Editor’s note: The following post arises from small group reflections from The Rise of Global Christianity, 1910–2010, taught by Dr. Todd Johnson at Boston University in the Fall of 2010. Led by doctoral students, the small groups discussed lectures given by Christian scholars in various disciplines, including significant changes that have occurred in global Christianity over the past 100 years.
Last week, we had the privilege of having Dr. Bonk from the Overseas Ministry Study Center at Yale University. His lecture on the relationship between money and mission was fascinating. His claim that we do not need a lot of money to evangelize the world was well substantiated with various anecdotes. However, our members had very different ideas on the role of money while understanding his points.
One student pointed out that there has been a general tendency to downplay the role of money in world mission. He shared his experience while participating in the Boston Conference 2010: he was in a room where one student presented his paper regarding the role of NGO on mission. He said that he was surprised during the discussion time that how many people were angry, arguing that we should keep money separate from the proclamation of the gospel. Another student agreed with him. He said that we should recognize the fact that we need money in mission. Although the missionaries came in faith without money, but they still had to pray to God for their needs. So we can’t say that money isn’t necessary in doing mission. Faith-based mission (depending on God for our money and needs) has also something to do with money. They just seek for another source for the money. The other student defended Dr. Bonk’s position. She said that it seems that he just wanted to emphasize that we don’t need to assume that we need so much money in doing mission. But the first student maintained that we should accept that money is important tool in world mission.
Another student jumped in the discussion and turned our attention to broader issue of power. He talked that we should remember there are other types of power beyond the monetary. Intellectual capital, networks of powerful people, etc. If we are to be responsible with our money, let’s also think how to be righteously rich with our other blessings. We agreed with his point. One student added to his remark by saying that since the shift to the south, money has become so much associated with colonialism.
At the end of the discussion, we briefly shared our expectations toward pastor relating to money issue and found very interesting cultural differences between Koreans and African-American: Many Koreans said that they want their pastors poor, but we learned that in many African-American churches, the leaders wear gold since the way a pastor lives is a reflection of the generosity of the congregation. What an interesting cultural difference!
Hye Jin Lee, discussion moderator
Showing posts with label Jonathan Bonk. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jonathan Bonk. Show all posts
Monday, November 29, 2010
Mission and Money
Editor’s note: The following post arises from small group reflections from The Rise of Global Christianity, 1910–2010, taught by Dr. Todd Johnson at Boston University in the Fall of 2010. Led by doctoral students, the small groups discussed lectures given by Christian scholars in various disciplines, including significant changes that have occurred in global Christianity over the past 100 years.
In the session for finance, Dr. Jonathan Bonk, the president of OMSC gave us the special lecture on the relationship between mission and finance. The lecture was moved for my group because Dr. Bonk was very persuasive with several concrete stories. Especially, the story of Mizoram that was one of the poorest regions in Northern India and later became the second highest literacy village in India was amazing. Though they are poor, they are sending missionaries with supporting fund by 40% amount of their total budget because they see the task of proclaiming the gospel as their responsibility as a nation. With the stories, Dr. Bonk concluded that mission is not the byproduct of the money affair, but the precious fruit of the passion.
The responses of my group were varying from positive to the other side. Most of participants agreed with conclusion, “mission is the precious fruit of the passion.” Since the subject of mission is God and we are just agents for God’s mission, our obedience with passion to God’s mission is most important element in mission activities any other than circumstance, finance and cultural equipment. However, one of my group members pointed out in a succinct manner that money matters in all activities including mission. It could be used as a resource or asset and this is obvious when we are going to the ends of the earth. Another responded that the lecture has very familiar stories because he heard similar stories in Korea, that is, people would describe spiritual movements through people. Another member also stated that the lecture was little different from what he expected because he expected to hear the story related to how the financial problem can be solved in mission enterprises. Despite these responses, we agreed that we should have missionary zeal like Mizoram people who show us the miracle of God’s mission. Lastly, we finished our discussion by talking on the business mission stated by Dr. Johnson for a moment.
Gun Cheol Kim, discussion moderator
In the session for finance, Dr. Jonathan Bonk, the president of OMSC gave us the special lecture on the relationship between mission and finance. The lecture was moved for my group because Dr. Bonk was very persuasive with several concrete stories. Especially, the story of Mizoram that was one of the poorest regions in Northern India and later became the second highest literacy village in India was amazing. Though they are poor, they are sending missionaries with supporting fund by 40% amount of their total budget because they see the task of proclaiming the gospel as their responsibility as a nation. With the stories, Dr. Bonk concluded that mission is not the byproduct of the money affair, but the precious fruit of the passion.
