By James E. Plueddemann
Adapted from a chapter in Nurture That is Christian, James C. Wilhoit and John M. Detonni (eds) BridgePoint Books. 1995.
Growing up is both difficult and exciting, exhilarating and frustrating. The wonderful task of Christian education is to help people grow to become all God intends of them. Piaget does not tell us all there is to know about human development, but he does provide valuable insights for the Christian educator.
The pendulum of Christian education seems to swing between two unhealthy extremes: mindless learning of Bible facts and an emotion-filled philosophy that neglects the authoritative Word of God. Healthy Christian education is both true to the Word of God and relevant to the needs of the person and the world. Emotionalists claim “If it feels so good, it must be true.” On the other hand, rationalists assume that if people know the truth intellectually they will automatically be good people. Insights from Piaget bring balance to Christian education.
One of Piaget’s most important contributions was to provide a philosophical and empirical connection between external and internal knowledge. How does objective knowledge from outside the individual relate to the subjective meaning-making activity of the individual? How does Bible knowledge relate to being a godly person? How does one avoid cramming raw facts down the throats of children, or at the other extreme, merely using the Bible as a tool for feeling good about oneself?
The Practical Problem
Insights from Piagetian theory might suggest a rethinking of the theory and practice of Christian. But is such a radical rethinking really needed?
The church around the world is growing rapidly. The ratio of Christians to non-Christians is higher than it has ever been since the first coming of Christ. Both the percentage of Christians and the number of Christians in the world is higher than ever in history. Christianity is growing rapidly in Africa, South America, Asia, and Eastern Europe.
Bible-believing Christian education professors and publishers are increasingly aware of developmental psychology and at the same time are able to integrate psychology with historic orthodox theology. This is an encouraging trend.
But families are falling apart and seminaries seem to be less and less relevant to the needs of the church. Ethnocentric and racial hatred is sweeping the world. Bible teaching in the Sunday school often seems strangely unrelated to the frustrations of life. Economic and ecological prophets of doom are sounding more persuasive, while prophets of the Lord are often ignored. Hundreds of thousands of new Christians are not growing in their faith. While the number of Christians in the world is higher than ever in history, the number of non-Christians is also higher than ever before because of rapid population growth.
Though there are encouraging trends in the field of Christian education, the overall picture provides many hints of a discouraging state of affairs. Bible-believing Christian educators must not relax, but must work and pray for a quiet revolution in the field. We can’t go on like we are! Christian education is in need of a gracious, Bible-based revolution. Piaget suggests a theory and practice of Christian education that might be a beginning.
The Influence of Piaget
Piagetian theory does not have answers for all of the problems of Christian education, nor are these theories complete or adequate to fully explain human development. Piaget suggested a general skeleton for thinking about knowledge and that general structure is being modified and fleshed out by modern researchers. Piaget himself would have been disappointed if fresh thinking about his theory ceased when he died. While he was alive Piaget encouraged his students to go into new directions, to use the basic insights from his theory to understand new problems ( Shulman, Restiano-Baumann & Butler. 1985, p. xi). Piaget’s theory was dynamic and changing while he was alive, and fresh thinking about his theory needs to continue.
Robert Kegan a neo-Piagetian, believes that “in Piaget we discover a genius who exceeded himself and found more than he was looking for” (1982, p. 26). Kegan has enlarged Piaget’s theory to include personality development, with implications for clinical psychology.
While Piaget’s theory is incomplete and developing, his insights about thinking and growing may be some of the most important of the century. Several scholars have lauded the impact of Piaget and conclude, “Assessing the impact of Piaget’s work on developmental psychology is a little bit like assessing the impact of the automobile on American society” (Dolezal p. 3), or “assessing the impact of Piaget on developmental psychology is like assessing the impact of Shakespeare on English literature or Aristotle on philosophy - impossible. The impact is too monumental to embrace and at the same time too omnipresent to detect.” (Beilin, 1992, p. 191).
Overview of Piaget’s Life (1896-1980)
Piaget was born in 1896 in the small Swiss university town of Neuchtel. “His father was a historian who specialized in medieval literature, and his mother was a dynamic, intelligent, and religious woman” (Gainsburg & Opper, p. 1). Piaget was a brilliant child. He published his first academic paper at age 10. By the time he was 21 he had earned a doctorate in natural sciences from the University of Neuchtel, had published twenty-five professional papers and was considered one of the world’s experts on mollusks. By the time he was thirty Piaget held a job in the Rousseau Institute in Geneva and had a world-wide reputation (Gardner, 1981, p. 56). Piaget was a disciplined person who organized his thinking on long walks and wrote down his ideas the next day. During the summer months he would retreat to a hideaway in the Alps, take long walks, write, and come down in the fall with another book. For Piaget, writing was the way he organized his thoughts. When traveling he would sometimes go to the airport several hours early so he could have uninterrupted time to write (Gardner, 1981, p 57). By the time he died Piaget had written or co-authored about 50 books and hundreds of articles.
Piaget discovered that the shape of mollusks would change when put in a changed environment and concluded that mollusks could assimilate changes because of the need to adapt to the environment.
After finishing his doctorate, Piaget shifted his interests to psychology and began to work in a laboratory with Binet to standardize intelligence tests. Piaget was intrigued with incorrect answers children gave to questions on tests. (Wadsworth, 1974, p. 3). For example many older children would be able to distinguish between the right and left hand of a picture of a boy standing on his head, whereas children a year younger would almost always be confused by the question. He observed that the process of adaptation in children had common elements to adaptation in mollusks.
Piaget spent many hours observing his own children, watching them learn to perceive the world in radically different ways every few months.
He worked in Geneva for the rest of his life. His theories have continued to generate much interest and research.
Piaget argued that in order to understand an idea, a person in one sense has to invent that idea. Invention of ways in which the world works is a challenging task with many pitfalls. Piaget’s theories went counter to Freudian psychoanalytic theories that encouraged parents to avoid frustrating the developing child in any way. He felt such theories led to an excess of unsupervised liberty (Piaget, 1973, p. 6). Piaget felt that children do not learn unless there is an optimum level of dissonance.
He also disagreed with the ideas of Skinner and of programmed instruction. “Programmed instruction is indeed conducive to learning, but by no means to inventing. . . unless the child is made to do the programming himself” (1973, p. 7). Piaget would also disagree with Mager-type behavioral objectives. He would likely prefer problem-posing educational objectives.
Overview of Piaget’s Theory
The Process of Growth
Piaget is best known for exploring the mechanism and the stages of cognitive development from birth to adulthood.
Piaget has generated important studies on the factors that promote development. Two important factors are social interaction and the process of exploring tensions, or “disequilibration.” People tend to grow and develop as they struggle with problems in a social setting.
Interestingly, people tend to make the most progress in learning when things don’t make sense! For example, a small child may have one single mental category for animals - the family dog. Everything with four legs, a tail, and a wet nose is a dog. When the child sees the neighbor’s cat, which has four legs, a kind of tail, and sort-of a wet nose, the child labels the animal a dog. The process continues until the child sees a cow, or any animal that doesn’t fit the "dog" category. The cow has some of the characteristics of a dog, yet is very different. The cow doesn’t fit the child's mental category. This causes “disequilibration.” The problem prompts the child to construct a broader mental category for animals and produces cognitive development.
Adults also grow as they explore tensions and create new categories. This process is enhanced through interaction with other adults. This means that small groups can provide an ideal setting for healthy growth. For example, when a Presbyterian and a Pentecostal think together over a passage in the book of Acts, it's very possible that interesting "disequilibration" will take place. As they explore the tensions of their differences in interpretation, both will see things they never saw before in that passage. Interaction with people who have different perspectives can be a powerful stimulus to growth.
Ultimately, growth toward Christlikeness is a gift of God. Each Christian has spiritual gifts, so the group itself can become a means of grace. Though groups can facilitate growth, godly development is a result of God’s grace.
Piaget has described the strategies used by children to make sense of their world. The mind at birth is not a passive blank slate, but has built-in structures or schemata for organizing information. The child takes in information from the surrounding environment and puts that information in a mental file folder. Piaget calls this process assimilation. Children transform or re-write the information to fit existing mental categories. But not all the information a child receives seems to fit the existing file folders. When young children hear the story of Pontius Pilate, they put him in the mental file folder labeled “pilot.” Maybe this is why one child drew a picture of the flight to Egypt of Mary and Joseph and baby Jesus in an airplane, with Pontius as the pilot. Such a picture makes sense given the child’s limited number of mental file folders. But eventually the child begins to figure out that there may be two kinds of pilots, and such an understanding results in confusion or disequilibration in a puzzling situation (LeBar & Plueddemann p. 212). The child realizes the need for accommodation, or the need to add more file folders to accommodate the new category. So the child has one category for airplane pilots and creates another category for a person named Pilate. Learning as defined by Piaget is not solely an inner or outer process, but is the interaction of the inner thinking of the child with the outer world.
Stages of Growth
Piaget spent many hours observing his own children in natural settings and found that growth takes place in spurts or stages. These stages are “great leaps” followed by times of calm and integration. He described four major stages. Many researchers have confirmed these general patterns of developmental stages in people from many cultures.
1. Sensorimotor stage (ages 0-2). The sensorimotor infant makes sense of the world primarily through physical observations - by seeing, hearing, and touching. If a baby is playing with a rattle and the rattle should fall from sight, the baby will not look for it. For babies, objects seem to cease to exist when they are out of sight.
In some ways, the sensorimotor age is the most complex of the developmental stages. Piaget discovered at least six sub-stages in infants. At birth children react entirely with their reflexes, and by the time children reach two years of age they have begun mastery of language and have discovered how to perform scientific experiments with concrete objects. For young children each day produces dozens of miracles both for the child and the parent.
2. Preoperational stage (approximately ages 2-7). At this stage there is the new capacity to make sense of the world through language and fantasy. Preschoolers learn through intuition rather than through systematic logic, and they have a creative imagination.
In some ways preoperational or intuitive thinking is the most interesting and creative stage. Children may have difficulty seeing the perspective of a parent or another child, and thus have difficulty with cooperative play. But preoperational children have a most creative way of thinking about the world. Since they are not burdened with abstract logic, cars can fly, dreams can hide under the bed, and the moon follows them as they go for a night walk. Elkind (1979) calls children at this stage “cognitive aliens.” Children speak a different language and make up words such as “mouth brow” for mustache. A three-year-old neighbor told her mom I was “lawning” when I was mowing the lawn. “We cannot take anything for granted insofar as the child’s knowledge or understanding is concerned” (p. 147). But children are logical thinkers. Their rules of logic are just based on different ways of knowing the world.
While preoperational children are “cognitive aliens,” Elkind (p. 151) calls them “emotional countrymen.” Children are least like adults in their thinking and most like adults in their feelings. Children aren’t little “thinking machines” when they read. Thinking and feeling are always tied together. Adults must treat children with love and respect.
3. Concrete operational stage (approximately ages 7-11). The elementary school-age child has the new capacity to use mental logic but is limited to situations that are real and observable. Ten-year-olds in my Sunday school class assume that “tent-making” missionaries, unless people live in tents. Children at this stage learn facts easily, are very literal, and see social issues in terms of black and white, right and wrong. They love the Guinness Book of World Records and have numerous collections of rocks, stamps, and sports cards.
4. Formal operations stage (often 12 and up). In adolescence and adulthood an important way of making sense of the world is through abstract thinking. Now there is the ability to solve hypothetical problems with logical thinking. Many principles of Scripture cannot be fully understood from the perspective of concrete operational thinking. But complex concepts such as the atonement take on deeper understanding when adults are able to see the abstract conflict between justice and mercy.
In one important sense people can have a mature faith at any level of cognitive development, but for a more adequate understanding of Scripture formal operational thinking is probably needed.
Piaget found that growth is promoted thorough interaction with other children and with parents. And progress in stage development is motivated or enhanced as the child encounters perplexing situation.
The theories of Piaget provide valuable insights for teaching children about God and the Bible. He would suggest that we encourage young people to struggle with problems rather than give them easy answers. He would also suggest we give children plenty of opportunity to explore for themselves and to interact with other children.
Growth in Perspectivism
According to Piaget, the process of growth is like the widening ripples caused by a stone falling into a pond (Plueddemann & Plueddemann, 1990). Each stage of human development leads to wider horizons and broader perspectives. The more mature person can appreciate a point of view from a greater number of perspectives, making it possible for empathetic and caring relationships with people of different perspectives. As people grow in the ability to see problems from the perspective of the other person, they can better "rejoice with those who rejoice and weep with those who weep." Perspectivism makes discussion possible as people listen and interact with each other's views. Missionaries who can present their message from the perspective of a person in another culture are more likely to be effective.
Parents know that small children are egocentric, seeing the world from their own limited perspective. A wise parent knows it does no good to tell a hungry baby to wait sixty seconds for milk. God didn’t create screaming babies with the mental capacity to contemplate the future.
As children grow older, their awareness of the points of view of other people increases, but the depth of their interaction with others is rather shallow. This is why young children tend to interact in what is called “parallel play.” They are aware of other children playing near them, but they "play alone together" (Selman, 1976). Minimal interaction for children begins to take place about the age of seven. They can now discuss concrete situations with each other and begin to take the perspective of other children. But they are still not able to discuss abstract concepts such as “sharing.” For the seven-year-old, sharing means letting another person use one particular object. So a child may remember to share an umbrella, but not a jump rope. Sharing in the abstract is a difficult concept for children.
From about the age of twelve, perspectivism grows rapidly. Teens experience a revolution of world-view when they are able to see themselves as others see them. Such perspectivism is a strong motivation for boys to begin combing their hair and for girls to pay special attention to what they wear. Teens are growing in their ability to participate in group discussions because they are better able to analyze and reflect on comments from others in the group. Teens often question the religious up-bringing of their home because they are able to reflect on what life might be if they were raised in a Muslim home. Perspectivism can lead to doubt or to a stronger personally-owned faith.
Many adults are capable of genuine perspectivism, but some adults have difficulty “wrestling” with new ideas from different perspectives. Adult Sunday school classes often end in an argumentative discussion with one person not really hearing the point of the other adult. Class comments are often a string of unrelated observations from different members of the group. At times overly simple answers are dogmatically given to complex questions. Piaget never assumed that all adults would reach formal operational thought, so genuine dialogue among adults is not something to be taken for granted.
Moral Reasoning
Why do people do what they do? The level of cognitive development is reflected in why people do or do not obey rules.
Piaget observed children playing marbles and wondered about their attitudes toward rules. Children seldom learned rules for playing marbles in a formal setting with rewards and punishment set by adults (Duska & Whelan, p. 9). Piaget wanted to know how children thought about rules, how rules could be changed, and if children actually followed the rules.
Before the age of two children play marbles without rules, but practice many of the skills of playing the game of marbles.
After the age of two, children learn from older children that there are rules to the game, and they imitate those rules. Piaget would call these children egocentric because they assume their rules are followed by all people in the world. They believe that their particular rules are sacred and should not be changed. “They believe that the rules of marbles have been handed down from adults, and some even believe that God may have originally formulated them. Any alteration in the rules is considered a transgression” (Duska & Whelan, p. 10). Children feel an obligation to play by the rules, but often play with little cooperation with other children, or according to the rules.
At about seven years of age, the child begins to play marbles according to rules set by the group, but becomes legalistic in enforcing obedience to the rules. Piaget would call this heteronomous obedience to rules. Rules can be made by the children if they all agree to a particular set of rules.
Twelve-year-olds often develop ability for abstract reasoning, and the making of rules becomes a most important task in playing a game. Rule-making becomes a social activity, rather than blind obedience to external rules. There may be a serious desire to cooperate, so children actually abide by the rules to which they mutually agree. Piaget calls this autonomous reasoning.
Younger children understand doing good as doing what one should do, obeying the rules of adults. Younger children seldom consider the intentions of people as to why they do what they do. For example if a child because of clumsiness or by accident breaks fifteen tea cups, that child is considered a worse offender than a child who out of anger intentionally breaks only one tea cup. Older children pay more attention to the intentions of the child.
Piaget’s understanding of the moral thinking of children supports the idea that children don’t merely absorb character traits from adults, but are actively involved in making sense out of moral behavior from their developmental perspective.
Piaget’s work on the moral reasoning of children stimulated much of the thinking of Lawrence Kohlberg and James Fowler in the fields of moral reasoning and faith development.
Religious Thinking in Children
David Elkind (1979b) built on understandings of Piaget when he conducted research about how children think about religious issues. He was not interested in what children were taught in formal education, but what they really thought about religious ideas in a spontaneous setting. He investigated children’s conceptions of prayer, God and religion. His method was to ask questions. “The only requirement in formulating questions is that they be so absurd, to the adult way of thought, that one can be reasonably certain children have not been trained one way or the other regarding them” (1979, p. 259).
He asked questions such as: Can God be president of the United States? Can God talk French? How did God get his name? Does God have a first name? Along a similar line he would ask a Baptist child: Can a dog be a Baptist? How can you tell a person is Baptist? Can you be an American and a Baptist at the same time?
Elkind found stages similar to those of Piaget. He found young children to be undifferentiated in their thinking (Baptists have blond hair), older children to be concretely differentiated (They don’t allow dogs in our Baptist Church so a dog could not be a Baptist), and young teens to be abstractly differentiated (Yes one can be both American and Baptist).
An understanding of Piaget can be helpful in understanding the broad task of religious education. People grow as they interact with people, with the physical world around them. and with knowledge. People are not merely empty sponges to be filled with knowledge but are active in the process of growth. Education is not something one gives to another such as teachers giving an education to a student. True education is the reflective interaction between the student and the environment.
Implications for Ministry across Cultures
The Church around the world is in serious need of Christian education that is related to the world-view and needs of culture and at the same time is under the absolute authority of the Word of God. Good teaching in another culture is most challenging.
Piaget would argue that most cultural differences are variations on a set of common themes. There may be thousands of different ways of looking at life, but Piaget would contend that such differences build on similar deep structures in the person.
