Early on in my attempts to deepen my ability to converse in the Sindhi language, I learned a new idiom for “dying,” which is similar to the English “to pass on.”  I decided to use it while conversing with an acquaintance and said casually, “When I pass on…”  He started and a look of amused disgust came over his face.  I immediately stopped the conversation and asked, “Did I not use that idiom correctly?”  “No,” he replied, “That idiom is never used when speaking of yourself, only of others.  When you referred to your own death in that way, it implied that you considered yourself an important person.”  In other words, rather than being a casual reference to my death, I had communicated an arrogant and self-important attitude.

Similarly, but with a different effect, consider the following illustration:

[An ESL (English as second language) student] learned an idiom “kick the bucket.” It had nothing to do with “kick” or “bucket.” She learned that it meant somebody is dead. She also learned that idioms have the potential to shorten interpersonal distance. The next day, she was told that her president’s father just passed away. When the president walked into the general office, [she] made a point to approach him saying, “I am so sorry that your father just kicked the bucket!”¹

there are skills that can be learned

Such amusing and embarrassing examples that result from a misunderstanding of the impact and mood of idioms cause much grief for ESL speakers.  But they also provide a challenge for churches in multi-ethnic communities here in Canada who wish to reach across cultural boundaries to talk about spiritual issues with those who have a limited grasp of English. In cross-cultural evangelism, significant discomfort comes from the inability to connect and converse well with people who are from a different background.  Potential embarrassment and a sense of inadequacy to handle the inevitable misunderstandings cause people to shy away from conversation with ESL speakers. In addition, the ESL speaker can quickly become confused and embarrassed due to their unfamiliarity with idiomatic English. As a result, they feel overwhelmed and incapable of responding adequately.  Fortunately, there are skills that can be learned that will overcome these difficulties and allow for comfortable and productive conversations with second language English speakers.

Communication Skills = Effective Ministry

As British Columbia becomes increasingly multi-cultural and multi-lingual, churches will need to develop English communication skills in order to minister effectively to immigrants and others with ESL limitations. A previous article encouraged our churches to learn each other’s cultural “language of respect.”  In this article I would like to describe different, but equally necessary, conversation skills for mother tongue English speakers that will enable them to converse effectively with those who have limited ability in English.  This is accomplished by developing sensitivity to our use of idioms that can cause confusion and embarrassment.  When we provide a safe and comfortable speaking environment, ESL speakers will be more inclined to engage in conversation, rather than withdrawing to protect their dignity.

In an insightful and helpful article, Wen-Shu Lee explains the impact of idioms and also outlines steps that native English speakers can take in order to bridge the gap of understanding for ESL speakers.² The development and use of the skills outlined below will create a comfortable conversational environment for all participants.

The nature of Idioms

Idioms are colorful shortcuts that communicate on an emotive as well as intellectual level.  They determine the mood of the conversation and are exclusive in nature.  That is, they refer to common narratives within a culture and they relate to the values and perspectives that are the given assumptions within the broader community.  For example, the figurative meanings of the following idioms, “bought the farm,” “get your feet wet,” “get your hands dirty,” and “a wild goose chase,”³ cannot be comprehended by an outsider without explanation.

But on an even more complicated level, idioms have a “relational meaning.”⁴ There are certain contexts in which their use is appropriate, and other contexts in which their use is out of place.  The two illustrations at the beginning of the article clearly demonstrate this reality.  Understanding the meaning of the idioms does not equip a person to the subtle nuances that guide their acceptable use.

As a further dynamic of idioms, they function as a key to “interpersonal closeness.”⁵ The use of idioms among friends is an indication and affirmation of the individuals’ identity and connectedness as a group.  Idioms refer to common values and experiences that constantly reaffirm that the participants are legitimate insiders of the group.  A lack of use, misuse, or confusion of idioms marks the speaker as an outsider.

The father of a friend of ours was dying.  She commented sadly, “He is so weak.  He is just bones and skin.”  We knew what she meant, but her error indicated that she was an outsider to our cultural context.

