This research study has compiled many of the demographics of the missionaries in churches of Christ. The size of families, when they went to the mission field, how long they stayed, the kinds of training, support and family background the missionaries had, the types of working partnerships the missionaries enjoyed, and the countries in which they worked were all discussed.
The responses to the Family Strengths Inventory were examined to determine the strengths and weaknesses of the missionary families. Overall, the missionary families were found to be strong, especially in the spiritual well-being and commitment categories. Missionary families were found to be weakest in the communication and ability to cope with stress and crisis categories.
Although there have been some research projects completed among missionaries in the churches of Christ, most are limited in the scope of the population sampled. This project used both returned and present missionaries in obtaining a larger and more diverse sample. The demographics collected here are widespread and should prove helpful to those whose job is to train and send missionaries.
Based on the largest percentage under each category, the typical missionary went to East Africa during the 1980s. He and his wife were probably in their early 30s and learned to speak a second language. Both the husband and the wife had a university level degree in some subject and had taken mission preparations classes at the university level. They received their support from one major congregation receiving both financial support and encouragement. The personal and working funds they received were both considered adequate. These missionaries came from strong families, and their parents went to see them at least once on the field and also encouraged them from home. The missionary family was part of a team and probably never worked alone on the field. The wife participated as much as possible in the mission work while keeping her focus on taking care of the family which included three children. The parents included the children in the work every time they could. After working ten years, the missionary family returned home.
Do missionaries have strong families?Yes, this research found high scores for the strength of missionary families. As was discussed in Table 12, these families are strong in every area of family strength with Spiritual well-being (92%) their greatest strength, and Communication (71.3%) their weakest area. These strengths are visually displayed in Figure 2. By looking at the figure, it can easily be seen that the missionary families scored much higher in strength than they did in growth areas. The highest growth area is 27.9% (Communication) with the average overall growth need being 18.3%.
Spiritual well-being. Overall, the missionaries had the highest scores in spiritual well-being (92%). Over half of the questions in this area were in the top ten percent of the questions with an S response. God appears to be a central part of the missionary family's life. They indicated a belief that God directs them and watches over them. The missionary has other family and friends that share these beliefs. Biblical values rate high in their priorities. On the negative side, the missionary families indicated that they do not meditate on God's Word enough (32.1%) and pray enough (24.8%). These are the kind of questions that are very subjective. This could be understood in light of what most dedicated Christians would probably say, that they need to grow in this area. Praying and reading God's Word are two things that Christians would like to do more. It could be that missionaries have a high standard and believe they need to read and pray more. On the other hand, it could mean that missionaries might not be as spiritual in private as they may appear to be in public.
Commitment. Missionaries are very strong in the area of commitment, receiving an 87.9% score overall. From these questions, it can be seen that the family is a fairly cohesive unit. They are committed to each other and can rely on each other for help. They have unconditional love for each other. The family is a close unit. The main negative factor is that 43% said that they put their work activities over family commitments. This appears to be a large problem in the missionary population. Of course, there are immediate needs and crises when the work might need a higher priority than family, but overall, the family is much more important than any work, as important as it may be. Missionaries need to remember that their families are their first responsibility.
Time together. The missionary family spends good quality and quantity time together (83.3%). They said they eat together, worship together, and celebrate birthdays and holidays together. The missionary family likes each other and enjoys being together. On the negative side, 40% of the missionaries said they did not do house and yard chores together. This could reflect the fact that they probably have hired labor to do these jobs, freeing them to do other things together. However, it is important to note that 32.8% of the missionary families said they do not play together enough as a family. Recreation is an important part of healthy families.
Appreciation and affection. The missionary family has deep and genuine affection for each other and can see the good in each other. They received a 79.7% ranking in strength in this category. Just over 50% of the missionaries, however, said they had a hard time not criticizing each other. The missionary families still need to grow in saying things to each other in a positive way (32.1%) and in building each other up with positive acts and words of appreciation (40.1%). It may be that the missionaries have stable marriages but are not quite as satisfied as they could be.
Coping with stress and crisis. The missionary family has a very close bond in times of stress. They jointly call on God to help them as well as support each other in working together to overcome challenges. Their score in this category was 73%. On the negative side, the missionary family does not get regular exercise (56.2%) or recreational activity (33.6%), and they do not tend to eliminate some involvements when they are overcommitted (49.6%). They are not as good at talking their feelings out to solve problems (36.5%), and they do not go outside the family for help from friends (32,8%) or professionals (33.6%).
Positive communication. Missionaries received their lowest score (71.3%) in the area of positive communication. In fact, the only question in this category that ranked in the top ten percent was "The missionary family is honest and truthful and kind." In the bottom 25%, the missionary seems to be in too much of a hurry to communicate well with the family. The family does not allow enough time (41.6%) for discussions to receive the depth they deserve (41.6%). The missionary family is less empathic (35.8%) and tends to be critical of each other (33.6%). These issues are important, especially considering that the missionaries are Christians.
