Ship of Fools: "To boldly go"...but where and especially how?

Thread: "To boldly go"...but where and especially how? Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=026590

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :

Right, I have a question....
I've been here in Kenya for a year now together with my husband as CMS mission partners working with the Anglican church. Our remit is peace and justice. CMS have as their strap-line "Sharing Jesus, Changing lives" and they very much believe that mission is the job of all of us who would call ourselves Christians.
Pope Francis is also calling the Christians of the world to a commitment to "evangelisation" and sharing the love of Christ.

So my question is what does mission/ evangelisation look like now in the world which is about to go into 2014? I mean within our own cultures and not just cross-culturally.
The years I spent in Evangelical circles involved a lot of "evangelistic" activities some of which I found excruciatingly tricky.....so I am especially interested to hear from shipmates who are from less evangelical backgrounds. (That's not meant to exclude anyone BTW!)

Just for the record, my AC/RC roots have always won through regardless of the theological/ ecclesiastic leanings of the places where I have worshiped and my understanding of this question is that mission should be incarnational.

What about you?

Posted by EtymologicalEvangelical (# 15091) on :

Where do we go from here?

Answer: we follow the leading of the Holy Spirit in our own personal lives. And that just might mean ignoring all the clever strategies that missiologists cook up to "win the world for Christ".

I often feel incredible respect for the missionaries who, for example, spend their lives translating the Bible into the language of a tribe numbering no more than 500 people (if that!). I guess some people might regard that activity as making little 'strategic' sense. But it makes perfect sense if God has called them to do it.

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

They would achieve far more by going and being Jesus to Himself in them.

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :

I assume they'd be doing that at the same time. Translation work of unknown unwritten languages requires total immersion if you're going to get it right.

Posted by Horseman Bree (# 5290) on :

ISTM that one should attempt to live out a life which reflects the light of Jesus, and only do the words/Word thing when appropriate.

Even Pope Francis has said that atheists can be met in the doing of "good" and we would all be better off for that.

I note that Papa F. doesn't say "Bring on the steel-plated Bible and whack the ungodly". As a rather weakly-Christian guy, I would run for cover from some of the "mission" people I have met; I can't imagine how much damage to the act/art of following of Jesus some of the "mission" people have done.

If you aren't visibly walking the walk, it won't matter how good you were at learning the theoretical methods of evangelisation.

Posted by Horseman Bree (# 5290) on :

I noticed a Google ad next to my latest post, and clicked on the "GVI Guide to volunteering overseas" But it was just a "download here" ad - no indication of the nature of GVI or anything else, other than a list of academic labels. Surely a reputable organisation would identify itself in a meaningful way?

Same goes for "mission" work: if you can't spell out what you are doing (not preaching, but doing) then you're not helping. I am extremely fed up with churches that send all their people on one-week junkets to Guatemala or wherever, to "help build a church". Some go several times, instead of converting the airfare into usefulness for the missionaries already in the field.

Yeah, first-hand short-term experience is a good teaching method and attention-getter, but what does it achieve in the long run?

How about getting off the "look at me" cloud and getting yourself grungy in the streets where you live (as Papa F. has said)?

Once you've learned how to help, then travelling might be worthwhile.

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :

I agree with so much of what has been said above and yes, some things people do in the name of mission turn me into a gibbering wreck.
But what about how to do it better?
What would that look like in Martin's parish or EE's local church and community, let alone here in Kenya which often feels stuffed full with overseas mission personnel?!

One of the things I've noticed here is that many Kenyan churches have perpetuated outreach practices that must have been started by foreign missionaries and some them make me truly sad.
It all became clear for me when I read and re-read "Christianity Rediscovered" by Vincent J. Donovan.

I have aspired to live in the light of that revelation ever since but it's not easy!

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :

And yes, Horseman Bree, those short term trips need very careful handling and are usually more for the benefit of those "on mission"....
That could warrant its own thread as it is a real hot topic here in Africa!

Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :

Those short-term trips are very useful if they result in the church sending a big cheque along with the tripper.

It would be more efficient for them just to donate the money plus the airfare, but humans don't operate like that and more money seems to follow from churches that send people "out there", come back with photos and stories of people that they have met and feel that they've participated.

