From the editor

Our mission and evangelism efforts are changing. On his column, Mennonite Mission Network executive director Stanley Green explains why his agency must adapt to a world changed from 100 years ago.

But why are our mission agencies, such as Mennonite Mission Network and Eastern Mennonite Missions, receiving less and less support from us? Here are some reasons:

• Reporting from our mission agencies no longer gives us the number of conversions. Such numbers once gave us a sense of pride and confirmation that we were being faithful to the Great Commission. But, Green says, “our congregations must expect a different type of accountability than reports on the ‘number of souls saved.’ ”

• We attach strings to our contributions. When we make a gift to support a mission agency, we want to see exactly where the money goes. This is a different expression of stewardship from what existed in the church several decades ago. Then, people gave to missions, relinquished connection to the money and trusted the people leading the mission endeavor to use it wisely. But as support for mission dollars declined, some agencies followed this need to remain connected and established “mission support teams.” This further reinforced the notion that we go with our dollars.

• The line between mission and service has been blurred. At one time we saw Mennonite Central Committee as the agency that provided relief and service to the impoverished and the oppressed “in the name of Christ,” while our mission agencies did not. But now mission agencies may also be feeding the hungry or responding to a tsunami. Green describes this as “a more holistic approach to our witness.”

• Many of us have relativized the gospel—or just plain lost confidence in it. In a world of many religions, we are no longer sure Jesus is the only way to God. It becomes easier to say all religions are good, and there is no need to hold Christian faith as extraordinary. And many of us are repelled by the coercion still present in the some evangelism tactics, or embarrassed by the colonialism implicit in our past efforts. So we have shifted from empathy for the gospel to apathy—and even antipathy.

• Some of us misunderstand St. Francis’ famous quote, “Preach the gospel; if necessary, use words.” This is usually a critique of what others are doing with their words and reinforces our pride: Mennonites respond to disasters and agitate for peace and justice, but we won’t talk about why we do it. The priority may be to act, but that doesn’t mean we seldom speak in a world that needs to hear about Christ.

• New mission strategies rely on partnerships in each country. But raising funds for partnerships is a tough sell for the agencies. Green notes that the former practice of sending Westerners into other countries has not been very effective. Example: After World War II, Western denominations flooded Japan with missionaries. None was allowed into China, however. Today, only 4 percent of Japan is Christian, while Christianity in China is growing rapidly. What would have happened in Japan if the emphasis was on training Japanese Christians to take the gospel to their families, friends and co-workers? This model is actually working at Lithuanian Christian College, where students from Muslim countries closed to outside mission workers now take the gospel home with them.

New missional language calls us each to join in the work God is already doing in the spheres of influence we inhabit locally. But we need mission agencies to extend our witness around the world. We are providing them less and less support, however. Take the list of reasons above and consider whether one or more rings true. Then send a contribution, or ask your congregation to increase support for mission work.