Theology of Mission: International Development in an Increasingly Complex World

Tipple Vosburgh Lecture. Drew University, Theological School
by Rev. John L. McCullough
Executive Director and CEO, Church World Service

October 15, 2007

My dear friend, Dr. Maxine Clarke Beach, Dean of the Theological School, Associate Deans -- Anne Yardley and Virginia Samuel, Distinguished Faculty - including Dr. Arthur L. Pressley -- with whom I have had the privilege of working for many years, Accomplished Students, and Friends:

Thank you for the kind invitation to address the Drew University community. I have noted what a particularly unique opportunity it is to speak still at the onset of a new academic year. I can only hope that this presentation will merit additional reference and engender debate throughout the year, whether it is in various courses of study, or less formal discussions about our global context and the responsibilities we share as earth's inhabitants during this space and time. I caution, however, that the wisdom of any one individual, such as me, is not nearly so important to any outcome or understanding, as is the collective genius of honest, intellectual debate and consensus.

Over the last couple of weeks considerable global attention has been thrust towards the small yet not insignificant south Asian country called Myanmar, formerly known as Burma. Myanmar became an independent nation in 1948, but beginning in 1962 the country was under the military rule of Gen. NE WIN until 1988. The military junta, however, has continued to rule, and is regarded by many as one of the most repressive governments in the world. Amongst it most controversial decisions included rejection of the 1990 elections that resulted in the main opposition party - the National League for Democracy (NLD) - winning a landslide victory; and the placing of NLD leader and Nobel Peace Prize recipient AUNG SAN SUU KYI, under house arrest or detention from 1989 to the present.

Recent images of unprecedented street demonstrations, accounts of military suppression – not only of the demonstrations but of an uncompromised public voice, statements of international outrage, and relatively soft admonishment by regional powers, all add to a confusing myriad of conflicting circumstances making the human and political crisis that is Myanmar extremely difficult to resolve.

Since 1984, more than one hundred thousand Burmese refugees, (Mon, Karen, Karenni, and Shan) are in Thailand, though Thailand does not officially acknowledge their refugee status, due to the political and economic ties between the two countries. Key elements of Thai policy include:

allowing Burmese to cross into Thailand only to flee active fighting, and denying entry to or forcibly repatriating those fleeing human rights abuses;
eeping camps perilously close to the border;
restricting the role of UNHCR; and
encouraging cease-fire agreements between the ethnic insurgents and the Burmese government.1

There are also some 450,000 internally displaced persons near the Thailand border. It is the combination of these situations, along with the crass impoverishment of the people (Myanmar being one of the 50 poorest and least developed countries in the world), and the virtual absence of human and civil rights (with the Constitution having been suspended since 1988), that led to the most recent uprising and demonstrations by Buddhists monks and others.

Church World Service, through its partner, the Thai-Burma Border Consortium, helps to provide food, shelter, blankets, and mosquito nets – and a voice -- for the more than 140,000 refugees who are in the border camps. Additionally, CWS remains in close partnership and consultation with colleague institutions in Burma, as part of our global ecumenical family. We value dialogue and the perspective that comes deep from within each context, but as is true in several Asian countries, the voice of the religious community is often treated with suspicion by government, and thereby is largely censored.

The introduction to the 2007 Church World Service Annual Report focuses on empowerment, and defines it in this manner: To help people gain capacity to improve their lives and livelihoods. To become full-fledged partners in the processes affecting them: economic, social, and political. To be able to embrace the future with hope.

The equipping and, yes, the empowering of people is at the heart of Church World Service's 60+ years of contribution to humanitarian work. Whether the challenge is chronic – long-term food shortage, bad water, lack of educational opportunities – or a crisis – a natural or human-caused disaster, or a combination of the two – Church World Service works in partnership with local communities to identify their needs and access the resources to address those needs and build a foundation for the future .

