Keep the Change

by Gary Corwin

History and personal experience remind us powerfully that change is inevitable. Futurists have been telling us for years that change is accelerating at breakneck speed, and that it will continue to do so.

History and personal experience remind us powerfully that change is inevitable. Futurists have been telling us for years that change is accelerating at breakneck speed, and that it will continue to do so.

Over the last several months I have become very concious of change in missions: organizational change, methodological change, changes in partnering and mobilization styles, changes required by Baby Boomers stepping into lreadership, changes required by generation Xers recruited by Baby Boomers, and on the list could go. I see most of it as pretty healthy. Some of it raises more questions than it answers.

All this change leaves us with no escape from how we are going to respond to it. Generally speaking, I have discerned three poles of response in the missions community. Each of these poles coincides with a possible interpretation of the phrase, "Keep the change."

The first response, least cordial to change, might employ the phrase to mean "You keep the change; we want nothing to do with it." At times, such as when attempts are made to undercut founcational principles and values (e.g., the lordship of Christ, the authority of Scripture, or salvation through Christ alone) this is the only appropriate response. When applied to methods and structures, however, it is only occasionally right, and organizations characterized too generally by this response are often in dire need of response number two.

The second response, most eager for change, might employ the phrase to mean "Keep the chnage coming we need it." This heart cry is usually the result of pent-up need for change, combined with widespread recognition that it has been too long coming. The ascendancy of this response today is widely discernible in mission circles, and products of change are a cause for rejoicing in many of them. It’s not without its dangers, however. There are, after all, an infinite number of possibilities for change. They are not all going to be right or wise.

The third response, a prayerful one, petitions the Heavenly Shepherd to "Keep the change (process) as a special object of Your care, in the same way that You keep us. Your prone-to-wander sheep." It recognizes on the one hand, how resistant we can be to changes we don’t like, and on the other hand, how our tempestuous zeal in times past has caused many babies to be thrown out with the bath water. It is a plea for the gentle leading and protection that keeps us from harming ourselves, as much as for protection from the prowling wolves that athreaten us from without.

In the last few months I have become impressed by both the growing consensus for helpful change, and the scope of change actually taking place. At the same time, I am sometimes perplexed by what seems like a headlong rush to adopt the lastest fads that are making their way across the larger cultural landscape.

Corporate confessin of the sins of our missionary forbearers strikes me as one of them. This is not to suggest that there is nothing for which repentance and apologies should be forthcoming. Where apologies are needed, however, Matthew 18 would seem to say that doing so should be carried out in much more personal and specific ways. Blanket apologies make about as much sense as blanket hugs and kisses.

Another fad-prone area is our love affair with the latest corporate and marketing models. While we should always be ready to learn from the expertise and experience of others, whether they are believers or not, we should remember that we are not Microsoft or Ford. We are the Lord’s servants, and the bottom line in kingdom work is an eternity away from Wall Street or Madision Avenue.

Clearly we need to be wary of fadish trends masquerading as effecive change. And we need to be wary of automatic responsies of whatever sort. The first two poles of response, whether rejecting or embracing change, are appropriate and helpful when used in the right context, but are counterproductive when used in the wrong one. Change is always needed, but all change is not equally valuable. Only the third response, humble, prayerful dependence on God, which should abide with all other responses, is eternally correct. And it should always co-exist with an attitude of graditude.

In response to good service from a cab driver, waiter or waitress, we often show our gratitude by encouraging the individual to "keep the change." We are saying that we appreciate what they do and the spirit in which they do it. Expressing thankfulness to the changeless God who is the Shepherd of change is certainly no less appropriate.

—–

Copyright © 1996 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.