I’ve written in the past about the need for churches to raise up the next generation of leaders from within, avoiding the tendency to poach the best and the brightest from other ministries and organizations. If you have some time to kill and want to see a bit of a philosophical approach to the subject, go here.
This is essentially the same topic, but with a slightly different approach. Neither philosophy nor food for thought; instead, we’ll be looking at a purely logical perspective. Well, it will be as purely logical as I am capable of making it.
I’ll lay out some statistics briefly (so as not to bore anyone), then we’ll examine the implications. One caveat: my stats come from the IMB, from Lifeway research, and other sources. There might be a few variations, but we’re looking for patterns and trends, not precise statistical deviations and calculations. If your numbers are better or more recent than mine, then do the same analysis I am doing and you’ll get nearly the same results.
SBC churches at the end of 2012: 45,764
Local Associations in 2012: 1,200
Total IMB Missionaries on 1/1/2013: 4,211
What jumps out and grabs you?
I’ll tell you what I see: it takes 10.8 SBC churches to send and support a single missionary, one adult. One local association can send 3.5 missionaries. I am sure some of you could find more stats, but I’ll stop here.
When I say, “…send and support…” I’m not just talking about finances. Sending and supporting a missionary is so much more than cash. It takes:
Pastors who preach missions.
Church leaders who train potential ministers from among the members.
Deacons who guide people to seek His will.
Opportunities to grow as a servant or teacher.
Friends who celebrate new missionary’s appointment.
Congregations that send cards and letters and care packages to the field.
Mission groups that gather volunteers and send working teams.
Groups that pray for and encourage missionaries.
And money.
I’m not asking for more of anything. No one is accusing any church of being derelict. I think SBC churches do a fabulous job of sending and supporting. If anyone wants to go off on the ”why aren’t our churches doing more?” tangeant in the comment stream, have fun; I’m not interested in your discussion, but in the nicest possible way.
However, I am asking for something else: the next time you want to hire a really great minister to fill a need at your church, don’t call an IMB missionary. At least not right away. Please. Don’t throw your deep pockets at 10.8 churches’ missionary.
Tell you what….name 11 SBC churches other than your own. Now, imagine calling each church and telling them that you’re planning to hire their missionary, the one they’ve supported with or without realizing it. You need a music director, and that church planter in Botswana seems to be perfect for the job. Have a nice day.
Oh, and if your targeted guy is married, you’ll need to call 22 churches.
I know you want the best person for the job. I know some missionary came to your church last year and really knocked people’s socks off. I know the church down the street hired an IMB guy as pastor and their church is booming now. I know he’s got a degree and experience and a great family. Do you know how he got that way? Do you know how he was able to dislodge your footwear? The IMB has this mentoring program, you see. You’ve heard of those things, I would imagine. The IMB also has a program (called ICEL) that offers books and courses and credits for missionaries. Personal development is pursued and wanted and achieved. Missionaries are allowed and encouraged to take seminary classes. Why? So that as leaders resign and retired, we’ll have a core of developing leaders ready to step in and fill the gaps.
You know your pastor will leave someday, right? So start training young (and not-so-young) men now to preach. Ask the congregation’s patience as these proteges stumble through a few bad sermons. Teach folks to prep for teaching and to teach well. Mentor them in church administration. Grab that guy with the guitar and get him involved in music production and Christmas performances. Show him how to deal with choirs and egos and agendas. Ask college students to apprentice as youth directors. Show them how to be wise, how to protect themselves and their kids. Deliberately, intentionally, voluntarily prepare your church for the day that your leaders leave, retire, die.
But don’t sit back and wait for others - IMB, NAMB, etc - to train the next generation for you.
Now maybe – possibly – I’m being a little unreasonable here. We’ve all got to obey His call. If there’s an IMB guy out there waiting for the chance to follow His leading back to the US, then someone has to offer a job. I get that. As well, I know there are IMB folks who return to the US and take on missions-oriented positions. They’re doing the same job in a different location. That’s great, really.
But to some of my colleagues and I, it seems as though a disproportionate number of churches seem to pursue IMB workers immediately and exclusively. Folks come back from Christmas vacation at Grandma’s and submit a resignation letter. “Sorry, man. They made me an offer I could not turn down. Besides, I’ll still be involved in missions.” And so one church hires away the efforts of 10 or 20 others.
I guess what I’m trying to say is to hire the person who can do the job, but realize that you don’t always have to fish in Lake IMB. You can create that person in your churches, someone precisely suited to know your community and members…without leaving a hole in some other part of the kingdom.
‘shepherd’ stealing ?
Questions:
1. Is the IMB having a problem recruiting missionaries or are there currently more missionaries who want to go, but can’t yet because they don’t have the necessary support?
2. Why WOULDN’T you hire a guy/couple that has a proven track record, been mentored, and is demonstrably good at his job? Seems like the “path to success” would become obvious and folks would want to “put in their time” as an IMB missionary before snagging that plum job at First Baptist back in the states.
3. If churches are hiring out of the IMB, aren’t they by definition making their church MORE missionary, not less? Aren’t they hiring someone who has already demonstrated a passion for missions and has a heart for going and not just sending? Won’t that result in MORE people going to the mission field since the church will now have people who are able to say “we” were missionaries instead of “they” are missionaries?
I’m just trying to see the downside of all this. If the IMB is getting stripped of good help and left with the dregs, then I can see where such practices would be a problem. But it seems like a win-win-win situation if done right.
