Alliance for Vulnerable Mission
… that there should be some missionaries from the West whose ministries are conducted in the language of the people being reached, without use of outside financial subsidy.
Contact: jim@vulnerablemission.com
Jim is planning to visit colleges and institutions training missionaries and Christian development workers in Europe / USA in late 2010. For details of these visits see: VISITS
To see reports on recent conferences: REPORTS
To participate in a list-serve discussion of vulnerable mission issues by email click here: PEARL
To receive the monthly AVM bulletin, send an email to: jim@vulnerablemission.com
Es gibt auch ein diskussion ueber vulnerable mission auf Deutsch: PERLE
To join the Lausanne global conversation on mission (many issues including vulnerable mission): LAUSANNE GLOBAL CONVERSATION
————————————————
Introduction to AVM (Alliance for Vulnerable Mission)
The AVM (Alliance for Vulnerable Mission) seeks to encourage wider use of mission and development strategies that depend on locally available resources and local languages.
These strategies are “vulnerable” in the sense that they do not have fringe benefits built into them, deliberately or otherwise. They will therefore fail unless or until there is strong local confidence in their spiritual or developmental value. The missionary or development worker will allow them to fail rather than prop them up with outside money.
“Vulnerable mission” may be seen as part of the movement toward contextualization of the Gospel of Jesus, which we regard as the theory of many and the practice of few. We would like to see more people take the risks of contextualization and vulnerability in order to reap the rewards that only come to those who value local resources and invest in local languages.
If local tools seem slow or weak by comparison with foreign money and English (Spanish etc. – European language), then we say with a wise missionary of long ago, “When I am weak, then I am strong.” (2 Cor. 12:10) While vulnerable mission may not be the only biblical approach to mission, it deserves much more attention than it has been getting. Let’s talk.
————————————————
A series of conferences were arranged to be held in the USA and Europe in 2009 to further these aims. The conferences have now been completed. The rationale for the advocating of these policies is given in many papers collected especially at the following two locations:
-contributions by various authors
- articles by Jim Harries, chairman to the Alliance for Vulnerable Mission
Some of the above articles are already published in Journals including: Missiology: an international review, Exchange: Journal of Missiological and Ecumenical Research, Evangelical Review of Theology and Lausanne World Pulse. More articles are sought for publishing on the web and/or presenting at the conferences. In brief, vulnerable mission is a means of over-coming widespread problems in mission (and development activities) in the two-thirds world, such as the creation of unhealthy dependency, neo-colonialism, the prosperity gospel, mission as secularisation, corruption and chronic under-development. These issues are avoided because by confining themselves to the use of local languages and resources missionaries ensure that their activities are appropriately contextualised.
The use of local languages in ministry combined with ‘missionary poverty’ (the two key principles of AVM) enforces humility and operation on a ‘level playing field’ with local people. Once these two conditions have been given as foundation, then ‘Vulnerable Mission’ can be extremely wide in its expression and can certainly include: provision of care for the sick, faith healing, theological and other education, church planting, literacy, water projects and so on.
AVM already has partners in many churches, missions and schools including SIL (Summer Institute of Linguistics), SIM (Serving in Mission), Church of God (Anderson), WEA (World Evangelical Alliance), WCIU (William Carey International University), WMA (World Mission Associates), GMI (Global Mapping International), Bibelseminar Königsfeld, and many more. More partnerships and affiliations are sought. Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox churches, groups and individuals are welcomed. The AVM is led by a small executive board made up of Dr. Stan Nussbaum, (Global Mapping International), Alex Araujo, (Partners International) and Dr. Jim Harries (Chair, Missionary in Western Kenya). This is supported by an Advisory Board that includes: Rev. Hans Schultheiss, (Bibelseminar Königsfeld), Rev. Dr. Steve Skuce, (Cliff College), Glenn Schwartz (World Mission Associates) and others (see below). Readers are encouraged to peruse the above websites.
Those with limited time for reading, please look at these six short articles: Vulnerable Mission
For discussions already engaged in and recorded by Jim Harries with people over vulnerable mission see: Discussions
See the articles below for insights into ‘Vulnerable Mission’ (posted in 2008 – more up to date articles below)
Race, Language and Traps in African Development
Intercultural Dialogue Difficult Questions of Giving – A Response
Frontier Missions and Pragmatics
The Effectiveness of Short Term Missionaries to Africa Language in education, mission and development in Africa: Appeals for local tongues and local contexts
The Immorality of Aid to the Third World Is there a cure for Dependency among Mission-Established Churches?
A new book on mission ‘dependency’ available over the web
My Experience Vulnerability Inherent in Bible Translation
(See listing and click on ‘Poverty and Mission’)
‘Comments’ ………………………………………………………………………..
Board Members
Dr. Jim Harries. Chairman of the board. Missionary in East Africa.
Dr. Stan Nussbaum. Board member. Staff missiologist for Global Mapping International.
Glenn Schwartz. Advisor to the Board. Director of World Mission Associates.
Dr. Jay Gary. Advisory board Member. Peakfutures consulting, and lecturer at Regent University.
Hans Schultheiss. Advisor to the Board. Lecturer in Missions, Bibelseminar Königsfeld, Germany
Rev Dr Stephen Skuce. Advisor to the Board. An Irish Methodist minister and former mission partner in Sri Lanka, currently teaches missiology at Cliff College, Derbyshire, England.
Frank Paul. Advisor to the Board. Married with Ute, 3 children (age 21, 18 and 16, the lastone born in Argentina). Was member of Mennonite Team in northernArgentina, Chaco province, since 1995. The team serves in acompaning andstrengtening the independent indigenous churches and their communities(Bible translation, land rights, bilingual education, teachers training,visits to jails, bible circles, visits to churches).Since 2008 reentry in Germany as a member of the ecumenic "ReichelsheimCommunity" (www.ojc.de).
