Moving Beyond "Supply Side" Missions

This last month SIM used an article I wrote as blog post for the SIM community worldwide.  I have received good feedback regarding these concepts so I thought it useful to share it on my personal blog.  (I have adapted it appropriately...)

Moving Beyond “Supply-Side” Missions

by Ken Baker

It is our privilege four times a year at SIM USA to welcome a new group of soon-to-be SIM missionaries as they gather for a two-week SIMGo orientation. As they circulate around the office we eagerly introduce ourselves and invariably ask two standard questions: Where are you going?  & What are you going to do?  Their varied answers demonstrate the breadth of ministry opportunities in the SIM world, but these questions also highlight what appears so significant to us about mission, going and doing.  For budding missionaries these are huge issues which, once settled, focus and inspire toward preparation and execution. 

We don’t seem to grasp, however, the level of presumption which accompanies such decisions.  With the going and doing settled, it seems the die is already cast well before one ever enters the eventual context of ministry.  Such confidence rests on the assumption that the SIM placement system has thoroughly affirmed the essential need to which the corresponding candidate is the hoped-for answer.  This is what I call “supply-side missions,” which operates on a continuum of identifying needs and providing solutions. 

For those of us who are accustomed to perceiving mission from a position of power and capacity, we seem to receive the Great Commission and the Great Commandment as a blank check mandate on which we can write any mission activity which seems appropriate.  Supply-side missions conceptualizes global engagement in terms of unilateral agenda and contribution, viewing the world through the lens of what-it-lacks and what-we-have-to-offer—what we have, what we know, what we can do, what we can say, etc.  Our capability often causes us to presume we (and what we have) are the supply to meet this need, reach these people, develop this ministry, etc. 

When we shape mission in terms of what we have to dispense to the nations, agenda and strategy control the conversation and determine what we bring to the ministry context.  This perspective flows from a self-perception of the complete (we are ‘saved’, knowledgeable, capable, etc. and no longer needy) to the incomplete (the lost and needy in ‘third world’, deprived places). 

This lack/need orientation flows from a tendency to categorize the world, its peoples and their conditions, and view them through a classification/problem-solving grid, leading us to formulate a strategic agenda in answer to the question: “What (and who) does it take for us to meet this need?”  There are four assumptions which populate this question…that we have accurately perceived and understood the need…that we can measure it…that we are the ones to meet it…and that we can actually satisfy the need through our activities.  I believe this is merely a management question masquerading as a missional question.

Ultimately, the main issue is not the nature of our mission engagement (i.e. word or deed) as much as it is who we perceive ourselves to be in relation to Others in the global community…whether those of the Majority World church or the billions of image bearers of God who do not (yet) follow their Creator, Savior and King.

When the Law expert in Luke 10 asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” He meant it in the sense of “how am I to view others in relation to me?”  His response demonstrates that he completely misunderstood the import of divine love, manifested in Christ Jesus, who exemplified “servant of all” (Mk 9:35).  Instead, a biblical perspective generates “who am I in relation to others?” and, personified by the Samaritan, considers others [and their context] as significant, contributory and incumbent upon me.  This is a chronically missing dimension in mission engagement because we are so consumed with our presumed, unilateral mandate and the vast capacity we have to offer. 

At its core, mission is about the in-breaking of God’s kingdom, which is already…and not yet.  He is establishing his authority and restoring all things as he intended them to be.  Thus, I propose that, as children of the King, a better missional question is: “How does God intend that his kingdom flourish in this place and time?”  Do you see how this completely rearranges what matters most?  The focus is upon what God is doing and the impact of his reign.  What is the story he is writing in this (or that) place?  What is the plot?  Who are the actors?  What is already happening? This line of questioning does not presume to insert ourselves and our solutions into the context, but rather seeks to listen (through the guidance of God’s Spirit) to the narrative the context is living and places us in our Lord’s agenda.   [Actually, this question applies for anyone in any context…neighborhood, school, workplace, field, etc.] 

