Four Reasons Why Spiritual Maturity is Impossible Without Global Partnerships

Photo: "Somos" by Miguel Cabrera

First, two moments . . .

#1.  As I sat listening to the Sunday sermon at Worship Harvest Ministries in Kampala, Uganda my mind filled with gratitude at the countless and consistent opportunities I have to learn from, work with and be sharpened and challenged by brothers and sisters, friends and partners from every part of the globe.  I relished in the thought and praised God and then tweeted this:

Ministries/churches based in the West which have no intentional means of regularly learning from leaders in the Majority World are insane.
— Cody Lorance (@cclorance) December 2, 2014

#2.  Yesterday in a fairly randomly (from my perspective) chosen coffee house in the Chicago suburbs, I caught wind of a business as mission venture that they just happened to be starting up that involved coffee, coffee beans, Uganda, and community transformation.  Now, that sounds pretty much exactly like what we are working on with Endiro Coffee so my fist thought was, "Ahh, DRAT ... competitors!"  But then, the Lord graciously let me to a new thought, "No, no, no ... partners!"  And we started to talk.

The evangelical missions world has always been sparsely populated, but when you are in the midst of it, it seems like everyone and their dog is clamoring around one or two ideas -- usually the same ones you are -- and it feels crowded.  It's like Toronto.  There are two valid and biblical options for dealing with the crowds.  First, you can move to Manitoba or, two, you can learn to make friends and work together.  

So, let's talk about this idea of global partnership for a moment.  I'll begin with a quote from the Lausanne Movement which is as poingnant today as when it was written a few years ago in advance of the 3rd Lausanne Congress in Cape Town, South Africa:

Partnering in the Body of Christ: Toward a New Global Equilibrium

Seismic Shifts in Global Christianity.  Global PARNTERSHIPS for world evangelization, unlike anything possible in the previous twenty centuries, are now attainable as we develop relationships that are based on mutual respect – acknowledging that God has called us to be one in Him. These new partnerships, increasingly led by visionary leaders from the majority world, will also involve more lay people who comprise the vast majority of those who bear witness to Christ in this Century.  By sharing the best available resources and best practices, together “the whole church (will) take the whole gospel to the whole world.”

Now the practical question for me as a mission leader is, Why?  Why should I lead my team and seek to mobilize others to enter into partnerships within and outside of the denomination, within and outside of the nation? Putting all the obvious (or at least they should be obvious) practical considerations aside, let's consider the deeper, theological impetus for engaging in and committing to global partnerships as individuals, churches, ministries, agencies, and denominations.  Here's Paul:

“I pray that, according to the riches of his glory, he may grant that you may be strengthened in your inner being with power through his Spirit, and that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith, as you are being rooted and grounded in love.  I pray that you may have power to comprehend, with all the saints, what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, so that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.” (Ephesians 3:16-19, NRSV)

Paul’s prayer declares that it is impossible for local bodies of Christians to reach (or even significantly approach) spiritual maturity without engagement in genuine relationships with other Christ-followers outside their local group.  We can point out at least four theological foundations for global partnership in this text:

1. The Desired Result is Spiritual Maturity – note Paul’s “so that” in verse 19.  Everything that Paul is praying is “so that” something will result in the lives of those for whom he is praying.  It is “so that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.” Which is a wonderfully evocative way of speaking of spiritual formation, maturity, sanctification -- i.e. God’s work to transform us into the image of Jesus Christ.
2. The Cause of the “So That” – It is clear that Paul believes that when a disciple of Lord Jesus is enabled to comprehend and know the multidimensional, knowledge-surpassing love of God, the result is spiritual maturity -- the “so that” of verse 19.
3. The Essential Conditions of Comprehending – Note that Paul’s prayer assumes that this comprehending and knowing of God’s love is only possible together "with all the saints” (v. 18).  This fellowship is presented here as a necessary condition for which Paul is praying on behalf of his readers and without which, the Apostle is convinced, grasping the love of God and thus spiritual maturity is an utter impossibility.
4. The Plurality of You – The Biblical demand for partnership comes into full relief when we recognize that the “you” of Paul’s prayer (v. 16, 17, 18, and 19) is plural (by the way, a nice benefit of global partnerships is having friends that speak languages which use plural forms of "you".  Thanks, Nepalis, for "timiharu"!) That is, the “you” being rooted and grounded in love in verse 17 is the local body of believers that has received and is now corporately reading Paul’s epistle.  Thus is it a local body of believers for whom Paul is praying in verse 18 when he says, “I pray that you [all] may have power to” comprehend and know the love of God. It is this plural "you" then that must enter into relationship, dialogue, and indeed partnership “with all the saints” – Christ-devotees from outside that specific community – “so that” spiritual maturity may result in their body.

