Shadow Pastoring
Posted by Strider in Church & Missions
With all the focus on the Great Commission Resurgence many are asking if the IMB is the best way for Southern Baptists to carry out the Mission God has for us. This IMB missionary would like to be able to answer a hearty ‘YES’ to that question. There is a lot of talk about the concept of ‘hiring out’ the job that God has given to the local churches to do and I would like to set the record straight and say that what the IMB is about is facilitating the local church to do the job. But there is a lot of misunderstanding between the missionaries on the field and the churches back home. I would like to write a couple of stories on this blog to help in our mutual understanding and see if we can not find ways to better work together. The first of these posts will deal with the concept of shadow pastoring.
I remember my family’s commissioning service in 1995. An old deacon in a local church there in West Virginia came up to me and said, “Well son, I guess you are looking forward to going over seas and pastoring a church there.” I replied that wouldn’t it be better if I trained several local men to pastor several different churches? He said, “Well now! I never thought of it like that!” I learned in that moment that people in the West are not opposed to our missiological methods, they have just never considered them. This is both my fault and yours. The IMB has not educated the churches concerning missiology near enough and the churches have not demanded to know what it is we are doing out here with all the money and personnel they have given. But living out the answer I gave to that deacon has been very different from what I imagined. Here is a story to illustrate.
In 1999 I was living and working in Gondor here in Middle Earth. We had large disaster response projects going on in Mordor to the south as well. During that time a man came from Mordor and visited the International Church that my family attended on Sunday afternoons. He was a believer- one of the very few Mordor believers there were- and he was fleeing persecution and looking for help here in Minas Tirith. I began meeting with him and eventually got him a job with another Aid Agency in town that also worked in Mordor. We worked together on several projects and I enjoyed spending time with him and discipling him. He had a New Testament in his language but had never seen the Old Testament. I loved being the first one to tell him the story of David and Goliath! As an aside Pastors, you don’t know what you are missing out here. You work your brains out trying to prepare three sermons a week that will tell the old story in a way interesting enough to keep your people awake. Here in Middle Earth there are people who have never heard the Word at all and just the simple telling of the simpliest story is the most amazing thing they have ever heard. But I digress… Anyway, one day this young man comes to me and says, “Strider, I think God is asking me to start a church here in Minas Tirith for the people of Mordor. I just need two things, someone to lead it and someplace to meet.” I said, ‘Brother, I think God has already asked someone to lead it!” He said, ‘NO! Not me, I was hoping you would lead it.” I told him I would not but if he would lead it I would help him. He struggled with that for two weeks and then gave in. He went around and invited some people that he knew were firm believers. They began to meet on Saturday mornings and I began to meet with him three times a week. Working with guys from Mordor was very politically sensitive and my friend did not want me to come and attract attention as a foreigner so I never went to the group meetings. Many people in the group never knew I was invovled.
As I met with this young man I had some basic principles that were very important to me. First, the answer to every discipleship question is, “What does the Bible say?’ This is an easy slogan to say but a very hard principle to live by. Three days a week, two to three hours a meeting we discussed what was happening. He would describe an issue that he was facing and I would say, ‘What does the Bible say?’ Then I might say, “That sounds like Philipians 2.” “That sounds like 1 Peter 3, let’s go there and look.” I wondered how reproducible this was, how long would it take before he could do this? About two months into this process I met with him on a Monday. I asked him how the study on 2 Corintians 5 went. He said they didn’t do 2 Corinthians, they talked about Psalm 27. “But we have never talked about Psalm 27!” He said, “Yeah, I know but as they were talking at the beginning of the meeting I thought, ‘hey, this sounds like they need Psalm 27′ so that is what we talked about.” In case anyone was wondering the Holy Spirit works! After three months my friend began training each of the men in the group to lead out. After six months he was in the backround and they were leading the group- which was appropriate since they were older married men and he was a young single guy. My friend worked hard. He met with the group on Saturday morning, he met with other believers who were not known well or trusted in the afternoon, and he met with non-believers on Sunday mornings. Several were saved, several more were discipled well and then after two years the political situation changed. Mordor opened up and all the refugees went back. The Church disbanded but three families went separately to Mordor. One family lived in northern Mordor and started a house group there. Two other families went the capitol and started two different house groups there. These all continue today but whether they have further multiplied or not I have no idea. My friend went to the West and married a girl there. He still wants to move back to Mordor but I don’t know if he will or not.
