious order. Not only was He not a part of the religious establishment, His harshest criticism was to those who had become captive of formal Judaism. Though the emerging church writers make an attempt to steer away from harsh criticisms of the Church, they freely point out the weakness of the establishment.

The second theme, common in these emerging church books, is the need for followers of Jesus to engage people of their culture outside the confines of the local church. Kimball’s list of “Six Common Perceptions of the Church” is:

1. The church is an organized religion with a political agenda.
2. The church is judgmental and negative.
3. The church is dominated by males and oppresses females.
4. The church is homophobic.
5. The church arrogantly claims all other religions are wrong.
6. The church is full of fundamentalists who take the whole Bible literally.

According to Kimball, most people he talks to like Jesus, they just don’t like the church. Jesus was a friend of sinners – ate with them, drank with them, worked with them and most importantly, talked with them. Many of the emerging church writers are trying to make the case that the task of the church is to be more like Jesus and less like the institutional religious industry that we have become.
It’s important to recognize that the emerging church proponents are dealing primarily with pre-conversion issues. There is always a tension between Christ meeting people where they are to where Christ wants them to be after they become His followers. You will read little to nothing about discipleship, spiritual growth or corporate responsibility in these books and that’s okay, as long as one understands there is a gap between helping the blind man see and then telling that blind man to go to the temple (or church) and perform religious rituals as an act of obedience in faith.

As a missiologist I can appreciate these current writings, as it is the same message I deal with in my teachings overseas. The established church, in many ways, is an impediment for the Buddhist, Muslim and Hindu. If I can engage others to talk about Jesus, rather than Christianity, I find that many of them respect Jesus…they just don’t like the church.

Missiologist - Critical But Not Negative

The other day a friend wrote and mildly rebuked me for one of my blog posts. He suggested that my writings would be more helpful if they were more positive. My reply to him was that, indeed, I recognize that sometimes my writing is often critical, but I am not sure that it is negative. One thing that many people don’t understand about my writing, speaking and teaching, is that my opinions and perspectives are that of a missiologist. I am not a pastor trying to shepherd a church. I am not a theologian trying to interpret doctrine. I am not a counselor making an attempt to solve personal issues. While it is true that as a missionary coach I sometimes take on elements of those roles, for the most part, my giftedness is trying to figure out how the work of missions and the church can be done better.

When I was serving in Kenya I did not plant any churches, though in the time we were in the country thirteen churches and a Bible institute was started. In the beginning I did everything that a traditional pioneer church planter is suppose to do. I preached, led singing, taught and created programs. Within our first two years we had three congregations meeting in different villages, but I wasn’t the pastor of any of them. I quickly learned that if the work was to multiply I had to give up doing things myself and let others take the lead in planting and growing the congregations. By the time I left Africa, fourteen years later, the only thing I was responsible for was what I am most gifted in doing…critically analyzing the context and giving guidance on how to do things differently and, hopefully, more effectively.

I am well aware that some people believe that the easiest thing to do is being a critic. However, when I speak of critical analysis it is not just finding fault, but rather finding weakness with suggestions on how to making programs stronger. As a missiologist, one who has been trained to analyze to view the church from the historical, theological and cultural context, my comments is borne out of unique set of lens that few people have experienced. My comments on everything from the role of national leadership to Western evangelical imperialism is not a part of an agenda, but is an honest evaluation based on on-going study and thirty years of living the mission experience.

Sometimes critical analysis bites. In an article entitled In Quest of Knowledge, Arnold Burron writes, “...among other impediments to critical thinking, [is the] unwillingness or fear to challenge socially acceptable ‘truth.’” When I write and say things like, training missionaries is a moral issue; short-term mission programs are primarily for the promotion of the American church; it’s okay for churches to die, etc., my comments are not meant to harm as much as it is for the church to think about why they do what they do and how can we do the job better.

As a missiologist I have been given an opportunity to view God’s work differently than most of my readers. That doesn’t make me smarter or more right, but it is a view that is not the norm. Critical doesn’t make it negative, it means the perception is from another angle that hopefully will add value to the task God has called us to do throughout the world.

Faith Like Jazz

When two or three of my friends tell me, “You need to read this book, Lewis, I think you will like it…it sounds like you,” I eventually get a copy. The most recent recommendation was Donald Millers book, Blue Like Jazz.

Miller acknowledges on his website that he wrote this book when his career was going nowhere. He had nothing to lose and so he penned honest thoughts just about anything that popped into his head about God. When you have nothing to lose you can do that. Most Christian authors and speakers have to worry about what the Church or evangelical community thinks. If your irreverent or live more like a hippie from the 60’s rather than a buggy riding Mennonite you can take such risks. Miller, like C.S. Lewis who was also not a part of the established ministry, gets away with being honest because he doesn’t have to cover his backside less he offends religious establishment and loses his means of support. What makes his book successful is that (a) he’s writing about what other people are thinking but won’t share with their friends, (b) he takes potshots at the norm of evangelicals, i.e., support of Republicans, intolerance of gays and, (c) has a postmodern approach to faith, including lifestyle and doctrine.

