The Lausanne Global Conversation is on the World Wide Open Network
Author: Patrick Fung
Date: 29.07.2010
Category: Partnership
Editor’s Note: This Cape Town 2010 Advance Paper has been written by Patrick Fung as an overview of the topic to be discussed at the Morning Plenary session on “Partnering in the Body of Christ toward a New Global Equilibrium.” Responses to this paper through the Lausanne Global Conversation will be fed back to the author and others to help shape their final presentations at the Congress.
I was asked to address the theme “Partnering in the Body of Christ toward a New Global Equilibrium” at this Lausanne Congress. However, I face a fundamental problem. I have struggled with the title. The more I reflect on the theme, the more I am convinced that “towards a new global equilibrium” might be an inappropriate title. I struggled with the word “equilibrium”. The word “equilibrium” is interesting. It signifies the condition of a system in which competing influences are balanced. Equilibrium suggests that we are trying to equalize the powers of different forces. This title seems to suggest that global equilibrium would be our final and ultimate goal.
1. The mission of God- Pursuing global equilibrium or world evangelization?
I can understand the reason why the Lausanne Congress would like to put the emphasis on “a new global equilibrium”. This may not be irrelevant as participants from some parts of the world might have great power – whether the nature is financial, organizational or political – while others may have very little. While Samuel Escobar passionately argued that “missionary and theological tasks have a global dimension wherein neither imperialism nor provincialism have a place,” (1) it was claimed that nearly one million people go out on a short-term mission every year, mainly from the rich Western countries. (2) “[An] often negative aspect of short-term mission is that westerners often give the impression that our wealth is the secret to helping people come into right relationship with God.” (3)
The numeric centre of gravity in terms of Christian growth has shifted to the Global South while the fiscal centre of gravity remains in the Global North, though this might be changing. The concept and the practice of the “powerful” bringing the good news to the “powerless” has been rightly challenged.
God’s power
Firstly, the biblical concept of mission is NOT primarily or particularly about equilibrium or the balance of power. It is about the power of God given to His people through His Spirit in the proclamation of Christ. If anything, it is about the imbalance of power, the power of God upon His people who are the recipients of His power. It is about God’s sovereign power that thrusts us out into the world to witness boldly for Christ. The early church, whilst seemingly powerless, acknowledged the sovereign rule of God and the power of God in the lives of the disciples (Acts 4:24-31). The power of God is not dependent upon equilibrium of resources. As we have learned, the spreading of the gospel in the early church period was not dependent on charismatic leaders nor any grand strategies of the established Jerusalem Church, but by the nameless, “powerless” people who acknowledged the Lordship of Christ and experienced the power of the Spirit (Acts 11:19).
God’s mission
Secondly, partnership in the body of Christ should ultimately enhance world evangelization, not global equilibrium. I am glad that LCWE stands for Lausanne Congress for World Evangelization and not Lausanne Congress for World Equilibrium. Lindsay Brown, in his letter on the Third Lausanne Congress, urged churches around the world: “Please help us by your prayers. Our goal in every aspect of the Congress is to strengthen the Church in fulfilling Christ’s final command on earth, which has never been rescinded – to make disciples of all nations”. Making disciples of all nations must be our urgent and ultimate goal as we partner together in the body of Christ. Our energy must primarily be spent on the urgent task that “the gospel must first be preached to all nations” (Mark 13:10).
God’s resources
Thirdly, although a better state of equilibrium will avoid the tendency of dependency, the biblical concept of partnering in the body of Christ should be interdependence. The younger church of Antioch decided to provide help for the brothers living in Judea, the impoverished church in Jerusalem, each according to his ability (Acts 11:29). Generosity was a way of life for the early Christians. Both willingness to give and humility to receive are needed. Yet, over-giving and over-receiving often cripple the work of God. (4) A pastor from China once said to me, “We do not need money from the West. Money will divide the church in China”. It is very encouraging to know that a group of participants from the Majority World attending this Lausanne Congress has asked the Congress not to sponsor them so that resources can be channelled to others in need.
In pursuing God’s mission, unity is more important than equilibrium.
All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possession was his own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all (Acts 4:32).
Here we see the disciples testify boldly with the power of God and share generously with the resources from God. Increasingly, resources for God’s mission will not only be channelled from the West to the rest, but also from “anywhere to anywhere”. (5) The time will come when churches from the Global South or the Majority World will contribute significantly to world evangelization. Equilibrium will never eliminate comparison and competition. However, unity with one heart and mind under the Lordship of Christ will bring about a sacrificial sharing of God’s resources for world evangelization.
