The Sudan United Mission British Branch 1934-1977: An Examination of the Mission's Indigenous Church Policy

Abstract

The indigenous church policy, which centred on the three-self principle of self-governance, self-support, and self-propagation, was the subject of much debate in mission circles in the 19th and 20th centuries. The Sudan United Mission British Branch (S.U.M., B.B.) successfully implemented the policy. There are three problems which this research addressed. Some converts on the mission field of the Church of Christ in Nigeria (C.O.C.I.N.) were over pampered; they were not encouraged to be self-reliant as a church from the outset. The researcher’s findings have addressed this deficiency. The current wide gap in the relationship between S.U.M., B.B. (now Pioneers UK) and C.O.C.I.N. is another problem of the study. This has roots deep in the mission’s interpretation and implementation of the three-self policy; and has affected the development of human resources in the church. There is also the problem of lack of document on how the mission implemented the policy. Therefore, as its aim, this research examined the Mission’s indigenous church policy, why it was adopted, how it was implemented, the reaction of indigenous Christians to the policy, how the Mission handled that reaction, and the impact of the policy on the Church and the Mission. The primary sources that were used for this study include the magazine of the Mission, newsletters, oral sources, and archival materials such as minutes, correspondence and diaries. To obtain relevant information from the oral sources, the interviewees were deliberately selected and open-ended questions were used. The secondary sources include related books, pamphlets and articles. The researcher’s findings are that the policy was in the S.U.M., B.B. right from the outset but only slightly implemented until 1923 when it was officially adopted. The adoption of the policy was to achieve the goal of a healthy church. Between 1934 and 1977 some indigenous Christians reacted negatively to it. How the Mission handled some of these reactions left much to bedesired. Right from 1923 the Mission’s ideas of the policy were different from those of Roland Allen, thus countering the widely held tradition that the Mission was operating Allen’s scheme. The Mission understood self-propagation as only evangelism in Mission districts therefore the Church was not encouraged to operate a mission society of its own. Self-governance was delayed until nationals showed their dissatisfaction. This shows that undue paternalism was part of the Mission’s interpretation of the policy. The Mission’s understanding of self-support deprived the Church of adequately trained evangelists and pastors. This greatly affected discipleship, thus making the Mission unable to realise its goal of a healthy Church. The policy separated the Mission and the Church so that there is no forum for fellowship between the two today. The contribution of this study is that it has, for the first time, fully laid bare how S.U.M., B.B. interpreted and implemented the policy and what the impact was on the Church. To the S.U.M., B.B. the formation of a missionary society for the church was not a necessary part of self-propagation. Besides, the adequate preparation of nationals in sufficient number for leadership was not, in practice, regarded as an essential part of self-governance. This discovery is not found in any of the materials the researcher reviewed.