An unsuccessful mission (The wise man built on what?)
vs
I hear people talking about how the Continent of Africa is a great mission field. I hear people using harvest metaphors. But I've got a problem with African missions. We haven't been doing a very good job.
You could say that Christian missions in Africa started in the 15th Century with the expulsion of the Moors by the Portuguese. In fact some of the earliest African missions were started in Portuguese areas of Northern Africa (see Pope Pius II calling for missionaries to Portuguese Guinea in 1462, Benin church 1485, Dominican mission to Senegambia 1486, etc.).
The strange thing is that even though we've had missionaries to the African Continent for the past 550 years it seems like there is an infinite amount of growth for evangelism. Unfortunately its impossible for there to be that much growth in population. What I'm saying is that the long-term effects of missionary efforts in Africa have almost been inconsequential. It seems like every 50 years you turn around and no matter how much progress had been made 50 years before the mission field was the same as it was in 1462 (Not completely but close).
Here's what seems to be the problem: infrastructure. It seems like in every wave of missionaries that we send they fail to set up an infrastructure for success. The Portuguese didn't do it in the 15th and 16th Century. The British, French, Germans, and Belgians didn't do it in the 18th, 19th, and 20th Centuries. It looks like the only people who went into the African mission field with a legitimate plan for longevity may have been Bart, Mark, Philip, and James TL (The Lesser). The ONLY churches that have honestly survived in Africa for more than 150 years were the Ethiopian Orthodox Christian and the Coptic Church. Both churches can trace their heritage back to the time of Acts. The Ethiopian church sites the baptism of an official by Philip as the beginning of their church. The Coptic Church can trace its roots to the missionary efforts of the apostles Mark, Bart, and James TL.
So what did the 1st Century missionaries do that the 15th-20th didn't? I think the answer is infrastructure. What's the difference in a church that we built 40 years ago in Kenya and the Lalibela churches in Ethiopia? One was built out of wood and mud and the other was carved out of the rock. One will stand until the a strong storm blows it down and the other has been standing for nearly 1000 years. What's your point Paul?
If we expect our missions to be successful we need to plan for the long term. We need to build churches that will stand over time, and not just the building. Something in our theology or actions hasn't worked in the last 500 years. Missionaries can go in and plant 50 churches in 5 years (I remember seeing figures like this in my Harding Magazine). That method didn't work 200 years ago what makes us think its going to work now?
In the end I don't think sending the right people is the answer. I think a lot of people go into the mission field with good hearts, and intentions; but that doesn't equal longevity. In order for a long term mission to be affective it has to be self-supporting. It has to have movement from with-in. We can keep sending missionaries to Africa for 500 more years, if we don't find a long term solution.
Education. I think the key is to educate people to be able to help themselves, to be able to preach. I think the goal of missionaries should be to start one solid church and make one solid preacher instead of 50 weak churches and preachers. We've got to set up educational facilities, preaching schools, and maybe even offer accessible ministry degrees to Christians in Africa. We can't keep feeding them the gospel; we have to teach them to feed themselves. We need to make less pew warmers and more bishops.
As the major mission fields are beginning to re-open around the world (see China pop 1.2 billion and India pop: 1 billion a combined 40% of the world population) I think its important to go in with a purpose. We need to make sure we're going in to build churches, not missionary newsletters that look good. It takes a lot more work and effort, but we need to carve our churches out of the rock.
Paul "I'll rail on short term missions later" Murphy
vs
I hear people talking about how the Continent of Africa is a great mission field. I hear people using harvest metaphors. But I've got a problem with African missions. We haven't been doing a very good job.
You could say that Christian missions in Africa started in the 15th Century with the expulsion of the Moors by the Portuguese. In fact some of the earliest African missions were started in Portuguese areas of Northern Africa (see Pope Pius II calling for missionaries to Portuguese Guinea in 1462, Benin church 1485, Dominican mission to Senegambia 1486, etc.).
The strange thing is that even though we've had missionaries to the African Continent for the past 550 years it seems like there is an infinite amount of growth for evangelism. Unfortunately its impossible for there to be that much growth in population. What I'm saying is that the long-term effects of missionary efforts in Africa have almost been inconsequential. It seems like every 50 years you turn around and no matter how much progress had been made 50 years before the mission field was the same as it was in 1462 (Not completely but close).
Here's what seems to be the problem: infrastructure. It seems like in every wave of missionaries that we send they fail to set up an infrastructure for success. The Portuguese didn't do it in the 15th and 16th Century. The British, French, Germans, and Belgians didn't do it in the 18th, 19th, and 20th Centuries. It looks like the only people who went into the African mission field with a legitimate plan for longevity may have been Bart, Mark, Philip, and James TL (The Lesser). The ONLY churches that have honestly survived in Africa for more than 150 years were the Ethiopian Orthodox Christian and the Coptic Church. Both churches can trace their heritage back to the time of Acts. The Ethiopian church sites the baptism of an official by Philip as the beginning of their church. The Coptic Church can trace its roots to the missionary efforts of the apostles Mark, Bart, and James TL.
So what did the 1st Century missionaries do that the 15th-20th didn't? I think the answer is infrastructure. What's the difference in a church that we built 40 years ago in Kenya and the Lalibela churches in Ethiopia? One was built out of wood and mud and the other was carved out of the rock. One will stand until the a strong storm blows it down and the other has been standing for nearly 1000 years. What's your point Paul?
If we expect our missions to be successful we need to plan for the long term. We need to build churches that will stand over time, and not just the building. Something in our theology or actions hasn't worked in the last 500 years. Missionaries can go in and plant 50 churches in 5 years (I remember seeing figures like this in my Harding Magazine). That method didn't work 200 years ago what makes us think its going to work now?
In the end I don't think sending the right people is the answer. I think a lot of people go into the mission field with good hearts, and intentions; but that doesn't equal longevity. In order for a long term mission to be affective it has to be self-supporting. It has to have movement from with-in. We can keep sending missionaries to Africa for 500 more years, if we don't find a long term solution.
Education. I think the key is to educate people to be able to help themselves, to be able to preach. I think the goal of missionaries should be to start one solid church and make one solid preacher instead of 50 weak churches and preachers. We've got to set up educational facilities, preaching schools, and maybe even offer accessible ministry degrees to Christians in Africa. We can't keep feeding them the gospel; we have to teach them to feed themselves. We need to make less pew warmers and more bishops.
As the major mission fields are beginning to re-open around the world (see China pop 1.2 billion and India pop: 1 billion a combined 40% of the world population) I think its important to go in with a purpose. We need to make sure we're going in to build churches, not missionary newsletters that look good. It takes a lot more work and effort, but we need to carve our churches out of the rock.
Paul "I'll rail on short term missions later" Murphy
posted by Paul Murphy at
11:24 AM
|
1 comments
