Last week, I arrived back from the Lausanne III congress. As with any conference or trip away, people always ask "How was it?" It's a hard question to answer, and it's even more difficult to answer in a short space on a blog.
Over the past few days, I've attempted to reflect on my time and experiences at Lausanne. I wrote a post, which I put up on here for a while, but decided to keep it for myself - I think my reflections were part of my processing of all I had experienced. Having said that, I think it is good to be able to communicate one's experiences of an event, some of the highs and lows. Having spent a number of hours writing reflections previously, I'll keep this one deliberately brief and to the point. Here are some of my thoughts on my time at Lausanne:
Highs:
* Privilege- It was an immense honour to be involved in an event of 4500 Christian leaders from across the world. One of my abiding sentiments from the Congress was the sense of privilege that I could be there.
* Humbling - it was humbling to hear stories of believers in different contexts who have proclaimed Jesus and suffered for Him in ways that I never have. Particularly significant for me was the testimony of the 18 year old school girl from North Korea, whose parents trusted Christ. Her mum then died of leukemia & her dad went back to the country & is now missing, presumed dead
* Brilliant. Spending time with old friends and new from around the world who are involved in evangelism. From Meryl, my Uni friend who became a Christian in the first weeks of Uni, to Michael, my evangelist friend who shares Jesus in Universities. From Julie-Ann, my IFES colleague in Australia, to Julia, with the IFES work in Germany. Chatting with the parents of 2 of my Relay workers & hearing how they going on in Jesus was a greater thrill than they probably realised. Meeting with former colleagues like Emma & spending time with current ones, meeting IFES partners I know, like Edith, Tom, Zeff, Samuil, Colin & meeting ones I didn't - Natasha, Daniel, Dorcas, Mirek, Ewa and Igor. And making connections with friends in the South Pacific, particularly Netina and Fijian friends, friends from the South Pacific, like Pete Saunders, as well as friends of my family, such as Datev an Armenian in Syria. Each was significant in their own way & each formed a major highlight of the Congress for me.
The Maori proverb "What is the most important thing? He tangata, he tangata, he tangata" rings true - it is people, it is people, it is people. Thankfully, Daniel Bourdanne reminded us that IFES is about intentionally investing in people, and it hit home once again.
*Edifying - I found some of the speakers particularly edifying. Some left good things to chew over, whilst some left you with an 'unusual taste'. I particularly enjoyed Os Guinness' session on 'the Importance of Truth', I enjoyed the personality and energy Ajith Fernando, Calisto Odede, Ben Kwashi & Ramez Atallah brought, along with Becky Pippert, Michael Ramsden and Lindsay Brown's commitment to preaching Christ crucified. Vaughan Roberts gave probably the best exposition I've heard him give.
* Heart-warming. In one of the first sessions, we were shown a film clip of Billy Graham at the 1974 Congress where he explicitly stated "This is a congress of world evangelisation. We're enthusiastic about all the many things churches properly do, but our calling is to a specific sector of the church's responsibility -evangelism." It was great to hear such a clear call to focus on evangelism & be reminded of all the good Billy has done under God. Praise God for him.
* Bold - I felt it was a particularly courageous move to have the entire congress set around tables of six people from around the world. It was probably a logistical nightmare, but the concept was brilliant. To give some of the time in the main session to inductive Bible study was great too.
* Global. On the whole, I enjoyed much of the music, but particularly the multi-cultural variety. It wasn't always right or and theologically rich as it could have been, but the multi-cultural mix was enjoyable. I particularly found the Arabic song and an Urdu song from Pakistan both enjoyable and moving.
* Inspiring. The day trip I went on to a local church who had set up an HIV/AIDS clinic was amazing. From a church of 300 members, the clinic had developed into a ministry with 170 staff. Living Hope was one of the most amazing local church initiatives I have seen.
Looking back, the Congress had some great experiences. However, it wasn't without its challenges and disappointments. In no particular order, here are some of the things that I found more challenging:
* Leadership. The Lausanne leadership seemed to be made up of mostly people who would fit into the middle-aged category. We need these people. However, if leadership is to be dynamic, creative and visionary, we need a younger generation of leaders also. Ramez Attalah spoke at the 1974 Lausanne in his 20s. Where were the younger leaders in 2010?
* English only. It saddened me that on stage, we had very few people speak in their native tongue. It was thrilling when Daniel Bourdanne announced he would pray in French. I heard the arguments about translation and saving time, but don't buy them! English is the only language I speak fluently (and that's debatable), but the church is not English only. We sang in other languages - why not speaking/listening to other languages?
* The central message. From what I saw, this could have been a church conference on any topic. Evangelism and the message of the cross did not seem to be the central features. Billy Graham's clarion call in '74 was not true of 2010. I wished that we had heard more specifically about evangelism, and more directly about the cross of Jesus.
* The closing ceremony saddened me. It felt more 'Disneyfied' than it should, and though the liturgy should have warmed me, I left feeling rather cold.
* Genuine dialogue - didn't seem to happen in the programme. Speakers seemed to be kept separate, sessions were packed, free time was minimal. The Congress felt "stage-down" rather than "grass-roots up". The CT2010 Commitment seemed to have been pre-prepared, and the further statements look like they'll be made from behind a closed door, rather than from genuine engagement and dialogue. In the Bible study times, and even in prayer, we were rushed, so that discussion or conversation was interrupted or frustrated.
* Prophetic voices were not heard. In 1974, Stott and Graham led with a prophetic edge, in 1989, Escobar & Padilla came to the fore. In 2010, there seemed to be a lack of direction or vision. Much of what I heard was what I could hear through reading books, or listening to sermons. I would have loved to be inspired, roused and challenged in the task of evangelising the whole world.
* Americanization. I have to be careful with this. I love the USA, have lived there & learned so much from America and American friends. I believe the USA plays a vital part in the church and should do. However, it is not the only voice that should heard, and should not be the dominant culture. From the dress code we were given, to the Unreached People Groups session, even to the Closing Ceremony, the Congress had a slightly American flavor. I didn't want a British flavour, or Western flavour, but a worldwide flavour where all cultures were recognised, so that the task of global evangelisation could be achieved.
Attempting to quantify, assess and evaluate the merit of the Congress is hard. It's $16 million budget is vast. Add to that the travel and accommodation costs, and multiple working hours, and the question must be asked "was it worth it?" Ultimately, I don't know, but those are not the questions I was left asking.
"Should Lausanne exist or would the goal of world evangelisation be better served by some other movement or work?" was one of them, but more importantly, "What was God saying to me, TSCF, NZ, our region & the global church?" has already got me thinking, talking, praying and agitating, so that world evangelisation is at the forefront of my agenda in the coming years. I thank God for the privilege of attending Lausanne, and pray that the impact would be felt in the years to come.
I have found Rene Padilla's perspective on Lausanne to be very helpful. One of the respected figures of global Evangelicalism, I feel much in agreement with what he writes. You can get it here in Spanish, or have use the Google tool at the top of that page to translate it into English.