Traditional IQ tests are thought to be culturally biased, but Piaget redefined intelligence. Piaget claimed that the foundational structures of intelligence are genetic, and thus are potentially available for every human being in every corner of the earth. Piaget did not promote an elitist or Western definition of intelligence. The rate of development may be slowed or optimized by cultural influences, but highest levels of intelligence are possible for every culture ( Ashton, 1975. Dasen, 1977. Price-Williams, 1981). The doctrine of Creation affirms that every person is made in God’s image with all the potential implied by that creation.
Since the fundamental components of teaching and learning are the same in every culture there are basic principles of teaching that are appropriate in every culture.
Implications of Piaget for Christian Education
Piaget’s theories need to be evaluated and modified in light of the authoritative Word of God and must be empowered by the Holy Spirit for effectiveness in Christian education. While Piaget made no claim of being a follower of Christ, his insights can remind the Christian educator of basic biblical principles.
* Piaget helps us to see that the purpose of education is development. The ultimate goal of human development is for people to glorify God by becoming like Christ in every aspect of life. The task of the Christian educator is to foster the development of people so they will become like Christ - people who more fully love, know and glorify God. Too often Christian educators become sidetracked with idolatrous purposes such as building bigger programs or merely transmitting knowledge. Church growth and program development must always be means toward the bigger goal of Christ-likeness or they become idols.
* Piaget helps us see that learning is a social activity. Christians should not need to be reminded that good education must involve the body of believers, the Church. People develop as they interact with other people. People don’t learn the most important things in life by sitting in a pew taking notes from one-way communication. Good lectures and powerful preaching may be a stimulus for significant education, but Piaget reminds us that people must interact with each other in order to grow. Education that merely fosters passive reception of information will seldom develop people.
* Piaget helps us to see that learning is a disequilibrating and re-equilibrating process. We grow as we wrestle with the problems of life in light of the Word of God. Life is filled with frustrations and challenges. We are influenced by sin at every stage of spiritual growth. There will always be tension between the way we live and the way we should live. The good news of the Gospel must always be the answer for the bad news of our human situation. The purpose of knowledge, even knowledge of the Bible, is that it be a tool for helping us to resolve the deepest dilemmas of being human.
Through the power of the Word of God and by the Spirit of God these three principles could spark renewal in the Church around the world. The purpose of Christian education is to promote the godly development of people. We must involve the whole Body of Christ in this process, using God’s Word as a means for resolving life’s tensions. If these principles are indeed revolutionary, let us be gracious and humble in implementing them, but let the revolution begin!
Bibliography
Ashton, P.T. 1975. Cross-cultural Piagetian research: An experimental perspective. Harvard Educational Review. 45, In Harvard Educational Review reprint # 13 Stage theories of cognitive and moral development. pp. 1-32.
Beilin, H. 1992. Piaget’s enduring contribution to developmental psychology. Developmental Psychology. 28: 191-204.
Dasen, P.R. (Ed.). 1977. Piagetian psychology: Cross-cultural contributions. NY: John Wiley.
Dolezal, J. G. 1984. A summary and systematization of Jean Piaget’s position on affectivity. Wheaton College, IL MA Thesis.
Duska, R. & Whelan, M. 1975. Moral development: A guide to Piaget and Kohlberg. New York: Paulist Press.
Elkind, D. (1979a). The study of spontaneous religion in the child. In The child and society. New York: Oxford University Press.
Elkind, D. (1979b). Piaget and Montessori in the classroom. In, The child and society. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gainsburg, H. & Opper, S. 1979. Piaget’s theory of intellectual development. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Gardner, H. 1981. The quest for mind: Piaget, LŽvi-Strauss, and the structuralist movement. (Second edition). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Jacob, S.H. 1984. Foundations for Piagetian education. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
Kegan, R. 1982. The evolving self: Problem and process in human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
LeBar, L. & Plueddemann, J. 1984. Education that is Christian. Revised. Wheaton: Victor Books.
Piaget, J. 1973. To understand is to invent. New York: Grossman.
Piaget, J. 1932. The moral judgment of the child. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.
Piaget, J. & Inhelder, B. 1969. The psychology of the child. New York: Basic Books.
Plueddemann, J. 1986. Theorists who influenced the study of James Fowler and faith development: Piaget, Kohlberg, Erikson. Christianity Today June 13, 1986
Plueddemann, C. & Plueddemann J. (1990). Pilgrims in progress. Wheaton: Harold Shaw.
Price-Williams, D. 1981. Concrete and formal operations. In R.W. Monroe, R.L. Monroe and B.B. Whiting (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural human development. NY: Garland STMP Press.
Pulaski, M. A. S. 1980. Understanding Piaget. New York: Harper & Row.
Shulman, V.L., Restiano-Baumann, L.C.R. & Butler, L. (Eds.) 1985. The future of Piagetian theory: The neo-Piagetians. New York: Plenum Press.
Selman, R. 1976. The Development of Socio-Cognitive Understanding: A Guide to Educational and Clinical Practice. in Morality: Theory, Research and Social Issues, ed. Thomas Lickona New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Wadsworth, B. J. 1974. Piaget’s theory of cognitive development. New York: David McKay.
Friday, November 13, 2009
Monday, July 20, 2009
Will the Real Leader Stand Up?
From forthcoming book by Jim Plueddemann - Leading Across Cultures (IVP).
There must be hundreds of definitions of leadership, each one reflecting philosophical, theological and cultural values. People from a goal-oriented culture might define leadership as accomplishing the task through other people. Leaders from a relationship-oriented society would prefer to define leadership as the ability to build alliances and friendships. Societies with a low tolerance for ambiguity insist on a precise definition, while those with a high tolerance for ambiguity would likely not bother with any definition.
Recently the U.S. News & World Report editors selected their choice of the best leaders. They defined a leader as a person who “motivates people to work collaboratively to accomplish great things.” [i] The selection committee used three criteria for the best leaders: they set direction, by “building a shared sense of purpose” [ii] they achieved results that had a positive social impact that exceeded expectations, and they cultivated a culture of growth by inspiring others to lead.[iii]
Since there is no divinely inspired definition of leadership I will show my theological and cultural bias with the following description:
Good leaders are fervent disciples of Jesus Christ, gifted by the Holy Spirit, with a passion to bring glory to God. They use their gift of leadership by taking initiative to focus, harmonize and enhance the gifts of others for the sake of developing people and cultivating the Kingdom of God.
[i] Amanda Ruggeri, “America’s Best Leaders: How They Were Picked.” U.S. News & World Report, December 8, 2008, p. 55.
[ii] Ibid.
[iii] Ibid.
There must be hundreds of definitions of leadership, each one reflecting philosophical, theological and cultural values. People from a goal-oriented culture might define leadership as accomplishing the task through other people. Leaders from a relationship-oriented society would prefer to define leadership as the ability to build alliances and friendships. Societies with a low tolerance for ambiguity insist on a precise definition, while those with a high tolerance for ambiguity would likely not bother with any definition.
Recently the U.S. News & World Report editors selected their choice of the best leaders. They defined a leader as a person who “motivates people to work collaboratively to accomplish great things.” [i] The selection committee used three criteria for the best leaders: they set direction, by “building a shared sense of purpose” [ii] they achieved results that had a positive social impact that exceeded expectations, and they cultivated a culture of growth by inspiring others to lead.[iii]
Since there is no divinely inspired definition of leadership I will show my theological and cultural bias with the following description:
Good leaders are fervent disciples of Jesus Christ, gifted by the Holy Spirit, with a passion to bring glory to God. They use their gift of leadership by taking initiative to focus, harmonize and enhance the gifts of others for the sake of developing people and cultivating the Kingdom of God.
[i] Amanda Ruggeri, “America’s Best Leaders: How They Were Picked.” U.S. News & World Report, December 8, 2008, p. 55.
[ii] Ibid.
[iii] Ibid.
Tuesday, July 07, 2009
Are All Christians Missionaries?
(From forthcoming book, Leading Across Cultures by James E. Plueddemann, by IVP. Publication date October 2009)
The word missionary has mixed connotations. For some people, missionaries are heroes and spiritual giants, worthy to be put on a pedestal. At the other extreme, missionaries are thought to be religious fanatics who destroy cultures and stir up sectarian strife. Many times, they are stereotyped as being from the West and having white skin. More recently the idea has surfaced that all believers are missionaries. I remember a missions conference with the theme, “You are either a missionary or a mission field.” I recently visited a church that featured a large sign over the exit: “You are now entering the mission field.” Some Christian organizations define a missionary as anyone needing to raise support. A prayer letter from a Christian camp announced that the camp staff were all missionaries, meaning the camp didn’t pay them a salary. One of my American friends jokingly defines a missionary as anyone who receives a tax-deductable receipt for the cost of their travel.
Most missionaries are neither spiritual giants nor destroyers of culture. They go out from every country in the world, they have a unique calling, and they are not defined by whether they raise support or not.
A missionary is anyone, from any country, who leaves home in order to proclaim the gospel, usually in another culture. The term is derived from the concept of “apostle,” or “sent one,” so by definition, missionaries move beyond their home ministries.
In the Old Testament, priests had local responsibility for taking care of the temple, while prophets spoke the word of God both to Israel and to the nations. Jesus’ disciples were also called apostles or “sent ones.” They were called to leave home, family and occupations for the sake of Jesus and for the gospel (Mark 10:29). New Testament pastors, elders and deacons were responsible for local house churches, while “apostolic bands” left home to preach the gospel. During much of the history of the church, parish priests led local congregations while religious orders carried the gospel to distant places. Put simply, missionaries are people who leave home for the sake of the gospel. While differences between local and non-local ministries become fuzzy at times, the basic distinction helps to avoid confusion of roles.
The Holy Spirit gives many gifts. Local pastors, evangelists and teachers play a most important, God-given role in world missions, but they are not missionaries. Christians living or doing business in another country are not necessarily missionaries unless they intentionally seek opportunities to share the gospel. Church groups visiting missionaries in another country are most likely Christian tourists. In my definition, Christians doing relief work in Southern Sudan are not missionaries unless they also seek to talk about Jesus. Many people provide outstanding service to humanity by building houses, drilling wells, stimulating micro-enterprises and feeding the poor. But unless they also intentionally seek opportunities to communicate the gospel, I would not call them missionaries. I’m grateful for philanthropists such as Bill Gates and the Red Cross. They aren’t second-class citizens; I just don’t classify them as missionaries.
Yet, communicating the gospel is not the only thing that missionaries do. They do in fact hold verbal proclamation of the gospel together with meeting human need. Through the centuries missionaries have holistically proclaimed Christ as they healed the sick, built schools, provided clean water, initiated agricultural innovation and spoken out against injustice.
When an Indian family moves away from their own culture in south India to the Islamic North in order to do the work of evangelism and discipleship, they are missionaries. Chinese family members setting up a market stall in Afghanistan for the sake of taking the gospel westward are missionaries. An Australian English teacher in China who looks for informal opportunities to share the gospel is a missionary.
The word missionary has mixed connotations. For some people, missionaries are heroes and spiritual giants, worthy to be put on a pedestal. At the other extreme, missionaries are thought to be religious fanatics who destroy cultures and stir up sectarian strife. Many times, they are stereotyped as being from the West and having white skin. More recently the idea has surfaced that all believers are missionaries. I remember a missions conference with the theme, “You are either a missionary or a mission field.” I recently visited a church that featured a large sign over the exit: “You are now entering the mission field.” Some Christian organizations define a missionary as anyone needing to raise support. A prayer letter from a Christian camp announced that the camp staff were all missionaries, meaning the camp didn’t pay them a salary. One of my American friends jokingly defines a missionary as anyone who receives a tax-deductable receipt for the cost of their travel.
Most missionaries are neither spiritual giants nor destroyers of culture. They go out from every country in the world, they have a unique calling, and they are not defined by whether they raise support or not.
A missionary is anyone, from any country, who leaves home in order to proclaim the gospel, usually in another culture. The term is derived from the concept of “apostle,” or “sent one,” so by definition, missionaries move beyond their home ministries.
In the Old Testament, priests had local responsibility for taking care of the temple, while prophets spoke the word of God both to Israel and to the nations. Jesus’ disciples were also called apostles or “sent ones.” They were called to leave home, family and occupations for the sake of Jesus and for the gospel (Mark 10:29). New Testament pastors, elders and deacons were responsible for local house churches, while “apostolic bands” left home to preach the gospel. During much of the history of the church, parish priests led local congregations while religious orders carried the gospel to distant places. Put simply, missionaries are people who leave home for the sake of the gospel. While differences between local and non-local ministries become fuzzy at times, the basic distinction helps to avoid confusion of roles.
The Holy Spirit gives many gifts. Local pastors, evangelists and teachers play a most important, God-given role in world missions, but they are not missionaries. Christians living or doing business in another country are not necessarily missionaries unless they intentionally seek opportunities to share the gospel. Church groups visiting missionaries in another country are most likely Christian tourists. In my definition, Christians doing relief work in Southern Sudan are not missionaries unless they also seek to talk about Jesus. Many people provide outstanding service to humanity by building houses, drilling wells, stimulating micro-enterprises and feeding the poor. But unless they also intentionally seek opportunities to communicate the gospel, I would not call them missionaries. I’m grateful for philanthropists such as Bill Gates and the Red Cross. They aren’t second-class citizens; I just don’t classify them as missionaries.
Yet, communicating the gospel is not the only thing that missionaries do. They do in fact hold verbal proclamation of the gospel together with meeting human need. Through the centuries missionaries have holistically proclaimed Christ as they healed the sick, built schools, provided clean water, initiated agricultural innovation and spoken out against injustice.
When an Indian family moves away from their own culture in south India to the Islamic North in order to do the work of evangelism and discipleship, they are missionaries. Chinese family members setting up a market stall in Afghanistan for the sake of taking the gospel westward are missionaries. An Australian English teacher in China who looks for informal opportunities to share the gospel is a missionary.
Monday, June 15, 2009
Can Women be Leaders?
My Disequilibrating Journey
I’m sorry to admit that I was 36 years old before I really thought seriously about the role of women in ministry. In 1979 I was being interviewed by a woman member of the Board of Regents for a teaching position at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. Out of the blue she asked me if I thought women should teach men. Without thinking I quoted 1 Timothy that Paul did not permit a woman to teach or assume authority over a man. (1 Tim. 2:12) She didn’t say anything but gave me a slight smile. I then asked her if she taught Sunday School in her church and if there were men in the class. She nodded, yes. With an embarrassed look on my face I mumbled that I assumed that she was a good teacher and admitted that I hadn’t thought much about the issue. My disequilibration had begun.
If women shouldn’t teach men, how could many of my most influential teachers be women? If women aren’t to teach men because women, like Eve are more easily deceived (1 Tim. 2:14) then for sure women shouldn’t be allowed to teach children or even worse, other women. Should men read books or sing hymns written by women? It didn’t fit my theology or my experience. My mother’s teaching led me to accept Christ as savior. If women shouldn’t have authority over men, how could some of the most dynamic, visionary leaders in missions be women? Does God’s inerrant and fully inspired Bible contradict itself when it says women should keep silent in church, while on the other hand they should cover their heads when they prophesy? (1 Cor. 14:34 and 11:5) My naïf position didn’t make sense theologically or experientially. I began to reflect on my experience, and went to Scripture again with a fresh curiosity.
I grew up in a godly, fun-loving home with a strict German father and Scotch-Irish mother. Both parents were well educated, committed Christians and influential leaders in our local church. In the home my Dad was clearly in charge, but my Mother took most of the initiative in raising and punishing me when I deserved it. Because Mom taught Good News Clubs in our home, I learned most of the Bible stories in our living room filled with children and a flannel-graph board. Even today, when I hear the stories of creation, Abraham, Moses, Daniel, Jesus and Paul, I still picture my mom moving flannel-graph figures around the board with a room-full neighborhood children.
Many other women teachers had a strong impact on my life. My fourth grade teacher Mrs. Phillipson, gave me a sense of confidence and self-worth that changed my worldview. Once, in front of the whole class, she told me that I might be president of the United States some day. As a 12 year old I recommitted my life to Christ under the dynamic Sunday School teaching of Nettie Baird. At Wheaton College, the teachers who influenced me the most were Vivian Bloomquist and Mary and Lois LeBar. When I began dating Carol I quickly realized that she was a lot smarter than I and had gifts where I was sorely lacking. She began to tutor me in Spanish, and helped edit of my papers. Because of her, my grades dramatically improved under her teaching.
After we were married, Carol and I joined the Sudan Interior Mission (now Serving In Mission) and began working with the Christian education department of a dynamic church in Nigeria. I realized that Carol along with Ruth Cox and Mary Marbaugh were much more qualified than I, at teaching, through the means of curriculum development. Mary replaced me in the leadership team when we went of furlo and became the first woman to serve on the SIM West Africa Council. Later when I became the International Director of SIM, I realized that a couple of our field countries were stagnating for lack of visionary leadership. When I appointed Becky Welling as the SIM Director of Sudan, her love for the local pastors, fluency in Arabic along with her enthusiasm and possibility-thinking revitalized the ministry.
On our first vision consultation in India we sensed a deep ingrown discouragement. When I asked the director about his vision for the country, he answered, “the last person to go, turn out the lights.” After we replaced the depressed leader with a dynamic woman medical doctor, Aletta Bell, the field took off. Seldom have we seen such a dramatic turn-around. Aletta traveled to most of the SIM sending offices, exuberantly pounding the pulpit with fresh vision for the ministry in India. In our last visit to India as International Director, the SIMers were buzzing with excitement and enthusiasm about fresh possibilities for ministry. On the last evening of a vision consultation, we sat on the beach, sang praise hymns and watched the sun set over the Arabian Sea. One of the younger folks played music on a “boom-box,” and the whole team made up of members from Ethiopia, Japan, Korea, the United States, India, and many more, lit sparklers and began to dance on the beach. Carol and I watched in amazement. What a difference between our first discouraging visit and our last one with dancing on the beach. India was our fastest growing field. God used this powerfully-gifted, possibility-thinking woman to bring dynamic change.
Journey Toward Re-equilibration
I consider myself a conservative evangelical Christian holding firmly to the fundamentals of the historic faith. I gladly ascribe to the verbal, plenary and inerrant inspiration of Scripture. Was I on a theological slippery slope toward liberalism? Did I sin by appointing women missionaries to positions of authority over men?