Posted by Galloping Granny (# 13814) on :

Stories that have impressed me:
Brothers from Taizé living in the midst of people in areas of poverty, on the same level so to speak, being good neighbours, playing football with the kids, praying at their regular hours without making an issue of it but welcoming anyone who comes along. Long term stuff, often collaborating with Muslims working in the same area – I read of a school they set up in India which had always to have at least one Christian teacher, one Moslem and one Hindu.
A city congregation with a lasting association with a village in (was it Cambodia?), visiting regularly and finding out what was needed, like schoolbooks or chickens or painting the orphanage...
A friend's daughter and her husband spent long periods over many years in a mountain village in Nepal translating the local language but doing much more to support agriculture, health and hygiene improvement etc.
While such long term commitment is not always an option, working with local Christian services is. A young couple who went to Africa (might have been Kenya) to be able to tell folk at home about the work reported that when the husband took off his jacket and tie and mucked in with the locals building a school it seemed he was the first 'missionary' who'd gone to such lengths.
And of course mucking in reminds me that we have a Habitat for Humanity organiser in our congregation who for the last two years has taken people to join 'builds' in Nepal, and that involves quite a bit of muck – knee-deep mud and dung to plaster the walls with or make bricks.

GG

Posted by Kwesi (# 10274) on :

MrsBeaky

quote:
It all became clear for me when I read and re-read "Christianity Rediscovered" by Vincent J. Donovan.

Amen! Amen!- It's about discovering the High God together. [Overused]

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

quote:
MrsBeaky: And yes, Horseman Bree, those short term trips need very careful handling and are usually more for the benefit of those "on mission"....

I have led a considerable number of short term trips. Some off-hand thoughts about them:

Short term trips can be okay, their biggest results are exchange of experiences and awareness raising.
If you're going to build a church/creche/school together, local people are probably better bricklayers/carpenters than you. The important part is the exchange of experiences while building it together.
Importance of planning the trip together with the receiving people, agree on expectations.
One could consider also including a return trip so that they can also see your church/country.
Preparation and attitude of the participants is key.

Here ends my Powerpoint [Biased]

Posted by Kwesi (# 10274) on :

This is a very complicated question, isn't it, with so many dimensions?

In Ghana missionaries are held in high esteem, especially those who established schools and hospitals many years ago, and played an important part in national integration. What I find disturbing are those US bible-belt hucksters and their ilk, aided and abetted by indigenous religious demagogues, shouting down microphones and relieving the ignorant of their meagre cash. There's a lost of money to be made out of God in Ghana.

The challenge in Ghana is to translate the ubiquitous religiosity into practical Christian living at the social level. The focus needs to be building on the establishment of a genuine democracy by fostering a culture of integrity in political, administrative and business dealings against endemic corruption, somewhat opaque transparency, and weak accountability. The idea of voluntary service is not strong enough. Too often there is a private pecuniary angle in church as well as public life. Too often cheques and containers from "over there" foster a cargo-cult mentality and a venality which make the problem worse. From what I gather Kenya is in a significantly weaker place. As a matter of urgency, setting aside ultimate destinations, the gospel needs to be one that ensures the widow's mite is respected and used to maximise social good in church and state.

Posted by the giant cheeseburger (# 10942) on :

I have a few thoughts based on my occasional involvement with the partnership between the Uniting Church in Australia and the United Church of Christ in the Philippines...

1. Patronage can be a major problem, could also manifest as the 'cargo cult' issue mentioned before. Churches in the west should not be completely funding new buildings, because the users of those buildings are beholden to two masters.

2. The monetarily rich church in a partnership needs to listen to what the monetarily poor church wants to get out of the partnership, even if that means breaking off the flow of money at the request of the poorer church to allow them to mend their dignity.

3. Partnership needs to be human, if it purely revolves around cheques going one way it doesn't work. There needs to be mutual exchanges of people (even if only one church is paying for the plane tickets) and cultural gifts.

4. Partner churches need to be treat each other equally when it comes to non-monetary gifts and exchanges - an example of this is making sure preaching or study exchanges go both ways and are genuinely embraced.

5. People on visits from the monetarily rich church to the poorer nation need to avoid exhibiting their wealth while in the country.

6. Never ever give hand-me-down materials. If a used item isn't good enough for a rich church to use, it isn't good enough to give to another church to use.

[ 02. December 2013, 10:52: Message edited by: the giant cheeseburger ]

Posted by Raptor Eye (# 16649) on :

I've heard a talk by this man which was inspirational.

He says that now it's a matter of collaboration, to support and empower people from within their own culture to do God's work, whether it's to help them to translate the Bible into their own language, or to help them to reclaim land or resources that have been taken from them unfairly, etc.

