FINAL REPORT:
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR MISSION STUDIES EUROPEAN CONFERENCE
4-6 April, 2014
INTRODUCTION
From 4 to 6 April, 2014, Members of the International Association for
Mission Studies from Europe gathered with guests from Europe, Africa, Asia, and
North America to reflect on the theme “Mission and Money: Mission in the Context
of Global Inequalities.” The conference was held at the beautiful Sofia Cultural
Center of the Russian Orthodox Church in Finland on the outskirts of Helsinki
Finland. For these three days, conference members listened to and participated in
discussion of many substantial papers, both in plenaries and in short panel
presentations. They were refreshed by the exquisite beauty of the location, by the
amazing variety of delicious food served in a dining room with a stunning view of
the sea, relaxed with swimming and saunas, and enjoyed each others company as
they traded experiences, stories, and academic wisdom. Old friendships were
renewed and new ones were made. It has been an intense three days, but they have
been wonderfully memorable as well.
This short Final Report will be divided into several parts, according to a basic
grid of questions that the Listening Committee, chaired by Steve Bevans and
consisting of Eleonora Hof, Jesse Mugambi, and Cathy Ross, used as a kind of
“listening device” throughout the conference. These questions are: (1) What issues
and concepts emerged during the conference? (2) What issues and concepts seemed
to need more clarification and definition? (3) What issues and concepts seemed to
need more development? (4) What issues and concepts were contested? And (5)
What were the things that seemed to be missing, ignored, or avoided? It will be
these questions that will structure this Report. Although Steve drafted this report,
all of us have approved it, and I (Eleonora) am reading this on behalf of all of us.
WHAT ISSUES AND CONCEPTS EMERGED DURING THE CONFERENCE?
Perhaps the most notable theme that emerged as the Conference proceeded
was that almost every topic or issue discussed is marked by a profound ambiguity.
The very theme of the conference, Missions and Money, turned out to be an
ambiguous one: are we reflecting on Missions and Money—that is, a more judicious,
cautious, careful use of money for the mission of the church? Or are we called to
choose, as Professor Duchrow suggested, between Missions and Money? To
paraphrase Jesus, can we even engage in Mission and be involved at the same time
with Money. Even the seemingly well-accepted conviction that Mission involves
human development was exposed by Jonathan Bonk as an ambiguous conviction.
And even the language we have used at this conference—English—is marked by the
ambiguity that, while we are trying to unmask the movements of Empire, we are
doing it in the Empire’s very language! Other emerging issues like Partnership
between and among churches, congregations of migrants in Europe, an
understanding of poverty and wealth, the relationship of state funding for
missionary work, the notion of a prosperity gospel, have all emerged as issues
fraught with this profound ambiguity. Reflecting on Mission and Money makes us
aware of the fact that even as we participate in the Trinity’s mission in our world,
we are caught in a web of conflicting interests and inequality can no longer claim
innocence.
WHAT ISSUES AND CONCEPTS SEEMED TO NEED MORE CLARIFICATION AND
DEFINITION?
Because of this profound ambiguity, many issues and concepts that we have
reflected on need further clarification and definition. The years since the 1960s have
revealed the problems with the notion of Partnership in mission, and so John Gatu’s
idea of a Moratorium is still valid in some way. We still need to clarify this idea more
as we subject it to critical reflection. We need to reflect more deeply on the meaning
of poverty throughout the world. Who defines poverty? What is real wealth? Further
reflection as well is needed around the phenomenon of migrant congregations,
especially in Europe. Is that term adequate? Might we speak more accurately of
international congregations? How should we name the reality that is abbreviated
“AIC”—African independent churches? Initiated churches? International churches?
WHAT ISSUES AND CONCEPTS SEEMED TO NEED MORE DEVELOPMENT?
Similarly, the ambiguity of the issues lead to the need for more development
of several. What is a mission field? We know that we cannot speak any more of the
rich, affluent North evangelizing a poor, undeveloped South, but what are the full
implications of this? We speak of “Mission from the Margins,” but where are the
margins? Are the margins determined by economic progress, or by the poverty of
faith? What is the relation between the various local churches in the world and the
worldwide universal church? Also in need of further thinking through is the difficult
question of how the knowledge share in a conference like this can be validated.
When we speak about issues of liberation, poverty, and development in Asia and
Africa, for example, who says that what is said is correct? For example, there was an
entire session on Africa AICs where no African had any voice. There were
representatives from these areas at the Conference, but can they truly represent
their peoples? Do we not need to develop ways of holding a Conference like this in
places where more voices of the peoples about whom we talk can offer their wisdom
and critique to our deliberations?
WHAT ISSUES AND CONCEPTS HAVE BEEN CONTESTED?
Perhaps the most contested issue during our conference has been the
concept of Capitalism, sometimes characterized as Free Market Economy or NeoLiberal Economic Policy (although Professor Duchrow maintained that Captitalism
destroys markets). Is Capitalism a basically flawed, evil system, or as our economists
seem to maintain, a system that is basically good, even though it can be abused, and
often is? Can Capitalism, in other words, offer the conditions for the possibility of a
“Win-Win Situation”? In some Panel Sessions the idea of the Prosperity Gospel was
contested. Should we even use this term, or should be understand better the
contexts in which people convert to and adhere to Christianity? At another Panel
Session, the role of women was expressed in a way that many contested: should
women be characterized as physically weak? As people who engage in gossip?
WHAT THINGS, ISSUES, AND CONCEPTS HAVE BEEN MISSING
No conference can cover everything, but it is always helpful to point out
items, issues, and concepts which seem to be missing.
While we recognize that this is a European conference, we still regret that
there have not been more people present from the various areas and countries that
we have discussed, especially people from Latin America and the Middle East and
women from Africa and Asia. There seemed to be little reflection on the impact of
culture, context, and social location on questions of how Money affects missionary
work. There has been little reflection on gender and family issues in terms of our
theme as well, and there was only one mention of the economic powerhouse which
is China. Strangely, there has been little if any biblical and patristic foundations
offered for our topic, even though such foundations are considerable.
CONCLUSION
It is important to say in conclusion, however, that what has not been
ambiguous is the usefulness of our reflections and struggles at this Conference. We
have not been able to tear down all the walls that divide rich from poor, oppressor
from oppressed, power and privilege from those marginalized, but we have, in the
words of this morning’s Scripture reflection, made some modest holes in those
walls. We can only express our gratefulness to the organizers of the conference, in
particular to Mari Pöntinen and Jonas Jørgensen, and to the many stewards and
others who have helped them. All of us have been enriched by their great work.
The Listening Committee:
Stephen Bevans, Chair
Eleonora Hof
Jesse Mugambi
Cathy Ross