Competition, Cooperation and Overlap
– How to Pool and Share Information and Resources
– How to Pool and Share Information and Resources
By Rolf G. Heitmann, CEO of The Norwegian Church Ministry to Israel - NCMI
The topic of this session actually consists of 5 important perspectives on missions and ministries in general, and Jewish mission and evangelism especially:
Each topic should be examined separately. In order to keep the time limit of 10 minutes and to cover the whole issue, I will leave the specific “how” to our discussion and concentrate on the following:Competition
Cooperation
Overlap
Sharing information
Sharing resources
A) Two Biblical perspectives
B) Building relationship/ Experience in partnership
C) Some challenges for the future
1. Two Biblical principles – a Biblical fact and a Biblical commandment
1.1. The Biblical fact: United in Messiah
Competition is often regarded negatively. We are afraid of competition and look upon competition as a threat and as damaging for ourselves and our ministries. If we could work solo, everything should be better: We would have no problems by recruiting manpower, the financial income would be secured and we could focus on our vision and goals rather than concentrating on how to defeat our competitor.
Yes, if competition means that one is the winner and the other is the loser – as it often is in individual sports – competition in Christian ministry is damaging. If competition means defeating each other, even if it is not expressed in this way, it is destructive.
But there is another kind of competition that is constructive or positive: Not to understand us as individual players, but as part of a team. One of the most successful coaches in Norwegian soccer, Nils Arne Eggen, summarizes the success of Rosenborg in this way: The main factor is not that we have a team of 11 brilliant soccer players, but that we manage in our team to make each other better.
Our perspective in Jewish evangelism should be that we belong to the same team. Or to be more Biblical: We belong to the same body, Jesus the Messiah. We have a common vision and a common goal: That the body of Christ may be glorified in the midst of His People. That they, the people of Israel, might be saved (Rom.10,1).
As agencies, organizations or ministries we have different functions in the body (Rom 12,3-5 and 1 Cor.12), but we should all aim making each other better.
The impact of unification in one body is first of all acceptance: Accepting each other as we are, with our own heritage, identity, culture, structure, methods – and maybe even theological diversity. Diversity in unity should be appreciated rather than neglected or rejected. The arm and the leg, the hand and the foot have different functions even if they belong to the same body.
The second consequence is practical: In order to function normally and optimally there is a need of communication: The hand needs to know in what direction the foot is moving. Sharing information is much more than being updated. It is necessary in order to make the right strategic decisions and act properly for the benefit of the whole body.
1.2. A Biblical commandment: The weak and the strong (Rom 14,1-3 and 15,1-2)
Accordingly there is another Biblical perspective that we have to emphasize. Not all parts of the body have the same image, or seem to be as important as the others. (For what reason do we have the appendix?)
Our ministries are also different. Some are small and some are big. Some have a strong economy, and some are struggling for survival. Some are working worldwide, while some are concentrating on specific fields. Some are involved in many activities and projects with regard to Jewish-Christian relations, while others have their only focus on evangelism. Some have clear and convincing answers to questions about the millennium and methods in how to approach the Jewish people with the Gospel. Others express a space for different views on such things.
Paul is speaking about the weak and the strong with regard to kosher lifestyle and keeping Jewish traditions. I think the same principle is transferable to other aspects of life and cooperation: The strong shall not despise or condemn the weak, and the weak shall not envy the strong. Let us respect and honour each other in our diversity. Let us identify with each other without claiming each other to be identical.
2. Building relationship
Cooperation is not only a question of “how” but also a question of “with whom”. As a mission agency we are cooperating on different levels and with different bodies, and in the following I want to share my own experience in cooperation on three levels.
Cooperation for me is first of all building and strengthening a relationship, which also includes sharing information, experiences and know-how. Secondly cooperation will also lead to common acts and practical results, i.e. with regard to sharing manpower and other resources.
2.1. Relationship with the local church
It is my understanding that the local church, gathered in the name of Jesus, sharing the Word of God and the sacraments, represents and expresses the presence of the Body of Messiah at its place. My first obligation as an expatriate should therefore be to ask the local church to share my vision for the Jewish people and invite to partnership. Even if we experience that we don’t have a common vision or understanding of the importance of sharing the Gospel with “the Jew first”, we should do our utmost to develop and keep a good relationship to the local church. Why is this so important?
First of all, as already mentioned, because the local church, in spite of all its weakness, represents the united body of Christ. Secondly, because the local church understands better than any expatriate the local context and culture. Thirdly, because we need to challenge, teach and invite the local church to take part in Jewish evangelism. The local church represents the continuity when expatriates leave. Nobody and no ministry can therefore replace the local church or take over the calling of this church to share the Gospel with the Jews.
When NCMI, after the fall of the “iron curtain”, wanted to restart a mission work in Hungary, our first initiative was to investigate the options by contacting the leadership of the Lutheran church in Hungary. Very briefly expressed, the outcome of this contact became a partnership agreement between NCMI and the church, which includes the teaching of pastors, common studies and involves the church in mission. So far we have arranged courses for more than 50% of the Lutheran pastors, trying to create an understanding of the importance of sharing the Gospel with the Jewish neighbours and challenging the church to be open, to accept and support Jewish believers in the congregations who want to express their Jewishness. Last month two Hungarian pastors spent three weeks in Israel, meeting with Messianic Jewish leaders and congregations in a project called “Sharing pastoral life”. Without the local church taking active part and supporting, we would never succeed.
