Fruitful Near-culture Church Planters: A Qualitative Study

by Gene Daniels and Pam Arlund

It is a fundamental principle of church-planting movements that workers for the harvest are in the harvest (Garrison 2004, 172; Cole 2005, 149). We have the privilege of living in a time when more and more missionaries are emerging from the harvest itself.

It is a fundamental principle of church-planting movements that workers for the harvest are in the harvest (Garrison 2004, 172; Cole 2005, 149). We have the privilege of living in a time when more and more missionaries are emerging from the harvest itself.

That is, more than ever before near-culture gospel workers are spreading the good news around the world. Given the importance of mobilizing local workers into the harvest, it is surprising how little is known and how little study has been done on how their experience is different than the traditional cross-cultural missionary from the West.

Yet, increasingly, the role of the near-culture worker will become more and more important. As a result, the Fruitful Practice Research team decided to conduct a specific analysis of an often neglected category of church planter: near-culture workers in the Muslim world.

Since 2007, the Fruitful Practices Research team has studied practices across many dimensions of ministry among Muslims. One major result of that research is a list of sixty-eight Fruitful Practices—“activities that promote the emergence, vitality, and multiplication of churches in a Muslim context” (Allan, Harrison, and Adams 2009).

In this article, we describe the results from a particular subset of our larger study—that is, the findings below are exclusively drawn from interviews with near-culture church planters. No interviews with Western or Majority World missionaries were included.

Each of these workers was on a team that had planted at least one church of Muslim Background Believers (MBB), and all in Muslim-majority contexts. The workers interviewed came from a wide variety of worldview backgrounds—Muslim, Hindu, and Christian—although the majority were from a Muslim background themselves. There were a number of fascinating results from this study, but we will look at just four.

Relating to God Drives the Fruitfulness of Near-culture Workers

The first and perhaps most significant finding is that the two practices most often mentioned in the interviews both fall into what we call the “Relating to God” category. In all but one of the interviews, and often mentioned multiple times, was the idea of the worker “persevering through difficulty and suffering.” It seems that difficulty and suffering are companions of fruitfulness for near-culture church planters.

The difficulties they faced were many: persecution, lack of understanding by the local community and/or their sending church, extreme loneliness, culture shock, lack of resources either to provide for their own needs or to help those in the local community, being marginalized for being different, and at times being physically assaulted or under threat of physical harm.

Given the pervasiveness of opposition, it should not be a surprise that the second most attested Fruitful Practice was that of “engaging in regular, frequent prayer.” These two items were often side-by-side in the interviews, and those interviewed often stated their prayer life was the reason they were able to continue despite the opposition they faced. One person stated it this way:

[The Imams went] to the government and the police, then the secret police followed us….After that, my father said you have to leave the house because they want to kill you. I was not scared because of the people—I was scared because of my family…. [Later] the people in my area made a lot of problems for my family. They beat my brother. I have a small brother and they beat him…. I was very sad and I prayed to the Lord, “What should I do? All the time you are helping me but now I am in this situation. I need you.” At that time, there was a verse from Matthew chapter 5 and the verse said don’t just love your friends—because they are your friends you love them—but love your enemies and pray for them that one day they will become a believer and your brother.

We found it interesting that it was specifically these near-culture workers who rated perseverance as the key driver of their faithfulness, something that was not true in our other studies focused on Western expatriate workers. A possible explanation is that near-culture workers, being from either the same country or a similar people group in a nearby country, do not enjoy the same protections and resources as Western expatriates. This makes them more vulnerable to persecution and other forms of local opposition.

In light of this, expatriates need to be more aware of the dangers faced by their local colleagues. We still believe it is very good strategy to send such workers to nearby cultures. However, we should be aware that hidden cultural barriers and the lack of diplomatic protections may make local workers more vulnerable to persecution than a foreign expatriate would be.

Appropriately Relating to Society Is Important to Fruitful Near-culture Workers

One of the Fruitful Practices categories is called “Relating to Society.” The interviews revealed two practices from this grouping were also quite high in the behaviors of near-culture workers. In particular, it was fascinating to see how “addressing tangible needs in their community as an expression of the gospel” looked through the eyes of a near-culture worker. One person responded,

So I started with one of my friends and I followed her to her farm, and when they saw it they were happy…. So the other woman said, “Okay, next time you will follow me to my own farm too.” It is like God was giving me their hearts and that is the only way they can understand you. Saying you are identifying with us.

Another person explained,

I also had to learn tailoring. I had to learn how to make their cultural dresses. So I made their dresses. They come to the house to bring their dresses, and sometimes this is just doing patchwork of the old clothes or dirty clothes that are torn. When they come, they sit, and we have the opportunity to talk and share the gospel with them.

Helping with the planting of crops and helping neighbors mend clothes are just a couple of examples of the ways these near-culture workers deliberately responded to needs in the community. Few of those we interviewed were involved in the formal development projects we typically think about in the Western mission community.

