Exploding the Myths of Church Development

by Larry W. Sharp

Western development theory is outcome-oriented and assumes quantitative growth, thereby overlooking three important factors.

In the days of the American frontier, when the wagon trains rolled westward, scouts would precede the company each day to blaze a suitable trail. On horseback, the scouts often misjudged the width of the wagon, marking the trail between trees too close for the company to pass through. Sometimes they plotted the trail up slopes too steep for the oxen. And the campsites they chose were then beyond the reach of the wagon train. The resulting tensions between the scouts and the company were conflicts between theory and practice.

The same gap between theory and practice looms today in the issues surrounding church development in Africa, Asia and Latin America. We may think of evangelical missions as the scouts and various indigenous elements as the company of wagons. In our theology and church growth models, we missionaries are supplying theory. But the local church has to deal with realities. Where the theories don’t conform with reality, the gap must be addressed. We must continually rethink our approach as we try to link our theology with mission application.

Samuel Escobar, the Latin American evangelical leader, states:

Our generation…finds itself in the midst of an evangelical identity crisis. Little by little we have become aware of the fact that there are now a large number of evangelicals, but that this community is not thinking through its faith nor applying it to every-day problems.

One way to close the gap between theory and practice is by exposing the fallacies that create it. The five myths that follow are paraphrased from the literature of general development in the belief that they apply specifically to church development. Development studies provide a fertile field of analysis since in the past two decades evident conflicts have emerged regarding strategies for Two-Thirds World development.

Myth: Church development always means numerical growth
Western development theory is outcome-oriented and assumes quantitative growth, thereby overlooking three important factors.

First, by focusing on growth as measured by numbers, we overlook qualitative factors like spiritual maturity, discipleship, and body life.

Second, by planning for growth we often look at the benefits of the process and ignore the cost. Church growth comes at a price. When we are tempted to look at a large congregation and say, "I wish my church could grow like that," we may forget that such a goal is reached only in difficult stages. Who has not seen strife or immorality, for example, plaguing a struggling congregation?

A third factor often overlooked in quantitative growth theory is the vulnerability of church leadership. Mobility, poverty, famine, and disease can quickly deplete the ranks of leaders who typically already are in short supply.

Myth: Financial and technical aid can solve the problems of church development
Even a cursory reading of development literature today will reveal that aid has not solved development problems. In fact, in many cases, aid has become an obstacle to development. The same is true for church development.

Missionaries often offer technological solutions without anticipating the long-term effects. The day will come when pastors are dependent on local resources. With any investment we must ask, "Will this help or hinder in the long run?"

In the West we tend to focus on the product, rather than the process. Thus we see a mission’s radio program and say, "Oh, this mission is in the radio ministry." Or, we see a seminary and say, "Great. This mission is producing seminary graduates." We see mission schools, buildings, airplanes, camps, and magazines, and equate these things with missionary service.

This conclusion is wrong. Missions organizations are in the people business. People are more important than things; the person precedes the activity. The church will grow only when the unique talents, resources, and abilities of people are tapped.

Miriam Adeney quotes Juan Perez Alfonzo, the Venezuelan father of OPEC who died disappointed by the way oil money increased the gap between rich and poor.

Oil money has done nothing but lead us to waste…this oil income, from the very beginning, has been hurting us. If oil were to disappear, it might be better for us … one cannot plant oil. It is impossible. Our solution does not lie in imitating the United States, in trying to send rockets to the moon. We must try to produce enough black beans to feed the Venezuelans. For this, we do not need capital. We need devotion, and we don’t have devotion because of all that money.

As we build the church of Christ, we must primarily concentrate on people. Dollars can facilitate growth, but they cannot cause it. Even the elimination of poverty would not replace the desperate need of human interaction in love.

This is not to deny that funds are sometimes badly needed. But let’s be careful not to kill initiative and increase dependency. Rather, we must help the recipient to be more self-reliant within his own social context.

Myth: Solutions made elsewhere still suit on the mission field
North Americans are by nature ethnocentric. Mexican writer Carlos Fuentes deserves our attention when he says, "What the U.S. does best is to understand itself. What is does worst is understand others."