Wayne Burgess, advisor to the board, is a medical doctor who, as a result of his diverse mission experience, now wants to promote mission in the 'vulnerable way'.
Executive Board Member, director for National Mission Movements for Partners International, consultant for cross-cultural mission partnerships.
Dr. Gord Sawatzky, advisor to the board, serves as an indigenous mission mentor with AIM Int. in the central African context.
A few more places to look:
Momentum Mission magazine – an interesting read for all kinds of mission issues.
Indigenous knowledge research finds that local languages are more effective
Looking at Intercultural Communication
A ‘New Friars’ look at mission and poverty
Thoughts on anticipated outcome of setting up a new theological teaching programme in Africa.
An Article about the Use of English in Africa
The local language – a neglected resource for sustainable development
November 12th, 2008 at 11:01 pm
This is obviously a healthy attempt to rethink missions and the role of Westerners. I read the first two articles and posted my comments after each. The only way I know to get to them is to go Jim Harries’ six articles at:
http://www.momentum-mag.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/vulnerablemission.pdf
and then click the comment link under each. You may find them otherwise.
November 13th, 2008 at 1:53 am
I have read all the articles referred to and tend to agree. In fact, I have been saying similar things in various settings, though in slightly different ways. Most recently I was at the WEA Missions Commission consultation where similar thoughts were expressed in conversation with many people. Rather than creating a separate set of activities that further break us up (no one can attend all the worthy events going on), would you consider participating in existing events where these ideas can be shared with a wide range of people from many countries serious about these issues?
Alex Araujo
November 13th, 2008 at 5:17 am
In response to John Lindner, another way to find the articles is to go to the Momentum Magazine (www.momentum-mag.org) or for the pdf versions go to http://is.gd/6hdp.
Thanks also for Alex’ comments. In short – yes, I would consider participating in events where these ideas can be more widely shared, and I think others in AVM will also. These AVM conferences among other things are a means to ‘get the issue onto the radar’ for folks.
There is also an extent to which a ‘vulnerable missionary’ ought not to be constantly travelling to international conferences. The above all fall within my three-yearly furlough. I guess that is part of the debate!
Jim Harries
April 8th, 2009 at 7:52 am
It would be interesting to read what the Christians in the two-third world are saying about this. A voice from the recipients would be a good voice to listen to. They have a voice, invite them in. Otherwise, its will be a one-sided monologue. Learn to listen to the one who has suffered the experimental brunt of development and mission.
If you fail to listen to the voice from the two-third world, your labor is in vain, the mistakes will be repeated, sadly. Exclusivity in theological reflections is like a weak one legged stool, cannot hold any weight. Think about this.
April 8th, 2009 at 9:38 am
Ubaya, pengine, VM inaamini ni vizuri Wamissionari kutoka nchi za magharibi wajaribu kuhusiana na wa dunia ya 2/3 kwa lugha yao. Na kufanya huduma kupitia mali yao. Sasa vipi?
April 13th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
First, I want to congratulate you for tackling these important questions. Your ideas make a lot of sense to me.
I first heard about Vulnerable Mission from my dad this weekend. We had some interesting discussions on your thoughts and efforts during this Easter time. I feel that you are onto something, and wish all the best for your work!
As someone not familiar with the Swahili language, though, I’d love to have the above comment translated into English… (Finnish would be even better…
) I suppose it was an answer to the question posed by the commentator named Joy? If not, I’d also be interested in hearing what you think about that question as I’m sure it’s something you have had to think about in your mission already.
April 13th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
Hi Jarkko, Thanks for your comment on my comment!
I had to think a great deal about the above comment from Joy. The AVM chooses to carry out ministry using the languages of the people being reached. So then, what to do if someone of such a language engages a vulnerable missionary using a Western language?
Of course, everyone is welcome into this debate. But is there a greater level of privilege for two-thirds world people? If so, then will we be cutting off our own legs, as again important debate will happen in English, and whatever happens in African language will only be that which remains for those who are uneducated and so not able to understand English.
Of course non-Westerners have insights that many Westerners do not have and would benefit from. But can they communicate them sufficiently helpfully in a language rooted in a context other than their own (of which they may have limited knowledge), as to earn them privileged position in missiological debate?
January 16th, 2010 at 1:58 am
The question of which langauge to use is very important and also a great challenge. Throughout history people have found great benefit in having trade languages, languages that for a variety of reasons emerged as familiar enough to different people groups to serve as a bridge. trade languages seem to have been particularly useful in commerce.
Dominant societies often lend their language to the rest of the world as they spread their influence cross-culturally: Greek, Latin, Arabic, Spanish, French, English, Swahili etc.
Of course, a trade language gives advantage to its native speakers. Yet, the alternatives are not usually very practical. If we don’t use a shared language, how else do we communicate important ideas? One model is that of the United Nations, which provides expensive simultaneous tranlations in its sessions, so that each national representative may speak in his/her national language. Yet, I suspect that in the hallways of the UN and behind closed doors, where important decisions are made, things may be different.
English has become in our time the dominant trade language in international contexts. On the one hand, it is a useful tool; on the other it favors native English speakers.
I have developped some suggestions for how it can be used more productively in international gatherings. These suggestions recognize its limitations as well as its advantages as a trade language, and offer practical ways to minimize the problem and increase the benefit.
If you are interested in seeing this documnt, let me know and I will gladly send a copy to you. It doesn’t resolve all the issues, but it can improve effectiveness in international meetings.