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

Good ones, cheeseburger.

Posted by the giant cheeseburger (# 10942) on :

quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
Good ones, cheeseburger.

I won't take too much credit, they were mostly absorbed over a three hour journey out to a country church here with a UCCP jurisdictional bishop and the principal's wife from their theological college.

Number six is mainly just an outworking of my disappointment with that kind of thing happening within one congregation when I was first involved with youth ministry [Roll Eyes]

[ 02. December 2013, 11:27: Message edited by: the giant cheeseburger ]

Posted by Felafool (# 270) on :

I have some friends who set Dignity: Dignity

Dignity is a visionary Christian organisation, whose goal is to "change rural Africa, both by spreading the good news of Jesus and by alleviating poverty." They "work as a catalyst to help lift people out of crushing poverty without creating any sense of dependency...[building] long-term and meaningful relationships in isolated villages supporting leaders, groups and individuals."
They "encourage people – through God – to transform their lives and those of their neighbours."

ISTM that this is the essence of mission whether in rural Africa or inner city UK.

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :

Thank you for the stories and the responses so far.

Kwesi- everything you said resonates strongly with me as regards Kenya. Thank you.

I wonder if what we are all saying is that mission be it at home or away is about a mutuality between us and the people we live amongst, involving a recognition and celebration of what God is already doing there and then building on that?

This understanding of mine of mission being incarnational has led to several of my friends believing I have sold out on the gospel....and yet I feel more enthralled by the person of Christ than ever.It's puzzling, to be honest.

On the whole short-term mission trip thingy, I too have led them and I can see so much wisdom in all your comments. Handled well they can be such a blessing to all concerned. Handled badly they can wreak havoc.

There is still so much to be learned!

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

quote:
Felafool: Dignity is a visionary Christian organisation, whose goal is to "change rural Africa, both by spreading the good news of Jesus and by alleviating poverty."

That sounds good. I do think that we some things should be kept in mind when mixing evangelism with development work. For example, converting to Christianity/this particular church shouldn't become a precondition for people to take part in such a project. We can invite people to church, but we must be careful about unequal power relations.

quote:
MrsBeaky: I wonder if what we are all saying is that mission be it at home or away is about a mutuality between us and the people we live amongst, involving a recognition and celebration of what God is already doing there and then building on that?

Correct answer. Go on to the next round and win a fridge [Smile]

Posted by stonespring (# 15530) on :

How is a thread with this title not about Star Trek or at least about space exploration? [Smile]

Posted by moonlitdoor (# 11707) on :

What do you mean by incarnational in this context Mrs Beaky ? You know how some Christians like to call themselves bible believing, when pretty much all Christians believe in the bible, but just don't all agree what it means. I feel the same way about incarnational.

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

quote:
Originally posted by MrsBeaky:

This understanding of mine of mission being incarnational has led to several of my friends believing I have sold out on the gospel....and yet I feel more enthralled by the person of Christ than ever.It's puzzling, to be honest.

I suppose it depends on what the gospel is calling people to do in a particular place. I don't suppose Kenyans really need Westerners to come and preach and teach the gospel to them any more; they surely have enough Christians now to be able to preach and teach it to each other! But Western Christians can help them to learn various skills that will benefit individuals and communities. And there's the benefit of Christians from different backgrounds sharing and exploring their faith with each other.

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :

Stonespring, that's why I did it!

Moonlitdoor, by incarnational I mean recognising that presence is just as important as preaching, perhaps even more so. That we are the gospel and not just hit and run purveyors of the "good news"...just as it says in John's gospel that the Word became flesh and lived among us, in the same way the Word still becomes flesh among us as we go about our daily lives. Everything flows from this.
It is how I have tried to live out my faith in various settings.
At one point in my teaching career I was the only person who would have called themselves a Christian on that staff. I tried to be a non-judgmental presence, to recognise where God was already at work and to help fan that flame. Then when the chips were down and we faced an appalling crisis at the school I was asked to lead the way in prayer. To this day, the retired headteacher who is not a church-goer testifies that the situation was turned around in answer to our (he meant his, other staff, mine, trusted friends) prayers.

Posted by Kwesi (# 10274) on :

MrsBeaky, "being there" is likely to land you in very difficult situations when faced with petty corruption. How have you handled /will you handle it? Would you be prepared to get someone the sack?