The responses of my group were varying from positive to the other side. Most of participants agreed with conclusion, “mission is the precious fruit of the passion.” Since the subject of mission is God and we are just agents for God’s mission, our obedience with passion to God’s mission is most important element in mission activities any other than circumstance, finance and cultural equipment. However, one of my group members pointed out in a succinct manner that money matters in all activities including mission. It could be used as a resource or asset and this is obvious when we are going to the ends of the earth. Another responded that the lecture has very familiar stories because he heard similar stories in Korea, that is, people would describe spiritual movements through people. Another member also stated that the lecture was little different from what he expected because he expected to hear the story related to how the financial problem can be solved in mission enterprises. Despite these responses, we agreed that we should have missionary zeal like Mizoram people who show us the miracle of God’s mission. Lastly, we finished our discussion by talking on the business mission stated by Dr. Johnson for a moment.
Gun Cheol Kim, discussion moderator
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Dynamics of mission and money
Editor’s note: The following post arises from small group reflections from The Rise of Global Christianity, 1910–2010, taught by Dr. Todd Johnson at Boston University in the Fall of 2010. Led by doctoral students, the small groups discussed lectures given by Christian scholars in various disciplines, including significant changes that have occurred in global Christianity over the past 100 years.
This past week in Global Christianity, Dr. Jonathan Bonk from the Overseas Ministry Study Center at Yale University gave the lecture on Christian mission and finance. Instead of elaborating on his article from The Atlas of Global Christianity, which discusses the concentration of Christian wealth in the ‘global north’ despite the demographic shift of Christianity to the ‘global south,’ he took a narrative approach. Dr. Bonk started by looking at the large amounts of money pumped into mission in the global north, particularly mission approached from the impulse of economic and social development and contrasted this with extraordinary stories of successful evangelizing missions done by communities on limited economic resources, such as the Mizoram in northeast India, and the Kachin Baptist churches in Myanmar (Burma).
Through mission the good news of the gospel has an important impact on culture. However, as Dr. Bonk pointed out, the Christian message may necessitate a shift in culture but not necessarily a change towards western consumerism. This we thought was an important insight when considering finance and mission. We discussed the case of Korea, where during the post civil war era the country was in financial crisis. The infusion of money from missions allowed missionaries to build structures such as schools and hospitals. Two Korean students in our discussion suggested this may have forged a path for some to come to the church, as a first step of evangelism in the Korean church. At the same time, we discussed how accepting financial help has complex affects. It can create a one-sided influence from the providers, and perhaps create a dependency relationship. While educational and healthcare institutions might be a positive, the missionaries also westernized Korea and pushed aside many cultural practices considered unchristian. As a result there was some lose of cultural identity. Our discussion came to a consensus that relationship building is an important way of doing mission that is incarnational. Such a holistic, incarnational approach to mission ensures that missionaries retain a sensitivity to local culture and avoid, to some extent, the political pitfalls associated with social issues.
Eva Pascal, discussion moderator
http://theredconnection.blogspot.com/
This past week in Global Christianity, Dr. Jonathan Bonk from the Overseas Ministry Study Center at Yale University gave the lecture on Christian mission and finance. Instead of elaborating on his article from The Atlas of Global Christianity, which discusses the concentration of Christian wealth in the ‘global north’ despite the demographic shift of Christianity to the ‘global south,’ he took a narrative approach. Dr. Bonk started by looking at the large amounts of money pumped into mission in the global north, particularly mission approached from the impulse of economic and social development and contrasted this with extraordinary stories of successful evangelizing missions done by communities on limited economic resources, such as the Mizoram in northeast India, and the Kachin Baptist churches in Myanmar (Burma).
Through mission the good news of the gospel has an important impact on culture. However, as Dr. Bonk pointed out, the Christian message may necessitate a shift in culture but not necessarily a change towards western consumerism. This we thought was an important insight when considering finance and mission. We discussed the case of Korea, where during the post civil war era the country was in financial crisis. The infusion of money from missions allowed missionaries to build structures such as schools and hospitals. Two Korean students in our discussion suggested this may have forged a path for some to come to the church, as a first step of evangelism in the Korean church. At the same time, we discussed how accepting financial help has complex affects. It can create a one-sided influence from the providers, and perhaps create a dependency relationship. While educational and healthcare institutions might be a positive, the missionaries also westernized Korea and pushed aside many cultural practices considered unchristian. As a result there was some lose of cultural identity. Our discussion came to a consensus that relationship building is an important way of doing mission that is incarnational. Such a holistic, incarnational approach to mission ensures that missionaries retain a sensitivity to local culture and avoid, to some extent, the political pitfalls associated with social issues.
