Missional pilgrimage: A new framework for short-term mission

Introduction

The importance ascribed to pilgrimage throughout a long period of history, and in a wide range of religious and cultural contexts, shows that it is a key element of much religious practice. Pilgrimage is, by definition, a journey: one carried out for religious purposes, with elements of both an external journey to a sacred site and an internal journey of spiritual growth. Within traditional Christian practice, pilgrimage is an act of religious devotion, with the pilgrim seeking purification, penance, worship, or healing (Schnell and Pali, 2013), both along the journey and on arrival at the “sacred centre,” usually a shrine which connects in some way to the life or death of Christ or a Saint (Di Giovine, 2011).

In the contemporary western Evangelical church, the language of pilgrimage has fallen out of common usage, but journeying from one place to another and back again is still a key practice, seen in the prevalence of “mission trips.” The practice of short-term mission, defined within the Evangelical Christian world as “short travel experiences for Christian purposes such as charity, service or evangelism” (Howell, 2012: 20), or elsewhere as “trips of short duration usually organised by religious organisations in the Global North to geographically distant locations in the Global South” (Adler and Offutt, 2017: 2), is typically considered to be an important journey for the one who undertakes it.

The concept of short-term mission encompasses a wide range of possibilities (Howell, 2012); trips lasting from a few days to a year or two, alone or in teams, to another country or a nearby community, engaging in many types of activities, in partnership with churches and missionaries or independently. Participants may be of any age and lifestyle, and trips may be organized by churches, mission agencies or individuals. Peterson, Aeschlimand, and Sneed (2003: 68) identify eight “defining variables” of short-term mission, including length of time, mission philosophy, and demographics of participants, and suggest that there are more than 777 million configurations of short-term mission. Despite all these possibilities, most of the literature on this topic focuses on small groups forming teams to travel from the west to majority world countries for no longer than a month or two (e.g. Priest et al., 2006; Zehner, 2006; Trinitapoli and Vaisey, 2009; Howell, 2012). We therefore will also focus on this expression of short-term mission.

This article considers anthropological discussions of pilgrimage and seeks to identify the key elements and characteristics of the practice, and then asks the question of whether these elements can and should be applied to the contemporary practice of short-term mission. Research shows that the primary motivation of many who undertake short-term mission journeys is related to personal and spiritual growth and transformation (Haynes and Warner, 2018; Serio, 2021). However, short-term mission is often publicized as an opportunity to serve and bless others. Instead of emphasizing one or other of these two motivations, we hope to present a new framework of short-term mission as a significant spiritual and religious practice that has value both for those undertaking the journey and those they go to serve.

Setting the scene

Both short-term mission and pilgrimage have seen a rise in popularity in recent years. Despite the expectation of many social theorists of the last century that religion and religious practices such as pilgrimage would die out and be replaced by rationality and secularism, it is now becoming evident that “a religious imagination and interest in the spiritual is still a strong aspect of social life almost everywhere” (Challenger, 2019, para. 2), and such interest can be seen as characteristic of postmodern culture (Kourie, 2007). The practice of pilgrimage has become a popular way to express spiritual interest and a longing for spiritual experience, perhaps in part because of its flexibility in adapting to meet a range of spiritual and practical needs (Dubisch and Winkelman, 2005).

Short-term mission has also been on the rise, particularly within the Evangelical church in North America and Europe. Although specific numbers are hard to find, it is estimated that in 2005 there were 1.6 million participants from North America alone (Wuthnow, 2009; Wuthnow and Offutt, 2008). It appears that it is almost considered a rite of passage for young Evangelical Christians. I (Rachel) well remember the astonishment of a group of young Christians when one of them admitted that despite having grown up in church, he had never participated in a short-term mission trip. The group, and the young man himself, felt that he had “missed out” on an experience both important and expected. Perhaps the popularity of short-term mission in the western Evangelical church reflects somewhat the resurgence of pilgrimage elsewhere. Both may be seen as a response to the desire for spiritual experience.