Posted by LucyP (# 10476) on :

quote:
Originally posted by the giant cheeseburger:
I have a few thoughts based on my occasional involvement with the partnership between the Uniting Church in Australia and the United Church of Christ in the Philippines...

[.....]

6. Never ever give hand-me-down materials. If a used item isn't good enough for a rich church to use, it isn't good enough to give to another church to use.

While giving of used goods can be done badly, (as you experienced) I don't think it has to be absolutely banned, in an age when we are more aware of the importance of recycling.

My parents were not well off and we relied on hand me downs from family and friends. The fact that we needed them (ie didn't have much choice) was perhaps slightly detrimental to my sense of self worth, but the actual clothing was of good quality and not visibly second rate. My brother in law has a good income - but my sister still likes shopping in charity stores, and is grateful for the fact that a family at church has children slightly older than hers and give her (good-quality) clothes, as children's clothes are often either (1) expensive and quickly outgrown while still in good condition or (2) cheap and poor quality and quick to wear out. For her, using second hand clothes is good money management, and allows them to support church & missions and live comfortably on one income.

It all depends on the reason the original item is being given away (eg you might give some perfectly good furniture away if downsizing your home, or if making your house child-safe when the first baby is born), the spirit of the donation (eg whether the recipient is allowed to say "thanks, but no thanks"), and the usability of the item.

A few years ago I was surprised to learn that, at times, donations of clothing from western countries to (eg) Africa are not always given away there - but have a significant resale value. One person's trash may well be someone else's treasure.

Posted by Galloping Granny (# 13814) on :

LucyP wrote:

quote:
A few years ago I was surprised to learn that, at times, donations of clothing from western countries to (eg) Africa are not always given away there - but have a significant resale value. One person's trash may well be someone else's treasure.

I remember a story about a parish where a women's group made beautiful baby clothes for their contact parish somewhere in the Caribbean; the recipients sold them for a good price in the market and bought cheap local stuff.

I think they were the same ones who decided that a water pump sounded like a good idea, and after much fund raising they sent one – but there was nobody at the other end to service it and it was not used for long.

Just another example of he importance of listening to the local people and respecting their dignity and recognising their needs.

GG

Posted by RooK (# 1852) on :

quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
How is a thread with this title not about Star Trek or at least about space exploration?

Exactly. I briefly had hopes of discussion about bootstrap philosophies for human expansion. Instead I feel cheated and sullied.

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :

Originally posted by Rook:

quote:
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
How is a thread with this title not about Star Trek or at least about space exploration?

Exactly. I briefly had hopes of discussion about bootstrap philosophies for human expansion. Instead I feel cheated and sullied.

Sorry to disappoint you but perhaps if we tried hard enough we could incorporate this theme into the current discussion, perhaps as an extension of the Great Commission.....

PS Kwesi, I'm still thinking about your question!

Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :

I would wonder if it is any better to stay at home supporting work which inevitably tangles with petty local corruption and pretending it doesn't exist. It is easier to ignore the problem "over here" rather than "over there" but I don't see that as a solution either.

Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on :

My son is current on a Young Adults in Global Missions assignment in Ramallah, the West Bank. When he was commissioned in Chicago, the director told them to let the world change them so they can change the church.

Our son has discovered so many things in this ministry. He is amazed that in an occupied land people still hope for the coming of the Lord. He has discovered a deep spiritual connection with olive trees that are thousands of years old. He has visited many of the "holy sites" of the religions of the Word. He stands as witness to the oppression of the Palestinian people.

He teaches English at a Lutheran school where over 90% of the students are Muslim--their parents want their kids to learn English. He is also an adviser to the school's Model U. N. group. This group got high honors in its meeting with other Palestinian schools. Now they are working at going to a model U. N. conclave in Sweden, though it appears my son will not be able to go to Sweden because of some visa restrictions on his passport.

He has been called upon to play is saxophone when the organist for the Arabic service did not show up. He had ten minutes to learn how to read music form right to left (as in Arabic). He has hosted Lutherans from Finland and Sweden. He personally knows the president of the Lutheran World Federation.

He has learned so much in just a few months. He will be there until the end of July.

He has already been offered a full ride scholarship to the Lutheran School of Theology in Chicago. He hopes to have a similar offer from another Lutheran seminary closer to home. Having this full ride will allow him to continue to explore other forms of ministry.

