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.

Follow The Star: The Christmas Story

Take-Away: Godly Conflict Resolution

Whenever I hear a speaker, read an article or read a book, I look for “take-aways;” a significant thought or statement that has meaning. Yesterday in church, our pastor, who is often dry as West Texas dust but who regularly comes up with incredible insights, offered up a take away that’s worth writing about.

He ended his sermon with a challenging question, “How can we, as Christians, subvert culture?” Of course the first issues I have to work through is his premise that Christians are to be about “subverting culture.” As a missionary anthropologist I advocate that Christians should NOT seek to subvert culture, at least not intentionally. Yes, I understand that when culture clashes with the Gospel it does bring about a subversive effect, but that subversion goes to the heart of man’s rebellion toward God. It is the sinful practices of humanity, manifested in everything from drunkenness, to divorce, polytheism and abortion that is the root of the problem, not the cultures in which we live. To be sure, the life of a follower of Christ will run counter-culture, as our Lord Himself was to the cultural practices of His day. But the issue is not subversion of culture but subversion to rebellion to a Holy God.

Godly conflict resolution is the answer to challenging worldview and cultural assumptions. As the pastor rightly pointed out, conflict resolution is a popular topic that can be found in the arena of business, marriage counseling as well as among the community of the church. Conflict is inevitable, but dealing with conflict is a mandate if a person or a community is to grow spiritually or even come to understand the Gospel. Many people refuse to address conflict assuming that by avoiding it they won’t have to deal with the messiness of sin; conflict is something they will just sweep under the rug. Conflict doesn’t exist if it can be ignored.

Perhaps one reason so few Christians share their faith with others is because of this reticence toward conflict. Let “sleeping dogs lie,” they contend. Why go to another culture and stir the pot? Why tell a friend or family member the answer to their problems is being a disciple of Christ? It’s easier to avoid conflict than try to resolve it godly or biblically.

There are many things that could be said about conflict resolution, certainly more than can be addressed in a blog. But last week I listened to a testimony of godly conflict resolution (click here to hear this amazing story). What struck me about this testimony was the courage it takes to resolve conflict. It’s a story of grace, a witness of what it means to be a disciple of the Master.

We are not called to subvert culture, but we are called to subvert that which keeps us, all of us, from knowing more about Him. Godly conflict resolution is important for all of us to understand and take away.

Cross Cultural Communication from “Outsourced.”

The movie is about a U.S. novelty company selling their products from a call center in India. If these clips are uncomfortable, seen in poor taste, offensive, crude, well, that’s the point. Learning cultural rules and how to communicate properly runs both ways.

My name is....

Anthropology and Missions

The work of a teacher does not begin and end at the doorsteps of the classroom. Even though I am back in the states I am grading final papers from my recent trip to India.

The subject I teach is cultural anthropology but a better title should be missionary anthropology as every aspect of my teaching is focused on reaching the most unreached in every community. There is a perception, unfortunately, that because my fieldwork was pioneer church planting between two semi-nomadic tribes in Kenya that the course subject can’t be much help to those involved in urban, social or ministry outside of tribal work. One only has to read the research papers of my students to know that is false perception. Here is a sampling of how students integrated anthropology and their ministry activities.

An Anthropological Exploration Of Bangalore’s Rock Music Youth Culture: Avenues of Engagement between Church and Culture. This student working with middle-class kids in Bangalore writes, “…the music of a sub-culture ought to be studied and understood within its own context,” and that the proliferation of rock bands is apart of young persons attempt for “achieved status.” He reminds us that music is both a medium and the message, and to reach this sub-culture their place of meeting should be in a neutral environment, not necessarily the church.

Another paper entitled, Anthropological Research Paper on the Garos of Meghalaya, was written by a young lady who from the south and belongs to a denomination not known for their missionary outreach stated, "When the daunting task of world evangelization dawned on me, the Holy Spirit inspired me to break down the shackles of tradition and reach the unreached. “ Going to this unreached people group in the north she states, “Being a woman I think I have a greater access to the women folk than men. Hence I would like to uplift their social condition, which is not satisfactory at present. As I am a Pharmacist by profession, I can bring awareness among the women about the medical facilities available to them and to follow a healthy lifestyle.”

One student, doing research on an unreached group called the Meiteis of the north, boldly suggests that missionaries working with this people should encourage Hindu Yeshu Bhakta’s (devotees of Jesus), which are Hindu followers of Jesus that stay in their Hindu community practicing their Hindustani culture and giving allegiance to Christ and Him alone.

