chris and becka warner

I’ve been following the presidential campaign, though not as obsessively as its been covered by the media. But it’s been interesting to see the different personalities, and for some reason this time around I’m really interested to see how it all turns out. I’m not sure who I would actually vote for at this stage, but it is still early, at least by my standards.

I guess I would consider myself to be an independent. Though I tend to be more conservative, I lean left on issues like foreign policy, the environment, and health care. It’s kind of an awkward position to be in; I don’t really identify with either Republicans or Democrats. Mostly it just disgusts me that in the past the Republican Party has “used” evangelicals to do some very un-Christ-like things, and that many evangelicals were foolish enough to go along for the ride solely because of two issues: abortion and homosexuality. Thankfully, I think those days are over; George W. put the nail in that coffin, at least for me and many others my age. I predict that the Republican party may look very different in five or ten years, once they realize that they have disenchanted a lot of young people.

But that’s not just a dig at the Republican party-I have no doubt that the Democrats would do the same if they could. Christians need to wake up and realize that if we are waiting for a government that will legislate the Kingdom of God-well, it isn’t going to happen. Governments can bring order and even legislate against evil, but they can’t legislate loving your neighbor, or give you the power to do so. Like I told my friends in war-torn Burundi, there’s a big difference between an absence of war, which is the best they could hope for the government to accomplish, and peace: the fullness of life, the forgiveness, acceptance, and reconciliation that can only come through Christ. The same is true for nearly every issue. A well-reformed health care system is important and (believe me) something to be very thankful for, but you can’t legislate compassion or wholeness of spirit. Immigration reform may be necessary, but the government is helpless in addressing the deeper issue of why we all can’t just get along.

Don’t get me wrong-I’m not saying that participating in the political process is pointless. But I am saying that we’re not limited to only this. As Christians we operate with a different sort of power, and our hope for change should lie in a different source. Incidentally, this fact is a lot easier to understand in countries where the general population has suffered greatly under a tyrannical government. But here in America, where we are enticed with the promise of democratic change, it’s a lot easier to forget this and put our hope solely in politics.

For example, it’s disheartening for me to see that we keep fighting what I consider to be superficial battles, like getting prayer back in public schools, displaying the ten commandments, preventing gay rights, and even abortion. Sure, it would be great if the grotesque practice of abortion was made illegal in America. But do we really believe that all the structures, the relationships, the boundaries-all the complex social issues that lie under the surface of every decision to have an abortion-that all these things will work out on their own, just by the signing of a bill? Of course not. If a law was passed today that made getting an abortion illegal, my guess is that the abortion rate would probably only drop slightly-because the deeper social issues cannot be resolved politically. As Christians we should already be bringing transformation in these areas; reaching out to the women in need, restoring families, modeling relationship, opening our homes to orphans, etc… Of course, this is happening to some degree. But my point is that we’ve made political success the standard of change, not Kingdom success. Another painful example: homosexuality and gay rights. Some leading evangelicals have decided to make this a political issue, but their attempts to bring political change have largely failed. However, in the process, what they have managed to do is send a message loud and clear to homosexuals: “Jesus doesn’t love you, and you’re not welcome in our churches.” How sad. I wonder if things would be different today if from the very beginning we started with the truth: “Jesus does love you, and I don’t have to understand you or even agree with you to show you the same love that He’s shown me.”

Change seems to be the buzzword of the presidential election. And I do hope that our new president will bring some positive change. But whatever change that may be, it’s going to be limited-not just because there will be empty promises and partisan bickering, but because politicians and political parties are fundamentally limited in what they can accomplish. Jesus, on the other hand, isn’t. If we do the things that Jesus did, we will see more than change; we’ll see transformation. Ghandi, who knew a thing or two about social movements and transformation, said it much better: “Be the change you want to see.”

“Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.”

“Every man must decide whether he will walk in the light of creative altruism or in the darkness of destructive selfishness.”

“A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom.”

“Have we not come to such an impasse in the modern world that we must love our enemies - or else? The chain reaction of evil - hate begetting hate, wars producing more wars - must be broken, or else we shall be plunged into the dark abyss of annihilation. ”

“He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it.”

“I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word in reality. This is why right, temporarily defeated, is stronger than evil triumphant. ”

“I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

“If physical death is the price that I must pay to free my white brothers and sisters from a permanent death of the spirit, then nothing can be more redemptive.”

“Life’s most persistent and urgent question is, ‘What are you doing for others?”

“Love is the only force capable of transforming an enemy into friend.”

“Nonviolence is a powerful and just weapon. which cuts without wounding and ennobles the man who wields it. It is a sword that heals.”

“Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men.”

In the last post, I mentioned Thomas L. Friedman’s book The World Is Flat and brought up the importance of the global Christian missions movement being current, or utilizing all the possibilities on the 21^st century playing field. In this post, I will give a specific example of a trend that is already happening globally and could be utilized by global missions: open sourcing. If you’ve never heard of open sourcing, check out the Wikipedia article, and you’ll be participating in what you’re reading about. In a nutshell, open sourcing is about collaboration; it’s about the free exchange of ideas and information within a community or about a product, with the result being a better community or a better product. All this is possible through a medium like the internet, which allows for global participation and rapid exchange of ideas and information. What amazes me about open-sourcing are the principles required to pull it off: participation, sacrificial contribution, mutual respect for all members of the community, and usually a common goal (to improve through community rather than individuality). Amazing…it’s like software designers know how to apply Paul’s epistles better than the Church does!

