October 1, 2024 marked exactly 20 years since I traveled from Nigeria to the United Kingdom as a theological student and a missionary migrant. So many things have developed in that 20 years, such as leading three different churches, pioneering a missions initiative with some friends (Center for Missionaries from the Majority World), involvement in theological education, discipleship and mentoring, advocating on the intersection of racial justice and climate justice, and contributions towards research and scholarship on reverse missiology, African Christianity in Britain, and intercultural ecclesiology (click here for more reflection on my journey).
Diaspora missiology or reverse missiology?
As I continue to reflect on the intersection of migration and mission, prompted by the discussions on diaspora missiology at the Lausanne 4 global congress, the need to develop migration theologies rather than a singular theology is now much clearer to me! This is already happening so not a new development as such (see for example, Peter Phan and Elaine Padilla eds, Theologies of Migration in Abrahamic Religions, 2014).
But the contextual realities of Asia, Africa, and Latin America are very different and therefore begs clarity concerning the nuances of each. It will be wrong to conclude that diaspora missiology is the overarching missions theology that speaks and addresses the context of Asians, Africans, and Latin Americans in Europe, North America and elsewhere. Even though the word "diaspora" is biblical and describes the scattering of God’s people in exilic terms, Africans tend to describe their migrant missions through the lens of reverse mission.
However, not all African missionaries and pastors like the term reverse mission because of the complexities associated with it. Some of these complexities include conceiving of missions as primarily something Westerners do, with reverse mission as secondary, or at worst, inferior. Another difficulty is with the history of the missions narrative, which tends to ignore the fact that there was already an African Christianity in North Africa long before European missionaries came to sub-Saharan Africa.
Despite the problematic nature of reverse mission, some Africans possibly still refer to their missions focus in terms of reverse mission because of the colonial context of Africa. That is, the colonization of the continent of Africa by Europeans means that Africans see their mission contributions back to those who colonized and Christianized them as a success story. In this way, reverse mission is understood as a post-colonial mission theology, whereby the agency of the colonized has shifted from that of receiving to now being the contributors, bringing the gospel to the now needy mission fields of the Western(ized) world.
I choose to refer to practices, experiences, and theological reflections on reverse mission by Africans as reverse missiology (see African Voices: Towards African British Theologies, 2017). It must, however, be pointed out that this is not to say that Africans do not use diaspora mission to describe their missions activities, because some definitely do (see an edited work with Bulus Galadima and Sam George with many African contributions on diaspora mission, Africans in Diaspora and Diaspora in Africa, 2024). Yet, many gravitate towards the use of reverse mission more than diaspora mission, while some use the terms interchangeably.
At this juncture, it is also important to state how the term diaspora mission is used. Diaspora mission, as used above, seeks to capture the New Testament usage of the term to describe the intersection of migration and missions (See Acts 11:19-26). In this respect, diaspora mission is not limited to one ethnic or cultural grouping but rather the recognition of "the whole Church on the move" as a fulfillment of God’s mission.
Secondly, and in a limited way, diaspora mission is used to describe ministries of migrant Christians who are coming from the Majority (non-Western) World to more developed countries to conduct missions work. Thirdly, it includes the descriptions of churches such as African churches, Latin American churches, South Korean churches, Asian churches, Oceania and Caribbean churches. Lastly, it is used to describe the ministries of people trying to reach out to migrants from other faith backgrounds in foreign lands such as Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists and so on.
Latin Americans and reciprocal missiology
If Africans frame their mission through the lens of reverse missiology instead of diaspora missiology, what about Latin Americans? I have observed that Latin Americans use neither the word diaspora mission or reverse mission. Perhaps this is because Latin Americans have contributed toward missions theology through the development of integral mission by Rene Padilla, Samuel Escobar, Ruth Padilla de Borst, and others.
Integral mission is primarily understood as a holistic missions theology with an emphasis on engaging God’s mission through proclamation, expression, and demonstration of the gospel. It developed with the recognition that poverty, socio-economic and political situations in Latin America require a holistic, transformative, and contextual approach to theology (for more detailed analysis on integral mission see Rene Padilla, Mission Between the Times: Essays on the Kingdom, 2013).
But, similar to reverse missiology not being accepted by all Africans, not all Latin Americans like or have embraced integral mission due to the conservative nature of Latin American evangelicals, therefore raising the question of how Latin Americans understand their missions in the West. Samuel Escobar describes missionaries from the Majority World in so-called Global North nations as "missionaries from below" because they are less trained, less theologically educated, from suffering contexts and a lack of resources (see Samuel Escobar, The New Global Mission: The Gospel from Everywhere to Everyone, 2003).
