“HOW CAN THE
MISSIONARY’S
FURLOUGH BEST BE SPENT?
by Michael C. Griffeths
Ministers and congregations have a
crucial responsibility for the retraining and encouraging of furlough
missionaries.
THE CURRENT CONVENTION called
“furlough” needs to be closely scrutinized.
Particularly, our curious custom of "deputation" needs to be
objectively reconsidered. Many
missionaries spend their furlough engaged in the rat race known as deputation,
apparently "planned more in terms of the maximum number of meetings
rather than in a considered strategy of arousing involvement and interest."[1] And again, "The missionary is still
in- volved in mental fatigue, high traveling expenses, and, towards the end,
staleness of repetition."[2] Far too often the missionaries repeat the
same two or three messages again and again; their presentations tend to become
stereotyped and stale; and they themselves become tired and weary, from both
travel and "representing their mission."
(These statements might be regarded as
exaggerated, but they are often nearer the truth than we may imagine.)
It is highly questionable whether such
deputation is in the best interests either of the missionary himself, or of the
congregations who have to listen to him.
Apart from the fact that it has become habitual, why does the missionary
have to dash around like this? Partly
because this is what his missionary society apparently expects him to do, and
the congregations are becoming resigned to his doing; but also, let's face it,
with an eye to financial support.
Inconsistently perhaps, the so-called faith missions no less than others
recognize that the interest of congregations must be maintained if investment
in missionary work is to continue. If
the sending church were fully bearing his support, then it would not really be
necessary for him to go on this soul-destroying round of meetings. Certainly
the EMA Survey is not alone in questioning whether deputation as currently
practiced is the proper use of the missionary "to foster and sustain
the churches' participation in world-wide mission at an acceptable and personal
level."[3]
It is not without significance that,
when Paul and Barnabas returned from their first term of service in Cyprus and
Galatia to the congregation "from which they had been commended by the
grace of God for the work that they had accomplished," they not only
gathered the church together and "began to report all things that God
had done with them and how He had opened the door of faith to the Gentiles"
(Acts 14:26-27), but it specifically and perhaps rather pointedly, in view of
our contrary practices, states that they spent "not a little"
time with the disciples (v. 28, marg.)
How wonderful it is when modern furlough missionaries are permitted by
their missions to do just this! Would
that more home churches insisted upon it.
Recently, some missionary friends of
mine, after a rather discouraging term of service with a struggling emerging
congregation in Japan, spent practically the whole of their furlough with a
particular congregation in north London and were provided with housing in the
area. The husband was accepted as a
kind of assistant pastor. The minister
generously shared his pulpit with him and made tactful suggestions for the
improvement of his imperfect homiletics!
The missionary and his wife not only were regularly in the congregation,
but took active part in work among young people and in outreach among young
married couples. This was a tonic for the hitherto discouraged missionaries who
received all the benefits of being involved in the life of a spiritually
thriving and vital fellowship of Christians.
They returned to the field better qualified to give pastoral help and
teaching to Japanese fellow believers.
Contrast, too, the difference between
their relationship with this congregation and that of the weekend visitor on
deputation. Doubtless if the deputationist's presentation is very striking,
some of the message may be remembered still on the following Sunday; but
probably most people will have forgotten most of it long before the
deputationist returns to the field. By
contrast, my two friends are now personally known on first-name terms to most
people in the congregation. Some people
there were led to the Lord through them; others were personally blessed by
their advice and testimony. Others feel
closer to them because they befriended the missionaries. The congregation is aware of some of the
human failings of my friends and therefore want to pray for them and their work
now, because they know that they need praying for! There is far less compulsion to pray for the relatively
impersonal stranger on deputation, who spoke about (they can't quite remember
what) a couple of years back. The congregation now feels personally involved
through my friends with the Lord's work in northern Japan.
Isn't this a much better way of
spending furlough? Isn't this a far greater benefit both to the missionary and
to the congregation? And does it not
give a far greater satisfaction to the minister, to know that he has made a
very real contribution to work overseas through the help that he was able to
give to this particular missionary family?
Not only has he enjoyed fellowship in the work with him and had the assistance
of a colleague, thus encompassing more work than he could ever have done on his
own, but also he has enhanced the ministry of the missionary and sent him back
more encouraged and more effective than when he first went abroad.
I was encouraged to discover that the
sentiments expressed above are, if anything, stated even more strongly in Abroad
from at Home. The question is
posed: "How much of a missionary's furlough should be spent actually
living in the vicinity of his supporting church, enabling him and his family to
participate completely in church life?