So, there you have it. This is how I do work here. But I think you can see the problems as well. On my ‘Annual Statistical Report’ what do I put? I could say that I planted a church. That would be true- sort of- but then again not. My friend planted a church. That church has birthed three and possibly more churches that I don’t even know about. I have not reported any of them so if you look at my report you might think I am not doing anything. Others of my colleagues are reporting these kinds of churches which lead some to believe that we are doing amazing things. Others think that the numbers are exaggerated since our missionaries are not directly planting these churches. I contend that we are not doing anything but that God is doing a great work and it is awesome that he allows us to witness it.
As far as the Great Commission Resurgence goes there is a lot more to be said. We here on the field are doing what God has called us to do-mostly (I hear about someone somewhere drawing a check and doing time but I have never met that someone somewhere). Many churches back home are feeling left out. There is much more to say about this. This situation needs correcting. The local church must be more involved- it is obedience for them and we need the support of real partners, not just check-writers. In future post I hope to address this.



Sorry guys, I don’t know why my picture is not showing correctly.
Strider,
Thanks for sharing how you work in the IMB. I agree that people back in the states can get some interesting ideas about what and how missions is “done” nowadays. I went to one church and said that I felt called to missions overseas and you’d have thought that I was Paul’s identical twin in the eyes of the pastor and congregation. Not quite. I moved to a new city and when I let the pastor know about my calling, his response was, “Let’s put you to work!” I prefer the second response.
I wish people in the states didn’t have such an idealistic view of missions and missionaries only because they tend to avoid leading in ministry because they don’t feel they are spiritual enough, and then they can expect missionaries to be super-Christians.
Strider,
Thanks for giving us this peak into the realities of missionary work in a place like Middle Earth.
I think most (if not all) missionaries can resonate with what you say here: “But living out the answer … has been very different from what I imagined.”
I also think it is good for those who have never experienced life as a longer-term cross-cultural missionary to have more insight into what it is really like, and to think a little more deeply about some of the strategic issues involved. I am looking forward to the insights you have to share. And, I am glad, as a member of the Body of Christ, and a cooperating SBC church, to play a part in what God is doing through you and your co-workers there in Middle Earth.
Thanks Andrew, it is true about many people putting M’s on a pedestal. I used to be flattered by this until I realized their motivation. If I was some kind of spiritual giant then they were off the hook and God surely would not call them. Calling all flatterers! I am not a spiritual giant, in fact, if I can do this by the power of the Holy Spirit so can you!
Still, do what God calls you to do and do not be swayed by others- least of all me.
Hey, thanks Geoff for fixing the picture.
Brother Strider,
Sounds like real ministry to me! In contrast to your testimony in Middle Earth, Americans have replaced the “field” with large new sanctuaries. Instead of going and making disciples, they are taught to come, depend on DVD’s, and build more facilities. It is refreshing to hear that you recognize the fields are white unto harvest.
It is a blessing and a great encouragement to learn that you are doing the work of the ministry with biblical principles.
Blessings,
Chris
John fixed it … I couldn’t figure it out.
