Author: Os Guinness and David Wells
Date: 13.07.2010
Category: Globalization
Editor’s Note: This Cape Town 2010 Advance Paper has been written by Os Guinness and David Wells as an overview of the topic to be discussed at the Multiplex session on “Globalization.” Responses to this paper through the Lausanne Global Conversation will be fed back to the authors and others to help shape their final presentations at the Congress.
“Globalization” is a monumental challenge that represents quite simply the most pressing face of “the world” in our time, as well as the greatest opportunity for mission and the greatest challenge for discipleship the church of Jesus Christ has faced since the Apostles in the first century. Never has the vision of “the whole Gospel for the whole world through the whole church” been closer yet more contested.
The double-edged strength of the church
As Christians, and as the church of Jesus Christ, we are called by our Lord to be “in” the world, but “not of” the world. “No longer” who we were before we came to Christ, we are “not yet” what we will be when Christ returns. This bracing call to tension in both time and space lies at the heart of our faith. Individually and collectively, we are to live in the world in a stance of both Yes and No, affirmation and antithesis, or of being “against the world/for the world.”
This tension is crucial to the faithfulness of the church, and to her integrity and effectiveness in the world. When the church of Christ remains faithful to this calling, she lives in a creative tension that is the prerequisite of her transforming power in culture and history. For the Christian faith is unashamedly world-affirming, and has a peerless record in contributing to education, to philanthropy, to social reforms, to medicine, to the rise of science, to the emergence of democracy and human rights, as well as to building schools, hospitals, universities, orphanages, and other beneficial institutions. Yet at the same time, the Christian faith is also world-denying, insisting on the place of prophets as well as priests, on sacrifice as well fulfillment, on the importance of fasts as well as feasts, and on the place for exposing and opposing the world when its attitudes and actions are against the commands of God and the interests of humanity.
Not surprisingly, the church’s constant temptation has been to relax this tension from one side or the other, so that the Christians in different ages have sometimes been so much in the world that they are of it, or so much not of the world that they were “no earthly use.” Either way, such unfaithfulness means that the church grows weak, but unfaithfulness in the direction of worldliness is worse than weak, for it puts the church, like Israel in the Old Testament, under the shadow of the judgment of God.
This challenge carries an inescapable implication: Christian faithfulness in any generation requires a clear-eyed understanding of the world of its day. The biblical view of “the world” has several dimensions, ranging from the world that God created and loves to the world that is “over against” the kingdom of Christ, and we in turn should have several appropriate responses. Seen positively, understanding the world is assumed and required by our desire to witness, for communication always presupposes understanding of context. Seen negatively, understanding the world is assumed and required by vigilance against the danger of worldliness, for we can only avoid what we accurately understand.
We meet in Cape Town in October 2010 one hundred years after the great world missionary conference in Edinburgh in June, 1910. It would be true to say that Edinburgh’s missionary vision and enterprise has been gloriously vindicated and fulfilled in the emergence of the burgeoning global church over the last hundred years. But it must also be said that the tragic blind spot of the Edinburgh Conference was its lack of self-criticism of its own position in the world, and in particular its failure to recognize its captivity to the powerful delusions of European “Christendom” just before its titanic collapse in the Great World Wars, the repudiation of imperialism, and its own self-induced secularization. While we today are no more omniscient than our sisters and brothers who met in Edinburgh, we must endeavor to be more self-critical through understanding our world and our own place in it.
Coming to terms with “globalization”
What, then, is “the world” of our day? Beyond any question, the single, strongest expression of the face of the world in our time—the advanced modern world of the early twenty-first century—is globalization, the process by which human interconnectedness has expanded to a truly global level. There are many people, such as the writers of The Economist magazine, who attribute globalization to the spread of market capitalism throughout the world, and use the word only as a synonym for this expansion. But this is self-interested as well as wrong. Globalization is a multi-dimensional process, and the decisive driver in its present expansion is not capitalism but information technology, powerful and important though capitalism is. At the centre of the current wave of globalization are “the triple S-forces” of speed (with the capacity for instant communication), scope (the capacity to communicate to the entire world), and simultaneity (the capacity to communicate to everywhere at the same time). Together, these forces have shaped our “wired world” and led to an unprecedented triple impact on human living: the acceleration, compression, and intensification of human life on earth in the global world.