What we are left with is an inspired prayer that sees spiritual maturity as only attainable when local bodies of disciples are engaged in meaningful partnerships with other communities outside their immediate context.  That is, we may say confidently from this text that any given mission team, church, agency, denomination, or Christ-centered business will be unable to be all that God would have them be as evangelists, medical missionaries, church planters, Bible translators, campus ministers, educators, relief workers, worshippers, intercessors, disciples, or whatever apart from the pursuit of global partnership as a corporate spiritual discipline.  Or, to put it positively:

The active pursuit of ever-deepening global partnerships by local bodies of Christ-followers enables those communities to better and increasingly comprehend and know God’s love which results in dramatic spiritual transformation and growth.

This is true, I assume, because there is actually only one body of Christ in the world (4:4) with one triune God indwelling, ruling over, and guiding that whole body (4:4-6).  That the gifts of Christ are distributed among all parts of that body (4:7ff) further testifies to the fact that it is when that global body is peacefully bonded together (4:3), pursuing and gradually arriving at the unity of faith (4:13) that the family of Jesus Christ in the world functions as it should (4:16).  It is when the whole Church builds itself up in love (4:16) – which it cannot do outside of the exercise of the spiritual discipline global partnership – that it “grows up in every way
into him who is the head, into Christ” (4:15).

United Nations Reports: 232 Million International Migrants Globally (And other random thoughts)

Random Picture of Me Performing a Naamkaran Ceremony for a Nepali Family.
Has little to do with the article.

Okay, first, take a look at this press release from the United Nations:

http://esa.un.org/unmigration/wallchart2013.htm

They are reporting that the total number of people living in diaspora as first generation, international migrants is now 232 million!  That's huge.  That's 3.2% of the world! 

The same report says that while the United States remains the most population destination country, Global South to Global South migration is now on an equal footing with "southerners" going to the Northern nations. And there is now a new top ten list for host nations (replacing the now outdated one I posted here recently):

In 2013, half of all international migrants lived in 10 countries, with the US hosting the largest number (45.8 million), followed by the Russian Federation (11 million); Germany (9.8 million); Saudi Arabia (9.1 million); United Arab Emirates (7.8 million); United Kingdom (7.8 million); France (7.4 million); Canada (7.3 million); Australia (6.5 million); and Spain (6.5 million).

------

So, it is exciting stuff, to be sure.  People are on the move like never before and God is on the move among them.  During the next few days, I will be speaking on diaspora missiology first at a Dallas-Ft. Worth Diaspora Leaders Roundtable and then at the annual gathering of the International Society of Frontier Missiology.  I am excited about the opportunity to share and pray that God uses the time to influence these leaders for the sake of missions among scattered people.  I hope you will pray.

-----

Also, if you have been tracking with us, you will have noticed that MoveIn and Trinity International Baptist Mission have just announced today that they are joining forces to launch MoveIn in the United States.  TIBM has two "MoveIn" teams that have already moved into "patches" and are engaging those communities with prayer and the gospel.  You will hear more about this development in coming days and weeks, but for now, I hope you will check out MoveIn and learn more about the vision.

-----

By the way, when I'm on the road, I like to post to my "Scatterings" blog which is on Tumblr.  So, if you haven't added me on Facebook, you can check out that blog for pictures and updates from my travels.  Usually.  

Without Thee, I Cannot Live: A Theology of Nominating Committees

Today I was praying for the Nominating Committee of our local association of Baptist churches and a thought or two came my way.  Do you know what a "nominating committee" is?  Basically they are the group in an organization responsible for getting other people to agree to fill voluntary positions and offices.  It's a rather thankless task to be sure.  On another level, however -- on a more spiritual level -- there is something else going on.  Something that I think we do well to ponder.

There is under-girding and thus birthing and sustaining the existence of such a thing as "nominating committees" in Christian circles a truth so central to our lives that it seems all other truths may just hang on it like ornaments on a tree.  It isn't the same thing which gives rise to "nominating committees" outside the Church (or at least it shouldn't be).  Outside it is this, "There are jobs which must be done and positions which must be filled; we need a group whose sole purpose is to berate, guilt, or sucker people into filling those posts."  No! In the Church it is another thing:

"Without Thee, I cannot live!"

Say again?

Consider:

"'Without Thee, I cannot live!' Whatever our small practice, belief, or experience may be, nothing can alter the plain fact that God, the Spirit of spirits, the Life-giving Life, has made or rather is making each person reading these words for Himself; and that our lives will not achieve stability until they are ruled by that truth." (E. Underhill)

Can the follower of Jesus doubt this? Without God, we are hopelessly lost are we not?  Is not our complete and utter dependence upon Him perhaps the uppermost reality governing our lives?

Sure, but what has that to do with "nominating committees"?