2. The redemptive purpose of God- Reconciliation as the basis of our partnership
The call to reconciliation
The first time I read John Stott’s book, God’s New Society – The Message of Ephesians back in 1979, I was struck by the profound statement in the preface, “For the sake of the glory of God and the evangelization of the world, nothing is more important than that the church should be, and should be seen to be, God’s new society [community]”. This new community is characterised by reconciliation – reconciliation to God and reconciliation to one another. Christ has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility (Eph 2:14). Christ crucified has brought into being nothing less than a new, united human race, united in itself and united to its Creator. (6) Christianity is not international, it is supranational. (7) God’s new community will always transcend racial, linguistic and national barriers as it reflects the nature of the kingdom of Christ.
Thus, reconciliation is the foundation of all Christian partnership. Reconciliation is to happen not only between ethnic groups, but also between generations, between the old and the young and between genders. For the Spirit of God has been poured out on all peoples. God’s new community includes those from the West and East, from the North and South, sons and daughters, young and old, men and women (Acts 2:17). Every generation owes the next generation a commitment to journey with them and partner together in serving God’s purpose (Acts 13:36).
As I reflect on the nature of God’s new community, I cannot help but think of brothers and sisters who by their ethnic background were taught to be enemies of other peoples because of political and racial conflicts. Yet, the power of the cross has brought together those who were alienated from one another to be united in Christ. Today, many who were once enemies are serving together on the mission fields, proclaiming the message of reconciliation. Chinese are bringing the gospel to the Japanese and Japanese are sharing their faith with the Chinese. It is as if the sins of aggression and hostility in the past were nailed to the cross. Recently in her will a Japanese Christian designated her assets for the ministry of the gospel amongst the Chinese people. The message of reconciliation is to be lived out by God’s new community, which the fragmented world needs to see. A senior communist party member once said to me, “If we communists could truly love one another like the Christians do, our society would be totally transformed”.
The call to “death to self”
Reconciliation is a position that Christ has achieved for us through the cross. We are reconciled to God. But we also know that in our human failures and weaknesses, reconciliation to one another sometimes is not evident; thus partnership becomes impossible. However, the foundation of all Christian partnership is reconciliation, and the foundation of reconciliation is the cross. The cross symbolizes death to self – death to our own rights – just as Christ did.
The Boxer Rebellion in China of 1900 will never be forgotten. Missionaries were murdered and mission compounds set on fire. Thousands of Chinese believers lost their lives. The China Inland Mission suffered heavy loss during that rebellion, with 58 missionaries and 22 children being killed. It was in the province of Shanxi that the violence of the Boxers reached its height, with the greatest number of casualties. When the Boxer Uprising finally ended, and reparations were offered, it came as a surprise to the Chinese government as well as to the foreign powers that the China Inland Mission refused to accept any compensation.
On 11 October 1901, the governor of Shanxi issued an edict. Placards were seen wherever the CIM had worked and suffered, throughout Shanxi. On each placard was written these words:
The Mission, in rebuilding these Churches with its own funds, aims in so doing to fulfil the command of the Saviour of the World, that all men should love their neighbours as themselves, I, the Governor, charge you all, gentry, scholars, army and people, those of you who are fathers to exhort your sons, and those who are elder sons to exhort your younger brothers, to bear in mind the example of Pastor Hoste [and the China Inland Mission], who is able to forbear and forgive as taught by Jesus to do so… signed by the Governor of Shanxi (CIM 1902:33, 36).
Missionaries in the past demonstrated a “death” to self in the proclamation of the gospel.
Out of the most severe trial, their overflowing joy and their extreme poverty welled up in rich generosity. For I testify that they [the Macedonian churches] gave as much as they were able, and even beyond their ability (2 Corinthians 8:2).
Similarly, the biblical model of Christian partnership is not a “win-win” model as the world promotes but always a sacrificial partnership.
3. The sovereign rule of God - The danger of pride and self-pity
Winds of Change
The Edinburgh Conference in 1910 has often been referred to as the defining moment for the modern Western Missionary Movement with epoch-making significance. There was such strong energy and commitment from the conference to carry the gospel to the entire non-Christian world. The period of the 1910s also coincided with new possibilities due to advances in technology from the Western industrial world. Technological progress was hailed as the handmaid to the spreading of the gospel worldwide. (8)However, the delegates were overwhelmingly Christians from the Western countries, mainly British and Americans (1000), and with a small minority (170) from continental Europe. Very few came from the younger churches from Asia. (9) There were also no Latin American or African participants. And the participants were mainly male.
