I’d like to read more this year, and missiology/missions is definitely on the subject list. I’m thinking of possibly reviewing some of those books on this site so:

What book(s) would you recommend to someone who says, “I’m thinking of becoming a missionary/going on a short-term mission trip” or asks the question, “What’s it like to be a missionary?”

Hit the comments below!

Related posts:

1. Question Week: What Books Would You Recommend to a Prospective Missionary?
2. Question Week: How Do You Handle Missionary Inquiries?

The latest newsletter from The Body Builders talks about the importance of sending gifts to your supporters, not only to encourage better relationships with your financial partners but also to help maintain giving. I have to be honest; in our almost five years in the field, we never sent Christmas gifts. As much as we communicated and made sure to send letters, postcards and make phone calls to our supporters, we just couldn’t afford to buy and ship packages from our field. The cost was too high.

But not every missionary is in Western Europe. So I’m curious: do you give/send Christmas gifts to your supporters?

And here’s the link to the newsletter: ‘Tis the Season…For Giving!

Related posts:

1. Roll the Dice, Get a Prize, Give to Missions?
2. Staying Home For Christmas
3. Fundraising: The Extreme Edge of Faith

I’m rethinking a lot about missions these days while back in the States. Much, much more to come, but a friend recently sent us this:

“Girls Night Out – Bunko With a Mission”! Mark your calendars for Saturday at 6:30 p.m. at [church]. Prizes and raffling off gift baskets from [Local Restaurant], Starbucks, Lacome, Mary Kay, [Tutoring], Bath & Body, [Football Team tickets] and much more. Suggested donation $10. Feel free to invite a friend…Please R.S.V.P.

There are so many ways to fundraise, I know. But in the case of missions, what are we conveying to people? This isn’t very important to you, so I’ll have to bait you with prizes and useful, fun items you receive in return. We’re so desperate, we’ll try anything. 

If they’re playing a game that had been originally used for gambling (I’ve never played it, so I’m not familiar with the method), isn’t this akin to having a “Casino Night for Missions”? I’m not fearful of cards or dice when playing a board game with the family, but it just seems to me like an odd method to use for mission fundraising.

We had been taught, mostly by being the audience in a church, that the missionary is to convince you with facts, figures, and photos why their mission needs our financial support. You might speak to the missionary afterwards to get more information, and then decide to give an amount freely, not expecting something tangible in return. We encouraged people to pray about this and a specific monetary figure, and I hope they did. It appears to me to be a more intellectual pursuit.

Of course, I realise that we sold off all our possessions years ago to go to our mission field; however, it was not presented in the classifieds as a “Help Missions Yard Sale”. It was just a yard sale, and it did benefit missions. Yet that was not why people showed up and bought my toaster. It was a simple transaction.

The church doesn’t seem to use these methods for regular Sunday tithes. Oh, I know there’s the year-end appeal when the church is in the red, but I’ve never been part of a church that ran, say, a Harvest Festival to Pay the Electric Bill. Tithing and stewardship has been addressed in the Sunday message in a rather straightforward way in my experience. Why the need to get money for missions in this way?

So, am I just a fossil who’s been out of the States for too long and needs to “get with the times”, or does this strike you as the wrong message to send about how to support missions?

Related posts:

1. Do You Give Christmas Gifts to Your Supporters?

This month’s fundraising newsletter from The Body Builders suggests raising support through the power of a community. Essentially, the concept is to meet regularly with a group of other missionaries that are fundraising to swap ideas and encourage one another. I think this is a brilliant idea and wish we’d had this opportunity when we were back in the States. You can read the entire newsletter here: “The Power of Community in Raising Support”.

I wonder, however, how this looks once you’re in the field. We view support raising as something that doesn’t stop, and while a meeting could be of great benefit while on furlough, I’m unfamiliar with the community concept while in the field. Has anyone else had experience of encouraging each other in a group setting while fundraising?

Related posts:

1. Top Five Fears in Fundraising
2. Transitioning From Fundraising to Tentmaking
3. Are You Using “Toxic Phrases” When Fundraising?