I think one of the fundamental problems with the IMB is that our SBC Churches do not know our IMB missionaries. There have been some efforts in recent years to try and connect our missionaries with our Churches and they have failed miserably…
Our church supports two “Independent” missionaries that we both know and love. What has made the difference? We hear from them “directly” each and every month… and at least four or five times a year they pick up the phone and call me directly, and after catching up on what is going on in each others ministries we always wind up praying together over the phone… (I love these men). And usually they visit our church once a year, sometimes they cannot make it home every year but when they are stateside they come see us. I know that is a lot of personal contact and it takes a lot of effort on their part, but in all honestly this is truly what has made the difference for us and it is what I see missing with the IMB.
I don’t care how much “junk” mail the IMB prints and sends to my church… no amount of this “professionally published” marketing literature they send will every take the place of just one hand written 3×5 post card from the mission field. And no DVD message from the IMB headquarters touting all the wonderful things the IBM is doing can ever replace having the phone ring and hearing the voice of a missionary on the other end say “I’m about to go into a new village this morning, Brother will you pray with me”.
Strange as it may sound… but in a very real way the IMB now finds itself in the position (unintended I am sure) of standing between the relationship of Churches and the Missionaries… Somehow this must be corrected.
Grace Always,
Thank you to John!
Greg you are exactly right. The Kingdom is all about relationships. Organizations can not replace flesh on flesh face to face relationships. They must facilitate those kinds of opportunities or get out of the way. I think most in the IMB know this but changing the mindset of both the missionaries AND the churches is taking time. And we are running short of time. Some in my part of the world are great mobilizers and have great state-side relationships. For myself, I am greatly supported and cared for by my West Virginia friends but that was built up while I was a pastor there for four years. Many younger guys don’t have that opportunity. We all must keep working for a more personal touch- it is not just about what churches prefer, we need this too!
Strider,
I believe churches plant churches. Was the international church involved in anyway with the church plant? I believe this is one of the major issues that mission agencies need to address, churches supporting and actively involved in planting, not just individual M’s. I look forward to your writings on the subjects mentioned in your post. Thank you.
Kyle, When the phrase Churches planting churches came out a few years ago I was in agreement with what I understood it to mean. I was excited about the idea that local churches in the US would put their gifts, resources, energies, into CP. We want partners in ministry here on the field, not just check writers! But your question above- if I am not reading too much into it- reveals what I disagree with about this movement. Biblically, churches don’t plant churches, apostles do. I know that the word apostles is not accepted by everyone in SB life so you can substitute the word ‘missionaries’(latin for apostle) if that makes you more comfortable. At the end of the day, apostles don’t really start churches either though, Jesus says, “I will build my Church…” and I really believe that! We are commanded to go and make disciples. Apostles are ‘set aside’ by the church for this work. But if you look at Acts 13:4 you see that Paul and Barnabas are not sent out by the church but by the Holy Spirit. In a very real sense I don’t work for the IMB, and I don’t work for a Church. I am called by God to be where I am and doing what I am doing. I think that is enough authority to be getting on with.
Now, concerning your question directly, no, the International Church did not have anything to do with that particular CP. Except that it facilitated the meeting of myself and my friend- the Kingdom is all about relationship! But don’t get me wrong. I love the love and support of the church. As I said in a comment above my friends in WV love and pray for us. This is vital to our being effective in Kingdom work. I believe that the Churches planting Churches movement can be one to encourage local churches to get much more involved and put the resources and gifts of the Kingdom on the front lines where they belong. But if we are once again talking about power and authority and control then count me out. I am leaving power and authority and control in the hands of Jesus where it belongs.
Strider,
I forget that words carry different meaning to different people even though they may use the same language.
I would say that you are reading too much into the statement “churches plant churches.” It appears you have much baggage with this statement. I guess you have seen some debacles created out of this principle. I do not have a problem with the word “apostles” or sent ones. I am very comfortable with the word apostle, sent one, missionary, church planter, or whatever else someone might want to use.