Christianity, according to Miller, is like jazz. It’s difficult, if not impossible, to write a score for jazz. Classical music is structured with proper beat, synchronized melody and timing. Classical music is predictable math. Today’s Christianity is like classical music, precise, ordered, and predictable. Knowing God is a formula and when one follows the pattern it looks, smells and tastes right. In typical postmodern style, Miller argues that knowing God is not math and that having a relationship with Christ is as random as jazz. Depending on your preference, of music and theology, you’ll either love this book or hate it.

Singing At The Gate

Sitting at my desk in New Delhi one early morning I head a man singing. He had a beautiful voice and, though I couldn't understand the words to the song, his voice was pleasant to the ear. I knew he wasn’t just a passerby as the song went on for serval minutes.

“Who in the heck is this guy,” I wonder as I got up from my chair and walked to the balcony overlooking the street below?

There, standing at the front gate across the road, was a man dressed in a red and orange robe. He was a Sadu, a Hindu religious man. As he continued to sing, he looked up to the second floor of the building, hoping that the residents would come down and give him some money for his spiritual song of blessing.

In every culture there are holy men (and a few holy women). For Muslims they are the Imam’s and Mullah’s. The Buddhist have their Monks, the Christians have their Clergy (preachers, pastors, reverends, etc.). Even the tribal people I worked with in Kenya had their animistic spiritual leaders called Mganga (witchdoctors). Functionally all holy men do the same thing. They interpret sacred writings, explain how God or the spirits want them to live and set boundaries for moral behavior. Most of the holy men depend on the financial gifts of the faithful. The Buddhist monks, like Sadu’s, walk the streets each day asking for offerings. Priest’s at the Sikh, Hindu or Jain temples are paid through the money received the daily ritual services.

As I got into my car yesterday to travel to another city to speak, I thought about the Sadu at the gate. I don’t wear religious clothes, smoke hashish for a spiritually high or get to let my hair grow long. I don’t go door-to-door blessing people with a song, don’t have a sacred cow I lead through the neighborhood and don’t evoke the name of Sai Baba for miraculous healing. But in a way, I’m not that much different, functionally.

Who set up this system of support for sacred messengers? Not really sure, but I know it’s been around for thousands of years. Jacob, in the Old Testament, had twelve sons and one son was named Levi. It was Levi’s clan that was in charge of the Jewish rituals and the other eleven sons of Jacob was commanded to support the “priestly” tribe with their tithes and offerings. The tribe of Levi was not looked down upon; their work was as valid as the work of Judah or Benjamin. I wonder if the sons of Judah ever said, “Those Levites don’t know what it’s like to live or work in the ‘real world’”?

After I speak this weekend the treasurer of the congregation will hand me an envelope, which will be an honorarium. It’s a gift -- I don’t charge people for what I do. I will use the money to offset the expense of travel, to provide for my family and hopefully have enough for further ministry projects. Though I believe in what I do, in Whom I serve and the services I provide for His Church, as I put the envelope in my coat pocket I will walk away feeling, right or wrong, as though I’d just finished singing at the gate.

Let It Die - Have The Courage To Bury It

As I walked around the vestibule I had a sense that I was in an old person’s house where the occupants have lived for fifty years. When people live in one place for a long period of time, clutter is a part of the décor. Old flowers stuck in the corner of the counter, coffee cups with pens in them and table clothes that need to be washed. The brown wood paneling, the grey carpet, the round globe lights indicate that the last remodeling was circa 1970.

The bulletin board, lined with dusty plastic flowers, had notices ranging from an upcoming women’s conference in June, pictures of the last four years couples retreat and the quarterly nursery assignment. The mission board had letters dating back as far as 2005. “No wonder they don’t have a vision for missions,” I thought to myself.

The interim pastor, an honorable and godly man, was called to help this Midwest church after the sudden death of the pastor, who had been there over twenty-five years. The location of the church is in a decaying part of the city. I got the feeling that the family members of the deceased pastor as well as the loyal flock of less than 100, were committed to carry on, if not for Christ, at least to the sacred remembrance of the past.

In visiting with the interim pastor I inquired about the city of 175,000 people. Indeed, there were many very good churches in the area, with at least 1,000 congregations. And then I asked my host, “Do you think it’s okay for a church to die?” The reality is that half the churches in the community could die tomorrow and God would still have an adequate witness.

Sadly, what will happen is that the congregation will go through the process of finding a new pastor. One of two things will happen. They will secure a shepherd who will fail miserably due to the lack of will of the people and the sorry demographics of their location. I can see a resistance by the old-timers, as change will be perceived as an assault on the memory of the former pastor. It will die a slow death and in the meantime the talent and resources of a handful will go down another ecclesiastical rat hole. That’s the pessimistic view.

The optimistic view will be a leader coming in, convincing the congregation to sell the property and move to another location. Ten years from now the assembly will be viable, who knows, it may be one of the growing churches in the growing part of town. Of course the original congregation will not be a part of the new assembly, as they will be assimilated into other churches, places that are more convenient and fit more their worship experience preference.

No matter the scenario, it would be better if this local church would just die. There is no church, no matter its glorious history, that is sacred or indispensable. Whatever God is going to do in the city He can do without this congregation. I would suggest they sell the property, sell or donate the furnishings to another group and give the proceeds to several worthy ministry projects in the community and around the world. As the church disbands, may the families be directed to other congregations where they can feel a sense of welcome and belonging. May their last service be a celebration of how God used them for a short period of time.

