Field and Agency Transitions
Other common transitions are moving from one field to another and from one agency to another. Transitions from field to field are more common than those from agency to agency. A field is most often an entire country, but it may be any area geographically close, such as a metropolitan area.
Each agency has its own subculture, and these subcultures may be quite diverse. They speak their own “language” which often includes many TLAs, “Three-Letter-Abbreviations.” Of course, there are not always three letters, but many things are referred to by some abbreviation, and these abbreviations have to be learned over a period of time. Some agencies put great emphasis on numbers and statistics, while other agencies put an emphasis on organization and flow charts.
In addition, each field has its own subculture within the agency. This refers not to the subculture of the country, but the subculture developed by the missionaries serving with this agency on this particular field. Missionaries of other agencies in the same country will have different subcultures. Some fields put an emphasis on church planting and converting nationals. Other fields put an emphasis on education and humanitarian relief. Just because two fields (countries) speak the same language does not mean that they are similar. Just because residents of Mexico and Colombia both speak Spanish does not mean that their cultures are the same or even that they are very similar.
When missionaries change fields within an agency, they have to learn only one new subculture, that of the field, because they already know the subculture of the agency. However, when missionaries change agencies, they need to learn two new subcultures. They need to learn the subculture of the new agency as well as the subculture of the new field.
Reasons for Changing
There are far too many reasons to change fields or agencies to list them all here, but following are examples of some of the major categories of issues that may result in a change.
· Family: A child with a learning disability needs educational help not available in the host country.
· Health: A disease, such as Ebola, is found in some cities on a particular field.
· Danger: Insurgents become increasingly brave about attacking people or planting explosives.
· Ethics: Disagreements arise over such things as smuggling or paying extortion.
· Stress: Missionaries have been living under relatively high stress and several national friends have “disappeared.”
· Invitations: Another field or agency has a need which a missionary can fill, and it asks for help.
· Call: A missionary feels God calling him or her to move to a different place where a need has arisen.
· Political: New leaders emerge in the country, and they have a goal of returning to only indigenous religions.
· Agency Issues: The board back in the passport country has decided to require missionaries to each raise their funds rather than hiring them.
· Ministry Discontinued: A TCK school is closed, and teachers leave. Travel by air is no longer needed, and pilots leave.
· Theological Issues: New guidelines are issued relative to how baptism must be done.
Of course, the list could go on and on. However, two issues are rather common when it comes to transitioning to another agency, another field, or even back to the passport country and quitting. Those two issues are conflict with other missionaries in general, and difficult leaders more specifically.
Conflict with Other Missionaries
No one has to convince missionaries that conflict exists in missions. It has been a part of missions since the very beginning in the early chapters of the book of Acts. Not only has there been conflict, but the basic issues are still the same in that there are cultural conflicts which bring disagreement between missionaries and headquarters as well as conflicts between individual missionaries on the field. Why do we have conflict? What should we do about it? What steps can we take to resolve it? What do we do if you feel like we are attacked? What if it cannot be resolved? Let’s consider some of these questions.
Why do we have conflict?
Conflict is normal whenever people who hold different opinions are in a close relationship. Conflict occurs whenever people who care have different opinions on important issues. The more the people care and the more important the issue, the more intense the conflict. Conflicts are simply a fact of life, and they are destructive only if not handled correctly.
Let’s take as an example the conflict that arose in Acts 15. Paul and Barnabas returned from their first term of service to the local church that had commissioned them in Antioch. They held a mission conference and told about all that God had done through them. Everything went well for a long time until men from the culture in which headquarters was located visited the church in Antioch.
These men began teaching that unless the men who had responded to the message preached by Paul and Barnabas were circumcised, they were not saved. The issue was whether or not this “custom taught by Moses” was a cultural issue or a salvation issue. Thus we have a situation in which missionaries who cared deeply (Paul and Barnabas) disagreed with others on an important question (Salvation). This brought the missionaries into “sharp dispute and debate with them” (v.2).
What should we do about conflict?
The conflict needs to be resolved as quickly as possible. In Matthew 5, Jesus noted that if you are offering your gift to God at the altar and suddenly remember that there is an unresolved conflict with another believer, you should leave your gift there, go settle the conflict, then return to offer your gift to God. We are to settle matters quickly, but we should carefully pick the time and place to be reconciled. Sometimes the conflict is still at a high emotional pitch, and it would be best to wait a while before approaching the other person. If other people are around, it is best not to involve them in the dispute. The important thing, though, is to resolve the conflict soon because the feelings aroused by unresolved conflict soon become established and are more difficult to change.