While short-term mission remains immensely popular for young Christians in Western Europe and North America (Adler and Offutt, 2017), we are concerned that it still takes places within an outdated paradigm of mission. In long-term and professional mission, there is a paradigm shift taking place, with mission becoming far more polycentric and missionaries moving from everywhere to everywhere. In contrast, the short-term mission model is still primarily “the west to the rest.” Although there are churches sending out short-term teams from the majority world, including Latin America (Cerrón, 2007; Offutt, 2011), Southern Africa (Offutt, 2011), and East and Southeast Asia (Zehner, 2010; Wuthnow and Offutt, 2008), there are still far greater numbers in the other direction (Offutt, 2011). This is despite the fact that the “new centers” of Christianity are now in the Global South (Offutt, 2011: 796). Bringing together short-term mission and pilgrimage is a way of considering a new framework for short-term mission that would enable it to become more polycentric, and more reflective of current thinking and practice in world Christianity.

With pilgrimage and short-term mission both on the rise, it is not surprising that authors from various fields, including anthropology, missiology, and contextual theology, have explored the similarities and differences between them, with various conclusions reached. Haynes, based on his research among short-term mission participants, proposes a theology of short-term mission that “moves away from pilgrimage towards a more robust practice of mission” (2018: 217). He argues that while the transformative experience of pilgrimage is a good thing, it should not be the primary aim of short-term mission. Others have looked for a more synthesized view of the two practices. For example, LeFeber (2011: 58) has suggested that short-term mission can serve both “to build God’s kingdom and to turn those who seek a personal spiritual quest to the centre that is the mission of God.” LeFerber’s suggests that the missio Dei becomes the “shrine” towards which these pilgrims travel, finding at the center of the journey the sacred activity of participating in the work of God. Wesley (2010: 11) also suggests that “short-term mission as Christian pilgrimage is . . . a natural expression of the missio Dei.” His conclusion is that both mission and pilgrimage should be continuous aspects of a Christian lifestyle that gives equal priority to gospel witness and personal growth.

As well as these contemporary discussions regarding the similarities between mission and pilgrimage, we can consider historical instances of mission activity crossing over with pilgrimage. One such instance was the early Celtic model of mission, which involved monks leaving the monastery to undertake pilgrimage journeys, during which time they were expected to preach the gospel and serve those whom they met along the road. There was therefore no separation of the two practices (Northumbria Community, 2020). It is this idea that is most resonant with our own argument, where mission and pilgrimage come together in one framework.

Similarities/overlap between short-term mission and pilgrimage

To begin exploring the similarities between short-term mission and pilgrimage, it is first necessary to consider the definition of pilgrimage itself. Like Fife (2004: 140) we “stretch the argument beyond what is normally considered pilgrimage.” The “sites” are not sacred shrines, but rather can be understood in several ways; as sites of action, activity, or spiritual development (Morinis, 1992; Serio, 2021). In this way, both pilgrimages and short-term mission trips may be seen as “allegorical-inner spiritual journeys . . . created through . . . a geographical journey” (Fife, 2004: 142).

A significant, initial, similarity is that of liminality, which has often been seen as a key element of the pilgrimage experience. Victor and Edith Turner, drawing on the work of van Gennep (1960), a French anthropologist, liken pilgrimage to “rites of passage,” whose “essential purpose is to enable the individual to pass from one defined position to another which is equally well defined” (1978: 3). They draw on the characteristic pattern of these rites, involving three distinct aspects. First, the rites of separation, or pre-liminal rites, mark the leaving of and separation from the old status, place, or situation. Second, the rites of transition, or liminal rites, occur when the individual or group concerned no longer has the previous status but has not yet achieved or been granted the new one. Third, the rites or incorporation, or post-liminal rites, celebrate and make official the new status or situation.

In their discussion of liminality, the Turners argue that the concept is broader than van Gennep’s definition. It applies to “all phases of decisive cultural change” during which thought, behavior, and relations are open to revision, and “all that is not manifest in the normal day-to-day operation of social structures can be studied objectively” (1978: 3). They then make the link between liminality (as understood in this way) and pilgrimage, by showing a number of ways in which pilgrimage has many attributes of liminality, such as release from structure, equal status and communitas, simplicity, struggle, reflection on values, ritual enactments, emergence of a “true self” along with individuality, and movement (both real and symbolic) (1978: 34).