As a SIM family we are a multicultural community living in a diverse, global context.  This reality means, no requires, that we display massive doses of mutual consideration in relationship with our diverse colleagues and the contexts in which we minister.  Such respect and consideration will only flow when we identify latent assumptions about our (and others’) identity and capacity.  May our Lord, by prayer, give us new eyes to see what we have not known.

Don’t Pursue Multi-ethnic or Multicultural Ministry Without Asking These Questions: Part 7

As expected, my list of questions in this series continues to grow.  So, I've added two more as Part 7 of this series.

Here are the prior questions with their links:  

Part 1 - "What is our church’s track record with Otherness in our community?"  

Part 2 - "Do we see those with different languages, cultures and beliefs as a threat to cohesiveness in our community?" 

Part 3 - "How does God want us to relate to Others in our neighborhood?"

Part 4 - "If mission among our Neighbors is biblical (and not just recently biblical with the sudden interest in ‘missional’ ministry), why are we not already in relationship with Others in our midst?"
Part 5 - "What in our church life and practice has prevented us from living in relationship with Others in our community?" and  "What would such scrutiny entail for a congregation contemplating a move toward multicultural ministry?"

Part 6 - Can we presume to be ready for a multicultural ministry when we have only had homogeneous church experiences?  and  What is the outcome we envision for ministry among diverse peoples in our community?

>Are we prepared for lifelong relationship with Others in our community?

God sovereignly determines the times and the exact places where people live (Act2 17:26).  The demographic realities in America today are God’s will for this place at this time.  He knows what we need; he is showing it to us.  How will we respond?  Instead of leading the way in intercultural competency, our churches are primarily temples of homogeneity, testifying before the watching world that God has nothing better than “I like being with those like me.”  We are called as the people of God to be a preview of the kingdom, the progeny of Jesus, who is the perfect human, and display what God intended perfect human community to be.   In this day and time, for Christ-followers, this means a multicultural existence through intercultural proficiency.

God’s kingdom mission is about New Creation.  He is about restoring all things as he intended them to be.  This is God’s Story, his good news.  Thus, our embrace of mission must be just as comprehensive as the whole good news of God...   The people of God have no other existence, no other mission, than to be the representation and witness of God’s good news in the world.  We were created for relationship, designed for community and destined to bless the nations!   

>How well do we know those who are already engaged in multicultural ministry?

 Far too often we latch onto a ministry direction, start crafting plans, and arranging our launch without ever spending time with those who have already spent years  in that same realm of ministry.  Such a scenario is often repeated when suburban churches embrace a vision to undertake an urban outreach ministry.  They presume they possess the capacity to repeat in an urban context the success they have known in their own.  In this sort of narrative leaders assume they understand the needs and designate their strategy as the solution.  I call this the the presumption of the privileged.  

For example…

Not too long ago I came across a brochure from a local megachurch promoting their missions programs: “The love of Christ compels us to serve the poor in ______’s inner city (our ‘Samaria’) and globally (‘to the ends of the earth’).  We’ve created local and global service opportunities that will challenge you, stretch your faith, and allow you to experience the joy of obedience.”  At first glance this blurb seems missionally-motivated, but look more closely.  The statement reveals much about the vantage point of the congregation.  It shows that “the poor” are ‘them, not us’ and ‘not where we are’.  Likewise, ministry opportunities are programmed, managed, self-contained and ultimately for the benefit of the those ‘acting upon the needy’ so they can feel good about their goodness. 

This type of ministry is ‘mission-from-above’ without true connection and interaction with those who are living the experience every day.   

What do you think about these questions?  this series?

Don’t Pursue Multi-ethnic or Multicultural Ministry Without Asking These Questions: Part 6

It's time to wrap up this series on key questions involved when contemplating multicultural ministry, so the next two postings will finish the most critical questions...though, I'm certain I'll continue to grow my list.  Do you out there have any suggestions?

Here are the prior questions with their links:  

Part 1 - "What is our church’s track record with Otherness in our community?"  

Part 2 - "Do we see those with different languages, cultures and beliefs as a threat to cohesiveness in our community?" 

Part 3 - "How does God want us to relate to Others in our neighborhood?"