I was just reading an article about two different approaches to missions. It was a dialogue between a minister of the Church of South India and a professor of interfaith relations at the Lutheran School of Theology in Chicago. I liked the concluding comments by the professor from Chicago:

"Perhaps we need to say this: a worry that often lurks behind discussions about Christ as 'only Savior' is whether people who do not make this confession explicitly in this life will meet some terrible fate in the hereafter, will 'go to hell.'

"If that's what we believe, then we can easily imagine our Christian duty as somehow extracting that confession, somehow bringing about that 'conversion,' by whatever means available to us. But those means easily become manipulative--'vociferous' at the very least.

"I am convinced that we can entrust our non-Christian friends and neighbors to God and the 'wideness of God's mercy' (as the old hymn has it), and pursue a way that seeks to honor Christ and reflect Christ: 'ever-generous.' as is 'always ready' with the attentiveness and hospitality (as host and guest) that Christ practiced throughout his earthly ministry.

"For us as Christians, when we ask how it is we are to be in mission, here, too, 'Jesus Christ and no other is the norm.' This is part and parcel of what it means for Christians to confess Christ as the 'only savior.'"

J. Jayakiran Sebastian and Mark N. Swanson, "Jesus the Savior: How do we Witness to Christ in a World of Living Faiths?" The Lutheran(December 2014) p 19.

Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on :

BTW, Kwesi, did I mention my son spent six weeks in Ghana learning African Dance and Drum? I can't remember exactly where his group stayed, somewhere near the ocean, I know that. At the end of their stay they performed for one of the local kings and I think even performed on Ghanaian television--which must have been hilarious since they were all American and all white and all from the West Coast of the United States.

During his down time, he got to play football (soccer) with some of the local kids. He was amazed most of them played shoeless on a not so perfect pitch.

I do wonder what God has in store for him next.

Posted by the giant cheeseburger (# 10942) on :

quote:
Originally posted by RooK:

quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
How is a thread with this title not about Star Trek or at least about space exploration?
Exactly. I briefly had hopes of discussion about bootstrap philosophies for human expansion. Instead I feel cheated and sullied.

And I thought it was going to be about split infinitives, a thread on shitty writing would be a nice complement for the thread on spelling.

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :

Originally posted by Kwesi:

quote:
MrsBeaky, "being there" is likely to land you in very difficult situations when faced with petty corruption. How have you handled /will you handle it? Would you be prepared to get someone the sack?

OK, I need to answer this carefully as this is a public internet forum. Our colleagues here and indeed the national press too constantly discuss corruption which is endemic in the system, not just petty. We have already had a number of tricky situations which are much more clear cut before you are actually in them! Some of our local colleagues take the situational ethics line: i.e. What is for the greater good, will I bribe this policeman (who has stopped me for no good reason) so that I get where I need to be as there is a peace-threatening emergency developing there?

Would I get someone the sack? Possibly not over money but at the moment we are confronting some human rights issues at the hands of authorities and in that instance yes, I might well do so.

We'd value your prayers quite frankly as we attempt to be peace to those who are struggling to find peace.

And Giant Cheeseburger, I fear the infinitive is now so far split that it would need a treaty to reunite it......

Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :

quote:
Originally posted by MrsBeaky:
What is for the greater good, will I bribe this policeman (who has stopped me for no good reason) so that I get where I need to be as there is a peace-threatening emergency developing there?

The problem with this is that one sets oneself up as the judge and jury to determine whether one has a good reason for bribing the policeman.

Am I really at fault? How important to others is it that I get through this traffic stop? I have substantial conflicts of interest in answering both these questions for myself.

I have occasionally thought bribery was like being mugged. If a policeman is threatening and brow-beats you into parting with money I don't see that as morally much different from being mugged. We don't blame victims.

On the other hand there is a fine line between being brow-beaten and avoiding a justly deserved penalty. And in my experience corrupt policemen are much more likely to back down when you haven't actually done anything wrong. But not always, and the rules vary by country and by location within country (often worse the more remote the area you are travelling in is).

My own view is that I'd never pay a bribe to avoid a court summons, an official fine or a trip to the police station, but I would pay one if I really thought I was about to be imprisoned or beaten up.

Posted by Tortuf (# 3784) on :

quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
Instead I feel cheated and sullied.

I thought you liked feeling sullied. I do anyway.

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :

originally posted by mdijon:

quote:
My own view is that I'd never pay a bribe to avoid a court summons, an official fine or a trip to the police station, but I would pay one if I really thought I was about to be imprisoned or beaten up.