Further research. Observations over a thirty year period verify these results. Most missionaries do have strong families. They have strong values putting God first in their lives. These Christian values reflect in the way they treat their family.
It should be noted, however, that a strong family could very likely still have problems. Some missionary families were not considered strong. There is a notable minority of missionary families that have had marital problems, or their children have suffered from abusive substances (alcohol or drugs), immoral behavior, broken marriages, or a falling away from their faith. Many of these problems could probably be avoided by taking more time to communicate in a positive and reassuring way. Further research could test the problems of missionary families.
The Family Strengths Inventory was designed for the general population and not specifically for missionary families. Some of the questions, such as, "We are part of a church family" that are designed to show that the family has a strong spiritual basis, actually work in reverse for the missionary family. Not all missionary families have a "home church" on the field; not all benefit from the support of a local church family. It was also noted that G scores on "We meditate on God's Word" and "We spend time each day in prayer" could be taken in either a positive (spiritual lives could always be improved) or a negative (spiritual life is definitely lacking) context.
Another noted question was, "We seek professional help in times of crisis." The discrepancies in the answers may come from one or more factors such as these: (a) There are no professionals available in the area; (b) The missionaries have many of the skills of helping professionals and can help themselves; (c) The missionaries might feel they have "special protection" since they receive help from the Lord. (d) The missionaries might tend to keep their problems within the family in the belief that they must uphold a pure Christian image to neighbors and friends. It was noted in comparison that missionaries "seek help from friends, church, and neighbors during crisis" at a 65% level.
The use of the instrument for research purposes could be improved by using a standard Likert-like scoring system on a scale of 1 to 5. It was noticed that some missionaries had a hard time deciding whether to use an "S" or a "G." As an example one family, known to the researcher, ranked fairly low on the percentage scale. It could be that family has many problems, but they seem as well adjusted and strong as many of the others. The respondent, however, is a very humble person. It may be that she found it difficult to say her family "has achieved" strength in an area, when as a Christian, she believes there is always room for improvement or growth. On the opposite end of the spectrum, many missionaries have lived in a very worldly environment. When comparing their families to those they had lived among, the missionary may have scored their family very high because their family was definitely the strongest and most well-adjusted family around.
In addition to those already mentioned, this research has spawned several interesting questions. Using Figure 3 as a visual reminder of results discussed in Table 5, it shows the percentage of missionaries that received training in some form in their mission's preparation. How these different preparations affect the family, if there is any effect, is unknown. Future research can try to determine if training in missions has any effect on family strengths. From this research, it is understandable to see the relationship that support and family of origin may have with stress, communication, commitment, and appreciation levels, but additional research could further define and elaborate on these relationships.
Others have questioned the "generation" of the missionary, such as those that went in the early years (1930-1940), those that went after WWII (1945-1960), and then those that have gone more recently. It has been asked if these different generations showed a difference in family strength. It may be that characteristics of these generations (endures hardships, learns to sacrifice, needs and wants gratified instantly, ready availability of telephone or e-mail) will make a difference. Figure 4 shows the total responses for strength according to the decade the missionary family went to the field. More research could determine if the generation makes a difference in the strength of missionary families.
Others have asked if it makes any difference to the family how long the missionary family stays on the field. Does a family become stronger with each additional year of experience? Is there perhaps a point when the family begins to decline because of so many years away from extended family? After the children leave home, is it detrimental to be continents away from each other? Many questions in this area are still to be researched. Figure 5 shows the responses in this survey for missionaries according to years of experience. Future research can determine if the amount of years on the field has any significant effect on the missionary family.
Missionary families, for the most part, appear to be strong families. High percentage ratings, as well as positive feedback from so many missionaries, may also answer some of the doubts of prospective missionaries. Those considering moving to a mission field can understand that the move will have its own unique set of advantages and disadvantages. They can have confidence that this move will normally have more of a positive effect than a negative one.
Those who train and supervise missionary families can now have a greater wealth of information about the missionary families that have been sent out by churches of Christ. They should be able to use this information to plan better strategies for training future missionaries. They can see the actual areas of family life in which missionaries need more training.
Supporting congregations and relatives of missionary families may be encouraged to be more supportive of the overseas family. Although future research in these areas is still needed, those who support missionaries in any way can see the effect their support has on families overseas.
As a basis for continued research, this project incorporates considerable information about missionary families from various backgrounds and in numerous countries. It serves as a valuable resource of information about missionary families. The research also includes very helpful advice and observations offered by experienced missionaries. These provide a wealth of material about preparation for the field, actual life on the field, and for re-entry into the home country for consideration by other missionaries and those who aspire to be missionaries. This research opens the door for future important studies on the missionary family.