I continued reflecting on my life. My professional career has been either as a missionary or a professor. For 24 years I’ve been a cross-cultural missionary, and for 19 years I’ve been a professor at Wheaton College or Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. I’ve lived, studied, written and taught in areas of leadership and cross-cultural studies. Both help me understand the dilemma of women in leadership.
The Bible is filled with universal moral ethical principles. Yet where Scripture seems to contradict itself—as in the command for women to be silent, and prophesy with covered head—the principle must not be universal but be intended for a specific or cultural situation. The church in Corinth well-known for specific tensions and squabbles. Many of the commands—such as the length of hair and wearing of hats in church—are generally thought to be culturally-specific. If the apostle Paul were writing to missionaries working in the Islamic world, he might say that it is not appropriate for a man to teach women. It would go against the morays of the culture. If the command is situationally cultural, then both men and women should be alert to times when it would be better for the other gender to do the teaching and leading.
My experiences and studies in cross-cultural leadership leads me to a rival hypothesis regarding the passage where Paul tells Timothy that he “does not permit a woman to teach or have authority over a man” (1 Tim. 2:11). In a many parts of the world a high power-distance leadership is the expected cultural value, where a domineering leadership style is assumed by both followers and leaders. Jesus consistently taught a counter-cultural low power-distance leadership value when he told the Jews not to call anyone Rabbi (Matt. 22:8), and his disciples to avoid the Gentile style of lording it over others (Matt. 20:25). Many of the translations of the 1 Timothy passage add the footnote with the alternate reading that Paul did not permit a women to teach man in a domineering way. Since leadership struggles were common in the New Testament church, Paul equally might have written, I do not permit a man to teach either men or women in a domineer way. Most likely a woman was giving Timothy problems by her domineering teaching style. The underlying principle probably refers to leadership styles of both men and women.
Resolution
The universal principle regarding the ministry role of men and women is that they are interdependent. “Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God” (1 Cor. 11:11). Men and women are different but interdependent, where the only hierarchical relationship is God. The position isn’t quite egalitarian or complementarian.
My understanding of the doctrine of progressive revelation helps me to respect both the continuity and discontinuity between the Old and New Testaments. I don’t find the term “ordination” in the New Testament. If folks ask me if I believe in the ordination of women, I tell them “no,” but neither do I believe in the ordination of men. (I enjoy being an iconoclast.) The whole idea of a priesthood limited to the males of one family of one of the tribes of Israel is done away in the New Testament. But if we give in to the cultural temptation to “ordain” people let’s not restrict it to the Old Testament doctrine of the limited priesthood. The laying on of hands seems to be a public indication of the giftedness of an individual and there is no indication that spiritual gifts are gender specific. Surely the doctrine of the priesthood of believers is not limited to males. Galatians lists barriers broken down in the New Testament, both men and women are one in Christ Jesus (Gal 2:28).
I don’t quite fit either the egalitarian or complementarian mold. Maybe I’m an interdependent, egalitarian-complementarian. I praise the Lord for the differences between men and women. Without these differences no one except Adam, Eve and Jesus could be born. I remember reading brain research that discovered a tendency for the left hemisphere to handle abstract functions while the right hemisphere helped with more intuitive ways of thinking. The disconcerting observation is that women usually have more connections between the two hemispheres. In order to make the best decisions it makes sense to have both men and women on governing boards, on leadership teams and highest positions of leadership.
I’m sorry it took me so long to become disequilibrated. From the perspective of a cross-cultural missionary I realize that there are times when, for the sake of the gospel, both men and women need to step back from leadership positions. I respect hierarchical complementarian men and women who, because of their high view of Scripture, struggle with the dilemma. Usually these folks do all they can to include women is as may leadership roles as they can. But as I look at a world in pain, a struggling and lukewarm church and billions of people around the world who don’t know Christ, I am passionate about the urgent need to employ the giftedness of the whole church.
We shoot ourselves in the foot when we unbiblically limit the leadership gifts of at least half the Body of Christ.
I’m sorry to admit that I was 36 years old before I really thought seriously about the role of women in ministry. In 1979 I was being interviewed by a woman member of the Board of Regents for a teaching position at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. Out of the blue she asked me if I thought women should teach men. Without thinking I quoted 1 Timothy that Paul did not permit a woman to teach or assume authority over a man. (1 Tim. 2:12) She didn’t say anything but gave me a slight smile. I then asked her if she taught Sunday School in her church and if there were men in the class. She nodded, yes. With an embarrassed look on my face I mumbled that I assumed that she was a good teacher and admitted that I hadn’t thought much about the issue. My disequilibration had begun.
If women shouldn’t teach men, how could many of my most influential teachers be women? If women aren’t to teach men because women, like Eve are more easily deceived (1 Tim. 2:14) then for sure women shouldn’t be allowed to teach children or even worse, other women. Should men read books or sing hymns written by women? It didn’t fit my theology or my experience. My mother’s teaching led me to accept Christ as savior. If women shouldn’t have authority over men, how could some of the most dynamic, visionary leaders in missions be women? Does God’s inerrant and fully inspired Bible contradict itself when it says women should keep silent in church, while on the other hand they should cover their heads when they prophesy? (1 Cor. 14:34 and 11:5) My naïf position didn’t make sense theologically or experientially. I began to reflect on my experience, and went to Scripture again with a fresh curiosity.
I grew up in a godly, fun-loving home with a strict German father and Scotch-Irish mother. Both parents were well educated, committed Christians and influential leaders in our local church. In the home my Dad was clearly in charge, but my Mother took most of the initiative in raising and punishing me when I deserved it. Because Mom taught Good News Clubs in our home, I learned most of the Bible stories in our living room filled with children and a flannel-graph board. Even today, when I hear the stories of creation, Abraham, Moses, Daniel, Jesus and Paul, I still picture my mom moving flannel-graph figures around the board with a room-full neighborhood children.
Many other women teachers had a strong impact on my life. My fourth grade teacher Mrs. Phillipson, gave me a sense of confidence and self-worth that changed my worldview. Once, in front of the whole class, she told me that I might be president of the United States some day. As a 12 year old I recommitted my life to Christ under the dynamic Sunday School teaching of Nettie Baird. At Wheaton College, the teachers who influenced me the most were Vivian Bloomquist and Mary and Lois LeBar. When I began dating Carol I quickly realized that she was a lot smarter than I and had gifts where I was sorely lacking. She began to tutor me in Spanish, and helped edit of my papers. Because of her, my grades dramatically improved under her teaching.
After we were married, Carol and I joined the Sudan Interior Mission (now Serving In Mission) and began working with the Christian education department of a dynamic church in Nigeria. I realized that Carol along with Ruth Cox and Mary Marbaugh were much more qualified than I, at teaching, through the means of curriculum development. Mary replaced me in the leadership team when we went of furlo and became the first woman to serve on the SIM West Africa Council. Later when I became the International Director of SIM, I realized that a couple of our field countries were stagnating for lack of visionary leadership. When I appointed Becky Welling as the SIM Director of Sudan, her love for the local pastors, fluency in Arabic along with her enthusiasm and possibility-thinking revitalized the ministry.
On our first vision consultation in India we sensed a deep ingrown discouragement. When I asked the director about his vision for the country, he answered, “the last person to go, turn out the lights.” After we replaced the depressed leader with a dynamic woman medical doctor, Aletta Bell, the field took off. Seldom have we seen such a dramatic turn-around. Aletta traveled to most of the SIM sending offices, exuberantly pounding the pulpit with fresh vision for the ministry in India. In our last visit to India as International Director, the SIMers were buzzing with excitement and enthusiasm about fresh possibilities for ministry. On the last evening of a vision consultation, we sat on the beach, sang praise hymns and watched the sun set over the Arabian Sea. One of the younger folks played music on a “boom-box,” and the whole team made up of members from Ethiopia, Japan, Korea, the United States, India, and many more, lit sparklers and began to dance on the beach. Carol and I watched in amazement. What a difference between our first discouraging visit and our last one with dancing on the beach. India was our fastest growing field. God used this powerfully-gifted, possibility-thinking woman to bring dynamic change.
Journey Toward Re-equilibration
I consider myself a conservative evangelical Christian holding firmly to the fundamentals of the historic faith. I gladly ascribe to the verbal, plenary and inerrant inspiration of Scripture. Was I on a theological slippery slope toward liberalism? Did I sin by appointing women missionaries to positions of authority over men?
I continued reflecting on my life. My professional career has been either as a missionary or a professor. For 24 years I’ve been a cross-cultural missionary, and for 19 years I’ve been a professor at Wheaton College or Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. I’ve lived, studied, written and taught in areas of leadership and cross-cultural studies. Both help me understand the dilemma of women in leadership.
The Bible is filled with universal moral ethical principles. Yet where Scripture seems to contradict itself—as in the command for women to be silent, and prophesy with covered head—the principle must not be universal but be intended for a specific or cultural situation. The church in Corinth well-known for specific tensions and squabbles. Many of the commands—such as the length of hair and wearing of hats in church—are generally thought to be culturally-specific. If the apostle Paul were writing to missionaries working in the Islamic world, he might say that it is not appropriate for a man to teach women. It would go against the morays of the culture. If the command is situationally cultural, then both men and women should be alert to times when it would be better for the other gender to do the teaching and leading.
My experiences and studies in cross-cultural leadership leads me to a rival hypothesis regarding the passage where Paul tells Timothy that he “does not permit a woman to teach or have authority over a man” (1 Tim. 2:11). In a many parts of the world a high power-distance leadership is the expected cultural value, where a domineering leadership style is assumed by both followers and leaders. Jesus consistently taught a counter-cultural low power-distance leadership value when he told the Jews not to call anyone Rabbi (Matt. 22:8), and his disciples to avoid the Gentile style of lording it over others (Matt. 20:25). Many of the translations of the 1 Timothy passage add the footnote with the alternate reading that Paul did not permit a women to teach man in a domineering way. Since leadership struggles were common in the New Testament church, Paul equally might have written, I do not permit a man to teach either men or women in a domineer way. Most likely a woman was giving Timothy problems by her domineering teaching style. The underlying principle probably refers to leadership styles of both men and women.
Resolution
The universal principle regarding the ministry role of men and women is that they are interdependent. “Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God” (1 Cor. 11:11). Men and women are different but interdependent, where the only hierarchical relationship is God. The position isn’t quite egalitarian or complementarian.
My understanding of the doctrine of progressive revelation helps me to respect both the continuity and discontinuity between the Old and New Testaments. I don’t find the term “ordination” in the New Testament. If folks ask me if I believe in the ordination of women, I tell them “no,” but neither do I believe in the ordination of men. (I enjoy being an iconoclast.) The whole idea of a priesthood limited to the males of one family of one of the tribes of Israel is done away in the New Testament. But if we give in to the cultural temptation to “ordain” people let’s not restrict it to the Old Testament doctrine of the limited priesthood. The laying on of hands seems to be a public indication of the giftedness of an individual and there is no indication that spiritual gifts are gender specific. Surely the doctrine of the priesthood of believers is not limited to males. Galatians lists barriers broken down in the New Testament, both men and women are one in Christ Jesus (Gal 2:28).
I don’t quite fit either the egalitarian or complementarian mold. Maybe I’m an interdependent, egalitarian-complementarian. I praise the Lord for the differences between men and women. Without these differences no one except Adam, Eve and Jesus could be born. I remember reading brain research that discovered a tendency for the left hemisphere to handle abstract functions while the right hemisphere helped with more intuitive ways of thinking. The disconcerting observation is that women usually have more connections between the two hemispheres. In order to make the best decisions it makes sense to have both men and women on governing boards, on leadership teams and highest positions of leadership.
I’m sorry it took me so long to become disequilibrated. From the perspective of a cross-cultural missionary I realize that there are times when, for the sake of the gospel, both men and women need to step back from leadership positions. I respect hierarchical complementarian men and women who, because of their high view of Scripture, struggle with the dilemma. Usually these folks do all they can to include women is as may leadership roles as they can. But as I look at a world in pain, a struggling and lukewarm church and billions of people around the world who don’t know Christ, I am passionate about the urgent need to employ the giftedness of the whole church.
We shoot ourselves in the foot when we unbiblically limit the leadership gifts of at least half the Body of Christ.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Ascension Day - Pray For Revival
May 21, 2009 is Ascension Day! . . . May 31 is Pentecost Sunday
Ascension day may be the most important date on the Christian calendar that is totally ignored.
This is the day the disciples along with the women who followed Jesus returned to the upper room to pray. They watched as Jesus was taken up before their eyes and a cloud hid him from their sight. For ten days they studied the Bible and prayed. They probably meditated on the last words of Jesus. "You will be my witnesses . . . to the ends of the earth." They were told to wait for the Holy Spirit.
Ten days after Ascension Day is Pentecost! The day when God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven heard of Jesus in their own language. (Reread Acts 1 and 2)
Let us take these ten days and pray for a fresh outpouring of the Holy Spirit.
Ascension Day Hymn
Tune: Hyfrydol
Alleluia! Sing to Jesus,
His the scepter, His the throne;
Alleluia! His the triumph, His the victory alone.
Hark the songs of peaceful Zion
Thunder like a mighty flood.
Jesus, out of every nation,
Hath redeemed us by His blood.
Alleluia! not as orphans
Are we left in sorrow now;
Alleluia! He is near us,
Faith believes, nor questions how:
Though the cloud from sight received Him
When the forty days were o’er,
Shall our hearts forget His promise,
“I am with you evermore”?
Alleluia! Bread of Heaven,
Thou on earth our food and stay;
Alleluia! Here the sinful
Flee to Thee from day to day;
Intercessor, friend of sinners,
Earth’s Redeemer, plead for me,
Where the songs of all the sinless
Sweep across the crystal sea.
William C. Dix 1866
Ascension day may be the most important date on the Christian calendar that is totally ignored.
This is the day the disciples along with the women who followed Jesus returned to the upper room to pray. They watched as Jesus was taken up before their eyes and a cloud hid him from their sight. For ten days they studied the Bible and prayed. They probably meditated on the last words of Jesus. "You will be my witnesses . . . to the ends of the earth." They were told to wait for the Holy Spirit.
Ten days after Ascension Day is Pentecost! The day when God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven heard of Jesus in their own language. (Reread Acts 1 and 2)
Let us take these ten days and pray for a fresh outpouring of the Holy Spirit.
Ascension Day Hymn
Tune: Hyfrydol
Alleluia! Sing to Jesus,
His the scepter, His the throne;
Alleluia! His the triumph, His the victory alone.
Hark the songs of peaceful Zion
Thunder like a mighty flood.
Jesus, out of every nation,
Hath redeemed us by His blood.
Alleluia! not as orphans
Are we left in sorrow now;
Alleluia! He is near us,
Faith believes, nor questions how:
Though the cloud from sight received Him
When the forty days were o’er,
Shall our hearts forget His promise,
“I am with you evermore”?
Alleluia! Bread of Heaven,
Thou on earth our food and stay;
Alleluia! Here the sinful
Flee to Thee from day to day;
Intercessor, friend of sinners,
Earth’s Redeemer, plead for me,
Where the songs of all the sinless
Sweep across the crystal sea.
William C. Dix 1866
Monday, February 23, 2009
LOST
We were frantic. Our son Danny got lost at a Michigan State University football game. We had just come on home assignment from Nigeria and Danny was four years old. Was he kidnapped? Did he fall a couple of hundred feet over the back of the stadium? I peered over the edge of the stadium and half expected to see a crowd of people gathered around a small crumpled body on the sidewalk. Why didn’t we take better care of him? Why didn’t we teach him our phone number? Why didn’t we make sure he had some kind of identification? In a frenzy we searched through the mass of 40,000 football fans. You can imagine our exuberance when we later found Danny in a special room for lost children, eating candy in the arms of policeman. We were so glad that the University took special concern for lost children.
Lets pretend that in our panic a friendly policeman sent us to the University Committee on Lostness. I barged into the committee room shouting, “Help! Our son is lost!”
Members of the University Committee on Lostness wished to ask me some questions. I assumed that they wanted to know what Danny was wearing, where we saw him last, if he might have gone home with a friend or some other helpful question. But he asked, “What do you mean by lost?” “Is he really lost?” “Who do you think you are to impose your morality of lostness on a child?” “It’s all relative, maybe you are the one who is lost.” “How can you be so arrogant to proclaim your son is lost. You are making a value judgment on his lost state and assume have better judgment than your son?”
Weeping and pleading I shouted, “But my boy is lost, I love this boy more than I love my own life. He is in serious danger. Stop your scholarly debates on lostness and come help me find my boy!”
At this moment there are at least four billion people who are lost without Christ. About two billion lost people are out of reach of any search party. Their Heavenly Father loves these people more than he loved the life of his own Son. We sense the pain of lostness in God’s heart when we read that there is great joy in the presence of God’s angels when even one sinner repents. The father in Luke 15 celebrated with an exuberant party when his lost son was found.
Mission agencies are recruiting people to form search parties to go into dark and difficult and neglected places to find the lost. We desperately need volunteers and those who will support them? How can so many Bible-believing Christians be complacent when our loving Father is weeping for His lost children?
Lets pretend that in our panic a friendly policeman sent us to the University Committee on Lostness. I barged into the committee room shouting, “Help! Our son is lost!”
Members of the University Committee on Lostness wished to ask me some questions. I assumed that they wanted to know what Danny was wearing, where we saw him last, if he might have gone home with a friend or some other helpful question. But he asked, “What do you mean by lost?” “Is he really lost?” “Who do you think you are to impose your morality of lostness on a child?” “It’s all relative, maybe you are the one who is lost.” “How can you be so arrogant to proclaim your son is lost. You are making a value judgment on his lost state and assume have better judgment than your son?”
Weeping and pleading I shouted, “But my boy is lost, I love this boy more than I love my own life. He is in serious danger. Stop your scholarly debates on lostness and come help me find my boy!”