Even more so when it is someone else who is in danger of imprisonment or beating....

Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :

With a third party it gets even more murky. How do we know who's telling the truth? I'm sure if you paid enough of a bribe you could get the population of the local prison freed. Who would you choose to free and who would you leave?

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :

Blimey, mdijon
That's beyond me!
I was only just coping with thinking about situations where I actually know the people... but you're right and it's all very perplexing.

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:

quote:
Originally posted by MrsBeaky:
What is for the greater good, will I bribe this policeman (who has stopped me for no good reason) so that I get where I need to be as there is a peace-threatening emergency developing there?
The problem with this is that one sets oneself up as the judge and jury to determine whether one has a good reason for bribing the policeman.

Am I really at fault? How important to others is it that I get through this traffic stop? I have substantial conflicts of interest in answering both these questions for myself.

I have occasionally thought bribery was like being mugged. If a policeman is threatening and brow-beats you into parting with money I don't see that as morally much different from being mugged. We don't blame victims.

On the other hand there is a fine line between being brow-beaten and avoiding a justly deserved penalty. And in my experience corrupt policemen are much more likely to back down when you haven't actually done anything wrong. But not always, and the rules vary by country and by location within country (often worse the more remote the area you are travelling in is).

My own view is that I'd never pay a bribe to avoid a court summons, an official fine or a trip to the police station, but I would pay one if I really thought I was about to be imprisoned or beaten up.

I'm surprised that foreign visitors get put into this kind of situation. How are they supposed to know how to deal with this? Hopefully the sending organisations and embassies, etc. give their workers advice about what to do if this kind of thing is remotely likely. I assume that if local partner churches know of places and situations where this sort of thing is notorious they warn foreigners in advance.

Posted by Kwesi (# 10274) on :

MrsBeaky, "sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof." My guess is that you have enough situations to manoeuvre without having to address conjoured hypothetical dilemmas!

Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :

quote:
Originally posted by MrsBeaky:
I was only just coping with thinking about situations where I actually know the people

Not pretending to have answers, but the difficulty comes with defining knowing the people. How well? On a trusted friend's say so? With my judgement clouded by family ties?

I agree it's murky and I would intervene in certain circumstances as well - being inflexible doesn't work well in Africa.

Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :

quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I'm surprised that foreign visitors get put into this kind of situation. How are they supposed to know how to deal with this? Hopefully the sending organisations and embassies, etc. give their workers advice about what to do if this kind of thing is remotely likely. I assume that if local partner churches know of places and situations where this sort of thing is notorious they warn foreigners in advance.

If you stay on the beaten track of a tourist trail you're very unlikely to end up in such situations. If you rent a car and go driving you could well be stopped by a policeman who might hint that he wants a little something for his trouble. It isn't likely to escalate into anything terrible either way, you might part with some cash or you might not.

If you are part of a mission with accounts and you notice something funny in the accounts on a visit then you could end up in all kinds of situations if you report the matter to authorities.

It would be difficult for an embassy to get involved in anything but the most news-worthy event.

Kwesi I don't think these are conjured hypotheticals, as you know this sort of stuff goes on every day in the average African country. You start with a decision that it's OK to give a bribe on occasion and you have to be aware that that can get out of hand very fast if you're not careful.

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

I have found that corruption and extortion are often more difficult to deal with in the field than what it seems when you're in a comfortable chair behind your computer. I don't doubt MrsBeaky's ability to deal with it.

My experiences with petty corruption are mostly with traffic police when I'm driving through Mozambique. Traffic Laws are very unclear in this country¹, which gives the police lots of room to charge you with an alledged infraction and try to extort a bribe.

I've managed to avoid paying a bribe so far, but I admit that I use the African solution for this: I have a friend who has a nephew who works at a high place within the Traffic Police. When the police stops me, I call him.

¹ Notoriously, the Traffic Law of Mozambique sets the speed limit at 60 km/h in urban areas, but it doesn't define what an urban area is. It's already happened to me that the police stopped me on a road in the middle of the fields, pointed to a shack 2 miles ahead that I hardly could see and said: "See? People live there. This is an urban area."

[ 03. December 2013, 15:44: Message edited by: LeRoc ]

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :

It seems to me that wherever we find ourselves we are faced with making ethical decisions, hopefully inspired/ informed by our faith if we have one. The culture of the place will invariably play a part in assessing where the boundaries might lie, maybe some things are acceptable in one situation but not in another.
To take an example: telling lies
I know Christians who believe lying is always wrong. I also know other Christians both in the UK and in Kenya who believe it is OK in certain circumstances and those circumstances are different in each country.

