Featured Article » Nonfiction

An Analysis of the Effect of Evangelical Missions on the 1632verse

Written by John Davis

 

Technology is usually thought of in terms of understanding of the physical world and the ability to manipulate it. However, ideas and methodology can also be thought of as a form of technology in which society is understood and manipulated. For example, the introduction of Grantville to the Germanies brought American ideas about the equality of people and representative government. American methodology has already shaped the process used in elections and legislation. Clearly this has changed the existing society dramatically in just a few years. In the same way modern evangelical approach to missions is likely to result in profound changes to the religious landscape of Europe. Pentecostalism in particular could over the next generation grow dramatically to perhaps one quarter of the population or more.

 

The growth of Pentecostalism would probably follow a pattern that begins with an initial burst followed by twenty-five years or so of steady growth and consolidation erupting at some point in an explosion of growth that touches one quarter of the continent. The initial burst could be expected to reach wherever there is sufficient freedom of religion for either public or private meetings. Additional bursts of growth are likely to happen as the message enters new areas where the necessary freedom is present. These bursts of growth are likely to last from three to five years from the time it begins in any given area. The bursts of growth will then likely slow to a steady pace for about a generation. During this time of steady growth, congregations will become established with members growing in doctrine and purified lifestyles. The purified lifestyles should produce stable families and an economic lift. Typically many of the members will sense a call to preach and some sort of educational program will be created for their training. The economic lift ordinarily provides financing for the training of new ministers and future outreaches. At some point after about a generation of steady growth a critical mass should be reached and exponential growth might follow which could encompass up to one quarter of the continent.

 

To understand why this scenario is likely it is necessary to understand the difference in how missions were conducted in the seventeenth century and today by Pentecostals. The approach to Christian missions in the Reformation era divided largely along denominational lines. The Catholic church continued to depend upon various religious orders for missionary personnel. This continued a system reaching back to the late Roman period that was, at least in theory, centralized and had a source of funding. Personnel from the various orders could be sent essentially at will by the organization. By contrast the Reformed and Lutheran Churches depended mostly upon the state for impetus and funding. Those sent usually represented the political entity that had sent them. In addition since these churches lacked religious orders there was not a ready source of personnel. This resulted in very limited efforts at missionary work. [1]

 

The modern approach introduced by the appearance of Grantville is the result of a series of changes that are first seen in the 1650's in the New England colonies with Puritan missions to the Native Americans. These changes are echoed and expanded in the early 1700's by the Moravian efforts. The three key changes in thought are that missionaries are God sent rather than by any human entity, that common people are sent, and that missionary needs are the responsibility of everyone in the church.[2] These changes were followed over the next two centuries by consideration of what should constitute the missionary objective. The formal answer to this comes in the mid-nineteenth century from missionary executives Henry Venn of England and Rufus Anderson in America.[3] This approach is usually summarized as the 3-Self approach to missions. It states that the object of the missionary endeavor should be the planting of churches that are self-supporting, self-governing and self-propagating. A self-supporting church is not financially dependent on money coming from another place for its continued existence. A self-governing church is able to manage its own affairs without outside intervention--that is without the need for continuing missionary involvement. A self-propagating church conducts evangelism with sufficient success that it grows locally and is involved in producing additional churches.

 

The next piece of the modern approach to evangelical missions is that churches should be contextualized to the culture where they are located. Roland Allen, a missionary to China at the end of the nineteenth century, is usually given credit for formally publishing this in 1927.[4] The modern understanding of a contextualized approach means first and foremost that the methods of evangelism, organization, and liturgy, should be understandable to a culture. In addition, the new believers in the culture being evangelized must ultimately wrestle with Scripture to organize and apply its truth in a way that speaks to and ultimately transforms their culture.[5] The result is not a rewriting of orthodoxy but a presentation of orthodoxy that is comprehensible to the culture. This is a time consuming process but results in the new believers "owning" their beliefs and practices rather than receiving the possibly ill fitting dictations of the missionary.