While the context is business entrepreneurship, John Doerr makes some interesting comparisons in this video from Stanford. I feel his description of missionary is very favourable, and it made me think in the Christian context, “Are some missionaries more like mercenaries?” The reason I say that is, if you pause the video at 1:04, there’s a comparison list. And it saddens me to say that I have encountered some mercenaries on the field, just replace “money” with “numbers” or “personal glory”. Thoughts?

Link to “Mercenaries and Missionaries”, John Doerr

No related posts.

The first time I heard it, it went something like this:

“With our method, we hope to plant 200 churches in the mission field within four years.”

Since then, the number of churches, or years, or the method changes every time I hear it, but it’s the same intent: an astounding number in a very short amount of time. And it makes me wonder, do missionaries have to make projection promises just to get funding? Or maybe attention?

I wonder because, by those kind of numbers, we’re pretty pathetic. In our first four years (according to the example above), we’ve planted nothing. Not even one. We’re not even at the beginnings of a church plant. Though I’m not trying to compare or measure up (we’re in a different field, etc.), other Christians have encouraged me over the years to direct my interest to a certain leader or group because “they have this great plan to plant ___ churches in ___ years!”

I have to say that I’ve never had someone suggest I go hear the exciting presentation from missionary who’s still slogging on for decades with perhaps a convert or two and a group of ten in church attendance.

If projection promises are the only way we feel we can gain support or interest, then are we shooting ourselves in the foot when it becomes apparent that the original promise may not be fulfilled on time? Or at all? In my experience, the group that made the above promise is the one that crumbled, with the missionaries spinning out so badly that they left evangelicalism altogether.

I see so much focus on numbers, whether it be how many years to accomplish something or how many are filling the seats of your meeting, yet I see so little focus on discipleship or spending time with people. Were I to be given a demand to projection promise, all that I can promise is that I will be faithful to and do my best to follow God’s will for the ministry in which He has placed me. If He chooses to cause our ministry to birth ___ churches in ___ years, He is most certainly able, but I don’t have that kind of information at the moment. And I’m not sure that we Christians need that information, either.

No related posts.

The other night I was talking with one of my national friends, and he was relating his busy last few weeks, most of which was taking a visiting missionary around the country on furlough.  When asked how long my friend had been hosting missionaries from this particular mission organisation, I was amazed to hear that it was before I was born (and I’m not young, either.)  His lengthy dedication was impressive, not just because of longevity, but because the hospitality also included shuttling the missionary to many places around a country not known for the best public transportation or infrastructure.

“Oh, but I’m not the first one to host here in this country,” he divulged.  “I actually inherited the responsibility from another man.”  My friend went on to explain that this man had hosted for quite a few years, and it was ageing (and a subsequent illness) that caused the man to pass the responsibility to my friend.  “When I visited him for the last time in hospital,” my friend recounted, “he personally asked me to ‘please take good care of my missionaries’.  Then he leaned closer to me and whispered, ‘Just don’t spoil them’.”

At this point, my long-term readers will probably be expecting me to start off with a politely-worded form of, “Just who does he think he is?  What in the world was that man thinking?!  We’re people too, yada yada yada, etc.”  But I’m not, because it’s what my friend said next that helped illustrate that standards of all sorts are quite relative, even for us missionaries.

My friend explained that the man lived in a two-room cottage and maintained a spartan existence.  Even as living standards rose in this country, his didn’t change.  My friend eventually found out that this man spent as little as necessary on living expenses—and donated everything else to church.  He could have lived a more plush lifestyle, but chose to give back as much as he could to God, including his hosting of many missionaries throughout the years.

In saying not to “spoil the missionaries”, he wasn’t demanding a double standard that it seems we (and other missionaries/ministry workers) often encounter. You know the situations: middle-class (or even well-to-do) Christians get upset that a missionary or ministry worker owns a microwave (or television, or car, etc…just fill in the blank), while the complaintive person own those items themselves and sees no problem with the difference.  It’s basic hypocrisy, essentially implying that working a secular job entitles a Christian to live at any (usually higher) standard they see fit and without accountability, while a missionary or ministry worker must “go without” because their funds essentially come from donations.  I’ve written about it, others have written about it, most of you have probably experienced it in one form or another.  Some have countered with the argument that one should live on par with the living standard of those to whom they minister; i.e. if the nationals live in huts, then the missionary shouldn’t live in a modern house.  Of course, that argument can backfire, since my nationals live at a higher standard of living than we can afford.

