Working with Short-term Outreach Teams (3)

When I started blogging, one of the first topics I wrote about was partnerships in mission. If you click on this link, you will find everything I wrote about partnerships. One of the reasons why I believe that partnerships often stop functioning effectively, is because most partnerships in mission are one way roads where resources are channelled from the “haves” to the “have-nots” which are only too glad to receive all kinds of gifts. But this usually leads to a very unhealthy relationship and eventually the people handing out the gifts get tired of doing this and then the relationship often stops.
I can’t remember where he wrote about it, but I recall that David Bosch once mentioned that both partners in a mission relationship should be giving. Obviously, the poorer of the two can hardly support the richer partner financially, but in most cases they have other things which they can give. What needs to happen is for the richer partner to realise that they have a need for what the poorer partner can give to them. One example of this would be the caring spirit that is often found amongst poorer communities – something which I have heard time and time again really touches people from richer communities who live in circumstances where they do not really need to take care of others.
In the past, when hosting short-term outreach teams, the team would greet me at the end of the time with the words: “When we came, we prepared ourselves to give to these people, but it feels as if we had received more than we could give.” Nowadays, when hosting a short-term outreach team, we prepare ourselves to give to them. We know much more about the culture than the visitors know. We know much more about the needs of the people. We know much more about ways of taking care of people, using the minimum resources. We have much more experience in taking care of people in need, of encouraging the sick and the dying. In most cases we know much more about HIV and AIDS. The list goes on. What the visitors have to offer we receive gladly, but I inform them beforehand that we are going to expose them to situations which most of them have never experienced, but we do it on purpose to help them better to understand what we are doing and in such a way equipping them to use their newly acquired knowledge in other places.
No longer do we have to feel guilty or ashamed because of what we are receiving. We are thankful for everything that is given to help in the ministry, but at the same time we are sharing our experience and our example with others, so that we can truly be equal partners in accomplishing the task God gave us to do.

Working with Short-term Outreach Teams (2)

I’m still trying to determine what causes one short-term outreach team to “work” while another team seems to “fail”. Since the 10th of May, I’ve been hosting a short-term outreach team from the Palm Beach Atlantic University, Florida (USA). This has possibly been one of the best groups I’ve ever had in Swaziland. However, if anyone should ask me why this team worked so well, I would not be able to give an exact answer. The team consisted of nine students, all female. This may have played some role in the group dynamics, as they slept in an old farmhouse on their own and had ample time to bond (and I think women may bond slightly easier than men.)
It also became clear to me that the students joining this outreach are carefully chosen. Which criteria are used, I don’t know, but it wasn’t merely a case that anyone wanting to join would be allowed. Although one should be careful not to restrict a mission outreach to an exclusive group of people, as if those people are on a higher spiritual level than others, having people in a group like this with too many unresolved personal issues, becomes a great burden to the rest of the team and inevitably hinders the work.
I spent a few hours with the group last night, doing some informal (or less formal) debriefing. What I heard was that great effort is made by their missions trip coordinator to prepare these groups for their cross-cultural encounters. Although I always spend time with a group upon their arrival to brief them about Swazi culture, to enlighten them about the reality of HIV and AIDS and to prepare them for what they can expect, I believe that the fact that they had already been properly prepared for something new before they came, played an extremely important role in the success of the group. And what definitely helped was that they were apparently told, over and over again, that the local people know better than they what needs to be done and therefore they have to submit themselves to the local authority (which they did!)
Instead of communicating with me directly, this group used Operation Mobilisation (OM) as go-between, them working with the office in the USA which communicated with the office in South Africa (with whom I already have a good personal relationship) and them communicating with me. It may sound as if this would make communication more difficult, but in effect it helped as OM has a lot of experience in handling international groups. Furthermore, being a parent myself, I can assume that for parents whose children want to go on a short-term outreach, it would be comforting to know that a large international organisation is also involved to ensure that their children will be safe.
But I think, if I have to say what caused this group to function so well, it would probably be because they were willing to learn from us. Previous groups very often came with the question: What can we do for you? Obviously, this is an important question to ask. This group came with the question: How can you use us? I believe there is an important difference between these two questions (or at least in the attitude behind the questions), but that would be the topic of a next post.

