This post concludes my three-part series (part 1, part 2) on the early Moravians. Today I draw attention to some of the places they served and elements of their missionary methods.
The Moravians had a global vision and acted upon it. Missionary activity was not something they simply discussed; it was something that was expected of their members. According to some estimates, they sent 1 missionary for every 60 Moravians (Ruth Tucker, From Jerusalem to Irianjaya, 2nd ed., 99).
It is amazing how they were able to travel to various points on the globe with the transportation of their day. It was not unusual for Moravian missionaries to spend weeks, even months, traveling by foot to a boat, to then travel for another several weeks by sea, and to then spend another several weeks or even months traveling by train, foot, or beast of burden to their final destinations. Getting to the field came with great sacrifice and much danger.
Here are some early dates and locations of their missionary service:
1732- Virgin Islands, St. Thomas, Danish West Indies
1733- Greenland 1734-1736- St. Croy, Danish West Indies 1734- Northern Scandinavia 1734 & 1738- Georgia 1735- Surinam & South America 1736- The Gold Coast, Africa, 1737- South Africa 1738- Amsterdam, Holland, 1739- Algeria, Africa 1740- Eastern & Midwestern United States 1740- Ceylon & Romania 1740- Constantinople 1747- Persia 1752- Egypt & Abyssinia 1754- Jamacia 1756- Antigua 1759-1795- East Indies, Nicobar Islands, & Tranquebar 1765- Barbados 1777- St. Kitts 1787- Taboga 1815- 1822- Serving among the Kalmuck Tartars 1849- Honduras & Nicaragua 1855- Magdala 1859-1861- Cabo Gracias a Dios
|
1860- Wanuta-Haulouver in Ephrata
1864- Tasbapauni in Bethany 1871- Kukalaya & Quamwatla 1875- Karata 1884- Yulu 1885- Alaska 1886- Little Sandy Bay & Twappi 1890- California 1890- Trinidad 1891- Tanzania 1893- Dakura 1895- Edmonton, Canada 1903- Karawala 1907- Sangsangta 1907- Santo Domingo 1923- Musawas 1927- Bilwi Puerto Cabezas 1938- Bonanza 1938- La Luz
Dates/locations taken from James Weingarth, You Are My Witnesses (n.p. Inter-Provincial Women’s Board of the Moravian Church, 1981), 27, 31, 81, 89-90 and Ruth A. Tucker, From Jerusalem to Irian Jaya, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1983, 2004), 102.
|
Here are 11 significant components that influenced their missionary methods:
Prototype Mission Stations. The Moravians pioneered a forerunner of the mission station model. As Moravians would leave Zinzendorf’s estate and travel to the field, they would begin by establishing their place of residence and attempt to replicate their community back home. In fact, their work in Greenland was named “New Herrnhut” after the name of the Saxony community.
Team Approach. A team approach was always used with Moravians in their work throughout the world.
Pioneer Areas. Their missionary labors were to some of the most neglected areas of the world. They were willing to go to where others were not found.
Long-term Perspective. It was common for missionaries to spend their entire lives working among a particular people in a particular area.
Cultural Acquisition and Language Learning. Missionaries immersed themselves into the culture of the people and sought to learn their language. Even though they were using a forerunner to the mission station paradigm, the Moravians embraced an incarnational approach. In some cases, particularly among the Native Americans, the Moravians were mistaken for the natives themselves.
Bible Translations. Many missionaries sought to understand the local language so they could translate the Scriptures for the people.
Missionary Zeal. Zeal permeated the Moravian community. Zinzendorf made certain the entire community participated in decision-making and the sending of missionaries.
Priority on Prayer. The Moravians were known for a continuous prayer meeting that lasted 100 years. Individuals set aside an hour a day (around the clock for 100 years) to pray for laborers and their work.
Disciple Making not Moravian Making. The aim of the Moravians was to reach unbelievers (i.e., “First Fruits”) with the gospel. Though they did work to help revitalize established churches, under no circumstances were they to attempt to make Moravians from other Christians.
Tentmaking Expected. Though Moravian leadership would eventually set forth the challenge to the Church to support those sent, early missionaries went as tentmakers. Self-support was the expectation for all missionaries.
Sending was the Status Quo. Missions was a normative part of the life of a follower of Christ. According to William J. Danker, “[T]he most important contribution of the Moravians was their emphasis that every Christian is a missionary and should witness through his daily vocation” (Profit for the Lord, 73-74). The community was not surprised when someone made a decision to leave and make disciples. The decision was not heralded with pomp and circumstance. Such a decision was the expectation not the exception.
———-
This week on Strike the Match, I plan to discuss the contents of my soon-to-be-released new book: To the Edge: Reflections on Kingdom Leadership, Mission, and Innovation. Be sure to listen: iTunes | Android | RSS
Thank you JD for this series. This group was fascinating in many ways and was used by God in powerful ways. We need God to stir the western church and do it again
You are welcome, Sean. Good words, brother!