A Consideration of the Lausanne Movement “State of the Great Commission” Report from an Indigenous Perspective: A Reflection from Memoria Indígena
By: Jocabed Solano (Memoria Indígena Executive Director) and Drew Jennings-Grisham
Contact:
jocabed@memoriaindigena.org
andres@memoriaindigena.org
This reflection aims to contribute to the dialogues taking place within part of the global evangelical church in preparation for and during the Fourth Lausanne Congress to be held in Incheon, South Korea, in September 2024. It also intends to bring together some Indigenous and non-indigenous voices to collectively think and work with and from Indigenous communities in faithful service to Jesus, rooted in love, compassion, and an abundant life through justice for all creation. Our contribution stems from the journey of our community of practice among Indigenous peoples and others, amidst our own ambiguities and tensions and the blend of influences in our lives and contexts. Thus, this text represents an invitation to engage in dialogue and mutual learning, recognizing that we are not exempt as humans from making mistakes, recognizing that we all speak from a place, and with an awareness of these expressions of domination over Indigenous peoples in order to avoid repeating and, in some cases, perpetuating them.
Approach from an Indigenous Perspective
Indigenous churches worldwide represent a significant number of Jesus followers. This raises several important questions when we think about the state and participation of the current Indigenous church in the life of the global church. We suggest some questions for analysis which the church should consider:
- How has the Indigenous church participated in the life and mission of the global church?
- Has the Indigenous Church been able to visibly contribute and serve as the body of Christ in the global church and the care of creation?
- What gaps can we identify in global mission from the history and life of Indigenous peoples and the Indigenous church?
In Abya Yala[1] (Latin America and the Caribbean), we can see the rise of Indigenous churches both in Indigenous territories and in the cities where thousands of Indigenous brothers and sisters live, having migrated or been displaced due to the social, political, climatic, and historical realities they face. These factors are crucial when we reexamine the Indigenous church. The church is part of society and creation itself, and the lives of Jesus’ followers are embedded in the realities and territories they inhabit.
Historically, it is said that Indigenous peoples were evangelized during the European invasion by those who committed genocide; this is one face in the historical memory of the Indigenous peoples of Abya Yala. Another face of the mission is that during the same period of invasion, there were some who opposed slavery, mistreatment, and bloodshed against Indigenous peoples. However, for hundreds of Indigenous peoples, the sword and the cross were and continues to be signs of death. As followers of Jesus, we must recognize that this is a regrettable image of mission and the church.
Over time, other mission proposals emerged, some with a more missional character closer to the heart of Jesus, from the Protestant to the Catholic church. From the prophetic voices of Jesus’ gospel and brothers and sisters who have lived their faith through their commitment to justice, we recognize that the healing of the body of Christ requires a great dose of humility to listen bravely and see our own mistakes, to walk in a continuous search for repentance and reparation towards Indigenous peoples and the Indigenous church.
An Indigenous perspective from Abya Yala can illuminate some blind spots in the mission discourse of the Lausanne Movement and its report on the “Great Commission,” which is being used for this fourth world congress. When we seek to outline or define something like mission, the Great Commission, or the church, we must always ask what is included and what is excluded, and why. In this case, we want to briefly address two gaps in the Lausanne report that are essential for Indigenous peoples to guide us as a global faith community towards the restoration and reconciliation of all things in Jesus. We hope that what we present will open the dialogue so we can continue to delve deeper together.
First, there is a lack of recognition of the colonial historical memory and the colonialities of power within the church and mission that are still reproduced in evangelical missions today.[2] The church needs to recognize that the majority of the so-called “unreached” in the world are actually peoples who have rejected the church due to its violence (religious, epistemic, racist, imperial, genocidal, etc.) in their encounter with these peoples. It is necessary to be aware of the power structures that exist in the church and in the dominant models of certain global missions, and how these determine the narratives and ways of understanding the world as well as which relationships are prioritized. These narratives often reflect and shape the ways we relate to each other and to creation. Without recognizing these power relations and their histories, Lausanne’s push for collaborative action risks continuing to replicate a colonizing mission.
The other gap we recognize concerns the issue of creation care. In reality, we cannot reimagine a mission that reconciles Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples if we do not comprehend that reconciliation with the earth is intimately and interdependently related to human reconciliation. Creation care must be transversal in all of Lausanne and all dialogue about mission, not just a separate topic among many. Justice in human society is not possible without just relationships with all of creation. This means it is necessary to go deeper in practices and theology that live the faith from a relationship of creation care, from a perspective of cosmic reconciliation to which we are called as a church, being part of Jesus’ reconciling work. From this vision of cosmic reconciliation, we can be a testimony of faith that is empowered by the character of a mission that lives remembering that abundant life must permeate all things, as expressed in this powerful phrase highlighted by Indigenous Peoples: All relationships are important. Therefore, any missional action of the church that seeks to demonstrate and proclaim the love and forgiveness of Jesus but does not concern itself with the integral well-being of the entire creation community is, at best, a partial gospel, and at worst, reinforces and reproduces unjust relationships and colonialities within and outside the church.