To call the present levels of globalization “unprecedented” is accurate, but it must be qualified at once. Today’s globalization is unique in history so far, but there are many earlier precedents of movement toward globalization, including the missionary expansion of the great world religions, the impact of the advances in transport and the widening networks created by trading, and the expansive effects of military conquest and imperialism. Equally, there are grand advances in earlier times that can claim a similar revolutionary impact on human life, such as the invention of writing, the alphabet and the wheel.
Thus, if viewed from the longer historical perspective, advanced modern globalization is only the latest of a series of waves of expanding human interconnectedness. But if viewed from the shorter perspective of the modern world, globalization represents a decisive shift from the Industrial Revolution, centered on production and epitomized by the factory, to the Information Revolution, centered on communication and epitomized by the computer. Either way, we must take into account both continuities and discontinuities with the past, and we must make our claims about the present with accuracy and humility.
Needless to say, globalization poses a sharp challenge to both accuracy and humility, and we need to start by avoiding the two equal and opposite pitfalls into which so many fall: the excessive “Wow!” attitudes of the cheerleaders and the excessive “gloom and doom” of the curmudgeons (who in their Christian form view globalization as the precursor to “the end times”). In any age, there are three tasks facing Christians who would wrestle with the world of their day and live faithfully as followers of the Way of Jesus.
The first task is to discern, and so to make an accurate description of the realities of the world in which we find ourselves.
The second task is to assess, and so to evaluate the pros and cons, the benefits and costs, of the world as a whole as well as of individual items and aspects of that world – all assessed within the framework of the biblical worldview.
The third task is to engage, and so to enter the world as disciples of Jesus called to be salt and light, gratefully using the best of the world as gifts of God and vigilantly avoiding the worst of the world. Or as the early church expressed it, we are to “plunder the Egyptian gold,” as the Lord told Israel to do, but we are never to set up “a golden calf,” as Israel was later judged for doing.
Easy to say, these basic Christian tasks are harder than ever to do because of globalization. History is always more complex than we can understand, and it proceeds not by the simple influence of certain factors but by their complicated interplay and through the ironies of their unintended consequences. Globalization only compounds our difficulty in understanding, for by its very nature, globalization means that we who are finite now have to deal with the whole world—in other words, a world that is always far beyond our full comprehension. And we are dealing with the world when the world is communicating and changing at an unprecedented speed—in other words, when the world may have changed even before we have finished describing it.
One safeguard is that to remember that many of our best descriptions always require immediate reminders. First, globalization almost always involves two countervailing forces, and not simply one—if the world is “universalizing” in new ways, it is also “localizing” in new ways (which has helped coin the odd term “glocal,” used to describe the impact of the global on the local and the local on the global). Second, in every new trend there are always both winners and losers—and Christians who honor their Master must never lose sight of the poor, the oppressed, and those left behind economically, especially those caught by the savage inequities of the globalized world. Third, there are “multiple modernities,” or different ways of being modern—so that the old adage that “Globalization equals Westernization equals Americanization” is not only wrong but a dangerous conceit. Different cultures, with their own history and their own values, are able to adapt to the modern world in their own way, and may always attempt to say No to what is considered “progress,” and not simply Yes.
The Global faith par excellence
The crucial and supreme point of the whole discussion is that globalization has a special relevance for Christians because the Christian faith is an essentially global faith. To any observer of the global scene, certain facts are evident and beyond question: The Christian faith is the world’s first truly global religion. Christians are the most numerous of religious believers in the world. The Christian church is the most diverse community on earth. The Bible is the most translated book in history. And in many parts of the world, the Christian faith is the world’s fastest growing faith, especially when growth is through conversion rather than birth rate. And so on.
