The Monkey and the Fish Written by Oliver R. Phillips September 17 2010 http://culturalexpressionsmagazine.

org/articles/the-monkey-and-the-fish-a-parable-for-crosscultural-ministry

An Eastern parable resurfaced in the past few years when Dave Gibbons titled his book "The Monkey and the Fish: Liquid Leadership for a Third-Culture Church." The book was written for the inquisitive disciple, who yearns to connect with the contemporary culture, while at the same time being loyal to the traditional concepts of the institutional church. Gibbons seeks to address the widening gap between the "first culture" church and the "third culture" church, and suggests that our methods of ministry, though well intended, might require a new attempt at realignment. Listen to the parable: A typhoon had temporarily stranded a monkey on an island. In a secure, protected place on the shore, while waiting for the raging waters to recede, he spotted a fish swimming against the current. It seemed obvious to the monkey that the fish was struggling and in need of assistance. Being of kind heart, the monkey resolved to help the fish. A tree precariously dangled over the spot where the fish seemed to be struggling. At considerable risk to himself, the monkey moved far out on a limb, reached down and snatched the fish from the threatening waters. Immediately scurrying back to the safety of his shelter, he carefully laid the fish on dry ground. For a few moments the fish showed excitement, but soon settled into a peaceful rest. Joy and satisfaction swelled inside the monkey. He had successfully helped another creature. --Duane Elmer, in "Cross-Cultural Servanthood"1 The landscape of cross-cultural ministry is littered with dead fish and populated with monkeys who were well-intentioned in their calculated efforts to rescue fish that they thought would be swept away eternally by the raging tides of secularism, atheism, materialism, agnosticism, and ignorance of Christ's atoning sacrifice. The metaphors may at first sound crass and irreverent, but the message and motif cannot be easily dismissed.

Ministering cross-culturally poses a real challenge, because cultural differences are often downplayed and underestimated. Cultural intelligence (CQ) is the ability of persons to adapt to, adjust, and interpret the values that represent the core underpinnings of a different culture. While a new behavioral and motivational construct, CQ is grounded in extensive research about the historical work done in the field of intelligence. The result of the research has been the development of a pedagogical approach that is formulated through motivational, cognitive, and behavioral designs. Commendable things could be said about this monkey. The monkey had laudable motivations and zeal to see the fish rescued. He was determined that the fish should enjoy life, as it was meant to be enjoyed. However, the monkey failed to take into consideration the cultural context in which the fish was predestined to exist. Salvation to the fish could not be determined by the same characteristics that the monkey was enjoying. In fact, the monkey's salvation was death to the little fish. If the monkey had taken the time to enhance her cultural intelligence, she would have been aware that the deliverance of salvation is contextual. Surely, salvation meant freedom from death, freedom to live the fulfilled life, freedom to procreate, and freedom from premature extinction. Little did the monkey realize that salvation could be accomplished on land or in the water. The fish would have appreciated the salvation that the monkey had to offer; but the fish was created to be in the water, alive. Every culture is different. We demonstrate monkey behavior, when we are not attentive to these differences or peculiarities and embark on the task of proclaiming the Gospel to a people, without regard for the culture in which this Gospel must take root. Peculiarities of Cultural Values Among the many areas of cultural disconnect is the frustration many people experience with the approach other cultures take towards value. The Western approach to time is referred to as being time-oriented, while most other cultures are event-oriented. To event-oriented cultures, the event takes precedence over the constraints of time. When the job starts or is completed is not as critical as what transpired in the fulfillment of the task. Relationships are relished, while the task is being accomplished. In Western cultures, time is of a premium; wrist watches have almost become a religious litmus test of one's commitment to punctuality. In other cultures on the other hand, time is elastic, and is partner to a host of variables that affect the importance that is placed on punctuality. For instance, in agrarian societies, farmers understand quite well that the weather forecast may vary from year to year or month to month, and even from hour to hour. Flexibility becomes the order of the day. When ministering among a people with such orientations, clashes and frustration could flourish unless this observation is acted upon. Ministry today, whether globally or locally, is fraught with the challenges of differences in culture. If the world were a village of 1,000 people:
y

