CHAPTER 125

Restoring the Role of Business in Mission

Steve Rundle

Steve Rundle is associate professor of economics and business as mission at Biola University in La Mirada, California. His teaching and research interests are focused on the intersection between international economics and faith-based business. He is also the editor of economic Justice in a Flat World: Christian perspectives on Globalization.

Adapted from Great Commission Companies by Steve Rundle and Tom Steffen. Copyright © 2003 and 2011. Used with permission of InterVarsity Press, ivpress.com. Also taken from Business as Mission by Tom Steffen and Mike Barnett. William Carey Publishing, 2006.

In employee is assaulted by a gang of thugs. Because of this, Jeff, the company founder and CEO, uses the opportunity to help his employee, a new believer, understand what it means to “love your enemies.” Later they pray together for God to bless the young men who attacked him. Another entrepreneur named Patrick helps a Muslim employee understand the unbelievable and unnatural concept of grace. On another occasion, he explains why the company gives away a third of its profits—through an employee-managed fund—to local charities. A Korean business owner, Jung-Hyuk, believed God wanted him to move his company from South Korea to China. Five years later a quarter of his 2,000 employees are following Christ. Many take advantage of the company-sponsored classes in computers, English, Korean, nutrition, music and dance. Some are even receiving corporate scholarships for formal pastoral training.

These are just a few examples of how business professionals are advancing the cause of Christ in less-reached parts of the world. Put differently, they are examples of how globalization is bringing business and mission together.

Mission—Every Believer’s Calling

When most people think about globalization, they think about the diminishing political, social and economic barriers that once kept countries and cultures largely separate. But there is another barrier falling—a conceptual one—that is having a profound effect on how the Church understands and fulfills its purpose. This barrier is the unwritten “spiritual-vocational hierarchy” that has governed the way many people think about their role in Christian ministry. This hierarchy treats some vocations as more God-pleasing and honorable than others. For example, pastors are perceived as doing work that is more significant in God’s eyes than engineers. Nursing is more honorable a career than sales. And so the prioritizing goes. The implication of this deeply-entrenched view is that those who are the most sincere about their commitment to Christ will get special vocational training, switch careers and go into “full-time ministry.”

The problem with this view is that there is no biblical support for it. As theologian R. Paul Stevens points out in his book, The Other Six Days: Vocation, Work, and Ministry in Biblical Perspective, “Mission is the intended occupation and preoccupation of the whole people of God, not merely a few chosen representative or designated missionaries.”1 Our individual callings and gifts may differ, but mission is nevertheless the central purpose of the entire body of Christ. The perceived distinction between “good” and “better” vocations has served only to undermine the effectiveness of the Church because many Christians simply resign themselves to second-class status, or worse, become completely detached from any involvement in ministry. Ed Silvoso uses the analogy of a World Cup soccer match to describe this detachment:

A handful of players, all in desperate need of rest, run all over the field while hundreds of thousands of spectators . . . watch from comfortable seats. The players are the ministers who exert most of the energy, and the spectators represent the laypeople whose participation is limited to a secondary role, mainly making the whole enterprise financially feasible.2

Christian men and women in business want to do more than watch the game of missions. They want to do more than dole out money to make the game financially viable; they want to be on the playing field. They have served on church committees, they have reflected Christ in their workplaces, they have participated in short-term missions trips, but the unmistakable message they continue to receive is that anything more requires a career change. This is a tough pill to swallow for people who are creative and resourceful by nature, and who quite frankly enjoy the challenge of business. Thankfully, it is a pill they no longer have to swallow because today it is not only possible, but necessary for Christian business professionals—and their companies—to become more actively involved in missions. This change is occurring at a time when large parts of the world are not only suffering and unreached, but are increasingly off-limits to people known to be missionaries. Businesses, on the other hand, are welcomed virtually everywhere. Properly motivated and equipped, business professionals can have not only economic impact, but social, cultural and spiritual impact as well. Many business professionals have come to understand that God has called them into business for a purpose, and that their interactions with employees, customers and suppliers are not distractions from ministry, but rather, God-designed, Spirit-given opportunities to build relationships and have a meaningful influence in people’s lives. They recognize that they serve a God who cares deeply about every dimension of people’s lives, not just their spiritual condition, and that the business has a vital role to play in His holistic, redemptive plan.