At this moment there are at least four billion people who are lost without Christ. About two billion lost people are out of reach of any search party. Their Heavenly Father loves these people more than he loved the life of his own Son. We sense the pain of lostness in God’s heart when we read that there is great joy in the presence of God’s angels when even one sinner repents. The father in Luke 15 celebrated with an exuberant party when his lost son was found.
Mission agencies are recruiting people to form search parties to go into dark and difficult and neglected places to find the lost. We desperately need volunteers and those who will support them? How can so many Bible-believing Christians be complacent when our loving Father is weeping for His lost children?
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Requiem Grace
by Carol Plueddemann
Music is one of the most significant “means of grace” in my life and I’m glad for the rich variety of hymn styles that nurture my heart—ancient, contemporary, country, Black gospel, jazz and all varieties of ethnic expression . I’m no expert when it comes to classical music, but the Brahms’ Requiem has become one of my favorite pieces.
Why this Requiem? I first sang this piece with the Jos Community Choir when we lived in Nigeria. We weren’t a polished group, but we sang from our hearts. Though still in my twenties, I had begun to experience the sorrows of death in the loss of two close friends just our age. Later I sang this work with the Wheaton Choral Union on the first-year anniversary of my father’s death. Last weekend Jim and I listened to the Requiem again at the Divine Word Chapel where the lovely sounds surrounded us with comfort in the recent death of my mother.
Unlike other requiems, the text of Brahms’ Requiem is all Scripture. The piece begins slowly with a somber melody: Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall have comfort and soon moves to the glad reminder that Those who sow in tears shall reap in joy. Then an ominous pounding of drums announces, Behold all flesh is as the grass. The grass withers and the flower decays. In contrast, The Word of the Lord endures forevermore. Here the music becomes bright, solid and hopeful and transitions to the joyful parade of the redeemed as they come to Zion. Joy and gladness, these shall be their portion. Pain and sighing shall flee.
"As I turn the pages of my score, I see margin notes penciled in during the many rehearsals I attended. I smile as I note that these musical reminders are also appropriate life challenges: Watch! Sustain—don’t fade. Don’t rush. Support—breathe! Sing sweetly."
Lord, make me to know the measure of my days on earth—to consider my frailty—that I must perish…Now, Lord, O, what do I wait for? My hope is in Thee. And then the sweet music of the well-known piece How lovely is thy dwelling place, O Lord of hosts! My soul longs for the courts of the Lord. My soul and body cry out for the living God. These words from Psalm 84 resonate with my longings for our true Home. The subject and counter-subject weave a glorious blend as They praise thy name evermore.
The fifth movement is written in memory of Brahms’ mother. I will comfort you as one whom his own mother comforts. The soaring, sorrowful soprano solo is among the loveliest music composed by mortals. It is almost too exquisite to bear and fills me with homesickness for heaven where we will experience music in brand new dimensions.
Here on earth we have no continuing place. The music is foreboding at this point but becomes brighter as pilgrims are assured, Howbeit, we seek one to come. And then, Lo, I unfold unto you a mystery… (Brahms’ music here rivals any mystery soundtrack.) We shall not all sleep—We shall all be changed in a moment, in a twinkling of an eye, at the sound of a trumpet. For the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible. (in-cor-RUPT-ible!) For death shall be swallowed in victory! (Can you hear the blast of the trumpets?) Death—where is thy sting? Grave—where is thy triumph?
Now the music explodes in a glorious chorale: Lord, Thou art worthy to be praised! And then a confident, calm affirmation: Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord. They rest from their labors and their works follow after them. Those who live and die in the Lord have eternal significance. Though their earthly lives are like grass, they will be raised—incorruptible-- to praise God forever. Brahms’ Requiem is a foretaste of that praise.
Music is one of the most significant “means of grace” in my life and I’m glad for the rich variety of hymn styles that nurture my heart—ancient, contemporary, country, Black gospel, jazz and all varieties of ethnic expression . I’m no expert when it comes to classical music, but the Brahms’ Requiem has become one of my favorite pieces.
Why this Requiem? I first sang this piece with the Jos Community Choir when we lived in Nigeria. We weren’t a polished group, but we sang from our hearts. Though still in my twenties, I had begun to experience the sorrows of death in the loss of two close friends just our age. Later I sang this work with the Wheaton Choral Union on the first-year anniversary of my father’s death. Last weekend Jim and I listened to the Requiem again at the Divine Word Chapel where the lovely sounds surrounded us with comfort in the recent death of my mother.
Unlike other requiems, the text of Brahms’ Requiem is all Scripture. The piece begins slowly with a somber melody: Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall have comfort and soon moves to the glad reminder that Those who sow in tears shall reap in joy. Then an ominous pounding of drums announces, Behold all flesh is as the grass. The grass withers and the flower decays. In contrast, The Word of the Lord endures forevermore. Here the music becomes bright, solid and hopeful and transitions to the joyful parade of the redeemed as they come to Zion. Joy and gladness, these shall be their portion. Pain and sighing shall flee.
"As I turn the pages of my score, I see margin notes penciled in during the many rehearsals I attended. I smile as I note that these musical reminders are also appropriate life challenges: Watch! Sustain—don’t fade. Don’t rush. Support—breathe! Sing sweetly."
Lord, make me to know the measure of my days on earth—to consider my frailty—that I must perish…Now, Lord, O, what do I wait for? My hope is in Thee. And then the sweet music of the well-known piece How lovely is thy dwelling place, O Lord of hosts! My soul longs for the courts of the Lord. My soul and body cry out for the living God. These words from Psalm 84 resonate with my longings for our true Home. The subject and counter-subject weave a glorious blend as They praise thy name evermore.
The fifth movement is written in memory of Brahms’ mother. I will comfort you as one whom his own mother comforts. The soaring, sorrowful soprano solo is among the loveliest music composed by mortals. It is almost too exquisite to bear and fills me with homesickness for heaven where we will experience music in brand new dimensions.
Here on earth we have no continuing place. The music is foreboding at this point but becomes brighter as pilgrims are assured, Howbeit, we seek one to come. And then, Lo, I unfold unto you a mystery… (Brahms’ music here rivals any mystery soundtrack.) We shall not all sleep—We shall all be changed in a moment, in a twinkling of an eye, at the sound of a trumpet. For the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible. (in-cor-RUPT-ible!) For death shall be swallowed in victory! (Can you hear the blast of the trumpets?) Death—where is thy sting? Grave—where is thy triumph?
Now the music explodes in a glorious chorale: Lord, Thou art worthy to be praised! And then a confident, calm affirmation: Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord. They rest from their labors and their works follow after them. Those who live and die in the Lord have eternal significance. Though their earthly lives are like grass, they will be raised—incorruptible-- to praise God forever. Brahms’ Requiem is a foretaste of that praise.
Saturday, July 12, 2008
The Quandary of Missionary Leadership
Missionaries are people who are not afraid to take bold risks. They often march to a different drummer, and have an entrepreneurial spirit. Missionaries are a delightful yet peculiar people.
When it comes to leadership they face a quandary:
1. Individualistic missionaries are often called to work under the direction of missionaries or nationals with widely different cultural views of leadership.
2. Missionaries may be called to lead multi-cultural teams of fellow missionaries and nationals who have radically different cultural expectations of leadership.
3. Missionaries teach in pastoral training institutions in cultures with dissimilar ideas about the leadership role of the pastor.
4. The dominant worldwide assumption is that leaders have the responsibility and power to control people. The North American corporate CEO, the South American caudillo, the Asian Confucian elder brother, the Middle-Eastern paternalistic father-figure or the traditional African chief, all fit the model of leadership as power and control.
5. Missionaries in a post-modern culture react against a domineering view of leadership, feeling called to “do their own thing.” They often see leadership as a service function with little or no authority.
The Quandary
So here is the quandary. Many post-modern missionaries have an egalitarian view of leadership, while the rest of the world assumes that leadership is control. Yet today’s missionaries working with bottom-up leadership styles are expected to work under leaders and to develop leaders in cultures with top-down assumptions about leadership.
A Possible Solution
Leadership is a spiritual gift mentioned in Romans 12:8, but footnotes show that the word means to “provide for others” or to “give aid.” The list of spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 12:28 uses the word “administration” in some translations, but in others it is translated “guidance” or “those who can get others to work together.” A biblical understanding of “the gift of leadership” challenges most cultural assumptions.
In one sense all believer have spiritual gifts and are responsible to use their gifts to influence the Body of Christ. In this sense, influence is leadership and thus all believers are leaders. But some believers have the gift of fanning into flame the gifts of others, coordinating gifted people and helping them to move in the same direction. This is the likely meaning of the gift of leadership in Romans 12:8. Maybe a way to describe the difference is to suggest that all believers are leaders with a lower-case l, while some are Leaders, upper-case L. In God’s eyes coordinating Leaders are no more or less important than leaders with general gifts.
Here is a tentative definition: Good leadership is the spiritual gift of proactively harmonizing, enhancing and focusing the spiritual gifts of others toward a common vision of the Kingdom of God.
Often leaders are thought to be either task-oriented or people-oriented. This definition assumes neither “leader as controller” or “leader as cheerleader.” The model takes the task of the Kingdom seriously and assumes that the leader will be proactive and take initiative, while being an encourager and a developer of people.
Mission Leaders are not servant door-mats, watching everyone to do what is right in their own eyes. But neither are they servant dictators, paternalistically making decisions for ignorant missionaries.
I’m hopeful that this model of leadership will allow missionaries to be more effective in multi-cultural settings.
* It brings out the best of the controller and the encourager models while overcoming the weaknesses of both.
* It allows missionaries to be proactive, to take initiative and to keep focused on the vision, while working under people with diverse leadership styles.
* It has the potential of being a bridge between the dominant modern view of leadership as power and the post-modern passive view of leadership.
* It provides a starting point and a goal for developing leaders in other cultures.
Few things in life are more rewarding than working with missionaries and church leaders of other cultures. I often say I am working with a “dream team” of mission leadership. I pray that the Lord will continue to show us how to harmonize and enhance the spiritual gifts He has given believers in every culture so that we may be used to fulfill a vision of His worldwide Kingdom.
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
The Intercultural Missionary - Syllabus
The Intercultural Missionary
C ourse Title: ME 6240
Professor: James E. Plueddemann, PhD
Trinity Evangelical Divinity School
Place: ROD 125
Time: Monday - 6:00 – 9:20 PM
Date: January 9 - February 25, 2008
C ourse Title: ME 6240
Professor: James E. Plueddemann, PhD
Trinity Evangelical Divinity School
Place: ROD 125
Time: Monday - 6:00 – 9:20 PM
Date: January 9 - February 25, 2008
Credit: Two Hours
Jim’s Web Log: http://missionaryimpossible.blogspot.com/
Course Description:
The course explores decisions and developmental tasks involved in preparing for a missionary career, adjusting to another culture, learning a language, rearing a family overseas, managing conflict, and handling intercultural stress. The spiritual formation of the missionary is emphasized. Two hours.
Purpose of the Course:
The course, while based on social science research, is intended to be practical. The readings, assignments and projects will be helpful for:
* youth pastors who lead short-term mission trips
* those considering short-term missions
* short-term missionaries looking to serve on a longer term
* missions pastors
* long-term missionaries looking for fresh insights
* anyone interested in the practical aspects of ministering cross-culturally.
Vision for the Course - I pray that the course will:
1. Give you greater confidence as you face challenges in cross-cultural ministry such as language learning, conflict management, stress, family concerns and your personal spiritual growth
2. Encourage you to be more involved in the exciting adventure of world missions and help you feel more comfortable in interactions with other cultures
3. Equip you to understand, serve and be more effective in other cultures through an understanding of basic cultural principles
4. Help you to be better teachers for those seeking to serve in other cultures
5. Help pastors, missions pastors and mission committee members to better understand the cultural and personal challenges facing cross-cultural missionaries
6. Be used of the Lord to foster the development of world missions in sending and receiving churches
7. Facilitate the glory and enjoyment of God in the whole world
Activities and Requirements:
The unique feature of this course is that we will move from practice to theory and back to improved practice. The primary activities of the course will center around practical mini-projects that will relate to the readings. Class lectures, discussion and simulations will vary depending on the needs and interests of the class.
Papers for each week
Theory: Read assignment for the week
Practice: Interview a missionary or someone not from your country or observe a cross-cultural situation
Integration: Write a 2 page paper integrating reading with interview
Learn from each other: Attend class and be ready to discuss findings and listen to others
You will need to interview experienced missionaries, someone from outside your culture, or mission pastors. Another possibility would be to observe a cross-cultural situation or ministry in the Chicago area. While you may include your own experience, you will also need to interview another person or gain a fresh experience.
Since much of the course integration will take place in the classroom, both attendance and active participation is expected. There will be no final exam or major paper.
Readings: (Other books and articles will be recommended in class.)
Barnett, Betty. 1991. Friend raising: Building a missionary support team that lasts. Seattle: YWAM Press.
Hiebert, Paul. 1995. Anthropological insights for missionaries, Grand Rapids: Baker.
Maranz, David. 2001. African friends and money matters. Dallas: SIL International.
Livermore, David. 2006. Serving with Eyes Wide Open. Baker.
Storti, Craig. 1999. Figuring foreigners out: A practical guide. Yarmouth, Main: Intercultural Press.
Grading:
Seven mini-projects worth 15% each = 90%
Class participation and attendance = 10%
A 95 – 100
A- 90 – 94.9
B+ 85 – 89.9
B 80 – 84.9
B- 75 – 79.5
Class Schedule:
Jan. 9 (Wed evening)
Course and Class Introduction
Jan. 14
Paper1 Hiebert: Parts 1 & 2 - Culture and the missionary
Jan. 21
Martin Luther King Holiday – No Class
Jan. 28
Paper 2. Hiebert: Parts 3 & 4 Becoming bicultural
Feb. 4
Paper 3. Livermore – Short term missions
Feb. 11
Paper 4. Barnett – Supporting missionaries
Feb 18
Paper 5. Maranz – More on money and missions
Feb 25
Paper 6. Stortie – Helping others become bicultural
Recommended websites for missions
Compass Direct http://www.compassdirect.org/
Reports on persecution in the church around the world.
Evangelical Missions Quarterly http://www.emqonline.org/
All the articles from the popular missions journal.
(Subscription required but recommended.)
Missions Help http://www.davidmays.org/
Practical help for missionaries and mission pastors. Book notes are excellent.
Dictionary of African Christian Biography http://www.dacb.org/
Life stories of African Christians – many written by Africans
Lausanne http://www.lausanne.org/
Committee for World Evangelization including Covenant & Manifesto
Mission Atlas Project http://www.worldmap.org/
Maps and data. Current situation in world missions.
Mission Finder http://www.missionfinder.org/
Click on resources for missionaries
Mislinks http://www.mislinks.org/
Directory of other links for missions including topics in missions
Mission Network News http://www.mnnonline.org/
Missions related news service
Operation World http://www.operationworld.org/
Daily prayer guide and information for world missions.
Strategic Network http://www.strategicnetwork.org/
Over 17,000 articles on missions. Good search capabilities
World Christian Database www.worldchristiandatabase.org/wcd
Statistical information but out by Gordon Conwell & Center for the Study of Global Christianity
World Fact Book www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html
Thursday, September 13, 2007
Announcing Book Title Contest
At the request of InterVaristy Press I have deleted chapters from the forthcoming book on leadership and culture.
Let's have a contest to give a title to the book. The present title has been criticized as being a bit blah: Leadership & Culture: Challenges for the Global Church.
Here are some of the names that have already been suggested. Feel free to give me more. (Keep checking this site for updates.)
1. From Great to Mediocre
2. The Secret of Mono-Cultural Leadership in One Easy Step
3. It Doesn't Take a Whole Village
4. Champagne for the Cross-Cultural Leader
5. Leading with the Right Side of the Brain
6. The World is Round
7. My One-Thousand-and-One Greatest Leadership Mistakes
8. The One-Hundred-and Thirty-Nine Habits of Highly Successful Cross-Cultural Leaders
9. Built to Collapse
10. Leadership for the Missional, Emergent, Post-Modern Missionary
11. Ten Easy Steps Toward Becoming a Servant Dictator
12. Leadership Secrets of Attila the Hun for Missionaries
As my wife reminds me, Keep Your Chins Up!
Jim Plueddemann
Let's have a contest to give a title to the book. The present title has been criticized as being a bit blah: Leadership & Culture: Challenges for the Global Church.
Here are some of the names that have already been suggested. Feel free to give me more. (Keep checking this site for updates.)
1. From Great to Mediocre
2. The Secret of Mono-Cultural Leadership in One Easy Step
3. It Doesn't Take a Whole Village
4. Champagne for the Cross-Cultural Leader
5. Leading with the Right Side of the Brain
6. The World is Round
7. My One-Thousand-and-One Greatest Leadership Mistakes
8. The One-Hundred-and Thirty-Nine Habits of Highly Successful Cross-Cultural Leaders
9. Built to Collapse
10. Leadership for the Missional, Emergent, Post-Modern Missionary
11. Ten Easy Steps Toward Becoming a Servant Dictator
12. Leadership Secrets of Attila the Hun for Missionaries
As my wife reminds me, Keep Your Chins Up!
Jim Plueddemann
Repositioning Missions for the 21st Century
We need a gracious revolution in our thinking about world missions. We are not likely to be effective in the next century by merely becoming more efficient within the old paradigms. Mission boards, churches, training schools, and mobilizing organizations need a new paradigm to guide their agenda. As I describe three common mission paradigms—Factory, Wildflower, and Pilgrim, each of which have influenced me at different times—I admit that, for the sake of clarity, I may be presenting extremes. In any case, I believe we must leave the first two paradigms behind and move on to become pilgrims in mission.
The Factory
The dominant assumptions underlying some contemporary missions are rooted in what I call the factory paradigm. The industrial revolution gave us this paradigm. The factory metaphor places a high value on precision, quantitative goals, predictability, efficiency, and control. It moves planners to set goals that can be easily measured. They want to know exactly what the final result will look like, when it will be accomplished, and how much it will cost.
Such a mind-set within the Christian community affects the way we look at the task,
strategies, leadership, and evaluation of mission. When we aim only at what can be measured,
we ignore the more important goals of character, discipleship, and holiness, which we cannot predict or quantify without falling into legalism. Factory thinking forces us to aim for goals that can be accomplished in a specific time frame. It inhibits vision for the qualitative development of people, of the church, and of society.