Such facts are not accidental, for globalization is integral to the Christian faith. For one thing, the Christian faith was global before the term, beginning not simply with the Great Commission to the whole world but with the promise to Abraham that he would be the father of the faithful and a blessing to the whole world. For another thing, the Christian church has been one of the great “carriers” of globalization throughout history, such as in the missionary expansion of the first century church, the Protestant missions in the nineteenth, and the reaching out to the whole world today by the churches from all around the world—the remarkable enterprise of the Korean churches is a shining example. For yet another thing, Christian NGOs (non-governmental organizations) such as World Vision, Opportunity International, Compassion, Food for the Hungry and the International Justice Mission are often the pioneering carriers of globalization in the world today.
Put these factors together and it is clear that, if the Christian church lives up to its calling and proclaims the Gospel in its fullness, it is the natural carrier of a global Gospel for the global era—“the best news ever” for all humankind. No less than that is our privilege and our responsibility in the global era.
Grand transformations
Our core focus at the Lausanne Congress in Cape Town will be on the implications of globalization for discipleship and evangelism. But it is crucial to underscore that globalization is transforming almost every aspect of human life on the planet, and all these transformations have a bearing on discipleship and evangelism in one way or another. Some of the major transformations that require further exploration can be summarized briefly as follows:
A proper description of these profound transformations is far beyond the scope of this brief introductory essay. But such consequences must never be forgotten, for they define the world in which we live and in which we bear witness to our Lord. Our focus, here, however, is on two central areas: globalization and discipleship, and globalization and mission.
Christian discipleship in the global era
If globalization has both local and global dimensions, and if its enormous benefits are also trailed by extraordinary shadows, as they are, then it poses for Christian discipleship challenges that are complex. How do we think about both the benefits and the costs as Christ’s followers? And how do we think of this world that lives in our consciousness at both a macro and a micro level?
Christian mission in the global era
The increased opportunities for mission and evangelism in the global era are obvious and huge. Christians are by definition great communicators, and the global era is by definition the great age of communication, so the potential for outreach in the global world can hardly be overstated. With the destruction of traditions, the collapse of traditional certainties, and the melting down of traditional roles and allegiances, there is greater political liberty, greater social fluidity, greater religious diversity and greater psychological vulnerability than ever before in history. As a result, human beings in the global era have been described as “conversion prone,” and more open than ever to consider new faiths. We therefore face the prospect of spreading the Gospel in a manner that is “freer, faster, and farther” than ever before in the church’s history, a prospect that must be seized with faith and courage.
At the same time, it would be naïve not to see that the increased challenges to mission and evangelism are equally powerful, and must be faced frankly. The following nine issues are examples of the sort of challenges we must consider in the global era:
Either way, history shows that such attempts are almost always ineffective for the culture and disastrous for the church. And in the process, the Christian faith gets pressed into the service of some political ideology or other, losing the distinctiveness of the way of Jesus, and ending up as the court chaplain to the powers of the age. Both extremes must beware the idolatry of politics in the modern world, and consider the maxim: “The first thing to say about politics is that politics is not the first thing.”
Is not this partly why the single strongest difference between the early church and the modern church is the lack of supernatural power in the modern church, and there is such an attendant lack of prayer, spiritual discernment, and capacity for healing, deliverance, and supernatural warfare?
Secularization means that in the advanced modern world we live in “a world without windows,” so that for many modern Christians, the unseen tends to be also the unreal. Thus it is possible for us to live as “functional atheists,” and in more and more of life to have “no need of God,” so that mission is driven by statistics, demographics, and the “roll out” of the Gospel to the “unreached,” rather than by the traditional passion for Christ and for “the lost.”
At the same time, the pluralized world amplifies the fears surrounding the challenges of living with deep religious differences, so that religion is viewed as divisive and evangelism as unwarranted and politically incorrect “proselytization.”
Two particular dangers must be highlighted here. One is the subtle distortions of the Gospel in the various forms of modern “possibility thinking,” and the other is the crass and vile distortions of the Gospel in the various forms of the “prosperity” or “health and wealth Gospels” that are now exported from the USA to parts of the Global South, where their effects are pernicious to both the Gospel and the poor.
Among many issues on which Evangelicals have both the biblical resources and the historical experience to speak out constructively is the issue of forging civility in the emerging “global public square.” Whereas some Western Christians are now widely attacked as part of the problem of religion and public life, the proper championing of freedom o
f conscience and religious liberty for people of all faiths would make us part of the answer—not only for our own good, but for the wider good and the shalom of humanity. Lausanne III at Cape Town could take a strong lead at this point.