Well, only the truly loyal readers have made it this far in a post about "nominating committees" (which is really about God), so let me reward you with a parable:

A little girl goes to school.  Her lunchbox in hand having been lovingly prepared by her attentive and thoughtful mother.  At lunchtime, the girl devours the peanut butter and jelly sandwich, small bag of Cheetos, pickle spear, oatmeal cookie and juice box.  The banana, however, gets tossed into the garbage.  Same as always.  The girl isn't a fruit lover.

And this is a picture of us.  Saying we need God; saying in a voice of triumphant piety, "Without Thee, I cannot live!" Then proceeding to open the lunchbox of what God has prepared.  We pick through and consume what we desire and chuck the rest. We never stop to consider the far greater wisdom of a Parent who has prepared these things (all these things) for us.

So . . . "nominating committees"?

Ah, yes.  Here we are. Well, what exactly has God prepared for us?


1Co 12:7-19 ESV  To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.  For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit,  to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit,  to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues.  All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills . . . .  For the body does not consist of one member but of many.  If the foot should say, "Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body.  And if the ear should say, "Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body.  If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell?  But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose.  If all were a single member, where would the body be?

And also . . . 

Eph 4:4-7 ESV  There is one body and one Spirit--just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call--  one Lord, one faith, one baptism,  one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.  But grace was given to each one of us according to the measure of Christ's gift.

God has provided a Body.  The Church. And my point is simple (though I've certainly taken the scenic route to get here).  When we presume that we do not need the Body, when we arrogantly cut ourselves off from noses or fingers or kidneys,  when we foolishly set out to conquer the world as solitary ears or hair follicles or even as a covenanted coalition of knuckles,  then we (to brazenly mix metaphors) are chucking items from the lunchbox carefully and lovingly prepared by our Parent, the Father.  We may say "'Tis but a speckled banana," or (switching back) "merely an ear lobe" but in the act of chucking we are not simply saying, "I don't need bannanas or ear lobes or church planters or Christians who care about the homeless or ESL teachers or "black" churches or "white" churches or Pentecostals or Calvinists or __________ -- No, we are saying something far different. Something much more serious.  We are saying, "Without Thee, I will be just fine!" For when we reject what He, in infinite wisdom and love, has prepared, we reject Him.  But really, we are dead without Him. As a friend of mine is fond of saying, "Without Him, we cannot move an inch!"

So it is upon this foundational truth that all great Christian "nominating committees" through the ions of salvation history have been built.  Or, at least, should be.  Why? Because it is the noble task of the "nominating committee" to say to the Church (or to their little corner of it anyway),

"Everyone, this is Sam. He's a deacon down at XYZ Church. God has given him such and such gifts and experiences.  You need him and Sam needs you, and we'll all be richer, fuller, healthier and happier with him in the lunchbox."

Over and out.

5 Challenges for the Illinois Baptist State Association: Introduction

Been putting this off for too long.  Last month, I had the honor of speaking at the weekly chapel service of the Illinois Baptist State Association (IBSA).  This is a small gathering of prayer, worship, and Bible study that the Springfield-based missionaries of the Southern Baptist Convention enjoy.  I was asked especially to share with IBSA from my experience representing them at Cape Town 2010, the 3rd Lausanne Congress on World Evangelization.

My goal in sharing was to seek to bring to these IBSA leaders what I felt that God was saying to our part of the Church.  In the end, I felt led to bring a series of 5 challenges to IBSA.  Though I felt somewhat intimidated in front of these leaders -- all sort of "outranking" me in our denominational structure -- I felt it was important to share with confidence and to avoid any hesitations.  This is, I believe, what God's Spirit is saying to us.  These are His challenges to us.

The feedback was very positive and I left deeply encouraged.  There was even something of an encore and plenty of fruitful conversations that followed.  Now that it has been a few weeks, I want to post these challenges publicly.  If you are a follower of Christ involved with the life of IBSA, you will be especially interested in my posts during the next few days, as I plan to simply post the 5 challenges as 5 posts over the next 5 days.  If you are not involved in IBSA, you may still be interested to know what our small segment of Southern Baptist brothers and sisters in Christ are talking about.  It is actually quite relevant to you as well.

Today, let me just close my post by directing you to a scripture that I brought before the IBSA last month as our launching pad.  It comes from 2 Corinthians 9:8--

"And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that having all sufficiency in all things at all times, you may abound in every good work."

Of course, I presented this text in the wider context of chapters 8-9.  I would encourage you to reflect on these two chapters and consider how Paul speaks about the purpose of God for want and plenty in the Body of Christ.  Especially read 8:10ff.  Paul assumes association and collaboration in the body of Christ.  Paul believes that the plenty of the Corinthian Christians is designed by God for the sake of meeting the needs of Jerusalem Christians -- and vice versa.  His assumption is clear:

God has designed and decreed want and plenty in the body of Christ to demonstrate to us all, in an utterly convincing way, that there is one Body and that no single part of it has all the gifts necessary for advancing the gospel and finishing the Great Commission.  That is, if we want to be in the will of God, collaborative mission and kingdom partnership are non-negotiable.

