Editor’s note: This article is part of forum discussing the fourth Lausanne Congress. It is not an official Lausanne Movement forum but an opportunity for Lausanne delegates to share their thoughts about the fourth Lausanne Congress, the Seoul Statement, and the future of the mission. You can read the entire series, from diverse voices around the world here.
Undoubtedly, so much happened during the fourth Lausanne Congress in Inchon. You may find much information by watching what is happening on the stage and from some documents, such as the Call to Collaboration, Seoul Statement, and the Report to the State of the Great Commission. However, much was happening behind the scenes during the Congress. It is easy to underestimate how meaningful social interactions between the participants were alongside the event program. If you want to see that importance, social media is a crucial tool. Follow the hashtag #L4Congress to get some information about it. There, you’ll find three types of posts: citations, group photos, and attempts to give snapshots of the atmosphere, all of which contribute to a deeper understanding of the Congress.
In his closing address at the Lausanne Congress in 1974, Billy Graham described the gathering in these beautiful words: “We have wept together, we have debated together, we have laughed together.”1 Together! It does not necessarily mean that being together, or even being united, is a matter of comfort.
As Kazusa Okaya concluded his reflection about the L4, “We need to learn to be uncomfortable; for discomfort is not a hindrance to unity, but the seed of humility.” This discomfort is not a burden but a challenge that inspires us to grow and learn. In the middle of the Congress, I encountered a friend of mine and colleague with the routine question: “How is event going?” and immediately started to complain: “It is hard time for me as a Regional Director to hear so different, very often contradictory displeasure with the statements.” He gave a sobering answer: “Of course, it is the Lausanne.” It is my biggest lesson for such a large and wide-represented gathering. Lausanne is about to be, think, pray, eat, laugh, debate, agree or disagree together, even if it is sometimes emotionally uncomfortable! The ancient question remains. How do we deal with this vast diversity?
Worries and Celebrations
During and after the Congress, many people expressed worries and concerns about the speeches and the Seoul Statement. Several people from Central Asia approached me with great concern about the statement of article 70: “We urge Christian leaders and local churches to recognize within our communities the presence of believers who experience same-sex attraction and to support them in their discipleship.” They were worried that this could be interpreted as the first step towards same-sex marriage recognition. At least one participant was concerned about strict language towards same-sex attraction in referring to the Bible usage in article 68. This concern sparked a heated debate among the participants, with some arguing for inclusivity and others for traditional values. This diversity of opinions is a testimony of the complexity of the issues discussed at the Congress.
In the same way, there are debates around Ruth Padilla DeBorst. The participants may also see daily protests during Congress in front of the venue’s main entrance. These concerns and debates are part of the rich tapestry of the Congress, reflecting the diversity of opinions and the need for respectful dialogue.
Of course, people disagree on many things, but should it be the disagreement concern as an apostasy? Does it indicate disunity? While we need to be more precise on the term apostasy, one can recognize that such disagreements are about diversity rather than disunity and not apostasy. Congress shows its vulnerability once again. It should cause the Global Church to worry and to celebrate. Worries because severe disagreements can cause brothers and sisters to become enemies. But when I saw how one of the participants prayed with a protester, read David’s apologies and Ruth’s response, and heard debates about different issues in the Seoul Statement, I continued to celebrate and worry with the Lausanne community: We are together despite the great diversity!
Management and Learning
Does the previous sentence sound naive? Sure. It might be because we lack an understanding of what we should do as people of the Global Church to accomplish the Great Commission. In other words, what is the message and method of the task of the Great Commission? The message of Congress: “Declare and display Christ together,” might be achieved through creating collaborative teams, as suggested in the L4. One can very easily perceive these words as triumphalism. What kind of Christ do we declare as a Global Church in different places, cultures, generations, genders, and social statuses? What does it mean to display Christ for other contexts, needs, and opportunities? It is the one Christ with different expressions, perhaps. But who and how can depict possible answers? Lausanne Movement cannot be such an agency even for the evangelical world. It is impossible to have such an agency in our time, especially after the concept of the Missio Dei broadly was received among different denominations and missionary agencies.
1 “The Lausanne Legacy: Landmarks in Global Mission,” ed. Cameron, Julia E.M., Hendrickson Publishers, 2016, 56