Fortunately, most factory-minded missiologists also have a genuine love for the Lord and a deep passion for the church, which produces qualities of character in people despite the inadequate aspects of the paradigm. But while the factory model has been helpful in defining the task, far too often lukewarm churches are the result of the assembly-line mind-set.
The Wildflower
In reaction to the factory model, the wildflower metaphor, a more intuitive paradigm, has gained strength. This model emphasizes personal experience, emotions, spiritual warfare, and inner healing. While the paradigm may provide a corrective to the factory model, I question the extent of its integration with biblical teaching, and I fear it may blindly build on contributions from existentialism and Freudianism. Wildflower missionaries often prefer a “go-with-the-flow” approach to missions; they are so embedded in the existential present that they have little time for future planning, or they may assume such thinking is unspiritual. If factory-oriented missionaries have their day planned in fifteen-minute intervals, wildflower missionaries seem to be blissfully unmindful of the calendar. One manages by objectives, the other by interruption. Wildflower missionaries have many strengths and bring spiritual vigor to missions because their flexibility and people orientation enhance their ministry. The danger is that they may lose the foundation of biblical Christianity, become inward looking and lack strategic planning for world outreach.
The Pilgrim
A better mental image is that of pilgrimage. Pilgrims have a visionary goal and a sense of direction, but they realize that the path often leads through rugged mountains and foggy swamps, bringing unexpected joys and sorrows. Pilgrims travel together, helping each other follow the map of the Word of God. Because pilgrims have a sense of direction, they are better able to decide if an event is an unfolding opportunity or a sidetrack interruption. Missionary pilgrims are not surprised by difficulty and ambiguity. They are motivated in their service by a vision of the kingdom.
><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
An Agenda for Revolution
We in missions need a gracious revolution as much as any mission, a revolution based on the pilgrim paradigm. Our direction can be outlined in the following twelve-point agenda.
1. Vision
The pilgrim missionary is driven by a vision of what God can do for people, for the church, and for society. Pilgrims invite lost people to join them on the road to Christ, involve them in a community of believers, and help them to become all God intends them to be. They challenge them to follow the map of the Word and to become lifelong obedient students of Jesus.
For the last ten years we have been conducting vision seminars in its candidate classes, leadership development courses, and field conferences. We also conduct regional vision consultations for missionaries and church leaders in South America, West Africa, East Africa, and Asia. When field directors report to the International Council (which meets every three years), they talk about their vision and the indications they see that the Lord is fulfilling that vision.
In all our efforts, while we encourage after-the-fact numbers to describe results, we focus on inner qualities that describe pilgrims marching toward a vision of the future. We ask, What difference does our ministry make in the lives of people, in society, and in the church? As we become ever more efficient and technologically competent at doing secondary things, I fear we might lose our vision for the work of Christ’s kingdom. Instead of church growth in mere numbers, we need a vision for a glorious church, without spot or wrinkle or any other blemish, holy and without fault. Instead of completing a precise task by a specific date, pilgrim missionaries have a dream of what people might look like if they enrolled as students in the lifelong school of discipleship and more consistently evidenced the fruit of the Spirit.
2. Strategy
It is not enough to have a vision. Strategic plans—action steps—are necessary. In a world of constant change and uncertainty, vision provides a foundation for pilgrim missionaries who dream of creative, innovative, and even audacious strategies. When missionaries unwittingly work from a factory paradigm, they are tempted to aim at programs or methods rather than eternal results. For example, the vision for a theological school should be more than to double the size of the library or build a new chapel. Vision foresees Christ-like qualities in students and the influence they will have on the church and society.
In each vision seminar during the last five years, we have discussed and planned action steps. A pastor’s library project, which provided about 20,000 small theological libraries and training sessions for pastors in Nigeria and South America, grew out of a vision for powerful preaching by better-equipped pastors. Out of a vision for the majestic Andes mountains ringing with the praises of redeemed Quechua grew a radio ministry for that people group. Out of a vision to reach upper-middle-class people of Lima, Peru, grew a Christian TV station. Out of a vision to reach Muslim beggar boys grew a friendship and feeding program.
3. Leadership
All pilgrims are called to be both leaders and followers in the body of Christ. The doctrines of the priesthood of all believers and of spiritual gifts mean that each pilgrim is responsible to lead by taking initiative to help others in the body of Christ. Since no person has all the gifts needed for the pilgrim band, there are times when all pilgrims need to follow other spiritually gifted pilgrims. There is often a need for a person to coordinate the gifts of other pilgrims. A coordinator does not take the place of Christ, the true Head, but has special abilities to maximize the effectiveness of other pilgrims. The most appropriate style for the pilgrim coordinator is team leadership. The pilgrim coordinator needs to be proactive, pushing the process of visionary thinking and action, while trusting the insights of others.
The primary focus of factory leaders is simply to use the person to accomplish the task. Task-oriented leaders tend to use a controlling style that stifles the development of people. Wildflower leaders seek to develop the person but often ignore the task. In contrast, the primary focus of pilgrim leaders is to use the task of world missions to develop other pilgrims.
4. Evaluation
Pilgrims use evaluation not to place blame for past failures or for boasting but rather to help colleagues do a better job next time. Many times the results of ministry are serendipitous—wonderful and unexpected. Thousands of people in a resistant people group decide to follow Christ. Revival breaks out in a Bible college. A women’s fellowship group in Africa catches the vision for supporting their own missionaries to a neighboring country. Evaluation in these cases is not to transfer to humans the credit that belongs to God alone but rather to rejoice in what God has done. Similarly, when results are discouraging, the purpose of evaluation is to figure out what might be done to improve the situation the next time, not to assign blame for failure.
SIM is in the process of changing ministry evaluation forms to focus on three questions: What was your situation? What was your vision? and What did you do to get there? We ask about indicators of results in the hearts of people and look for ways to improve the strategy in the coming months. Under the wildflower paradigm, evaluation tends to focus on how people feel about themselves; attention is concentrated on interpersonal relationships. Evaluation under the factory paradigm, in contrast, is often threatening because it measures specific outcomes in comparison to predetermined goals.
5. Evangelism
John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress illustrates that evangelism is a necessary—indeed urgent— step in helping pilgrims flee the City of Destruction, enter the gate of salvation, and leave their burden of sin at the cross of Christ. Although the global Christian community has grown rapidly over the last century, due to population growth, there are today more people outside the gate than ever before. As a result, evangelism is needed as never before. Evangelicals working from all three paradigms place a strong emphasis on evangelism. While factory-oriented missiologists have been somewhat mechanical in their approach, they have provided a most valuable service in pinpointing areas of need and drawing attention to unreached peoples. Missiologists working under the wildflower paradigm have helped to emphasize the joy of the Lord for new believers and have encouraged greater creativity in expressions of worship. SIM acknowledges its debt to these streams of mission influence and seeks to be faithful as pilgrims in evangelism.
Along with our related national churches, SIM regularly asks if there are unreached people groups in our areas of responsibility. A high percentage of our missionaries are working with unreached people groups, and we have recently entered some of the most needy areas of the world.
6. Discipleship and Church Growth
When Bunyan’s hero, Christian, flees the City of Destruction, enters the gate of salvation, and leaves his burden of sin at the cross, he is just beginning the next stage of the journey. Evangelism is a most necessary and crucial step, but it is not sufficient. The most urgent need in world missions is the task of helping pilgrims become disciples, learning to obey everything Jesus commanded. There may be as many as 1 billion lukewarm, nominal Christians in the world today. Transformed by Christ, these pilgrims could evangelize their world and flood the earth with justice. Rwanda, Congo, Liberia, Colombia, China, and the United States would become models of justice and peace. Racism, ethnocentrism, and poverty would end as people began to evidence the fruit of the Spirit in their communities.
Growth in grace and in the knowledge of Jesus is an inner, qualitative process that is difficult to predict, control, and measure. It does not fit the factory paradigm. But world evangelization by itself is not the fulfillment of Christ’s Commission. Christ commands us to make disciples who will obey everything he commanded. This is a lifelong process, not a precise task that can be finished by the year 2000 or any time before Christ returns. Church growth as defined by logarithmic graphs and ten-year projections has never been a New Testament ideal for a church.
7. Theological Education
Visionary theological educators see teaching as an opportunity for fellow pilgrims to spend time in what Bunyan called Interpreter’s House. Solid biblical content is taught to help pilgrims find the right path, discover resources to win spiritual battles, and catch the vision of the ultimate goal. Teaching Bible content is a means, not an end. The implicit curriculum for the pilgrim educator is the development of a caring community of disciples learning to obey all Jesus commanded. Wildflower educators often downplay the need for formal education or emphasize personal experience over theological reflection and biblical interpretation. Factory-oriented educators preoccupy themselves with behavioral objectives, test scores, and outward compliance with course requirements.
There are about 18,000 students in our related theological schools or extension programs. A high percentage of our missionaries are involved in pastoral education. We also have worked in a low-profile manner to help promote renewal in theological education. We have encouraged international accrediting in Africa and South America, promoted Theological Education by Extension, and helped to publish the writings of theologians from the Two-Thirds World. We have led seminars for theological educators from dozens of countries, urging a quiet revolution in theological education. But I am afraid that the factory paradigm is still common in our related theological education.
8. Meeting Human Need
Pilgrims are concerned about poverty, sickness, injustice, and hopelessness; the Holy Spirit helps them respond with love and practical action. Both factory- and wildflower-oriented missionaries also have a heart for helping people in need. The factory paradigm, however, tends to see the task in terms of doing things for people, like giving them pills, fertilizer, roads, and wells. It tends to measure results in terms of economic indicators, the number of schools, and so on. Wildflower-oriented ministries tend to give aid based on the emotions of the moment rather than on the long-range development of people in need. But all real development is human development—development that leads people to become all God intended for them.
Even though we can cite many failed efforts from our past, we hope we have been
learning from our mistakes. We support programs that involve people in their own development, such as People Oriented Development in Nigeria and the Niger Integrated Development team, and helping churches minister to the poorest of the poor, for example, in Guayaquil, Ecuador. It is most fulfilling to see the churches we helped to plant catch the vision for meeting human need through their own development projects.
9. Mission and National Church Relationships
Pilgrim missionaries have the task of planting and nurturing churches in other cultures, while
avoiding the temptation of trying to run them. Missionaries need to get out of leadership positions in national churches as soon as possible. Growing churches need to be self-supporting, self-governing, self-propagating, and self-nurturing. At the same time, however, we must confess that an “independent” church is an oxymoron. How can members of the universal body of Christ in one country be independent of the rest of the body? The ideal relationship is one in which the national church and the foreign mission work together in a loving, trusting, and interdependent relationship, each fulfilling complementary functions, neither dominating the other.
Missions working from a factory paradigm seldom see a loving, interdependent relationship as the goal. They are primarily interested in evangelism and precise time-specific targets. For example, they may say that when 20 percent of a people group have become Christians, then 95 percent of the missionaries need to be moved to a new field. Such a strategy may avoid some tensions of church-mission relationships, but it also misses the joy of cross-cultural discipleship and the excitement of partnering together to reach the rest of the world.
We at times has had problems with national church relationships. Sometimes we have held control too long and hindered the development of the national church. But there also have been times when we lost our identity as a cross-cultural mission and fused with the local church. This has meant losing our distinct function as a cross-cultural mission. Through channels such as Evangel Fellowship, which every two years brings together leaders from our related fields, we are endeavoring to develop healthy interdependent relationships.
10.Mission Church Relationships
The home-based sending churches and mission boards have an interdependent relationship. Each needs the other. It is not healthy for a sending church merely to send the missionary and the monthly support and not be involved in the care, encouragement, and prayer for that missionary. Likewise, it is difficult, inefficient, and usually ineffective for local churches to send isolated missionaries around the world. Mission boards provide not only logistic and spiritual support but also structures for field-based visionary planning and for accountability. For individual churches to send missionaries around the world would be like local towns sending their own soldiers into war and having the soldiers report back to the mayor of their home town rather than to the officer in the field. Such a plan not only would be more expensive, it would create chaos in the battle. Sending churches and mission boards are mutually dependent on each other.
Churches and mission boards with a factory paradigm have a more difficult time with an interdependent relationship. Factory-oriented mission boards have a passion for control and may feel threatened by local churches wanting to take more initiative. Factory-oriented church mission committees may feel threatened by the mission board and resent the fact that they use so much money for administration and don’t consult them for every strategic move on the field. The pilgrim paradigm is driven by vision and has a higher tolerance for the more ambiguous relationship of interdependence.
We are learning how to listen to sending churches. While the missionary is the primary
contact with supporting churches, we can learn much from listening to highly motivated mission pastors and committees. In the past two years, leaders have hosted significant meetings with missions pastors and laypeople from major missionary-supporting churches in five key cities. The purpose is not to indoctrinate them about our mission but to listen to their vision and problems and ask if there are things we can do to help them. Several major initiatives have resulted from these meetings.
11. Partnering with National Church Missions
A primary reason why a mission needs to continue a noncontrolling, interdependent discipling relationship with national churches is so we can partner together to reach places neither could reach on their own. The Gospel will be preached in all the world with much more power and credibility if it can be preached by Bolivians together with Australians and Nigerians. It is difficult for a Muslim to say that Christianity is a Western religion when he is hearing the Gospel from a team made up of missionaries from Japan, Canada, and Ethiopia. An ideal is for Christians from any country to be able to share the Gospel together in any other country.
The factory paradigm places a high value on efficiency and getting the most results for the least amount of money. Advertisements in major magazines like Christianity Today challenge churches to simply send their money to support national evangelists because it is cheaper or more efficient. While there may be situations where churches in more-developed countries should send money to support national evangelists, the process is loaded with danger. Seldom does the national church feel the responsibility to pick up the support of the evangelist when foreign funding is eventually cut off. Often the local evangelist does not feel accountable to the local church. Moreover, sending churches in the West do not get the blessing of sending their own daughters and sons to their “Judea, Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”
Our related churches in Nigeria and Ethiopia each have more than 1,000 cross-cultural missionaries, supported primarily by local churches.
12. Revival
Pilgrims need regular renewal. It seems that the normal tendency is for missionaries, supporting churches, and field churches to lose their way and fall into the Slough of Despond, to be tempted at Vanity Fair, chained in Doubting Castle, or captured by the Giant of Despair. We become discouraged and begin to fight with each other. Revival helps us to get back on the pilgrim path. Revival is not the ultimate goal for the church any more than getting back on the track is the ultimate destination of a derailed train. Without revival, however, we get stuck with all kinds of problems for a long time.
Factory-oriented churches either try to control revival or are afraid it will become too emotional. Wildflower churches may at times think that the emotional high of revival is the ultimate goal rather than a means for pilgrims to get back on the path of worship and service. Pilgrims seek daily revival as the Spirit uses the Word to challenge and correct those who stray from the path.
Since 1998 we set aside the ten days between Ascension and Pentecost for fasting, confession, and obedience to the Word. Guided by the model of revival in Nehemiah 9, we included confession, worship, prayer, and obedience. We used e-mail as the primary means of encouraging the mission family each day to continue to seek the Lord.
We now have four couples who travel around the mission world as international pastors. Many times the Lord brings renewal during the annual spiritual life conferences held on each field. Many have told me that they are praying daily for revival in our mission, in our supporting churches, and in the thousands of our related churches in Africa, Asia, and South America. May the Lord graciously give us profound times of refreshing and renewal.
What might happen if churches, missions, and schools would catch a vision for a gracious revolution in world missions? Could it be that the twentieth century, an amazing century of progress in missions, will be seen by historians as a mere prologue to the astounding growth of biblical Christianity in the twenty-first century? May it be so.
The Factory
The dominant assumptions underlying some contemporary missions are rooted in what I call the factory paradigm. The industrial revolution gave us this paradigm. The factory metaphor places a high value on precision, quantitative goals, predictability, efficiency, and control. It moves planners to set goals that can be easily measured. They want to know exactly what the final result will look like, when it will be accomplished, and how much it will cost.
Such a mind-set within the Christian community affects the way we look at the task,
strategies, leadership, and evaluation of mission. When we aim only at what can be measured,
we ignore the more important goals of character, discipleship, and holiness, which we cannot predict or quantify without falling into legalism. Factory thinking forces us to aim for goals that can be accomplished in a specific time frame. It inhibits vision for the qualitative development of people, of the church, and of society.
Fortunately, most factory-minded missiologists also have a genuine love for the Lord and a deep passion for the church, which produces qualities of character in people despite the inadequate aspects of the paradigm. But while the factory model has been helpful in defining the task, far too often lukewarm churches are the result of the assembly-line mind-set.
The Wildflower
In reaction to the factory model, the wildflower metaphor, a more intuitive paradigm, has gained strength. This model emphasizes personal experience, emotions, spiritual warfare, and inner healing. While the paradigm may provide a corrective to the factory model, I question the extent of its integration with biblical teaching, and I fear it may blindly build on contributions from existentialism and Freudianism. Wildflower missionaries often prefer a “go-with-the-flow” approach to missions; they are so embedded in the existential present that they have little time for future planning, or they may assume such thinking is unspiritual. If factory-oriented missionaries have their day planned in fifteen-minute intervals, wildflower missionaries seem to be blissfully unmindful of the calendar. One manages by objectives, the other by interruption. Wildflower missionaries have many strengths and bring spiritual vigor to missions because their flexibility and people orientation enhance their ministry. The danger is that they may lose the foundation of biblical Christianity, become inward looking and lack strategic planning for world outreach.
The Pilgrim
A better mental image is that of pilgrimage. Pilgrims have a visionary goal and a sense of direction, but they realize that the path often leads through rugged mountains and foggy swamps, bringing unexpected joys and sorrows. Pilgrims travel together, helping each other follow the map of the Word of God. Because pilgrims have a sense of direction, they are better able to decide if an event is an unfolding opportunity or a sidetrack interruption. Missionary pilgrims are not surprised by difficulty and ambiguity. They are motivated in their service by a vision of the kingdom.