Indeed, God is able to make all grace abound to us, so that having all sufficiency in all things at all times, we may abound in every good work.  But if that's not our experience, if instead we see only need, lack, inability to carry on the work of our mission for a lack of human, financial, or other resources what does this indicate?

The experience of perpetual want in our mission seems to point to a kind of disconnect between us and the body of Christ.  God's primary means of meeting our needs is through the Church.  But if our view of the Church is too small, narrow, weak, flimsy, or whatever -- well, we should not be surprised by our enduring neediness.  It isn't that God hasn't made provision.  It is that we are able or willing to connect with His means -- the body of Christ.

That's enough for now.  I would guess that most will not have read this far anyway.  But do take a look at the blog during the next 5 days.  I want to present 5 challenges to IBSA that flow out of the principle that I've just elucidated.  

Campus Ministries Sign Agreement - News - InterVarsity.org

A great start . . .

Campus Ministries Sign Agreement - News - InterVarsity.org

What Should Be our Priorities in Making Disciples of All Nations

Okay, I want to be simple here. First, super grateful for your prayers. I thought there would be no way for me to finish this paper - to stay awake. I even got in bed.  But as I started reading, my energy was renewed. Twenty pages finished. The paper?

"World Evangelization in the 21st Century: Prioritizing the Essential Elements of the Great Commission" by Paul Eshleman on behalf of the Lausanne Strategy Working Group (LSWG).

The paper is simple and crucial. It seeks to say to the Global Church, "As we look at the work of mission in the world today, here are the things that should be our top priorities." It is specific, Biblical, and compelling.  I read it with the eyes of a pastor, church planter, missionary, and ministry leader.  If you find yourself occupying one of those roles, read this paper.  If you are a disciple of Jesus concerned about the Great Commission, read it.

There is a lot I could say here and there in response to the LSWG paper.  However, I want to limit my comments to several specific questions that came to my mind as I thought through these priorities and specific calls.  I kept asking how this related to Trinity International Baptist Mission.  What is God saying to us?  I am expecting God to speak in powerful ways to me and to my context of ministry.  So, it is important that I bring my ministry and every component of it to the table.  I challenge you to do the same with your church or ministry as you read the LSWG paper.  Here are the questions I am beginning to ask (note: TIBM refers to Trinity International Baptist Mission and all our related ministries):

1. Can TIBM recruit and deploy one team tasked to produce an "Oral Story Bible" for one of the 2,252 language groups that still do not have one verse of Scripture in their language?

2. Can TIBM drastically increase our intentional and strategic distribution and use of the Scripture?

3. Can TIBM recruit and deploy one full-time worker to go to one of the 2,365 people groups (with populations over 5,000) that are totally unengaged with the Gospel?

4. Can TIBM launch a new ministry focused on reaching out to members of a major religious group that we aren't currently engaging?

5. Can I effectively teach effective Bible storying and narrative preaching to those I lead and mentor?

6. Can the entire TIBM team get trained in orality ministry?

7. Can TIBM start more churches where there are actual needs?

8. Can TIBM become a "house of prayer for the nations" - developing a 24/7 missional prayer ministry?

9. Can TIBM form new boundary-crossing partnerships that result in extending God's Kingdom?

10. Can TIBM become for faithfully mobilized in compassion ministry?

11. Can TIBM be renewed and refilled by the Holy Spirit?

12. Can TIBM become more effective and intentional in mobilizing followers of Christ to pray, give, and go for God's global mission?

13. Can TIBM become thoroughly and constantly informed as to the status of God's mission in the world?  Can we increase our access to and use of resources like Christian World Encyclopedia, Operation World, Ethnologue, Joshua Project, People Groups, and more?

14. Can TIBM conduct regular research and produce reliable results that are helpful to the Body of Christ?

And that's it. I am particularly looking forward to the plenary session on this topic and the interaction around the tables.  Let's pray that God will give us very clear direction.

Equilibrium: Revisited

I had just settled in to my seat on a South African Airways flight from Jo'burg to Cape Town.  I had my copy of Complete Nepali (excellent, by the way) in my hand, ready to be read.  Then Greg sat down.  Followed a bit later by Azim. Both men were my age.  Both native South Africans. Both 3rd generation Indian immigrants.  What followed was a lively conversation about Cape Town, life, world affairs.  

At one point, I said to my traveling companions, "I'm curious about your perspectives on things going on in the U.S.  What does it look like to a South African?"  There were some attempts to answer me, but eventually Greg explained, "You know, we all pretty much feel that Americans are arrogant.  That they have no idea about what's going on in the rest of the world.  So in response, a lot of times, we just don't care about what's going on in the United States."  The conversation continued, building on the theme that Americans must learn how to listen.