So how is information shared in the world of missions now? Well, I’m no expert, but I would guess we’re hardly utilizing all the potentials. Speaking of experts, I think this is where most of the information stays: in the minds of a very small group of professionals. From there, the information “trickles” through various outlets: peer journals and conversations, specialized and highly-focused books, missionary training institutes, and maybe supporter newsletters. A very small portion of the information actually makes it to the “masses.” Sure, missionaries often “showcase” their work in churches, but this is almost always a very simplified version of what they are actually doing; a general overview of their work (not the ideas and information they’ve gathered) designed to fit into a short presentation or sermon. All of this is normal for a specialized field, but in my mind this information “bottleneck” is a serious problem, mainly because missions is not supposed to be a small compartment within the Church or a separate ministry department; missions is supposed to be seamlessly interwoven into the DNA of all believers. Besides the theological reasons, there are plenty of practical reasons why information should be easier to access. More information means increased awareness, increased partnership, increased effectiveness, better accountability, and increased unity.

Consider the following scenario, which is based on various issues I’ve repeatedly observed on the field: A missionary feels called to an unreached part of, let’s say, North Africa. The missionary has been strategically placed there by their organization. This organization has no other representatives in the region, so therefore classifies it as “unreached.” However, upon arrival, Joe missionary discovers that there are already at least five different Christian organizations working in the area, each independently of the others. Three are denominational, and two are parachurch organizations that focus on community development. There are a scattering of small fellowships that associate with each organization, but not with each other. Joe discovers that the information about the region given to him by his organization is fairly inaccurate. Because the various missions organizations have slightly different visions and methodology, they feel threatened by each other, and therefore don’t really work together or share information. The region is large, so even if they were to meet for fellowship and sharing ideas, it would be difficult. Joe decides to stay, but he’s more or less on his own. After ten years, with very little help from the other missionaries, Joe has mastered the culture and language. After a few false starts and five more years, Joe discovers a highly effective way of reaching Muslims in a culturally relevant way. His work explodes, and soon he is overseeing a house church movement of twenty-thousand believers. He decides to write a book about his experiences in the hopes that it will help others in similar situations. Three years later, the book is finished. It’s published by his own organization, which makes him a celebrity among his immediate peers and his supporting churches, but still unknown outside of his own little circle, despite his great ideas. Unbeknownst to Joe, one of the original missionaries in the region he was in moved on to a new region, again working with Muslims. After years of hard work with very little results, this missionary is close to calling it quits. He decides to see what others in similar situations have learned. By chance, another colleague emails him the title of Joe’s book. The author’s name seems vaguely familiar. Amazon.com doesn’t carry the book, so he goes directly to Joe’s organizations website. After wading through various doctrinal statements, mission statements, and self-promotion, he comes across a page for Joe’s book. It costs $29, and they don’t ship outside of the United States.

Sadly, scenarios like this involving massive breakdown in communication are way too common in global missions. If we were a business, we’d be bankrupt. Of course, there are more issues here than just being able to access information; issues like unity (sadly, many organizations and denominations just refuse to work with each other). However, the point is that missions as a global enterprise is still stuck in the Dark Ages, in terms of global connectivity. To go back to Friedman’s book, we’re still operating like the world is round, when in fact the changes in just the last ten years imply the equivalent of a global “flattening.”

Global connectivity is no longer a dream, it’s a reality. Imagine if all the information, all the ideas, all the wisdom, in all the history of Christian missions up until this moment, could be easily accessed? What if churches, organizations, and missionaries could share their information, experiences, and ideas in a global, moment-by-moment conversation, in total unity? What if the global Church could utilize the already existing structures to interconnect and exchange information? What if the global Christian missions movement was open-source, where everyone participated and contributed their information and ideas? What would be the result? Would we be closer to realizing Jesus’ prayer, in John 17, that they may all be one? What’s stopping this from happening, today?

I started a new book today called The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century, by Thomas L. Friedman. Because of our travels I missed all the hype about this book, but apparently it’s a well-acclaimed bestseller. If you haven’t heard of it, the book looks into how globalization, technology, and information have “flattened” the global playing field in terms of global economic possibilities, and is more or less a snapshot of all the complexities of life in the twenty-first century. This type of book, while it may not be my first choice for enjoyable reading, appeals to me because I place a high value on gathering and applying information. More information leads to better understanding, which leads to better decisions and better results. Even though the book is probably more focused on the information technology industry, I’m hoping that reading it will give me some insight into the missions industry.