206 would be Chinese

y y y y y y y y y y y

167 would be Indian 79 would be from Central and South America 50 would be from the former Soviet Union (Eastern Europe) 51 would be North American 45 would be Western European 33 would be Indonesian 21 would be from Japan 22 would be from Bangladesh 21 would be from Nigeria 24 would be from Pakistan 118 would be from other Asian countries.2

Religiously, the global village would look like this:

y y y y y y y y y y y

Christian: 330, leaving 670 non-Christians Muslim: 198 Nonreligious: 126 Hindu: 135 Buddhist: 60 Ethnoreligionist: 38 Atheist: 25 New-religionist: 17 Sikh: 4 Jewish: 2 Other: 653

In the midst of this cacophony of differences, it is possible to duplicate the monkey's mistake. It could safely be said that each of these groups is present here in the new mission field called the US and Canada. The monkey's mistake was that he wanted the fish to be just like he was. Enjoying life on the land, as the monkey did, was his passion for everyone else, including the fish. That sense of superiority easily seeps into our own motivation for reaching others with the Good News. The task before us is to come to grips with the differences in culture, and at the same time, recognize that the language we use to describe the nuances in culture should be refined. By that I mean, there are attitudes that we Westerners take that may impede any attempt to bridge the gap in cultural understanding. One of those areas is that of relegating various aspects of culture to be "right" of "wrong." Culture Right or Wrong Thinking We are all products of our culture and society, and the prevailing attitude has been that another's culture has to be wrong for ours to be right. We leave absolutely no room for "different." We learn in our math class that an answer is either right or wrong. But that is hardly the way we want to live cross-culturally. So often we hear the argument that if some behavior cannot be substantiated by Scripture, it cannot be acceptable. We fail to recognize that the Bible is a book written thousands of years ago to a people vastly different from us and to a culture that was

fundamentally primordial, primitive, mostly agrarian, and deeply influenced by surrounding cultures that were not always consistent with Judean or monotheistic values. In contemporary America, we are prone to neat and hasty categorizations. One is liberal or conservative, Republican or Democrat, left or right, socialist or capitalist, pro-choice or pro-life, now or later, early or late, literalist or figurative, post- or pre-, and it goes on and on endlessly. We judge the actions of the monkey as right or wrong! To pursue the path of such extremes leads to an unnecessary impasse in the bridging of cultures and flies in the face of the cultural diversity that God has designed. In his book Cross Cultural Connections, Duane H. Elmer states that when we are too quick to categorize, we are in the midst of four conclusions: 1. 2. 3. 4. We are eager to correct the behavior. We no longer seek to understand the behavior. We are disturbed by the behavior and enlist friendly allies. If the people resist our suggestions for change, they become adversaries.

When tempted, as we often are, to use Scripture to investigate the relevance of another's cultural artifacts, Elmer4 gives us some theologically appropriate suggestions that could be helpful. He states that "if anyone is going to place a wrong cultural practice under the authority of Scripture, it is best done by the Holy Spirit guiding the local church rather than someone from the outside imposing a 'correct' theology. If the Holy Spirit is guiding them, the authority of Scripture will emerge as an internal conviction that will promote deep and lasting cultural change. If the decision is made by an external person or group, change may be only temporary and superficial." The task before us, as we attempt to help the fishes represented by the many cultures around us, is to acknowledge that not everything within that culture is right or wrong; they may be merely different. When we begin with such understanding, we will embark on a journey that opens the door to discovering other places to put the fish than on the "right" ground that is laced with the preconceived notions of the "wrongness" of the fish's culture. Let's reach other people where they are, not where we would like them to be. Duane H. Elmer, Cross Cultural Servanthood: Serving the World in Christlike Humility, (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2006). 2 2001 World Population Data Sheet, Population Reference Bureau 2001, www.prb.org 3 David B. Barrett and Todd M. Johnson, Status of Global Mission, 2001, in Context of 20th and 21st Centuries, International Bulletin of Missionary Research, (January 2001): 25 4 Duane H. Elmer, Cultural Connections: Stepping Out and Fitting in Around the World, (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002).
1