Greg told me of a time he was in the U.S. on business, consulting for an American company. One of the American's asked him if he knew what an "MP3" was.  Well, Greg was taken aback.  He felt offended that the American assumed that since Greg came from the majority world, that he knew very little about technology. "This guy didn't even know that actually MP3s were already an outdated form of technology!"

Let me paint a different kind of scenario:

A kind of coalition of churches is formed in an American city. The several churches represent several different ethno-linguistic groups.  There is property involved.  Electric bills.  Space and time negotiations.  Etc.  The assumed head of this coalition is the one American church.  Not that this was ever mutually agreed upon.  It just was.  It is simply assumed that since the property that is being used by all is legally owned by the American group, that they are the ones who have the final authority.  And, by the way, it isn't just the Americans who make this assumption.  Everyone else does as well.  At the end of the day, it appears that finances and power are woven together very tightly.  We should pause and consider if this is true and if it is as it should be . . . ok, now let's move on.

Then there is a meeting. The Americans have been struggling for some time, but recently some of its leaders have experiences a fresh vision and hope for the future.  They call the meeting to discuss their vision with the other churches – the immigrant churches.  Their exciting new plans are laid on the table.  The other churches are invited and challenged to get on board in prescribed ways.  The immigrants are encouraged to consider how they might make adjustments to their plans and ministries in order to prepare for growth.  In as sense, it sounds very exciting.

Except . . .

Here’s the thing, the immigrant churches have already been growing.  Some of them have planted daughter churches after only existing for a couple years themselves.  The growth is heavily through making new disciples.  They are already vibrant, hopeful, excited.  Beyond that, some of the leaders in those immigrant churches have accumulated very significant experience in evangelism, church planting, missions, and more.  As a matter of fact, from the perspective of a fly on the wall, the meetings seems very strange.  The one church that has not been growing, is the one leading, the one casting the vision, the one (indirectly) demanding to be listened to.  But the question is never raised, nor does it appear to enter the mind that the Americans should go to the immigrants and ask, “Will you teach us how to reach our neighbors?”

Greg said it.  Americans like me just have no idea how to listen. How to learn from the rest of the world.  How to be humble before them and recognize that our brothers and sisters in Christ from the majority world have been gifted and blessed by God in ways that we need.  That I need. 

So, these thoughts are very much on my mind today in Cape Town, South Africa.  Because of the people I’ve been talking with.  Because of what Greg said.  Because of what Paco said. And Niove.  Because I’ve been asked to lead a table and I want to listen.  Because of David Ruiz’s tremendous paper, “Cooperation in the Body of Christ: Towards a New Equilibrium”.  There is so much good stuff in his paper that trying to quote something or sum up something seems an injustice.  Just read it.  Pay careful attention to what he says about COMIBAM. It made me write in the margin of my paper, “What if the Cooperative Program was actually cooperative?” Some of you will understand that.

Take note of what Ruiz says about the best “motor” to empower and drive missions. Take note of the “high price” of cooperation.  Take note of this, “a united group starts with me.”

Together with Patrick Fung (who’s paper I review here), Ruiz will be presenting here in Cape Town on Sunday the 24^th.  I have a feeling that’s a plenary you’ll want to download the podcast for.

Blessings.

Must the Church Pursue a Global Equilibrium?

I always appreciate it when thinkers carefully examine unstated premises.  I always think about an episode of the West Wing in which one main character is repeatedly advised to handle reporters by "rejecting the premise" of their questions. I believe that Singaporean Church leader Patrick Fung's ability to do this -- to put the premise of his paper's title ("Partnering in the Body of Christ toward a New Global Equilibrium") under the microscope-- is what makes his contribution to the Lausanne Congress so valuable.

Fung's self-conscious article presents a very important question. Should a global equilibrium of power, resources, and influence be pursued at all?  Phillip Jenkins and others have done a good job of pointing out to us that the majority of Christians now live in the global south while most of the power and influence remains in Western countries.  But as I read Fung, I must acknowledge that this fact alone mustn't be the sole reason that we pursue a global equilibrium in the Church.  Rather, our goal is world evangelism, not equilibrium.  Writes Fung, "I am glad that LCWE stands for Lausanne Congress for World Evangelization and not Lausanne Congress for World Equilibrium."  This is an important point. We must not be saying "to the extent to which pursuing global equilibrium in the Church is the nice thing to do, we must do it." Rather we must say "to the extent to which pursuing a global equilibrium in the Church contributes to the extension of God's reign and fame among all peoples and nations, we must do it."

To this point, I want to say three things -- things that I think Fung is also saying.

First, we may speak of a geographic, financial, numerical, or intellectual "center of gravity" in the Church, but the only "center of gravity" that has any real meaning is the theological one -- Christ is the one and only "center of gravity" for the Church.