Working with Short-term Outreach Teams (1)

Since 1985, when I first arrived in Swaziland, I’ve been working with short-term outreach teams. Usually things worked out fairly well, but at other times it was terrible. A certain university in South Africa had a long-lasting relationship with Swaziland and up to 1996 we received four teams from the university during their annual winter break. Each year, after the team left, my wife and I tried to analyse the visit, trying to find out what was good and what was bad and more especially why certain teams worked well and others not.
One of the amazing discoveries we made after all the teams that we had received, was that the team leader played a fairly insignificant role when it came to the success of the group. This does not mean that the team leader is not important. Obviously, someone has to take responsibility. What we did find was that the team leader had a much greater role to play when it came to creating a feeling of unity amongst the group than in real leasership. The best leader we ever had (two years running) was a student who had virtually no typical leadership characteristics. When problems occurred within the team, he would go around, give each member a bear hug and tell them that he loves and cares for them, and afterwards everyone smiled and apologised for saying bad things about others and then they went on with their work.
The worst leader we ever had was a student with exceptionally strong leadership capabilities, even being one of the elect few amongst almost 20,000 students who served on their university’s Student Representative Council. However, in spite of his exceptional leadership qualities, he wasn’t able to create a feeling of unity amongst his team and because he himself was not willing to accept authority, it became one of the worst teams we ever had in Swaziland. The day they left, we breathed a sigh of relief and said: Hallelujah!
Much more thought needs to go into the issue of short-term outreaches. After 1996 I had a discussion with representatives from the university from which the students came and my advice to them was that they needed to rethink these outreaches and perhaps, after more than twenty years, they had to ask themselves the question why they are coming to Swaziland. Was it because of the traditional bond between the university and Swaziland, or was it because they were really making (or undergoing) a difference?
Eventually a decision was made to stop these visits.
Looking back at those times I often wonder how we could have done things differently. Our biggest problem was that many of the students created the impression that they had come to Swaziland on a fairly inexpensive vacation. Anyone willing to come, was accepted gladly on the team. Their costs were minimal. However, when they arrived in Swaziland they expected expensive meals. In fact, they ate food that we would rarely if ever eat in our own home. (This changed later after we had a long and deep discussion with the students about this.) Their work consisted mostly of visiting schools (which I had to arrange beforehand), meeting children before school during assembly, introducing themselves, singing a few songs, perhaps doing a short skit or a puppet show, selling Bibles and then driving off to the next school. During the afternoons they would go to the local market and mix with people.
I also had the impression that they mostly considered the children standing in front of them to be unbelievers. During the skits and the puppet shows they were always sharing the news about Jesus who had died for their sins (granted, this is amazingly good news) but the next year they would visit the same school and bring the same message as if they had never spoken to these children before. This also got me thinking about the purpose of a short-term outreach.
I’ll continue with the topic tomorrow, but I would be glad to get some feed-back from people who had possibly been on a short-term outreach or who had received such teams and how you feel about them.

Keeping Mission Supporters informed

When I arrived in Swaziland in 1985, we were four missionaries working for the same mission organisation ( www.swazimission.co.za ) and one of the tasks which I was instructed to do was to write a newsletter once every four months to keep our supporters and others interested in the work informed about things happening. The other missionaries wrote during the other three months. 1985 was BC (Before Computers) which meant that we had to type a newsletter on an old typewriter (my kids don’t even know what a typewriter is!) and then this document had to be posted to an office in Pretoria in South Africa where it was retyped, duplicated, put into envelopes and posted to a few hundred people.
With time the system changed. Of the four missionaries I was the first to buy a computer in 1986 and we then started doing the newsletter on computer, in those early years using a program known as Wordstar and later progressing to other wordprocessors which enabled us to make the newsletter slightly more attractive. As my fellow missionaries left Swaziland, either to work in other areas or to retire, I eventually ended up having to write a newsletter every month. Getting the newsletter duplicated was not too difficult, but it became a family affair once a month to fold hundreds of newsletters and to get them into envelopes.
And then the next big step came when I started sending these newsletters via email. At present I have less than twenty people still receiving their newsletters via snail mail. What an improvement! But up to today I am glad that I was forced, in those early years, to discipline myself to send out newsletters to our supporters. As I receive and read newsletters from a selected group of missionaries that I am involved in, I realise the importance of these newsletters. All people supporting a ministry, be it morally, financially or through prayer, need (and have the right) to know that their support is making a difference. As missionaries we depend upon those people and therefore every missionary has to discipline him / herself to keep those supporters informed about the work.
As I went on my first short-term missionary outreach to Russia in 2001, a great number of people prayed for me. (Frankly, I suspect that many of them did not think that I would return home.) Stories of the persecution of Christians in Communist countries were still fresh in our minds. As I kept these people informed almost on a daily base as I prepared to go to Russia, I made a decision that, once in Russia, I would try my best to send out regular emails to all of these supporters. I was mostly thinking of sending out prayer requests but this became much more a personal diary (my first “blog” even before anyone else knew about blogs
Mission is teamwork. One missionary needs a large group of people giving all kinds of support. The missionary has the responsibility to ensure that all these people are well informed of the “successes” as well as the needs. For many missionaries this may feel like a waste of precious time, but it is time well invested in the kingdom of God.