Throughout its long and storied history the part of the ecumenical movement that is Church World Service has always focused on empowering people in the midst of disaster to acquire the resources and capacity to rebuild their lives and communities. At one time the nation's largest international humanitarian movement, today CWS provides for an interfaith and intercultural platform wherein thirty-five Protestant, Orthodox, Anglican, Historic Black, and Peace churches intentionally collaborate and partner with religious and secular organizations in some eighty countries relative to humanitarian assistance, sustainable development, and public advocacy. Its mission is one of Christians working together with partners to eradicate hunger and poverty and to promote peace and justice around the world.

This mission is undertaken in the context of three global constructs: Chronic conditions of or leading to poverty; Crisis intervention in response to natural and human disaster; and, working in Partnerships in an ecumenical construct with the most vulnerable: especially women, children and youth, and communities of color.

On the surface this mission might sound relatively straight forward and uncompromised, but in an increasingly complex global arena where the entanglements of working agreements, the potential vulnerability of funding from multiple sources including government, and where at times severely polarized public opinion are all at play, it is difficult navigating, to say the least.

When examining a context like Myanmar, as people of faith, we are challenged to think carefully about the implications of our response or lack of response. More than just a matter of personal conscience; it is also a matter of weighing how our voices as Christians might as well negatively impact not only the very existence of Christian institutions and community, but also the practice of public religion. When information dissemination is tightly controlled, where government often times scripts what civil society says about local conditions, and where the disappearance of dissenting voices is commonplace, empowerment becomes a complex framework. Without careful preparation and analysis, we can at times find ourselves on the wrong side of issues, having to explain or account for our actions and inactions.

Church World Service was born out of a theology of mission that stated then, in 1946, and still contends today that the church has an obligation to respond to situations of human crisis around the world. The theological fabric from which we draw our mandate is the Gospel According to Matthew, the 25 th chapter (‘Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry and gave you food, or thirsty and gave you something to drink? And when was it that we saw you a stranger and welcomed you, or naked and gave you clothing? And when was it that we saw you sick or in prison, and visited you?' Then the king will answer them, ‘Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me.' -NSRV vss.37-40)

From the very beginning, CWS has made it its business to wrestle with the face of hunger, dispossession, and isolation. It is not pretty in appearance, nor are the situations few in number, and the prevalence of effected members of God's family is unrelenting. Following World War II our mission was one of assisting 40 million uprooted, hungry, and desperate people. In the 1960's, CWS joined the Civil Rights movement in the United States, and advocated for the rights of the Palestinian people to a homeland; in the 70's, it helped in the rebuilding of Viet Nam following its war, while protesting the Pol Pot regime that was wreaking havoc on Cambodia. In the 80's, CWS was amongst the first international voices speaking against Apartheid in South Africa, and in favor of a more proactive response to the emergence of HIV/Aids – now a global pandemic with nearly 40 million people living with the disease.

There were devastating earthquakes in Nicaragua in the 1990's, along with bloody persecution of indigenous populations across Central and South America, war in the Balkans; and now in the twenty-first century tsunamis, Katrina, and a War on Terror. I wish that I could report to you today and suggest that any of these situations has been resolved. The fact is that they have not, and through the years we have found that these and similar conditions continue to compound, making the times in which we live that much more complex and challenging, stretching the resources we bring to the table to the brink.

Amazingly, however, we persevere; perhaps as much a matter of clarity of mission as it is a theology based on specific values:

Embodying the love of Jesus Christ.
Respecting all faiths and traditions.
Working with the most vulnerable.
Promoting dignity and the rights of all people.
Advocating a social, political and economic order based on peace and justice.
Working ecumenically.
Working in partnership.
Supporting the integrity of creation.
Being responsible stewards of resources.

Given the intersection of social, economic, and political issues on human development, we wrestle with the question of how theology will inform our moral and ethical response. What does God expect of us, and what do we believe is God's own response? Yes, of course we can draw from our prophetic tradition: “[The Lord] has told you, O mortal, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God” (Micah 6:8); but words alone do not suffice, they have to be reinforced with meaning, given by (or through) action. What one believes in the very core of his or her existence about the theological tenets of justice, kindness, and mercy has everything to do not only with how one responds to the hurts and brokenness of the world, but how one recognizes the manifestations of hurt and brokenness in society. And what of limitations: to what extent, how far do our concepts of justice, kindness, and mercy reach. Do we ascribe to the theory of the proverbial edge of the world we dare not encroach, or is there no limit to our compassion?