In sum, while the global world offers unprecedented opportunities for reaching peoples and parts of the world that have never been reached before, it sharpens the contrast between the wisdom of the world and the foolishness of the Gospel to a daunting and uncomfortable degree. Evangelism in the global era appears easier, and in many ways it truly is, but discipleship is unquestionably harder, and so too is costly incarnational evangelism that is patterned on the life and death of Jesus rather on the brilliance of modern insights and techniques.
Serving God in our own generation
Every generation is as close to God as every other, and we are responsible only for our own generation. Yet it is claimed today that the generation of young people who are now entering adulthood are the “crunch generation,” in the sense that many of the global trends of our day are converging to create unprecedented challenges for humanity. Regardless of whether this proves true, it is not too much to say that globalization represents the greatest opportunity for the Gospel since the Apostles, as well as the greatest challenge to the Gospel since the Apostles, and that we must respond to both with faith and with courage.
Above all, we must face both the opportunities and the challenges of globalization as the united people of God. In particular, and remembering the tragic blind spot of the Edinburgh Conference in 1910, we must avoid the peril of two equal and opposite forms of the worldliness of power. On the one hand, we must not confuse the spread of the Gospel with the spread of Western power, and on the other, we must not confuse a prophetic stand against Western power with the premises and prejudices of anti-Western “post-colonialism.”
With Western power in visible decline, there is less excuse for the first confusion than at Edinburgh, though the economic and cultural power of the West may well outlast its political and military dominance. In many parts of the world, the current temptation is to fall for the opposite confusion introduced by post-colonialism, but this would divide Christian against Christian in the name of suspicion, envy and resentment. And it would also divide the church along such lines as “the West” versus “the Rest,” the “global North” against the “global South,” or the churches of the “more developed” world against the churches of the “less developed” world. Such “accidental” and extra-biblical definitions and boundaries were the very mistake that Edinburgh made in light of the artificial and territorial notion of “Christendom.” More recent missionary themes such as “The whole church to the whole world,” or “Everyone to everyone, and everywhere to everywhere” are not only more in tune with the global era but more faithful to the Great Commission.
We all thank God together for the abundant evidence of the spectacular growth of the churches in the global South, with all their courage, passion and spiritual power. They put to shame the all-too obvious contrast with the marked spiritual poverty of the churches in the West. But at the same time, we must all be humbly aware that much of the global South is not yet fully modernized, and therefore not yet fully tested by the coming challenges and seductions of modernity (to which the Western church has fallen captive). That test is still to come.
Equally, we all openly acknowledge and sorrow over the dire weakness and worldliness of much of the church in the West, and its profound need for revival and reformation. Yet its sorry condition can stand as a helpful warning to all the churches elsewhere in the world: Do not do as Western churches have done over the past two hundred years—falling captive to the spirit and systems of the modern world. Thus, all the global churches can join hands in prayer with Western churches in this hour of their greatest challenge.
Then, the global churches around the whole world can be true partners and join forces to face the task of recovering a faith with such integrity and effectiveness that it can prevail over the challenges of the advanced modern world, and so do honor to our Lord and bring his Good News to the world.
No less than that is the supreme challenge posed by globalization to followers of Jesus Christ, and no less than that is the urgency of the topic we will explore together in this Multiplex session in Cape Town in October, 2010. Plainly, the topic of globalization is too large and the session too short to do justice to its immensity. But whether then or later, as this extraordinary century unfolds, we may trust that God is greater than all—globalization included—so God may be trusted in all situations, and we may have faith in God, and have no fear.
© The Lausanne Movement 2010
Keywords: Globalisation, discipleship, community, calling, tension, integrity, assessment, engagement, societal transformation, witness, mission, worldliness, Edinburgh Conference, secularisation, interconnectedness, discernment
Ian O. Guinness has not Contributed any other Conversations entries. To see other content that Ian O. Guinness has Contributed, click here
Originally Posted in English
Views: 5795
Comments: 17
Recommendations: 9
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | The Lausanne Global Conversation is powered by World Wide Open | What is World Wide Open?