Perhaps this understanding of missionaries from below is one way to contextualize the missions of Latin Americans outside of their contexts. Another way to conceive the Latin American missions impulse is through the language of reciprocity. This was a language used by Samuel Cueva to describe mutuality and collaboration in mission (see Samuel Cueva, Mission Partnership in Creative Tension, 2015).
Cueva’s reciprocal missiology offers us a missions model that sees Latin American missionaries and Westerners working together, going beyond the Western model of west to the rest. Reciprocity and mutuality in missions defines collaborations between the missions force and the mission field. Cueva argues that it is a relational theology shaped by a trinitarian and Christological framework.
Asian Christianity and diaspora missiology
If Africans and Latin Americans do not use diaspora missiology to define their missions elsewhere why does it appear that Asians do?
From my observation, some South Koreans use diaspora mission to define their missions and we also see this in some South Asian usage. For example, Hun Kim, a South Korean missionary in Europe, in describing Korean missions, prefers diaspora mission (see S Hun Kim and Wonsuk Ma, eds, Korean Diaspora and Christian Mission, 2011). Ram Gidoomal, Robin Thompson and others narrating the story and missions of South Asian Concern (SAC) talked about diaspora mission (see Arif Mohamed, Ram Gidoomal, Robin Thompson and Raju Abraham, Diaspora Mission: The Story of South Asian Concern).
Sam George through the work of the Global Diaspora Network also uses diaspora to describe the migratory experiences of Asians and Asian Christianity (see Sam George three-volume series on Asian Diaspora Christianity, 2022). And we must not also forget that one of the key pioneers of the term "Diaspora Missiology" (2011) is Enoch Wan, of Asian background. My question is why is the term diaspora missions preferred by Asian scholars more than Africans and Latin Americans?
I do not claim to have all the answers, so my perspective is limited. Nevertheless, from my observations, the Asian experience is quite unique in terms of its visible imprint on adopted societies. For example, we talk about China towns in almost every Western city where there are Chinese migrants. This is not to say that other communities do not have such equivalents, but they are not as old or well-established as China towns.
Perhaps the realities and complexities of displacement and movement of people within and outside Asia has led to this conceptualization. For example, displacements such as the Anglo-Nepalese war, the Gorkha war, the partitioning of India and Pakistan in 1947, the impact of the Vietnamese war, and the expulsion of Asians from East Africa has influenced some of this thinking. That is not to say that Africans and Latin Americans have not had their own share of displacements and movements, but despite their share of displacements, they are using different terminology to define their experience of migration and missions.
Even so, the new missionaries from Hong Kong to the UK are using reverse mission to describe their mission engagement, therefore giving a different emphasis to Asian Christianity and missions in the UK. But we need to be careful with our understanding of how reverse mission is understood and utilized differently by Africans and Hong Kong missionaries.
For example, recent migration from Nigeria has happened through the Japa syndrome, which sees many Nigerians trying to escape economic hardship in order to fashion a new destiny for themselves. Hong Kong migrants are here due to the political situation back in Hong Kong. Reverend Chi-Wai Wu, a Hong Kong missionary to the UK, describes this situation as "runnology". That is, the attempt by Hong Kong migrants to run away from their political situation. These nuances are very important as we conceptualize how reverse mission is used and the contexts in which it is used.
As our world continues to experience the push and pull factors of migration, it is important to pay attention to how each context is defining their missions in the new mission fields of former Christendom. It is also important not to force one terminology as a singular definition of the entire migration experience and missions contributions of Majority World people and missionaries, or transpose one over the other. In essence, we need to continue to contextualize missions theology as we continue to develop theologies of migration.
Originally published by Israel Olofinjana. Republished with permission.
Rev. Dr Israel Oluwole Olofinjana (PhD) is the Director of the One People Commission of the UK Evangelical Alliance. He is an ordained and accredited Baptist minister and has led two multi-ethnic Baptist churches and an independent charismatic church. He is the founding director of the Center for Missionaries from the Majority World, a mission network initiative that provides cross-cultural training to reverse missionaries in Britain. Israel is an Honorary Research Fellow at the Queen’s Foundation for Ecumenical Theological Education in Birmingham and is on the Advisory Group on Race and Theology of the Society for the Study of Theology (SST). Among numerous other roles and activities, he is a consultant to Lausanne Europe, advising them on matters related to diaspora ministries in Europe. He is on the Christian Aid Working Group of Black Majority Church leaders, exploring the intersection of climate justice and racial justice and a member of Tearfund UK’s Theology Committee.
The views expressed in this or any other opinion article do not necessarily reflect the views of Christian Daily International.