But what if the expectation of the supporter is in line with their own way of living?  My friend explained to me what the man meant.  Because he was living so sacrificially, the man had never updated his dwelling to include additional rooms—or to even bring his outdoor bathroom indoors!  He knew that when my friend took over the hosting duties, the missionaries would be sleeping on more comfortable beds than he provided and could use my friend’s indoor-plumbed facilities which the man had deemed a superfluous expense in his own life.  In effect, my friend would be spoiling the missionaries with what we see as modern living standards.

“Spoiling” a missionary is also incredibly relative.  I’ve heard of a stateside church that, when their missionary family returns on furlough, they are whisked around in a limousine, showered with expensive gifts and treated like royalty.  Personally, I’d feel uncomfortable with that much attention and conspicuous consumption in the name of us doing what God’s called us to do, but then again, missionaries 100 years from now could read this and laugh because a limousine may then be seen as an everyday type of item without prestige.

Of course, I’m not calling for everyone to do away with their bathrooms or heating system.  Because living standards are constantly changing in this fast-paced world, something considered a luxury today may become standard-issue living arrangements tomorrow.  It’s hard for me to see how the man considered certain situations as “spoiling”, yet I don’t really feel comfortable with what some people want to “spoil” us with, either.  I guess it’s all relative.

Related posts:

1. Are Short-Term Missions Sabotaging the Conversion to Long-Term Missionaries?

From the minute we started fundraising in the States years ago, and even up to the present, the first question we’re asked as missionaries is, “Why did you become a missionary to [our mission field country in Western Europe]?”

Most of the time, the query comes from a Christian, both native and international.  It’s an odd question, because as stated above it’s really open to interpretation for the answer they’re looking for.  I’m never sure if they’re looking for:

So our retort is always, “ God.”  Not to be snarky or even difficult, but because it’s true.  Really true.  There’s no earthly explanation as to why two Californians with no link to this country or background in missions ministry would dump everything in the States to do this long-term.  It doesn’t make a bit of sense, I realise this.  But it is what it is.  And many seem to think this is not the right answer.

Our questioner usually performs the eye roll, complete with sarcastic “Yeah, yeah, God’s doing this.  Of course, I agree. But how did you pick this place?” or “What really made you come over here?”  I don’t know if missionaries to the 10/40 window receive this question, too, but the implication is definitely that we’re making something out of nothing.

This isn’t an isolated incident.  Most of the Western European missionary bloggers that I follow have noted similar situations.  Because we’re not in the 10/40 window, many consider this to be a “Reached” area for Christ (as opposed to “Unreached People Groups” within the window).  Let me be clear: I support mission to the 10/40 window and in no way am advocating a stoppage to ministry there.  If you’re called there (or are already working in ministry there), then keep on keepin’ on.  However, Ernest Goodman put it best about missions to “reached” groups when he said, “This isn’t a case of ‘my people group is loster than yours,’ it’s a heartfelt call to action by someone who God has called to service.”  Which is why it’s hurtful when people lob the follow up questions, “Why’d you pick an easy place to live?  Couldn’t handle Africa?  Wanted a vacation?”

Easy?  Since when do we start comparing fields amongst missionaries?  Who has the master list of Difficult Mission Areas in descending order?  Must all missionaries live in the very worst of physical conditions to qualify?  Right now, I think the hardest place for me to live would be back in the States!

And how do we define “easy”?  My “easy” field’s missionary attrition rate is through the roof. Over the almost four years we’ve been here, over 20 missionaries left way before their term commitment. Marriages collapsed, church plants collapsed, one couple left evangelicalism completely for Eastern Orthodox. None of that sounds like a cake walk mission field to me.

The reality is that we’ve been called here.  My mission field is extremely spiritually dark.  While we do have First World amenities here, it doesn’t negate the spiritual warfare, the separation from family and friends, or the financial struggle we experience as missionaries.