At times I think it is too easy an explanation to say that we are the manifestation of God's response. No, we are not God's response, but we are part of God's instrumentality; yes, to that I can agree. But, we are our own response, of faith and action. Along with our advocacy and influences of wealth and power, we also recognize the contribution of prayer as a basic thing for which we can take responsibility for doing, and for making theology part of the response's substance.

So, God will do what God must, but, are there not some basic things for which society itself should take responsibility?

Consider these global realities:

Rising food prices are threatening the ability of aid organizations to help the world's hungriest people. Worldwide, basic foods now cost 21 percent more at the wholesale level than in 2005, with key commodities such as grains and oils up more than 30 percent, according to World Bank price indexes. For poor people, that means the quality and quantity of nutrition are at risk. For relief organizations, it means aid resources are stretched thin. 2

According to UNICEF, 30,000 children die each day due to poverty. And they “die quietly in some of the poorest villages on earth, far removed from the scrutiny and the conscience of the world. Being meek and weak in life makes these dying multitudes even more invisible in death.” That is about 210,000 children each week, or just under 11 million children under five years of age, each year.

Half the world -- nearly three billion people -- live on less than two dollars a day.

Nearly a billion people entered the 21st century unable to read a book or sign their names.

Around the world, the lives of some 850 million people are affected by some form of chronic hunger or malnutrition, according to UN estimates.

Currently, some 115 million children are not being educated. One fifth of South Asia's children do not attend school. In Sub Saharan Africa, a child has only a one in three chance of completing school. Three-fifths of the 115 million children out of school are girls, and two-thirds of the 876 million illiterate adults are women.

I do not know if it can be argued that people are born depressed. What I am certain of is that people can be, and all too often are born into depressing situations. The prevalence of children born into poverty is staggering. In the United States today it is reported that there are nearly 33 million people living in poverty. Of that number, “Nearly 12 million children were living in poverty in 2002 - one out of every six children in America. While the total rate remained virtually unchanged from the previous year, the number of poor children living in extreme poverty increased, from 4.8 million in 2001 to 5.1 million in 2002. Children still represent the largest population group living in poverty.” 3 Extreme poverty is defined by the US Government as a family having a cash income of less than half of the poverty line. For a family of four, that poverty line is $18,100/year. 4 For many of you it is difficult to imagine your family living in these United States on $9,000/year; for others of you, sadly it is not difficult at all because that is your reality.

Poverty has thus far proven to be a timeless and horrible predicament. Poverty, however, is not a living and breathing thing in the sense that it has a life of its own. Poverty is largely dictated by the decisions of a given society. We cannot say that poverty is colorblind, because it isn't. We cannot say that it treats women and men equally, because it doesn't. We cannot say that poverty absolves children from its grip, because so many are not free from the pain, affliction, and discrimination associated with it. We cannot say that one's language, religion, education, ethnicity, and family history are irrelevant factors in determining who is poor and who isn't, because they do matter. We cannot say that poverty is restricted by national boundary or policy. The Israelis can build a wall the entire length of the West Bank to shield themselves from the impacts of Palestinian poverty, but it will still find a way to scale the wall or penetrate cement; poverty can cut through barbed wire and slice through steel.

The alleviation of poverty is an issue of justice; and justice is that word of God that “…is living and active, sharper than a two-edged sword, piercing until it divides soul from spirit, joints from marrow; [and] is able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart”(Hebrews4:12).

The facts don't lie, and we shouldn't waste time debating the validity of them. Rather, we should expend our intellectual and compassionate capital working to rectify these situations, and effecting a different and more promising future for those who are so far away from ever realizing God's most fundamental hopes for all of humanity.

Are there not some basic things for which society itself should take responsibility, and is not our theology part of the substance from which we draw that response?

The task of international development, simply put, is to:

Accompany the poor in their struggle for a better life for themselves and their families,
Recognize where there is brokenness in the human experience, and
Eradicate the conditions that demoralize the human spirit.