While the pilgrim does go through a sort of initiation into a “new, deeper level of existence” (Turner and Turner, 1978), this experience of liminality is not exactly parallel to that experienced in the initiatory rites of passage as described by van Gennep. These tribal rituals reinforce social structures and encourage a deeper commitment to the local community, whereas the pilgrim is seeking release from the restrictive structures of day-to-day life (Turner and Turner, 1978: 9). Another difference between pilgrimage and van Gennep’s rites of passage is that pilgrimage is almost always voluntary, rather than being an “obligatory social mechanism” (Turner and Turner, 1978: 34). The Turners therefore suggest that pilgrimage is “perhaps best thought of as ‘liminoid’ or ‘quasi-liminal’” (Turner and Turner, 1978: 35).

Descriptions of short-term mission experiences collected by researchers frequently include themes that are reminiscent of this liminoid pilgrimage experience (Haynes, 2018; Howell and Dorr, 2007). The short-term mission trip appears to be more of a liminoid experience than either tourism or long-term mission, as the participant neither breaks away completely from normal life, as in tourism, nor incorporates into a new life, as in long-term mission, but “enters a liminal state where many of the tensions characteristic of evangelical Christian life . . . are confronted, challenged and (re)incorporated into the religious life of the believer” (Howell and Dorr, 2007: 243). This liminal state occurs because the participant temporarily leaves behind the “ordinary, compulsory, workday life at home and experiences an extraordinary, voluntary, sacred experience away from home” (Priest, 2010: 89).

The second similarity that can be seen between pilgrimage and short-term mission is the experience of communitas, which is often a result of the liminoid experience. The release from social structures that occurs during this liminoid period, when pilgrims or short-term mission participants are both geographically and socially separated from their normal roles and situations, and when “traditional social conventions are suspended” (Di Giovine, 2011: 252), leads to this experience of communitas: “an unstructured or rudimentarily structured and relatively undifferentiated comitatus, community, or even communion of equal individuals who submit together to the general authority of the ritual elders” (Turner, 1969: 82). This sense of unity among pilgrims is one that “transcends the daily differences of their social life, a spontaneous and sympathetic sensation of mutual ‘fellow-feeling’” (Di Giovine, 2011: 247). Equally, in short-term mission many of the normal structures to which people are subject are abandoned, and a “homogenization of status” can be observed, for example in shared dress codes, equal allocations of accommodation, ministry tasks and responsibilities, and an emphasis on team-building and team relationships (Haynes, 2018: 196). This leads to deep connections that are rapidly formed amongst people from a range of backgrounds and situations, generating a deep sense of communitas. In a traditional model of short-term mission, however, this does not extend to the hosts, and therefore is also a marker of difference.

Eade and Sallnow, editors of the book Contesting the Sacred, argue that the Turners’ model of pilgrimage fails to account for the “historical and cultural idiosyncrasies that structure a particular pilgrimage experience” (1991: 254), and that it treats all pilgrimages as if they were equally structured and had the same goals, which is not the case. They suggest that the Turners’ theory should be seen as just one discourse among many, all of which coexist and compete with the others. They have, therefore, proposed an alternative model of pilgrimage in which, rather than generating unity among pilgrims, pilgrimage is based on “acts of contestation . . . and competing discourses,” and is therefore characterized not by communitas, but rather by a struggle for control over sacred places and objects.

These two models may seem opposite. However, Coleman (2002) suggests that ideas of contestation and communitas both imply “empty space.” For the Turners this is found in the stripping away of identity resulting in communitas, whereas for Eade and Sallnow it is found in the “religious void” of the sacred site into which pilgrims place their own meanings and assumptions. While short-term mission is seen to offer communitas, the meanings attributed to it are also often conflicted and contested. Short-term mission could be an anti-structure and liminoid experience, as espoused by the Turners, but often becomes a space where everyday assumptions are expressed in a new way (Eade and Sallnow, 1991). Contestation can therefore be seen as the third similarity between pilgrimage and short-term mission. This contestation may be particularly prevalent when there are discrepancies in expectations between hosts and participants, for example if the participants (and organizers) are seen to be overly goal-focused (Johnson, 2003, 2014; Livermore, 2004) or insensitive to local culture (Livermore, 2004).

As a fourth point of similarity, both short-term mission and pilgrimage contain a kinetic element. Coleman, working with Eade, has suggested that a better way of understanding pilgrimages is to see them as “kinetic rituals,” based on the various forms of movement and motion that are constitutive elements of the practice (Coleman and Eade, 2004). They argue that this perspective challenges the dichotomy between structure and process that is evident in the Turners’ work and allows a broader “ethnographic gaze” than that of both the Turners and Eade and Sallnow (1991), who tend to focus on the central shrine. This theory can be seen as more relevant in postmodern society, in which mobility and transition are normal conditions of life for many people. Pilgrimage is therefore less likely to be seen as exceptional, or as set apart from day-to-day life and society. Coleman and Eade go so far as to suggest that the pilgrim could be “emblematic of aspects of contemporary life” (2004: 7). A similar approach was also taken by Morinis (1992: 3), who identified movement as key to understanding pilgrimage, and suggested that “the term can be put to use wherever journeying and some embodiment of an ideal intersect.” Clearly, movement and motion are also key aspects of short-term mission, which, by definition, involves a journey. Although little attention is paid to the actual process of going and returning for short-term mission, this idea of a kinetic ritual might still be significant and relevant in its study, particularly as many short-term mission projects involve hard physical tasks.

One apparent contrast between pilgrimage and short-term mission is that pilgrims travel toward a site that is perceived as sacred by the pilgrim, whereas short-term mission trips tend to have as their destination communities of people considered to be in need, whether materially or spiritually. It has been argued that the concept of “the poor” has become the perceived shrine to which short-term mission participants make their pilgrimage. Traditional shrines are therefore replaced by so-called “poor communities,” and ritual shrine activity is replaced by the experience of serving these communities (Howell and Dorr, 2007; Occhipinti, 2009; Haynes, 2018). There is a significant danger in identifying people or communities in this way. This will be discussed further in the missiological application section below. For now, we can say the fifth similarity between short-term mission and pilgrimage is that there is something at the center, and this “something” is perceived as being in some way sacred.

The sixth and final similarity is that both pilgrimage and short-term mission carry with them the expectation of some kind of spiritual reward (Howell and Dorr, 2007). Traditionally, Christian pilgrimage was seen as an act of religious devotion, and was undertaken in search of purification, penance, worship, or healing (Schnell and Pali, 2013). According to the Turners (1978), the experience and reward of communitas also provide a fundamental motivation, especially when undertaking “an arduous and taxing pilgrimage journey” (Di Giovine, 2011: 248). Today, pilgrims also expect to experience fellowship with others, and to find a liminal space which “facilitates reflection, individual growth and development . . . [leading to] wholeness and fulfilment” (Challenger, 2014: 136).

In short-term mission, this expectation of spiritual reward is generally framed in terms of personal and spiritual transformation and renewed commitment to faith. As Haynes (2018: 182) clearly states, “many of the short-term mission participants . . . were like pilgrims in that they expected their travels and experiences to bring about a change in personal faith development.” This expectation of personal growth is often accompanied by a desire to “leave one’s comfort zone,” to experience new and unfamiliar situations, and to suffer (although mildly) in some way (Howell and Dorr, 2007: 245), perhaps as a way of stimulating their faith and increasing their dependence upon God. In fact, in wishing to encounter these difficulties, participants were “seeking to enter a liminoid state,” whether or not they were aware of it (Haynes, 2018: 193). This expectation of personal growth and transformation has more in common with the expectations of pilgrims than of long-term and career missionaries, whose motivations and goals are much more focused on the recipients of their missionary service (Wesley, 2010). Some short-term mission participants also desire to use their experiences to bring about change and development in their churches and home contexts (Howell and Dorr, 2007). For example, Trinitapoli and Vaisey (2009) found that adolescents reported increased religious participation and solidified religious beliefs on returning from short-term mission trips. Likewise, a study by Beyerlein et al. (2011) found that those who engage in “mission trips” were significantly more likely to participate in various forms of civic activity, particularly religious-based volunteer work.

