The Bishop as Principal Missionary Agent of the Diocese

Diocesan Partnerships are forged for a variety of reasons and in a variety of ways. For instance, over a decade ago a decision was made by Province V that each diocese of the province would enter into partnership with at least one diocese from Nigeria. Those partnerships were forged largely by initial contact between the bishops, and in the Diocese of Michigan there was some success with that venture. Here in Indianapolis a relatively small group of persons was involved in sustaining those relationships, and the impact they had on the overall life of the diocese was minimal.

As an agent for mission in the diocese, the bishop might first draw together a group of people who have not only enthusiasm, but the willingness to learn about what it takes to engage in the enterprise of mission. And it doesn't hurt to recruit someone who has a little experience as well! Here in Indianapolis we are blessed to have several of each!

A mission partnership which truly engages a diocese requires the work of a good committee, funding, ceaseless communication, and a broad base of general diocesan support. This means that lots of people have to be committed and involved to make it happen and to make it meaningful. Even with all of this in place it would be an uphill battle for the diocese to maintain an effective relationship without the active participation

of the bishop...... for a variety of reasons.

The bishop and the diocesan mission committee can support each other and hold each other accountable for such things as budgeting, the planning of visits, recruiting of volunteers when we are hosts, and recruitment, training and formation of team members when we are guests.

Another reason active participation by the bishop is key, is that the bishops in such partnerships quite rightly expect that there will be,mutuality and the willingness to become part of each other's lives and journeys. Bishops must be willing to travel and to share fully in the life and worship of the companion diocese - and to extend reciprocal invitations to partner bishops.

The effort involved in developing such relationships deserves to be mutual, and to have a similar place of priority in the programs of the partner dioceses, which means that the budget process will be impacted. Unless the bishop is supportive, budget allocations for mission partnerships may be difficult to sustain.

It is also true that the bishop has the most visibility and the tallest bully pulpit when it comes to raising funds for various causes and projects, and the bishop's voice can be especially helpful when extra funds for mission are required.

As important as all of these things are, it is the articulation of the reasons for mission partnerships in the first place, and the interpretation of what is being gained by them that may be one of the bishop's most important and challenging contributions.

t '

The reasons for entering into these partnership agreements will not be immediately apparent to all members of the diocese, and again, though many people may be involved in "talking it up," the bishop is the most public articulator of the theology and goals of mission partnerships.

The first challenge may be to distinguish between "mission work" and "diocesan partnerships."

We are aware that for many Christians "mission work" has traditionally meant sending missionaries to foreign lands with the idea that they will evangelize those who have not heard the Good News of God in Jesus, and so will bring them into the fold. For them, the mission enterprise is primarily about the salvation of souls. Once a mission field has been established, the work shifts to building up the community of faith and eventually to raising up indigenous teachers, evangelists and clergy to continue the work of ensuring that every person has the chance to choose to give his or her life to Christ.

On the way to saving souls a great many other good things are also accomplished in areas such as education, medical care and economic enterprise. But the agenda for this kind of

mission work is set entirely by those sending the missionaries, and what is likely to

provide the most satisfaction is the publication of statistics which show that an ever increasing number of people have been saved and joined the church.

The theological emphasis here is on the atoning death of Jesus, and the need for every person to deliberately claim that saving action of God in Jesus Christ for him or herself.

But we must be aware that for many Christians today the motivation for mission is very different. Many Christians share a conviction that in Jesus all persons have in fact already been saved, and that those who are unaware of that fact are not automatically consigned by God to Hell. For them, the goal of mission work is not to save souls, but rather to live among others, sharing Jesus' own message ofthe realm of God, always seeking ways to enter and inhabit that realm.

In the midst of that enterprise a great deal of good is often done in areas such as education, medical care and economic enterprise --- so these two approaches can seem very similar, especially when we acknowledge that in this kind of mission the agenda has often been set entirely by those engaging in the ministry of mission.

But where the theological impetus for the first group is the Atonement, the theological motivation for the second is the Incarnation, and the need for persons to appropriate that saving action of God in Jesus the Christ, and to share the living of it with their Lord.

What will prove most satisfying to those whose support for mission has this focus, will be reports that people are living together in new ways which coincide with the teachings of Jesus about the kingdom of God, including the seeking of justice, peace, and in the American mind, capitalistic free enterprise!

2.

The use of the language of "partnership" has raised the importance of rethinking old models of "doing mission." Because whether one's primary theological focus is the Atonement or the Incarnation it has always been possible to adopt the attitude that "what I bring is something they don't yet have and very much need - therefore I am here to do

them good..... "

But this is never the goal of partnerships, and it is crucial that the bishop be able to articulate this difference clearly.

A partnership is mutual; it assumes that each party will bring something much needed by the other into the relationship. When we form partnerships, we do so with the goal of sharing what we believe, and learning from others.