Skills to help ESL speakers feel wanted and comfortable

Lee provides four steps that English speakers can take to establish productive and comfortable conversational relationships with ESL speakers:

Step 1: Establish a New Conversational Decorum⁶

cultural sensitivity and candid discussion

As pointed out in the article on learning another’s language of respect, “Success in navigating intercultural relationships is dependent upon the practice of hearing and speaking the other’s language of respect.”⁷ As one application of this principle, it is important to establish mutually acceptable ways to address the errors that arise in conversation.  This requires cultural sensitivity and candid discussion. Talk openly and in general terms about how and when ESL speakers would like pronunciation and grammar corrected, as well as when to provide correction concerning the use of idioms.  Beware of how you indicate mistakes when they occur. Pointing out errors in some cultures is insulting unless done in the correct manner.  Laughter and light-hearted comments can inadvertently sting.  Watch for, and address, signs of withdrawal from the conversation and sensitivity to correction that may indicate hurt feelings or embarrassment.

Step 2: Differentiate Goal-Oriented Talk from Metatalk⁸

By goal-oriented talk, Lee is referring to ordinary conversation where the interaction is comfortable and unproblematic so that the participants only need to focus on the topic.  Metatalk, on the other hand, occurs when the participants step back from the topic and discuss the way the conversation is being conducted.  This occurs on two levels linguistic metatalk and relational metatalk.  Linguistic metatalk focuses on the meaning of a word or idiom, while relational metatalk addresses the appropriate context in which the word or idiom can be used.

In the “kicking the bucket” illustration, goal-oriented talk would occur if the president responded to the content of the student’s comment, either by ignoring the inappropriate idiom and thanking her, or with indignation to the implied callousness.  Linguistic metatalk would occur if they discussed the different idioms that could be used to describe someone dying.  Relational metatalk addresses the scenarios in which such idioms can be appropriately used.

Step 3: The Principle of Double/ Multiple Description⁹

This step requires English speakers to be aware of the idioms they are using and the references they are making that may be obscure to an ESL speaker.  They then provide additional descriptions that orient the hearer to the meaning of their statement.  This added effort is a concession to the reality that ESL speakers do not have sufficient familiarity with the Canadian context that would allow them to comprehend the singular meaning intended.  The ESL speaker generally requires additional cues in order to direct them to focus on the meaning intended.

For example, if at night I say to my wife, Karen, “toothbrush?” the familiarity of the context and our common experience causes her to respond, “yes, please,” with the expectation that I will bring her toothbrush to her.  If, on the other hand, I was to turn to her on one of our walks during the day and say, “toothbrush?” she would look at me blankly because the contextual cues do not provide enough information for that cryptic statement to have meaning.  Similarly ESL speakers struggle to identify the contextual cues and make the connection between the comments made and the Canadian context.  In order for a conversation to continue with a sense of control and comfort, it in incumbent upon the English speaker to provide that connection for the ESL speaker by using double or multiple descriptions.

In the “kicking the bucket” example above, the person who introduced the student to the phrase would have done well to clarify the focus of the comment, how it relates emotionally, the context it is used in, and what it says about our relationship to the hearer.  For example, “This phrase is used when there is no emotional attachment to the person who died and never used with those who know the person.  It is used when the death of the person is spoken of in a disrespectful or light-hearted, rather than serious, manner.”

Step 4: Find Relevance in ESL Speakers’ Cultural Context¹⁰

The final step helps ESL speakers relate the idiom to their own context.  By exploring various scenarios of death in their culture and the significance of the relationship with those who died, parallel situations may be discovered that will give the ESL speaker a “feel” for when the idiom can be used appropriately.  For example, a reference to the death of a respected grandfather will require a different attitude and perspective than the death of an ornery mule on the farm.  The former requires a more formal “passed away,” whereas “kicked the bucket” is appropriate for the latter.

These four steps can also be used as a method of contextualizing the gospel cross-culturally.  In the next article we will consider an example of how to help someone from another culture understand how Jesus as redeemer relates to their life by using these four steps.

