Missions in the Post-Communist Context
Hampered by the Handicapped Child Mentality
An Anonymous Contribution from Eastern Europe
Ever since the fall of the Soviet Empire in the late 1980s, American Christians have been fascinated by the new mission field in Central and Eastern Europe. These countries have experienced spiritual revival, yet the needs there are noticeable and many. The response of our American brothers and sisters has been to reach out and lend a helping hand in any way possible. Since almost ten years have passed, it is time to evaluate these efforts, presenting some of the assets and liabilities of American approaches to supporting its family in Christ in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union.
Two Models for East-West Ministry Relations
This article will present a very limited scope of issues
involved in foreign support in one church in one country in Eastern
Europe. It is likely a similar case can be made for other countries
which are struggling to find their way in the post-Soviet era.
Generally, missionaries and foreign supporters follow one or the other
of the following models. In the first model, local leadership is not
considered trustworthy. Foreigners bring their own resources, their own
people, and pretty much do their own thing with little or no
cooperation with the local church. This type of colonialism certainly
is unhealthy and proves unfruitful in the long run. In the second
model, a healthy relationship exists between the supporter and the
supported. East-West partners discuss and evaluate plans together in a
spirit of mutual respect and great sensitivity. A well-functioning
accountability system helps make the ministry effective. This model of
partnership has proven to be the most helpful and fruitful option
available in the long run.
And a Third Model
Yet there is more. A third model I have observed is based on
reverence for survivors of Soviet persecution to such a degree that
Western support becomes almost indiscriminate. Americans want to do
everything possible to make our long-buried dreams come true.
Unfortunately, little or no accountability can lead to inefficient use
and even misappropriation of funds. Nevertheless, financial supporters
prefer to stand by rather than interfere in any way. While
noninterference is a noble idea, beautiful ideals do not always match
painful realities. This uncritical approach to support is the subject
of this article.
European people have a rich cultural heritage which can become grounds for national pride, self-sufficiency, and confidence that can easily lead to arrogance. We think we have all the answers; the only problem seems to be the missing financial resources. With the growing materialism of secular culture, the ultimate solution seems to be more resources and bigger churches, in order to impress the world around us. Since that is the "vision" of the "faithful," nobody dares object, though some building projects seem too ambitious and fanciful, hardly compatible with the small number of worshippers and their ineffective ministry. Perhaps the greatest needs in our context are fresh vision from God and hearts prepared to follow His leading.
The Handicapped Child Mentality
Western supporters sometimes succumb to the temptation of
providing formerly persecuted churches with funds the way some parents
tend to indulge a handicapped child. Oftentimes, children who suffer
from a physical defect grow up socially handicapped as well, just
because their parents love them…too much! If one child is suffering or
has suffered more than others, surely that child should get the best
presents and the most expensive toys. And parents are willing to do
whatever it takes to make this child the happiest person in the world.
Often, however, the parents’ efforts just lead to bigger and better
toys, which never completely satisfy the child. In many ways, that is
what seems to have happened to some churches, with foreigners doing
their best to support the local leadership.
Fostering Integrity or Perpetuating Paternalism
The word accountability has already been mentioned in
connection with the partnership model. In drawing the fine line between
accountability that fosters integrity, and control that perpetuates
paternalism, much depends on the context and the level of maturity of
those giving and those receiving. Sometimes a lack of accountability
can lead to becoming socially handicapped. Decades of Soviet rule have
left us with the heritage of doing business the Soviet way. I remember
feeling shocked years ago in a Western school where I had to pay for
every single sheet of paper—why? Office supplies had always been
"free." Likewise, it didn’t hurt to bring something home from your
factory because everything was "shared." Similarly, working on the job
was not essential; the main thing was to be present. Furtively, the
same attitudes have permeated the church unnoticed. For example, the
church often tolerates a lax attitude towards finances: "Oh well, the
main thing is that people get helped." Or, "As long as it is done in
love with good intentions, it does not really matter that a few rules
are bent here and there." Ironically, the secular world around us has
dealt with these "legacies," naming them for what they are. Yet some
churches still stand as bad examples of the "old ways."
"Money Trees"
The church in Eastern Europe still seems to view the Western
world, and especially America, as the "dreamland come true." It seems
to be a place where money grows on trees, where people do not quite
know what to do with their wealth. The daily struggles of average
Americans, much less Americans living in poverty, just do not make
sense to us. It is not surprising, however, for the only homes many of
us usually see as church visitors from overseas are the fancier
ones—with swimming pools in the backyard, computers everywhere, you
name it! It seems so easy for such people to give. Probably, in the
back of our minds there is the consolation: If I can ever get THAT
rich, I will start giving as well. An appalling discovery was recently
made by a fellow countryman. Visiting the not-so-rich people in a
church in another country who had given a million dollars, he realized:
If we could ever get our people who are financially on the same level
to give in the same way, the sky is the limit!
Reading and Misreading Another’s Faith
Closely connected is the delicate issue of praise and
admiration of our American friends. Americans come and admire our faith
and commitment and trust in the Lord. Sometimes, however, this trust is
little more than a refusal to take responsibility. Thus, saying "God
will take care of everything" can cover up inadequate planning and
initiative, rather than reflect deep conviction. At the same time,
Americans downplay their own faith and commitment, which in a free
society may be an even greater challenge to maintain. Unfortunately,
our people tend to take these comments at face value, failing to
recognize the deep spiritual ways of many American Christians. It is
impressive how well many American churches are organized and
administered, and how much time and effort is devoted to seeking God’s
leading. By sharing these skills and experiences, the church in America
could help us, thus providing the fishing rod rather than the fish.
In conclusion, I would like to thank our American brothers and sisters for their unconditional love and commitment to us. I am deeply humbled to realize that sometimes our little "innocent" games and unconscious schemes are seen through, yet the commitment continues. I would only like to encourage our Western supporters, on the one hand, to trust local leadership to make responsible choices, yet, on the other hand, to provide leadership and accountability systems with great sensitivity and respect. In doing so they will be acting as responsible parents so that the once-handicapped children will finally be able to get up and walk on their own.
Written permission is required for reprinting or electronic distribution of any portion of the East-West Church & Ministry Report.
© 1998 Institute for East-West Christian Studies
ISSN 1069-5664