Comments and Responses Post Comment
Note: This content has been auto-translated using the Google Translate service, a third party, machine translation service that we do not control. The translations provided are only an approximation of the original content and should not be considered exact. (Learn more)
United Kingdom
Thanks for this article - so many challenges and things to think through.
I want to highlight the point you make below
"In a world connected electronically and virtually, the trend is to diminish face-to-face human relationships and increase “virtual relationships” and “social networking.” Questions are even being raised as to whether anyone should “go” to church anymore. But is the “church” merely an “imagined community” that exists only in the ether? And how does this “mediated world” impact discipleship patterned on the flesh and blood realities of the Incarnation?"
I think we need to work though what is means to be a human in relation to above. I agree that so many people seem to negate face to face relationships maybe because they think they have friendships because they speak online.
In the UK there is an increase in automated options, pay for fuel at the pump, self service checkout and so on.
I sense that we will lose something about being human if we don’t interact. The smile, the grumpy face, the cough, the laughter are not there online or in automation. I have had made interesting conversations with people in everyday situations and had openings to talk about the gospel.
I wonder if virtual globalization creates a paradox? On the one hand we are able to reach the world yet in someways because of a high level of virtual interaction our physical world becomes smaller and smaller?
There are challenges as to how the church understands fellowship let alone mission? There is a new way to be human as believers but do we demonstrate this to people in our church? Do we have compassion? Are we willing to listen? can we cut some events to spend more time finding out about each others lives? Are we more bothered about numerical growth growrh in depth?
Thanks for raising these points and there is much to think about.
Look forward to conversing with others.
25.08.2010
United Kingdom
Thanks for this article - so many challenges and things to think through.
I want to highlight the point you make below
"In a world connected electronically and virtually, the trend is to diminish face-to-face human relationships and increase “virtual relationships” and “social networking.” Questions are even being raised as to whether anyone should “go” to church anymore. But is the “church” merely an “imagined community” that exists only in the ether? And how does this “mediated world” impact discipleship patterned on the flesh and blood realities of the Incarnation?"
I think we need to work though what is means to be a human in relation to above. I agree that so many people seem to negate face to face relationships maybe because they think they have friendships because they speak online.
In the UK there is an increase in automated options, pay for fuel at the pump, self service checkout and so on.
I sense that we will lose something about being human if we don’t interact. The smile, the grumpy face, the cough, the laughter are not there online or in automation. I have had made interesting conversations with people in everyday situations and had openings to talk about the gospel.
I wonder if virtual globalization creates a paradox? On the one hand we are able to reach the world yet in someways because of a high level of virtual interaction our physical world becomes smaller and smaller?
There are challenges as to how the church understands fellowship let alone mission? There is a new way to be human as believers but do we demonstrate this to people in our church? Do we have compassion? Are we willing to listen? can we cut some events to spend more time finding out about each others lives? Are we more bothered about numerical growth growrh in depth?
Thanks for raising these points and there is much to think about.
Look forward to conversing with others.
25.08.2010
Puerto Rico
¡Excelente artículo! Creo que todos los que asistirán a CT2010 deberían leerlo. Provee un excelente resumen del fenómeno de la Globalización y a la vez presenta un desafío a completar la Gran Tarea. Casi al final del artículo, los autores, en una justa evaluación de la iglesia en Occidente (nosotros), me parece hallar una de las mayores piedras de tropiezo en el trabajo misionero. Sin ser simplista, creo que si existe una "clave" para la Tarea, la Iglesia la tiene! Probablemente se debería dar más atención a la necesidad de la Iglesia (nosotros) de creer y vivir el Evangelio como si de verdad creyéramos que es la verdad.
24.08.2010
Puerto Rico
Excellent article! Everyone attending should read it. It is at the same time an excellent summary of Globalization and a mature call to understand how it affects the Great Task. Almost at the end, in the author’s (fair) evaluation of the Western church, I find one of the BIG stumbling blocks to Missions. Almost every line of thought about the unfinished task ends for me in the CHURCH. Without trying to be simplistic, if there is a "KEY" to the Task, the church has it! Probably more attention should be given to the need of the Church in the West (us!) to believe and live the Gospel as if it were true!
