Are you a missionary? Or thinking about it Libby?

The short form is that I was finally told to be quiet and end “negativity and criticisms,” at times directly, and at times in subtle, back-handed ways, as I’ve already mentioned, such as, “trusting in God who is sovereign (therefore, just trust your director and leaders in full submission).” A few people know how I tried my best for improvement. But without a place to speak, I didn’t have a place at all. My conscience was too bothered by what has happened and what is still going on and, in the face of losing my voice regarding these wrongs and the refusal of leadership to honestly and openly address them, not only in my chapter but from those I spoke with at the Chicago HQ as well, I felt that the only right thing to do, for the sake of my family and others, was to leave. From that time I could not in good conscience support what UBF is doing and has done. Maybe I can write a longer form version soon.

http://www.inc.com/steve-cadigan/culture-is-the-word-for-2014.html

Can you share with us how that transpired?

Once, at a USA/Canada staff conference, the director of Korea UBF at the time, Samuel H. Lee, gave a presentation on the Nevius method, highlighting the importance and quick time frame of turning over leadership to natives. Without delay, as soon as the presentation was over, a USA senior staff member rushed to the podium and said, “Please don’t misunderstand his presentation. I feel like my job is threatened.” I was horrified and hugely disappointed. His insecurities seemed to me to be prevalent among directors and leaders.

You asked, “How can we work towards missionaries, should we even do so? How much should a native person change and bear with a missionary? – See more at: http://www.ubfriends.org/2015/01/13/missionary-empathy-5-things-i-learned-in-the-philippines/#sthash.JSO1Hmdc.dpuf

I’ve traveled and visited with UBF chapters in many parts of the world and have seen how many people were suffering from living in a different culture. Adjusting can be especially difficult and defeating since many missionaries carry a “bury my bones in the mission field” mindset. They’re trapped in a difficult place. At first, I too was sympathetic. I thought that they were braving on in their mission. But I noticed other patterns throughout the years, which you touched upon, such as resisting change, assuming their way is the *right* way, and passing the blame onto every other thing except their own failure to adapt (blaming students, blaming culture, blaming the campus environment, blaming iPhones, blaming internet, blaming dating, etc.). It gets worse the higher the position a missionary had, peaking with directors and senior ______.

Anyway, to answer your questions, of course there ought to be mutual respect and acceptance from both sides, in a humble, loving and Christ-like way. But I don’t think it’s right or fair anymore to ask natives to adjust for the missionaries. It becomes a slippery slope so that the servants become the ones being served. (I’m speaking very generally here.) Missionaries approach the natives. They say something to effect that God sent them in this land and so on. Natives aren’t asking the missionaries to come to their lands or to approach them or to change them. Missionaries ought to be true to what they are telling natives God has sent them to do. Missionaries ought to find out how to change themselves for those they are serving. I believe it is the very model found in Christ who is “the Word [who] became flesh.” It was also Paul’s MO, as he described in 1 Corinthians 9:20-21. But in UBF, the model is completely flipped around. Those who are recruited are demanded to be like those who recruited them, and the recruiters have no concern about themselves being changed in order to reach their audience. So we get the standard “Shepherd X” identity, the “UBF man/woman” which Brian has written about in his own case, which is prevalent and obvious.

http://www.ubfriends.org/2010/12/14/evangelism-and-the-gift-of-missionary-part-1/

http://www.ubfriends.org/2010/12/17/evangelism-and-the-gift-of-missionary-part-2/

For me, the take-away messages were:

(1) Being a cross-cultural missionary is a highly specialized calling. It is very hard for Christians to separate the essential message of the gospel from the specific ways that they experienced the gospel in their own culture. Only a small minority of Christians have the necessary gifts, background and discernment to do it properly. None of the original 12 apostles could do it. Even Jesus did not attempt to do it during his public ministry.

(2) Even if missionaries are gifted at cross-cultural evangelism, they ought to do what Paul did: turn leadership of their ministries over to natives as soon as possible and get out of the way. If they hang around and try to run the show, they will prevent their own ministries from growing.

My kickback to your post is that missionaries are supposed to adapt to the foreign culture, like Hudson Taylor did, which all missionaries think they are emulating. Missionaries are not supposed to make the indigenous people adapt to their culture, which has been the “failure” of missionaries, including British missionaries who tried to evangelize India, Africa, Asia based on British values and culture (which Hudson Taylor did not do). In my opinion I do not think that some ubf missionaries are able to acknowledge this or see this.