><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
An Agenda for Revolution
We in missions need a gracious revolution as much as any mission, a revolution based on the pilgrim paradigm. Our direction can be outlined in the following twelve-point agenda.
1. Vision
The pilgrim missionary is driven by a vision of what God can do for people, for the church, and for society. Pilgrims invite lost people to join them on the road to Christ, involve them in a community of believers, and help them to become all God intends them to be. They challenge them to follow the map of the Word and to become lifelong obedient students of Jesus.
For the last ten years we have been conducting vision seminars in its candidate classes, leadership development courses, and field conferences. We also conduct regional vision consultations for missionaries and church leaders in South America, West Africa, East Africa, and Asia. When field directors report to the International Council (which meets every three years), they talk about their vision and the indications they see that the Lord is fulfilling that vision.
In all our efforts, while we encourage after-the-fact numbers to describe results, we focus on inner qualities that describe pilgrims marching toward a vision of the future. We ask, What difference does our ministry make in the lives of people, in society, and in the church? As we become ever more efficient and technologically competent at doing secondary things, I fear we might lose our vision for the work of Christ’s kingdom. Instead of church growth in mere numbers, we need a vision for a glorious church, without spot or wrinkle or any other blemish, holy and without fault. Instead of completing a precise task by a specific date, pilgrim missionaries have a dream of what people might look like if they enrolled as students in the lifelong school of discipleship and more consistently evidenced the fruit of the Spirit.
2. Strategy
It is not enough to have a vision. Strategic plans—action steps—are necessary. In a world of constant change and uncertainty, vision provides a foundation for pilgrim missionaries who dream of creative, innovative, and even audacious strategies. When missionaries unwittingly work from a factory paradigm, they are tempted to aim at programs or methods rather than eternal results. For example, the vision for a theological school should be more than to double the size of the library or build a new chapel. Vision foresees Christ-like qualities in students and the influence they will have on the church and society.
In each vision seminar during the last five years, we have discussed and planned action steps. A pastor’s library project, which provided about 20,000 small theological libraries and training sessions for pastors in Nigeria and South America, grew out of a vision for powerful preaching by better-equipped pastors. Out of a vision for the majestic Andes mountains ringing with the praises of redeemed Quechua grew a radio ministry for that people group. Out of a vision to reach upper-middle-class people of Lima, Peru, grew a Christian TV station. Out of a vision to reach Muslim beggar boys grew a friendship and feeding program.
3. Leadership
All pilgrims are called to be both leaders and followers in the body of Christ. The doctrines of the priesthood of all believers and of spiritual gifts mean that each pilgrim is responsible to lead by taking initiative to help others in the body of Christ. Since no person has all the gifts needed for the pilgrim band, there are times when all pilgrims need to follow other spiritually gifted pilgrims. There is often a need for a person to coordinate the gifts of other pilgrims. A coordinator does not take the place of Christ, the true Head, but has special abilities to maximize the effectiveness of other pilgrims. The most appropriate style for the pilgrim coordinator is team leadership. The pilgrim coordinator needs to be proactive, pushing the process of visionary thinking and action, while trusting the insights of others.
The primary focus of factory leaders is simply to use the person to accomplish the task. Task-oriented leaders tend to use a controlling style that stifles the development of people. Wildflower leaders seek to develop the person but often ignore the task. In contrast, the primary focus of pilgrim leaders is to use the task of world missions to develop other pilgrims.
4. Evaluation
Pilgrims use evaluation not to place blame for past failures or for boasting but rather to help colleagues do a better job next time. Many times the results of ministry are serendipitous—wonderful and unexpected. Thousands of people in a resistant people group decide to follow Christ. Revival breaks out in a Bible college. A women’s fellowship group in Africa catches the vision for supporting their own missionaries to a neighboring country. Evaluation in these cases is not to transfer to humans the credit that belongs to God alone but rather to rejoice in what God has done. Similarly, when results are discouraging, the purpose of evaluation is to figure out what might be done to improve the situation the next time, not to assign blame for failure.
SIM is in the process of changing ministry evaluation forms to focus on three questions: What was your situation? What was your vision? and What did you do to get there? We ask about indicators of results in the hearts of people and look for ways to improve the strategy in the coming months. Under the wildflower paradigm, evaluation tends to focus on how people feel about themselves; attention is concentrated on interpersonal relationships. Evaluation under the factory paradigm, in contrast, is often threatening because it measures specific outcomes in comparison to predetermined goals.
5. Evangelism
John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress illustrates that evangelism is a necessary—indeed urgent— step in helping pilgrims flee the City of Destruction, enter the gate of salvation, and leave their burden of sin at the cross of Christ. Although the global Christian community has grown rapidly over the last century, due to population growth, there are today more people outside the gate than ever before. As a result, evangelism is needed as never before. Evangelicals working from all three paradigms place a strong emphasis on evangelism. While factory-oriented missiologists have been somewhat mechanical in their approach, they have provided a most valuable service in pinpointing areas of need and drawing attention to unreached peoples. Missiologists working under the wildflower paradigm have helped to emphasize the joy of the Lord for new believers and have encouraged greater creativity in expressions of worship. SIM acknowledges its debt to these streams of mission influence and seeks to be faithful as pilgrims in evangelism.
Along with our related national churches, SIM regularly asks if there are unreached people groups in our areas of responsibility. A high percentage of our missionaries are working with unreached people groups, and we have recently entered some of the most needy areas of the world.
6. Discipleship and Church Growth
When Bunyan’s hero, Christian, flees the City of Destruction, enters the gate of salvation, and leaves his burden of sin at the cross, he is just beginning the next stage of the journey. Evangelism is a most necessary and crucial step, but it is not sufficient. The most urgent need in world missions is the task of helping pilgrims become disciples, learning to obey everything Jesus commanded. There may be as many as 1 billion lukewarm, nominal Christians in the world today. Transformed by Christ, these pilgrims could evangelize their world and flood the earth with justice. Rwanda, Congo, Liberia, Colombia, China, and the United States would become models of justice and peace. Racism, ethnocentrism, and poverty would end as people began to evidence the fruit of the Spirit in their communities.
Growth in grace and in the knowledge of Jesus is an inner, qualitative process that is difficult to predict, control, and measure. It does not fit the factory paradigm. But world evangelization by itself is not the fulfillment of Christ’s Commission. Christ commands us to make disciples who will obey everything he commanded. This is a lifelong process, not a precise task that can be finished by the year 2000 or any time before Christ returns. Church growth as defined by logarithmic graphs and ten-year projections has never been a New Testament ideal for a church.
7. Theological Education
Visionary theological educators see teaching as an opportunity for fellow pilgrims to spend time in what Bunyan called Interpreter’s House. Solid biblical content is taught to help pilgrims find the right path, discover resources to win spiritual battles, and catch the vision of the ultimate goal. Teaching Bible content is a means, not an end. The implicit curriculum for the pilgrim educator is the development of a caring community of disciples learning to obey all Jesus commanded. Wildflower educators often downplay the need for formal education or emphasize personal experience over theological reflection and biblical interpretation. Factory-oriented educators preoccupy themselves with behavioral objectives, test scores, and outward compliance with course requirements.
There are about 18,000 students in our related theological schools or extension programs. A high percentage of our missionaries are involved in pastoral education. We also have worked in a low-profile manner to help promote renewal in theological education. We have encouraged international accrediting in Africa and South America, promoted Theological Education by Extension, and helped to publish the writings of theologians from the Two-Thirds World. We have led seminars for theological educators from dozens of countries, urging a quiet revolution in theological education. But I am afraid that the factory paradigm is still common in our related theological education.
8. Meeting Human Need
Pilgrims are concerned about poverty, sickness, injustice, and hopelessness; the Holy Spirit helps them respond with love and practical action. Both factory- and wildflower-oriented missionaries also have a heart for helping people in need. The factory paradigm, however, tends to see the task in terms of doing things for people, like giving them pills, fertilizer, roads, and wells. It tends to measure results in terms of economic indicators, the number of schools, and so on. Wildflower-oriented ministries tend to give aid based on the emotions of the moment rather than on the long-range development of people in need. But all real development is human development—development that leads people to become all God intended for them.
Even though we can cite many failed efforts from our past, we hope we have been
learning from our mistakes. We support programs that involve people in their own development, such as People Oriented Development in Nigeria and the Niger Integrated Development team, and helping churches minister to the poorest of the poor, for example, in Guayaquil, Ecuador. It is most fulfilling to see the churches we helped to plant catch the vision for meeting human need through their own development projects.
9. Mission and National Church Relationships
Pilgrim missionaries have the task of planting and nurturing churches in other cultures, while
avoiding the temptation of trying to run them. Missionaries need to get out of leadership positions in national churches as soon as possible. Growing churches need to be self-supporting, self-governing, self-propagating, and self-nurturing. At the same time, however, we must confess that an “independent” church is an oxymoron. How can members of the universal body of Christ in one country be independent of the rest of the body? The ideal relationship is one in which the national church and the foreign mission work together in a loving, trusting, and interdependent relationship, each fulfilling complementary functions, neither dominating the other.
Missions working from a factory paradigm seldom see a loving, interdependent relationship as the goal. They are primarily interested in evangelism and precise time-specific targets. For example, they may say that when 20 percent of a people group have become Christians, then 95 percent of the missionaries need to be moved to a new field. Such a strategy may avoid some tensions of church-mission relationships, but it also misses the joy of cross-cultural discipleship and the excitement of partnering together to reach the rest of the world.
We at times has had problems with national church relationships. Sometimes we have held control too long and hindered the development of the national church. But there also have been times when we lost our identity as a cross-cultural mission and fused with the local church. This has meant losing our distinct function as a cross-cultural mission. Through channels such as Evangel Fellowship, which every two years brings together leaders from our related fields, we are endeavoring to develop healthy interdependent relationships.
10.Mission Church Relationships
The home-based sending churches and mission boards have an interdependent relationship. Each needs the other. It is not healthy for a sending church merely to send the missionary and the monthly support and not be involved in the care, encouragement, and prayer for that missionary. Likewise, it is difficult, inefficient, and usually ineffective for local churches to send isolated missionaries around the world. Mission boards provide not only logistic and spiritual support but also structures for field-based visionary planning and for accountability. For individual churches to send missionaries around the world would be like local towns sending their own soldiers into war and having the soldiers report back to the mayor of their home town rather than to the officer in the field. Such a plan not only would be more expensive, it would create chaos in the battle. Sending churches and mission boards are mutually dependent on each other.
Churches and mission boards with a factory paradigm have a more difficult time with an interdependent relationship. Factory-oriented mission boards have a passion for control and may feel threatened by local churches wanting to take more initiative. Factory-oriented church mission committees may feel threatened by the mission board and resent the fact that they use so much money for administration and don’t consult them for every strategic move on the field. The pilgrim paradigm is driven by vision and has a higher tolerance for the more ambiguous relationship of interdependence.
We are learning how to listen to sending churches. While the missionary is the primary
contact with supporting churches, we can learn much from listening to highly motivated mission pastors and committees. In the past two years, leaders have hosted significant meetings with missions pastors and laypeople from major missionary-supporting churches in five key cities. The purpose is not to indoctrinate them about our mission but to listen to their vision and problems and ask if there are things we can do to help them. Several major initiatives have resulted from these meetings.
11. Partnering with National Church Missions
A primary reason why a mission needs to continue a noncontrolling, interdependent discipling relationship with national churches is so we can partner together to reach places neither could reach on their own. The Gospel will be preached in all the world with much more power and credibility if it can be preached by Bolivians together with Australians and Nigerians. It is difficult for a Muslim to say that Christianity is a Western religion when he is hearing the Gospel from a team made up of missionaries from Japan, Canada, and Ethiopia. An ideal is for Christians from any country to be able to share the Gospel together in any other country.
The factory paradigm places a high value on efficiency and getting the most results for the least amount of money. Advertisements in major magazines like Christianity Today challenge churches to simply send their money to support national evangelists because it is cheaper or more efficient. While there may be situations where churches in more-developed countries should send money to support national evangelists, the process is loaded with danger. Seldom does the national church feel the responsibility to pick up the support of the evangelist when foreign funding is eventually cut off. Often the local evangelist does not feel accountable to the local church. Moreover, sending churches in the West do not get the blessing of sending their own daughters and sons to their “Judea, Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”
Our related churches in Nigeria and Ethiopia each have more than 1,000 cross-cultural missionaries, supported primarily by local churches.
12. Revival
Pilgrims need regular renewal. It seems that the normal tendency is for missionaries, supporting churches, and field churches to lose their way and fall into the Slough of Despond, to be tempted at Vanity Fair, chained in Doubting Castle, or captured by the Giant of Despair. We become discouraged and begin to fight with each other. Revival helps us to get back on the pilgrim path. Revival is not the ultimate goal for the church any more than getting back on the track is the ultimate destination of a derailed train. Without revival, however, we get stuck with all kinds of problems for a long time.
Factory-oriented churches either try to control revival or are afraid it will become too emotional. Wildflower churches may at times think that the emotional high of revival is the ultimate goal rather than a means for pilgrims to get back on the path of worship and service. Pilgrims seek daily revival as the Spirit uses the Word to challenge and correct those who stray from the path.
Since 1998 we set aside the ten days between Ascension and Pentecost for fasting, confession, and obedience to the Word. Guided by the model of revival in Nehemiah 9, we included confession, worship, prayer, and obedience. We used e-mail as the primary means of encouraging the mission family each day to continue to seek the Lord.
We now have four couples who travel around the mission world as international pastors. Many times the Lord brings renewal during the annual spiritual life conferences held on each field. Many have told me that they are praying daily for revival in our mission, in our supporting churches, and in the thousands of our related churches in Africa, Asia, and South America. May the Lord graciously give us profound times of refreshing and renewal.
What might happen if churches, missions, and schools would catch a vision for a gracious revolution in world missions? Could it be that the twentieth century, an amazing century of progress in missions, will be seen by historians as a mere prologue to the astounding growth of biblical Christianity in the twenty-first century? May it be so.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Agenda for A Quiet Revolution in Christian Education [1]
The field of Christian Education by its very nature needs renewal in each generation. Because we are involved in the ongoing process of helping to mature believers, we are always only one generation away from extinction. It is easy, and maybe natural, for Christian educators to lose the vision of the previous generation, and to merely perpetuate the mechanics of programming. Rather than being motivated by the driving force of our movement's founders, we are often motivated by a need for mere survival. In each generation we must seek to rekindle the fire and vision of those who have gone before us.
In some ways we are facing a crisis today as great as or greater than ever before. Anti-Christian values are more obvious in society. Families are facing pressures greater than could have been imagined 50 years ago. Missions have been very successful in the last half-century, but now much of the church around the world is facing a second-generation lukewarmness. Nominal Christianity in many of the developing nations is growing at an astounding rate.
Meanwhile, the field of Christian education is again becoming stagnant. Today we seem to be enamored with a mechanistic view of ministry -- or else we move to the opposite extreme and "buy into" a romantic intuitive view. The Christian education pendulum swings back and forth between an agenda that on one hand stresses efficiency in depositing information into the head of the learner, and an agenda which on the other hand merely stimulates people to contemplate their proverbial navels.
The church around the world is facing the age-old crisis of nominalism while the field of Christian education is again urgently in need of renewal. We must rethink both our theory and practice. This is not to say that there are not healthy signs of renewal in many of our organizations, but we can all benefit from a rekindling of our vision.
Renewal Is Difficult But Not Impossible
We err when we think that renewal in Christian education will be simple. But we also err when we think it is impossible.
Often we are tempted to think that renewal in Christian education can be brought about by adding more efficiency to our method or by instituting better planning. Sometimes we seem to assume that if we can learn to control the environment a bit more efficiently, we can program the Holy Spirit and organize the universe.
Even if we could achieve perfect curricula, programs, structures, methods, and teachers we would never be able to guarantee Christian growth. Thus, it is naive to think that we can bring about renewal by demolishing the Sunday School, by incorporating computers, or by using more creative teaching techniques. neither can we guarantee success by merely encouraging more fellowship and sharing.
Renewal in Christian education seldom comes through long-range planning. It has most often come through men and women of vision, faith, and action who were able to inspire others. If the process of Christian growth is impossible to pre-determine, then it is impossible to set a time-table for our agenda. Our agenda for renewal is not to figure out a better system. Our agenda must be to stimulate vision and action in men and women of faith.
It would be easy to conclude that renewal in Christian education is impossible. When we study the history of God's people from Adam and Eve to the present we see a frightening pattern of rebellion and refusal to grow in grace. Jesus found it much easier to raise the dead and walk on water than to promote faith in his disciples -- and how many of us can even walk on water? The story of the children of Israel is a case study in the difficulty of promoting spiritual growth. God had much less trouble getting the people out of Egypt than he did in getting Egypt out of the people. The prophets were frustrated with the ongoing problem of rebellion and idolatry in the children of God. Even with the teaching and modeling of the apostles, the power of sin was still strong in the hearts and actions of the early Christians. For some reason, God chooses not to force spiritual growth in his people, even though he has perfect control over all the curriculum factors.
Yes, it would be easy to think that the task of renewing Christian education is impossible, and in one sense it is. Yet in another important sense, it is irresponsible for us to think that we cannot work to rekindle our vision and renew ministry. We have supernatural resources. Throughout history there have been examples of people who have sought God, prayed, and through the power of the Word and the Spirit have brought about a revolution in ministry. Renewal is possible only through the grace of God, but that grace is real and is greater than all our sins. Renewal is both necessary and possible.
Hopeful Signs
There are already hopeful signs of renewal in the field of Christian education. Hundreds of dedicated youth directors are spending thousands of hours discipling youth and are using creative methods to stimulate growth. Summer missions projects are stirring up a new sense of commitment to the Lord and to ministry. The Christian camping movement is challenging youth to a deeper commitment to Christ. Seminaries are producing hundreds of graduates each year who have basic Christian education skills and a heart for ministry. Christian radio and television ministries seek to strengthen the home and the church. Topical seminars and films are meeting needs of struggling Christians. Para-church organizations are continuing effective ministries which play an important part in bringing renewal. Christian education publishing houses are producing innovative curriculum to further stimulate the educational work of the local church. Missionaries are becoming more aware of the need for understanding the cross-cultural implications of Christian education principles. Third-world church are taking advanced degrees in Christian education and related fields.