Some may observe that the Lausanne report on the Great Commission does indeed include a section on the climate emergency and creation care. They may also note that the Lausanne report recognizes demographic changes in the church and global missions, even calling for “polycentric missions” and collaboration within a highly diverse church. But we must be careful that these spaces are not simply a containment strategy that seeks to include certain voices without affecting the logics and power relations in the evangelical missionary movement. It is not enough to simply make space in the dominant church and its missionary discourse for Indigenous (and other marginalized peoples’) voices and knowledge; rather, we must allow this space to be reconfigured by these Indigenous voices and knowledge.
To give an example, these gaps in the Lausanne report on the Great Commission help us see the current reality of colonialities that today disguise themselves when in the missionary projects we carry out in Indigenous communities we say they are for the good of the community, but at the core, they have more to do with projects that sustain a capitalist and mercantilist mission economy, which often creates divisions in the community and the local church and does not lead to healthy collaboration. The economic power gap absent a recognition of the richness of the value of reciprocity that we see in Indigenous Peoples and present in the narratives of the Bible (as in the letter to the Ephesians) does not allow us to reimagine just relationships that cultivate full life among the entire global church and towards the entire creation community. This gap, for example, can be overcome by imagining a church where the body of Christ is a body with diversity and reciprocity is practiced. The barriers posed by any hegemonic dominance of power over the other are broken down when we work in a way that creates space for other voices and allows these voices and perspectives to transform the space where we act, including our economic, political, social, and cultural relations.
If our commitment to the gospel of Jesus is to share the good news, then we need to urgently recognize these gaps and embark on a journey of repentance that allows us to collaborate from a path of humility and acknowledgment of these realities, both past and present, giving a privileged space to the voices of the people and communities most affected. This path of healing occurs when we sit down to listen, dialogue, know, and recognize this power dominance present in systems that sometimes camouflage themselves but other times clearly perpetuate imposed violences of “doing mission” that are not the true mission of the church. Jesus called us to share the good news of the gospel from the power of love and not from the power of dominance.
Walking alongside Indigenous peoples and Indigenous churches opens us up and brings us closer to a path where the mission gaps are narrowed by the power of the Spirit acting in the body of Christ, which is Christ’s church, and frees us from domination over the other, for the gospel of Jesus leads us to recognize ourselves in the other. From these observations, we underline that Indigenous peoples offer the global church these perspectives among others:
- Indigenous communities and churches offer a holistic and relational vision of the community. In marked contrast to the modern and capitalist ways of life that permeate contemporary Christianity, heavily impregnated with utilitarianism, individualism, consumerism, patriarchy, and cannibalistic competitiveness, Indigenous communities offer models of solidarity, reciprocity, and complementarity economies. Consider the weaving of the mola among the Gunadule people.[3] The mola consists of several layers and threads, each necessary to create an integrated and beautiful design. Therefore, mutuality and complementarity are required to create the mola. Similarly, the Church of Jesus needs to deeply live this value of mutuality, walking in unity and complementarity to reveal the beauty and power of the gospel.
- Indigenous churches understand different cultures not from a colonial perspective but rather from a place of coexistence and daily life together, recognizing and valuing plurality and diversity for what each one offers towards mutual well-being, as the gospel calls us to do: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28). We must realign our lives together, ceasing to shape our faith and resulting relationships around a colonial logic. The Indigenous church and communities are therefore not just a space to serve but model precious lessons from which the global church can greatly benefit.[4]
Our prayer is that in the midst of our journey, we can continue weaving and collaborating, dreaming with God and Indigenous peoples of an Indigenous church that lives the faith in Jesus fertilized by the good values that exist in their communities and that from their weavings, reflections, thoughts, and feelings, their contributions are embraced by the global Church to learn from the virtues of Indigenous peoples and live the power of the gospel from a proposal of a pluricultural ecclesia filled with the vibrant colors that make up the body of Christ.
[1] Abya Yala is the name that the Gunadule people use in their language to refer to the American continent. It means mature land, vital land, land of blood.
[2] While each people and community have their own histories and narratives of their past, the Western world has created hierarchies of knowledge that privilege certain stories over others. “Colonialities” is a term from social theoretical frameworks that have been coined from social and cultural analysis to refer to the cultural logic of domination underlying contemporary social practices. The historical memories of Indigenous peoples in relation to their encounter with the Western colonial world, including the church, can help us weave a new common memory that takes seriously the experiences of those who were left out of the “official” history.
[3] Mola is a form of communication, also a textile art created by the Gunadule woman, which expresses her way of understanding her worldview and world experience.
[4] These two points were previously published by Jocabed R Solano Miselis at https://grahamjosephhill.com/jocabed-english-2/