| Rift Valley Travel LimitationsThe disruption in January has made REAP concentrate on in-depth discussion with many who have been keen to seek out Roger’s advice and discuss ideas.This has been particularly the case with those who work in Sudan or who are looking to expand into the use of natural medicines.Restrictions on travel have also allowed the team more time to put new ideas down on paper and produce the much needed literature to convey them to a wider audience.In mid- March Roger was once more able to visit the work in Kisumu.
Much has now returned to normal in the Kisumu area and the people are positive about the future:
The REAP team has been wondering how to use their emphasis on stewardship and Kingdom teaching to enable the work to impact more positively on, and progress within, the current situation.
REAP continues to extend it’s teaching to explain simple methods of sustainable improvement in the use of agriculture, cooking methods, nutrition and natural medicines, largely through African Christian churches. Many churches are entering into a time of reflection and prayer, facing the difficulty that they have become tribal institutions.
REAP’s focus on Kingdom values is ideally positioned to give a renewed vision which extends beyond the message of salvation to a balanced holistic emphasis.
The herb garden at the back of the REAP office in Nairobi.
This is Rosalia at the Nairobi office when she managed to fly down for her monthly report in February.
This is a picture of Anne, who works in REAP’s Nairobi office.
|Good News for the Poor
REAP continues to extend it’s teaching and write more leaflets explaining simple methods of sustainable improvement in the use of agriculture, cooking methods nutrition and natural medicines, largely through African Christian churches.
Success at Kisumu
In August Reap won first places as Best Small Trade Stand and Best NGO Stand, and second place as Best Environmental Management at Kenya’s Kisumu Show. The medical garden once more caused great interest in displaying how Africa’s poorest people can effectively grow plants which can be of enormous benefit to them.
An Opportunity to meet Dr. Roger Sharland
Discover more about the vision of REAP.
In November Roger will be at two open Supporter’s Days, in Exeter and Reading.
|Showing how medicinal charcoal is made|
|Kenya’s President meets Pamela, Reap’s goat, who won first prize at this year’s Kisumu Show, when he was awarding the cups that Reap won again this year.|
|A medicinal garden plot|
|Rosalia teaching about the use of natural medicines at the Ukweli Pastoral Centre|
- Roger will be chairing the facilitating committee for the Cush Consultation again, in Yei, Sudan, this September. Please pray that this organization, which networks all the Christian organizations in Sudan, will effectively combine its resources.
- For the smooth purchase of a plot of land that REAP has found near Kisumu, with money from Greyfriars’ building fund, to enable much needed further development of plants.
- Prayer for Roger as he is working on a Human Resources Manual to enable the church to move forward in this direction.
Hedges Demonstrate Improved Crop
Rain has continued throughout Kenya’s dry season and so enabled the vetiver grass hedges to thrive. Sam has been busy establishing many vetiver nurseries and introducing the plants throughout the villages.
Natural Medicine News Comes to More People
Rosalia has been able to increase the teaching program for natural medicine benefits.
Fireless Cookers Promoted
Roger has written an article on the Fireless Cookers, which REAP has been introducing in Africa, for the next edition of Organic Way.
NOTE: This analysis relates to evangelical Protestant Churches. The Catholic and Orthodox Churches have a very different structure that leads to different potentials.
Relating to the church type
There is a tendency to share models that are successful in one place to a different situation where the model that is good for one area may not relevant for another. By more careful thinking of the circumstance of the church, it should be possible to be more discerning in determining what model will transfer well. Of particular significance in this respect is how well established and influential a denomination is in an area. In Africa, denominations tend to be structured in relation to people groups (tribes, or in some cases smaller or larger groupings), and the degree of influence a particular denomination has in a people group is very significant for thinking on relevant development approaches. The relevant type of development approach must depend on the potential of the denomination while accepting the constraints or limitations that it faces. These, in turn, have a close correlation to the nature of the church in a particular people group.
We may be able to identify four main church situations:
1. Where one denomination is dominant and a majority of the population have allegiance to that denomination, which is therefore respected and has a potentially almost universal influence.
- Where the church is very well established with second and third generation Christians. The structure is indigenised. Much in the culture has been Christianised. However, Christians may now be moving towards a model of life that is more conformist rather than distinctive. e.g. Wolaitta Kale Heywet Church, The Episcopal Church of Sudan in Moru and Kakwa areas of Sudan, The Church of Uganda in Kigezi, DCT in Dodoma Region Tanzania.