Mark spends part of his time assisting churches in developing significant cross-cultural relationships.  If you are interested, please contact him via the Contact Me form.  If you would like to leave a comment, please use the “comment” link at the bottom of this article.

____________________




• 1 Lee, Wen-Shu 2000. That’s Greek to Me: Between a Rock and a Hard Place in Intercultural Encounters in Intercultural Communication: A Reader. 9^th Ed. Samovar, Larry A. and Porter, Richard E. Eds. Belmont: Wadworth Pub, 220.
• 2 ibid., 217-224.
• 3 ibid., 217
• 4 ibid., 218.
• 5 ibid.
• 6 ibid.
• 7 Naylor, M. Resolving Intercultural Tensions 3: Speaking Another’s Language of Respect. http://impact.nbseminary.com/archives/115
• 8 Lee, That’s Greek to Me, 218.
• 9 ibid., 220.
• 10 ibid., 221.

A fuzzy understanding of Missions

I have a saying on my screensaver by Joseph Jourbert: “Words, like eyeglasses, blur everything that they do not make clear.”  This is true for Bible translation – which is the reason the quote appeals to me – but it is also true for the word “missions.” For some, the word is loaded with passion and purpose.  Missions, in the plural, refers to God’s mission to bring redemption to the world and a heart for missions is the positive response to Jesus’ invitation to participate in what God is doing (Mt 28:19-20).  Unfortunately, for many in our churches, missions is a word somewhat “fuzzy” in meaning.

Throughout the first two eras of the modern missionary movement, beginning with William Carey in the 18th century and ending sometime in the latter half of the last century, the definition of missions was clear: missions was the job of missionaries who traveled overseas with a lifetime commitment to bring the gospel message to those who had never heard.  The role of missions committees in the churches was to support the missionaries in their task, and the distinction between missions and other ministries in the church was clear.  However, times have changed.  Short term mission teams abound, the world and its variety of religions has come to our doorstep, and the west has been recognized as a legitimate “mission field.”  In the midst of such change and diversity, churches have become somewhat unclear in distinguishing missions from the other ministries in the church.  Indeed, at times, the distinction has been deliberately downplayed in order to encourage every believer to be a “missionary” wherever they are.

Is missions one aspect of what the church does, or is it inclusive of all church activities?  Does any and all interaction with those who are not believers constitute missions, or only particular ministries?  Should donations to the denomination headquarters, church planting efforts in our own province, local evangelism efforts or training for teens to reach their peers all be considered legitimate items on the missions budget? Or is there something distinct about the nature and purpose of missions that determines which ministries can be considered missions?  For example, consider the following.  Which do you think should be classified as missions?

• Youth summer ministry in downtown Vancouver
• Teaching a class at a seminary in Korea
• Rescuing girls from prostitution in Bangkok
• Gospel outreach to local First Nations
• The Alpha program
• Billy Graham crusade in Vancouver.
• Youth for Christ camp ministry in Venezuela
• Leadership training at Northwest Baptist Seminary
• Leadership training at a seminary in Singapore
• Awana
• Young Life youth ministries
• Feeding the homeless in the Lower Mainland
• Church planting in interior BC
• A Punjabi church plant in Lower Mainland
• Church planting in Australia
• Church planting in Japan
• Community Fun Day at your local church

If everything is missions, then nothing is missions

Stephen Neill warned, “If everything is missions, then nothing is missions.”¹ If we are unclear concerning the task of missions to which God has called us, it is very easy to lose sight of the primary purpose of missions.  Without insight into the reason for missions, it is impossible to strategize and prioritize effectively.  We can become busy with many things, but miss out on what is essentially missions. So what are the appropriate criteria by which we can determine what is legitimately “missions”?

Missions is initiated by those who are “sent”

In his book, Loving the Church, Blessing the Nations, George Miley provides an important biblical distinctive that qualifies missions and distinguishes it from other ministries in the church.  Through an examination of 1 Co. 12:28 he relates missions to the role of apostolic leaders who are to “blaze the trail, to pioneer, to initiate kingdom breakthroughs into new areas, and to lay foundations on which others can build. When it comes to extending the reign of God on earth, they … go first.”² God has appointed apostles to the church for the purpose of advancing his kingdom.  They are the “sent ones” who to open the way for the gospel.

