The title above doesn’t always apply… but often does. Usually does, I think.

A missionary, as noted by others, is a person who works himself out of a job. He (I am going to use “he” although missions is one of the most egalitarian roles in Evangelical Christianity, so feel free to substitute “she” or “they” if you want) does a job training up local people to do the work so that he is no longer needed. Then he moves to another place and repeats the process. Alternatively, he may stay in one location and people come to him and he trains them up. This is still a repetitive process where there is little of what one might call “advancement.” In some large mission organizations, one may move to being a team leader or mobilizer, or a regional director. This might be seen as professional advancement. At the same time that advancement is very niche. I have talked with missionaries who have served many years in the field. Several have noted how their work in ministry in the field is given almost no recognition back home. Often they go back home where if they want to serve in ministry, they start at the bottom.

I recall talking to a retired missionary who had been one of the top, perhaps the top, missionary of his denomination in a country with LOTS of missionaries. He noted that he was considered a bit of a celebrity in the country where he served… but back in the United States, he was “nothing.” That might be strongly put, but I have known enough others who have returned to the US or Australia or England and who had similar stories.

For me, a few years ago, our family suddenly lost most of our financial support to serve overseas. I really did not want to go back. I believed what I was doing was valuable, but I also wanted to support our family. I was teaching missions in a seminary in the Philippines, so I was looking if I could teach missions in a seminary in the United States. I quickly had a rude awakening (although I had actually been warned of this previously). I had a ThD, but in the US I was expected to have a PhD. The doctorate was not from one of the denomination’s premier in-country seminaries, but from a “developing world” school. I had written tons of training materials for students, missionaries, theologians and pastoral counselors in Asia, but had never once written for a peer reviewed journal, or a recognized publishing house (admittedly by choice). I had, at the time, served as a missionary in the field for 11 or 12 years, but I had never applied for research grants.

In other words, my qualifications for teaching missions was severely hampered by the fact that all of my training and work was in, and for, the mission field.

But… you know…. that is not that bad of a thing.

The fact drove me to make the decision to stay in the mission field and trust God to provide for our family. And He did. (I am not trying to universalize my situation… many missionaries do feel the need to go home, and I have no reason to think they were in error for doing so). But if being a missionary made one super-employable back home… I expect that it would be a rather unhealthy lure for many who should stay where they are.

Additionally, I would like to talk a bit about my own unique situation in teaching missions in the mission field. There are many advantages for being in this situation. But I must note that it is a dead end position in some ways. I am mission faculty and as such, there really is not upward mobility. The seminary, understandably, wants to be led by locals rather than foreigners. At one time, the seminary was exclusively run by foreigners… but thankfully, that has changed. There is much good in this. There are good things teaching in this setting.

#1. I am evaluated by my ability to teach, supervise, and serve as a missionary. This is in contrast to being judged by grant money and publishing. (I still remember attending my first day in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo. The dean was introducing the faculty. For each faculty member he shared three bits of information— Name, Specialization, and how much research money the person has brought into the department. Would you like to guess what the department’s focus was?)

#2. I am expected to invest my time with my students, and support their holistic development. Research in study are encouraged but not a substitute for developing the next generation of ministers in Asia. (I also remember trying to go to my assigned faculty supervisor at SUNY. After a couple of attempts and being told just to “talk to the department secretary” I reaslized that my supervisor was useless— only giving time to his masters and doctoral students.)

#3. I am encouraged to publish… but if I don’t that is not really a problem. I am not encouraged to get my name put on the work of my students. Actually, the biggest thing that I am evaluated for by the Board of Trustees is the counseling center that my wife and I co-lead. Essentially, how I transform lives as an educator and a missions minister are the key areas of interest in the seminary. Right now, I have been given a side task of overseeing research and creative writing at our seminary, so my job is to help to empower such publishing— but again, this is encouraged, but does not drive hiring or retention.

I have heard so many in academia around the world express their distaste for the politics, finances, and pressure of the academic grind. While I am pretty busy, and sometimes pretty worn out, I love the fact that what I feel passion to do is what I am being asked and expected to do. The activity I like the least at seminary is the annual “SportsFest”— but it is the “cross I must bear”. (Half joking)

I am almost 59 (strange… I don’t feel a day over 57) and there really is no higher positions in my job track. I will be where I am until I hand off my roles to others. Then I retire (or “retire”— we shall see). I hope that many of you in ministry will have the opportunity to have a ministerial dead-end job as well.