In Scripture Paul was sent by a church and the churches were continually involved in the planting efforts. Did the entire “church” organization go with Paul? NO, impossible to do. But, in spirit and in representatives, the church was involved in planting. Paul’s name was lead, but others from the church(es) were involved. The churches would send representatives to help, be involved and support (financial and spiritual). Humans birth humans, animals birth animals and churches birth churches. Jesus will build His church and the Holy Spirit will empower and gift individuals for the work of the ministry. IN these we are agreement.
But, church planting is not given to agency’s, denominations or any other group to birth churches, not even to lone individuals. Does this happen? Yes. Is it the best way or most effective? Not in my opinion. The church abdicated its responsibility many years ago and allowed agency’s, denoms, individuals and others to do what the church should have been doing all along. I am thankful that church planting has been carried on by these groups. But, some churches are beginning to realize their abdication and ask to have their seat back at the table. This seems to be very threatening to some. Do agency’s, denoms, individuals and parachurch orgs have a place in church planting? YES!!!! But, not to the exclusion of the local church.
Personally, I think a church should be involved actively in planting other churches by sending representatives to train indigenous leaders, help support the point person (M, apostle, sent one) who is their representative, pray for them and advocate for them with resources and help keep them connected to the body that sent them in the first place.
I believe, it is important for there to be a church to model what biblical community looks like so the principles and DNA of biblical Christianity can be passed on to the new body. (I am not talking about forms of worship, governance or whatever else the sending church culture is familiar with.) I am talking about love of the Word and obedience to the commands of Christ, life, vitality, community among believers, influence for Christ, generosity and the like.
Some things can be modeled best with a mass of people (more than one or two). That is why a church should be involved in someway.
I have enjoyed following your writing and look forward to reading the other post in this series. My apologies for the length of this response.
Strider,
Thank you for an excellent blog. It is inspiring to hear your story and I hope and believe it is being repeated in many places by many people with the IMB and with other sending agencies.
Kyle,
You are correct when you say words carry different meanings to different people even though they may use the same language. After reading your explanation I am still not sure what you mean when you say churches planting churches. You make the statement, “Personally, I think a church should be involved actively in planting other churches by sending representatives to train indigenous leaders, help support the point person (M, apostle, sent one) who is their representative, pray for them and advocate for them with resources and help keep them connected to the body that sent them in the first place.”
This is what has been happening at the IMB for the 30 years I have been involved. We have encouraged and welcomed this kind of participation. I am not sure what you see wrong with what the IMB has been doing. I was sent out by my local church and regularly report to them. They have sent teams out to work with us and so have other churches. Sometimes a missionary is in a situation where a church back in the US cannot be involved directly in the day to day activities. You need to also keep in mind that we almost always are working with a local national church in planting churches. If we want to plant indigenous churches, it should not be directed or controlled or financed by a church in the US. Local believers should be involved just as in the case Strider described.
Kyle, You are right, I have baggage. If the shoe did not fit feel free not to wear it. I really want to promote communication and community on this blog not rant and rave.
Ron, you answered Kyle better than I could have, Thanks. The issue as I see it is that the IMB has been wanting more partnership with the Churches for a long time. They saw 30 years ago that the next generation will not give money blindly to causes they do not know about personally. Local churches have been slow to catch on. It has been wonderful to see many churches make partnerships with teams on the field and begin to do exactly the things that Kyle is referring to. But not all Ms are on board either. I have talked with some who said, ‘Hey I went to this country talked to the M’s there and they said they didn’t have time for us. So, now we are 1) partnering with independents 2) partnering with nationals 3) starting our own thing with volunteer teams. I sure wish the IMB would let us participate!” I am sure this has happened. It shouldn’t but it does. Part of the problem is that we know nothing of spiritual warfare. The enemy seeks to divide us and succeeds so easily. The other problem is that churches have forgotten who the IMB is. We are not some institution that sends out Ms. The IMB is the organization that WE created to send out OUR Ms. As an IMB M I am not an employee looking over to the churches like some kind of distant stranger. I is you. I was a Southern Baptist pastor for four years before going overseas and I am still a part of this family even though far away.