A New, Not-So-New Idea

Using business as a vehicle for missions and ministry is not new. The apostle Paul, for example, was a full-time leather worker during much of his missionary career. A study of his letters reveals that he saw his day job as an indispensable part of his church planting strategy, and was as important to his witness as his preaching. (More will be said about his example in the next section.) In the Middle Ages, Christian monks integrated work and ministry by tilling fields, clearing forests and building roads, while also tending to the sick, the orphaned and the imprisoned, protecting the poor and teaching the children. The transforming effect was significant over time. As villages and towns sprang up around the monasteries, the surrounding society incorporated many of these same social concerns.3 Even as recently as the 19th century, many early Protestants such as the Moravians, the Basel Mission Society and William Carey integrated business and other secular occupations into their mission strategies.4

So why then does this seem so new and unfamiliar? There are at least three reasons why today’s missions community has been reluctant to work closely with business. First, there is the recent and widespread belief that “work” takes time away from “ministry.” The irony of this, as YWAM’s Michael McLoughlin points out, is that once people quit their jobs to go into full-time ministry, they become isolated from the very people with whom they once had daily contact!5 Second is the closely related belief that a business can either serve society or make money, but not both. The perception is that activities with high social or spiritual value—education, health care, and humanitarian work—are not compatible with a profit motive. The third reason business and missions have seldom been combined in recent history is that in some countries it creates tax complications. Obviously, anyone thinking of bringing non-profit and for-profit activities together needs competent legal and tax advice. But those who uncritically treat the nonprofit approach as “the way it has always been done” don’t know their mission history and are depriving themselves of a powerful tool for ministry.

Variations on a Theme

There are several terms that are being used to describe the integration of business and mission/ministry. They are often used synonymously, but it is helpful to distinguish them.6

The term “tentmaking” has been around the longest. It obviously is a reference to the Apostle Paul—the pioneer of Christian missions—who was, by trade, a tentmaker (Acts 18:3). A careful study of his letters reveals that working was not a “necessary evil” for Paul, or a “cover,” but rather was an essential part of his missionary strategy for several reasons. Preaching the gospel for free (see 1 Cor 9:12–18) added credibility to his message (2 Cor 2:17; Titus 1:10–11) and served as a ministry model for his converts. “By working for a living, Paul set a pattern of lay witness and ministry by regular, working Christians,” notes Dave English of Global Opportunities. He “made it normative for every Christian to make disciples.”7 Working shoulder-to-shoulder with the locals also gave him opportunities to model a godly work ethic and a Christ-centered lifestyle for former pagans. (See, for example, 2 Th 3:7–9; Eph 4:28–32; and 1 Cor 4:12,16.)

Tentmaking and BAM are similar in that, like Paul, their primary interest is in the unreached (Rom 15:20). Marketplace Ministry and BAM share a conviction that well-run businesses can themselves be redemptive influences in society. They are also passionate believers in the doctrine of the “priesthood of all believers.” That is, they encourage business men and women to view the business as their ministry and their employees, coworkers, suppliers and customers as their “flock.” At the risk of over-simplifying their differences, the emphasis of Marketplace Ministry is on near-neighbor ministry, whereas the primary focus of BAM is on cross-cultural ministry.

Perhaps more than any other terms, BAM and Microenterprise Development are often used synonymously. After all, it is reasoned, MED is about helping businesses prosper in the poorest and least-reached parts of the world. However, there are significant differences that merit separate treatment. For example, MED focuses on helping local people start small businesses, while BAM usually involves larger (sometimes multinational) businesses run by a combination of expatriates and locals. MED is almost always funded by charitable donations and conducted through nonprofit organizations such as Partners Worldwide or Opportunity International. In contrast, most advocates of BAM expect the businesses to be funded by private investors.8 Out of the four different categories, MED is the least focused on missions mobilization.

One commonly-cited concern (in missionary circles) about tentmaking and BAM is that the work requirements leave little time for ministry. However, such a perspective misses the beauty and power of Paul’s model. What better way to become enmeshed into the fabric of society than to work alongside the locals, and genuinely serve them through business? Working, especially under stressful, even inhospitable conditions, allows one to demonstrate the value of the gospel in ways that speak louder than words. Of course, this is easier said than done, and to do it well requires training, experience and accountability, subjects to which we now turn.

Spy, Terrorist or Missionary?

One model that has little to commend it is the “missionary in disguise” approach. This is one that uses a business merely as a “cover” for people who quite frankly have little interest in business except for its usefulness as an entry strategy into countries that are off-limits to traditional missionaries. The aim is to do the least amount of work necessary to appear legitimate (at least in their own eyes; few others are fooled so easily). While there have been some churches established this way, many Christians now recognize that this “ends justifying the means” approach to ministry has serious integrity problems and is a poor witness.

A business that makes no obvious contributions to the local community will quickly raise suspicions. Spies often use pseudo-businesses as covers. Foreigners are often viewed as potential spies or subversives and in countries already hostile to Christian missionaries, there is little preventing such companies from being expelled from the country. This is unfortunate because many of these same countries are quite willing to tolerate legitimate Christian-managed businesses. We have found that the most effective kingdom businesses are in fact quite open about their faith and even have a reputation for evangelistic work. What keeps them from being persecuted or expelled? The value added. Without exception the most secure business “platform” is the profitable, job-creating, tax-paying company.