What steps do we take to resolve it?
Jesus gave a three-step procedure to use in resolving conflict in Matthew 18. In American culture as in much of Western culture where we tend to think linearly, it is usually most appropriate to take these three steps in sequence. However, if the conflict is with someone of a different culture, be sure to consult with someone raised in that culture before trying to resolve the conflict. These steps in this order may not be culturally appropriate in that situation, and the conflict may only be worsened if you do all of them in this order. The steps Jesus gave are:
· Approach the person alone. Often the two of you can resolve the conflict by yourselves and your friendship will be stronger than ever before. Of course, you must choose the time, situation, and manner of approach carefully.
· Find a mediator. If a direct approach does not work, or if it is not appropriate in the culture, you should choose a mediator. Again, choose a mediator carefully, one that you believe both parties will see as unbiased and in which both will have confidence.
· Take it to the church. If neither you nor the mediator can bring about resolution, the issue should be brought before the larger body. After the church comes to a decision, both of you are to accept the decision. The church is instructed to treat either party who does not abide by the decision as being outside the church.
Let us return to the conflict in Acts 15. Paul and Barnabas were in “sharp dispute and debate” with the visiting teachers, but were unable to settle the conflict alone. They apparently called in mediators there in Antioch, but they were also unable to settle the conflict. So, Paul, Barnabas, and some other believers were sent to headquarters in Jerusalem to settle the conflict.
How do we go about resolving it?
Assuming that the issue is an important one and that you have carefully chosen the time and situation, here are some guidelines found in Acts 15 that will help you resolve the conflict, whether it is two of you alone or it is a whole body of believers.
· Give both sides a chance to present. Paul and Barnabas presented their position, then the Pharisees presented theirs.
· Give time for adequate discussion. This was a crucial issue (salvation) so there was “much discussion.”
· Be quiet. Note that “the whole assembly became silent” as they listened to the discussion. Too often in such situations there is an undercurrent of whispering in the crowd.
· Listen. “They listened.” There is a big difference between being quiet and really listening. Put yourself in the other’s place and really try to hear and understand what the other side is saying. Too often we “turn them off,” let our minds wander, think about what we are going to say in reply, or just doze off in a long discussion.
· Allow others to finish. “When they finished, James spoke up.” Do not interrupt until others have finished.
· Keep to the issue. The issue here was whether or not circumcision was necessary for salvation. Imagine all the other issues that could have been proposed from the books of the law! Also discuss the issue, not personalities.
· Express feelings appropriately. There is no report of verbal attacks or counterattacks during the discussion.
· Apply scripture. There may be differing interpretations, but certainly at least look at what the Bible has to say. James quoted from Amos 9.
· Propose a solution. James said, “It is my judgement, therefore, that…”
· Settle on essentials. They all agreed on several items and wrote a letter.
· Accept the decision. When the delegation delivered the letter back to the church at Antioch, “The people read it and were glad for its encouraging message.”
· Reaffirm your friendship. “After spending some time there” for fellowship, they were sent off “with the blessing of peace.”
What if we feel like we are being attacked?
Sometimes you are not the one trying to resolve the conflict and the other side approaches you in an inappropriate way. A good example of this is found in Joshua 22. The Israelites had just finished years of fighting for the Promised Land. Every one of God’s good promises had been fulfilled and they were ready for a time of peace and rest.
As the tribes living on the east side of the Jordan River were going home, they built a large altar on the property belonging to the tribes on the west side. This angered the tribes on the west side and they “gathered at Shiloh to go to war with them.” Fortunately, rather than just attacking, they sent a delegation to talk first; unfortunately the delegation was not skilled in conflict resolution. It was an important faith issue, but Phineas and his group assumed things about the thoughts and motives of those who had built the altar and were predicting what would happen—things that should not be done in conflict resolution.
The delegation started with “How could you…..How could you…” Read verses 16-21, noting how many times “you” and “yourself “ are used. Put yourself in the place of those hearing the accusations and see how they must have felt.
