Pulling Your Hand Out of a Bucket
Posted by C. Holland on Sep 03, 2009Number 20 left a week ago. She was supposed to be here long-term indefinitely, but she made it almost two years which is longer than the 18-month average here.
Since we’ve been in the field, twenty missionaries have left permanently, all before their stated term and some in terribly egregious ways. These are all people we knew relatively well and interacted with; these are not second- or third-hand statistics. If I pulled from those sources, I’m sure there’s more.
Why I bring this up is not to be complaintive about the loss (our mission field is notorious for chewing people up and spitting them out, so unfortunately none of this is a surprise) but to highlight an issue that I’m sure people don’t consider when they depart: what happens to a mission field when the missionary leaves?
A good friend once told me as I left a secular job for a new one that leaving a situation was similar to pulling your hand out of a bucket of water. No matter how gently you do it, there will be ripples or waves, and the water level will be lower once your hand is removed. Bottom line: even handled in the best possible manner, leaving a situation still affects people.
I can only speak for my location (and I’d like to hear of others’ observations), but the relatively short time that people spend here has mostly served to innoculate the nationals against further contact with missionaries, especially of the American flavour. You can understand the obvious upset by the nationals at the church planting missionary permanently leaving with one day’s notice (though he knew and planned for three months prior), or to the missionary who absconded to another European country with money, or even to the evangelical protestant missionary who converted to Eastern Orthodoxy and now tells all the evangelicals in the field that they’re going to hell. Rough stuff, indeed.
But I can also say that some of the missionaries who left prematurely had understandable reasons (funds running out, severe homesickness, just didn’t fit) and even communicated appropriately their absence. A few even communicate to nationals today, and it would be fair to say that they left on “good terms”. However, their brief interaction here still registers with the nationals that missionaries are just not in this for the long haul.
When people from a transient, future-focused culture (America) interact with a less-changeable, in-the-now culture (our mission field), there are bound to be difficulties in communication. But what so many seem to miss is that our field holds a relational people, a type that take years to open up to anyone and have lived on the same plot of land for generations, even hundreds of years. Things don’t move so fast here, and that’s okay for them. Growth in church world here is by ones, if you’re lucky, so you can’t measure it by the American church planter formulas.
While things are bound to be different after someone leaves, and some change is going to happen, the fallout in our field is pretty bad. A thriving church plant failed, promises from the States of funds and/or equipment never materialised, relationships suddenly ran dry. Two existing churches run by nationals no longer accept foreign missionaries as they freely did over the last decade. A church run by an American is viewed with suspicion; “it won’t last” they’ll openly say. Though some have gotten to know us over the last few years, we are still painted with the same brush by so many others. “When will you go back?” they ask. I tire of the question, “Why can’t your American missionaries stick with anything?” Trust is something we personally still hope to earn with many, proving our talk of remaining here indefinitely is so much more than talk.
The Eastern Orthodox convert once told me (before he converted) that the nationals in our mission field didn’t want to work with Americans. He was both right and wrong. Right, because the majority of missionaries from the States that they had encountered had been more trouble than help. Wrong, because a) a handful of missionaries from other countries have been equally as problematic, and b) there are a handful of American missionaries that are culturally sensitive, committed, and have done very well here.
So, for all the planning and preparation in coming to a mission field, it seems that the exit point (even in a year-only commitment) does not get much focus. I recognise that not everyone is built for the long haul, but if our witness is that we rush into situations and rush out equally as quick, we’re cutting ourself off at the knees.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!Related posts:
- Doing Ministry at Arm’s Distance
The “Just Be Yourself” Paradox
I’m Not There: Why the Missionary Can’t Have It Both Ways
Missionary Confidential by Email
September 3rd, 2009 at 9:30 pm
First off I would like to say that I’m sorry for some of the hurt that you’ve sustained due to people leaving. We are “those who left” a difficult mission field after 3 years of ministry. We still count some of our friends there as some of our closest and miss them dearly. However, as “leavers” I have to say that some of your comments (while valid) don’t take into account all the reasons. Our reasons for leaving weren’t listed here in this article at all. We had European citizenship issues that lead to severe depression, unhealthy team dynamics (from nationals, not Americans), pressures from a rising cost of living, suicides and marriage breakups of close friends, and only one of us able to work. Our struggle (and it was a painful, agonizing struggle) with leaving lasted over 6 months as we debated, prayed, and sought counsel back and forth over wether to leave. I would submit, that while your experiences and challenges are valid they are not the sum total of every reason. Some of us have left because not doing so would have destroyed our families, our marriages, and our souls.
All in all, an interesting post. I just wanted to submit a counter-point to it. Cheers!
September 3rd, 2009 at 9:37 pm
BTW C, I really liked the illustration of pulling your hand from a bucket. Very apt description of what happens when a good missionary has to leave the mission field.
September 5th, 2009 at 9:57 am
Hi Kevin, your reasons for leaving are precisely why I included the line “had understandable reasons…and even communicated appropriately their absence”. I’m very sorry that your experience was so difficult, and I don’t doubt your struggle for a second. Some of the missionaries I know went through much of what you described.
My issue is with the callous or flip attitude that the other “leavers” have, especially their rudeness in leaving and refusal to communicate once back in the States. Because there are so many of these, once you add the normal attrition, the number is so large that it leaves a bad impression that makes it difficult for those left in the field, or even new missionaries, to overcome.
A certain amount of attrition is to be expected in any field, and I accept that. In fact, when missionaries have been transparent about why/when they’re leaving, I’ve found the nationals are very compassionate and understanding. Several nationals have told me that they could not handle the reverse (leaving here to plant a church in America) and understand the strain and difficulty involved in ministering to a foreign culture.
And who knows, the way immigration issues are for us, we could always be kicked out despite our desire to stay. People are going to leave for various reasons; I just wish they’d handle it in a more mature and Christian attitude.
September 5th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
I agree completely. It’s the same old story, the few idiots ruin it for the rest of us. Despite the pain (we shouldn’t expect any less) we’re planning on returning to Europe, albeit a different country next year. Some of the changes came from citizenship issues being ironed out, some of it came from healing and maturity on our part. We’re now working within a very healthy European planting movement and are hopeful that things will turn out different this time around. We’re like you in that our horizon and desire have always been long-term which is why the pain was so acute when leaving the first time. Thanks for the follow up.
September 24th, 2009 at 10:15 pm
I find that if you are persistent and consistent in communication most Europeans are actually quite friendly and understanding. Most Europeans I have seen doesn’t take initiatives in relationships but once you break the ice they become very friendly.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:53 am
@Tai: That’s a good observation, and most times I find I have to break that ice. But most all tend to respond positively when I do.