It is encouraging to see that the picture is very different today. It is reported that Korea has sent out more than 20,000 cross-cultural missionaries to over 160 countries.(10) With a Christian population of more than 70 million, there is an increasing concern for world evangelization from the church in China. Over half of the delegates from this Third Lausanne Congress are from the Majority World. Many scholars, including Philip Jenkins, emphasize a shift of power from Western churches to those South of the equator. (11)
While I rejoice in the growth of the Asian Missionary Movement, I still have a nagging restlessness. There is a thought that is circulated among Chinese Christians that the 21st century mission or the next century mission belongs to the Asians or to the Chinese. Sometimes, even the Westerners boost the confidence of our Asian brothers and sisters by promoting this concept, which unfortunately is to our harm. I do not deny the wealth and the tremendous resources with which God has blessed many of the Asian countries, including China. However, I am concerned that we as Asians may be repeating the same mistake that our Western brethren might have committed in the past – that is, to equate economic and political power with advances in the spreading of the gospel. We continue to reinforce the notion that the spreading of the gospel is always from the powerful to the powerless, the haves to the have-nots. There is a sense of Asian triumphalism that makes me nervous.
Winds of God
The early Christians acknowledged a fundamental truth in the spreading of the gospel, namely, the sovereign rule of God (Acts 4:25). Our sovereign Lord is the one in control of history, the Lord of all political powers and the one who determines our times. The Most High is sovereign over kingdoms of men and gives them to anyone he wishes (Daniel 4:25). No one ethnic group or nation can claim the exclusive privilege of being the ones to finish the Great Commission. We need to acknowledge that the Lord in the Bible even used Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar to fulfill His purpose. He does as He pleases.
God, by His sovereign grace, has created in Christ a new spiritual community from all tribes and nations to bring the good news to the world. God’s new community of all tribes, nations and tongues is to be a community of mutual encouragement and learning. Professor Andrew Walls insightfully highlighted the concept of polycentrism: the riches of a hundred places learning from each other. He believes that there is no one single centre of Christianity or one single centre of missionary activity. He said, “One necessitates the other”. (12)
Arrogance and self-pity will be the major barriers to pursuing world evangelization. Arrogance with ethno-superiority can be hidden within the justified vision for world evangelization. Self-pity undermines God’s work in us and through us. There is a rich heritage of the modern Western Protestant Mission from which the non-Western Christian community can learn. The faith and perseverance of Western missionaries who gave their lives for the sake of the gospel should be re-discovered. The stories should be retold. On the other hand, there is also a spiritual vibrancy from the Global South that the Western world needs to observe. Also there is a desperate need for more missiological thinking beyond the Western paradigm, which speaks to the contemporary political, social, religious and ethnic contexts. (13,14)
We are God’s global community united in Christ. Partnership is based upon this firm foundation. Partnership must spring from a deep sense of gratitude to God for what Christ has done. He has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility that separates us from God and from one another. Sacrificial partnership with a commitment to “death to self” will be the only way to world evangelization, for the very shape of mission is cruciform. The cross lies at the very heart of mission. (15)
© The Lausanne Movement 2010
Keywords: Partnering, partnership, equilibrium, power, global, Global South, Majority World, evangelization, centre of gravity, mission, interdependence, resources, reconciliation, community, cross, pride, arrogance, self-pity, sovereign, polycentrism, unity
Patrick Fung has not Contributed any other Conversations entries. To see other content that Patrick Fung has Contributed, click here
Views: 61498
Comments: 40
Recommendations: 10
Conversation Post Comment
China
Thank you Patrick for this thoughtful article as we are reminded of the biblical mandate to disciple all nations and that the Great Commission is given to all His disciples, not just to any particular group or gender to complete.
Nonetheless, there are certain realities we need to acknowledge and global trends, which are taking place as missions does not take place out of an abstract situation but in the context of our generation and politico-legal, socio-economic situation. While the geopolitical and economic centre of gravity is moving from the Atlantic to the Pacific, that of church growth has moved to the Global South and East Asia.