I'm now asking myself what place this has in my original question in the OP....does it have a bearing on how we view the mission of the church and more especially how we live, act and seek to display the love of Christ?
If ethics are central to the church's mission in either Kenya or Kettering, what will this look like?
Is living out the gospel going to look different in different places?

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:

If you are part of a mission with accounts and you notice something funny in the accounts on a visit then you could end up in all kinds of situations if you report the matter to authorities.

I can imagine!

The extent to which Western visitors can speak out must depend on precisely why such visitors are 'needed' in the first place. MrsBeaky says Kenya is almost overrun with Western 'overseas mission personnel'. Are they there because Kenyan churches or charities are eager for help to change what they see as undesirable cultural values within themselves? Or are they there because (white) Westerners are deemed to bring prestige to an institution, apart from what they actually do or say? Is anyone honest about the barriers which the so-called benefits of cultural exchange are unable to penetrate?

One concern some people might have regards potential accusations of cultural imperialism. Appearing to crusade against 'African corruption' as a non-African might have unfortunate implications, no matter how sincere and selfless the individual concerned might be. I don't know what the solution is, but perhaps it should involve African campaigners and organisations, rather than foreign intervention. Of course this wouldn't be of immediate benefit in everyday, ordinary situations where bribery occurs.

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:

quote:
MrsBeaky says Kenya is almost overrun with Western 'overseas mission personnel'. Are they there because Kenyan churches or charities are eager for help to change what they see as undesirable cultural values within themselves?

On reflection, perhaps not "overun" but there are certainly considerable numbers. Most are here because of some sense of vocation but this can be worked out in a variety of ways.....which is where it becomes challenging.

Some like ourselves, are working with indigenous organisations taking our lead from them and working very much in partnership. Others have started their own work which is sometimes good and fruitful but always runs the danger of cultural imperialism unless we are very, very careful.

When it comes to speaking out, we generally let our Kenyan colleagues do the public communication often after long discussions altogether in private.

Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :

At the risk of generalization, I think many Kenyan churches or charities would view Europeans as potential sources of cash and wouldn't wish to turn them away. And many are, indeed, sources of cash and much good is done with the money.

(And of course many are also much more than simply sources of cash).

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

quote:
mdijon: At the risk of generalization, I think many Kenyan churches or charities would view Europeans as potential sources of cash and wouldn't wish to turn them away.

I don't know; do these kind of missionary workers usually come with a load of cash?

Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :

Relatively speaking, yes. And they often represent or have access to organisations with much more cash than local groups.

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :

Originally posted by mdijon:

quote:
Relatively speaking, yes. And they often represent or have access to organisations with much more cash than local groups.

leRoc and mdijon-

It does vary but this is often the case, especially with ex-pats funded by large churches/ organisations.
As a CMS mission partner, I am funded by the kind donations of friends and churches in the UK (as well as some self-funding). I am seconded to work with the Anglican church here. Some of our work is being done in collaboration with NGOs who are funded from overseas. Some of our work is being funded by local people. Also some of our work is specifically funded through partnership with Anglican dioceses across the globe.

And quite honestly, a small amount goes a long way in some of the work we are doing.
Equally, the perception is that we are rich (and we are in comparison to many) and we are constantly being asked to fund schools etc. We have to keep explaining that we don't personally have access to those sorts of funds....but we keep on being asked as quite a lot of ex-pats do!

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

quote:
Originally posted by MrsBeaky:
Most [overseas mission personnel] are here because of some sense of vocation but this can be worked out in a variety of ways.....which is where it becomes challenging.

This is what it means for you, but I was wondering what it means for the Kenyans. Further posts have suggested that for the Kenyans the presence of such personnel is valued mostly because it comes with money. I can see how there might be a clash of perspectives and expectations if one side mostly wants money in order to undertake various practical activities and the other seeks to balance the practical help with a focus on changing the normative values in the culture.

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :

That's what I meant about how important it is how these things are framed:
For the Kenyans with whom we are working it is primarily about partnership because of the way in which we have been sent and received: we are working together to further the cause of peace and justice and any money we (might!) bring to this is secondary. In fact we are constantly looking together at how to make what we do sustainable by our Kenyan colleagues

It is another story with many of the big NGOs who despite their good intentions are often viewed solely as a source of revenue.