- Where one particular church denomination has spread fast recently but most Christians are the first generation. Rapid growth means that teaching is probably still limited so that Christian values are only beginning to penetrate the culture. However, people are wanting to know what it means to live as a Christian in practical matters. e.g. The Episcopal Church of Sudan in Bor Dinka area of Sudan, The Presbyterian Church of Sudan in Nuer area of Sudan.
2. Where the majority of the population have allegiance to one or other of many denominations, but there are many different denominations competing for allegiance. Most of the people share the same respect for the Bible and the church, but structurally they belong to many different denominations. Identity is often more in being a member of a particular denomination than being a Christian.
- Although there are others, one denomination is particularly associated with this people group. It may be well known as the church of this people group by outsiders. e.g. Methodist Church in Meru area of Kenya, Church of God in Bunyore area of western Kenya, United Church of Zambia in some parts of Zambia.
- Because there are so many different denominations you cannot predict what denomination a member of this people group is likely to belong to. There may or may not be interdenominational contact and working together. e.g. Much of Anglophone Africa: South Africa, Western Kenya, Central Kenya, Northern Tanzania, Ghana etc.
3. Where the church does not yet spread to the majority of the population but one or only a few denominations are having a significant presence in the area. The church is respected but does not have the allegiance of the majority of the population.
- Christians mainly belong to one denomination but not yet reaching a majority of the population. e.g. Presbyterian Church of Sudan in Anuak and Shilluk Kingdoms of Sudan, KHC in some areas of southern Ethiopia.
- One evangelical church is dominant in an otherwise Catholic or other non-evangelical church areas in a country that is not predominantly Roman Catholic. e.g. Africa Inland Church in Acholi and Madi areas of Sudan.
- One Evangelical church is sharing significance with either Catholics or Muslims in a non-Catholic and non-Muslim country. e.g. Church of Uganda in Lugbara area.
- A number of different denominations are competing in the (relatively large) people group but one may be significant in a particular area. This may also be linked with the people group being cross-border e.g. Many Maasai areas in Kenya, The Turkana in Northern Kenya, AIC in North Mara in Tanzania, CEE in CAR and ECS in Sudan among the Azande.
4. The evangelical church is a minority group in a culturally antagonistic environment. There is often persecution. This may be from Muslims, Majority Orthodox or Catholic cultures or where Witchcraft is active. e.g. Some areas of KHC in Ethiopia (e.g. Chencha), the Protestant church in much of Francophone Africa, and EER in Rwanda,
This analysis has many implications on the nature and the most appropriate way of working of the church in a particular people group. Some of these factors have been summarised in the following table:
It is important in any situation that the involvement of the church in development be tailored towards the overall church situation in an area. The church must play to its potentials. For any church, motivation from the Bible must be a significant resource but how this is used in development will depend on the influence of the church locally and the degree of competition or cooperation.
Looking at the significance of the church to the different people groups is entirely relevant in Africa as it is the way that the church is structured, and is the way that spirituality is expressed. Looking at the reality is different from the negative aspects of tribalism that can be xenophobic and competitive. This model is looking at the potential that a church can have in a particular area and basing relationships and interventions on that reality.
Where one denomination is dominant the existing church structure is easy to work through, but when there are many competing denominations a more sensitive approach may be needed in order to be able to share the common message.
SWOT is a commonly used tool for helping organisations understand themselves in organisational analysis and strategic planning. We look at the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats that the organisation faces and this helps us to look at its identity, and to decide what needs to be done.
A common way of using SWOT is to try to overcome some of the constraints by addressing weaknesses. This in practice means to some degree changing the nature (and therefore identity) of the organisation to overcome the weaknesses. This is most commonly done through training etc. coming from the opportunities. This is the basis of much Capacity Building. Weaknesses are somehow seen as something to be ashamed of, but we are being strong in facing up to them!
SWOT is often used to try and help an organisation be more acceptable and able to work with outside partners or donors.
Churches do not however work in the same way as NGOs and other similar organisations. In doing a SWOT analysis with churches we often find contradictions and difficulties. The same or related characteristics come up in both the strengths and the weakness section, or characteristics may appear as weaknesses that we feel should be in the strengths. Through using SWOT with both NGOs and churches I have feel that SWOT is not entirely appropriate for churches and have sought to work on a modified tool. In particular I have felt that the aspect of trying to change the nature and identity that results from most implementation of SWOT is not appropriate.