Fortunately, someone on the east side of the river knew about defusing a conflict situation. First he tried to defuse the situation by affirming that they were both completely dedicated to serving the same God, and he did it using “we” “us” or “our” messages rather than “you” messages. These first person pronouns appear 20 times in verses 22-29, an average of more than two per verse. Following the guidelines we found in Acts 15 and refusing to read minds, judge motives, or predict what will happen, and by using “I” messages (One on one, or “we” messages in a group setting), one can defuse and resolve conflicts as shown in Joshua 22.
What if the conflict is not resolved?
Sometimes conflicts cannot be resolved, and the options then are either “agree to disagree,” or part company. Just after the good conflict resolution in Acts 15, we find an irreconcilable conflict between Paul and Barnabas. In planning to go back for another term of missionary service, Barnabas wanted to take John Mark with them. Paul did not, and they had “a sharp disagreement.” Apparently Paul was task-oriented and did not want to take a chance on someone quitting, but Barnabas was people-oriented and did not want hurt feelings.
We are not told how they tried to resolve the conflict, but they were not able to do so, and “they parted company.” Of course, God works in all things to accomplish his purposes. He sent Barnabas and Mark to Cyprus, while Paul and Silas went to Syria. Note that later Paul changed his mind about Mark and asked to have him visit (2 Timothy 4:11). God uses our conflicts to advance his work.
Serving under “Difficult” Leaders
Debbie had spent several years preparing for what God had called her to, teaching in a Christian international school where she could reach nationals and help other third culture kids (TCKs) like herself. However, she was disappointed by what actually happened.
Her principal was very difficult. Although she was new at the school and new to the culture, she had been given most of the problem students as well as a poor schedule. At first she thought it was just her, but she soon found out that other staff found the principal difficult as well. The principal freely gave criticisms but seldom gave compliments. Usually, when there was a disagreement with parents, the principal failed to support the teacher, even when it was obvious that the parents were wrong.
By the end of the first month of teaching Debbie was so discouraged that she began seriously considering giving up and going home, or at least not retuning next year. How could it be that such poor leadership was here where God’s work was so vital? What could be done about it?
Who are the difficult leaders?
A poor leader can be anyone who has authority over missionaries. Here are a few examples.
· Principals who supervise teachers and other staff at mission schools.
· Field directors who direct the activities of missionaries over a whole country.
· In the passport country department heads who make decisions that influence the lives of missionaries around the world.
· National church leaders who have authority over the activities of expatriate missionaries.
How did they become leaders?
They became leaders just like the good leaders did—someone thought they would do well. Unfortunately, not all leaders are good at leading. Here are some possible reasons why they became leaders.
· Years of service. People may have been put in leadership positions because they had much experience, rather than because they were good leaders.
· Need. When leadership positions opened up and someone was needed immediately, the best available person may have been given the position.
· Nepotism. A missionary may have been given the leadership position because he or she was related to someone higher up in the agency.
· Peter Principle. Missionaries outstanding in previous positions may have been “promoted” until they reached their level of incompetence, and then they stayed there for the rest of their time of service.
Are there examples in the Bible?
The Bible has two excellent examples of TCKs serving under difficult national leaders in host countries. One such example is Joseph’s service under several Egyptian leaders.
· Sold into slavery. His brothers hated him, were jealous of him, plotted to kill him, dropped him into a cistern, and finally sold him to a passing caravan of merchants. When they reached Egypt, the merchants sold Joseph to Potiphar, captain of the guard (Genesis 37).
· Falsely accused. Although he refused her seductive attempts, Potipher’s wife accused Joseph of attempting to rape her. He was put in prison (Genesis 39).
· Forgotten. While in prison Joseph correctly interpreted the dream of another prisoner. Joseph asked the man to remember him and mention him to Pharaoh. Unfortunately, the man forgot about Joseph (Genesis 40).
Another example of a TCK is Daniel’s service under four different leaders from three different cultures (Daniel 1-6). Carried off to another culture, Daniel’s ability to serve under difficult leaders began to emerge even as a youth during his three years of higher education. Here are some of the challenges Daniel faced.
· Religious issues. While Daniel was in training, the king declared that students had to eat specific foods. Daniel resolved not to eat foods that would defile him (Daniel 1).
· “Impossible” demands and threats if those were not met (Nebuchadnezzar). The king demanded that Daniel and others do something no one could do. Without telling them his dream, he demanded that they describe and interpret it—or they would all be killed (Daniel 2).