Equilibrium is often used in the context of a dynamic stable state and while it is NOT equality or uniformity, one can look at it as the "optimum partnership" and sharing of all kinds of resources that will "maximize evangelization". Whether it is the wealthy rich nations that supply the financial or other resources or the depth of experience of the suffering church, we need one another to fulfil His mandate. If we look at it as God’s equilibrium where all of His children are contributing in their own unique way and working in dynamic harmony/unity for His Kingdom, then equilibrium is positive.
With Asian churches waking up to the fact that they have resources to send more workers, many want to take greater responsibility for global missions. This should be a matter for rejoicing! It is the realization that Asia has been blessed to be a blessing to the nations. Many I have met and spoken to have a sense that Asia (with China probably having the most Christians in any Asian nation) is at its "kairos" moment for a missions movement. We cannot deny the impact of the financial crisis on the Western nations and in turn, resources available for ministry. On the other hand, Asia on a whole has coped well and therefore likely to have growing resources that could overflow into world missions.
We have great examples of good partnership and great missions movements, but with these, there have also been cases of flawed or even painful partnerships. Resource providers, who are usually wealthier than the recipients, tend to dominate and control those in receipt of their "charity". This has left a bad taste in the mouth of the local believers in some cases, as indicated by one Chinese response to this paper.
Much as we celebrate missions, we must also admit the many mistakes made because of colonialism or imperialism. However, imperialism or colonialism is not an exclusive "Western problem", it is just human failure and sin. This often arises because of skewed/extreme nationalism and a sense of superiority of one’s culture. Of course, a superior attitude can be taken not just by those who are wealthy and provide funding or training materials, one can also revel in suffering as if that were a superior experience. The bottom line is, it is not about suffering or even sacrifice, it is about obedience though obedience often entails suffering and/or sacrifice.
With rising Asian wealth and rich experience in suffering for the Gospel in some countries, the Asian church will need to be mindful so it does not end up making the same mistakes. We are to share all resources in partnership for the Gospel, with no one lording over the other. Indeed good partnership can occur only when we have mutual respect and humility with a willingness to generously share God-given resources for His Great Commission.
On another note, in international organizations or alliances, it is time to think about the composition of their leadership, if such organizations have not already done so. Does it reflect the existing realities of growth in their African, Asian or South American membership? With this growth of the church in the Global South and East Asia, I am excited to see the growing contribution not just in world missions but also theology, missiology, literature, art, music and songs from believers in the "developing" world. These increasing contributions from various cultures will enrich us as we see things from different perspectives and as a result, we will have a broader picture and better understanding of who God is and what He wants us to accomplish in the 21st Century!
20.10.2010
United Kingdom
Mission partnerships must be one of the greatest blessings of the Christian life this side of the new creation. This Asian perspective is so helpful. We have many Chinese students in our city at our church in North East England, and we struggle to know how best to help them, particularly after they return to China, perhaps with a new-found faith in Christ. We are also one of those churches which sends people on short-term missions. A wider perspective on the strengths and weaknesses of this approach and how to improve these partnerships would be very useful. We have seen how life-changing they can be for those who go. I was moved by your reference to the Boxer Rebellion and its aftermath. Another person caught up in that was Roland Allen, whose books have done so much for the cause of world mission and global partnership.
05.10.2010
Kenya
@ Jonathan_Pryke:
Thanks for your inspiring suggestions.
A suggestion - although a difficult one - would be to pray for and seek for a volunteer who could do more for the Chinese through a life committed to mission to China. Not sure how ’open’ China is to that these days?
05.10.2010
Nigeria
@ Jim_Harries:
Hi Jim,
Someone suggested that the church planted (possibly) by the ’Ethiopian Eunuch’ has survived 20 centuries - The Ethiopian Coptic Church, not so those planted by missionaries. Is it rue?
15.10.2010
Kenya
@ besoman:
I suggest there is an urgent need for some Western missionaries to be doing their ministries using the languages and resources of the people they are reaching, and not those they bring from home. Then, who knows, by God’s grace and power, he could use even much maligned Western missionaries to glorify his name.
15.10.2010
Taiwan (ROC)
This is the most insightful article I have read about Christian partnership.
When we think about “partnership”, our human nature immediately directs our thoughts towards certain modern forms of the Towers of Babel. Patrick judiciously guides us away from such dangers, & navigates our thoughts towards the center of God’s heart for us—the Cross, where we learn to be humbly interdependent to each other, under the sovereign God.
