The Missionary: "A Breed Apart"? tagged: , , ,

The Missionary: "A Breed Apart"?

Posted by in Baptist Life, Church & Missions

In a recent post that has been the object of many comments and reactions (including here at sbc IMPACT! ), the question was raised whether the IMB missionary force has become part of an “in-bred system that no longer recognizes the authority, beliefs, and practices of those churches who support those missionaries.” I don’t want to rehash everything that has already been said about whether the next IMB President, whenever that time may come, should be a missionary or not. My opinions on that topic are already well-documented (see comment string here and here). I would like to explore a bit more, however, the idea that we as missionaries have become, in one way or another, “a breed apart.”

Before leaving for the first time to live overseas, the typical missionary candidate is not much different than the typical pastor (or pastor’s wife, church staff member, accountant, doctor, etc.). He/she has lived through the same things as the typical pastor (or pastor’s wife, church staff member, accountant, doctor, etc.). He shares, for the most part, the same cultural background, education, and worldview as all those in the sending churches that are not going along with him to the mission field.

Upon responding to the missionary call, and making it through the missionary appointment process, though, the new missionary, in many ways, is “put upon a pedestal.” Although at the core, he is basically the same person as always, with the same weaknesses and character flaws as always, the temptation comes to think of himself as “something special.” Soon afterwards, at Field Personnel Orientation, he is introduced into the organizational ethos, and begins to bond, forming a special camaraderie, with his colleagues, who are about to embark together with him on this exciting adventure.

But more important than all of this, actual life on the mission field adds another element to his perspective. All of the sudden, he is exposed to new ways of doing things, and new ways of thinking. Certain presuppositions about life that he had always held dear are challenged, and he must deal with how to make sense of the world through the lens of different cultural points of view.

For some, the challenge is too great, and they end up returning home, defeated and disconcerted, much sooner than they had initially envisioned. Others put up a strong resistance and hang on, year after year, maintaining a defensive posture toward the host culture, oftentimes making both themselves and those around them miserable in the process. Still others come to adopt a philosophy of “if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em,” and totally distance themselves from, and in some cases, even disown, their own cultural and/or theological heritage. Sociologists have called this response “going native.” However, from my observations over the years, the majority of those who remain on the field any significant length of time eventually go through a synthesis of thought, arriving at a reasonably healthy balance of perspectives on Christian ministry, culture, and life in general.* (see below)

The truth of the matter, though, is that life on the mission field does change you. In the majority of the cases, however, rather than producing an “in-bred,” narrow focus and mentality, it serves to broaden your horizons. It gives you a different perspective that is not necessarily more accurate, but is based on a wider variety of sources of input. At the same time, in some aspects, long-term missionaries have a tendency to be benignly indifferent to certain issues on the home front. They are, more often than not, intensely focused on their “magnificent obsession”: doing “whatever it’s going to take” to make and multiply disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ among the particular people group to which God has sent them.

As missionaries, I believe we must resist the temptation to think that this somehow makes us superior to others. We are what we are by the grace of God; and the experiences we go through that help to make us what we are come into our lives by means of the same unmerited favor of God. I also believe that it is important for us to stay in touch and in tune with the desires and expectations of the churches and believers who have sent us out, and who financially underwrite our missionary endeavors. We are accountable, and should not resent being expected to give an account of what we are doing and what we are teaching.

In the Southern Baptist system of international missions, there are basically four levels of administrative accountability: first, the sending churches themselves; next, the Board of Trustees; next, IMB administration; and next, the field missionaries. I believe it is important, if the work of missions is going to continue forward in a positive manner, that there be a healthy environment of mutual trust and respect between those on every one of these levels. There should be an open flow of communication, with as little “hidden agendas” as possible. We should all seek to do what we can to uphold the idea that we are partners together, working on the same team, with the same ultimate end in mind.

At the risk of furthering the “pedestal” mentality, I will go on record here as saying that the many missionaries I have had the privilege of knowing down through the years are, in general, among the most dedicated, informed, and balanced servants of God I have met. They have wrestled with tough issues, and had the opportunity of trying out and proving the principles of the Word of God in the crucible of the real world, with all of its cultural and contextual complexities. On the various occasions in which I have been blessed to sit in on discussions of applied theology and biblical hermeneutics among missionary colleagues, I have come away thoroughly impressed by their general depth of insight and faithfulness to the teaching of Scripture.

I think that, especially, those in the sending churches need to be open to and understanding of the changing perspectives of those they send out into the mission field. It is good to remember that, first and foremost, missionaries are not sent out by the churches, but by God himself. And, beyond the scope of each one’s particular country of origin, and sponsoring denomination, all of us are representatives, wherever we may be in the world, of the entire Body of Christ.

Our point of view, as missionaries, may indeed be a little different, from time to time, from what you in the sending churches are used to. In some ways, we may well be “a breed apart.” But we are not just trying to be difficult. We are trying, to the best of our ability, to be faithful to the Lord, in light of some different experiences and different perspectives He has allowed us to be exposed to along the way.

*Of course all of these, as basic categories, are over-generalizations, and there are many shades of variety among the ways individual missionaries deal with these circumstances and phenomena.