I am not suggesting that every small congregation disband. This is not about larger churches being more valid than smaller groups. Many trendy churches waist resources at a greater scale and spirituality cannot be measured by the Sunday attendance.

There is no doubt many congregations throughout the world that are in similar situations as this little flock in the heartland. Let us have the courage to let the church die and facilitate the burial process.

Faithful Soldiers

I lose track of North American holidays when I’m overseas. One of the engines of the U.S. economy is the once-a-month special days (Mothers, Fathers, Valentines, Labor, etc.). This weekend is the Memorial holiday, a good day to reflect on those who gave their lives in the service to our country. I’m not sure how many people will actually think about the meaning of the day, I don’t personally know of anyone who has died in combat in the last fifty years. I do think, however, that it’s right and fitting, especially with our involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq, that we set aside a special day for those who paid the ultimate sacrifice of service.

As I traveled to the airport this morning I was thinking about some “other” fallen soldiers. These soldiers died this past year in their service for Christ. I think of my friend Bill Ashton, board member of LCCTI, who succumbed to cancer at the age of 56. Bill’s role in life was that of an organizer and accountant. In the past several years he was Pastor of Administration in a church in South Carolina. Bill was forever telling corny jokes, and he had a ton of them. He died at his post early in life and I miss him.

John Buma was a giant of man. He stood over six feet six inches and his hands were like ham hocks. His tattered second-hand jackets never did fit him, always at least two inches short. John was one of my early students in Kenya and became the pastor of a church in a village a long distance from running water or electricity. No one really knows what Buma died of, probably malaria related. I talked with his widow, Beatrice, last December and she is managing just okay with her four kids.

Lewis Smedes defined faithfulness as finding out "what you are here to take care of, and then give it your best shot." I think of the service of Bill and John and conclude that they gave the Master their best shot. They weren’t trying to win awards or the Medal of Honor; they just faithfully did their job the best they could each day.

Indeed, this is a good day to remember and honor those who faithfully served in the great battle for the souls of men. It’s a good day to remember those serving today. Some serve on the front lines, others quietly serve in support roles, but all are a part of the Good News effort. The great crowd of witnesses that have gone on before cheer us on to take care of why we are here and give it our best.

Missions: Project or Process?

Should missions be project or process based?

Dave Dougherty of OMF defines the difference in approach:

Mission as process: This is the ongoing activity of traditional agencies, churches, and training institutions. They focus on fulfilling the Great Commission in every nation and among every people group.

Missions as project: This is the new outreach of mobilization organizations, churches, and individuals. They focus primarily on the unreached, or the least reached people groups.

As a career missionary you might assume that I am opposed to missions as project, but I am not. I believe that missionary projects, which include short-term trips and programs, can be significant in the global outreach. The reason that missions as project is popular today is two-fold. First, many people who are interested in world missions have become bored with missions as usual, i.e. missions as process. Supporting career missionaries to do the work of the Great Commission is not very exciting. Second, the desire to be personally involved rather than just sending career people to the field gives a feeling of being personally engaged, to have ownership as well as experiencing first hand the work of working cross-culturally. Missions as project provides things this generation longs for…instant gratification and a feeling they are doing something.

While I applaud the mission as project approach, it must be critically analyzed, as is missions as process. The downside of mission as project is that it is not always missiologically sound. Missiologists wrestle with issues of contextualization, indigenousness (new term is organic), self-governing as well as self-sustaining. Few mission as project programs wrestle with these concerns.

In addition, mission as project operate in terms of event not time. Miles Delos comments, “Church growth is a process, not an event.” Certainly this is true also of evangelism and church planting in a cross-cultural context. In missions, like language learning, there are no short cuts to success. Brewster wrote, “Learning a culture is the process of learning what its people know.”

Jay Gary, missiologist, states the church needs to take the long view. “To finish evangelizing the 25 percent of world population which remains unevangelized will likely take two or three generations…This is an area where those who sow may never know those who reap." By the year 2033, we will realize that we must measure our progress in world missions by centuries, not just decades.”

Whether we are engaged in missions through project or process, it must be current in thought, focused and strategic.

The Greater God - Conversations at C-543

“I want you to read a book and after you’ve finished with it we will discuss it,” Mr. J said to me one evening.

My old neighbor then hobbled into his bedroom and came out with a copy of Billy Graham’s book, Peace With God.

“This was given to my son before he died. I don’t know who this Graham person is, but I have a problem with his writings.”

I dutifully read portions of the book, noticing that on every page someone had underlined key phrases. Sometime later I asked Mr. J., “What is it that you want to discuss about in the book?”

“Well,” he began, “I have a problem with the writer elevating his religion above other religions. He seems to be saying his God is superior to my gods.”

Mr. J is a cultural Hindu who has probably been more of an agnostic throughout his life than a practicing follower of his religion. The argument against a superior Being is standard for the secularist whose philosophy is that there is not just one road to heaven but many. To suggest that Jesus is greater than Buddha, Shiva or Mohammed and that the path to salvation is limited to only one way is repugnant and ludicrous.