Missiological application

We have proposed six key similarities between pilgrimage and short-term mission: the experiences of liminality, communitas and contestation, the elements of movement and of a sacred center, and the expectation of spiritual reward. With these similarities in mind, we are proposing that short-term mission can be defined, and valued, as a form of pilgrimage practice that benefits and enriches the lives of those who undertake it and of those whom they serve. This immediately raises two opposing questions.

First, is it acceptable to call a short-term mission trip by the term “pilgrimage”? It is ironic that, despite the similarities, many of the fiercely Evangelical participants of short-term mission trips may well reject the concept of pilgrimage due to the “sacramental, ritual and Catholic associations of the term” (Howell and Dorr, 2007: 265). Second, is it acceptable, and indeed accurate, to call such trips “mission”? As Serio (2021: 204) comments, “Participants travel to impoverished places for a certain reason, because they need something and to feel like they are contributing in some small way to the community, but. . . we (the mission team) gain the most out of these trips.” Although reasons for participating in short-term mission are many and varied, fusing both altruistic and non-altruistic motives (Howell, 2009; Priest et al., 2010), participants often focus on their own self-benefit, transformation, and enlightenment over changes the local community could experience (Trinitapoli and Vaisey, 2009; Haynes, 2018).

We believe that by bringing the two practices of mission and pilgrimage together into a new framework of missional pilgrimage we reframe the premise for these two questions, and that under this framework churches and parachurch organizations can send out teams and individuals who will effectively participate in the mission of God in various ways. Reframing both short-term mission and pilgrimage into this new, combined concept of missional pilgrimage will allow churches, mission agencies, and participants to fully embrace the transformative impact of a short-term mission trip on those who undertake it, as well as reframe the relationship with the “hosts” who should be seen as equal partners and participants within the practice. This gives these organizations the freedom to offer an experience that more effectively matches the desires and motivations of short-term mission participants and of those who receive them.

Within this framework, short-term mission can be intentionally offered as a way to experience liminality: an opportunity to step out of day-to-day life, confront new challenges, and return with new perspectives, emphasizing the reciprocal learning that may take place between hosts and participants. Joining a short-term mission team can also be put forward as a way of experiencing communitas, of finding unity and equality amongst people from different backgrounds and cultures, both with teammates and with those who receive them. The expectation of spiritual reward can be valued and developed, with discipleship and spiritual disciplines incorporated into the trip, and mentoring provided during and after the trip, with the goal of helping participants to reflect upon, understand, and learn from their experiences. This may also help to answer LeFeber’s criticism that many short-term mission participants “come back energised and excited about their work for God [but] show no lasting growth in discipleship” (LeFeber, 2011: 48).

There are many potential hurdles to implementing this new framework effectively. In short-term mission discourse, the issue of inequality and wealth disparity is ongoing (Serio, 2021), and there is an argument that inequality is necessary and that, in order for participants to keep coming and bringing money, they need to feel like they are useful (Moodie, 2013). However, this perception is harmful (Serio, 2021) and raises the important question of the inequality in the balance of power between participants and hosts, with participants often being perceived as having power over the host communities (Huang, 2019). This difference in material wealth leads many participants to approach short-term mission in terms of poverty-alleviation, putting the participants in the superior position of those who have a “solution” to provide (Corbett and Fikkert, 2012; Livermore, 2004).

This question of power is also raised by an East African pastor, quoted by Wesley (2010), who asks how short-term mission follows the example of Christ giving up power, as described in Philippians 2. Wesley comments that going (whether on pilgrimage or short-term mission) should reflect a person’s Christianity, not an expression of their resources. When short-term mission is approached with a similar attitude to that of Jesus Christ, an attitude of self-emptying humility, the material inequalities between participants and hosts may become less significant.

Adler and Offutt (2017) have suggested the use of gift-exchange theory as a way of recognizing that something is given and received in both directions, and of emphasizing the partnership between participants and hosts. In short-term mission trips, gift exchange is spiritualized as participants identify personal and spiritual growth as the gifts received in exchange for material gifts and practical service. Barr found that while participants felt that they received personal and spiritual gifts, the hosts were not aware of this. He suggests that participants should communicate more clearly what they receive (Barr, 2019). Within a missional pilgrimage framework, the expectation of receiving some kind of spiritual or personal reward is clearly expressed and can be held in balance with the desire to serve and give in practical ways.