The Need For Renewal
Yet as I talk to Christian education leaders in seminaries, publishing houses, and para-church organizations, I sense discouragement, dissatisfaction and a hunger for renewal. Too often we merely go through the motions to keep out organization from collapsing. Survival or profitability, rather then significance, have too often become our chief concerns. While there are signs or renewal in Christian education, the general pattern is not encouraging.
As I suggest an agenda for renewing Christian education, I do so not as a distant critic, but as a fellow struggler. An agenda is not intended to be a final statement, but a guide for dialogue. Both the agenda itself and the implications of the agenda are intended to stimulate discussion and debate. I encourage disagreement and trust that you will help me to see the agenda more clearly.
Agenda Item #1:
We Must Cooperate.
Most of our organizations represent centers of influence in Christian education. One organization may be seeking renewal yet be frustrated by lack of support from other organizations. We tend to blame other centers of influence for not doing their part. Church may blame seminaries for not producing youth ministers with practical skills, and seminaries may blame publishing houses for not being more innovative. Publishing houses say they can't sell innovative curricula to traditionally minded churches. Creative directors of Christian education say they will get fired if they don't do what the management-minded local church Christian educational committee wants them to. The need for renewal in one center of influence calls for renewal in another centers.
Many adult Sunday school are merely providing a dull second sermon. Christian education directors may jump from one curriculum fad to another while unaware of basic questions.
Christian education in the home has been emphasized, but does not yet seem to be having much effect in helping with the problems of marriage and parenting. Parents are not finding answers and are becoming more desperate. Deep problems in the home carry over to the church and make it difficult to renew the Sunday school. Likewise, problems in the Sunday school make it difficult to renew Christian education in the home.
Publishing houses are often frustrated in their desire to improve curriculum. They know that local churches will not buy anything too different. Knowing that teachers are volunteers, and knowing they will most likely spend less than 20 minutes preparing the lesson, they give step-by-step formulas to the teacher. Such formulas make it more difficult for a teacher to adapt a lesson for the specific needs of the students. Students get bored, teachers resign in disappointment and the superintendent madly rushes to coerce another unsuspecting teacher into the cycle.
Pressure is put on academic departments of Christian education to attract more students. We compete with each other in trying to "sell" our degree as being the easiest to earn, the cheapest of the most practical course of study. Sometimes we achieve this by requiring students to do less theoretical and scholarly reflection. We are often subtly pressured to give students easy, "cook book" answers to complex problems and to give them a "bag of tricks" called teaching methods. We in the academic study of Christian education are not being encouraged to rethink our philosophical and theoretical assumptions. On the other hand, some Christian educators involved in scholarly reflection do not test and revise their theories by attempting to improve the practice of Christian education. Too often there is an antagonism between scholars and practitioners of Christian education. This antagonism leads to an isolated, ivory tower scholarship that results in poor theory, or else it leads to an uncritical acceptance of methods that results in poor practice.
No single center of influence will be able to bring about renewal. If we are to bring about renewal in Christian education, we must work together. Individual seminaries, publishers, para-church organizations, denomination and local churches will not be able to bring about a renewal. Christian education centers of influence re-enforce each other in promoting or hindering renewal. Yet our moral tendency is to compete with each other and to blame each other for failure in the church or the home, rather than to cooperate in strategizing for renewal.
Many of us are tired of shallow gimmicks and of organizational competition. In spite of the overt success of some of our churches and organizations, many insiders have the growing suspicion that the field of evangelical Christian education is again stagnant and in need of renewal. While we are bogged down with internal struggles, families are falling apart, individuals are faltering in their growth toward maturity in Christ, and churches are becoming lukewarm. The urgency of the task demands not primarily survival, but significance. Our task is to foster the maturity of individuals and the Church. This task should be our top priority.
Agenda Item #2:
We Must Re-Evaluate Out Purposes.
(BOX A)
Renewal in Christian education will not be possible until we re-evaluate the ultimate purposes of our organizations. What is the ultimate purpose of Christian education? The problem among evangelicals is not that we are unable to answer the question. We would most likely answer that the chief purpose of our organization is to glorify God. But we tend to answer as if this were a catechism question. We might say the right words but we are not sure of their significance. We say we believe that our purpose is to glorify God, but seldom understand the implications of such a statement for our ministry. Our stated purpose is seldom our actual purpose.
If we really believe that the ultimate purpose of Christian education is to glorify God, then our ultimate purpose must not be Bible knowledge, organizational survival, human development, or even church growth. All of these are means to a greater end. If they become ends, they become idols. Teaching the Bible, developing programs, building relationships and showing concern for the poor are good, but in themselves they do not automatically contribute to the glory of God. When they become ultimate ends, the educational process becomes unbalanced and less than biblical.
I fear that in actual practice, most of our organizations make idols out of means. We must re-evaluate our ultimate purposes.
Agenda Item #3:
We Must Re-Evaluate Our Motivation For Ministry.
Our real ultimate purpose, in contrast to our stated ultimate purpose, also controls our motivation, or our moral reasoning. Even good actions can reflect low levels of moral reasoning. God is concerned not only with what we do, but also with our motives. People look on outward behavior, but God is more interested in the heart. Eating and drinking can be either good or evil, but whether we eat or drink or whatever we do, we must do it for the highest levels of principled morality for the glory of God.
Schools, churches, para-church organizations, denominational structures and publishing houses must operate at some level of moral reasoning. If the level of moral reasoning is to glorify individuals, or the organization, or even the Church, then the activities and results of the organization will not contribute to renewal. Our programs will reflect our level of moral reasoning, or our motives for ministry. If we could make the glory of God our actual purpose rather than an afterthought tacked on to organizational purpose statements, we would be much more willing to cooperate with each other, would have a deeper sense of personal satisfaction in our ministry, and we would rekindle the vision for renewing the field of Christian education.
I fear that in our day-to-day activities, our real motivation is seldom to bring glory to God.
Agenda Item #4:
We Must Study More Thoroughly The Nature Of Human Development.
(Box B)
In order to bring about renewal in Christian Education we must do more to study the nature of people and how they develop. Our current emphasis is inadequate. We learn about the nature of persons through special revelation in Scripture and through natural revelation. We believe that Scripture is the ultimate authority, but that God wrote the book of nature as well. The two sources are complimentary, even when they at times may seem to contradict each other.
Our first source of information about the nature of persons is special revelation. In order for us to understand the nature of persons, we need to understand the nature of God. As Christian educators we need to study theology more deeply. But again, it is not enough to know "correct" answers regarding the nature of persons. We must integrate this information into the theory and practice of Christian education. We believe that God created people in His image, yet our educational methodologies often treat people as if they were machines or animals. Other educational strategies (even those used by evangelicals) tend unconsciously to ignore the Fall and the fact that people are basically selfish and depraved. We have lost something of the image of God and thus we cannot bring about Christian growth by means of our own internal resources. We are tempted to think that we can "educate" or socialize people into the Kingdom. Even we evangelicals are tempted to think that if we can somehow get rid of poverty and injustice people will be whole. We must struggle more fully with the educational implications of our theological understanding of the nature of persons.
The second source of information regarding the nature of persons is empirical observation. Christian education at Wheaton has always studied the nature of persons. Twenty-five years ago when I was a student here, we studied age-group characteristics based on the findings of Gesell and others. We charted characteristics and implications for the practice of ministry. A sensitivity to such research helped us realize that our task was not just to teach the Bible, but to teach it to real people with specific interests and abilities.
But evangelical Christian education has been slow to catch on to the significance of newer bodies of research about nature of persons. As the LeBars learned much about the nature of persons from research in their time, we today will have much to learn about the process of human development from more recent research.
We should take the initiative in conducting research in human development. The more we can discover about how God intended people to grow, the more insights we will gain for promoting that growth. we are not doing enough serious research about human development and about the variables that promote or hinder development. Research questions should be generated from our understanding of both theology and social science. Solid theoretical research has many practical applications. Such findings are broadly generalizable and are thus useful in many more situations, including inner-city and non-western cultures. Theoretical research will help us to answer not only, "What kinds of programs work?", but more importantly, we will begin to address, "Why does it work?" and "How can we do it better?" For example, what factors in the Christian home promote or hinder internal faith convictions? What is the relationship between moral reasoning and Sunday school teaching styles? Research is crucial in helping us to understand the nature of people and the factors that promote the kind of development intended by God.
Christian educators have often been slow to see the value of theoretical research. Such research does not seem "practical," at least not for the pastor urgently seeking ideas for setting up a personal filing system. Theoretical research in human development does not seem practical for the Sunday School teacher trying to find techniques to make flannel-graph stick to the board.
Seminaries and Bible colleges have a professional orientation and do not claim to be strong research institutions. It is appropriate for them to generate practical projects rather than to conduct correlational or quasi-experimental research. But solid research must be done within the Christian liberal arts context.
All social science research builds on philosophical assumptions. Our research must be built on our theological and philosophical assumptions. For example, the recent research in faith development is an example of interesting and important research that is flawed by poor theological assumptions. But who is doing such research from an evangelical framework?
Para-church organizations and publishing houses are learning the value of market research. Such research is valuable, but it does not go far enough. We need to know not only which curriculum is most likely to be bought by churches, but also need to investigate the relationship between curriculum and spiritual growth. We need to go beyond asking, "which colors attract buyers?" to "what is happening in the lives of students and teachers as a result of the curriculum?"
If our ultimate purpose in Christian education is to help others to more fully glorify God, then we need a deeper commitment to discovering how God intended people to grow toward that purpose. We will never fully understand the secrets of human development, but a deeper understanding of God-ordained human development is a necessary precondition for re-thinking aims and means in Christian education. Apart from this kind of research we will be tempted to adopt methods without reflecting on their implications for promoting or hindering Christian growth.
I challenge us to do more research from a theological and theoretical perspective, to learn more about human development. We need to take the initiative in this research, to the glory of God.
Agenda Item #5:
We Must Reconsider The Aims Of Christian Education.
(Box C)
We will not be able to renew Christian education if we continue with inadequate aims. Our aims for Christian education must be generated from our understanding of ultimate purpose, and from our understanding of the nature of persons. Our ultimate purpose is to glorify God in what we do and why we do it. Basic to understanding the nature of persons is knowing that we are created in the image of God, yet we are fallen. In our fallen state we do not glorify God. Thus we need new birth and God-ordained development. Such development is both natural and supernatural. Growing out of these understandings, our aim must be to promote the kind of growth which will enable us to more fully glorify God.
The greatest need of the human race is to regain the completeness of the image of God which was lost in the Fall. The reason we are not able to glorify God in all that we think and do is because we have been children of the Devil. Christ died and rose again in order for us to be restored. We must be born again into God's family. Then we need to grow more and more into the likeness of Christ. This is the aim of Christian education -- to be born into God's family and to mature toward the likeness of Christ. Our aim is to promote natural and supernatural growth. Yet, we know that we shall not be like Him until we see Him as He is. In some sense, then, we can never fully achieve the aim of Christian education this side of heaven.
Growth is an inner, active and continuous process. Yet too often Christian educators understand the aim not as an inner process, but as promoting outward behavioral character traits. Often our aim is merely to impart bodies of information. Fads in teacher education tempt Christian educators to aim at pre-determined behavioral objectives. Secular trends in educational measurement tempt Christian educators to aim for measurable and quantifiable results. But our measurements are only of religious behavior or religiosity, rather than inner "heart development." Since we are able to observe and quantify much educational activity, and since we feel our aims must be measurable, our unconscious aim becomes educational activity rather than inner, active and continuous growth toward becoming all God intends us to become. Outward behavior is not a guarantee of inner spiritual growth. (In spite of what my mother taught me, cleanliness is not an indication of godliness.) People with polite character traits are not necessarily godly people. Some of the most evil people throughout history have been knowledgeable of the Bible. Satan probably would have no trouble getting a perfect score on our Bible diagnostic exams.
To be sure, outward behavior must change as we become more Christ-like. But such behavior is an indication of heart development, and is not an aim. When the indicator, or outward, behavior becomes an aim, we are really teaching people to become pharisaical.
On the other hand, some Christian educators are reacting so strongly against behavioristic aims that they say aims are not necessary at all. Some say we should just teach the Bible and let the Holy Spirit determine aims for the learner. Yet Scripture does give us aims.
Aims are not end points, but directions. We can never check off the list of the fruit of the Spirit as something finally accomplished. We can never fully say we have accomplished love, so now it is time for us to get to work on joy, and next year peace, and maybe before I die I'll get to self-control. Growth in grace is never fully achieved in this life, but it does give us an aim or a direction. Faith, hope and love do not evidence themselves in pre-determined and fully predicted behaviors. Our aim must be to promote a process rather than to predict a product. That process is growth -- both natural and spiritual growth.
God has given the human teacher a part to play in promoting growth, yet he or she is responsible for only a part of the process. Although Bible knowledge is important. But Lois LeBar taught that the Bible is a means for promoting growth and is not an end. Our greatest danger in Christian education is that we make the means the end. The result will be merely external or "outer" development. Is it any wonder that most of our efforts in Christian education do not produce "inner" results.
The aim of the teacher, then, is to stimulate conditions which are most likely to foster the process of growth.
It may be appropriate for our organizations or businesses to have pre-determined objectives and measurable standards. But we should not confuse organizational aims with educational aims of ministry.
I fear that we carry over our understanding of management objectives to the task of Christian education, which is primarily an inner process. Such a management philosophy in Christian education will produce hypocrisy rather than spiritual growth. If we see the aim as a product, we still aim for knowledge, skills, habits or character traits, all of which may or may not be an indication of true inner development. A product understanding of aims may be the reason why nominal and lukewarm Christianity is growing so rapidly in our evangelical churches.
In order to renew Christian education we must rethink our aim. The aim to foster the God-ordained process of development.
Agenda Item #6:
We Must Rethink Our Methods.
(Box D)
If the aim of Christian education is to foster a process, then the means for promoting the process is of utmost importance. In a certain sense, fostering the means for promoting the process becomes the aim.
Learning is an inner, active, continuous and disciplined process. Thus, we should begin with the felt needs of learners rather than from the theoretical knowledge of Scripture. The Bible is a means for promoting maturity in Christ and was not intended by God to be an end in itself. Such thinking is radical. Christian education methods are still too often characterized by tactics which intend the learner to be passive. Our methods are so dependent on external motivation and external behavior that we may actually hinder inner growth in grace. Too often we seek to control outer behavior rather than to compel active reflection. We use gimmicks to get the attention of the student, but such gimmicks seldom lead to an inner sense of need.
We must begin with the felt needs and experiences of the learner. We must then help the learner to see his or her own experience in light of the authoritative Word of God. When we compare Scripture with experience, we sense disequilibration. Such disequilibration can be used by the Holy Spirit to convict us and motivate us to put our experience and life more into submission or equilibration with Scripture. The process is often best done in a community of learners. The job of the teacher is the Word, the Spirit and the body of believers. The essence of interaction must compel thinking and action in the learner, relating experience to the Bible.
Methods based on technology have only limited potential. Technology can be useful for transmitting information, but usually by itself, does little to foster the process of critical reflection and action in the learner.
Neither are romantic teaching methods sufficient. such methods tend to focus only on experience, without stimulating reflection on content.
Social learning theory provides an inadequate model for method. Scripture must be free to critique society. Modeling by itself is not a good method for stimulating critical reflection between Scripture and experience.
Methodology in Christian education is in need of renewal. Too often we accept methods merely because they seem creative, make us feel good, or seem to be "at the cutting edge" of technology. We must rethink our educational methods.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I fear for the Church around the world. Almost everywhere the Church is plagued by apathy. Half-hearted Christianity is becoming a dangerous epidemic. There's a war going on! The Church is in trouble, and we Christian educators, who can provide resources for the battle, are ourselves complacent and in need of renewal. We must seriously rethink our purposes, our motives, our understanding of persons, our aims and our methods. We must move beyond our narrow organizational horizons and rekindle this strategic vision. Discussing the agenda must be only the first step.
[1] Adapted from a talk given May 22, 1988 for the celebration of the Price - LeBar Endowed Chair in Christian Education at Wheaton College
In some ways we are facing a crisis today as great as or greater than ever before. Anti-Christian values are more obvious in society. Families are facing pressures greater than could have been imagined 50 years ago. Missions have been very successful in the last half-century, but now much of the church around the world is facing a second-generation lukewarmness. Nominal Christianity in many of the developing nations is growing at an astounding rate.
Meanwhile, the field of Christian education is again becoming stagnant. Today we seem to be enamored with a mechanistic view of ministry -- or else we move to the opposite extreme and "buy into" a romantic intuitive view. The Christian education pendulum swings back and forth between an agenda that on one hand stresses efficiency in depositing information into the head of the learner, and an agenda which on the other hand merely stimulates people to contemplate their proverbial navels.
The church around the world is facing the age-old crisis of nominalism while the field of Christian education is again urgently in need of renewal. We must rethink both our theory and practice. This is not to say that there are not healthy signs of renewal in many of our organizations, but we can all benefit from a rekindling of our vision.
Renewal Is Difficult But Not Impossible
We err when we think that renewal in Christian education will be simple. But we also err when we think it is impossible.
Often we are tempted to think that renewal in Christian education can be brought about by adding more efficiency to our method or by instituting better planning. Sometimes we seem to assume that if we can learn to control the environment a bit more efficiently, we can program the Holy Spirit and organize the universe.
Even if we could achieve perfect curricula, programs, structures, methods, and teachers we would never be able to guarantee Christian growth. Thus, it is naive to think that we can bring about renewal by demolishing the Sunday School, by incorporating computers, or by using more creative teaching techniques. neither can we guarantee success by merely encouraging more fellowship and sharing.
Renewal in Christian education seldom comes through long-range planning. It has most often come through men and women of vision, faith, and action who were able to inspire others. If the process of Christian growth is impossible to pre-determine, then it is impossible to set a time-table for our agenda. Our agenda for renewal is not to figure out a better system. Our agenda must be to stimulate vision and action in men and women of faith.