Though it was not easy to talk to Mr. J about Jesus being the only means of salvation for man, it’s not a new challenge. Throughout history, revealed through archeology as well as ancient documents, man has worshipped deities ranging from the animal kingdom to celestial bodies. Most religions have an animistic base with veneration to the sun, moon, stars, birds, rocks, trees, rivers as well as to ancestors and gods made of wood or stone. The first commandment Jehovah gave to Moses was, “Thou shall not have any other gods before me…You shall not make for yourself an image, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.” Our unbelieving forefathers resisted the exclusive claim of one true God as my old friend does today. He cannot accept a faith that is exclusive.

My discussion with Mr. J was two fold. One, all religions exclusive and, two, in spite of postmodern thought, there are absolutes.

Those who are opposed exclusive claims of Christ usually have their own exclusive claims. Whether it is Islam, Jainism or secularism, everyone claims his or her religion or theory of life is solely valid.

Those of us who are followers of Christ do so because we believe in the historical writings of the Bible, both Old and New Testament. For us there is an unfolding eternal plan for this world and mankind, which began at creation and culminates with end of time and the establishment of God’s eternal kingdom. The people of the Book, which Islamists call Christians, recognize that throughout human history man has consistently followed lesser gods. We have been consistently exclusive throughout the chronicles of time and see that as positive, not negative.

While truth can, and is, often elusive, we maintain it takes more faith not to believe in absolutes. I weary with the endless arguments by some against the notion of intelligent design in creation, or the discussion what is or isn’t morality. Between the intelligentsia insisting that we must accept every scientific explanation of how we came into being and how we are genetically coded to be, to the suicide bomber who believes it is morally and religiously acceptable to destroy the innocent, there is a longing for a message that is not diluted with supposition and conjecture. Jesus was an absolutist in his claim that he was the Son of God. Those who accept his assertion, by default, must also embrace his absolute claim.

For Mr. J, and the millions who are like him, the thought of a greater God is too confining. My friend is not certain about his faith; he faces death with a hope that his cultural upbringing will sort things out for him. He may have another life, he may be ushered into heaven, he’s not sure. He’s willing to risk his eternal life on a cultural belief system, which, to me, is the greatest risk of all.

Making A Negative A Positive

The other day I attended a denominational national meeting. I chatted with the Missions Director and he was telling me about the missionaries that would be appointed that week.

“We have four couples who will be approved as career missionaries, eight missionaries who will be approved for short term internship.”

He then went on to explain their short-term program, which is a two-year assignment, is designed to give missionaries hands on experience.

“Sixty-percent of those who complete this internship program go on to become career missionaries,” he added.

What the Director did not talk about, which I thought was significant, is the forty-percent who come home after the two year project and who do not sign up for career service.

For many years I have argued for equipping people better for those going to the mission field. From the time a missionary family is approved or appointed by their mission board, the two years it takes for them raise their support, living in a country for one term (traditionally four years), the financial investment is approximately $500,000. In some organizations, where the standard of acceptance and screening is low, the attrition rate among first term missionaries averages between twenty and forty percent. With an investment of a half-million dollars, or more, you’d think that mission agencies and sending churches would seek ways to insure that their financial investment was not in vain. Yet, there are very few sending agencies that require any training or internship for those who venture out into career cross-cultural work.

The forty percent interns who do not sign up for career missions reveals what is obvious -- some people are just not cut out to live overseas for a long period of time. It may be because of family matters, personal issues, lack of culture adjustment, not finding their niche in ministry overseas or a host of other reasons for not re-signing for longer than a two year service.

Being able to live overseas does not an effective missionary make. The best internship program will include focused training and hands-on coaching. Though successfully living overseas for two years is helpful, it is only half the battle. Did the interns learn language, culture and do the research necessary to have a long lasting impact are the questions needed for an effective internship program. And for the forty percent not re-upping as missionaries, a thorough exit evaluation of why would enhance the internship program in making it a more valuable program in the future. Counseling for the forty on their “next step” should also be a part of the program in helping those people readjust into their local community and church.

I do not see the forty as a negative, but a positive in this internship project. If more agencies would offer similar programs it would no doubt help reduce missionary attrition and save money in the process.

Chosen Hardship

The greatest challenge for any person is self-control. Take any subject: work, study, prayer, personal health, time management, family relationships, etc., you name the area of concern and self-control is probably a key component of success or failure. Those who can “rein in” themselves, their appetites, their lust, their tendencies for idleness, will succeed. Those who fail in self-control are doomed to, at best, meritocracy, or, at worse, poverty.

I recognize that the issue of discipline/self-control is not a profound revelation. I’ve been reading the Proverbs all my life and often hear Solomon’s words of admonishment ringing in my ears -- “Take note of the ant, thou sluggard…” or “A little folding of the hands, a little slumber and your fields will grow over with weeds.” Coupled with the fact that I grew up in a family where “work” is defined as a physical activity, I can hardly sit down and read a book, write, study for future training without the feeling that I’m not worthy to eat. Though guilt should not be a motivator, the issue of self-control is still an issue that every person should give heed.

Mission mobilizer Paul Borthwhick defines discipline as chosen hardship. One chooses the hardship of not having a second helping of mashed potatoes, to turn off the computer and quit surfing the net, to get up early to study God’s Word, to keeping your mouth shut when you have a good piece of gossip or advice you’d like to pass on. The hardship one chooses varies, but it all falls under the category of discipline.

In the day we live, if one is not self-controlled they are probably a victim. In India one is a victim of dharma (born into the wrong caste determined by the works of a former life). In America the obese are victims of skewed thyroids, criminals are victims of a bad childhood, the divorced are victims of not being loved, the poor are victims of an unjust government system. To be sure there are social inequities, physiological and physical deficiencies, but, for the most part, the lack of self-control is the major culprit. The ant cannot make an appeal for his marginal insectness…it’s still a bug that, notwithstanding, must gather food for the winter. Insects instinctively are disciplined to work or they will die. It’s only the higher form of animal that must notice the lesser to gain lessons on the importance of chosen hardships.

The challenge for me, and I suspect anyone who takes time to read this blog, is identifying the discipline needed and then be active in that chosen hardship? It’s not always the upfront work is that is most needed, but usually the mundane tasks that determine success or failure. In the book, “The Shaping Of Things To Come,” the author’s write about the importance of the task before the task.

“If we think about fishing during Jesus’ time the key to successful fishing wasn’t in the technical details of tides and weather patterns, but in the strength of the nets. For this reason, Jesus’ fishing disciples spent most of their working day, not out on the lakes’ surface, but on shore, mending nets.”

Mending nets is a chosen hardship. So, too, may be sitting with your child or spouse and listening to their stories. Writing three hours a day, walking around the track for an hour, or trying to figure out a computer program. I often hear new missionaries talk about how they aren’t doing ministry yet, but are just learning language. I remind that language learning is ministry and it falls in the category of mending nets, which is the task before the task.

The chosen hardship is valid when it points to a goal, but the goal can be subtle and surely cannot be judged by others. Whatever our chosen hardships are, without discipline or self-control the goal will never be realized and most certainly the weeds of an undisciplined life will one day take over.

God's Grace At C-543

“One of my greatest regrets,” my eighty-six year old friend, Mr. J., confessed to me, “is that we didn’t have more children. I bought into the notion that our country is over-populated and that it would be better for us as a nation, as well as for each family, if we everyone had fewer children. We terminated a couple of pregnancies which, now, I realize was a mistake.”

In the Indian society nothing is more important than family. Almost every Bollywood movie has a family theme – father/son conflicts, daughter-in-law/husband difficulties, etc. The largest segment in the Sunday paper is the matrimonial section where want ads are placed by parents looking for suitable partners for their son or daughter. Daily there are news reports of daughter-in-laws that have either committed suicide or murdered because of dowry demands; female infanticide is common. Family in the Indian society is not just the outgrowth of a biological union, it’s the heart and soul of their very existence.

The J’s had two children, the eldest a daughter, the second born a son. As in many developing countries, daughters are not as “prized” as sons. The girl, in reality, is a bit of a burden to the social framework. Dowry, the system where the family of the girl pays the family of the boy to get married, is a hardship for the poor. When a girl does get married she basically leaves her father and mother’s family and becomes a part of the husband’s family. To be quite honest, a girl is a liability.

Having a son is like stock and bonds. The boy will contribute to the family unit economy throughout his lifetime and even in marriage will add to the household workforce. In Mr. J’s thinking he was doing the right things by not having more children after their son was born…he had contributed to society as a whole, plus his son insured him security in his old age, or so he assumed.

When my wife and I met the J’s we didn’t realize we were the first tenants to live in their deceased son’s apartment. Tragically, their son died of leukemia five years before. The daughter-in-law and grand-daughter moved out (according to her, asked to leave) a few months after his death. The apartment remained empty and each December 5th held a puja (Hindu prayer service) for their son.

Overtime in my conversations with Mr. J. I gained insights into his worldview as it relates to the death of his son. He partly blames his daughter-in-law for his demise, as superstition by some in that culture accuse the widow for the source of misfortune. Mr. J. believes he is probably the reason of his son’s death and suggests it is the sins of his former life as the reason the god’s took his only son.

Because our friendship has grown over the years, I have become almost a surrogate son to Mr. J. Certainly not in a legal or financial sense, but my visits with him each evening provide a solace for a lonely old man who is dying without much family. Though Mr. J. does not know the God I know and often speaks harshly of a God who would make him suffer, I marvel at God’s grace on my dear friend. Knowing that it is the goodness of God that draws people to Himself, there is a reason I dwell on the first floor of C-543.

Conversations At C-543

In December 2003 my wife and I made a rental contract with a man I will refer to as Mr. J. The apartment is less that a 1000 sq. ft has two bedrooms, sitting room and two bathrooms. There is neither hot nor cold and running water, just a pipe that runs from the water tank on the roof. Daytime temperatures determine whether our bucket baths are hot or cold. C-543, a section of the city where we live, is a typical flat of 1960’s construction, which includes a kitchen that is the size of a walk-in-closet in the states.

When we met Mr. J. for the first time he was wearing a white khadi kurta and a Nehru hat. He was a pleasant man with impeccable English and, as we quickly found out, opinionated.

“Are you a Muslim,” he asked?

“No,” I replied, “I’m a Christian from America. Is that a problem?”

“Being an American is not too much of a problem. I usually don’t rent to Americans as they are fussy and make too many demands to rent the apartment,” he said. Then he added, “I never rent to Muslims.”

