We are in the middle of a hugely significant paradigm shift:  missions is transitioning out of the paradigm “from the West to the rest” into a new and not yet fully defined or understood paradigm “from anywhere to everywhere”.  For over one hundred years missionaries have been sent out from about a dozen western countries to serve around the world.   Mission organizations that developed during this period of history are today called traditional western missions.   Many of the traditional mission structures (both organizational and discussion/networking forums) were birthed out of this old paradigm.  But this paradigm’s days are numbered. 

A new paradigm in missions is being driven by two significant phenomena.  The first is globalization, reflected best in the flattening of the world through new communication technology. This is less structure and more relationship.  A picture of this is the Quechua woman sitting next to a business office in Cuzco, Peru with her laptop computer.  She is borrowing an internet connection in order to sell her hand woven cloth on EBay to a Chinese businessman living in Beijing who pays for it through PayPal and has the merchandise shipped to his uncle in London who owns a store selling handmade cloth.  

The second phenomenon is the tremendous growth of the majority world Church and its related missions’ movement.  Conservative estimates suggest cross-cultural incarnational missionaries are being sent now from over one hundred different countries.  This mission force is called by some the “majority world missions’ movement”.  These missionaries are bringing with them into missions vastly different realities than do their traditional western colleagues.  They tend to come from economically less affluent countries and so understand the issues of poverty and suffering.  English is usually not their mother tongue.  They come from religious realities where they are often the minority and many have been persecuted for their faith.  They don’t bring with them a political backdrop of global dominance associated with many from the West.  Their theology tends to be more conservative and focused on the essentials.  And they often enter into ministry, as did the founders of the traditional western missions’ movement, with a willingness to live by faith and to suffer for the gospel rather than having guaranteed salaries accompanied with world class health and evacuation insurance.  

One does not plan and build a new paradigm but rather discovers it.  While the “from anywhere to everywhere” paradigm is not fully understood there are areas of growing clarity. 

• The biggest challenge for traditional western missions is to maintain their relevance in global missions. Organizational structures, governance models, and policies on finance and personnel reflect an appropriate response to the old paradigm but seem strangely irrelevant to the new reality.   Not all missions will successfully navigate the transition.
• A culture of relationships/partnerships will replace the highly defined and self contained mission structures. 
• The local church will assume a seat at the “missions table” once dominated by missiologists and mission organizations. 
• The “us and them” perspective (West to the rest) is being replaced by the global “we”. 
• Almost all significant challenges in missions are global by nature and can only be adequately addressed through true global dialogue.  This is not the same as majority world input on a western agenda.  Global forums all too often reflect agendas driven by the West.   
• The wisdom and insight of the majority world Church and mission leaders will eventually be recognized as essential for determining best practice principles for global missions. 

 

What will the new paradigm of missions look like?  I encourage others to share their perspectives.  Here are a few questions.

• What will mission organizations look like in the future? 
• How will global leadership be provided for this new paradigm?  If relationships and best practice principles are foundational, could continent wide umbrella missions associations fill a strategic role as they facilitate global networking? 
• What are practical steps that can be taken to encourage healthy engagement with the new paradigm? 
• Could alliances between missions and missions, missions and churches, and churches and churches be developed similar to those used in the airline industry?  Could commitment to best practice principles serve as the foundation for a partnership culture?
• Those behind the Lausanne Conversation (World Wide Open) are providing a social networking tool for leaders in global missions.  Could a tool like this encourage the paradigm shift?    

I would appreciate any feedback.  Communicate either via the profile link or directly with me at either  [email protected] or [email protected]