What does the Church need to understand about risk?
A theology of risk is primarily focused on decision-making by missionaries facing danger for the sake of the Gospel. The question of “what is a theology of risk” is a field-driven problem, because all the easy places have been reached. Less than 10% of all missionaries go to dangerous places, so the Western church has very little felt need to understand or know about risk. In contrast, in places where the church does face danger, there is often an attitude of pride. There is a belief that “we live in risk”, so we don’t need to learn more about it. Both attitudes are dangerous.
As of this writing, I know of only one potential doctoral dissertation being written in the United States. One has been written in Germany, and of course mine. So the church has not only not felt the need to understand risk, the church has a lot of misunderstanding about risk.
First, the church needs to avoid myths. We’ve heard these repeated all over the world by Christians. In Facing Danger, I wrote about twelve risk myths, but there are now sixteen risk myths that will be available in Facing Danger 2nd edition. One example of a risk myth is, “The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church.” This is not exactly what Tertullian said to the emperor, but it has been taken by the modern church to mean that persecution grows the church. The data does not support this belief. See analysis here.
Labels like “wise” or “fearful”, “hero” or “foolish” are thrown around. When God leads a missionary to move further into danger or to flee a situation, the circumstances around those decisions are much more nuanced than people back home realize. No one is ever perfectly courageous or perfectly fearful. The binary approach to naming complex issues is both harmful and hurtful to faith development and debriefing.
Often people back home don’t feel like they have much to offer a missionary who has ministered in a dangerous place. In reality, what lowers resiliency and endurance are the twin feelings of isolation and resignation. Isolation is the feeling that you are all alone, and resignation is the feeling that there is nothing you can do. In reality, just offering the ministry of presence and safety by listening without judgment will sometimes deeply minister to someone who needs the space to process. You don’t need a seminary degree to be a safe person.
When a missionary withdraws (or flees) from a dangerous place, people back home, including pastors will often say, “Aren’t you so happy to be safe and home?” The very opposite is likely true, and being home is not usually celebrated by the missionary. They just left their home, their friends, people dear to them. Let the missionary say what they want about how they feel about being back.
A good first step for pastors and senders in the churches is to learn what the sixteen risk myths are, and evaluate which ones they tend to rely on. It’s a good discussion to have with your missionaries the next time they are on home leave, and certainly more substantive than the questions they usually get asked. Secondly, become familiar with the three elements of a theology of risk, and use those to draw out your missionary on their experience of those elements in the risks they’ve faced. Finally, learn about witness risk by reading books that address ministering in hard places, such as Facing Danger, The Insanity of God, Why God Calls Us to Dangerous Places, and more like them.
ما الذي تحتاج الكنيسة أن تفهمه عن المخاطر؟
Que doit comprendre l'Église au sujet du risque ?
Apa yang perlu dipahami oleh Gereja tentang risiko?