Through tea and biscuits (cookies) we learned more about each other. The J’s were in their early 80’s, Punjabi’s originally from Lahore (Pakistan) who was forced out of their home at the time of partition (when India and Pakistan divided into two countries after independence from Britain in 1948). Since being displaced from his homeland Mr. J. has a disdain from Muslims and thus the reason for his question about my religion. He told me that with my beard I looked like a mullah, a Muslim teacher. If I have had been an American Muslim he probably wouldn’t have rented to us.

The J’s are not in good health. Mrs. J is a plumb woman with diabetes. She is a kind woman who is a practicing Hindu who prays each morning before her god and is a strict vegetarian. Mr. J. has diseased esophagus and can only drink soup six times a day. Mr. J is an educated man with a PhD in economics and before retirement worked for the government. Mr. J is a cultural Hindu who has never been a religious person; probably an agonistic at best and I suspect much of his life he was an atheist.

We have lived above the J’s nearly four years. Mr. J. is now bedfast and only with great effort is he able to go to the toilet. His days and nights are spent in bed wishing to die. Last week my wife and I recently returned to the states for the summer and as I said goodbye to my eighty-six year old friend, who now weighs less than eighty pounds, I wonder if he will be alive when I return to India in July?

Each evening when I am in town I visit this dear old man and we discuss everything from the price of papaya to politics to religion. Mr. J. has given me many insights into the Indian culture, especially the worldview of a past generation. In the next few posts I will be sharing my conversations with my landlord at C-543 who has become a good friend whom I have learned to love. The great mystery to me is why God would orchestrate us finding each other? In a city of 12 million people our relationship is not by chance, though I do not see our relationship having any eternal value. Whatever the reason for our relationship I hope you will enjoy some of the insights gained in the conversation at C-543.

Sharing Life

You can have a ton of money, be top in your professional field and receive accolades from others. You can circle the globe and see the Seven Wonders of the World, and more, but if you can’t share your of life with others, it all seems hollow and empty.

This past month my wife and I have had the privilege to have our eldest daughter, Becky, and our first grandchild, Molly, share the experience of living in India. From the wonderful colors of the bazaar to the taste of achari paneer; from the elephant ride up to Nahargarh Fort in Rajahstan to auto rickshaws in the congested city of Delhi we have experienced a slice of life together. In between our work and daily chores we schedule one more trip to a museum or a Hindi movie while suffering through the 105 degree heat. At the end of day, exhausted, I wonder if it’s worth it and even a bit guilty that I am not doing more work, you know, the really important things of life? I catch myself in mid-thought, reminding myself that the work will always be there but the chance to share this part of my life with my children and grandchildren is a one-time deal.


Becky (and our youngest daughter, Sara who is scheduled to visit us in August), were blessed/cursed to be born to nomadic parents. Unlike many families in the world, where people settle in and around the extended family, in the nearly thirty-nine years of marriage Sandy and I have never lived near our parents, siblings, and now, children. What is interesting about our roving life is that we are one of the closest families in our kinship clan. Though we are seldom together in one place, when we are it’s like we have never been apart and we pick up where we left off the last time we saw each other.

Sharing life with my wife and daughters is special, but God has allowed me to live long enough to share life experiences with my grandchildren. I regret that my grandson, Collin, couldn’t make this trip, but blessed that Molly could take time away from school to make this trek to India. When Doc and Grammy are no longer anymore she perhaps will recount her adventure to her grandchildren. Perhaps the memory of our existence on this earth will go beyond two generations. I wonder which of our grandchildren will follow the nomadic lifestyle of their grandparents?

As we all know, life is but a shadow. With all thy getting, get some time, share some time with others. Blessed is the man or woman who can live well and can slice off part of that life with others to experience.

Maybe I Just Ain't That Smart

I get some interesting mail sometimes. Recently a friend of mine in California, who has been reading my blog, sent this note:

“Enjoy your thinking - How come you don't sound that smart when we are together?!

My answer to him was that (a) maybe he’s not listening or (b) he’s talking so much I can’t get a word in edgewise.

Or, I could quote from Goody’s book, The Logic of Writing and the Organization of Society, “In the context of both intellectual and practical developments, it is important to stress that a significant attribute of writing is the ability to communicate not only with others but with oneself.” Maybe that’s what blogging is all about, talking to yourself.

Probably my best defense is in the old saying that good writers are seldom good speakers, as good speakers are seldom good writers. I don’t have a speech impediment, but I do process things differently when at the keyboard than before a microphone. I would never be good in a debate and I hate being a keynote speaker. The other day I was viewing a video of me speaking to a large delegation in Korea. If you think I’m tedious in person magnify that by going through an interpreter!

In my own defense as a tongue-tied spokesman, I’m in pretty good company. Moses told God he wasn’t articulate enough to speak for the people of Israel but he did a pretty good job as a technical writer in penning the Pentateuch (I realize scholars are divided on how much he did write, but he no doubt had a part). Paul was criticized for not being a polished orator as Apollos, but he churned out some rather heavy tomes in the New Testament. I may not be in their league, but they allow me to justify my writing as having influence through the written word. Though I do wish I could verbalize my thoughts better before a crowd, I’d rather be a quite writer than a big talker. I am much more comfortable in a classroom setting as prepared lesson notes are kin to writing.