This, of course, isn't a point original to me, but rather comes from something I read in the Lausanne Theology Working Group paper.  Let me provide an extended quote here:

"We rejoice in the phenomenal growth of the church in the majority world of the global south, and for that reason we understand the intention of the statement that the 'centre of gravity' of world Christianity has shifted south.  However, we strongly discourage the further use of this term, for two reasons.  First, Christianity has no centre but Jesus Christ.  We are defined by no geographical centre, but only by our allegiance to the Lordship of Christ, and he is Lord of all the earth.  The 'centre', therefore, is wherever he is worshipped and obeyed. Secondly, any talk of a centre (other than Christ) undermines the fact that Christianity, even since the book of Acts, has always been fundamentally polycentric. Anywhere on earth can be a centre, and any centre can rapidly become peripheral.  The global nature of the church as 'one throughout the whole wide world' subverts the language of a centre--whether geographic, numerical, or missionary. Mission is from everywhere to everywhere."


Second, for the gospel to be the gospel, there is a need for a kind of global equilibrium in the Church.  This is because a full-orbed understanding of the gospel includes the good news that God is creating out of fragmented and broken humanity, one new humanity, the Church.

So there can be no true gospel and no true evangelization unless it includes the presentation of this new reconciled humanity.  And I sense a growing chorus of voices on this point.  It is here in Fung's article, "Christ has destroyed the barrier . . . has brought into being nothing less than a new, united human race . . . the message of reconciliation is to be lived out by God's new community, which the fragmented world needs to see." It is also in the Lausanne Theology Working Group paper, "It is important to see how this 'peace-making' work of the cross -- reconciling Jews and Gentiles, and creating on new humanity -- is not just a by-product of the gospel, but is of the essence of the gospel itself." It there in the words of Antoine Rutayisire who, when speaking of factors contributing to the Rwandan genocide of the 1990s, mourned the fact that conflicts between missionaries from different denominations "created more divisions and animosities among the people who did not see Christianity as a unifying factor but rather another colonial importation." It is, of course, in the Lausanne Covenant itself which states, "our disunity undermines our gospel of reconciliation" and the Manila Manifesto which affirms "the urgent need for churches, mission agencies and other Christian organizations to cooperate in evangelism and social action, repudiating competition and avoiding duplication." And more voices besides these could be cited.  Praise the Holy Spirit as He works to move us more and more to this point of common ground.

Third, for a global equilibrium to be built upon an a priori commitment to God's global mission, it will necessarily look different than conceptions of equilibrium that are based on a rather arbitrary sense of niceness, fairness, or democracy.

And I'm not meaning to be cute here, but Fung has raised a critical specific point that alludes to this larger one.  His specific point is this, "although a better state of equilibrium will avoid the tendency of dependency, the biblical concept of partnering in the body of Christ should be interdependence". Now, I can't tell you how tempted I am to chase that rabbit trail, but I will try to exercise a bit of self-control and simply suggest, in agreement with Fung, that it is unbiblical to hold up independence and autonomy as signs of spiritual maturity either for individuals, local churches, or national/regional churches.  The three (to four) self formula is fundamentally flawed if it cannot allow for the kind of permanent interdependence that the Bible calls for.

Now it is this Biblical interdependence that must become what we mean by equilibrium.  It is not that the Holy Spirit distributes the same gifts, history, resources, experiences, and knowledge to every person, church, and region in precisely the same ways so as to facilitate our human conception of fairness.  Rather, it is that the Holy Spirit distributes gifts as He wills for the common good (1 Cor. 12).  We are all supposed to be strong in some ways and weak in others.  For in this, we cannot but come together.  The real problem may not be that Western churches "have all the power, influence, scholarship and resources", but rather that we in the West have failed to recognize the richness in majority world Churches that we desperately need.  Likewise we fail to recognize value that lies outside our normal categories of assessing value.  So that if we continue to only think of equilibrium in terms of balancing money, influence, information, and the like then we will never achieve Biblical interdependence (i.e. equilibrium) that also calls us to value a whole range of other categories such as prayer, worship, persecutions, powerlessness, poverty, joy, and more.

Why Contextualize? (Part 4) We need the whole Church

For those of you who may be just joining us, what I’m doing here – broadly speaking – is attempting to write just a whole bunch of stuff on contextualization generally and the practice of contextualization among Hindus in particular.  And, I’m trying to begin by laying down a number of theological foundations in answer to the question, “Why should we pursue contextualization in mission?”  Today, I want to provide a fourth and (for now[i]) final foundation to consider.  I encourage you to take some time to consider all four of these foundations together (see links on the right) so that you can get a real sense of the cumulative weight of Scripture on this topic.


4. Our Need of the Whole Community of Christ


Here’s what we’ve already established:

·         We want to be like Jesus.
·         We want to reach all people groups.
·         We want to please God.