Prayer and Mission

I’m almost through with Philip Yancey’s book: Prayer: Does it make any difference? As I read the stories of great missionaries, the one thing which stands out is, first of all, their personal dedication to prayer and secondly the prayer support given to them by other people. I have learnt to be very humble when it comes to prayer, mainly because I have found no foolproof recipe that works every time. In fact, I maintain that, if I should find such a foolproof recipe, I would probably be able to convert virtually the whole world, because which person would reject a foolproof offer to change whatever they want to change, merely by praying about it? Unfortunately (or rather, fortunately), prayer doesn’t work in this way. Yet I have often found that in strange ways, things that we pray about, often seem to work out in ways unforseen.
Through the years I have found that I cannot cope with the work in Swaziland without proper prayer support. As I go around, telling people about our work, mainly at present concentrated on those living with HIV and AIDS, the one thing I ask for, time and again, is prayer supporters. And as more people get involved in this task, so we find that the work becomes manageable and we also experience positive things happening.
Prayer support can be given in many ways. On the negative side, many missionaries experience people saying very easily: “You’re doing great work. I’ll pray for you,” without really realising what the work entails. My feeling at these times are that the people are actually saying: “I don’t want to get too deeply involved with your work and the quickest way to get rid of you is to tell you that I’ll pray for you.” The message I want to get across is that we have to be sincere when we say to someone that we will pray for them. Missionaries rely on people praying for them and their ministry. I’m trying to get myself in the habit, when someone asks for my prayers, to immediately pray for whatever they asked for, merely because I tend to forget afterwards. When a friend sends me an email asking for prayer support, I often write my prayer on a return email.
I have about 300 people receiving monthly updates from me via email in which I also highlight two or three matters for which there can be prayed. Many of those receiving the newsletter immediately pray for these matters. Many of them will only pray once, but in some way which I still cannot understand, they have contributed to the work being done in Swaziland.
And then I have a number of people who have made it their task to pray for our work on a daily base. These are the people that I contact whenever a crisis occurs. These are the people who start the day, praying for the various aspects of our work (and usually for other missionaries as well), the people contacting me on a regular base to find out whether there are any special prayer requests.
But then, obviously, our own church members are also motivated to pray for the work on a regular base, bringing special needs to God, bringing people with specific needs to God, praying for special projects.
How it works I cannot explain. But I know, without prayer support we would not have been where we are today. And although it is impossible to prove, I think that, with more prayer support, we may have been further than we are today.
By the way, should you want to receive our monthly newsletters via email, you can subscribe to the newsletter by clicking on the link at the end of this sentence and then choosing whether you want to receive it in Afrikaans or in English: SUBSCRIBE TO SWAZILAND NEWSLETTER

Luke / Acts – A model for mission (7)

In this, my last post on the present Luke/Acts topic, I want to concentrate on the final part of the spreading of the gospel, the story how the gospels goes unto the ends of the earth, the story found in Acts 10 – 28.
In a most unlikely source I found a deeper meaning in these chapters. I had always considered the mentioned chapters merely as relating the story of the spreading of the gospel. In a book which I bought thirty years ago for less than 50 US cents (brand new at the time and out of print at present), the Greek scholars Newman and Nida’s “ A Translator’s Handbook on the Acts of the Apostles”, analysed this part of Acts even further. Acts tells us about the geographical expansion of the gospel, and each time when a certain geographical area had been reached, Luke ends of that portion with a “ concluding” verse. When reading Acts, one would expect to have three or four such concluding verses, indicating the spreading of the gospel in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria and then to the ends of the earth. However, this is not the case. We actually find six such concluding verses. They are the following:

• Jerusalem – Acts 6:7: “So the word of God spread. The number of disciples in Jerusalem increased rapidly, and a large number of priests became obedient to the faith.”
• Judea / Samaria – Acts 9:31: “ Then the church throughout Judea, Galilee and Samaria enjoyed a time of peace. It was strengthened; and encouraged by the Holy Spirit, it grew in numbers, living in the fear of the Lord.”
• Antioch – Acts 12:24: “ But the word of God continued to increase and spread.”
• Asia Minor: Acts 16:5: “ So the churches were strengthened in the faith and grew daily in numbers.”
• Europe: Acts 19:20: “ In this way the word of the Lord spread widely and grew in power.”
• Rome: Acts 28:31: “ Boldly and without hindrance he preached the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ.”

What is the implication of this? For Luke (and Paul), Rome is the ultimate “ ends of the earth.” From the start the goal had been to take the gospel into this ungodly city. Acts therefore relates the story of the expansion of the gospel across:

• geographical borders (Judea, Samaria and to the ends of the earth)
• theological borders (no longer merely the kingdom of Israel but the whole world)
• political borders (Rome, the cradle of the ungodly Roman empire).

The promise (and the hope) that we can get from this is that nothing can stand in the way of the gospel of grace and love. We can continue spreading the good news, regardless of any opposition which we may experience along the way. If Paul was able to take the gospel into Rome, then nothing can prevent us from continuing with this work.

Luke / Acts – A model for mission (6)

If the gospel in Samaria was the first great breakthrough for the Christian community, then the second breakthrough, the first Roman accepting Christ, was equally important. If I’m not mistaken (I’m fairly sure that I’m right, but I couldn’t confirm it), it was Lesslie Newbigin who first referred to the three-fold conversion taking place in Acts 10 & 11. The story starts with two visions. Cornelius, a Roman centurion, had a vision in which he was told to fetch Peter from a house in Joppa. He immediately sent three people to fetch Peter. The following day Peter also had a vision. He saw a large sheet coming down from heaven containing all kinds of animals and reptiles. He was told to eat the food, but Peter responded by saying: “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.” God answered: “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.” (Acts 10:13-15).
Shortly after the men from Cornelius turned up and after sleeping over, they went to Cornelius. After hearing what Cornelius had to tell him, Peter said: “I now realise how true it is that God does not show favouritism but accepts men from every nation who fear him and do what is right.” (Acts 10:34-35). This could be considered as the first conversion in this story – Peter making a 180 degree turn from his previous viewpoint.
After hearing about Jesus, Cornelius and his household also came to repentance – the second conversion. At that time another Pentecost experience took place: “While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God.” (Acts 10:44-46)
Now Peter and the others returned home, probably thinking that the church leaders in Jerusalem would be very excited about the news. But this was not so. Peter was severely criticised for what he had done. Only after Peter had told the entire story, did the church accept what had happened and their response was: “So then, God has granted even the Gentiles repentance unto life.” (Acts 11:18). This could be considered as the third conversion taking place in this story: First Peter, then Cornelius and his household and then the entire church in Jerusalem. And in between, because this is a major breakthrough in the expansion of Christianity, we find a third (and last) Pentecost experience.
Formerly I would have stopped the story at this point, saying that from Acts 10 – 28 we find the story of Christ being proclaimed to the ends of the earth. But lately I have seen that there is much more to this story. I will come to that in my next post.