This is illustrated in Acts 13:2-4, recounting an incident that occurred in the church at Antioch.

While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.” So after they had fasted and prayed, they placed their hands on them and sent them off. The two of them, sent on their way by the Holy Spirit, went down to Seleucia and sailed from there to Cyprus.

set apart for a distinct task that is fulfilled beyond the boundaries of the church

The distinction between other ministries of the church and missions is clear in this passage.  The church at Antioch had a responsibility to be Christ’s witness in their local context, but they are also given the opportunity to affirm with the Holy Spirit that some are set apart for a distinct task that is fulfilled beyond the boundaries of the church.  That is, Paul and Barnabas are sent out to initiate the kingdom in a context where the church has no influence.  The church does not directly benefit or grow numerically through this process.  On the contrary, they sacrifice their “best and brightest” in order to see God’s work become established and grow among a group separate from themselves.

initiate the kingdom where it would not otherwise occur

This understanding of missions does not necessarily require geographical distance, but it does require the appointing of individuals to the task of “stepping beyond” the boundaries of the local church’s influence in order to initiate the kingdom where it would not otherwise occur.  Based on this understanding of missions, I believe that is it helpful for churches to make a distinction between their task of local outreach and evangelism, and their role in missions.  Consider the following statements:

outreach is making an impact where you live
missions is making an impact by intentionally
stepping beyond where you live.

“Evangelism is church growing where it is,
missions is church going where it isn’t”³

Outreach is what the church does
by existing within its context
Missions is what the church does
by initiating beyond its context

This is just one of a number of parameters that are helpful for members of missions committees to keep in mind as they fulfill their responsibilities to lead their church in missions.  In the following article other biblical images and concepts that clarify missions will be explored.

Mark spends part of his time coaching churches for effective involvement in missions.  If you are interested in taking advantage of this, please contact him via the Contact Me form.  If you would like to leave a comment, please use the “comment” link at the bottom of this article.

____________________
• 1 Quoted in Bosch, D.J. 1991. Transforming Mission: Paradigm shifts in theology of mission. Maryknoll: Orbis, 115.
• 2 Miley, George. 2003. Loving the Church, Blessing the Nations: Pursuing the Role of Local Churches in Global Mission. Waynesboro: Gabriel, 94.
• 3 Quoted in Mays, David. Missions Stuff.

From the outset of this article, I want to be clear that I believe in and promote evangelism.  One of my ministries offered to our FEB churches through Northwest and FEBInternational is that of coaching for evangelism following the grassroots method of encouraging Significant Conversations.  Furthermore, it is not my intention in any way to discourage those who want to reach their community for Christ and are experimenting in creative ways to do so.  Obedience to and passion for the Great Commission (Mt 28:18-20) is to be commended and encouraged when it is found in our churches.

At the same time, it is also important to interact with each other to stimulate strategic and critical thinking about the way we approach our communities and the message we are communicating.  During our time in Pakistan – a country with little response to the gospel message – we learned to appreciate the challenges and critique of others with respect to our methodologies.  It is wise to seek and welcome questions and perspectives that cause us to evaluate our approach, so that our efforts can be as effective as possible.  It is in this spirit that the following thoughts are offered.

Challenges concerning Priorities in Evangelism

I received a CD from an influential evangelical association recently. On the cover was a picture of bouncy castles and people eating hotdogs.  The intent was to promote the idea of churches doing “acts of kindness” and planning church-sponsored events in the community.  The promoters of the CD believe that through such community events the relevance of the church can be demonstrated and fruitful relationships with the unchurched established.   Following this methodology, 3 churches in the area in which I live each held separate community fun days during the summer.