24.08.2010
Japan
I greatly appreciate that the authors correctly point out as ‘“accidental” and extra-biblical definitions and boundaries were the very mistake that Edinburgh made in light of the artificial and territorial notion of “Christendom.”’ This extra-biblical definition to see the world as ‘the developed’ and ‘the less developed’ has long influenced Christian thought about the world till now. Disciples of Jesus in the 20th century have been bound with its implication of a view of superiority/inferiority through the eye of ‘Westernization or civilization.’ Westernization has brought an unchallenged appreciation of a life which greedily pursues comforts and conveniences, into the world, while minimizing how Jesus showed a way of life through His living example.
My 20 years’ service relating to ‘the less developed’ countries under this extra-Biblical definition has created continuous dissonance inside me when I tried to follow Jesus seriously. This definition underlies that ‘the physically/outwardly developed’ modern countries are superior, while giving less attention to the real spiritual situation. In this view, I also appreciate that the authors mention that ‘Do not do as Western churches have done over the past two hundred years—falling captive to the spirit and systems of the modern world.’ When I read the authors’ warning to non-Western churches, I’ve realized that churches from any nation may be possible to fall captive in any un-Biblical spirit, while putting down other nations by new achievements and its utilization to control other nations instead of sharing fruits of God’s allowed achievements with others.
Here we need to remember Paul’s urge saying, ‘consider others/other nations better than ourselves.’ How can we, Christians in the 21st century, restore Paul’s urge in the first century, to our relationship to the Whole Church and the Whole World?
I believe that the key word is ‘the Whole.’ We may be required of our intentional shift toward Jesus way of viewing persons/peoples as whole as physical, social, and spiritual being, who was equipped with wisdom by God. From this point, we may start recognizing ‘the developed’ world’s social and spiritual poverty, as far below God’s desired situation.
We may also need to restore Biblical value of ‘inter-dependence’ for the true growth as the Whole. All peoples are imperfect. Each people/nation is lacking in some parts. However, each people group/nation has been blessed by God’s special gifts as its strength. All peoples are made as complementary ones. In the Ephesians Paul stated the church, as ‘joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows…’ Each nation’s churches can learn from counterparts of other nations and support one other, till we, Christians in the 21st century, will grow to the Christ. This Christ-like growing Whole Church can ultimately be the prototype for the world. As the complementary growing Whole Church, we may be able to show the world the true model of globalization led by the invisible living God in this fast-changing world beyond human comprehension.
Practice of Biblical inter-dependence among churches from all nations may be the Light for the Whole World, which has faced huge challenges of globalization of the 21st century and has waited for the true Hope appearing.
19.08.2010
Australia
Globalization is a challenge as this stimulating paper recognises. Certainly there have been many factors behind this which requires reflection, discernment (as stated in the paper) and a response from believers in light of Romans 12: 1-2 concerning the need to renew our minds and not conform to the ways of the world. So the implications for discipleship and evangelism are numerous which this paper starts to discuss.
My main concern about globalization relates to culture and language. I notice that Jim Harries raises the language question too. The use of ’standard solution’ strategies, music and resources, originating from the western world, impacts on people from other cultures. So is the ’McDonaldization’ (Drane) of the church what is desirable? What message does it send to them about how God sees their own culture? Are we then wanting to say there is only one Christian culture? If we say ’yes’ to this question, what are the consequences for those who don’t conform and fit into the particular brand? What are the pyschological and emotional dimensions for people being caught between their own culture and the globalized Christian culture? Does it lead to a shallowness in the discipleship process and the extent to which the Christian faith impacts?
One response arising from globalization is the splintering of the global Christian community. So what is the impact on unity and the capacity to work in partnership? Unity and diversity is a strong Biblical theme.
Shouldn’t globalization facilitate global partnership and cohesion? If not, why not?
God knows this context, is still in charge as stated in the paper and will equip his people to respond.