· Poor judgment and rash decisions (Darius). Darius the Mede took over the kingdom and retained Daniel, a man he intended to place over the whole kingdom. Lower administrators persuaded Darius to issue a decree that would result in Daniel’s death if he continued to worship his God (Daniel 6).
What can missionaries do?
Niebuhr’s serenity prayer describes two options, “God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.” Joseph and Daniel used both of these options.
The first option is to accept things one cannot change. As a slave and prisoner, Joseph was not able to change anything. He just accepted his situation and served the best he could wherever he was and in whatever situation he found himself. Daniel sometimes chose to do this as well.
· Joseph, when sold into slavery. Potiphar noticed that Joseph, living in his house, was true to his own God and that God blessed him. Joseph evidently chose to serve his master well rather than to wallow in self-pity. He became Potiphar’s trusted attendant and was ultimately in charge of everything Potiphar had (Genesis 39: 1-6).
· Joseph, when accused. Joseph also evidently chose to serve the warden well in prison rather than to wallow in self-pity—he was put in charge of running everything in the prison (Genesis 39:20-23).
· Joseph, when forgotten. Joseph just continued serving in the prison. Finally, two full years later, when Pharaoh had a dream and asked for an interpreter, the man suddenly remembered Joseph. Pharaoh immediately sent for Joseph in the dungeon, asked him to interpret Pharaoh’s dreams, and ultimately put him in charge of the entire country of Egypt. Again Joseph served his master well and coordinated preparations for disaster (Genesis 41).
· Daniel, under Darius. Daniel was thrown into the lions’ den as Darius said, “May your God rescue you.” It is interesting to note that Darius was so distraught he could not sleep while Daniel was with the lions. When God saved Daniel, Darius was so overjoyed that he issued a decree that everyone in his kingdom must reverence God. Daniel continued to prosper the rest of Darius’ reign as well as the reign of Cyrus the Persian (Daniel 6).
Paul, an early missionary who also served in difficult situations, wrote about having the serenity to accept them: “I have learned to be content whatever the circumstances…the secret of being content in any and every situation” (Philippians 4:11-13). He described some of his difficult situations in 2 Corinthians 11:23-28.
The second option in the serenity prayer suggests is to change the things one can. Daniel did this when he could.
· Daniel, facing religious issues. Determined not to violate his convictions, Daniel asked the chief official for a food exemption, but the official refused. Daniel then proposed an experiment to the guard who took direct care of him. When the experiment showed that vegetables and water were better than the rich diet, the guard changed their diet, without telling his superiors. Daniel and his three friends graduated at the top of their class and entered the king’s service (Daniel 1). This approach may be risky because officials may see such actions as insubordination and become very angry.
· Daniel facing an “impossible” situation. Daniel again showed his ability to serve under a difficult leader. Note the three steps he took in Daniel 2). First, he spoke to the commander of the guard “with wisdom and tact” (v. 14). Second, he asked the king, his difficult leader, for time (v. 16). Third, he asked his friends to pray (v. 18). Finally, God answered, and then Daniel praised and thanked him (v. 19-23). Daniel was made ruler over Babylon in charge of all the king’s advisors (v. 48).
Daniel’s procedure here is commendable. Using wisdom and tact, he asked everyone involved for permission, he asked people to pray, and then he thanked God.
One option not mentioned in the serenity prayer is for missionaries just to quit and return to their passport countries. Some do that. This may be necessary in some circumstances when false leaders thwart God’s call to service. Jesus gave strong warnings about false prophets, false Christs, and false teachers. He noted that there will be many such people and that they will deceive many. Some of these people may be in leadership positions. Jim Jones (People’s Temple) had a successful cross-cultural ministry in Indianapolis and was a charismatic leader taking his people to California and Guyana. Unfortunately, his followers all died of suicide/murder in Jonestown Guyana in 1978.
An excellent book about serving under leaders, good or difficult, is Leading from the Second Chair: Serving Your Church, Fulfilling Your Role, and Realizing Your Dreams by Mike Bonem and Roger Patterson published by Jossey Bass, 2005.
Field and agency transitions are common. Moving to a different field within the same agency is usually easier than changing do a different agency because only one new subculture needs to be learned. Changing to a different agency means that one has to learn the subculture of both the new agency and the new field. Furthermore, the old agency and/or the missionaries in it may resent your leaving.