And we’ve seen how these desires are inextricably tied to the pursuit of contextualization.  That is, the imitation of Christ necessitates an imitation of His incarnation; the Bible believes that contextualization is necessary for reaching the lost; and God is pleased with the long term preservation of at least certain elements of the unique glory and splendor of each and every nation.


But as we study the Scripture, we note that these three desires cannot be attained nor even meaningfully pursued in isolation
from the whole body of Christ.  The word of God teaches that without cooperating “together with all the saints” we cannot attain to “all the fullness of God” (Eph. 3:14-19[ii]).  Likewise that if we want the “world to know” about Jesus Christ we must become “perfectly one” (John 17:20-23).  Finally, that pleasing God isn’t possible apart from a unified church.  For that is where God commands his blessing (Ps. 133).


So, I submit to you that we followers of Christ need each other.  We need the whole Church.  I cannot imitate Christ without you.  The U.S. Church cannot reach the world without the Nigerian Church.  Asian Christians cannot please God without European Christians.  And I submit further, that without a sincere and global pursuit of contextualization, that kind of partnering and joining together cannot happen—the whole Church cannot be truly whole.


 I say this with 1 Corinthians 12 and a broader-than-typical view of contextualization in mind.  Regarding the latter, I am convinced that when the pursuit of contextualization is motivated solely by evangelism, it is somewhat less than authentic.  We can be justly accused of precipitating a kind of “bait and switch” when we lure in unsuspecting men and women by a contextualized evangelistic message or event only to impose conformity to Western, “established” forms of discipleship and “doing church” once someone has professed faith.  Contextualization, however, is even more for followers of Christ than for those who don’t know Him.  Note that only one of the three previously mentioned Biblical foundations for contextualization is focused on sharing the gospel with non-Christians.  If one could hypothetically conceive of a cultural context that was 100% Christian, pursuing contextualization would still be every bit as critical as it would be for that small band of Christ-followers living in a place where the vast majority of people don’t know Jesus.  Disciples of Jesus must pursue the incarnation in their unique contexts.  The must seek to preserve and enhance those particular deposits of glory and splendor, that God has already made and continues to make in them, with which He desires to be praised and reflected now and even into eternity.  The Word made Flesh must be realized by the people of Christ in every generation, nation, culture, and village—and that for the sake of the whole Church becoming whole.


And so I come to 1 Corinthians 12, a very familiar passage that I hardly need to say much about.  We are the body of Christ.  And each of us – Mokilese, Garung, Rajbansi, Beja, Punjabi, Korean—are a part of it.  And we need each other.  And if I try to make feet conform to the function and method and appearance of noses, I am essentially saying to the rest of the body, “I don’t really need you, I just need more of me.”  Contextualization says feet can be feet and noses can be noses – and, indeed, should be.  Contextualization says, the body of Christ is whole when each part is fully what God intends it to be and is that in relationship with all the other parts.  We must recognize that if that doesn’t happen, we’re in trouble.  As Paul poignantly asks, “If all were a single member, where would the body be?” (1 Cor. 12:19)

---

[i] Note: I’ve got another theological foundation brewing in my mind and heart – a foundation-o-foundations—that I will share some time later.  It just needs to steep more in my heart.  But I think, it ends up being the foundation upon which all these foundations are ultimately built.

[ii] See also my article on this particular scripture passage entitled “The Theological Impetus for Global Partnership”.

The Theological Impetus for Global Partnership

Now, this post today, just perfectly fits the title of my blog – “Ramblings.” Because, you see, what is moving me to write this is just simply my frequently rambling mind.  I’ve had some thoughts on global partnership—new to me—that I need to write down . . . to discipline myself to write. 

     First, there is the critical issue that faces the 3^rd Lausanne Congress on World Evangelization (just one of
six issues): 

Partnering in the Body of Christ: Toward a New Global Equilibrium

Seismic Shifts in Global Christianity.  Global PARNTERSHIPS for world evangelization, unlike anything possible in the previous twenty centuries, are now attainable as we develop relationships that are based on mutual respect – acknowledging that God has called us to be one in Him.

These new partnerships, increasingly led by visionary leaders from the majority world, will also involve more lay people who comprise the vast majority of those who bear witness to Christ in this Century.  By sharing
the best available resources and best practices, together “the whole church (will) take the whole gospel to the whole world.”

From the Cape Town 2010 web site – http://www.lausanne.org/cape-town-2010/why-cape-town-2010.html

Now the practical question for me as a mission leader is, Why?  Why should I lead my team and seek to mobilize others to enter into partnerships within and outside of the denomination, within and outside of the nation?  It is honestly just very challenging to me to assess the value of such partnership. And, if I look on a larger scale, how do I convince my local Baptist association or the Southern Baptist Convention as a whole to engage in meaningful partnerships with churches, agencies, and associations from other parts of the world?