Luke / Acts – A model for mission (5)

In a previous post, I mentioned that the great breakthroughs in the spreading of the gospel (to Jerusalem, to Judea and Samaria and then to the ends of the world) are all linked to a certain “ Pentecostal” experience. I thought that it would be important to clarify this statement.
Fredrick Bruner, in his excellent book on A theology of the Holy Spirit, first opened my eyes to this. In Acts 8:4-17 we read how the gospel was first spread amongst the Samaritans. Keeping in mind the feeling of animosity between the Jews and the Samaritans, it is not surprising that the proclamation of the gospel amongst this group is such an important event. This is also the only account that is found in the book of Acts where people had come to repentance but had not received the Holy Spirit as well at the same time. In Acts 8:14-17 we read: “When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them. When they arrived, they prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit had not yet come upon any of them; they had simply been baptised into the name of the Lord Jesus. Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.”
The gospel had been proclaimed to them by Philip and the Samaritans had accepted Christ as Saviour. For some strange reason God did not bestow the Holy Spirit upon them at the same time and instead chose to give the Holy Spirit to them, only after Peter and John had lain their hands upon the new believers. (The only other place in Acts where the Holy Spirit is linked to the laying on of hands, is in Acts 19:6, when Paul arrived in Ephesus.
Bruner’s solution to this, an argument which I find convincing, is that God had to do something special to break down the ill feelings between the Jews and the Samaritans. Most probably God realised that, if word had reached the Jewish Christians that the Samaritans had come to repentance, the church in Jerusalem would not have taken it seriously. Because Peter and John had been present when the Spirit was given to these believers – in fact, not only present but instrumental through the laying on of their hands – it was impossible for the Jewish believers to deny what had happened in Samaria. To deny this would be to tell their church leaders that they were liars.
And therefore, when the first boundary is crossed outside Jerusalem, God gives a special experience, almost a kind of mini-Pentecost, as sign that the Samaritans were now also truly considered to be part of the family of Christ.

Luke / Acts – A model for mission (4)

I’ve been on the road the past few days and where I had been it wasn’t possible to get onto the internet.
Before I continue with the message in Acts about the different regions where the gospel was spread, I first want to say something more about Acts 1:6 and Acts 1:8.
In Acts 1:6 the apostles asked: “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?”
Through this question, the apostles demonstrate their lack of understanding for God’s plan for the world. In this short sentence, they are basically making three serious errors, which I usually describe as:

• The “who” error
• The “when” error
• The “where” error

The “who” error
The apostles still expected Jesus to do all the work. Jesus had come to earth. Jesus had died. Jesus had been resurrected. And now Jesus had to complete the work by making the kingdom come. The answer that Jesus gives them is: “…you will be my witnesses…” For this, the Holy Spirit was given.  God, in His wisdom, chose not to send legions of angels or even to leave Jesus on earth to do the work. It is the task of the believers, making use of the power of the Holy Spirit, to proclaim the kingdom of God to all nations.

The “when” error
“Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?” Jesus answers them: “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority.”
This answer is clear enough. But I think that there is something much deeper in the question that was asked. The apostles had experienced the power of God. They had been chosen by God. As far as they were concerned they were ready to go to heaven. Therefore, in their way of thinking, the logical thing would be for God to bring an end to everything. Those who have been saved will go to heaven and those who had not been saved will be left behind. But this is an extremely selfish way of thinking. From the start it was God’s intention that all nations would be saved. As God had said to Abram: “…all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.” A Christian is saved, not (only) to ensure that he / she has everlasting life, but (also) to help other people to find the same salvation.

The “where” error
“Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?” The apostles were still focussed on Israel, not realising that God had the entire world in His mind. From the start (Abram) God wanted the whole world to be saved. Israel was merely the tool that He intended to use to proclaim God to all the nations. And therefore Jesus answers: “…you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”

Luke / Acts – A model for mission (3)

The next question which arises is how we should understand the book of Acts. Where Luke 9:51 forms the key to understand the Gospel of Luke, so Acts 1:8 forms the key to understand the book of Acts. However, to understand Acts 1:8 one first has to understand Acts 1:6: “So when they met together, they asked him, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?”
At the end of the Gospel of Luke (24:49), the disciples were commanded to remain in Jerusalem to await the power which God would give them: “I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high.” Obviously the disciples (still) didn’t understand what God’s plan was and therefore they ask the question: “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?” In other words, they are still awaiting an earthly kingdom instead of a heavenly kingdom.
Jesus answers them: “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”
This verse then forms the key to understand the rest of the book, as the structure of Acts is built according to the structure of this verse:

• Acts 1-7: The gospel in Jerusalem
• Acts 8-9: The gospel in Judea and Samaria
• Acts 10-28: The gospel to the ends of the world

It is interesting to see that these three “breakthroughs” are all linked to a certain “Pentecostal” experience