by Olan Hendrix
There are simply too many foreign mission organizations. We may lack missionaries,’ preaching, and conversions, but there are too many separate missionary groups. The result: excessive overhead expense, duplication of effort, confusion in the minds of the Christian public.
There are simply too many foreign mission organizations. We may lack missionaries,’ preaching, and conversions, but there are too many separate missionary groups. The result: excessive overhead expense, duplication of effort, confusion in the minds of the Christian public.
We need to investigate the possibility of combining some of our organizations. Look at these figures from the August 31, 1965 Statistical Report of the Interdenominational Foreign Mission Association: (1) IFMA includes forty-seven missions with 8,413 missionaries and home staff members. (2) Twelve IFMA missions have 200 or more missionaries each, and comprise seventy-three percent of the total missionary and home staff population. The other thirty-five missions make up the remaining twenty-seven percent of the personnel. (3) Thirtyfive missions have fewer than 200 workers. (4) Twenty-four missions have fewer than 100 workers. (5) Sixteen missions have fewer than fifty workers. (6) Eight missions have fewer than twenty-five workers.1
SOUND REASONS FOR MERGER
There are sound reasons for merger.
1. Economy. Most IFMA missions are confronted with financial needs, and some are critical. Centralized administration and reduced overhead are desirable. It was rumored in mission circles a few years ago that a certain denomination discovered that approximately $100,000 could be saved annually by combining its home and foreign operations.
2. Efficiency. Suppose you linked twenty-five smallerand medium-sized IFMA missions. That would produce a mission with a total population of 800 plus, similar in size to The Evangelical Alliance Mission with its 825. Contrast the two situations: On the one hand you would have one mission, one headquarters, one set of publications, a few more than 800 missionaries, and a home staff of fourteen executives. On the other hand, you have twenty-five missions, twenty-five headquarters, twenty-five sets of publications, a similar number of missionaries, but a home executive staff in excess of sixty’ Which setup can we honestly say is the most efficient?
3. Ecumenism. Another primary reason for the consideration of merger is ecumenical union. The point here is not to imitate a pattern being set by the World Council of Churches. But in contrast with the view of ecumenism as an end in itself. with minimal regard to doctrine, our view of ecumenism should be a means to an end-"that the world might believe." The question here is not union among groups of divergent theological concepts, but within the ranks of IFMA itself.
OBSTACLES TO MERGER
There are obstacles to incorporating missions.
1 Compatibility. There needs to be enough variety in mission organizations so that any servant of the Lord can choose the one he feels at home with. However, do we need the extensive variety we have today?
2. The mission founder and/or leader. Miles Mace and George Montgomery wrote an industrially-oriented book about amalgamation entitled, Management Problems of Corporate Acquisitions, in which they said, "We found that in every company in which there was a successful acquisition program (merger), the chief operating executive was personally involved. There were no exceptions." It is not flattering, but we must admit that such matters as personal security, future, and scope of future activity all come to mind when mission executives are confronted with a question of mission merger. Can we afford to indulge in this personal interest in view of the unfinished task?
3. Organizational sentiment. Some feel that an organization brought into existence by the Lord must continue forever with the methods it first used. We need to reexamine our effectiveness and mode of operation in the light of the total missionary effort. The average suggestion from a factory employee for better ways of doing particular jobs is usually valid and useful for only four years, before it becomes obsolete and must be updated. In mission work our message is timeless, but we dare not assume this of our structure, procedure, and organization.
4. Time. National industrial figures show that for every 150 companies selected for possible merger, only one merger actually results. Merger takes time. We have not bad the time for study and negotiations that is necessary to bring about a merger. In the light of the critical hour in which we live we must make time.
5. Precedent. Usually in the past, merging religious organizations has been considered only when one or both organizations were failing. Therefore, we have subconsciously assumed that even to think of consolidation is to admit some sort of failure or decline of operation.
6. Fear. We tend to fear the headaches of other organizations, particularly when we do not know if and what the other is doing to solve its problems, and when we do not know the background of the trouble. We tend to be suspicious of and avoid problems with which we are not related, and in which we had no voice.
HOW TO ACCOMPLISH MERGER
How is merger to be accomplished? We need to think clearly and convincingly of mission merger as a principle and probability. Some research needs to be done. Someone has defined research as, "An activity where truthfulness is essential; in fact, truthfulness is the measure of its success. Truth does not inhabit the same orbit as vagueness and ambiguity, but insists upon definiteness and completeness."
There needs to be clear thinking, serious discussions, and negotiations. It would seem advisable to involve a third part in these discussions as soon as possible. Let the exploration be on the basis that transcends mere documents, facts, and figures. There must be warmth of human personality and compatibility of purpose, if mergers are ever to be effected. Do not come to documents and statements too soon. Look bevond them to the people who are serving the Lord, and the purposes to which they have committed themselves.
Everyone who contributes to missions can help bring about mergers. For example, pastors could be a stimulus to both missionaries and mission executives. Pastors who agree with the above thesis should discuss the matter with missions that benefit from their church’s support. Businessmen can help by questioning and evaluating a mission’s efficiency and economy with those who are directly involved in mission administration. Every donor desires that his money should accomplish the most in the winning of souls to Jesus Christ. He should also be concerned that the group handling his gifts use the funds wisely and effectively.
But obviously the great responsibility for consolidation rests with those who are already involved in mission administration. If we are to effect merger among our societies, it will necessarily involve the vision, burden, and approval of our constituency and membership as a whole. Only the Spirit of God can accomplish this, and He will, if we commit ourselves to Him and seek His guidance.
—–
This article is based on a paper given by Mr. Hendrix at the 1965 annual meeting of the Interdenominational Foreign Mission Association. It is aimed primarily at mission mergers from the standpoint of North American administration. The Editorial Committee would like to invite reader reaction to this proposal, for publication in subsequent issues. What do our readers think of the idea of mission mergers? What benefits might accrue to field operations should a merger be consummated at the home level? Should we consider merging missions working in the same country? Send your contributions, typed please, to the editorial office. Box 267. Springfield. Pa. 19064.
Endnote
1. While my article is based on a study of IFMA-member mission,, and the appeal for amalgamation is addressed primarily to these boards, I believe the principles are valid and applicable in other mission situations as well.
—–
Copyright © 1966 Evangelism and Missions Information Service (EMIS). All rights reserved. Not to be reproduced or copied in any form without written permission from EMIS.