I want to challenge the community fun day approach and explain why these church organized events, to a large extent, distract from, rather than encourage evangelism.  The issue is not one of right and wrong, but a matter of considering our priorities in light of what we have to offer as followers of Christ.

priorities and strategy in evangelism

In the early days of our church planting ministry in Pakistan, I spent considerable time explaining the gospel message to young men who came to visit me.  Later on, I realized that my priority was misplaced as relationships with the “power brokers” in the family hierarchy were not being developed; it was the relationships the leaders of the families that would have guaranteed a reproducible and lasting impact in that context.  Similarly, it is possible for Canadian churches to have misplaced priorities and engage in outreach activities that distract from more strategic and impacting evangelistic methodologies.

Consider the following:

1. Most of our communities offer many opportunities for entertainment and activity.  Anyone with children knows that one of the primary tasks of a parent is as taxi driver, taking children from one activity to the next.  In this context, organizing a community fun day means that the church has put itself in a position of competition with all of the other activities and programs available to the community.  Rather than filling a vacuum by providing much needed entertainment – a possibility in some rural or impoverished communities – most churches add one more opportunity to an excess of amusement options.

I would challenge churches to take a different approach: infiltrate community programs that already exist and support events organized by other groups.  Volunteering demonstrates the desire of the church to serve and to see others succeed.  It builds bridges of appreciation with the organizers of those groups, which can lead to the establishment of relationships and open the door to significant conversations.

2. For the most part, church-based community fun days do not meet the real needs of the community by bringing positive change in another person’s life.

My challenge to churches is to identify a truly needy segment of the population, discover who is already meeting the needs of that group and then partner with them to make a difference.  This allows for good stewardship of church resources while encouraging synergy with others in the community.  Strong relationships are built when people work together for a common purpose.  In addition, significant ministry to those in need benefits both the giver and receiver (recognizing that significance must be measured according to the recipient of the service, not the ones serving).

3. A community fun day is not evangelism.  Although the point of the program is to connect with the community, the forum is not conducive for people to engage each other about significant spiritual issues.  Instead, energy is put into running a smooth program and ensuring that people feel satisfied and happy, like a Sunday School picnic to which the community is invited.

I encourage churches to recognize that their primary evangelistic outreach is already occurring through the congregation. Consider those activities, opportunities and relationships that people experience on a daily basis throughout the week as the best forum through which Jesus can be introduced. Significant conversations already occur in our lives.  Set the primary evangelism program of the church to be the support and development of those existing relationships.

4.  Community fun days misrepresent the church’s purpose if they are an attempt to promote or reinvent the church in the eyes of the community. Church is about the gospel of Jesus Christ and the difference he makes as we live in obedience to him.  The message of a fun day, on the other hand, is that church provides the community with a good time, and thus obscures the primary agenda.  A message that we are a community-oriented social organization whose presence is inoffensive and consistent with the goals of society, is a misrepresentation.  We are seeking to be counter-cultural: change agents with a mission to turn people’s perspective towards God.

The challenge churches need to keep in the forefront is to discover those people who have a spiritual hunger and engage them in conversation.  A community fun day environment promotes fleeting, surface level interaction between strangers.  However, the majority of any congregation has daily contact with friends, co-workers and relatives whose spiritual interest is known to them.  Leaders who spend their energies on supporting and guiding believers to make the most of their naturally occurring conversations will find themselves pulling with the congregation, rather than being frustrated by a lack of enthusiastic participation in outreach programs.

5. Busy lives can leave little time for relationships and relationships take time. Programs that involve people in activities with strangers leave less time and energy to develop those relationships that are already significant in their lives.

It is important that people have the time and encouragement to develop their current relationships and to fulfill what they perceive as significant service to others.  A man connected with our church died a short while ago and over 600 people attended his funeral.  Each of those 600 people who took time out of their schedules in order to say good-bye represents a significant relationship. While he was alive, these were the people that he could talk to at a level deeper than the surface pleasantries common to the interaction of strangers. Instead of encouraging people to participate in programs through which they interact with strangers or develop new relationships, it is usually more productive to begin with the relationships that already mean something, those relationships in which conversations on a deeper spiritual level can more naturally occur.

6. Community fun days are an advertisement, like the sign in front of a church.  Advertising seeks to connect with a desire of the consumer.  Through the exposure to fun, family-oriented activities, the church communicates its value and benefit to the participant. It is possible that, seeing the fun programs, some will decide to pursue a connection with the church.