Yes, global Christian missions is an industry: twenty-two billion dollars annually, hundreds of organizations and denominations, and thousands of personnel. Now, I know there are some problems with making direct parallels between a secular, profit-driven organization and a Christian organization. YWAM is not exactly Microsoft, and Wycliffe is hardly Apple, and for good reasons. On one hand, being effective in anything requires a certain degree of management, marketing, and strategy, and Christian organizations can learn from the best in this area. On the other hand, results and effectiveness in Christian ministry can hardly be compared to the bottom line in a purely profit-driven business; it would be like comparing oranges and apples. The nature of Christianity is such that often tangible results must be sacrificed for relationship, discipleship, and community. For example, while it may be in the best interest of a business to fire a problematic employee to increase productivity, a missions agency in the same situation should handle that person differently, even if it means sacrificing some level of efficiency. Kingdom values do not always yield the results the world expects. Jesus washed the feet of a man he knew stole from the corporate treasury and would later betray him to His death.

However, I do believe that one area that Christian organizations, particularly missions organizations, can learn from the business world is in this whole area of processing, managing, and applying information. For example, let’s say that a major IT company wanted to launch a new product. There are certain pieces of information that have to be gathered to make it a successful venture: demand for such a product, potential markets, manufacturing costs, etc, etc. (those etceteras are there to mask my ignorance of the actual process…) A successful launch of this product depends on factoring in all the necessary information, but even more, it requires an awareness of the world, or the “playing field”. As this book is suggesting, globalization and technology have drastically altered the global playing field, and therefore the way that we access and apply information needs to reflect the world for what it really is, not how it was twenty, a hundred, or two-thousand years ago. This is true for an IT company, and it should be true for the global Christian missions movement.

I know some people disagree with this concept. There are missionaries out there who still use the original King James Version, don’t use email, and are still trying to get the “natives” to wear proper Western clothes. Usually such people argue that God never changes, and therefore change is a sin. While I would agree that God is unchanging in his nature, something about the incarnation strongly suggests that God is willing to go to any length to reach people, including changing His form. He “played” the field perfectly. The apostle Paul is another great example of someone who utilized the playing field around him for maximum effectiveness: he planted churches along major Roman highways (taking advantage of the good road system), usually in the major metropolitan areas (Corinth, Ephesus, Philippi, etc.) This set the groundwork for the rapid expanse of Christianity across the whole region. Paul intuitively recognized what is widely understood today (but probably was not in his day), and implemented it with great success, namely, that ideas and influence flow from urban to rural settings, and not the other way around. Later in is his life, Paul attempted to apply this on an even larger scale by focusing his attention on the greatest city on earth, Rome. By the time Constantine issued the Edict of Milan in 313, Christianity was influential throughout the Roman Empire. It could even be argued that Paul’s highly effective strategy originated in the Holy Spirit’s leading. His effort to “become all things to all people, so that I may by all means save some” (1 Cor. 9:22) included “playing the field” wisely.

One of the greatest challenges facing world missions is the lack of innovation, or the ability to read the world for what it is and act ahead of the current trends. I’ve noticed that the individuals and organizations that are doing this tend to remain a minority voice, drowned out by those still stuck in an old paradigm. By the time an idea catches on and trickles down to the consciousness of the majority, too much time has been wasted. In the next post, we will look at one undeniable trend that has dramatic implications for world missions, is easily understood, verified, and acknowledged, and yet remains on the fringe of the world mission consciousness.

Though I’ve always been mildly interested in Native American history, my main point of interest has been the link between the various atrocities that were committed against Native Americans, often in the name of Christianity, and their passionate resistance to Christianity to this day. At the risk of over-generalizing the situation, essentially Native Americans never really had a culturally relevant presentation of the gospel. Instead, they were introduced to a “colonial-Christianity” which was inseparable from the politics of those whose ultimate goal in dealing with the “native problem” was either total elimination or total integration. They were lied to, cheated, marginalized, and murdered. We know this. But what you may not realize is that those dark pages in America’s history have deeply and profoundly impacted the Native American community’s openness to the gospel, to this day. I was reminded of this during dinner with our friends in Montana. They shared some of the challenges in working on an Indian reservation, many of which were linked directly to the initial negative exposure the tribe had to Christianity.

Over the past few years my exposure to different cultures has opened my eyes to how common this sad story is. Two cultures interacted with each other; Jesus was misrepresented; there were profound hurts on both sides; one culture came out on top; and to this day the minority culture struggles with its identity, unable to heal because the Healer remains hidden from them. They know His name, but it is the name of a foreign God who belongs to a culture that destroyed their way of life.

When we were living in Australia, I was struck by the direct parallels between the history and present challenges facing both Aboriginals and Native Americans. Both cultures live on the edge of mainstream society; both marginalized and spiritually hardened against the religion of the culture that destroyed their way of life. During an outreach to a small Australian town, I decided to spend most of my time with the alcoholic aboriginals. They had been designated a small piece of land under a bridge on the edge of town where they could drink freely. Every night twenty to thirty would congregate, and they gladly welcomed a new face with an American accent. They were very open spiritually, but it was obvious that something under the surface was preventing real transformation in their lives. I asked one of the older men what he thought about Christianity. He wasn’t too drunk to be careless, so he asked me, “Do you want the nice version, or the truth?” I said

Continue Reading »