2.2. Relationship with partner organizations
LCJE is a network of partner organizations, so maybe this should be my main point, even if networking in Jewish evangelism is far older than the Lausanne movement. Actually NCMI has always, from the very beginning 160 years ago, followed a strategy of partnership in mission. The first 50 years of our history we had no missionaries, but supported Jewish mission organizations, first in Germany, but also the London Society.
The NCMI of today (actually since 1949), has had a main focus on Jews living in the state of Israel. Founding congregations based on Jewish immigrants whom we knew from our previous ministry in Romania was our first calling in Israel. But we also realized quite soon that building congregations is not sufficient.
Example 1
First of all, our missionaries recognized that many of the elderly immigrants suffered and had problems being assimilated into the Jewish society. Among them were also Messianic Jews who had survived the Shoah. A vision to build a home for these needy and elderly Messianic Jews was conceived.
We could have said: It’s a good idea, but we have no resources or know-how to build and run such an institution. The leadership of the NCMI at that time did not look at the limitations, but rather the possibilities. Through our international network at that time, which was created through many years, the vision was spread and appeals sent out. Next year the Ebenezer Home will celebrate its 30th anniversary. By a common vision and sharing resources the Home became a reality. Even up till today there has been a multinational staff of employees and volunteers from supporting organizations.
Example 2
Another experience that we made was that the lack of a local institution to provide the messianic congregations with qualified leadership and programmes in Hebrew. In order to raise up a new generation of messianic leaders we started up Caspari Center with its programme “Theological Training by Extension”. Also this project was enabled through a joint venture of several organizations involved in Jewish evangelism and training.
Today several institutions with the same goal have been established, and to a certain extent replaced Caspari Center’s programme. It may be discussed if it is wise to spread know-how and resources on several training centers and institutions, but I will leave this topic for discussion.
Anyway, the development of Ebenezer Home as well as Caspari Center has proceeded from NCMI owned institutions till partner-owned and governed institutions with boards consisting of or elected by partners with mutual responsibility and mutual authority. We also se a development where local bodies are more involved in the governing and running of the institutions, and with local management. We aim at such a development. Transferring of authority does not mean that partnership is less important. Rather we would say that we are strengthening equal partnership, not only among the agencies, but also with the local body.
Example 3
We will not hide the fact that as an organization with long-term commitments based on agreements with partners we have had financial difficulties in keeping the level of support. In our own country we also have limited resources with regard to manpower. We have no mission training school ourselves, and screening of missionary candidates may take time.
We have especially felt the difficult times with regard to our ministry in Tel Aviv. After a split in the congregation in the beginning of the nineties, we did not have the resources ourselves, neither money nor manpower, to continue the work. Our good partnership with the Finnish Evangelical Lutheran Mission (FELM) solved the situation. At a time when our resources were limited, they assisted by sending staff and covering the personnel expenses related to this.
This partnership created a new vision: Why not define the Lutheran work at Immanuel Church in Tel Aviv/Yafo as a joint venture for all Nordic Lutheran mission agencies involved in Jewish evangelism. Joint Mission to Israel (JMI) today consists of 5 partner organizations, so that even small organizations (like the Faroese Israel Mission) that are not able to establish an organization abroad may be part of an important and bigger project, and even have influence on the development. The biblical principle of the strong and the weak is really illustrated in JMI.
Such a cooperation has really been a blessing to the local work in Tel Aviv, as well as to the cooperating partners. Shared responsibility for covering expenses and recruiting personnel has been important in order to run the business, and I feel that in this way we have been able to plan and work more strategically. The present Danish pastor replaced a Norwegian pastor, who replaced a Finnish pastor. In principle JMI is open for new partners, and today we are discussing partnership with a Lutheran organization outside the Nordic countries.
2.3. Relationship with the messianic movement
Relationship between the mission agencies and the local churches have often been regarded as a relationship between the strong donator and the weak recipient. This has sometimes created a dependency that hinders the growth of the local church.
It is very important that we, in our relationship with messianic congregations and institutions, create partnerships based on equal responsibilities, and stimulate independency with regard to finances and management.
There is no time for developing this topic here, but let me just raise a question: How do we as a mission organization involve our messianic partners in our own decision making process? Are we satisfied with just sending money and personnel, or are we open also to include our partners in developing our own strategies and give them a voice and vote when decisions are made?
For the future we should aim at a more equal and transparent partnership and relationship and stimulate mutual exchange of resources. I am quite convinced that as an agency we have much to learn and receive from the messianic movement today.
3. Challenges for the future
The geographical focus on Jewish evangelism has changed during the last decades. In the eighties there was a strong focus on the growth of messianic congregations in the USA. In the nineties the focus was directed towards FSU, and partly also South America. Today we have a strong focus on Europe, and especially Germany.
I don’t think I am wrong when I guess that the state of Israel in the coming years will be much more important for agencies involved in Jewish evangelism than it has been so far. If this is correct, does it have any impact on LCJE?
The messianic movement in Israel is still small. But over the last years there has been a tremendous interest in establishing new institutions. It seems like every messianic ministry or congregation need to have an institution in Israel, serving the whole body of Messianic Jews. I am questioning if this is a good strategy. It seems like owning or running an institution in Jerusalem is a certificate of success?
My question for LCJE is therefore: Is it possible to see LCJE as a the new network where we can share a common vision for the Jewish people and join in common efforts and acts in order to fulfil our dreams and visions? Would it be possible to realize the vision of Ebenezer Home and Caspari Center today? Do we see our own organizations, ministries and agencies as goals in themselves, or only as instruments for realizing a common biblical vision for the Jewish people: That all Israel might be saved?
Rolf Gunnar Heitmann
rolf@israelsmisjonen.no