Some Unresolved Questions

One of the remarkable things about BAM is how the Holy Spirit is prompting Christian business people from all over the world to view their businesses and their talents as instruments for global mission. Whereas in the past they may have been advised to leave the business and go to seminary, increasingly today they are charting a different course and following the Holy Spirit’s leading in creative and fascinating ways. While this is something worth celebrating, we need to be aware of some of the potential problems.

Accountability

As someone who routinely interacts with both the missions and business communities, I can confidently say that some of the most exciting things happening in the BAM arena are off the radar of any mission agency or church. There are probably many reasons for this, but I can make some generalizations. First, when a career business person sees an opportunity, whether it’s a new market or a new ministry opportunity, they are not pre-conditioned to get the advice of a pastor or a mission agency. Second, and worse, many business people have learned to be cautious about revealing too much about their own ministry ambitions because of the tendency ministry professionals have of trying to co-opt them for their own pet ministry projects.

The unfortunate consequence is that many career business people chart their own courses without the benefit of the insight and experience of the mission movement. Something significant is lost when ministry professionals are sidelined (which, ironically, is a reversal of the earlier problem).

Those who come from traditional mission backgrounds often believe that the solution is to bring business people into the mission agency fold. I am not as certain. I believe there is a need for new kinds of mission organizations, organizations that provide many of the services of a mission agency, but also provide value-added services specific to business. They would also be sources of accountability.

Training

Another critical need is in the area of training. Growing a successful business is difficult even under the best of conditions. Starting one in a foreign, less-developed country is infinitely more difficult. Add to this the challenge of doing business in a way that draws people’s attention to Christ, and it’s no wonder some mission scholars are expressing doubts about whether BAM can live up to its expectations.

Clearly, our educational programs have not caught up yet with the changing needs. At present, few Christian business programs offer any meaningful training in cross-cultural ministry.9 Still, there are things that can be done without the help of educational institutions. Specifically research shows that those who are most likely to succeed in a tent-making or BAM context are those who:

These skills, experiences and attitudes do not require formal education, and can be nurtured quite readily by local churches.

Exciting Times Ahead

It is becoming increasingly obvious that the gospel cannot be carried to the whole world on the backs of mission professionals alone. Nor was it ever meant to be. I believe God is using the forces of globalization to bring the entire church, and all its resources, back into mission. The perceived division between sacred and worldly professions that has long sidelined so many Christians is being torn down as businesses of all sizes are being forced to think globally about their markets and supply chains. This, in turn, is creating new opportunities for Christian business people who desire to have a larger role in the missionary enterprise of the church. Could this be what globalization is about? Rather than being expected to “Pay, pray and stay out of the way,” business people are being thrust onto the playing field, much like they were during the early church period. For those who care about completing the Great Commission, this is exciting news. Image

RETURN TO LESSON 15: World Christian Discipleship

Tentmakers: Integrating Work and Witness Ruth E. Siemens

Ruth E. Siemens served for 21 years in Peru, Brazil, Portugal, and Spain, pioneering campus fellowships for the International Fellowship of Evangelical Students (IFES). During the first six years, she supported herself in secular binational schools, where she integrated work and witness. She founded Global Opportunities, an agency that provides counsel and links Christian witnesses and international employment opportunities. Adapted from Ruth Siemens, “Why Did Paul Make Tents?” (1996).

The church needs thousands of Christian professional people to finish evangelizing the world, like engineers, scientists, business people, health care workers, athletes, agriculturists, computer technicians, media specialists, and educators of all kinds—tentmakers who can integrate work and witness in the twenty-first century as Paul did in the first century.

Why Did Paul Work?

In both of Paul’s brief letters to the Thessalonians he said he worked “night and day”—that is, morning and late afternoon shifts (1 Thess 2:9). In Corinth, Paul’s job and house hunting had resulted in employment and lodging with Aquila and Priscilla, Jewish refugees from Rome, because they had the same trade (Acts 18:3). “Tentmakers” were not weavers, but artisans who made animal skin products, including tents. Paul offered three reasons for his physical labor:

Credibility

He said twice (1 Cor 9:12; 2 Cor 6:3ff.) that he worked in order not to put an “obstacle” in the way of the Gospel so his message and motivation would not become suspect to the Gentiles. Paul’s self-support demonstrated his genuineness. He received no financial gain.

