The church in which I grew up has become one of the largest missionary sending organizations the world has ever known. It was conceived and birthed in the heat of passion for going and sending based on the aforementioned Great Commission. But if there is one thing we have learned, it is that why and how one is sent is as critical as being sent in the first place.
What we have learned is that sometimes the worst thing that can happen to a country, a culture, or a people group is the invasion of what I’ll call fanatical Christian salvation guerillas. Because, the one and only message they have is salvation. So they storm the country with medical teams, food supplies, or relief efforts, in an attempt to gain an attentive ear for their message by providing for needs. Now, providing for needs isn’t a bad thing. That is very much a Kingdom value taught by Jesus. But not when the real purpose is bait and switch.
When physical needs are met for the sole purpose of creating a captive audience for a quick presentation of the Gospel, that is bait and switch. And, it doesn’t just happen in foreign countries either. It also happens in churches every week right here in the good old US of A.
Youth are baited with pizza, extreme games, celebrity guests, and fancy hangouts. Adults are baited with promises of wealth, beauty, and success, not to mention a break from their children for at least an hour. Add on top of that promises of discipleship training for every age group (as though that was supposed to be the job of the church and not the disciple).
Worse than that, the needy in our cities are promised food in exchange for a church service which they have to attend. “Free clothing” comes with a secret price tag—the cost of which is measured in enduring bad music and a reductionist salvation message. In either situation—the fancy church or the skid row mission—the problem is the same. Here it is: What you win them with, you win them to—whether it’s pizza, prosperity, or free clothes.
Now, I know that many churches and Christian organizations do wonderful things for people with no strings attached. Those groups have my compliments. But there are just as many, if not more, who use this as a “strategy.”
Last Sunday afternoon, I went to a downtown park where some friends of mine were doing a cook out for our homeless friends. There were at least 60 of us in the park that day. And although this was a first (the cookout), it was not the first time these men, women, and children had fed, loved on, and talked to many of these people. They called each other by name, and were so genuinely glad to see one another. And the food and the hugs and the football and the croquet were all paid for and given away unconditionally.
Unfortunately, some there that day who didn’t know my friends were waiting for the other shoe to drop. So when two guys got out their guitars to play some jazz and folk music, one man was overheard to say, “Uh-oh! They’re gettin’ out the guitars. Here comes the Jesus message…”
Bait and switch.
Now my friends and I had no intentions of doing anything more than feeding, hugging, and spending some time with them. But they were so conditioned to the schemes and methods they had seen so many times before that they were certain we were getting ready to “lay some Jesus on them.”
Some of my other friends who are missionaries in Asia have a name for people who convert in one of these bait and switch situations. They call them “rice Christians.” Rice Christians (whether in Asia or South Tulsa) aren’t won to Jesus, they are won to: fill-in-the-bait.
Now, so far you’re wondering how this applies to our subject of “Sending the Indigenous.” I guess what I’m wondering in my head and wandering through with the above is if we are ready to entrust the Holy Spirit with the next step. If we can trust Him to draw or to persuade the indigenous to follow him without our coercion or manipulation, are we ready to allow Him to help them to contextualize the truths of scripture for their own culture without our messing it up for them?
Before we can talk about sending the indigenous to reach their own, we have to answer the question: Are we ready to let them build their own versions of ecclesiology (church) and maybe even soteriology (salvation) that may or may not resemble our versions?
3 comments:
Several years ago I participated in an "outreach" downtown. It involved churches from all over the city. People in need were promised all kinds of things, including a bag of groceries, for free. The needy lined up for about a square mile. Not just the homeless, but even whole families in need.
We gave the water as they stood in line. We talked with them. We played with their children. We were friendly and loving. But that all changed when they finally got to the front of the line and realized they were required to sit through a 5 minute sermon before they could receive their free groceries. Some were just plain pissed off. I'm sure there was a lot of good done that day, but I'm also sure thousands of people were hurt.
This comment is for the last two posts. I think I know where you're going with all this, and I agree ... but I remember hearing something like this "let the Spirit persuade/convict" from my Evangelical youth groups too.
The logic was something like, "Just live like a good Christian - no smoking, no drinking, no cussing, no making out, no partying, etc. Your friends will be so impressed by your strong convictions and lifestyle that they'll ask you why you're different from everyone else." Then I guess we were supposed to pounce on our friends with a Sinner's Prayer or whatever.
Needless to say, it didn't work. If you emphasize you're "different" in a big public high school by cutting yourself off from the things everyone else is doing, you just ostracize yourself and everyone ignores you. Leaving everything to a "they will ask" presentation tactic is dry at best, and empty at worst. In both of those cases in Acts there was an astounding message (ch. 2) or occurrence (ch. 16) that shook people out of their ordinary apathy.
Now, I agree completely that most of the contemporary Church doesn't realize that the medium is as much a part of evangelism as the message. But at the same time, the message has to be relevant or else no amount of proper presentation will do any good either. Bait-and-switch sucks, yeah; and we gotta make sure we don't trade one kind of bait - material goods - for a more abstract and crafty kind of bait - a nice feel-good relationship or experience (yikes?!).
I know the downtown group you mentioned and I know there are no strings attached to what they do. And I think your closing questions get at the heart of the matter and what it is they're doing with those homeless friends. They're not baiting, nor coercing, nor manipulating anyone for any ulterior reason.
They're living the message, the Gospel, the "good news" - that God loves all of His creation and every human for no reason except that they are human. For this purpose He came to us and showed us how that love plays out in our humanity. And He said we should go on loving like that. Not because we want the objects of our love to start reading Scripture on their own or form their own version of church?
For me, the downtown ministry to the homeless seems like the ultimate surrender to the Holy Spirit. It's when we stop ALL of our pretense - no bait-and-switch, no agenda or motive at all except to love people. EVERYTHING beyond that - salvation, scripture, church, indigenous evangelism, etc. - is totally up to God.
Sorry to tromp all over your whole post here, but I might call it "Love the Indigenous." Love is the bait, love is the switch, love is the message, and love is the medium.
Luke,
I agree whole-heartedly with your comment. You know my heart and know that I am not about anything ulterior. But I do believe that the Holy Spirit is at work today. I also believe that Jesus instructed us to "make disciples", not "make people be disciples."
Therefore, I believe that some of those we offer love and help to will come to follow us as we follow Christ. Then what happens?
Jesus warned the Pharisees that they would turn converts into twice the devil that they were themselves. Therefore I believe we have a responsibility to those who decide to follow Christ.
So as we "make disciples" it matters HOW we "send" them. My point is that we empower them (see my next post) to contextualize the Gospel for themselves and for the culture to which they are indigenous. This is where we will disagree.
A Catholic approach here is to fold them into the ancient church whose discipleship forms and rituals are preset. However, in many countries and cultures that form has violated the cultural norms that are in no way preset by scripture.
The "Send" portion of my "missional proposal" is not at all like what I grew up with. I use this word "send" because it is the word that most pastors and Christians understand as it relates to the Great Commission.
Post a Comment