14.08.2010
China
@ David Turnbull: Let me chime in with Jim as well: Language! Language! Language! Culture! Culture! Culture! To downplay or avoid the use of these essential tools in our cross-cultural efforts is to offer something less than our best in Christ’s service; we kid ourselves when we say the differences don’t matter. And a hearty "no" to the McDonaldization of church and mission. Why these values? Are they eternally significant, somehow supra-cultural? I think not.
What we are striving for as the global church is unity, not homogeneity. As Guinness and Wells discuss in this paper, globalization often brings with it a superficial sameness that obscures even as it threatens the distinctiveness of places and communities. The "every tongue, tribe, and nation" of the final consummation is a pantheon of diversity--and that is precisely what makes their/our unity before the throne so powerful.
16.08.2010
Kenya
Hi David, I seem to be responding to you today!
I agree with almost all that you say. I am especially struck by your comment on the ‘splintering’ of the ‘global’ Christian community. I think this is a key issue to consider, and the ‘danger’ of splintering is real etc.
I would also add however, that much of the current ‘unity’ in the church, is economic. That is, the apparent unity between northern and southern especially churches, has arisen from economic dependence of the south on the north. Take away that dependence, and not only cans of worms but buckets of worms will appear everywhere. This is one sense in which financial dependence is extremely risky – in covering over issues. (The same of course applies to the use of a so-called international language, which is actually a Western language that others are obliged to use …).
What to do about this? I guess I can point again to the Alliance for Vulnerable Mission (see also http://conversation.lausanne.org/en/groups/view/1024 ).
15.08.2010
South Africa
Brilliantly insightful, sobering and cautionary. This provides valuable framework for further reflection and interaction.
14.08.2010
Argentina
Muchas gracias por esta excelente presentación, equilibrio y perspectiva que nos lleva a repensar la misión sobre “toda la iglesia a todo el mundo” o “todos a todos, y de todas partes a todas partes” en donde las iglesias globales de todo el mundo pueden ser verdaderos socios y unir fuerzas para enfrentar la tarea de recuperar la fe, integridad y eficacia enfrentando los desafíos del avanzado mundo, honrando al Señor y llevar sus buenas nuevas a todos lados.
Simplemente agregar que Edimburgo 1910 no pensó en Latinoamérica como una región para alcanzar con el evangelio. Recién esto tuvo lugar en el encuentro de agencias misioneras celebrado en 1916 en Panamá
11.08.2010
Kenya
Thanks Ian. A few comments:
You state that we need a ‘clear eyed understanding of the world’. What the piece does not mention is language. We won’t, I suggest, get any kind of ‘clear-eyed’ comprehension of ‘the world’ of people other than our own unless we learn their language. There is a desperate need for some Westerners to get into the languages of others.
In states that ‘with Western power in visible decline …’. I am not sure I agree. It seems that Western power is ever growing … The spread of English is one aspect of that. Where there is English, the West has power.
It is good to be self-critical in our understanding. The paper however seems grossly self-depreciating of the Western church, and raises the Southern church to come super-human prominence. I think that’s a case of ‘the grass is greener on the other side of the fence’, and not a global perspective.
06.08.2010
China
@ Jim_Harries:
China is always the asterisk at the bottom of any statistical global comparison. But to the degree that China is not Western, globalization is--at least so far--something that is coming to China rather than something that she exports to the rest of the world (though I recognize that this is changing). And--similar to Jim Harries’ comments--when I look around me I see a church that so far has not viewed globalization with anything resembling critical distance. I think we have much to learn from (in this case) the church in China, but I do not think they are doing much better at dealing with globalization than my passport country church (I am an American citizen).
I very much fear that the church here in China will lose some of its greatest gifts--the priority of the community over the individual, a great level of comfort with being counter-cultural, as examples--before it is even aware that they were at risk. Globalization has made tremendous inroads into Chinese society, but for most people it is not yet recognized as something that might need resisting. And, as I said below, I also think that the foreign missions community in China is if anything compounding the problem through... well, through our complicit participation in all the things listed as challenges in this paper under the section "Christian mission in the global era."
I hope to find a chance to discuss this paper with some local chruch leaders, and will report their comments as I am able.
09.08.2010
You must be logged in to post a comment. If you don’t have an account, you can sign up now (it’s free and easy!).