What am I missing here?
I don’t think the “path to success” should equate here. It sounds like people are joining the IMB as an entry-level position to “work their way up the corporate ladder as SBC ministers.” Something doesn’t sit well with that. Is that the way we should look at our calling as Christians?
I always enjoying reading your posts and thank you for keeping missions themes before us regularly. That said, I think you are stretching a bit with this one. I agree we need more missionaries on the field but I do not think the reason so many are coming home is to fill slots here in the States. I think God calls them home and they then have to find a job. Every couple back in the States I know followed this process. No church I know of fishes “Lake IMB” for prospects. If anything the former IMB worker has a harder time finding work because he has been out of the loop for a while. You may be writing this based on a specific situation, but my experience has been the opposite. In fact I am trying to help current IMB guys find pastorates in the States and they are having a very hard time finding churches.
I sensed the Lord leading me back into the pastorate after a time with the IMB and He opened a door for me. I got in line like every other guy candidating for a pastorate. I pray God was involved in the process and believe He opened a door for ministry. The church I am pastoring now has members serving overseas with the IMB and several others who previously served with them who are now stateside in other ministries.
I agree that we need more missionaries. I agree the statistics are alarming. I wish we could send more! I just don’t agree with your conclusion that churches are to blame for offering them jobs here. I think a topic worthy for discussion would be focused on the IMB and why retention rates and morale are so low.
I pray God’s blessing on your ministry,
Bill Pfister
Bill, thanks for your perspective. It is one that I do not have, and as such it is necessary in order to bring a balanced perspective to the subject.
I’m not sure how many folks leave at the prompting of a church calling them. And in the end, we have to assume that everyone who goes to the field answered a call…and so does everyone who leaves.
This is an intriguing post.
I wouldn’t follow the advice 100% of the time, but I don’t think you are advocating that anyway.
From a macro-scale analysis, it makes sense.
If there are only 4200 IMB missionaries and 45,000 churches, it doesn’t take long to deplete the missionary pool, or at least a significant percentage of it, to have an impact on missionary retention.
Retention on the field is already prett tough, I bet. It’s just tough in lots of cases to raise a family in another culture.
But if you add to that a mentality in the churches that sees the IMB pool as a good pond, and you could have difficulties.
But I don’t really know how much this goes on.
My guess is that are a whole lot of factors that may affect missionary retention. How much job offers in U.S. Baptist churches is a guess. I haven’t seen it in my lifetime, but I guess it goes on.
Solution – continue to help make missionary service fulfilling – in human terms.
Jeremy,
Not to be contrary, but it takes two to tango. If that missionary feels called to return home and serve a church, and if that church feels called to invite that missionary, then, uh, I kinda think they should both go with God’s will on this matter. Doing God’s will is not just a good idea. It’s always the right thing to do.
Rick, I’ll try to answer both of your comments here. And no, I don’t think you are being contrary.
First off, you make excellent points. I may not agree with every single one, but they are still quite good.
The easiest one comes first: I tried to allude to the fact that when IMB folks feel the need to return to the US and become pastors, then that’s the way to go. Any church that makes an offer is just providing a place to land after the missionary has begun his leap. You’ve fleshed that out here, and it something worth remembering. Bill commented somewhere up above about his own calling back to the US, and that certainly substantiates the point you are making. Obedience is paramount.
Are there more applicants than there is money? I think so.
Why wouldn’t someone want to hire someone proven? That sort of goes to my point:
1. find someone proven that you know because you raised them up;
2. don’t create a hole in another ministry or organization that they might struggle to fill.
Thanks again for your comments.
Jeremy,
Let me add another point by asking a question: How much does the IMB spend on average to train missionaries? We just sent a family off to join the IMB. They will have two years of training before they actually set foot on their mission field.
Last time I heard, the average cost was between $5,000 and $8,000 to selection, vet, appoint, train, and send a missionary unit. That’s up-front cost before a minute of work is done.
For now, I am pretty sure the average IMB worker stays with the organization about 9 years. That’s an apprentice term (3 yrs), plus a 7 month STAS, plus a full 4-year term (as career), plus a 12-month stateside assignment. In other words, we get a rookie who survives his first term, then returns from stateside for a complete term…then leaves.
Jeremy, I have a sincere question, where did the IMB missionary originate? Was it through your mentoring process or a local church? What if the local church took the same mindset for nations we have been working in for years? Don’t steal our best that we have trained for local ministry raise up your own leaders from the nationals. Does this logic work both ways?
Yes, indeed, is does work both ways.
A number of years ago, I was visiting with a very sharp couple in the Carolinas. Later, as I recalled my converstaion while chatting with a convention head, he stopped me and said, “Yeah, they’re pretty sharp…but don’t take all the best workers out of the U.S. just yet. Someone’s got to stay here and minister.”
He was absolutely correct. I’ve never forgotten that.
One of the larger (yet most subtle) shifts in IMB thinking over the last couple of decades is the focus on training national leaders to do the work. As fast it can be done without being unwise, national partners are being challenged to do more and more of the work themselves. So, to answer your excellent question, yes, the IMB does recognize that there is a great responsibility to raise up national Christians to do local work as well as go out into all the world.
It is a fine, fine line that we all have to tread.
And thanks for the question.
Thank you Jeremy, may God increase the laborers.
Any one going into mission work needs to be (sure) that is what God
wants them to do. This will deep the rooster in the barn yard.
Gosh, this statement is deep.
Comments on this entry are closed.