Rather, these workers were doing the sort of things that a kind neighbor would do for another neighbor. One or two of those interviewed had aspirations to be more formal in how they were helping to meet needs. Yet it was clear they understood meeting needs as a highly relational, one-on-one, undertaking—not a program.

The other fruitful practice which stood out in this category was about “communicating respect by behaving in culturally appropriate ways.” Although they were from near cultures, they seemed to have a heightened awareness of being somewhat of an outsider, thus the need to earn a place in the local context. 

In fact, the activities of simply eating and drinking with Muslim friends were specifically mentioned many times so much so that we eventually realized that hanging out over a cup of coffee/tea, sitting in the market, or sitting in the courtyard eating fruit constitute a natural gospel strategy because they are part of culturally appropriate behavior.

To the Western mind, sitting and eating do not seem active enough to be considered an intentional missionary ‘practice.’ We tend to view spending time eating and drinking as merely leisure activities. Thus, it is not uncommon for Western workers to feel frustrated with long hours of just sitting in a local home or market eating, drinking, and spending time with Muslims. However, these near-culture workers understand that it is an integral first step in their work.

Another interesting insight has to do with cultural barriers. Approaching the interviews with Western eyes might lead us to presume that as near-culture workers, they already know exactly how to make friends in their target cultures.

Furthermore, it might seem that they don’t need to worry as much about cultural barriers as the person from half a world away. However, our interviews did not bear this out. If anything, these near-culture workers seemed more aware of their “differentness,” and that they would have to work hard to bridge that barrier. They were very aware of a need to intentionally communicate respect, something they did by simple, culturally-appropriate behaviors.

This is in some ways counter-intuitive. We often assume that a worker from a nearer culture will automatically have an easier time gaining acceptance. Our findings on this point are a reminder that all workers, expatriate and local alike, need to pay careful attention to societal norms, even though we may be “free in Christ” to ignore them.

Also, we believe these two Fruitful Practices together are indicative of the value system of these near-culture workers. First, they place a high value on showing love, concern, and human interest by helping people. They understand that helping out, wherever necessary, is a universal indicator of the kind of person local people want to have in their communities.

Second, they realize that conveying respect is a major requirement of being accepted by both leaders and members of any community. These workers seemed willing to take on whatever behaviors might show those values and gain a hearing for the gospel.

Fruitful Near-culture Workers Use a Variety of Ministry Methods

The near-culture workers we interviewed personified one of our Fruitful Practice statements in the area of communication methods: “Fruitful workers use a variety of approaches in sharing the gospel.”

All of those we interviewed were skilled at selecting which of various approaches would be best for each situation. Also, we found it interesting that none of the interviews specifically mentioned any of the methods which are making the rounds among Western agencies for sharing Jesus with Muslims (e.g., Camel method, T4T, Any3, Discovery Bible Studies, Simply the Story, etc.).

It is likely that at least some of them were using one or more of those methods or were aware of these methods, but none felt any of these important enough to mention by name. And while some interviews mentioned activities that sounded similar to these well-known methodologies, we cannot be sure whether they had been taught the methods mentioned here or simply discovered them on their own.

What was clear, however, was that these workers did not feel it necessary, or even beneficial, to use only one method when sharing the gospel. No one directly said, “I use different methods at different times.” Instead, they described their ministry in terms like this: “No I don’t have really a plan how to preach the gospel. It depends on the circumstances and the people, and the place, and what he knows about his religion.” Another person said, “And also how to reach people through the Qur’an as well, which is one of the methods that we focus on here. It’s one of the methods, it’s not the method.”

The workers clearly felt the need to be flexible and take each case locally and individually. If there was any one ‘method’ they consistently talked about, it was the direct leading of the Holy Spirit. Several we interviewed spoke of saying certain things or going certain places as a direct result of what they felt the Holy Spirit showed them to do. For example, one person said, “There are situations that the Holy Spirit leads and one approach may not be real relevant in all situations unto all people, so there are different approaches.”

However, in other cases, some workers seemed to decide how and when to share Jesus based on their innate sense of cultural or relational appropriateness. Whether led by the Spirit or by cultural intuition, the common factor was that these workers were clearly not wedded to a single methodology.

Each of these near-culture workers exhibited some awareness of their personal preferences in ways to share the gospel: sharing their own testimony, reaching out through inner healing, building bridges to known concepts, sharing Bible stories, etc. However, in the end, it was clear there was no ‘one-size-fits-all’ pattern.

Several mentioned that they would sense where the other person was and tailor their presentation to that individual. They often mentioned sharing Jesus along the natural flow of conversations.

These interviews with near-culture workers were a strong confirmation of what our overall research has shown—that is, the fruitfulness of using a variety of approaches to sharing the gospel. This should cause us to carefully reconsider the Western focus on methodology and technique in sharing the gospel. Perhaps it is simply a manifestation of our culture rather than good practice.

Fruitful Near-culture Workers Emphasize Heart Values

As we analyzed the interviews, one thing became very clear: the near-culture workers in our study were fruitful primarily because they value certain things: growing intimacy with Jesus, persevering on mission with God, honoring and respecting others, and treating others as individuals.