So, there are problems to address. If the IMB has put any roadblock in front of any church to stop them from partnering with those on the field then that roadblock must come down. The churches are in partnership and as this world continues to shrink there will be more and more opportunities to do exactly what Kyle suggest. Step one, eliminate the us and them attitude that has crept into both sides.
No ranting or raving taking place here… words typed and read on a screen cannot adequately convey the proper way an emotional discussion should be received. So, my words aren’t meant to be personal as I know yours aren’t meant to be.
Ron…you and I have a difference of opinion. I am fine with that if you are. I do believe the sending church should be involved. I do not think it should be controlled by the sending church, but the sending church does have influence with the missionary they send out. They should have influence in vision, strategy, direction and accountability with the M, apostle, sent out one. Just as the apostles in Jerusalem has influence with Paul and the church in Antioch also presumably did also by the reports he would send back to the churches.
We possibly could be saying the same thing and I be missing it though.
I am a fan of the IMB. My concern and disagreement with some things does not negate my love and appreciation for the 165 years of experience they have in leading out in International Mission. Again, I think the IMB picked up the “ball” when the church “dropped” it and they have run diligently for many years.
As you say, now that there are some churches who are desiring to lead, strategize, cast the vision, plant and have accountability with M’s we need to utilize the best of what they IMB does.
In my opinion, just as seminaries do not plant churches, they train pastors who will go, plant and lead churches under the direction of other churches until they are able to stand on their own. (Someone’s criteria, you decide what that should be.) The IMB should train missiologist and mission leaders who the church decides to send. The IMB has the research, training, and many of the logistics pieces down to a science, why not utilize that to it’s fullest potential. The church has the pool of people, the leadership in many instances, creativity in methods, and other things that the IMB could utilize also. This two(church/IMB) could/can partner together for the cause of planting. The IMB in teh support role and the church leading in personnel, strategy, casting the vision, planting and accountability with M’s.
I am thankful for your 30 years of service in the field God has called you to and I celebrate all that God has done through you. I am not trying to invalidate your service or the organization. I am looking, praying and visioning for the new method or way the church and the IMB can partner together.
Strider,
Thanks for the forum. I will leave this now and wait for your next post. Maybe I will be able to meet you and we can talk face to face about all the great things the IMB has done in the past and all my wonderful hopes and dreams for the IMB in the future. Thanks for your openness that we all have much to learn from each other and maybe together we can do new things. It will not be easy, but it is worth it.
Thank you for your service. No harm meant..just ideas, dreams, visions and desires for a new way in a new day.
Using the same metaphor, it’s not accurate to say that “the IMB” picked up the ball because churches dropped it. It’s more accurate to say that “churches founded the IMB to carry the ball together”.
Now, in the 165 years or so since:
* Other organizations have come along who also carry the ball.
* Because of technology and cheap (by historical standards) travel, churches are able to carry the ball by themselves in ways they couldn’t before.
* Some pastors won’t participate if they’re not carrying the ball themselves, or at the very least drawing up the playbook.
Churches invest in what they value.
Could more be done to help churches get to know IMB personnel and get churches involved in IMB work? Yes. Are there ample existing opportunities to get to know IMB personnel and be involved in IMB work? Yes, also.
It takes one phone call to Richmond to get connecting with a furloughing missionary. It takes a little more effort to find the right place to plug into a field strategy, but it’s not “that” hard. It’s easy to “blame” any disconnect on the size, age, or structure of the IMB. But it’s time to admit that we sometimes don’t get to know our own personnel or get involved in their work because we simply want to carry the ball in a different way, or according to our own playbook.
Sorry if I extended the metaphor out a bit too far.
Kyle, I was referring to my ranting and raving not yours. Thanks for your comments. We will have opportunity to extend this discussion but it does concern me that every time you further explain your position I hear power and control from the sending church. I can’t imagine anyone thinks it is a good idea for 5000 Ms to have 40000 church pastors and M committees as their bosses who are calling the strategy.
