Non Profit--For Profit

One of the most common objections or "concerns" that people raise when it comes to BAM is that doing business will lead to greed or distract you from ministry in the pursuit of money. At first I was surprised when people brought this up. I thought to myself, "If you know me you HAVE to know that is NOT what I'm about." But some of these people didn't know me. And when thinking about others doing BAM, I might have the very same concern if I didn't know them that well. I might have that suspicion, "Is this just a fancy way for them to use God to get rich?"

Here in The Location stinginess is more of a cultural sin than greed. It's like, You shouldn't withhold your money from me--that's wrong! But it's not so wrong (in people's minds) to want more money all the time. But greed is a real thing and it certainly can and does affect us. We should not take it for granted that greed isn't going to raise its head and tempt us. Our defense should never just be, "Oh, I would never do that."

So if a Christian missionary starts a business with the goal/plan of doing BAM, what is going to keep them on the right track? If the business is successful then they would not need to be financially supported by anyone. Therefore, if they would start teaching heresy or if they dropped all ministry just to do business and make money, there would be no recourse of "pulling their funds" to stop it.

I think I have a way to help address this concern, and it is how we have set things up with our work here in The Location. That is to have non-profit ownership of for-profit enterprises.

That means that the missionary (or the minister, if done at home) is not the one who owns the business but is the one who runs it. He or she wouldn't be keeping all the money, nor would it be at their discretion to use as they please. Neither would there be shareholders who control the profits or who are expecting/desiring to get a return on their investment. Instead, all the profits would stay within the company and organization that owns the business.

In the US it is not against the law for non-profits (even tax-exempt organizations) to do profitable business. While some activities would still be taxed, the important thing is how profits are handled. For this set up, profits would not go in anyone's pockets but would be used for the stated purpose of the non-profit organization. So, it is possible for something like a church (a non-profit organization) to own a business like a coffee shop. The income, in addition to covering expenses, can be given to the missions budget or help feed the homeless or any other kind of ministry.

Along with non-profit ownership of for-profit enterprises comes oversight and accountability. I believe that in BAM we should have as thorough a ministry plan as we do a business plan, and vice versa. The board of directors can then hold the missionary(ies)/minister(s) accountable to not only run the business well, but to put excellence into the ministry as well.

So, imagine some possibilities:

A non-profit organization is created in the US and opens several different businesses. One is something like a YMCA center where people come to work out, play sports, take classes on all kinds of different things... and the staff are the ministers who not only interact with the customers but also offer special short courses on the Bible, do discipleship, and run children's programs. Another team of ministers start a coffee shop to reach out to the college and artsy crowd while also having a worship night once a week; hosting group meetings to overcome substance or pornography addictions; and partnering with a homeless mission to help provide food and volunteers on a regular basis. Another group of ministers start an organic farm in a more rural area and host area youth during the summer to help do the work of the farm while also discipling them. The income from the produce covers all expenses.

And I'm sure there are a lot more creative and more impacting ideas out there that others can/will think of. Perhaps this will help you to start brainstorming.

I have actually created a non-profit organization in the US to be the owner of our business here in The Location, and also future businesses we may start in the States that are associated with what we're doing over here. But it takes teams of people with a common vision to do all of this. I'm excited about the possibilities.

So, let's hear your ideas...

The Blessings of Restricted Access

I have often said that our situation here in The Location (a "closed" country) forces us to do things right. And this is not something I ever thought about before I came here.

Here in The Location...

We are not the ones up in front leading things.
We do not run big ministry programs.
We do not build church buildings.
We do not pay preachers.
We do small discipleship rather than mass evangelism.
We do Business as Missions.
We set up National Tentmakers.

I always thought of working in "closed," "restricted access," or "creative access" countries as simply an obstacle to overcome. I wanted to work in such a place over an "open country" because I knew that many of the most unreached peoples are living in restricted access countries. So, for me, doing other things besides traditional missions was simply an "evil necessity" because of the political situation. That is, we do business or tentmaking or development projects because we have to do it just to get in, but if this country was open, we'd dispose of those other things and just do ministry.

I don't view it this way any longer.

I discovered that the things I felt I was "forced" to do because of restricted access were actually the best things that a place like The Location needs from someone like me--a missionary from the West. And so I also discovered that the other things I might be doing if this were an "open" country are sometimes NOT the best things to be doing. My situation caused me to "think outside the box" when I was mostly used to traditional missionary approaches I had seen in places like Mexico, Haiti and Latin America and heard about from places like India and Thailand.