Eva Pascal, discussion moderator
http://theredconnection.blogspot.com/
Monday, November 22, 2010
"Money tells us very little about mission"
Editor’s note: The following post arises from small group reflections from The Rise of Global Christianity, 1910–2010, taught by Dr. Todd Johnson at Boston University in the Fall of 2010. Led by doctoral students, the small groups discussed lectures given by Christian scholars in various disciplines, including significant changes that have occurred in global Christianity over the past 100 years.
After reading Jonathan Bonk’s essay in the Atlas of Global of Christianity it was a delight to have him speak in class on November 17, 2010. It was a rare opportunity to hear and speak with one of the authors of the book. Without repeating what was written in the Atlas, Bonk exposed us to a variety of contemporary forms of mission that are accomplished with little or no money. His overarching point was to dissociate mission and money. Echoing the tenor of the lecture, one student in our group summarized the lesson: “Money tells us very little about mission.”
The way Bonk presented the material made an impression on the class. He narrated a variety of stories, interspersing them with a few observations or remarks. In this way he did not try to argue the class into seeing mission and money differently, he illustrated it. It was a delightful and subtle approach, and left a strong impression. One student noted appreciatively, “I picked up a lot of good preaching points and illustrations from tonight’s class.”
As our group settled into discussing the details of how money and mission overlap, current concerns surfaced. One student explained that she will move to Israel in two months in order to become a missionary working among Palestinians. She is currently pressed by her mission organization to complete the raising all of her funds. The money, she trusts, will come. However, there are deeper problems. Her church and mission organization both want to send out missionaries who have impressive credentials: university and seminary degrees, certificates of ordination. “How,” she asked, “do those status symbols help me live more closely to those among whom I want to minister?” The symbols of academic and clerical achievement she fears will only intensify her “outsider” status. Yet, ironically, the institutions that desperately want her to become an “insider” insist that she hold them. Mission really does struggle with issues of money, and the status symbols that can be purchased by it.
The theme of Bonk’s lecture, focusing on creative ways groups have engaged in mission, later called forth further examples from the group. In particular, the early Methodist movement was singled out. It did not raise money for expanding the church, someone reflected, but as Methodists moved about they started their own small groups. As those groups grew, they might eventually appeal for a clergyman. “Why,” it was asked, “have we inverted that process?” Why do we send the religious specialist first? It costs so much money to support the religious specialist, but none to support a migrant who has settled into a new community and found a new job. By sending the religious specialist first we have forced ourselves to create structures for sending money from outside a community, and grown a bureaucracy of mission. Nostalgia for a simpler time, or simpler way of doing mission seemed to affect the whole group. Nevertheless, parting remarks revealed an awareness that we cannot simply dismember the history and institutions of the modern missionary movement. We cannot naively return to a simpler time or way of doing mission. We can though learn from alternative models. And that, we concluded, was the gift of the evening. It was an opportunity to stretch our imaginations.
Daryl Ireland, discussion moderator
After reading Jonathan Bonk’s essay in the Atlas of Global of Christianity it was a delight to have him speak in class on November 17, 2010. It was a rare opportunity to hear and speak with one of the authors of the book. Without repeating what was written in the Atlas, Bonk exposed us to a variety of contemporary forms of mission that are accomplished with little or no money. His overarching point was to dissociate mission and money. Echoing the tenor of the lecture, one student in our group summarized the lesson: “Money tells us very little about mission.”
The way Bonk presented the material made an impression on the class. He narrated a variety of stories, interspersing them with a few observations or remarks. In this way he did not try to argue the class into seeing mission and money differently, he illustrated it. It was a delightful and subtle approach, and left a strong impression. One student noted appreciatively, “I picked up a lot of good preaching points and illustrations from tonight’s class.”
As our group settled into discussing the details of how money and mission overlap, current concerns surfaced. One student explained that she will move to Israel in two months in order to become a missionary working among Palestinians. She is currently pressed by her mission organization to complete the raising all of her funds. The money, she trusts, will come. However, there are deeper problems. Her church and mission organization both want to send out missionaries who have impressive credentials: university and seminary degrees, certificates of ordination. “How,” she asked, “do those status symbols help me live more closely to those among whom I want to minister?” The symbols of academic and clerical achievement she fears will only intensify her “outsider” status. Yet, ironically, the institutions that desperately want her to become an “insider” insist that she hold them. Mission really does struggle with issues of money, and the status symbols that can be purchased by it.