Part 4 - "If mission among our Neighbors is biblical (and not just recently biblical with the sudden interest in ‘missional’ ministry), why are we not already in relationship with Others in our midst?"
Part 5 - "What in our church life and practice has prevented us from living in relationship with Others in our community?" and  "What would such scrutiny entail for a congregation contemplating a move toward multicultural ministry?"

Here are the questions for Part 6:

>Can we presume to be ready for a multicultural ministry when we have only had homogeneous church experiences?

Imagining a multicultural trajectory, or harboring dissatisfaction with monocultural churches, does not mean that we are prepared for the challenges and skills necessary for multicultural ministry.  Where we are determines what we see.  This is consistent literally, for where we actually live shapes our conception and opinion of where and how others live.  Likewise, our ethnicity, upbringing, traditions, education, politics, experiences and exposures all contribute to what we see (and don’t see).  We are a product of what we have known…even if we are in contention with that paradigm.  Therefore, we cannot presume to be ready to lead in multicultural ministry just because we desire it. 

>What is the outcome we envision for ministry among diverse peoples in our community?

Any effective endeavor must begin with a clear vision of the outcome.  If one’s understanding of the outcome is incomplete, the processes one employs to reach the outcome will be equally incomplete.  Therefore, the question, “What will it take for us to reach ­­­­so-n-so people in our community?” usually means an outcome vision based upon a pre-determined, homogeneous church planting model.  However, our communities in the USA are exponentially multicultural, as well as socially and spiritually complex.  Thus, a mature missional vision asks, “How does God desire that his kingdom flourish here, right now?”  Instead of us presuming that it is our calling to ‘reach’ ______ people, we are recognizing that God’s kingdom narrative for a particular time and context involves a multitude of considerations, actors, and roles, many of which we are unaware (and which may not even include us!).  If we are truly seeking to be who God calls us to be in space and time, then we will be seeking to understand the story he is writing in a given context.

Don’t Pursue Multi-ethnic or Multicultural Ministry Without Asking These Questions: Part 5

I'm continuing this blog series, but I need to pick up the pace.  Rather than one question each post I will group them until I exhaust my questions.  In any case, these are the prior questions (and you can find the posts below):  

Part 1 - "What is our church’s track record with Otherness in our community?"  

Part 2 - "Do we see those with different languages, cultures and beliefs as a threat to cohesiveness in our community?" 

Part 3 - "How does God want us to relate to Others in our neighborhood?"

Part 4 - "If mission among our Neighbors is biblical (and not just recently biblical with the sudden interest in ‘missional’ ministry), why are we not already in relationship with Others in our midst?"

Part 5: 

>What in our church life and practice has prevented us from living in relationship with Others in our community?

Frankly, we don’t care about ‘them’, we care only for ‘us’.  The bottom line is that we don’t really believe Others can contribute any value to my life.  We don’t believe we need those who are unlike me.  While we may be curious about exotic ways, enjoy ‘ethnic’ music and appreciate interesting differences, we still assume that all we need for life can be found through ‘our own kind’.  This is the subtle danger of the ‘heart language and culture’ motif, for it undermines the biblical reality of The Body.  We gut the meaning when we only teach that differing spiritual gifts are in view.  No, we need each other...because each gift is embodied in a person and a culture.  If we need the gift, then we need the person, her culture, her history, her story, her life!  This brings the kingdom unity for which our Lord prayed in John 17...for unity has no meaning apart from diversity.

>What would such scrutiny entail for a congregation contemplating a move toward multicultural ministry? 

We first recognize that we are called to be someone new, not merely to do something new.  We then confess our sin of indifference, which is ‘hate’ by another word, because it is less that the love we are commanded to give our Neighbor.  Scripture does not allow us to justify a ‘not love/not hate’ reality; let’s call it for what it is, the sin of indifference.  Secondly, we recognize that each one is my Neighbor to love, a gift for my life, for our community, because each one is uniquely loved by our Lord. 

Don’t Pursue Multi-ethnic or Multicultural Ministry Without Asking These Questions: Part 4

This blog series presents a series of questions which arose out of a recent visit with two prospective church planters.  My initial intent was to post a new question each week...well, extensive travel in October/November blew that program out of the water.  So much for good intentions.  In any case, these are the prior questions:  

Part 1 "What is our church’s track record with Otherness in our community?"  