“The three basic measurements used in the human development index to establish international norms are: “a long and healthy life, knowledge, and a decent standard of living.” 5 These norms have been discussed, debated, influenced by our faith traditions, and agreed upon through the construct of the United Nations, and hence are entitlements for which we must be advocates; but again, in ways that ultimately serve the interests of those most directly impacted. The poor should not be treated as mere objects in a global debate about what it means to do justice, kindness, and mercy. The poor should be honored and respected for their humanity, their intellect, capacity, vision, and endurance. They have lived their conditionality, and have a keen sense of the future they hope for.

This is how we seek to manifest the three basic measurements:

Sustainability

Commitment to an enduring partnership with the poor at least until their condition has changed for the better. As people of faith we have a commitment, regardless of the availability of resources to accompany people who struggle for a better quality of life.

Meeting basic needs.

Housing
Hunger
Education
Health
Fair trade. Because everyone has the right to achieve an income enabling them to care for themselves and their families.

Resolving uprootedness.

Finding durable solutions for displaced persons. On average, 80% of those displaced by disasters never return home, and it seems to make little difference whether we are talking about the third world or the first world. If we peel back the numbers of those who left the gulf states following both the natural disaster of hurricane Katrina, and the man-made disaster of the breeching of the levees we will likely find that approximately only twenty percent have returned. Yes, people are repopulating the area, but they are not necessarily those who left.

Protecting the most vulnerable.

Human Rights. There is a universally agreed upon human rights charter, that no government however belligerent has the right to violate.

These are the common threads that define our humanitarian assistance, and enable what we believe to be a more holistic approach to development.

For Church World Service, this has been a continuum. We have helped to resettle nearly six hundred thousand people across these United States over sixty years, working in partnership with local churches and other community organizations. Only a few days ago I attended an event in which some six or seven of the “Lost Boys of Sudan” were present. One of them, John Bul Dau, is author of the book, God Grew Tired of Us. In his memoirs he recounted his and the journey of his 24,000 young colleagues, more than a thousand mile trek through three countries: fleeing persecution in Sudan, finding refuge in Ethiopia; forced to leave Ethiopia due to a regime change, walking back through Sudan while pursued by the military, and finally finding refuge in Kenya. At one point, given their hunger, seeing so many of their brothers die (from dehydration – gunfire – or killed by wild animals), and the general chaos that was a daily reality, they wondered if God had grown tired of them and their plight, yet they persevered. That so many of them today are now resettled into new communities, are gainfully employed, attending colleges and universities, and are sending remittances to assist family members and communities in Sudan is living proof that a well thought out theology of mission can be confirmation of God's continuing accompaniment, and at the same time provide for very practical life-saving measures.

We have heard the voices of once belligerent governments now articulate an earnest desire to work in partnership with the faith community, according to one national leader, “Because the problems we face are too large for us to resolve alone”. CWS has been a constant presence on Capital Hill and at the United Nations; and, supported by millions of people across the United States, has and continues to influence both national and international policies.

To be faithful partners in the larger efforts to bring positive change to the world we must keep ourselves not only open to self-examination, but also to the leading of the Spirit. That means we must continue to challenge ourselves to stay in the dialogue, to keep talking about the imbalances of the world, for therein we will find not only the expansion of our capital, but also God's hope for the poor and the world.

Theology of mission for international development is not a stagnant concept. It is like a wind from God swept over the face of the waters (Genesis 1:2). It exists because for so many of the world's people life is like a formless void and darkness. In the midst of an often times confusing and increasingly complex world, of one thing we can be sure, God never intended for the first day to have the last word. While much remains to be done, we have the assurance of our faith that at the appointed time our work will be done, and God will say, “Now that was Good.”

Rising food prices curb aid to global poor, Mark Trumbull | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor from the July 24, 2007 edition.
Source: Poverty USA—Catholic Campaign for Human Development—A hand up, not a hand out
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, September 2002
Source: UNDP, Human Development Report – Indicators 2003