The first two fruitful practices highlighted in this study were focused on how they relate to God, not about how to do ministry. Opposition will come, and these fruitful workers have learned to turn to Jesus when it does. Therefore, the most important ability for any worker is to be able to persevere enough to abide in Christ in all circumstances.

Many people in the fields of educational and sociological research currently call this character trait “grit.” Deborah Perkins-Gough of Penn State University says that in the area of professional or educational achievement, grit is a combination of resilience, hard work, and having focused passion over the long term (2013).

It is no surprise that recent educational research has shown that IQ and skill are not the most important predictors of whether a student will ultimately be successful. More importantly, it is also no surprise that the Bible has something to say about perseverance as the key to success.¹This quality of perseverance, or grit, is considered a blessing which comes as a result of being tested and not falling away (cf. James 1:4, James 5:11, Heb. 12).

In confirming the teaching of scripture, secular scholars have provided us a reminder that perseverance is not something one is born with, but is rather something that is learned through time. Interestingly, Paul said the same thing (see Rom. 5: 3-5). Our research confirms that grit, or perseverance, is indeed key to the lives of these fruitful, near-culture workers, and it was clear that intimate times of prayer makes this possible.

The next two Fruitful Practices we looked at are also personal and are connected to the two Fruitful Practices above by the key word “relating.” In this case, the relationship is to society and individuals in that society, rather than to God. However, once again, the practice is about a heart attitude, rather than a ministry technique.

These workers were willing to do whatever it took to show that they were trustworthy members of their new community. They had taken the time to learn what conveyed honor and respect and sought ways to show respect in tangible ways. They were aware that people in different cultures show respect in different ways, and they were willing to do whatever was necessary to convey that respect.

They used the technique of observing and participating with the local people; however, more than that, it appeared to be a heart value. These workers demonstrated a willingness to step in and do whatever would speak to the local worldview.

We can now link these to the third finding, which showed that fruitful workers used a variety of ways of presenting the gospel. They did not stick doggedly to a particular technique; rather, they demonstrated a belief that different ways work for different people. They were also aware of the voice of the Holy Spirit in the moment and were willing to go the direction he would lead.

This might be a good time to note a nuance of difference: while near-culture workers were aware of the cultural differences, they did not appear to be trying to reach, say, the Ansari people group, as much as seeking to reach Ansari people.

Their interviews gave a very personal, intimate view of those they were reaching, whereas Western workers tend to speak of their people in a group sense. While this may seem a small distinction, it could have large implications for both mobilization and strategy.

In short, while all of these near-culture workers were aware of the need to build bridges between themselves and locals, they knew that no single technique could get them there. Instead, they seemed committed to a heart value in which they were willing to bridge the gulf by honoring the local culture and cooperating with the Holy Spirit. Foundational to this was their intimate walk with the Lord and the character that had been produced through spending time with him in prayer.

In general, Fruitful Practice research is behavior oriented, but there are times when our qualitative side, rooted in interviews and conversations with real-field workers, offers limited insights into the reasons behind the behaviors. It seems to us that the best way to connect the key Fruitful Practices (behaviors) in this data set is by considering the heart attitudes or values from which they seem to have originated. The figure below gives a simple graphic representation of this:

Conclusion

Through this study, we offer a look at the practices of near-culture church planters who are fruitful in the Muslim world. The fact that opposition and perseverance through prayer ranked as the highest Fruitful Practice is new in the research done within Fruitful Practices so far.

Also, while it may be counterintuitive, these near-culture workers were also keenly aware of cultural differences and were keen to convey respect and honor by being culturally appropriate.

Finally, they were not committed to one particular method of sharing the gospel. Instead, they felt the need to be flexible and share the gospel in ways they felt were appropriate to the individual.

As an outgrowth of these first three findings, we have proposed that heart values seem to be the main indicator of fruitfulness in the lives of these workers. We have grounded the practices in the factors that seem to be motivating them. If the drivers are the heart motivations and not the behaviors, then the question will be: How do we teach people to be fruitful? Do we train hearts, behaviors, or both? We should give careful consideration to these as we both train near-culture church planters and partner with them on multicultural teams.

References

Allen, Don, Rebecca Harrison, and Eric and Laura Adams. 2009. “Fruitful Practices: A Descriptive List.” International Journal of Frontier Missiology, 26(3): 111-122.

Cole, Neil. 2005. Organic Church. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Garrison, David. 2004. Church Planting Movements. Arkadelphia, Ark.: WigTake

Perkins-Gough, Deborah. 2013. “The Significance of Grit.” Educational Leadership. 71(1):14-20.

. . . .

Gene Daniels (pseudonym) and his family served in Central Asia for twelve years. He is now the Director of Fruitful Practice Research, studying how God is working in the Muslim world. Dr. Pam Arlund is the Director of Training for All Nations Family. She trains and coaches believers to ignite church-planting movements. Previously, she lived among an unengaged people group and helped to bring the first people to Christ.

Comments are closed.