I have taken recently tried to take a different approach with churches, namely looking at Potentials and Limitations rather than Strengths and Weaknesses. This seems to give us a much clearer idea of the realistic situation of the church as a vital body. It is not an organisation like a business or an NGO, though some churches are in this country registered under both categories. It is fundamentally a body with a membership that operates effectively at a number of different informal levels in most cases.
The methodology is not very different but the differences are I believe significant. The resultant analysis may be called a PLOT Analysis!
The analysis can be applied in basically the same way as SWOT. The thinking may need to be on a different level, as potential must look a bit deeper than strengths and weaknesses sometimes do. The resulting picture is however somewhat different from the outcome of a SWOT with different types of characteristics coming up, and no real room for something to come in both the potentials and limitations columns at the same time.
Once the boxes are filled in the way I use this is different from SWOT. In SWOT a lot of emphasis is put on weaknesses as if they are something to be ashamed of. They are not good for our relationship with partners or donors. Looking at them in this way means that you try to overcome weaknesses and do away with them. You focus capacity building mainly on this. In PLOT you use the analysis to face up to reality, and to use the picture of the church to get an understanding together of where the church fits in to the wider scene and what its strategic position is as an imperfect human organisation. It is a tool that is particularly useful for determining which relationships are going to work, and how to develop those relationships in a spirit of true understanding and partnership. You deal with Potential and Limitations in different ways:
- Potentials are those areas that point to what you can expect to be able to do well. They need to be worked on and developed, not just accepted with a pat on ones own back (as strengths sometimes are). They point to what the church could be doing well and where it has a strategic advantage. In the analysis it is however recognised that potential has not yet been reached. Developing potentials then becomes the focus for capacity building, with the focus being on how to bring the Opportunities to strategically realise the potential. The potentials are what the church brings to a partnership.
- Limitations are those things that the nature of the church point out as being the reality. Rather than trying to overcome them, and thus try to change the nature of the body, they are accepted as the background for planning and help planning to be realistic. They are also things that you may look to in others to compliment the church in partnership. Partnership of this sort recognises that you don’t have to do everything yourself!
What are the advantages?
- It does not try to treat the church in the same way as an NGO, as a constituted organisation
- It becomes less threatening than SWOT
- It becomes less related to personalities and the resulting confusions can be avoided
- The church does not get pushed into changing its nature in order to realise some unrealistic OD goals
- It gives us tools for saying “No” to irrelevant activities, especially when donor driven
- It is a very positive starting point for real partnership
- It helps us to decide in strategic planning what is appropriate for the church and what is not
The following two pages are like appendices with thoughts that come out of this basic thinking:
Some thoughts on PLOT and the church in rural development:
What sort of picture does this give for the conventional type of rural development project that most churches get involved in because they are the only ones that they know? Churches are well equipped for certain types of activity and not for others, so why not get involved in the types of activity that they have high potential for, and for which secular and governmental organisations do not?
I would like to briefly focus of four aspects of the potentials and see how these relate to a distinctive model for development. This is a development based on teaching not on projects. These inevitably link to what we are trying to do in REAP because it is this thinking that out teaching is based on.
One of the most difficult things for development is to motivate people. The Bible motivates, so should be the basis for any church development teaching.
e.g. 1 Stewardship of the Earth for sustainable agriculture.
e.g. 2 The Body as the Temple of the Holy Spirit for Health teaching
e.g. 3 Absolutes in AIDS teaching
A structure that reaches to the grassroots:
This is potential for gaining good understanding and information for planning. It also enables replicable teaching.
e.g. Teaching through women’s fellowships
This being in touch with the reality leads on to:
A concern for the poor:
This means new teaching that is relevant for the poor or marginalised. Should not be based on money in order to benefit.
e.g. 1 LEISA
e.g. 2 Expense substitution – body oil, fuel saving stoves, home gardens, preventive health etc.
(NOTE: Does credit ever help the rural poor? Is it something suitable for churches to be involved in?)
Because of the above the church has enormous potential for achieving what others cannot through replicable teaching that spreads:
e.g. Vetiver & fruit trees through 867 local churches in Wolaitta Kale Heywet Church
(NOTE: With things whatever is given means there is less to give, with teaching there is always potential for more)
Some Characteristics of Churches from my experience
The following table lists some of the issues that I have identified as being fairly common amongst churches: