Emerging Trends …
A shift is taking place.
I’m not alone in taking time to examine emerging trends in global missions. It’s critical that we do so. Missions has changed considerably since my namesake, Ray Zuercher, and his wife Carol packed up for Colombia in 1948 to begin what became a 50-year missionary career with Avant (The Gospel Missionary Union).
Even more recently, mission trends have shifted again. Increasingly, missions leaders are gathering to address significant changes in the global landscape — particularly the growing need to resource and care for indigenous churches, their leaders, and networks.
This shift reflects both the maturity and the complexity present in the global church — maturity, this is good news! But this shift also requires discernment. I’m considering these realities both as a local church Elder and as the founder of ZEELO, a missionary care ministry. There are important implications we must grasp.
The times, indeed, are changing.
There was a time when sending organizations and those who resourced indigenous leaders operated in separate lanes. Some ministries focused on sending cross-cultural workers; others focused on supporting national leadership. That line is quickly fading.
Today, many traditional sending organizations are directly funding and training indigenous ministries. This reflects a biblical principle: the church should ultimately be led by its own people. These corrective measures were needed. But now we face an entirely new set of challenges: how do we pursue ongoing partnership without creating dependency?
Ted Esler, President of Missio Nexus — from whom I’ve drawn much of my thinking on this topic — captures the tension well:
“We’ll send money; you do the work… That’s not partnership; that’s employment.”
Indigenous ministries often need funding for their staff and leaders. ZEELO readily acknowledges that people are the most significant resource in ministry. Funding leaders can feel both strategic and generous. Yet financial relationships can unintentionally create dependency. Over time, dependency distorts partnership. And distorted partnerships rarely produce lasting strength.
As my dear friend Dr. Malcolm Webber once told me while we were in Cambodia together, “Ray, bro, money messes ministry up!” (Read that again in your best Australian accent.)
The question is not whether to give. The question is how to give wisely.
Is financial support catalytic or permanent?
Does giving build capacity or reliance?
Is there a plan and path toward sustainability?
These questions matter deeply — whether you are a church, a missions committee, or a sending agency. The goal must always be to strengthen, not weaken, indigenous churches and their leadership.
Another important insight has surfaced in these discussions: it is not best practices for cross-cultural agencies to make decisions and then invite indigenous leaders into the conversation. True partnership requires shared engagement early on, not simply funding decisions after the fact. This is not simple or easy. Trust takes time. Cross-cultural communication carries layers most of us do not immediately see. Humility is essential. Healthy partnership requires humility, patience, and relational depth before strategic alignment can happen.
I witnessed this firsthand during my years helping global churches develop biblical generosity training. My friend Patrick Johnson, founder of GenerousChurch, consistently modeled open-handed humility. He approached every meeting with a posture of listening rather than control.
This mirrors the pattern of the early church. When Paul and Barnabas strengthened new churches, they did not retain control. They appointed local elders and entrusted the work to the Lord (Acts 14:23). The goal was maturity and local leadership — not permanent dependence on outside expertise.
There is another risk as well. When churches or agencies send funds but not people, missions can subtly drift toward outsourcing. Financial support and missionary sending are not competing strategies; they belong together. However, if we remove personal investment and shared sacrifice, we weaken spiritual ownership. Our churches must always have skin in the game beyond financial contribution.
Stewarding well.
Resourcing indigenous mission is a growing and important segment of global missions. As the global church expands in strength and capacity, partnership models will continue to develop. Yet merely resourcing indigenous ministry is not a magic pill. It carries its own tensions — dependency risks, leadership gaps, and cross-cultural misunderstandings among them.
Handled wisely, good stewardship can strengthen the global church. Handled carelessly, it can undermine the very maturity it seeks to build. Indigenous partnership is a good way — when practiced with humility, clarity, and shared ownership.
And that kind of partnership is worth building.