Roots and Wings

By Don Matchett

Two thousand two was a tumultuous year in Côte d’Ivoire, West Africa. Rebel forces advanced and controlled the northern part of the country while the government retained control of the south. The conflict soon escalated into an all-out civil war. This is important to my story because the Free Will Baptist Bible institute is located in Bouna, in the northern, rebel-held portion of Côte d’Ivoire.
Dr. Kenneth Eagleton served as the primary professor and acting director.

During this time, a Ghanaian student named Philip attended the institute. Philip met Clint Morgan in Nantes, France, a couple of years earlier. Clint, seeing the calling on Philip’s life, suggested he attend the Bible institute in Côte d’Ivoire. Take this in. In 2000, Philip, from Ghana, lived in beautiful, peaceful Nantes, France, and in 2002, he lived in war-torn Côte d’Ivoire. Why would he give up a comfortable life in France for the hardships of West Africa? Phillip’s calling drove him to learn more of God’s Word and doctrine. Philip attended the Bible institute to develop roots.

Plants derive stability and support from their roots. Some plants create an “iceberg effect” with more roots underground than plant visible above ground. Roots provide constant nourishment, allowing the plant to do more than just survive. Roots enable the plant to thrive.

Any gardener worth his salt knows what happens if the soil is not prepared correctly. Hardened soil does not allow roots to grow deep enough. Sandy soil allows the roots to grow but may not firmly support the plant. Of course, the overarching goal is for the plant to mature and reproduce. This cycle continues indefinitely as long as conditions are right.

Philip not only searched for roots; he was also looking for wings. Wings provide freedom to fly. In this case, freedom in ministry and methodology in any direction the Holy Spirit leads.

By the end of 2002, most missionaries had left Côte d’Ivoire, including Dr. Eagleton. Institute students were assigned internships and, by 2003, the institute was under African leadership. Philip finished his degree at the Free Will Baptist Bible institute and acquired a master’s degree from the Christian and Missionary Alliance seminary in the capital city of Abidjan. He then moved to a church-planting effort in Ghana. Philip spread his wings.

When discussing roots and wings it is important to remember the four stages of a mission’s development:

• Model: open a new field, preferably with an unreached people group.
  

• Equip: present the gospel and, as some become believers, begin the discipleship-intensive stage. The idea is to train towards indigenous leadership.
  

• Collaborate: indigenous believers work shoulder-to-shoulder with missionaries in all aspects of the mission.
  

• Entrust: missionaries and mission leaders participate only from a distance. Native leadership has complete authority and autonomy.
  

Missionaries should always be working themselves out of a job, turning work over to trained leaders. Of course, this is easier said than done. As you can imagine, obstacles arise: lack of leadership (pastors and church leaders), persecution, government regulation, or a field slow to adopt and mature. The list goes on and on. Nonetheless, the goal should be to progress to the fourth stage as quickly as possible. The only way to accomplish this is to allow roots to grow to maturity and wings to spread.

Challenges

Some western ideals regarding missions present challenges to this idea of “roots and wings.” Let’s discuss three of these challenges.

The first danger is being too rooted or too winged. An approach too rooted in tradition could turn potential recipients of missionary efforts away. Missionaries simply aren’t accessible. A mission designed to immerse in culture ends up in isolation. Equally so, a too-winged mission approach could be so liberal it isn’t counter-cultural and may leave out the gospel altogether. Missionaries must find the tipping point. An appropriate balance is rooted in tradition and doctrine but winged enough to allow methodological freedom.

Second, western mission ideals usually find no problem developing roots among evangelized people. However, we are challenged to provide wings. Westerners want to continue their quest of teaching, training, and instilling doctrine—imperative goals. But we should hope, dream, and pray for a day when each field has its own preachers, teachers, church leaders, and scholars. In short, a time comes to get out of the way. The real challenge is allowing mature believers to develop wings and fly.

Third, with the popularity of short-term missions, we face a growing challenge, particularly with motivation and approach. We indeed celebrate the increased interest in going. Yet, sometimes, helping hurts. Much has been written about short-term missions motivations, so I’ll ask a question focused on only one element of short-term mission’s approach. Are we “doing for” or “being with”?

I see a vast difference.

Christ’s Example

The incarnation of Christ is a great way to evaluate this idea of “doing for” versus “being with.” The incarnation of Christ leads us to believe it was not enough for Jesus to be for us. His incarnation insisted He be with us. “And they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us” (Matthew 1:23b). Don’t get me wrong, God is always for us, but isn’t the purpose of His creation that He be with us? Only He can do and has done certain things. We celebrate this every Easter. Only the Son of God could perform the events that took place in Jerusalem and Galilee. Only Jesus could accomplish the works of the Cross, the Resurrection, and fulfilling the Kingdom—all for us. But why were these things accomplished? So He could be with us.

“Doing for” is undoubtedly necessary. The positive side of “doing for” is loving charity. “I do this for you because I have compassion, and I want to help your circumstance.” But remember, charity has an ugly, evil twin named condescension. Condescension does missions with pious pity from an ivory tower equipped with a staircase of self-gratification. “Doing for” is undoubtedly necessary, but if it is the sole focus, indigenous leaders cannot be developed, and we risk creating an unhealthy dependency. “Doing for” with the wrong incentives can hinder missions progress and clip the wings of indigenous autonomy.

“Being with” should be mandatory in every mission encounter and engagement. “I want to be with you because you are God’s creation, and the gospel is for all. We have many differences, but we can find common ground.” “Being with” declares we view every person and people group equal in God’s creation. If we approach missions to “be with,” condescension finds no room. “Being with” rather than “doing for” will organically manifest indigenous autonomy because all people are viewed as equal brothers and sisters, not spiritual conquests to be lorded over.

The good news: many fields are already rooted in doctrine and winged in methodology. We call them partners. National leaders guide the work in Brazil, India, Central Asia, Russia, Côte d’Ivoire (including BERACA, the NGO overseeing Doropo’s hospital), Cuba, and Panama. We participate and support each country, but the leadership has its own autonomous plan of building the Kingdom, both in-country and abroad. We celebrate that they can reach the world in ways we cannot.

So, what happened to Philip? Many years later, Dr. Kenneth Eagleton returned to Bouna to find Philip sitting in his chair. Once the student, Philip was now an assistant director of the Bible institute and a professor. All because, the original goal was to give him roots and wings.
You can support “roots and wings” by giving to the World Missions Offering April, 25, 2021.

About the Writer: Don Matchett is director of development for IM, Inc. Learn more: IMINC.org.