Some of the things I learned:

• That as a foreigner I should not do things the nationals can do, but try to contribute in ways that are mostly impossible for the nationals to do without outside help.
• That building things like church buildings and Bible colleges tends to institutionalize Christianity as a religion rather than growing God's church as a living community.
• That for the most part we ignore the idea of "The Priesthood of All Believers" in our practices both at home and on "the mission field."
• That sustainability and reproducibility are definite and realizable goals and not just long-term hopes.
• That not only is discipleship a bigger need than evangelism (in our popular understanding of those two things), but that real evangelism is discipleship (in Jesus' understanding).
• That slow, deliberate growth is strong and ultimately more effective.
• That it is right for Christians to be deliberate about being in the world rather than isolating ourselves from the world, even though isolation is our pattern around the world.

So, for me, restricted access has become an opportunity to learn how to do things the right way. Another thing I have found myself saying often is that if The Location were to open up, begin offering missionary visas and inviting Christian workers, I would not change my approach to what we're doing here. It would basically stay the same.

Now I feel that even if God calls me to work in an open country (or in America) I would still do ministry in this fashion. That is a strong emphasis on discipleship and leadership training; indigenous leadership from the earliest stages of church planting; business as ministry that helps those who are poor to be able to feed and support themselves; setting up national tentmakers; and an emphasis on simple organic church communities that are easily reproducible and that live out the Priesthood of All Believers concept.

We should not view "tentmaking" or Business as Missions as a necessary evil for working in "closed" countries. Instead, we should consider how these approaches might work in more open places, too.

National Tentmakers

Okay, I have to admit, I am very excited about this. As far as I know, I coined the term "national tentmaker" but it wouldn't surprise me if someone else has used this term for years without me being aware. That's okay with me.

There is a really good book about Tentmaking written by Peter Lai. I really recommend reading it because there is a lot of good stuff in there. However, one tendency I don't really like is that it seems Lai has taken "tentmaking" and made it an office. You know what I mean, "God gave some to be apostles, some to be pastors, some to be tentmakers..." I don't agree with that tendency.

Tentmaking, for one, is a modern term we use for people doing any kind of vocational work with the purpose of doing mission work. Originally, Paul actually made tents. (Well, he was a leather-worker, I'm told, which is the meaning of the term.) So, we've taken his example, assuming that he did this to fund himself (which I'm sure he did) and applied it to other types of vocations or businesses done with the view of doing missions. And I'm fine with all of that.... I just would never want to become dogmatic about it, "Well, you're not a REAL tentmaker!"

Traditionally we think of tentmakers being tentmakers for two purposes:

1. Access to restricted areas (such as "closed" countries)
2. Financial support

But I think there is a third purpose and is perhaps the best reason to be a tentmaker:

3. Association

Being a tentmaker allows a Christian worker to relate to regular people as regular people and not as some kind of religious clergy that are often hard for the local people to figure out. It also shows that we are not Christians because we're paid to be Christians or because it is a requirement for our job. We follow Jesus because we ourselves really, really want to. And that goes a long way in encouraging others we meet to consider believing in Christ themselves. They can't just say, "Well, I'm not a pastor (like you)."

But we most often think of a tentmaker as being a missionary.... that is, someone (usually from the West) who goes cross-culturally. But after serving here at our location for a number of years I asked myself, Why can't the nationals be tentmakers themselves without going cross-culturally? If tentmaking is an effective way for me to do ministry, why can't the nationals do ministry through tentmaking, too? If we really believe in the priesthood of all believers then I think that national tentmaking is the natural conclusion.

Now, this opened up a whole new can of worms in my thinking. And there is too much to put into one blog post. However, I still believe that nationals can be tentmakers for the same three reasons: Access, Financial Support and Association.

Access. In our location nationals are not free to travel about the country and live in any village they choose for any reason. They can move to a village they want, but they have to have a good reason. If they simply go to preach the gospel they will get arrested and all their property will be confiscated. However, if they go to do some sort of business then they are allowed to live in a village where they can do that.

Financial Support. In my post "Easy Money" I talked about some of the problems with simply paying people to do ministry. Well, there are more. For one, it is illegal in my location for a foreigner to hire a national to "spread religion." So, when people do that (and they do) it has to be "under the table." But it leaves the national without a good explanation for those in authority about the source of their funding. It raises suspicion. I personally know nationals who have been arrested and disappeared by the authorities never to be heard from again. But when a national works for a legitimate company or does legitimate business, the officials can clearly see how they make a living, and suspicions are eased.

Association. Beyond government officials, being a national tentmaker helps other nationals accept them as well. These national tentmakers are able to demonstrate that they aren't Christians because they're being paid to be Christians. They have to work to make a living just like everyone else. They follow Christ because they really believe in him, not because anyone expects them to.

So, to answer the question in my last post of what do we do with people who we've discipled... Well, some of them return home. Others go to work with us in some fashion. And some are being set up as national tentmakers.

During their time with us as interns we are able to get to know them really well. We don't promise to set anyone or everyone up as a national tentmaker... we don't even dangle it out in front of them. But when we see those who have a true heart for God and know they are ready, this is our goal--to put them in a position to reach people in very unreached places with the transforming love of Christ by doing a business that makes sense for our location.