Not many people understand the power of partnership in missions like Phil Strout does. As a former missionary and now a senior pastor of the Lewiston Vineyard in Lewiston, Maine, Phil has the advantage of seeing missions from both ends of the spectrumthe giving and receiving. Cutting Edge caught up with Phil to get his working insights on the power of partnerships in missions and how church plants can get involved in the mission field sooner rather than later.
What is so important about partnerships among churches in missions?
Partnerships is missional thinking. It’s a strategy of churches working together because churches that work together can do more than any one church can do on its own. It’s synergistic and has the concept of total body, where every joint supplies something to the cause. For me, the idea of partnerships in missions came during my time in Chile in the late 80s. Being on the mission field, I realized that many missionaries didn’t have local contact from back home. Fortunately, we did have good support, and as a result, we had become a hospital of sorts for other missionaries. That’s when I realized there has to be a partnership between missionaries and local churches. There’s got to be a better way of doing missions than we’re doing them.
When a church takes on 15 to 20 missionaries, the missionaries all get $25 or $50 per month and the people in the church have no idea what’s going on. When I was with some missionaries in Chile, we thought about how we would do the church planting collectively. So when I moved back to the U.S., I thought What if a bunch of churches in New England started a church planting movement in Spain and wanted to reach the Basque people there? We wanted to target one place and stick with that and give money and resources there until it could become its own movement. And every church could make its own level of contributionone take care of administrative concerns, another handle travel arrangements, another lead the preparation for the trip, another handle communications with the churches in Spain, etc.
When you were on the mission field, what did it mean to you to have local church involvement?
It meant everything. I did not have what I wished I had. That’s probably why I have such a commitment to this. If it’s a cross-cultural mission, it’s such a battle to fight and it’s great to have other people in your corner. They are thinking about you and helping youand it’s not just a check at the end of the month. I did have some very committed churches and had friendships. I saw missionaries around me drop like flies from a lack of honest relational connection.
Why do you feel partnerships are more effective than mission agencies?
[bctt tweet=”Church without mission isn’t even a church. – Phil Strout #vineyardglobalfamily” quote=”Church without mission isn’t even a church. “]
There are a couple of things that are very important to us. We believe that the church is the entity that the Lord has raised up and it’s the community of faith that expands. The church is missional. It doesn’t send money to a certain group. It’s missional at its very core. Church without mission isn’t even a church. And we wanted to see that championed. We call it local church-based missions. We see that it begins in the neighborhoods on its way to the nations. It’s not that we endorse mission agencies because it works. But we don’t want the church to abdicate its very central core values.
What churches have you seen transformed through getting involved in partnerships?
I think New England’s effort in Spain over the long haul has impacted a handful of churches. We have a 10 to 12 year commitment in Spain. It’s been hard and difficult. But the unity it has created among the churches has been phenomenal.
The Vineyard’s Mexico partnership has been phenomenal in the way the churches have been connected. There are quite a number of church planting partnerships. It’s happening all over the globe. But whenever I see partnerships who have stuck with it for a while, the friendship among those churches is very rich. The upstate New York churches in the Dominican Republic have done a lot of church planting together and are very healthy. Both ends prosper. You have more attention in the targeted area, especially if it’s geographically centered. If the partnership is gathered in South Florida and targeting one area, they have a better chance of building relationships even better than those scattered across the U.S.
What are some ways you think partnerships can improve?
Because we’re so committed to the local church-based missions, it seems to me that we are learning as churches how to do missions as we go. And we’ve learned a lot through experiences from the agencies and incorporating in a greater level of care for those who work for us in the other cultures. Strategically, it’s just not a matter of doing something but thinking how we can reach the unreached and drawing from others’ wisdom. At first when the partnerships started, we were jumping into easier targeted areas. At that time, the whole concept of theater was in play. We were concentrating on Latin America, but as time has gone on, some of the churches minister in lightly evangelized, lightly churched areas. Now we’re reaching into difficult access areas that are known as the 10-40 Window in missions. Instead of abdicating to the local agencies who do it, we’ve had to learn better missional thinking and strategical thinking and not just easy access area.
How can church plants get involved in missions?
Partnerships are ideal for church plants for the following reason: It allows you to be part of something bigger than yourself. It allows you to participate in being outward. You begin thinking missionally in your neighborhood and the nations. The fact is a church plant doesn’t have a lot of money. But when you partner with other church plants and established churches, you can authentically stand before your church and say, “We are committed to reach Muslims in inner city London with seven other churches.” Maybe you only have $50 or $100 a month because you’re a new church plant. But that money put together with several other churches allows you to honestly tell your church that you are reaching out to the world, instead of sending a $25 check to a couple on the mission field that you have little or no contact with. Then your people get into it. They want to go on missions. And they get involved with it.
[bctt tweet=”The optimum value of partnership is the fact that it works for churches of all sizes. – Phil Strout” quote=”The optimum value of partnership is the fact that it works for churches of all sizes.”]
The optimum value of partnership is the fact that it works for churches of all sizes. It allows church plants and small churches to get in at a significant level of ministry.
What are some first steps a church planter can take in getting involved in a partnership?
If you’re a church planter or thinking of church planting, I would talk to the area pastoral care leader in your area and ask what is going on with cross-cultural missions in your area. Get involved right from the start. Every region has a task force representative and they can tell you what’s going. There are plenty of ways to find out what is going on in your area.
As you get started in a church plant, according to the tree is the seed. Thinking missionally has to be in there from the beginning. And not just thinking about it from the cross culturally in your area, but also in distant areas. If you go looking for that, it’ll be easier to make that happen. If you do that, you’ll be planting churches and probably sooner than you think. If not, you’ll be sending $25 tokens around the world and trying feel good about it without really making as big of an impact.