The caution against Asian Triumphalism is timely & prophetic.
14.10.2010
Italy
Absolutely wonderful! May we, as His body, learn from one another and focus on the furthering of the Kingdom! May His missionary Spirit blow from all 6 continents to all 6 continents.
13.10.2010
United States
Terrific and thought-provoking. I’ve blogged on this but want to include my full article here to make things easier:
I always appreciate it when thinkers carefully examine unstated premises. I always think about and episode of the West Wing in which one main character is repeatedly advised to handle reporters by "rejecting the premise" of their questions. I believe that Singaporean Church leader Patrick Fung’s ability to do this -- to put the premise of his paper’s title ("Partnering in the Body of Christ toward a New Global Equilibrium")-- is what makes his contribution to the Lausanne Congress so valuable.
Fung’s self-conscious article presents a very important question. Should global equilibrium of power, resources, and influence be pursued at all. Phillip Jenkins and others have done a good job of pointing out to us that the majority of Christians now live in the global south while most of the power and influence remains in the the Western countries. But as I read Fung, I must acknowledge that this fact alone mustn’t be the sole reason that we pursue a global equilibrium in the Church. Rather, our goal is world evangelism, not equilibrium. Writes Fung, "I am glad that LCWE stands for Lausanne Congress for World Evangelization and not Lausanne Congress for World Equilibrium." This is an important point. We must not be saying "to the extent to which pursuing global equilibrium in the Church is the nice thing to do, we must do it." Rather we must say "to the extent to which pursuing a global equilibrium in the Church contributes to the extension of God’s reign and fame among all peoples and nations, we must do it."
To this point, I want to say three things -- things that I think Fung is also saying.
First, we may speak of a geographic, financial, numerical, or intellectual "center of gravity" in the Church, but the only "center of gravity" that has any real meaning is the theological one -- Christ is the one and only "center of gravity" for the Church.
This, of course, isn’t a point original to me, but rather comes from something I read in the Lausanne Theology Working Group paper. Let me provide an extended quote here:
"We rejoice in the phenomenal growth of the church in the majority world of the global south, and for that reason we understand the intention of the statement that the ’centre of gravity’ of world Christianity has shifted south. However, we strongly discourage the further use of this term, for two reasons. First, Christianity has no centre but Jesus Christ. We are defined by no geographical centre, but only by our allegiance to the Lordship of Christ, and he is Lord of all the earth. The ’centre’, therefore, is wherever he is worshipped and obeyed. Secondly, any talk of a centre (other than Christ) undermines the fact that Christianity, even since the book of Acts, has always been fundamentally polycentric. Anywhere on earth can be a centre, and any centre can rapidly become peripheral. The global nature of the church as ’one throughout the whole wide world’ subverts the language of a centre--whether geographic, numerical, or missionary. Mission is from everywhere to everywhere."
Second, for the gospel to be the gospel, there is a need for a kind of global equilibrium in the Church. This is because a full-orbed understanding of the gospel includes the good news that God is creating out of fragmented and broken humanity, one new humanity, the Church.
So there can be no true gospel and no true evangelization unless it includes the presentation of this new reconciled humanity. And I sense a growing chorus of voices on this point. It is here in Fung’s article, "Christ has destroyed the barrier . . . has brought into being nothing less than a new, united human race . . . the message of reconciliation is to be lived out by God’s new community, which the fragmented world needs to see." It is also in the Lausanne Theology Working Group paper, "It is important to see how this ’peace-making’ work of the cross -- reconciling Jews and Gentiles, and creating on new humanity -- is not just a by-product of the gospel, but is of the essence of the gospel itself." It there in the words of Antoine Rutayisire who, when speaking of factors contributing to the Rwandan genocide of the 1990s, mourned the fact that conflicts between missionaries from different denominations "created more divisions and animosities among the people who did not see Christianity as a unifying factor but rather another colonial importation." It is, of course, in the Lausanne Covenant itself which states, "our disunity undermines our gospel of reconciliation" and the Manila Manifesto which affirms "the urgent need for churches, mission agencies and other Christian organizations to cooperate in evangelism and social action, repudiating competition and avoiding duplication." And more voices besides these could be cited. Praise the Holy Spirit as He works to move us more and more to this point of common ground.
Third, for a global equilibrium to be built upon an a priori commitment to God’s global mission, it will necessarily look different than conceptions of equilibrium that a based on a rather arbitrary sense of niceness, fairness, or democracy.
