The “Political Correctness” of Missions: 2nd Reason to Advance in Missions Today
February 12, 2010 – 10:35 amIt is too small a thing that You should be My Servant To raise up the tribes of Jacob, And to restore the preserved ones of Israel; I will also give You as a light to the Gentiles, That You should be My salvation to the ends of the earth. (Isaiah 49:6)
I have never been big on political correctness. It seems to be mostly just another form of social pressure. However, when it comes to missions, political correctness has taken on a new meaning for me. I’ll tell you why.
Political correctness involves affirmative action programs, non-discrimination, and other approaches to life to ensure that everyone gets a fair chance, no matter what his or her ethnic background or social position might be.
This in itself is not a bad thing. Affirmative action programs were developed to counter the tendency of merit programs to select people mostly from the same background or social standing because of their greater numbers.
Therefore, rather than being considered for a scholarship or a position in a medical school on the basis of merit alone, a quota system is designed to make sure that there are a variety of groups of various ethnic makeup and background that are accepted into a school or a program.
The negative aspect of this is twofold: 1) sometimes someone gets in who can’t make the grade, but they are accepted because of their ethnic background; 2) sometimes someone who is really qualified doesn’t get in because the quota for her or his ethnic background is already filled.
So which is better, quota or merit? And what about discrimination? First, let me suggest that biblical missions is totally non-discriminatory, as when Peter said in Acts 10:34-35: “In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality. But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him.”
Furthermore, biblical missions does not choose between quota and merit, but rather uses both. Consider Rev. 7:9-10: “After these things I looked, and behold, a great multitude which no one could number, of all nations, tribes, peoples, and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, with palm branches in their hands, and crying out with a loud voice, saying, ‘Salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!’”
That looks like a quota system to me; it takes some from each possible group of humanity. But missions is also a merit system: “God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation” (2 Corinthians 5:19).
The merit is the merit of another, Jesus Christ; it is called grace. Furthermore, this system is not limited by the confines of human resources, and there is no number limit: “Look to Me, and be saved, All you ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other” (Isaiah 45:22).
So when it comes to missions, I guess I really do believe in political correctness. In fact, missions is the most politically correct thing there is to do!
Glenn Kerr, guest author for the MM Blog, provides 10 reasons why local churches should advance in their effort to start indigenous church planting movements in regions that do not have a gospel witness.
Glenn J. Kerr is chief translation consultant for Bibles International, the Bible Society of Baptist Mid-Missions. He has worked as a consultant for 15 years, being involved with translation projects on five continents and about 28 languages.
He has a master’s degree in Hebrew and Semitic Studies from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, has done graduate studies in linguistics at Michigan State University, and is currently in doctoral studies through the University of South Africa.
He teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in Bible translation and related linguistic subjects on an adjunct basis at three Bible colleges and universities in the US as well as his consulting work overseas.