One week? Six months? The full
year?”[4] And subsequently, the answer to this
question is given: "Opportunities for deeper missionary-supporter
relationships would exist if missionaries stayed longer with an individual
church — perhaps at one church for the whole of their furlough. This is scriptural, economical for the
societies, practical for the missionaries, illuminating for the church, and
beneficial to all concerned."[5] It is pointed out that in the United
Kingdom's situation, "The missionary who has a church with an overseas
orientated outlook supporting him is one of the fortunate few. Yet even such a
church is highly unlikely to see more than a passing glimpse of their
missionary when he is home on furlough."[6] Another point taken is that whereas 64
percent of furlough ministry was arranged by the missionary society, only 3
percent was arranged by the missionary's own church. While the North American situation is much more healthy than this,
churches vary tremendously in the extent to which they are prepared to involve
the furlough missionary in active ministry with his home congregation. While it is true that he may often be away
because his speaking is appreciated elsewhere, it is sometimes true that he is
away because his home congregation does not appreciate him enough!
Many missionaries, in the interests of
getting to the field earlier in order to adapt better and learn the language
faster, may go abroad with a minimum of church experience. It is far more profitable for them and the
emerging churches with which they are working overseas, for the missionaries to
spend their furlough being better fitted to fulfill a pastoral teaching
ministry, than for them to hawk around the country two or three rather tired
and shabby messages about "our work" or "our mission."
Putting this more positively, an enthusiastic home church and its minister may
be able to make an enormous contribution to missionary work through the experience
in a thriving church life that they can give and the enthusiasm that they can
generate by ensuring the maximum possible involvement of the furlough
missionary in the church's ministry.
I am not implying by this that I think
missionaries should necessarily be totally supported by one congregation,
though Dr. George Peters makes a good case for this:
A local congregation should accept
first and full financial responsibility for the missionaries of its own
church. The churches do so for their
pastors and they should do likewise for their missionaries. A partial or token monthly support can
hardly be justified morally or Scripturally, and it dislocates and disinherits
a rightful member of the church by making him or her a member at large and a
debtor to several churches and at times to numerous individuals. Thus the
church home of the missionary is disrupted.[7]
He does however modify this somewhat
when he says, "Local congregations should accept a larger share of a
few missionaries than a small portion of a larger number of missionaries."
Regarding furlough he suggests,
A local congregation should continue
the missionary on the payroll while on furlough, provide for him a home, help
to re-establish him and his family in the congregation and arrange with the
society to engage him or her in a ministry in relation to the home church,
either on full or part-time basis.[8]
While the missionary may have been brought up or converted through one congregation, he may have become involved in another during professional or Bible training. More than this, he probably has a relationship with his wife's home church as well. Evangelical churches serving university communities probably have more potential missionaries than they could hope to support on their own.
Moreover, I am not suggesting that all
deputation should stop. If this were so, some smaller congregations
might go for very considerable periods without ever hearing news of missionary
work in other parts of the world.
Really vital telling of what the Lord is doing overseas may bring
tremendous blessing and encouragement to devoted Christians in remoter rural
areas. Obviously some deputation work must continue in order to bring
news to other congregations of what the Lord is doing in many other
places. Even if one congregation is
supporting a number of missionaries, they need to have a much wider knowledge
of the Lord's working than acquaintance with that number of missionaries can
ever possibly provide. It would be
unfortunate if we swung from the extreme of too much traveling around to far
too little, so that there was a dearth of missionary information for worldwide
prayer coverage.
Such bringing of information is also
scriptural; thus Paul sent Tychicus:
That you also may know about my
circumstances, how I am doing, Tychicus, the beloved brother and faithful
minister in the Lord, will make everything known to you. And I have sent him to you for this very
purpose, so that you may know about us, and that he may comfort your
hearts (Eph. 6:21-22).
The missionary may in fact fulfill this
responsibility of informing other congregations far better, and they may listen
the more when everybody knows that he is not doing it in order to get their
money!
The emphasis that I am suggesting here is that missionaries, while they ought not to discontinue visiting other churches to a certain extent in order to bring them news, should spend far less time itinerating and far more time in a settled church situation, preferably with the congregation which first selected them and sent them out.
Again Abroad from at Home underlines
this conclusion: "The number of one night 'missionary stands' should be
drastically reduced. These are largely ineffective in achieving the kind of
support Societies need. Programmes can
be filled much more easily by the Society sending a filmstrip or slideset,"
and they urge that "the whole subject of the missionary's use of
furlough and his deputation ministry during it needs urgent attention by all
Societies" and "a careful and immediate review of deputation
programmes is indicated, with a concentrated effort being made to encourage
churches and missionaries to be in close contact for longer periods during
furlough."[9]
The stress, however, that I would like to make is that here is another ministry for pastors and congregations — retreading tired missionaries! A tremendous contribution overseas can be made next year by a missionary who has benefited this year from the pastor's tutoring and the congregation's education, resulting in a greater mutual involvement and enthusiasm. g