And I’m not meaning to be cute here, but Fung has raised a critical specific point that alludes to this larger one. His specific point is this, "although a better state of equilibrium will avoid the tendency of dependency, the biblical concept of partnering in the body of Christ should be interdependence". Now, I can’t tell you how tempted I am to chase that rabbit trail, but I will try to exercise a bit of self-control and simply suggest, in agreement with Fung, that it is unbiblical to hold up independence and autonomy as signs of spiritual maturity either for individuals, local churches, or national/regional churches. The three (to four) self formula is fundamentally flawed if it cannot allow for the kind of permanent interdependence that the Bible calls for.
Now it is this Biblical interdependence that must become what we mean by equilibrium. It is not that the Holy Spirit distributes the same gifts, history, resources, experiences, and knowledge to every person, church, and region in precisely the same ways so as to facilitate our human conception of fairness. Rather, it is that the Holy Spirit distributes gifts as He wills for the common good (1 Cor. 12). We are all supposed to be strong in some ways and weak in others. For in this, we cannot but come together. The real problem may not be that Western churches "have all the power, influence, scholarship and resources", but rather that we in the West have failed to recognize the richness in majority world Churches that we desperately need. Likewise we fail to recognize value that lies outside our normal categories of assessing value. So that if we continue to only think of equilibrium in terms of balancing money, influence, information, and the like then we will never achieve Biblical interdependence (i.e. equilibrium) that also calls us to value a whole range of other categories such as prayer, worship, persecutions, powerlessness, poverty, joy, and more.
12.10.2010
United States
@ Cody_Lorance:
Cody, thank you for your insights and for so eloquently elaborating on Patrick Fung’s paper. I say AMEN absolutely to your points. I have myself been struggling with the ability to percieve and communicate your sentiments expressed here about the NEED for interdependance, while not ignoring the real dangers of dependancy or colonialism. Which result in the cultivating of immature indiginous believers by elevating earthly wisdom (customs) and foreign cultural norms above the simple truth of the Gospel that brings freedom from physical earthly systems of power and influence.
12.10.2010
United States
@ Kurt_Tuffendsam:
Thanks for reading, Kurt. I glanced back at my post to see what exactly was so profound and could only see my typos. So I appreciate your encouraging comments. I couldn’t help myself, so I went back and made some corrections (still can’t edit comments on LGC) and the post is now available on my blog here.
http://codylorance.blogspot.com/2010/10/must-church-pursue-global-equilibrium.html
Blessings to you, brother. I suppose I’ll see you in the crowds next week. This is such an important issue. Let’s pray for the Spirit’s strong, strong guidance.
12.10.2010
Switzerland
Dear Patrick
This is an excellent paper, full of fresh thinking, having a global perspective. I like the way you are stressing first and foremost God’s incredible power. Seeing Him as He is, our response cannot be one of competition but one of reconciliation, humility and gratitude. Thanks for encouraging us. I am looking forward to meeting a ’supranational’ community. Blessings
Michael H
09.10.2010
United States
I love this paper!
I love that it boils down to the sovereign hand of God, moving through various cultures, the powerful and those lacking power. And God’s great gospel ventures forth through us all. I love that none of us are off the hook. We are all called to share Jesus. Those in the West need not shrink back from doing so for fear of seeming colonial. And those in the global south need not revel in their need. We are all one people, serving one God, who empowers us both.
07.10.2010
United States
@ Maryedemuth:
I want to clarify that I don’t believe acting in a colonial or superior way is the correct way to be. Just that as an American, I worry a lot about that, and try to ask great questions and learn from a culture. Sometimes I let my fear of offending prevent me from walking forward.
07.10.2010
Australia
Thanks Patrick....
The cross is the heart of mission
And through the cross we have reconciliation
And through reconciliation we have unity and hence partnerships.
Through His power we are one universal church.
We are God’s universal community united in Jesus Christ.
We should not think nationality but unity in Christ.
By His power we are all ONE in Him.
It does not matter where the missionary comes from ..."but our citizenship is in heaven"...Phil 2:20
Let us not dwell on the differences that separate us, and, instead,dwell on the unity that exists through our Lord.
We are all one in Him through His grace and power.
This is the unity
This is the rediscovered paradigm
All this seems to have nothing to do with "equilibrium". It is much more than that.