In partnerships, we experience the context of life in places that are sometimes vastly different from our own. We ask questions, we share experiences, we pray and sing, and dance, and work together.

We learn about the culture, the politics, and the economics of our partners, and the ways in which these things form the context for the living of their faith. We learn from each other about the challenges and anxieties of life and the causes for joy.

We ask questions:

How did we come to embrace the faith, in our different circumstances? How do we carry forward what we have embraced as true? How do we interpret and use the Bible? How has the Book of Common Prayer been adapted for use in our context? How is the Church structured in this place? What is the role of lay persons, bishops, priests and deacons? What are the roles taken by women, and men and children in the church in this place, and is this in conformity to the surrounding culture, or a challenge to it?

How are people of other faiths perceived here? How does the Church relate to them - if at all? What is the relationship of the Church to government? How does that relationship affect the functioning of the Church?

We learn from each other the most pressing needs of the Church in each place, and we pray and reflect together on ways to provide support, encouragement and help to each other in meeting those needs.

We even dare to dream together....... . .

For the interest and enthusiasm of a diocesan household to be maintained over time, someone has to be communicating and interpreting what is being learned on a regular basis, and encouraging others to do the same. Articles in the diocesan paper, news on the web site, intentional sharing of partnership news at clergy gatherings, parish visitations are all ways in which the bishop can encourage ongoing and full communication about the partnerships.

Here in the Diocese of Indianapolis we have two global partnerships. When our partnerships in Nigeria expired in 2000, we wanted very much to forge new ones. We already had some ties to the Dioceses of Ecuador, and Brasilia, and to the Episcopal Church in Sudan. What I particularly wanted was to keep a relationship in Africa, but also to have one in this hemisphere.

What I proposed to our GEM representative, Fred Farrell, was that we think about having a relationship in each place that would also connect the African diocese to the one in South America. We knew of no other such three-way partnerships, and so had no pattern to follow in setting it up.

We did some research on the dioceses we had in mind, and I initiated contact with the bishops of Brasilia and Bar, in Sudan. I invited each of them to consider a partnership with the Diocese of Indianapolis that would also be a partnership with each other. They both agreed, and in April of 2002, I went with a group of people from this diocese to visit in Sudan for about ten days. The bishop of Brasilia and a translator joined us.

In July of that year we took a group to Brasilia, including the bishop and three others from Bor. In June of2003 we had groups from both Brasilia and Bor come to us at the same time, so they could be learning about us together. They spent two weeks with us, and through a series of Deanery events and their participation as preachers on Sundays, they were able to help our members put a face on our partnerships.

While we were all together here in Indianapolis, we planned for a gathering of young people to be held in Brasilia the following summer. Each diocese was to choose six young adults - three men and three women, to make the visit, along with an adult chaperone.

(unfortunately, the Sudanese were never able to get their visas - they were at the

Nairobi airport ready to leave, but had to return home)

The depth of all those experiences has been a real gift; encountering the vast differences in culture alone has opened all our eyes to the ways in which our brothers and sisters live out their faith. Our hope is to make another visit to Bor after the rainy season this year, taking partners from Brasilia as well.

We have learned that both Brasilia and Bor have a deep concern for the education and training of clergy and lay leaders. Each has a concern for the educational and economic needs of the poor among and around them. In addition, Bor has struggled with the ravages of war, and the need to reach out to internal refugees and to learn to contribute to making the peace agreement work.

As you can imagine, requests for money come to my office on a regular basis - asking help for this school or that person's ministry. It would be easy to get caught up in responding to such requests, but we have agreed not to do it.

[I

l .

Our relationship with Bor and Brasilia includes a firm understanding that any money sent for projects will be channeled through their diocesan offices, to ensure that diocesan priorities are being upheld. We do not want to put ourselves in the position of undercutting diocesan priorities by sending money directly to others who may ask for it.

But because partnerships are not just about money, there are other ways for the bishop to be communicating, over and over, the "value added" to diocesan life. The rich learnings

have already been mentioned, but let me just add that at this particular point in the history of the Anglican Communion, it is more important than ever that we have brothers and sisters around the world who are not getting all their information about us from the internet, and can say, "I know what the Church in the United States is like. I've visited there and seen with my own eyes what they do, how they pray, what their life is like. We know and love each other. Their life is bearing good fruit."

Our cultural context makes it possible for us to offer to our Sudanese brothers and sisters we provide an example of being Christian in the midst of religious diversity. (Indiana is the most religiously diverse State in the country!) We provide the religious experience of a people who were not colonized into their faith and observance. We have a very similar church structure, but because of the war, the ECS has not been able to carry out all the provisions of its Constitution and Canons, and that has caused some heartache and acrimony within our companion diocese of Bor. We can provide the example and some training to help them get established as they want to be, and the Diocese of Brasilia can provide that help to them as well.