 

A final twentieth century addition to the modern approach is the "power encounter." This is essentially an expectation of miracles, healings and exorcisms as demonstration of God's power and the reality of the message being proclaimed. While most often identified with Pentecostals most missionaries of Evangelical persuasion utilize this method at least to some degree. A popular description of both the method and its results in South America has been written by Peter Wagner, a non-Pentecostal.[6] An example he uses is Tommy Hicks seeking an interview with Chile's Perón. A meeting was arranged with the secretary of religion who came in limping with an injured leg. Hicks offered to pray for the leg but the secretary scoffed at both the request and the power of prayer. Hicks prayed anyway and the pain instantly vanished. The result was an audience with Perón and the use of a huge stadium for evangelism.[7]

 

These ideas would be carried through the Ring of Fire by most church members of Evangelical persuasion and any Pentecostals in particular. The majority of Pentecostal and Evangelical churches in America have written into their DNA the Moravian idea that missionaries are God sent rather than by any human entity, that common people are sent, and that missionary needs are the responsibility of everyone in the church. This is readily seen in the very wide participation in these churches of the support of missions by prayer and financing. In addition, many will take part in at least one short term missions trip where they can see the work firsthand and participate at least a little. Every report they receive from missionaries emphasizes some part of the 3-Self plan of church planting. In addition, many of the books and articles in promotional materials from the denominations also emphasize this point.

 

Missionaries home on furlough visit supporting churches and delight in reporting on power encounters in large part because people love to hear about them. As a result the people and leaders are aware of its power to persuade and open doors. Perhaps more important for the 1632verse Pentecostal people who believe that God is sending them are willing to take real risks trusting that God will do miracles. It takes very few successes to strongly impact both those who feel sent and those who are listening. The results often cement both of them to the church forever.

 

Leaders, whether clergy or not, in these churches are generally aware of the contextualization portion of the approach. Though they probably would never say contextualization, they understand that we must do what works there and not just what works here. This is effectively contextualization. Missionaries on furlough also bring up differences in practices in positive terms, which reinforces this understanding. When these churches are transferred to Thuringia, this thinking will go with them.

 

What will happen when people who think like this travel through the Ring of Fire? At first the general switch may overwhelm them. However, they will soon begin looking around them at the continent full of "lost" Catholics and Lutherans and set about the task of reaching them with the Gospel. The way they go about this will be drawn from the example familiar to them using the methods of modern evangelical approach to missions.

 

To estimate the effect of this missionary effort a modern analogy might be seen in the Pentecostal inroads into the formerly solid Catholic area of South America. "In Latin America, Catholicism had been imposed by more or less open force."[8] This parallels many areas of the Germanies during the Thirty Years War. The same could be said for many Lutheran and Calvinist areas. The majority of the population gave no more than nominal allegiance to the church according to many 1632 stories. Similarly in Brazil today "barely a tenth of those registered Catholics are regular churchgoers."[9]

 

Another possible point of comparison is the social disruption occurring in both South America and Europe in the 1630's. Willems attributes much of the growth of Protestantism in Brazil and Chile in the 1940's and 1950's to social disruption leading to moral emptiness (anomie) and the desire for stability, which is satisfied by the cohesion of the new church affiliation.[10] It should be understood that in this context Protestant effectively means Pentecostal. Harvey Cox expands this analysis suggesting that Pentecostalism's insistence on a lifestyle that, "strictly forbids drunkenness, carousing, and infidelity" has raised the status of its followers, "producing something the continent has always lacked, a middle class."[11] This makes affiliation attractive both to those at the bottom of society and acceptable to those at somewhat higher levels. Given the number of people at or near the bottom of the social scale in late medieval Europe this has to help the missions outreach.

 

The initial Pentecostal missionaries in South America met with serious semi-official resistance and frequent general opposition. This resulted in confrontations that ranged from name-calling and a refusal to do business to martyrdom. This is paralleled by the treatment given the Grantville Evangelicals who engaged in evangelism beyond the immediate borders of Grantville as mentioned in various 1632 stories. Indeed the appearance of Grantville has changed what would likely have been the burning at the stake of missionaries to a mild to midlevel opposition. Historically this mild to midlevel level of opposition with occasional bursts of violence has provided the most fruitful times of Pentecostal growth.

 

Since about the 1940's Pentecostal missionaries in South America have used a 3-Self approach and power-encounter with startling results. Remember the 3-Self approach states that the object of missionary endeavor should be the planting of churches that are self-supporting, self-governing and self-propagating. This means the forming of new congregations will be the paramount objective of their missionary endeavors. Outsiders often fail to realize the importance of the self-governing portion of the formula. This translates into personal responsibility for "my church" not the missionary's church. This is in sharp contrast to churches sponsored by the state. With self-government also comes the training of local believers as clergy. The result is characteristically more clergy than churches, which motivates these new clergy to plant new churches multiplying the effort. ...