06.10.2010
United States
Dear Patrick, thank you for the paper. I was moved when I read it, felt an excitement in my spirit. You are a man of honor.
Marguerite
02.10.2010
Brazil
Patrick,
I believe your article is one of the most thoughtful and realistic pieces I have read leading up to LC III.
Although you struggle with the word equilibrium, and from your definition I understand why, I believe you did strike a balance in many of the subjects you made reference. I appreciate a scholar that shows both sides but allows does not resolve a particular tension between them or resists in emphasizing only a one-side view.
01.10.2010
Nigeria
I so much appreciated this article! I found it very helpful how you teased apart the title regarding equilibrium; it made me ponder again the ultimate goal of partnering.
I was reminded of a 1995 article by Stanley Skreslet in IBMR, where, based on documents and trends he had considered in a mainline denomination, he issued the challenge to consider the ultimate end of partnership in mission. His observation was that partnership was inappropriately becoming the goal of mission, as opposed to a means of mission. He identified the historic understanding of the goal of mission using the words of the United Presbyterian Church Book of Order (1981-82): "The great ends of the Church are the proclamation of the gospel for the salvation of men; the shelter, nurture, and spiritual fellowship of the children of God; the maintenance of divine worship; the preservation of the truth; the promotion of social righteousness; the the exhibition of the Kingdom of Heaven to the world." And then he concluded with this challenging observation, "To move from (this statement) to the idea of partnership - whether defined as "seeking solidarity" or "demonstrating unity" or "participating in the global Christian community" - is to lose something essential. Partnership is in no way equivalent to, or an adequate substitute for, the "great ends" of the church described and proclaimed above. It is a concept of a different order, a means of mission, but not, in itself, the goal of Christian witness. Any church that forgets this distinction stands in danger of entering into mission with an empty basket." (International Bulletin of Missionary Research, July 1995, pp98-104; PDF file file available at www.internationalbulletin.org/files/html/1995-03-contents.html)
27.09.2010
United Kingdom
Thank you for this paper.
I liked the example from Shanxi.
Yes i too have only seen partnership working effectively when there has been self-sacrifice involved.
24.09.2010
Kenya
Thanks Matthew and others who are here discussing.
May I suggest that a helpful basis for ‘partnership’ be what we are calling vulnerable mission? This is essentially to be committed to working using the resources and language(s) of the people being reached. By such means many of the problems that otherwise occur are simply avoided. This is something that a growing group of us have been working on for a number of years now, and more and more people are seeking to practiceit in implementation. See www.vulnerablemission.com
21.09.2010
United States
Hi Patrick,
Thanks for the thoughtful article. It seems to me that Jesus-like character is the key to successful partnership. You appropriately drew attention the the idea that arrogance and self-pity would be the biggest barriers to the advancement of the Kingdom.
Loved your words:
"As we have learned, the spreading of the gospel in the early church period was not dependent on charismatic leaders nor any grand strategies of the established Jerusalem Church, but by the nameless, “powerless” people who acknowledged the Lordship of Christ and experienced the power of the Spirit (Acts 11:19)."
The need of the hour it seems is for men and women of the global church to come together in partnership on the terms of personal surrender to the Lord Jesus and not care about much else...
21.09.2010
United States
Whatever the wording, you are right, Patrick: unity of the body for global evangelization is what we need to work towards. Our unity, manifested in our love for each other, is what identifies us as Christ’s followers (1 John 4:7), and partnering with each other will better communicate the Gospel.
Many of my students in Japan thought that Jesus was born in the U.S., and a big stumbling block for Japanese is that Christianity is seen as a foreign religion, that they can’t keep their Japanese identity if they become Christians. Clearly there has been a problem communicating the Gospel free of cultural attachments. Better partnership between missionaries and locals as well as a diversity of cultural backgrounds among missionaries would help change perceptions of Christianity in this country.
Also, regarding sending and receiving missionaries, a good example of humble partnership is one set by the church my husband and I are working with in Mexico. They are working with a church in the U.S., and the goal of this partnership is that one year the Mexican church will send a team to the U.S. to help with the Spanish ministry there, and the church from the U.S. will send a team to the Mexican church to help with its summer camps. It would be great to see more of this back and forth happening around the world, not necessarily in sending of manpower but in aspects of ministry such as ideas, research, resources, etc.