My answer to my friend was also (c) maybe I just ain’t that smart. Either way, Rick, keep reading and I will keep writing.

Does The Church Care?

About a year ago I met with a young Christian professional who works in Mumbai (Bombay). I’m not a business guy, I’m a culture guy, but I am interested in encouraging the member s of the Body of Christ where God has gifted them...in the workplace. Moving away from the emphasis on the institution of Christianity and more to the incarnational face of a follower of Christ, we need to think of ways we can support those outside the professional role of ministry. It is my belief that the incarnational church is made up of those who do not draw their “daily bread” from the coffers of the non-profits, but instead their salaries are derived from the marketplace.

I want to restate my position; I am neither against the institutional church nor the role of career pastors or missionaries as they play an important role in God’s Divine purpose. It has been vocational pastors, teachers and missionaries of the past that is responsible for many fine churches and schools established throughout the world, provided social programs for the poorest of the poor and made Bible study and theology truly the queen of the sciences. I have a hard time thinking of what the world would be like today if it were not for those who gave up lucrative careers to serve others, many with meager means. However, increasingly the professional clergy and ministries are becoming a part of the problem in putting the emphasis of the local church (ecclesiocentric) rather than the Great Commission of reaching the community with the message of Christ.

One role of the local body is to equip the saints for ministry. The other functions of the local assembly are worship and instruction in God’s word. The institutional church does a good job, generally, in the latter two areas of function but usually not very strong on outreach or equipping. The equipping of the saints has given way to equipping the church staff to do the work of evangelism and the theory is if we can pour enough resources into making the local church attractive, the not yet followers of Jesus will be drawn in. At least that’s the theory.

Meanwhile, the saints (I’d call him Joe six pack, but the saints are to be teetotalers), feels he has no place in God’s grand scheme except to show up for church, volunteer for the church focused activities and underwrite programs with their tithes and offerings. Saint Joe is seldom guided, coached or equipped to do ministry in his community, workplace, and school. In my reading I came across a quote, made by a businessman thirty years ago. His comments are profound as well as convicting. William Diehl, sales manager of a major overseas steel corporation writes:

In the almost thirty years of my professional career, my church has never once suggested that there be any type of accounting of my on-the-job ministry to others. My church has never once offered to improve those skills which could make me a better minister, nor has it ever asked if I needed any kind of support in what I was doing. There has never been an inquiry into the types of ethical decisions I must face, or whether I seek to communicate the faith to my coworkers. I have e never been in a congregation where there was any type of public affirmation of a ministry in my career. In short, I must conclude that my church really doesn’t have the least interest whether or how I minister in my daily work (1976: Christianity and Real Life).

I believe Diehl would be pleased with the emerging churches that are addressing the need of workplace ministry today. Through small group interest groups believers are encouraged to be involved in non-Christian workplace functions and organizations, not necessarily to convert, but to be salt and light in places where people interact on every level of life. Through special interest grouping the topics the institutional assembly never addressed for Diehl’s ministry needs are dealt with as “real life,” issues.

My Mumbai friend and I have created a network of Christian professionals throughout India. What is interesting to me is that some career pastors have joined the group, but the network is steering the discussion away from institutional topics (theology, outreach programs, etc.), to workplace subjects, such as ethics and how to be a relevant witness of Christ as a member of a minority religion. It’s my belief the institutional church does care about the needs of their membership including equipping them to be functional in the world, it’s just they don’t know how to do it. Stuck in a 1,700 year model that focuses on how to be separated apart from the world, they have forgotten how to be holy within the world. How to change directions will not be easy and probably not widely accepted.

Church Planting Challenge

I’m presently working through a book entitled, “The Shaping Of Things To Come: Innovation and Mission for the 21st-Century Church.” I think most people like books if they (a) are not redundant of common themes, (b) provide new insights and (c) are generally in the same ballpark of their own philosophy or thinking. This current reading coincides with my own thoughts on the institutional church and the traditional church-planting model.

As I stated in a recent post, sometimes I believe that the church and missionaries are stuck with the old paradigm of CP, i.e. evangelism, collecting the believers in one locality, buying land, building a structure, filling those structures with church stuff, etc. Authors Michael Frost and Alan Hirsch label this the “attractional” model: build it to attract outsiders and they will come (also know at the Field of Dreams syndrome). The author’s, in contrast, suggest a better way, the “incarnational” model, which begins with reaching people with the message of Christ and from that a fellowship of believers group together, which may not look anything like the institutional church today.

Most missiologist understand the concept of incarnation and/or indigenous principles. The problem is that many, in spite of supporting the incarnational philosophy, seldom execute this model and instead revert back to the traditional CP of the past. Why?

Church planters feel a need to quantify what they do as a defined by ministry activity. When I moved to Kenya I raised support as a pioneer church planter. Following the pattern of the traditional way, I sent reports to our donors on our activities. I learned language, visited people in the villages, found a meeting place for Sunday services and eventually churches were planted. Accountability is important and people who support traditional missions expect there be a return on investment. We bought land, erected church buildings (mud or concrete blocks) established a training program and we were very successful. I was the epitome of a classic pioneer church planter.