Part 2  "Do we see those with different languages, cultures and beliefs as a threat to cohesiveness in our community?" 

Part 3  "How does God want us to relate to Others in our neighborhood?"

Question 4: If mission among our Neighbors is biblical (and not just recently biblical with the sudden interest in ‘missional’ ministry), why are we not already in relationship with Others in our midst?  

 

If we have come to conclude that multicultural body life is an accurate representation of biblical character, we must acknowledge as well that it has always been biblical!  This begs the question, if a multicultural congregational character is biblical, then why is our church not already diverse?  In other words, what are the pathologies in our church which have kept us from this vision and perspective up until now? 

There are three realms of abiding denial—racialization, cascading demographic change, and Christian segregation—realities which American churches rarely acknowledge...except in conversations of economic and political alarm.  And we wonder why there is such missional paralysis in our churches!  These “elephants” trample around us daily while our indifference cloisters us from social realities.  John Perkins aptly challenged, “Can a gospel that reconciles people to God, and not people to people, be the gospel of Jesus Christ?”  Absolutely not!  But, our friendship networks tell a different story...  Much more can be said, but not now.  However, I will leave you with an thought provoking series on racialization from Paul Louis Metzger.

Don’t Pursue Multi-ethnic or Multicultural Ministry Without Asking These Questions: Part 3

This blog series presents a series of questions which arose out of a recent visit with two prospective church planters.  In Part 1 I explained the background to these questions and a presented the first question, "What is our church’s track record with Otherness in our community?"  Part 2 addressed this question: Do we see those with different languages, cultures and beliefs as a threat to cohesiveness in our community?   Which leads us to the third question: 

Question #3: How does God want us to relate to Others in our neighborhood? 

As people to people!  Relating to Others in your neighborhood/community means pursuing relationship, which means spending time together, pursuing friendship.  Are we willing to take the time necessary to get to know our Neighbors?  We are called to reciprocate in hospitality, serve one another, care about each other’s lives...in other words, living as humans together in relationship—incarnating the love of the One who ‘Neighbored’ us.  Usually, we are more concerned about our agenda—‘helping’ them, evangelizing them, organizing them—than actually befriending and loving as Neighbors to Neighbors.  Often, the most we want is occasional participation in some compassion delivery system.  But, our mandate is to love fully and completely with Christ as our standard.    How are we doing in this area…especially as it relates to other Christians?   Our Neighbors...are they scenery? (to ‘color’ my world) are they machinery? (those who do the things I need) or are they people? (like me, created in God’s image)  

Don’t Pursue Multi-ethnic or Multicultural Ministry Without Asking These Questions: Part 2

Last week I began a blog series reflecting on a series of questions which arose out of a recent visit with two prospective church planters.  In Part 1 I explained the background to these questions and a presented the first question, "What is our church’s track record with Otherness in our community?"  Which leads us to the second question:

Question #2: Do we see those with different languages, cultures and beliefs as a threat to cohesiveness in our community?   

Let’s face it many Americans (i.e. those whose immigrant past has faded from present consciousness) have a basic discomfort about the validity of distinct cultures to exist in America without rapid assimilation.   Often there is disconnect between political/economic reservations and outreach motivations which often lead congregations to employ an ‘Evangelism Plus’ mentality.  In other words, not only do they need ‘the gospel’, but they also need to become more like us so that we can all live together.  (The subtext is 'if you become more like me then that makes me more comfortable'.)  Such expectations not only violate the meaning of “love your neighbor,” but they also reveal ethnocentric possessiveness which forgets there is nothing we have that we haven’t been given.  The way of Christ is to love and accept people, any person, as they are, and for who they are.   Recognize and repudiate our tendency to lump people in categories—whether it be economic, political, religious, ethnic, generational, lifestyle—and treat them accordingly, with pre-determined attitudes and arguments.  We are to not sin when it comes to people and identity; such as, realizing that actions may be ‘illegal’, but people are not...therefore, to call a person illegal is to dehumanize someone who an image bearer of God.  

Stay tuned for question #3 next week...