An investigation into the attitudes of UK Evangelical Churches to mission in Mainland Europe

For many years I have been interested in mission in Europe, encompassing the preaching of the gospel, justice ministries, and engagement in the public square.  This deepened when I had the opportunity to live in Brussels in the 1990s, working in the Legal Service of the European Commission. 

From my own observations, however, I felt that within churches in the UK there was a lack of engagement or understanding about mission in the continent of Europe.  This was reinforced by conversations I had with those involved in a variety of different mission agencies working in Europe, including those engaged in church planting, incarnational ministries, and involvement in the public square in Europe.

It was both my conviction and observations that prompted the research topic for my MA dissertation.  Limiting myself to the Anglican church, I surveyed a number of church leaders, and also interviewed church members and leaders from two mission-focused Anglican churches. I also interviewed leaders of three mission agencies based in the UK who work in Europe.

The hierarchy of the Anglican Church takes a positive attitude towards engagement in mainland Europe in mission through the role of the diocese in Europe, its chaplaincies, its links with mission agencies and partners, and through the work of the Conference of European Churches, which is involved in dialogue with the Institutions of the European Union. 

Officially the stance of the Church of England in the referendum campaign was neutral.  However during the course of the referendum campaign, the Archbishop of Canterbury made clear his decision to vote to remain in the EU.  While acknowledging that the EU needed renewed vision and reform, he based his decision on the contribution to peace and social care and the importance of being an outward looking nation. The Bishop of Europe expressed deep disappointment at the outcome of the referendum, describing it as a failure of vocation.

Attitudes of church leaders

Thirteen church leaders were asked how they decide what missions to support. Nine leaders gave ‘personal contact/member of your church’ the highest rating and over half respondents put emphasis on evangelism in one of the top two categories. As one church leader indicated, their involvement in Europe was “not because of any leadership policy or stance; it is because of personal relationships and God's call to people to get involved.”

When asked whether they thought there was a need for mission in Europe today, twelve either agreed or strongly agreed.  Ten agreed or strongly agreed that it was important for their church to give and pray for mission in mainland Europe, and eight said their church gave regular support to organisations and mission partners working in Europe. While they prayed for members of the UK parliament on a regular basis, none did so for the European Parliament.

Attitudes of church members

Like church leaders, the most important factor for almost all the church members interviewed was a personal relationship with the person they were supporting. One interviewee said: "personal relationship is definitely the top… a belief in the person and what they are doing.” Hearing personal stories and reports was also important, and for the majority of interviewees, this meant from people involved rather than second-hand reports from mission organisations.

Eight of the eleven respondents agreed or strongly agreed that there was a need for mission in mainland Europe, however the majority felt it should be aimed at poorer and more disadvantaged areas, such as Eastern Europe.  Those who disagreed did so on the basis that Europe was not sufficiently needy, needs being defined in material terms. There did not appear to be any difference in perceived need for mission according to whether a country had a Catholic, Orthodox or indeed a Protestant heritage.

Almost no one got their information about the EU from Christian organisations and churches. When asked what would help stimulate mission in Europe, alongside personal contact and stories, a short-term mission trip was considered important. Despite this, some interviewees felt that it was more important for the church to engage in mission to the local area.

Conclusion

Overall, my dissertation would tend to suggest that the perception that there is little interest in mission in mainland Europe might be correct.  However, further research is needed to confirm this.  The lack of interest would need to be addressed by restoring a commitment to global as well as local mission and re-emphasising the important of evangelism and church planting as an essential component of the missio Dei.  Finally, and particularly as personal contact is key to inspiring churches in mission, much more needs to be spoken and written about mission in Europe to highlight the urgent need for mission in European countries, and for a new vision for the public square in Europe so that the Body of Christ in the UK can play its part fully in the spiritual renewal that this continent so desperately needs. 

Rosemary Caudwell, MA student at Redcliffe College