Finances.  That’s the other argument against our calling.  It’s wildly expensive to live in our field, so much so that we’re part tentmakers to make up the declining support difference.  It’s been suggested that we serve in a place that’s cheaper to live.  But we’re called here.  We didn’t find some list of pricey European cities and then try to call a move there a mission field.

Back in January, Kevin over at Life.Outpoured wrote a great article entitled, “Should cost be a factor in your ministry decision?” Of course, we’re to be good stewards of the money God provides us, but are the most economical places the only place we may be called? Is “the most bang for the buck” what determines who hears the Gospel and who does not?

Finally, I’ve also heard the argument that we should be serving where there is a harvest going on right now, not in a place so spiritually desolate.  While some will need to be serving in a spiritual harvest area, I think that we reflect upon what leads up to the harvest, using the agricultural metaphor.

We’re in the midst of our first official vegetable garden, having only gardened for flowers/plants in the past.  At the beginning of this year, we sat down in cold January and decided we’d like to plant a garden where there was just grass.  To get us to the vegetable garden we currently have, we had to rip out the grass, prepare the soil, plan the garden, sow seeds, water, feed, pick off pests, place stakes for climbing plants—in other words, we really had to work that patch of land diligently to have what we do now.  At most points in the progression, anyone walking by would have thought the garden to be simply a plot of dirt, a place with no promise, nothing to see or do.  Yet we knew what was coming, just as long as we kept faithful to our work.  And now we have a harvest of good food.

The point here is that there are stages in ministry before the harvest.  Work was needed in different skill sets to complete the task.  If we had simply said in January, “Let’s have a garden,” then did nothing until September, all we’d have now is a patch of much-longer grass.

I believe there will be a harvest in Western Europe.  Though possible, I’m not sure we’ll see it in our lifetime.  But God is making a way for the soil to be prepared, for seeds to be planted, and for the fields to be prepared.  The small group of diligent missionaries working now in Western Europe are preparing the way, and I’m proud that God called us to be counted amongst that number.

Related posts:

1. “I Can’t Call You a Missionary”—ouch
2. The Search Terms I Get…
3. Lose Yourself: What is Your Identity?

Of all the lessons that foreign missions ministry has taught me (and continues to do so), the top of the list has to be that we are shaped by our location and culture more than we realise.  Most anyone who has lived in a foreign country for a decent stretch of time would probably recognise how true this is.

When you meet a fellow Christian from another country, there are some great similarities and kinship that’s experienced through our Family in Christ.  It’s difficult to describe to others, but there is an understanding of what it’s like to press on with life as a Christian in this fallen world.  They know what you’ve seen, and usually understand how fellow Christians experience life.

Then there’s the point that you realise that their Christian experience has differed than yours.  Their “favourite songs” are ones you’ve never heard, or methodology in worship services is, well, just different.  Nothing wrong or sacrilegious, but jarringly different to your exposure.

Who and what you are surrounded by is bound to influence your perception and choices.  Even when I’ve worked with missionaries who are firmly resolved to not lose one bit of their “American” accent, actions or attitude, over time even they begin to start using phrases here that wouldn’t ever be used “back home”.  They don’t notice it, and can become alarmed when informed of this, yet for all their determination to resist, the phrase or action creeps back in.  Bear in mind that these are things that are completely inoffensive both here and to Americans, nor would they be anything wrong in God’s view at all.  They hear it used over and over again, or perhaps people here understand them better when they say that phrase.  It just happens, even if they purposely try to stop.

The anger and fear that I’ve witnessed when a missionary realises that they’ve changed is striking.  It appears to them as if they’ve lost a part of their identity, a part of what defines them, and, to put it bluntly, the change freaks them out.  I know that we personally act and speak differently since being in the field, and not a few of our friends and family have politely (sometimes sternly) reminded us that we’re “still American” or should “act/talk more American”.  All this has done is reinforce in me that first and foremost, my identity is in Christ and my citizenship is in Heaven.

As Christians, Christ and His ways, His laws, His thoughts are to be our starting point.  This knowledge I’ve always believed, but now in the situation of changing cultures this wisdom is moving from my head to my heart.  The more we’re around someone or something, the more we become like them.  We humans can’t help it.  I believe it’s why the potter/clay analogy is used; we are impressionable beings, able to take shape according to the influence of another.