Space does not allow me to share papers on how these students will use anthropology to reach people with HIV/AIDS, the Sha people deep inside Myanmar (Burma), Muslims in Pakistan and even pygmies in central Africa.

Almost every student has written me stating that this course changed the way they viewed ministry in the past. These MA students are not only future of the church in India, most of them are deeply involved in ministry today. As I tell my students, anthropology cannot and does not replace the work of the Holy Spirit. However, anthropology can and is an important tool in presenting the Good News of Christ and His salvation.

The Mind and Worship

For the past three weeks I have been teaching at the South Asia Institute for Advanced Christian Studies (SAIACS) in Bangalore, India. This morning in chapel one of the professors reminded us of our Lord’s answer to the religious person who asked how one gains eternal life.

(Jesus) answered, " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind. And love your neighbor as you love yourself'" (Luke 10:27).

Though SAIACS is an academic institution where students are enrolled to enrich the heart as well as the intellect, when it comes to worship Christians generally enter devotion with the heart, not the mind. The speaker’s theme today was that learning, growing intellectually is also, or should be, a form of worship.

I grew up in a household that did not highly value education. Historically the denomination in which I have been a member for many years also had a dim view of scholarship, believing that mankind only needed the preaching of the Word so that Holy Spirit could convict the “heart” of man unto salvation. Scholarship, as I was conditioned to believe, was primarily the wasted energy of eggheads and people who spoke beyond their level of intelligence. God’s true work, as the argument goes, is measured in shoe leather, and blessed are the feet of those preach the gospel (Romans 10:15), not those who sit in the ivory towers of academia.

My thoughts wandered to those refrains of disdain as I sat in a weeklong consultation gathering of intellectuals who debated the topic - Indian and Christian: Changing Identities in Modern India. The participants were principally evangelical scholars, but there was also papers presented from Catholic and Hindu professors. For Christians in this country, not more than 4% of a population of 1.3 billion people, identity is an important issue to the minority. Are they Hindu, Christian, Christian/Hindu and however they define themselves, what should their role be in community and government? From morning to night papers were read, respondents challenged and some of us tried to keep up.

At the end of the week one wonders what was accomplished? Conversion was not of the lost without Christ, but rather to a point of view. A church was not established, but perhaps prestige was. And, though no shoe leather was lost in the process I was reminded of another saying from my youth, “A river will only rise as high as its source.” Or, as Forest Gump said, “Stupid is as stupid does.” Though the eggheads do sometimes talk above and past others, I’m sure the venue of dumb and dumber is not the answer in reaching this country for Christ.

Obviously, the balance between poiesis and praxis is needed in missions and ministry. Let us not slight one for the other. It’s also good to remember that to love the Lord our God with all our mind is truly an exercise in worship.

October Update

Many of you receive our monthly E-Updates. For those who don't here is the LINK for the October report.

Criteria for Ministry Partnership

One judges a program or organization by its leadership. I get a ton of requests to teach in India, Africa and other parts of the world, but I obviously can’t respond to every request. I determine my initial acceptance by the references of those who know the program. What determines my on-going working partnership is the quality of leadership. If a school or mission organization is poorly run, see my contribution as a means of financial gain, then I usually back away from such venues. If, however, there is a spirit of reciprocity, a clear vision of what the program is trying to accomplish in terms of discipling cross-cultural workers or leaders and, who make every effort to facilitate my participation in their work, I am more than willing to not only teach but be involved in other aspects of their ministry.

Such is the case with TENT India. I have been teaching missionary anthropology there for the past five years. Dr. Vijayam is one of the most gracious men I have met in India. He is unpretentious, mild tempered and most gracious. His staff, John Samuel, Sunil Daniel and many more that I could name, are every bit as gracious and unassuming as Uncle Vijayam. In a country that is consumed by status and achievement, the highlight of my fall discipleship schedule is to work with this organization in Hyderabad.

This past month I taught the Joshua Vision India (JVI) class; national missionaries preparing to go cross-culturally. Two of the men (pictured above) came from the most northeastern part of the country on the border of Myanmar (Burma). They told me it takes nine days to travel to Hyderabad, five of those days by foot over the mountains, the other four days by bus and train.

I was privileged also to teach a group of young women called the IWILL program (Indian Women in Lord’s Labor). Many of these women will work in their own districts using and teaching the skills they learned at TENT; small acreage farming, candle making and micro-finance programs, enhancing church outreach and helping the poor.

There are bigger programs, more high-profile ministries in India, but there not any ministries I prefer working with over TENT India.