In Brasilia there are people who have become skilled practitioners in healing with the use of herbs and plants. The people ofBor also knew these things, but because of the war, they have lost some of it. From Brasilian brothers and sisters they will regain some of their own heritage.

Ecumenical relationships are thriving in Brasilia in ways that are not always true here. We have some things to learn from them about how to listen, learn from, and accept each other.

And Bor has been teaching us all about the steadfast faith which believes when there seems to be no reason to believe - when faith means being willing to keep putting one foot in front of the other because there is nothing left but the hope of faith and trust in God.

What a visiting team sees and experiences must be shared fully with the diocese, but there are times when the bishop's role as communicator expands beyond diocesan borders.

Following our visit to Sudan in 2002, I shared what I had seen and heard with my colleagues in the House of Bishops. Most of the bishops had a chance to hear from a group of Lost Boys when the House of Bishops met in Vermont in September of2001,

.$,

but I was the first US bishop to visit within Sudan since the 1970's, and our team had promised that we would tell their story at very opportunity.

So I told my colleagues about the living conditions we encountered, the poverty, the terrible longing of the people to return to their homes, and the cruel separation from family members they could not be sure were still alive. I told them of our visit to the refugee camp at Kakuma in Kenya, about the very rustic "conference center" where we were able to tune in CNN Europe each evening for an hour or so, never hearing a word about Sudan.

I also told them of the deep hope and faith we encountered, of having our feet washed when we entered a new village, of the endless singing and dancing, the prayer and worship. I told them of meeting a generation of young people who had only heard of home - .and of the adults who taught the children to have hope for the future because they trusted that God would bring them home again just as surely as the Exiles had been gathered home from Babylon.

I told them about the 7 year old girls who sang to me about wanting to grow up to be a bishop!

I told them of the tremendous generosity of spirit we encountered, and the determination we had seen to learn and study and grow in the faith. And then I asked them to DO SOMETHING! At the very least, I asked them to pray for peace in Sudan, but even more, to learn about our brothers and sisters there, and to discover ways to be helpful and supportive of them.

Since that time, at least two other bishops have visited Sudan (they went in the legal way!) and several others have begun plans for forming mission partnerships. The role of bishops is not just to be missionary agents within the dioceses they serve, but beyond them as well.

But what makes any bishop effective - and I say this with humility and gratitude to our mission partners - is the willingness to be changed. I would say that it helps me a great deal to think of these visits as pilgrimages - visits made to places that we already count

as holy, because we know that God has worked wonders among the people there and we want to come into contact with the mystery and marvel of those works.

We cmmot enter deeply into the lives of others and allow them into our own, without being open to change. A partnership of this kind expands the circle of interdependence. We open ourselves to respond to requests, but we also ask for help.

When we pray for our partners we call to mind the things that make up their struggles and their triumphs. We offer to God our own yearnings for the success of their ministries, and take comfort in knowing that they are praying for us as well. It seems impossible to me to remain unchanged in the midst of such a relationship.

Pilgrimages to other parts of the world can always open our eyes to the beauty of God's world, the marvelous variety in nature, and the boundless creativity of our brothers and sisters. And we learn to look at ourselves and our faith through new eyes.

I remember being nearly done in by the heat in Sudan, and having someone say to me, "But I don't understand why anyone would want to live in a part of the world where you have to pay for heat!"

I have also heard a young Sudanese man say that there were times when he wondered what his people had done wrong - that their lives were so painful. That sometimes he thought maybe God had made them for an experiment and not for life. He then went on to say that even so, he knew God had been with them and would deliver them from their suffering.

And I will never forget the women, who brought food to a celebration, holding the dishes above their heads and coming into the compound on their knees in the dust, singing and thanking God that people had come to hear their story and to share their journey. I could not view my own life in the same way ever again.

In our own members who have joined in our pilgrimages I have been blessed by their sense of excitement and awe, concern and commitment, and the prayerful and humbling recognition that in these partnerships we have as much to receive as to give. I have seen our own members transformed and their own faith energized as they come to see their own lives in new ways.

In all of this I have been changed, and if I am effective at all as an agent of mission in this place, it is because of brothers and sisters here and across the globe, and the Holy Spirit whose never-ending presence envelops us all.

Mission partnerships, if they are faithful, must be about the conversion of everyone involved... .and conversion often includes having to leave behind treasured assumptions, prejudices and agendas.

But perhaps the most important aspect of being a missionary agent is to pray. I became convinced long ago that prayer shapes ministry; and wherever the life of prayer is meager and sporadic the ministry will reveal that. And where the life of prayer is disciplined and intentional the ministry will reveal that as well, because in prayer we make ourselves available to God.

My prayer is that more and more of our members will open themselves to the ministry of mission, embracing the conversion that partnerships must include; and that together with our brothers and sisters we can become agents of the justice, peace, and reconciliation that are signs of God's reign among us and within us.

+Catherine Waynick

GEM Conference

June 2005, Christ Church Cathedral