Once Jesus is established as our example, all other identities are up to where He places us.  Those identities may alter according to our circumstances, but it doesn’t negate our place in Christ.  Whether I act more or less “American” doesn’t diminish the fact of where I was born or lived most of my life.  It doesn’t mean any ill will towards my American family or friends, either.  It just means that I live somewhere else now that differently shapes my experience of life.

You’ve probably already guessed that I would invoke Paul’s entreaty to “become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some.” (1 Corinthians 9:22-23).  But it’s the phrase that summarises Chapter 9 in my Bible that says it all: Paul Surrenders His Rights.  If I need to change language, actions or appearance (within God’s law and direction in the Bible) to reach people in another culture for Christ, so be it.  I only need to be concerned with God’s direction in my life, and nothing more.

Related posts:

1. The Search Terms I Get…
2. What Are You Doing There? Justifying Your Call

One of the things I’ve learned since being in the mission field is that the word “missionary” carries a significant amount of baggage for both Christians and non-Christians alike.  Some of it is well-intentioned and respectful, other reactions are more telling about people’s perception of missionaries.  But it was this post on another blog that suggested working a secular job internationally with a missional intent (and the subsequent comments) that made me ponder if it is possible to have an authentic relationship with both Christians and non-Christians in your mission field as an identified missionary.  Does the perception by others of our assigned “agenda” to convert (or at least proclaim) discourage people from accepting our interest as an authentic relationship?

In the referenced post, I asked the author, Grady Bauer, to clarify his statements about a “truly authentic set of relationships in a different culture”:

“I think one of things those of us in full-time ministry, regardless of location, struggle with is relationships. If I’m a full-time missionary in a country…who do I connect with along natural lines? Very few people. Work can lead to relationships that are created authentically, not me targeting them with the gospel. Hobbies and mutual interests also serve this purpose as do volunteering with a public organization. It helps us to connect with people in ways that make sense and seem more authentic.”

I’ve let these thoughts sit in the back of my mind for a while, but what prompted me to explore further was this recent search term here at my blog:

“Do the missionaries really like me?”

While I realise this could just be the question of an insecure person in a very specific circumstance, it immediately brought all these thoughts back.

In no way am I implying that missionaries themselves cannot be authentic, nor do I feel that we’re all just “agenda” driven.  On the contrary, I’ve met quite a number that have genuine love and concern for the nation and people of their calling.  But for some reason there seems to be a perception amongst the people I’m sent to minister that, because my main job here is a missionary, witnessing and conversion is my only reason for getting to know anyone.  My interest, in their minds, cannot be genuine.

Do I want to share the Gospel with every new person I meet?  Definitely, with discernment and timeliness as God provides.  But the way I see it, I had this exact same motivation when I was working a secular job in the States.  I’m just in a different country with a different funding source; nothing else has really changed.

When you’re working full-time in ministry regardless of title or location, more often than not you’re surrounded during your day by only Christians.  If a concerted effort is not made to “branch out” of the comfort zone to interact with the general population, it’s easy to see why the outsider perception is that we Christians only emerge from the “Holy Huddle” to proselytise a few new people into our camp.  And it’s even easier to understand why people in your mission field might be more dismissive of someone’s motives who is not appearing to live like they do (i.e., clocking into a “regular” job as opposed to the missionary being paid from afar via fundraising).

This video from Tim Keller is actually addressing the definition of the “missional” church (and I feel it’s the clearest, best definition yet), but what he says around 1:25 is crucial to even us missionaries:  “When non-Christians come in [to a missional church], they see that we inhabit the same world.  We read the same magazines.  We’re struggling with the same issues in the neighbourhood.  They see that we’re really being Christians in the same world that they live.”

I’m certainly not calling for compromise of the Gospel, nor for adapting too far culturally by breaking God’s laws and commands.  I’m not even advocating being “trendy”,  “hip”, or “attractional”.  And as Christians, I realise we are still set apart for God.  We will always in certain ways be very, very different.  However, I do wonder if our starting point with new acquaintances were on a more even level (as in co-worker), would it help us to bridge faster that reluctance and suspicion gap?

No related posts.