An immediate case in point is a co-worker of mine who is with another agency. The agency wants him here in Gondor in a new town. He feels called to this town. He has been faithfully working for two years here and is beginning to see some fruit. This summer his sending church pulled the plug and decided- without any consultation from the M- to ‘change their strategy’ and pull him back home. He had to leave that church and find other supporters in order to continue to do what God is calling him to. That is the scenario that I hear you purporting. I am sure you don’t think you are, but that is what I see as the outcome of the paradim you are suggesting.
Let’s keep talking. I seem to be hearing my history professor Doyle Young calling out from the back of my mind, “Truth is always found in the middle.”
Stuart, Good insight, you did not push the metaphor too far.
* Some pastors won’t participate if they’re not carrying the ball themselves, or at the very least drawing up the playbook.
This is what I am concerned about.
Strider,
Thanks.
My short(ha) comment writings do not adequately express or convey in a way that would help you or others to fully understand what I am addressing.
I think your professor is correct in his statement. “Truth is always found in the middle.”
I would say that your comment to Stuart about pastors could also be said about M’s or M organizations also.
Kyle,
My point is that even if a pastor wants to “carry the ball” himself or “write the playbook” there are ways to do that with and through the IMB.
Now, OF COURSE there are m’s who want to write the strategy. And they may even get a little bit testy when someone comes over and tells them how they should do it differently, or why some method we tried in the States would be better. They live there. They know the culture. They’ve learned the worldview. They’ve observed the bridges and barriers. It would be a no brainer to want to tie into that. But if a church can’t or won’t, they still have options of adopting their own people and making their own strategy, yet still partnering with the IMB.
Kyle,
Again we must be misunderstanding each other. You said, “Ron…you and I have a difference of opinion. I am fine with that if you are. I do believe the sending church should be involved. I do not think it should be controlled by the sending church, but the sending church does have influence with the missionary they send out. They should have influence in vision, strategy, direction and accountability with the M, apostle, sent out one. Just as the apostles in Jerusalem has influence with Paul and the church in Antioch also presumably did also by the reports he would send back to the churches. We possibly could be saying the same thing and I be missing it though.”
I agree with everything you said so I am not sure where we have a difference of opinion.
I am like Strider though, in that I have seen plenty of instances inside and outside the IMB where missionaries and churches have not been on the same page. It would seem strange to me to have missionaries who have spent years learning the language, building relationships, have experience in cross cultural church planting and expect them to sit and wait until their home church or pastor in the US told them what they could or could not do. I guarantee you Bertha Smith would not wait. I do not see the Biblical basis for what you are saying. Paul did not wait to hear from the Jerusalem church when the Macedonian call came. He was following the leadership of the Holy Spirit.
I am wondering is this teaching coming from one of our seminaries or from where? It a litte like the old Gospel Mission movement in China back in the 1800s.
“Some pastors won’t participate if they’re not carrying the ball themselves, or at the very least drawing up the playbook.”
That statement makes me want to throw up.
Mostly because I know it’s true. Not true of any of the present company, or course, but of many others out there.
I don’t know if I’m sadder for the pastors who, although they pastor “Christian” churches, apparently have no concept of the Kingdom of God or for the rest of us who have to pretend that they do.
Actually, I do know. … much sadder for the pastors. In their striving to make their own kingdoms bigger, they’ve missed the whole point.
I can’t honestly say I’m that far “above” said pastors. I think it’s WAY too easy for me to confuse power over man with anointing from God, manipulation with leadership, man’s favor with God’s favor…I could go on and on.
I think we need to keep in mind:
1. God is REALLY, REALLY BIG
2. We are really, really not.
3. Despite our confusion of these two points, He LOVES us tenaciously
4. but He also wants us to be in tune with HIS HEART
5. HIS HEART is not beating to feed our egos or our sense of power/fulfillment/significance…