For a number of years the Brethren Revival Fellowship has explored ways by which we might become more effective in helping to revive and promote world missions in the Church of the Brethren. It is sometimes pointed out that the extent to which a denomination is interested in working at world evangelization, directly reflects on how much zeal is evident toward winning the lost to Christ on the home front. This equation is certainly true in the Church of the Brethren. During the last thirty years we have been withdrawing from aggressive mission development abroad, and we have also experienced membership loss at home. These are two indisputable facts about trends in the Church of the Brethren.
The Brethren Revival Fellowship Committee is proposing at least one course of action–the idea of starting a Brethren Mission Fund. The proposal is contained in the current issue of the BRF WITNESS, in order to alert our readers to the fact that this matter will be an item of business at BRF’s general meeting in September. We hope that the entire content of this proposal will be carefully read and considered before a judgement is passed on its validity. We welcome responses in writing, or by attending the September 12, 1998 meeting at the Heidelberg meetinghouse in the Atlantic Northeast District. [Ed. note: This proposal was approved at the 1998 BRF General Meeting. See the Brethren Mission Fund page.]
One of the highlights of the 1998 Annual Conference in Orlando was the 75th anniversary celebration of the start of our mission endeavors in Nigeria. As the dozens and dozens of former missionaries and staff members filled the risers, it was a reminder of the “glory days” of mission endeavors by the Church of the Brethren. At one time years ago there were more than one hundred American Brethren supported to do mission work in Nigeria. Now we are down to a small handful of persons in Nigeria. We have had a missionary presence in China, India, the Sudan, Brazil, Ecuador, Puerto Rico, and the Dominican Republic, as well as in other places. Currently the General Board has determined to limit our worldwide endeavors to Africa and the Caribbean.
Within the last five years an overall annual loss of about two million mission program dollars has been felt by the General Board. We now are able to budget about 4.9 million dollars nationally toward all Church of the Brethren ministries. This represents a serious loss of program dollars. Surely some of this loss is due to the loss of membership, but BRF believes that there are other reasons too.
Our zeal for soul saving mission work has waned. Even though we have passed a few good mission philosophy position papers that give us a sound basis for doing mission work, the results have been disappointing. Since these papers were passed, the General Board and staff have not proposed one new mission field. As the result of a query coming to Annual Conference, a decision was made in 1990 to plant the Church of the Brethren in South Korea by establishing gospel proclaiming congregations in that land. This program was passed with the condition that it should be given a sufficient denomination wide emphasis to ensure sufficient prayer and financial resources. Dan Kim was sent to South Korea but was never given more than a shoestring budget with which to operate. Whatever Korean side enthusiasm was developed, was met with American side foot dragging, and after about five years of these feeble efforts, all official funds were withdrawn. Dan and Sue Kim continue to train potential leaders in Korea because of their own commitment to this work, but they have no official Church of the Brethren status for support.
What is ironic is that at the very same time we were told there are no mission dollars for South Korea, food money was sent to North Korea to help with the hunger crisis. The issue is really one of priorities. We tend to have money for social needs, but not for spiritual needs. BRF has no quarrel with the church’s desire to help the hungry, but why do social needs seem to be cared for at the expense of meeting spiritual needs? This type of prioritizing of funds has resulted in a loss of trust in supporting the church program. Out of the 4.9 million mission dollars now available to do programs in the Church of the Brethren, only a few hundred thousand dollars are being directed toward the Africa and Caribbean mission efforts. Is a mere five or ten percent of monies going toward mission efforts a large enough share? For many, this is not a high enough priority.
The Brethren Mission Fund will be channeled as described in the proposal to do mission work. It will not be used to do anything else BRF does except that a small administrative fee may be withdrawn. This comes at a time when under the new design of the General Board, the Missions and Ministries Planning Council (MMPC) is to have an open attitude to receive and consider new mission ideas. Ideas which are submitted to the MMPC for consideration are also to come with a plan in place to resource such programs.
Perhaps BRF’s Brethren Mission Fund can be a means whereby world missions can be brought to the forefront of our worldwide endeavors. We welcome your response.