TIBM has “partnering with others” as one of our seven central tasks.  So it is something that we do.  And with certain of those partnerships, it is not difficult to convince me that the relationship is important and valuable, but if you ask me to articulate why, I’m not sure I could do so convincingly.  More fundamentally, I’ve had trouble articulating why partnership as a practice is inherently right and good and to be passionately pursued by all Christian churches, agencies and organizations.  I mean, if it is only a matter of trying to keep us from bickering at each other, well, then partnership is reduced to a mere necessary annoyance – like filing your taxes.  Even if the value of partnership is only practical – sharing “resources and best practices” – well, I suppose that is good, but doesn’t that potentially reduce the impetus for partnering to the desire to seek relationships of convenience? So that if I cannot be convinced of the practical benefits of such an arrangement, there is really no reason to enter into it. 

Is there more? Is there a deeper, essentially ontological, compellingly theological reason for engaging in global

partnerships?  Is there an inescapably Biblical demand that relegates all pragmatic motivations and hesitations concerning partnership to the dim background?  Well, of course, I have a thought.  Consider Paul’s prayer in Ephesians 3:

“I pray that, according to the riches of his glory, he may grant that you may be strengthened in your inner being with power through his Spirit, and that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith, as you are being rooted and grounded in love.  I pray that you may have power to comprehend, with all the saints, what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, so that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.”  

(Ephesians 3:16-19, NRSV)

I believe that one of the things that Paul’s prayer declares is that it is impossible for local bodies of Christians to reach (or even significantly approach) spiritual maturity without engagement in genuine relationships with Christians outside that local group.  Look with me at this text:

1. The Desired Result is Spiritual Maturity – note Paul’s “so that” in verse 19.  Everything that Paul is praying is “so that” something will result in the beneficiaries of his prayer.  It is “so that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.” Which is a wonderfully evocative way of speaking of spiritual formation, maturity, sanctification – God’s work to transform us into the image of Jesus Christ.

2. The Cause of the “So That” – It is clear that Paul believes that when a Christian is enabled to comprehend (the Greek word καταλαβέσθαι means literally to “eagerly seize”) and know the multidimensional, knowledge-surpassing love of God, the result is spiritual maturity—the “so that” of verse 19.

3. The Essential Conditions of Comprehending – Note that Paul’s prayer assumes that this comprehending and knowing of God’s love is only possible “together with all the saints” (v. 18).  This fellowship is presented here as a necessary condition for which Paul is praying on behalf of his readers without
which, the apostle is convinced, grasping the love of God and thus spiritual maturity is an utter impossibility.

4. The Plurality of You – The Biblical demand for partnership comes into full relief when we recognize that the “you” of Paul’s prayer (v. 16, 17, 18, and 19) is plural (preserved nicely in the Nepali Bible as “timiharu”).  That is, the “you” being rooted and grounded in love in verse 17 is the local body of believers that has received and is now corporately reading Paul’s epistle.  Thus is it a local body of believers for whom Paul is praying in verse 18 when he says, “I pray that you [all] may have power to” comprehend and know the love of God. It is this plural you then that must enter into relationship, dialogue, and indeed partnership “together with all the saints” – Christians from outside that specific community – “so that” spiritual maturity may result in their body. 

What we are left with is an inspired prayer that sees spiritual maturity as only attainable when local bodies of
Christians are engaged in meaningful partnerships with other communities of faith outside their immediate context.  That is, we may say confidently from this text that any given mission team, church, agency, denomination, or Christian organization will be unable to be all that God would have them be as evangelists, medical missionaries, church planters, Bible translators, campus ministers, Christian educators, relief workers, worshippers, intercessors, disciples, or Jesus-followers apart from the pursuit of global partnership as a corporate spiritual discipline.  Or, to put it positively, the active pursuit of ever-deepening global partnerships by local bodies of Christians enables those communities to better (and increasingly so) comprehend and know God’s love which results in dramatic spiritual transformation and growth.

  
This is true, I assume, because there is actually only one body of Christ in the world (4:4) with one triune God indwelling, ruling over, and guiding that whole body (4:4-6).  That the gifts of Christ are distributed among all parts of that body (4:7ff) further testifies to the fact that it is when that global body is peacefully bonded together (4:3), pursuing and gradually arriving at the unity of faith (4:13) that the Church of Jesus Christ in the world functions as it should (4:16).  It is when the whole Church builds itself up in love (4:16) – which it cannot do outside of the exercise of the spiritual discipline global partnership – that it “grows up in every way
into him who is the head, into Christ” (4:15).

Whew! Okay, then, think about that for awhile. I’d love to read your comments. Also, I strongly encourage you to engage the global conversation on this topic at http://www.lausanne.org/global-conversation/more-partners-at-the-family-table.html where you can read several articles, watch a video, explore resources, and interact with others.  Blessings!