Identification

Paul’s social class and education gained him the respect of the upper class everywhere. But it was harder for Paul to identify with the working classes, so he did manual labor to earn his own living (1 Cor 9:19ff.). He wanted to dress and live as they did. But there was no pretense. He and his team were fully dependent on their own labor. Why did educated Paul choose to identify with the artisans who were fairly low on the social and economic scale? Because most of the people in the Roman Empire were near the bottom. Ten to 20 percent were slaves!

Modeling

Paul writes, “With toil and labor, we worked night and day that we might not burden any of you, and to give you an example to follow” (2 Thess 3:8–9). Paul set an example that established a pattern for everyday believers to do evangelism (1 Thess 1:5–8). New believers were expected to evangelize others in their own social circles, answering questions about their transformed lives and new hope. They would not hastily change their relationships or occupations in order to bring the gospel to their extended families, friends, neighbors and their colleagues at work (1 Cor 7:17–24).

Who Is a Tentmaker Today?

Tentmakers are missions-motivated Christians who support themselves in secular work as they do cross-cultural evangelism on the job and in the free time they may have. They may be business entrepreneurs, salaried professionals, paid employees, or expenses-paid volunteers. Sometimes tentmakers work in professional exchange programs, funded research, internships, or study abroad programs. They can serve at little or no cost to the church.

Regular missionaries, on the other hand, receive donor support, usually channeled through a mission agency or a church. They are sometimes perceived as religious workers, even if they use skills like nursing or teaching, because they work under the auspices of Christian institutions.

In between these two equally excellent ministry models are hybrids—all of them valid as long as they are open and honest. Some tentmakers supplement a low salary with modest donor gifts, and some missionaries take parttime work in a secular institution like a school or university, for extra support or for contact with non-believers. God leads some Christians to alternate between tentmaking and donor support at different times.

New believers were expected to evangelize others in their own social circles, answering questions about their transformed lives and new hope.

Unfortunately, many Christians with jobs in distant lands are not tentmakers. They are people who have had little or no ministry at home. Crossing an ocean does not change that. They attend an international church consisting of people from their homeland. For example, Americans often find and join an English-language congregation. But few Christian expatriates seek to evangelize local citizens or other guest workers from different countries. Probably less than one percent of people working in other countries are tentmakers.

All My Time Belongs to God

A major misconception in mission circles is that tentmakers’ jobs leave little time and energy for ministry. Christian workers constantly ask me, “Didn’t you find it frustrating to spend so many hours on a secular job and to have so little time left over for God?” But I believed that all my time belonged to God! He had led me to a secular, bilingual school in Lima, Peru, and then to another in Sao Paulo, Brazil. He gave me an exciting ministry with teachers, elementary and high school students, and their upper-class Peruvian and Brazilian families. Besides this, there were school nurses, janitors, bus drivers, and cooks. This ministry centered around my job but spilled over into my personal life, through hospitality and home Bible studies.

In my free time, I taught and trained in local churches and started university fellowships. University campus work became my main ministry for thirty years, pioneering student movements in Peru and Brazil, and later in Portugal and Spain, and training students and staff in many other countries. My ministry was as full time when I had fulltime employment as it was at a later period when I received donor support—because I integrated work and witness!

RETURN TO LESSON 15: World Christian Discipleship

Notes

1. R. Paul Stevens, The Other Six Days: Vocation, Work, and Ministry in Biblical Perspective (Eerdmans, 1999), 208.

2. Ed. Silvoso, Anointed for Business (Regal, 2002), 24.

3. Edmund Oliver, The Social Achievements of the Christian Church (Board of Evangelism and Social Service of the United Church of Canada, 1930), 67–68.

4. See, for example, William Danker, Profit for the Lord (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971); and Vishal Mangalwadi and Ruth Mangalwadi, The Legacy of William Carey (Wheaton, IL: Good News Publishers, 1999).

5. Michael McLoughlin, “Back to the Future of Missions: The Case for Marketplace Ministry,” Vocatio (December 2000), 1–6.

6 For a more thorough discussion of the distinctions, see C. Neal Johnson and Steve Rundle, “The Distinctives and Challenges of Business as Mission,” in Business as Mission: From Impoverished to Empowered, ed. Tom Steffen and Mike Barnett (Pasadena, CA: William Carey Library, 2006), 19–36.

7. David English, “Paul’s Secret: A 1st-Century Strategy for a 21st-Century World,” World Christian 14, no. 3 (2001): 22–26.

8. For an exception to this, see Patrick Lai, Tentmaking: Business as Missions (Waynesboro, GA: Authentic Media, 2005).

9. One exception is Biola’s international business degree, which includes three courses in this area. Admittedly, it’s not much, but it’s a start. The students at least have a better idea of what they don’t know, which is more than what others know.

⬅️ 上一章 🏠 回到總目錄 下一章 ➡️