Losing Sight of the Frontier Mission Task: What’S Gone Wrong with the Demographics? by R

Reassessing the Frontiers Losing Sight of the Frontier Mission Task: What’s Gone Wrong with the Demographics? by R. W. Lewis stared in shock at the bar graph. It was on the website of one of the most extensive databases of unreached people groups (UPGs) in the world. “How can the Scottish people group,” I thought, “be the largest unreached but Iengaged people group in the world?” I was baffled. A quick search on the Internet revealed that Scotland not only has many churches but also has renewal movements going on within the Church of Scotland and other Protestant denominations. But further down on that same bar graph were the Japanese with far fewer churches. Even farther down were some large Muslim and Hindu people groups with no believers whatsoever and very few missionaries trying to engage them. All of these people groups were in the same category: unreached but engaged—engaged because at least one missionary is working with them. Today people groups with high numbers of Christians are being classified as unreached people groups in some databases, simply because less than 2% of the Christians are in separate evangelical denominations. The unintended consequences of these kinds of data representations are alarming: unreached peoples groups with no believers among them will not receive the witnesses they need if they are not clearly distinguished from those with thousands of believers already. For example, let’s compare the needs of the 46 million French people in France 1 and 45 million Shi’a Muslims in India.2 Both are categorized as unreached but engaged. But the Shi’a Muslims have few believers, no known fellowships and only a handful of people trying to reach them. Meanwhile, France has 1.2 million Protestants, R. W. Lewis studied the history including 500,000 evangelicals who make up 1% of the population. The of Christian missions in both her undergraduate and graduate degrees, country has thousands of evangelical churches (2,263) and a reported aver- and in the 1970s helped her missiolo- age annual evangelical growth rate of 2.4%. Finally, there are some 1500 gist father, Dr. Ralph D. Winter, map Protestant (mostly evangelical) foreign missionaries working within its bor- unreached peoples. She is a missionary scholar-practitioner who has min- ders.3 The relative need for help is extremely different but is being lost in cur- istered with her husband among the rent data representations, with the result that many missionaries go to France Muslims of North Africa and South Asia for over thirty years. but very few go to the 300 million Muslims living in South Asian countries. International Journal of Frontier Missiology 35:1 Spring 2018•5 6 Losing Sight of the Frontier Mission Task: What’s Gone Wrong with the Demographics? Somehow the frontier mission task has who were trying to help Christians in with a) no movements to Christ of become confused and obscured. How people groups that already had their own their own and b) virtually no laborers did we lose sight of the frontier people churches—whether or not they were ac- to bring them the message. groups—namely, those that have not tive or in need of revival or reformation. Yet after forty years, far less than 1% of yet had any missiological breakthrough In the early 80s, the term used for people the global mission workforce is going to with a resulting movement of believers groups requiring frontier mission efforts these frontier people groups that make in their people group? was changed to unreached people groups, up roughly one third of the world’s Discovering the Frontier which meant “people groups without an population. The vast majority of mis- indigenous church-planting movement.” sionaries are still going to people groups Mission Task A number of agencies arose (e.g., Joshua that already have strong churches and Over four decades ago, demographers Project and Adopt-a-People Clearing movements to Christ. Why? at World Vision’s MARC and mission House) to try to figure out and illustrate I believe the primary cause of dispropor- scholars at Fuller Theological Seminary’s which people groups were unreached tionate sending is a lack of clear demo- School of World Mission (SWM) real- people groups so that missionaries could graphics. The frontier people groups, ized that there remained thousands of be sent to them. However, as chronicled 6 those which have never had any move- cultures without a witness to Christ. One in David Datema’s recent article, this ment to Christ, are not being distinctly of those SWM professors, my father, initial definition of UPG was quickly highlighted. Changing the criteria of the late missiologist Dr. Ralph Winter, broadened and eventually has led to the 4 unreached people groups, such as includ- chose the term hidden people groups to confusion I wish to address in this article. ing all people groups with less than 2% refer to overlooked people groups that evangelical in this category, has resulted in had neither any indigenous movement the inclusion of many people groups with of believers in Christ nor many witnesses strong national movements to Christ. coming from other cultures. Why are most Dr. Winter showed the desperate plight missionaries still going Today many maps and charts of un- of these hidden people groups graphi- reached people groups do not clearly cally on the pie chart called “Penetrat- to people groups that distinguish between: 5 ing the Last Frontiers.” As a recent have strong churches 1. people groups that have not had graduate of Caltech, I worked with my any movements to Christ (fron- father to show the statistics on that pie and movements tier people groups); chart. He wanted to clearly distinguish to Christ? 2. people groups that now have sus- between those non-Christians who tainable indigenous movements could be reached by Christians in their among them, though small, and; own culture and the people in hidden 3. people groups with a lot of non- people groups, which were culturally evangelical or even nominal distant non-Christians—those who The Purpose of Frontier Christians who still need help were so sufficiently different culturally Missions Demographics: with renewal and outreach to and linguistically from any Christian Strategic Deployment their own group. church that they could not realistically be assimilated into existing fellowships The frontier mission task is to catalyze These three types of people groups need but needed their own fellowships. self-sustaining indigenous movements different missiological approaches. No- to Christ in every people group that tice that it is possible to partner with The termfrontier missions was coined at does not yet have one. I will refer to indigenous/national churches in the that time because the word missions was these people groups as frontier people latter two kinds of people groups, but 7 being applied broadly and legitimately groups. This task includes identifying not in the first kind. Although all three to many different mission endeavors. and overcoming barriers to that goal. are being classified as unreached, only The term frontier missions sought to the frontier people groups (#1) require specify the pioneering or frontier mission The purpose of unreached people a cross-cultural effort by any witness, task facing those going to people groups group demographics is strategic de- even if that witness is coming from “where Christ has not been named . not ployment of missionaries: to mobilize adjacent people groups with believers building on another’s foundation” (Rom. churches and agencies to send workers but distinct cultures and identities. 15:20). This task was to be distinguished to the people groups where they are from the very legitimate evangelistic most needed, specifically frontier peo- Since most churches prefer to send peo- and discipling task of those missionaries ple groups—unreached people groups ple to partner with existing Christians International Journal of Frontier Missiology R. W. Lewis 7 and church movements, the frontier people groups are inadvertently eliminated aving a new term will help clarify the from deployment options. The result is distinctive needs of frontier people groups and that the areas with the most Christians receive the most missionaries: Oceania H the different problems faced in pioneering work. receives 300 foreign missionaries per Several problems confusing the to develop resources that have helped million people, Latin America receives frontier task will be discussed in detail us refocus the mission movement 162, Europe 146, North America 113, below, but here is one quick example: on reaching every people group on and Africa 93. However, all of Asia the Scottish people have a long history earth. Mission agency leaders, like my receives on average only 13 foreign mis- of indigenous movements to Christ husband and me, and mobilization or- sionaries per million people, with India and a high percentage of Protestant ganizations have been very dependent coming in very low at only 7 foreign 8 adherents, but few separate evangeli- on their data to determine strategic missionaries per million. cal denominations. Currently the IMB deployment. Having spent the last 9 Current UPG demographic databases people groups website does not track couple years discussing the need for do not prioritize clearly the people the percentage of a people in a given clearer demographic representations groups with NO existing churches— group who consider themselves Chris- of that task, I have been impressed by let alone no believers—with whom to tian (whether Protestant, Catholic, or the deep commitment of all involved in work. So recruitment and deployment Orthodox, etc.), but only the percent- the frontier mission task. I present now of missionaries around the globe is age who consider themselves evangeli- some of the main concerns that have not taking into account this crucial cals.

Load more