It would be easy to conclude that renewal in Christian education is impossible. When we study the history of God's people from Adam and Eve to the present we see a frightening pattern of rebellion and refusal to grow in grace. Jesus found it much easier to raise the dead and walk on water than to promote faith in his disciples -- and how many of us can even walk on water? The story of the children of Israel is a case study in the difficulty of promoting spiritual growth. God had much less trouble getting the people out of Egypt than he did in getting Egypt out of the people. The prophets were frustrated with the ongoing problem of rebellion and idolatry in the children of God. Even with the teaching and modeling of the apostles, the power of sin was still strong in the hearts and actions of the early Christians. For some reason, God chooses not to force spiritual growth in his people, even though he has perfect control over all the curriculum factors.
Yes, it would be easy to think that the task of renewing Christian education is impossible, and in one sense it is. Yet in another important sense, it is irresponsible for us to think that we cannot work to rekindle our vision and renew ministry. We have supernatural resources. Throughout history there have been examples of people who have sought God, prayed, and through the power of the Word and the Spirit have brought about a revolution in ministry. Renewal is possible only through the grace of God, but that grace is real and is greater than all our sins. Renewal is both necessary and possible.
Hopeful Signs
There are already hopeful signs of renewal in the field of Christian education. Hundreds of dedicated youth directors are spending thousands of hours discipling youth and are using creative methods to stimulate growth. Summer missions projects are stirring up a new sense of commitment to the Lord and to ministry. The Christian camping movement is challenging youth to a deeper commitment to Christ. Seminaries are producing hundreds of graduates each year who have basic Christian education skills and a heart for ministry. Christian radio and television ministries seek to strengthen the home and the church. Topical seminars and films are meeting needs of struggling Christians. Para-church organizations are continuing effective ministries which play an important part in bringing renewal. Christian education publishing houses are producing innovative curriculum to further stimulate the educational work of the local church. Missionaries are becoming more aware of the need for understanding the cross-cultural implications of Christian education principles. Third-world church are taking advanced degrees in Christian education and related fields.
The Need For Renewal
Yet as I talk to Christian education leaders in seminaries, publishing houses, and para-church organizations, I sense discouragement, dissatisfaction and a hunger for renewal. Too often we merely go through the motions to keep out organization from collapsing. Survival or profitability, rather then significance, have too often become our chief concerns. While there are signs or renewal in Christian education, the general pattern is not encouraging.
As I suggest an agenda for renewing Christian education, I do so not as a distant critic, but as a fellow struggler. An agenda is not intended to be a final statement, but a guide for dialogue. Both the agenda itself and the implications of the agenda are intended to stimulate discussion and debate. I encourage disagreement and trust that you will help me to see the agenda more clearly.
Agenda Item #1:
We Must Cooperate.
Most of our organizations represent centers of influence in Christian education. One organization may be seeking renewal yet be frustrated by lack of support from other organizations. We tend to blame other centers of influence for not doing their part. Church may blame seminaries for not producing youth ministers with practical skills, and seminaries may blame publishing houses for not being more innovative. Publishing houses say they can't sell innovative curricula to traditionally minded churches. Creative directors of Christian education say they will get fired if they don't do what the management-minded local church Christian educational committee wants them to. The need for renewal in one center of influence calls for renewal in another centers.
Many adult Sunday school are merely providing a dull second sermon. Christian education directors may jump from one curriculum fad to another while unaware of basic questions.
Christian education in the home has been emphasized, but does not yet seem to be having much effect in helping with the problems of marriage and parenting. Parents are not finding answers and are becoming more desperate. Deep problems in the home carry over to the church and make it difficult to renew the Sunday school. Likewise, problems in the Sunday school make it difficult to renew Christian education in the home.
Publishing houses are often frustrated in their desire to improve curriculum. They know that local churches will not buy anything too different. Knowing that teachers are volunteers, and knowing they will most likely spend less than 20 minutes preparing the lesson, they give step-by-step formulas to the teacher. Such formulas make it more difficult for a teacher to adapt a lesson for the specific needs of the students. Students get bored, teachers resign in disappointment and the superintendent madly rushes to coerce another unsuspecting teacher into the cycle.
Pressure is put on academic departments of Christian education to attract more students. We compete with each other in trying to "sell" our degree as being the easiest to earn, the cheapest of the most practical course of study. Sometimes we achieve this by requiring students to do less theoretical and scholarly reflection. We are often subtly pressured to give students easy, "cook book" answers to complex problems and to give them a "bag of tricks" called teaching methods. We in the academic study of Christian education are not being encouraged to rethink our philosophical and theoretical assumptions. On the other hand, some Christian educators involved in scholarly reflection do not test and revise their theories by attempting to improve the practice of Christian education. Too often there is an antagonism between scholars and practitioners of Christian education. This antagonism leads to an isolated, ivory tower scholarship that results in poor theory, or else it leads to an uncritical acceptance of methods that results in poor practice.
No single center of influence will be able to bring about renewal. If we are to bring about renewal in Christian education, we must work together. Individual seminaries, publishers, para-church organizations, denomination and local churches will not be able to bring about a renewal. Christian education centers of influence re-enforce each other in promoting or hindering renewal. Yet our moral tendency is to compete with each other and to blame each other for failure in the church or the home, rather than to cooperate in strategizing for renewal.
Many of us are tired of shallow gimmicks and of organizational competition. In spite of the overt success of some of our churches and organizations, many insiders have the growing suspicion that the field of evangelical Christian education is again stagnant and in need of renewal. While we are bogged down with internal struggles, families are falling apart, individuals are faltering in their growth toward maturity in Christ, and churches are becoming lukewarm. The urgency of the task demands not primarily survival, but significance. Our task is to foster the maturity of individuals and the Church. This task should be our top priority.
Agenda Item #2:
We Must Re-Evaluate Out Purposes.
(BOX A)
Renewal in Christian education will not be possible until we re-evaluate the ultimate purposes of our organizations. What is the ultimate purpose of Christian education? The problem among evangelicals is not that we are unable to answer the question. We would most likely answer that the chief purpose of our organization is to glorify God. But we tend to answer as if this were a catechism question. We might say the right words but we are not sure of their significance. We say we believe that our purpose is to glorify God, but seldom understand the implications of such a statement for our ministry. Our stated purpose is seldom our actual purpose.
If we really believe that the ultimate purpose of Christian education is to glorify God, then our ultimate purpose must not be Bible knowledge, organizational survival, human development, or even church growth. All of these are means to a greater end. If they become ends, they become idols. Teaching the Bible, developing programs, building relationships and showing concern for the poor are good, but in themselves they do not automatically contribute to the glory of God. When they become ultimate ends, the educational process becomes unbalanced and less than biblical.
I fear that in actual practice, most of our organizations make idols out of means. We must re-evaluate our ultimate purposes.
Agenda Item #3:
We Must Re-Evaluate Our Motivation For Ministry.
Our real ultimate purpose, in contrast to our stated ultimate purpose, also controls our motivation, or our moral reasoning. Even good actions can reflect low levels of moral reasoning. God is concerned not only with what we do, but also with our motives. People look on outward behavior, but God is more interested in the heart. Eating and drinking can be either good or evil, but whether we eat or drink or whatever we do, we must do it for the highest levels of principled morality for the glory of God.
Schools, churches, para-church organizations, denominational structures and publishing houses must operate at some level of moral reasoning. If the level of moral reasoning is to glorify individuals, or the organization, or even the Church, then the activities and results of the organization will not contribute to renewal. Our programs will reflect our level of moral reasoning, or our motives for ministry. If we could make the glory of God our actual purpose rather than an afterthought tacked on to organizational purpose statements, we would be much more willing to cooperate with each other, would have a deeper sense of personal satisfaction in our ministry, and we would rekindle the vision for renewing the field of Christian education.
I fear that in our day-to-day activities, our real motivation is seldom to bring glory to God.
Agenda Item #4:
We Must Study More Thoroughly The Nature Of Human Development.
(Box B)
In order to bring about renewal in Christian Education we must do more to study the nature of people and how they develop. Our current emphasis is inadequate. We learn about the nature of persons through special revelation in Scripture and through natural revelation. We believe that Scripture is the ultimate authority, but that God wrote the book of nature as well. The two sources are complimentary, even when they at times may seem to contradict each other.
Our first source of information about the nature of persons is special revelation. In order for us to understand the nature of persons, we need to understand the nature of God. As Christian educators we need to study theology more deeply. But again, it is not enough to know "correct" answers regarding the nature of persons. We must integrate this information into the theory and practice of Christian education. We believe that God created people in His image, yet our educational methodologies often treat people as if they were machines or animals. Other educational strategies (even those used by evangelicals) tend unconsciously to ignore the Fall and the fact that people are basically selfish and depraved. We have lost something of the image of God and thus we cannot bring about Christian growth by means of our own internal resources. We are tempted to think that we can "educate" or socialize people into the Kingdom. Even we evangelicals are tempted to think that if we can somehow get rid of poverty and injustice people will be whole. We must struggle more fully with the educational implications of our theological understanding of the nature of persons.
The second source of information regarding the nature of persons is empirical observation. Christian education at Wheaton has always studied the nature of persons. Twenty-five years ago when I was a student here, we studied age-group characteristics based on the findings of Gesell and others. We charted characteristics and implications for the practice of ministry. A sensitivity to such research helped us realize that our task was not just to teach the Bible, but to teach it to real people with specific interests and abilities.
But evangelical Christian education has been slow to catch on to the significance of newer bodies of research about nature of persons. As the LeBars learned much about the nature of persons from research in their time, we today will have much to learn about the process of human development from more recent research.
We should take the initiative in conducting research in human development. The more we can discover about how God intended people to grow, the more insights we will gain for promoting that growth. we are not doing enough serious research about human development and about the variables that promote or hinder development. Research questions should be generated from our understanding of both theology and social science. Solid theoretical research has many practical applications. Such findings are broadly generalizable and are thus useful in many more situations, including inner-city and non-western cultures. Theoretical research will help us to answer not only, "What kinds of programs work?", but more importantly, we will begin to address, "Why does it work?" and "How can we do it better?" For example, what factors in the Christian home promote or hinder internal faith convictions? What is the relationship between moral reasoning and Sunday school teaching styles? Research is crucial in helping us to understand the nature of people and the factors that promote the kind of development intended by God.
Christian educators have often been slow to see the value of theoretical research. Such research does not seem "practical," at least not for the pastor urgently seeking ideas for setting up a personal filing system. Theoretical research in human development does not seem practical for the Sunday School teacher trying to find techniques to make flannel-graph stick to the board.
Seminaries and Bible colleges have a professional orientation and do not claim to be strong research institutions. It is appropriate for them to generate practical projects rather than to conduct correlational or quasi-experimental research. But solid research must be done within the Christian liberal arts context.
All social science research builds on philosophical assumptions. Our research must be built on our theological and philosophical assumptions. For example, the recent research in faith development is an example of interesting and important research that is flawed by poor theological assumptions. But who is doing such research from an evangelical framework?
Para-church organizations and publishing houses are learning the value of market research. Such research is valuable, but it does not go far enough. We need to know not only which curriculum is most likely to be bought by churches, but also need to investigate the relationship between curriculum and spiritual growth. We need to go beyond asking, "which colors attract buyers?" to "what is happening in the lives of students and teachers as a result of the curriculum?"
If our ultimate purpose in Christian education is to help others to more fully glorify God, then we need a deeper commitment to discovering how God intended people to grow toward that purpose. We will never fully understand the secrets of human development, but a deeper understanding of God-ordained human development is a necessary precondition for re-thinking aims and means in Christian education. Apart from this kind of research we will be tempted to adopt methods without reflecting on their implications for promoting or hindering Christian growth.
I challenge us to do more research from a theological and theoretical perspective, to learn more about human development. We need to take the initiative in this research, to the glory of God.
Agenda Item #5:
We Must Reconsider The Aims Of Christian Education.
(Box C)
We will not be able to renew Christian education if we continue with inadequate aims. Our aims for Christian education must be generated from our understanding of ultimate purpose, and from our understanding of the nature of persons. Our ultimate purpose is to glorify God in what we do and why we do it. Basic to understanding the nature of persons is knowing that we are created in the image of God, yet we are fallen. In our fallen state we do not glorify God. Thus we need new birth and God-ordained development. Such development is both natural and supernatural. Growing out of these understandings, our aim must be to promote the kind of growth which will enable us to more fully glorify God.
The greatest need of the human race is to regain the completeness of the image of God which was lost in the Fall. The reason we are not able to glorify God in all that we think and do is because we have been children of the Devil. Christ died and rose again in order for us to be restored. We must be born again into God's family. Then we need to grow more and more into the likeness of Christ. This is the aim of Christian education -- to be born into God's family and to mature toward the likeness of Christ. Our aim is to promote natural and supernatural growth. Yet, we know that we shall not be like Him until we see Him as He is. In some sense, then, we can never fully achieve the aim of Christian education this side of heaven.
Growth is an inner, active and continuous process. Yet too often Christian educators understand the aim not as an inner process, but as promoting outward behavioral character traits. Often our aim is merely to impart bodies of information. Fads in teacher education tempt Christian educators to aim at pre-determined behavioral objectives. Secular trends in educational measurement tempt Christian educators to aim for measurable and quantifiable results. But our measurements are only of religious behavior or religiosity, rather than inner "heart development." Since we are able to observe and quantify much educational activity, and since we feel our aims must be measurable, our unconscious aim becomes educational activity rather than inner, active and continuous growth toward becoming all God intends us to become. Outward behavior is not a guarantee of inner spiritual growth. (In spite of what my mother taught me, cleanliness is not an indication of godliness.) People with polite character traits are not necessarily godly people. Some of the most evil people throughout history have been knowledgeable of the Bible. Satan probably would have no trouble getting a perfect score on our Bible diagnostic exams.
To be sure, outward behavior must change as we become more Christ-like. But such behavior is an indication of heart development, and is not an aim. When the indicator, or outward, behavior becomes an aim, we are really teaching people to become pharisaical.
On the other hand, some Christian educators are reacting so strongly against behavioristic aims that they say aims are not necessary at all. Some say we should just teach the Bible and let the Holy Spirit determine aims for the learner. Yet Scripture does give us aims.
Aims are not end points, but directions. We can never check off the list of the fruit of the Spirit as something finally accomplished. We can never fully say we have accomplished love, so now it is time for us to get to work on joy, and next year peace, and maybe before I die I'll get to self-control. Growth in grace is never fully achieved in this life, but it does give us an aim or a direction. Faith, hope and love do not evidence themselves in pre-determined and fully predicted behaviors. Our aim must be to promote a process rather than to predict a product. That process is growth -- both natural and spiritual growth.
God has given the human teacher a part to play in promoting growth, yet he or she is responsible for only a part of the process. Although Bible knowledge is important. But Lois LeBar taught that the Bible is a means for promoting growth and is not an end. Our greatest danger in Christian education is that we make the means the end. The result will be merely external or "outer" development. Is it any wonder that most of our efforts in Christian education do not produce "inner" results.
The aim of the teacher, then, is to stimulate conditions which are most likely to foster the process of growth.
It may be appropriate for our organizations or businesses to have pre-determined objectives and measurable standards. But we should not confuse organizational aims with educational aims of ministry.
I fear that we carry over our understanding of management objectives to the task of Christian education, which is primarily an inner process. Such a management philosophy in Christian education will produce hypocrisy rather than spiritual growth. If we see the aim as a product, we still aim for knowledge, skills, habits or character traits, all of which may or may not be an indication of true inner development. A product understanding of aims may be the reason why nominal and lukewarm Christianity is growing so rapidly in our evangelical churches.
In order to renew Christian education we must rethink our aim. The aim to foster the God-ordained process of development.
Agenda Item #6:
We Must Rethink Our Methods.
(Box D)
If the aim of Christian education is to foster a process, then the means for promoting the process is of utmost importance. In a certain sense, fostering the means for promoting the process becomes the aim.
Learning is an inner, active, continuous and disciplined process. Thus, we should begin with the felt needs of learners rather than from the theoretical knowledge of Scripture. The Bible is a means for promoting maturity in Christ and was not intended by God to be an end in itself. Such thinking is radical. Christian education methods are still too often characterized by tactics which intend the learner to be passive. Our methods are so dependent on external motivation and external behavior that we may actually hinder inner growth in grace. Too often we seek to control outer behavior rather than to compel active reflection. We use gimmicks to get the attention of the student, but such gimmicks seldom lead to an inner sense of need.
We must begin with the felt needs and experiences of the learner. We must then help the learner to see his or her own experience in light of the authoritative Word of God. When we compare Scripture with experience, we sense disequilibration. Such disequilibration can be used by the Holy Spirit to convict us and motivate us to put our experience and life more into submission or equilibration with Scripture. The process is often best done in a community of learners. The job of the teacher is the Word, the Spirit and the body of believers. The essence of interaction must compel thinking and action in the learner, relating experience to the Bible.
Methods based on technology have only limited potential. Technology can be useful for transmitting information, but usually by itself, does little to foster the process of critical reflection and action in the learner.
Neither are romantic teaching methods sufficient. such methods tend to focus only on experience, without stimulating reflection on content.
Social learning theory provides an inadequate model for method. Scripture must be free to critique society. Modeling by itself is not a good method for stimulating critical reflection between Scripture and experience.
Methodology in Christian education is in need of renewal. Too often we accept methods merely because they seem creative, make us feel good, or seem to be "at the cutting edge" of technology. We must rethink our educational methods.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I fear for the Church around the world. Almost everywhere the Church is plagued by apathy. Half-hearted Christianity is becoming a dangerous epidemic. There's a war going on! The Church is in trouble, and we Christian educators, who can provide resources for the battle, are ourselves complacent and in need of renewal. We must seriously rethink our purposes, our motives, our understanding of persons, our aims and our methods. We must move beyond our narrow organizational horizons and rekindle this strategic vision. Discussing the agenda must be only the first step.
[1] Adapted from a talk given May 22, 1988 for the celebration of the Price - LeBar Endowed Chair in Christian Education at Wheaton College
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