The theme of Bonk’s lecture, focusing on creative ways groups have engaged in mission, later called forth further examples from the group. In particular, the early Methodist movement was singled out. It did not raise money for expanding the church, someone reflected, but as Methodists moved about they started their own small groups. As those groups grew, they might eventually appeal for a clergyman. “Why,” it was asked, “have we inverted that process?” Why do we send the religious specialist first? It costs so much money to support the religious specialist, but none to support a migrant who has settled into a new community and found a new job. By sending the religious specialist first we have forced ourselves to create structures for sending money from outside a community, and grown a bureaucracy of mission. Nostalgia for a simpler time, or simpler way of doing mission seemed to affect the whole group. Nevertheless, parting remarks revealed an awareness that we cannot simply dismember the history and institutions of the modern missionary movement. We cannot naively return to a simpler time or way of doing mission. We can though learn from alternative models. And that, we concluded, was the gift of the evening. It was an opportunity to stretch our imaginations.
Daryl Ireland, discussion moderator
Money and foreign missions
Editor’s note: The following post arises from small group reflections from The Rise of Global Christianity, 1910–2010, taught by Dr. Todd Johnson at Boston University in the Fall of 2010. Led by doctoral students, the small groups discussed lectures given by Christian scholars in various disciplines, including significant changes that have occurred in global Christianity over the past 100 years.
Dr. Jonathan Bonk from the Overseas Ministry Study Center in New Haven, Connecticut gave the lecture on Christian/Mission Finance. He reminded us that missions does not require huge financial resources and large institutional structures but rather passion on the part of Christians who feel profoundly that they need to share what they have seen and heard. You don’t need a lot of money to evangelize the world. Bonk’s presentation included examples of this from around the world.
Once again we had a diverse group, men and women as well as Koreans, Indians and Americans, in which to reflect on our speaker’s contribution. As Dr. Bonk had referred to examples of mission in the church of Mizoram, one of our group shared about a visit he had made to that church. He noted the large percentage of the population that is Christian and how prevalent the church is in society, the Presbyterians being the largest Christian tradition in the region. It has invested significant time, energy and financial support in social programs. Government officials are active members and the state supports church activities in many ways.
As two of our number are from Korea, we reflected on the situation there. Dr. Bonk had noted that the number of Korean missionaries is increasing while the number of church members is actually decreasing. We were surprised since this seemed counter-intuitive to us. One of our group shared the perspective of his father who is a pastor in Korea. Since as a pastor he has seen that involvement in missions revitalizes his church, he encourages his congregation’s participation in the sending and financing of foreign mission initiatives. Hence mission is understood to be good for the sending church and is a measure of its vitality. That is certainly one of the principal themes in Robert Wuthnow’s book Boundless Faith that we have been reading for this class. Engagement in foreign mission activities then can, in some cases, be an attempt by Christian leaders to recapture forward momentum and energy in their churches.
Bruce Yoder, discussion moderator
Dr. Jonathan Bonk from the Overseas Ministry Study Center in New Haven, Connecticut gave the lecture on Christian/Mission Finance. He reminded us that missions does not require huge financial resources and large institutional structures but rather passion on the part of Christians who feel profoundly that they need to share what they have seen and heard. You don’t need a lot of money to evangelize the world. Bonk’s presentation included examples of this from around the world.
Once again we had a diverse group, men and women as well as Koreans, Indians and Americans, in which to reflect on our speaker’s contribution. As Dr. Bonk had referred to examples of mission in the church of Mizoram, one of our group shared about a visit he had made to that church. He noted the large percentage of the population that is Christian and how prevalent the church is in society, the Presbyterians being the largest Christian tradition in the region. It has invested significant time, energy and financial support in social programs. Government officials are active members and the state supports church activities in many ways.
As two of our number are from Korea, we reflected on the situation there. Dr. Bonk had noted that the number of Korean missionaries is increasing while the number of church members is actually decreasing. We were surprised since this seemed counter-intuitive to us. One of our group shared the perspective of his father who is a pastor in Korea. Since as a pastor he has seen that involvement in missions revitalizes his church, he encourages his congregation’s participation in the sending and financing of foreign mission initiatives. Hence mission is understood to be good for the sending church and is a measure of its vitality. That is certainly one of the principal themes in Robert Wuthnow’s book Boundless Faith that we have been reading for this class. Engagement in foreign mission activities then can, in some cases, be an attempt by Christian leaders to recapture forward momentum and energy in their churches.
Bruce Yoder, discussion moderator
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)