However, I believe that it is more important to allow the relevance and significance of the gospel to be the attraction.  People are looking for meaning and purpose in order to make sense of their lives.  They are not likely to discover this in a bouncy castle setting, nor even in a church service, which is often the next invitation they receive.  Rather, it occurs in those informal, natural settings in which people engage in conversation and speak freely about their questions, concerns and beliefs.

7. Community fun days are one example of programs that encourage people to get involved with a goal of encouraging church unity.  It is true that when people work together they can develop strong  relationships, as noted above, and this is a good thing.  But when the program does not reflect the essence of our faith, the connections fail to fulfill the spiritual unity prayed for by Christ (John 17).

I would challenge churches to consider the content of what unites us as believers. Church unity and fellowship are experienced around expressions of the Christian message.  For example, because a key desire of believers is to live as intentional Christians within their current relationships, leaders have the opportunity to develop and encourage networks of prayer and support for believers to aid in the process of discovering how to live out their faith.  Participation in each other’s lives that leads us closer to Christ is the fellowship for which Jesus prayed.

8. Church programs, such as community fun days, are “safe.” We maintain full control and can run them according to our beliefs and values.  We can have the last word and ensure that it fits our perspective.

Nonetheless, I encourage churches to participate in community run programs where they have little power, limited opportunity to set the agenda and cannot overtly preach the gospel.  We need to discover how to influence those we interact with through relationships, rather than through controlling the agenda.  We need to engage in dialogue, rather than insist upon our message having pre-eminence.  As E. Stanley Jones noted, when there is round table dialogue with all religions having equal opportunity to present their beliefs, it is Jesus who shines.  We do not need to fear an even playing field, or even one in which we are discriminated against.   For it is through relationships, significant conversations and love that people will come to Christ.

An Alternative: Recognize the Untapped Outreach Potential of Your Church

lead from behind = empower

When we lead from behind, the definition of leadership becomes “empower.”  Rather than creating programs for people to become involved in, I suggest that the current involvement people have in the lives of others be considered their primary ministry. Because people already engage others in significant conversations at a grassroots level, pastoral leadership can put their efforts towards empowering them to fulfill their God-given vision of Christian life and ministry.

As followers of Christ, believers have a desire to live relevantly and to impact their culture, and so they struggle to discover how Jesus makes a difference in their daily relationships.  They want to understand and express how their faith makes sense within this pluralist context, and they look to pastoral leadership to help them understand how God speaks into their situation.

Without intending to criticize the sermons or teaching found in church services, I nonetheless suggest that there is a gap between the instruction people receive in church and the life that they live, a gap that needs to be addressed from the perspective of the daily challenges they face.    That is, the questions need to be first understood within their environment before the relevance of biblical teaching can be identified.  The priority is to first listen to and understand the conversations that are taking place and then discover how the God’s word provides relevant teaching.  This requires personal, one-on-one interaction.  One metaphor I find particularly relevant is that of filling bottles with water.  Throwing a bucket of water over a number of bottles will result in some water getting into the bottles.  However, the more effective approach is to spend time pouring water into each bottle – slower, but far more effective and lasting.

Therefore, instead of encouraging people to be busy in church programs, consider the following:

1. Identify those people in the congregation who are already speaking to others about spiritual things.  There are probably more people than you realize who engage others in significant conversations. By being attentive to what is already happening, you are validating people’s passion to live significant lives in relationship with others.
2. Meet with them on an individual basis to hear their stories, to encourage them and to pray with them.
3. Coordinate networks of support and prayer for them with others in the congregation.
4. Affirm and celebrate publicly their investment in other’s lives as the primary ministry of those church members.

Mark spends part of his time coaching churches in Significant Conversations.  If you are interested in this method of evangelism, please contact him via the Contact Me form.  If you would like to leave a comment, please use the “comment” link at the bottom of this article.

Also see:

Significant Conversations

Onion Model of Culture

Why I Don’t do Evangelism