Our great seminaries and Bible colleges have done a remarkable job of producing expositors of the truth and communicators to our culture. We have a great understanding of the "text" and we can express God’s truth, but do we have the skills to analyze the context of our hearers in other cultures?

We will always reflect our culture; that is understandable. But do we recognize that our culture emphasizes values foreign to most of the world, such as individualism, "the American way," cause and effect, empirical abstract thought patterns, systematic analysis, and believism?

For example, most people in the world see life as a whole rather than as a collection of unrelated fragments, as we Westerners perceive. We debate whether evangelism or social concern is more important. The very question is strictly a function of our culture. For non-Westerners, it is not an issue; both social concern and evangelism are part of a global Christian whole.

Myth: Education is schooling and it is essential for growth
During the past decade some general trends have become evident in education in developing countries:

• There is universal emphasis on education. In some countries, the number of pupils in school is doubling every 10 years.

• Students are staying in school longer.

• Teachers are under-trained, under-paid and overworked. A typical secondary teacher in Brazil will teach "full-time" at two or three different schools in order to survive. As a result, the quality of education is declining.

• Much of the education is irrelevant to the realities of the job market. Curriculum is too academic, and in most countries the learning is rote copying. The students are not learning to think, make decisions, plan and progress.

• Traditional models of education are being challenged by new innovative theories, including non-formal education.

What about the church? Are we any different in our view of education? Bosch reminds us of the unfortunate realities:

. . . theology taught in most Third World seminaries was abstract, a-historical, focusing on conceptualizing and systematizing Christian doctrines, thus producing an elitist, upper-middle class mentality and spirituality completely foreign to ordinary believers.

Our Western theology is abstract, intellectual, and propositional. And we tend to teach the same way on the mission field. Alien practices like this must end, since they stress theology without social reality.

On the other hand, evangelicals must not swing to the "obedience-before-faith" theology either. Rather, we must evaluate how our high-level theological education relates to the realities of living. The pastors we train must be able to communicate with farmers, bus drivers, and peasants. When a man is unemployed, his son on drugs, or his wife unfaithful and he can’t cope, he doesn’t want to hear about Barth or Bultmann or eschatological truth. He needs an understanding person who can relate biblical truth to his need. As Nunez states:

…in Latin America we are far behind in training leaders capable of carrying out contextualization; leaders rooted deeply in the Word of God and fully identified with their own culture; leaders who know the text and the context…

The answer to educational deficiencies is not "more is better." Nor is it schooling in a Western mode. Learning is helpful only when it is built into life. Church growth theorists are to be commended for their critique of traditional schooling, and for advocating alternative models such as Theological Education by Extension and nonformal education.

But in Brazil, many pastors are still trained in a typical North American fashion, and one lamentable result is that many seminary students are not returning as pastors to their home villages. Indeed, some leave the ministry as soon as they graduate. Maybe true education is not identical with schooling. Maybe local leaders should lay hands on promising younger men and then use life situations as a laboratory for education.

Myth: Multinational mission agencies know what is best and should be the main actors
Most of us would doubt the ability of multinational corporate executives based in New York or Tokyo to know what is best for an African or Latin American. It probably is not more Coca Cola or air conditioners. Just what it may be is a question for the African or Latin American himself.

The application to missions is clear. Like the scouts blazing the wagon trail, missionaries must relate to the realities of the field.

Any good manager knows that an employee must feel that a plan belongs to him in order for it to be successful. The plan "owned" by the employee will succeed over one imposed on him from the outside, even if the outside plan is superior.

In the same way, the best people to address church development are not necessarily those with the highest grades in seminary or with the most technical abilities. Nor are they the missionaries with the most work funds. Rather, those who understand the culture and who evidence people skills are best suited for the task of church development.

Contextualization will take different forms. Every church-planting setting is culturally unique and the gospel message must be communicated in a manner appropriate to that setting. Effective linking of theory and practice requires a careful rethinking of church-planting concerns. Our work must not be undermined by blind acceptance of flawed principles of church development.

—–

Copyright © 1987 Evangelism and Missions Information Service (EMIS). All rights reserved. Not to be reproduced or copied in any form without written permission from EMIS.

Comments are closed.