In my role today I teach in traditional schools and training programs. My students are equipped with theology, evangelism methods and discipleship programs and at the end of their training are sent out, expected to plant churches using the attractional model. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t. Every national I have ever taught feel that their greatest need is having enough funds to build it (church, school, orphanage), so they (the lost) will come. In spite of my best efforts to convince otherwise they are stuck in that model? Again, why?

I think it’s partly due to the fact that no one quite understands how to organize an incarnational church plant. The truth is, it can’t be done. It’s my belief, and I would think Frost and Hirsch world agree, that a truly incarnational church shouldn’t be organized, at least not in the traditional sense. Once the leadership tries to harness a movement it loses the dynamics of being indigenous. Let me give you an example.

Several years ago I was invited to speak at a large church in Cleveland. I was impressed with the facilities…forty acres of land, large meeting place for corporate worship, etc. The pastor gave me the history of the church and said that he was a drug addict when he was introduced to the Gospel message. He told me that after his conversion he and his girlfriend started telling others in the inner city about this Jesus who had transformed their lives. He told me that for years they were just a rag-tag group of converted addicts and prostitutes telling others about the Savior. One day they incorporated and he told me, over 15 years ago, that he was worried that they had lost their edge. I’ve heard that over the years the congregation has struggled with the same things that plague every traditional church -- finances, personnel problems, transfer of membership, etc. This group of redeemed potheads started out incarnational, they became one of many traditional congregations trying to attract others into their assembly. Ministry to the inner city became organized outreach rather than spontaneous and incarnational telling others about Christ.


The church today is a business enterprise and has all the trappings of product. Whether it is books to market, discipleship material to promote or capital campaigns to finance a new and improved worship center, going into all the world requires a business plan. The secret disciples of Christ in a Tajikistan village cannot be measured; the underground church in Laos cannot be identified. Somehow, it is thought, we must rescue these people from anonymity, expose them, promote them, and put up a building for them. It’s only when the product is packaged appropriately that it can truly be called church planting.

No Regrets...Future Focused

The evening I sent out my last post I was “chatting” with my brother in the states. He wanted to know if I was depressed or remorseful that prompted my writing about “Turning Back The Clock”? My brother knows me better than anyone else in this world (he preceded me in life by five minutes), and I do have moments of introspection. But my last post was not one of those times…it was in context with what I have been writing about as it relates to missions today as well as the future. If my brother misunderstood the meaning of the post, maybe others did as well.

The truth of the matter is, my generation of x-cultural workers is stuck in the institutional mission thinking. I believe most churches are stuck, or somehow can’t break out, of doing ministry as usual. I’m coming to the conclusion that church planting and church planters are part of the problem with the mission enterprise, and it has affected the national church around the world. The church planting paradigm necessitates structure, which includes formal theological studies, support for people to go out and plant (like a corn) churches, erect a meeting place, fill the building with church stuff (seats, pulpit, baptistery, sound systems, etc.), have small groups, build another theological school and-on-and-on-and-on. In the meantime one-third of the world has never heard the Savior’s Name and ninety percent of the worldwide outreach effort is doing missions with the old fashion way to one third of the population who have already heard the Gospel!

Having said all of that, I have a very strong belief in the Sovereignty of God. I believe He has used the efforts of the past, which I have played a role, as He is using the traditional Christendom today. My prayer is, however, that I personally won’t fossilize nor will I make sacred the methods of the past. I’d like to die thinking about how to serve Christ in the future rather than talk about the good old days of my past. The buzz trends of “saturation church planting,” “people group movements” and even “business as mission,” remains the brainchild of the institutions. Helpful, yes, but still tethered to program that is often cumbersome and limited.

Someone said to me, “Richard, don’t just give theories, people want answers, they want to know what to do.” Well, my last post was an attempt to do that; it wasn’t just an old guy regretting life.

If I were thirty years younger and just starting out on life’s journey I’d do things differently today. Sadly, most missionaries starting out today are stuck in yesterday’s model spurred on by the institutional church that is mired in tradition that demands structure. My point is, let’s keep pushing the edge even if it doesn’t quite fit into the old mold.

If I Could Turn Back The Clock

If I could turn back the clock I’d do things differently in reaching the unreached with the message of Christ.

* If I were an engineer I would get a job with a company that works overseas.

* If I were in college today I would study international business.

* If I was graduating from college this spring I would take a civil service test, apply for a State Department job and try to get an overseas assignment with the U.S. embassy.

* If I were a history, english or math teacher I would apply to teach at international school in the Middle East.

* At 23 years of age and single I would join the Peace Corp, Red Cross or some other international agency.

* If I were a chef I’d open a hamburger joint in Jordon.

Whatever a person is good at, they can live, work and serve Christ overseas.

For a local church to be involved in M3 ministry they only have to look as far as their local college or university as students from M3 nations are in your town.

In almost every community there are cultural blocks of people. In my hometown in northwest Arkansas of 45,000 people, there is a significant Hispanic population, but also a considerable number, between 15 and 20 percent, of immigrants from the Marshall Islands. One does not need to abandon their local church to reach out to students or immigrants; they merely have to look for ways to interact with others.

If I could turn back the clock I probably would still teach intercultural studies, but rather than following the traditional mission track of working within the established church I would look for ways to serve Christ in the secular workplace. I can’t turn back the clock and I’m too old to start over, but I can encourage others to think about doing missions differently in this age of globalization and post-Christendom.