21.09.2010
Nigeria
Thank you Patrick, I could’t agree with you more. God who formed man and crafted his hands did not make each finger equal, did He? But short or tall, each is very vital and relate perfectly. So should the Body of Christ.
20.09.2010
United States
Thank you Patrick for your article on partnership. I am thankful especially for your emphasis on Unity and a focus on making disciples of all peoples as being the primary goal, not equality of posessions, wealth, or influence.
In working with Churches in less affluent nations, I myself am wrestling with how to balance a healthy fear of creating dependency with true compassion and promoting of interdepency between Churches cross-culturally in order to see the Gospel spread to more people.
For instance, what are the most common ways wealthy Christians create dysfunctional relationships with indigenous Churches by giving too much finances or material help from outside the local Church? What are examples of ways wealthy Christians can partner cross-culturally with Churches in poverty to help the Gospel expand to a larger group of people. ie. (buying Bibles for the locals to distribute, helping financially with mercy ministries to "help" more people in need, providing means of transportation for locals to travel to further villages or plant more Churches outside their own cities, etc.) If it is a partnership then what are ways the local Church in poverty can contribute to the Churches from wealthier nations? Are we allowing the Churches in poverty contribute to our Churches in wealthier nations?
13.09.2010
Argentina
Muchas gracias por esta presentación. Interdependencia y unidad siguen siendo las palabras claves. Una unidad que refleje la diversidad y una diversidad que se esfuerza para lograr la unidad. Nadie puede saber más y hacer más que todos juntos. Las diferencias no deben ser motivo de remordimiento sino parte del esfuerzo por llegar a ser lo que Dios quiere. Es aprender unos de otros y compartir unos con otros. «En medio de toda la diversidad, sin embargo, hay un eje: Cristo Jesús… escuchar la palabra de Dios y escucharnos los unos a los otros van juntos; sólo podemos tener lo primero si estamos igualmente preparados para tener lo segundo»[1].
Cada Iglesia debe estar abierta a responder a las necesidades de las otras. Compartir sus bienes materiales y espirituales. Todos tenemos algo para dar y algo para recibir. Cada iglesia está en una situación de misión y las iglesias en todas partes se necesitan las unas a las otras. El campo de misión es el mundo entero donde la Iglesia es la que comparte el mensaje de salvación: “porque no quiere que nadie perezca sino que todos se arrepientan” 2 Pedro 3:9. La misión de Dios invita a participar a la Iglesia de todos los pueblos a todas partes.
Para que exista la cooperación se necesita haber cumplido con un nivel de confianza que es muy difícil de edificar cuando alguien se muestra autosuficiente. La belleza de la encarnación es que Jesucristo siendo por naturaleza Dios se «rebajó» voluntariamente para estar entre nosotros. Debemos relacionarnos, perdonarnos, humillarnos, entender y comprender nuestras diferentes culturas y ayudarnos mutuamente.
No hay nadie superior, ni nadie inferior. Significa también que debemos construir mejor nuestro puente de comunicación. Una relación cara a cara, enriquecer el diálogo entre todo el cuerpo de Cristo: la iglesia global. No hay Norte o Sur, Este u Oeste, lo que hay es «un solo cuerpo» donde lo que queda muy claro es la idea de compartir algo, una empresa, un propósito, una experiencia, el dinero, la alegría, sufrimiento, el gozo, la persecución, la riqueza y pobreza, lo que sea, debe ser compartido. La fe común debe tener una salida a la participación práctica y esta participación en la práctica tiene consecuencias concretas.
[1]Bosch, David Jacobus: Misión En Transformación: Cambios De Paradigma En La Teología De La Misión. Grand Rapids, Mich. : Libros Desafío, 2000, pp 566-567
09.09.2010
Malaysia
Dear Patrick,
I affirm that genuine partnership can only happen if we see ourselves as God’s global community in Christ who share the same vision of world evangelization. I know of house church in cn who come alongside and support a missionary from sg to work among a minority. This is a new paradigm. The definition of sending and receiving country is redefined. One needs to learn to give and also to receive in genuine partnership.
26.08.2010
Singapore
Patrick, thanks for this. I agree with much that you have shared and am convinced that God-ordained partnership isn’t really so much about the powerful lording it over the powerless. From my experience of working in partnership with various Christian bodies, I’ve seen that the most fruitful ones have been when all parties have intentionally adopted attitudes of servanthood, each fully committed to helping the other to succeed, and the humility to admit that they might not always have all the answers.
17.08.2010
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!).