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

quote:
MrsBeaky: As a CMS mission partner, I am funded by the kind donations of friends and churches in the UK (as well as some self-funding).

At least in my case here in Brazil, my funding is mostly for my living allowance and to be able to travel/give trainings/hold meetings etc., not a sack of money that I can just divide between projects. I don't think that people will see me as a 'cash cow' easily.

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :

Yes, LeRoc, that's the same for us, our funding is basically to cover our living expenses so that we can be here and do the work. But I'm still very much aware that even though we live simply I have more than so many local people...but not as much as some of them seem to think!!

Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :

This is my experience too. What to me is a very modest lifestyle represents substantial comfort to many in East Africa, particularly rural East Africa. When you see someone who can obviously afford things you don't have it is easy to see them as a stack of money.

People who have very little may find it difficult to distinguish between someone who has 10 times as much as them, and therefore can afford a comfortable life but can't throw money at problems at a whim, and someone who has 100 times as much who could throw money around. And even if they can guess at the distinction it might be worth asking, just in case.

Posted by Kwesi (# 10274) on :

Mdijon, MrsBeaky, LeRoc, I don't think any of you should agonise over the differences between your incomes and those of many of the indegenes. It's quite clear that you are living modestly even if it may seem differently to others. I doubt you would be able to survive living like the poorer locals regarding diet, water, sanitation, transport, communication etc.. I'm sure, too, that your efforts are appreciated by those you work alongside or are in receipt of your services. You can't escape the gross economic inequalities in the world. You don't have to live in the Hilton, but you do need mosquito nets! It's a question of proportion. I bet the locals are more concerned about the rapacious activities of their own political leaders, though not, I fear, of religious supposedly Christian "prophets", "healers", "empowerers", who grotesquely flaunt their wealth in defiance of the gospel.

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Kwesi:
Mdijon, MrsBeaky, LeRoc, I don't think any of you should agonise over the differences between your incomes and those of many of the indegenes. It's quite clear that you are living modestly even if it may seem differently to others. I doubt you would be able to survive living like the poorer locals regarding diet, water, sanitation, transport, communication etc.. I'm sure, too, that your efforts are appreciated by those you work alongside or are in receipt of your services. You can't escape the gross economic inequalities in the world. You don't have to live in the Hilton, but you do need mosquito nets! It's a question of proportion. I bet the locals are more concerned about the rapacious activities of their own political leaders, though not, I fear, of religious supposedly Christian "prophets", "healers", "empowerers", who grotesquely flaunt their wealth in defiance of the gospel.

I don't think agonising would serve much purpose, but the considerable financial imbalance between the large numbers of Western visitors and the people among whom they choose to work must have some interesting consequences in the long term.

The impact of missionary personnel isn't a subject I know much about, but I find the ambiguous outcomes of global interactions rather fascinating. I don't think there's any way of getting rid of such ambiguities entirely, but I'm sure that many Western missionaries today reflect on these issues, as all conscientious travellers ought to do.

(I've just done a bit of googling and come up with a relevant book that might be interesting: Jonathan J. Bonk, 'Missions and Money: Affluence as a Missionary Problem', 1992; 2007.)

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :

There several Kenyans we know here who are living in much larger houses than we are so I do wonder if it is about money rather than country of origin? Ex-pats are associated with both money and generosity (albeit possibly naive generosity)but there are plenty of wealthy Kenyans too.

I remember living in South London 30 plus years ago and there being members of our parish church who lived in damp, cold housing and others like a QC who lived in a beautiful Victorian villa....

To return to my OP, all of us together in that church tried to figure out what our mission in that parish would look like, just as we do here today in Kenya. And yes, here it involves decisions around all that has been discussed above.

Lots of church websites have a mission statement/ vision and values. Some make me jump for joy, others make me cringe.
So I would love to hear any ideas you might have about how we best represent our Founder in the here and now in a variety of church settings.

Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :

quote:
Originally posted by MrsBeaky:
There several Kenyans we know here who are living in much larger houses than we are so I do wonder if it is about money rather than country of origin? Ex-pats are associated with both money and generosity (albeit possibly naive generosity)but there are plenty of wealthy Kenyans too.

I think its the association with generosity as well. Many wealthy Kenyans wouldn't give the average "chancer" the time of day, although wealthy Kenyans from more modest family backgrounds are often supporting extensive family networks of school fees, medical expenses, funeral and wedding costs.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0