We believe that the combination of a change of attitude towards Christlike humility, and a more explicit acknowledgment of reciprocity in gift-giving would overcome some of the ethnocentric practices currently found in short-term mission. This change would bring us closer to the “counter example” offered by Zeher (2006: 513) where an East African Church calls for a recognition of “the value of becoming experientially aware of the Christian Community, learning interdependence with people from different backgrounds and learning to develop experiential empathy for the sufferings of the two-thirds world . . . recognising the church’s ministry leadership, even when deploying foreign personnel.”

Likewise, the question of the sacred center needs to be revisited. As discussed above, the concept of “the poor” (itself a highly contentious term) has frequently been put in the place of the shrine, or sacred center. We see this as dangerously dehumanizing. The risk is that the people in these communities are seen as just “a means to an end,” a tool to be used in the search for personal growth and transformation. We are proposing instead that the individuals and communities on the “receiving end” of the mission trip are considered to be “fellow pilgrims” on the journey. After all, an outward pilgrimage journey is only an expression of the inner spiritual journey that we are all undertaking in one way or another. In this understanding, these fellow pilgrims experience a taste of the same communitas, serve the team through hospitality and in other ways, and receive blessing and spiritual reward themselves. The sacred center, rather than being focused on the people or community, becomes the place where God is at work, where his Kingdom is being built, and the sacred activity is to join God in his Kingdom work. All pilgrims, both those who have come from far away, and those who have joined them as fellow pilgrims, can approach this sacred center together. This might also, with significant time and effort, help address the concern that short-term mission trips, as they are currently constructed, do not affect participants’ racial attitudes or aid in the reduction of prejudice (Johnson, 2014).

While most current short-term mission trips do not fit within the proposed framework of missional pilgrimage, occasionally we can see the elements of the model already in practice. One such example is a trip organized by CRU in 2020, which involved walking the traditional pilgrimage route of the Camino de Santiago in southern France and Spain. This trip was advertised as being both a pilgrimage that would benefit the participant, and as an opportunity to minister to and share the gospel with fellow pilgrims along the way (CRU, 2020). In this kind of missional pilgrimage, the sense of communitas that occurs in short-term mission teams would be shared with others walking the same route, providing an opportunity to demonstrate and witness to the work of Christ within the context of an existing connection and relationship, and demonstrating the principle of both teammates and others experiencing the pilgrimage journey together. The experience of liminality, during which time people are more open to change and growth, may make those who hear the gospel more receptive to its message, and for those pilgrims who are undertaking the journey as a way of seeking meaning and clarity in their lives, the message of the gospel may appear to them as the answer they are looking for. Participants in the missional pilgrimage are therefore presented with numerous opportunities to proclaim Christ and serve their fellow pilgrims, while themselves enjoying all the personal and spiritual benefits of a pilgrimage. Although this is a unique example, it is possible for similar themes to be developed in other manifestations of short-term mission.

Conclusion

In this article we have looked at the ways that pilgrimage and short-term mission can be seen as similar, and through an understanding of their complementary characteristics we have proposed a new framework of missional pilgrimage. Missional pilgrimage embraces the best of the two practices of short-term mission and pilgrimage, enabling Christians to participate in the mission of God, serve one another, and experience transformative spiritual growth. This framework can also be helpful in overcoming the negative power dynamics that often exist between those participating in short-term mission trips and the individuals and communities who receive them.

However, in proposing this framework we are not suggested that missional pilgrimage can be easily implemented by churches and mission organizations without significant theological and ideological reflection and reframing of the paradigm of short-term missions. Many barriers to missional pilgrimage exist, and much more thought needs to be given to issues such as race and ethnicity, equality in partnerships, trends in global Christianity, and many others. Only when the way in which western churches and missionary organizations think about short-term mission changes from a mindset of problem-solving or serving the poor, to a mindset of partnership and true unity in the worldwide church, will missional pilgrimage provide a helpful and realistic model of short-term mission.

While this article has focused on the practice of sending small teams of people “from the west to the rest,” this model of missional pilgrimage could be explored further with regard to more polycentric models of mission, local mission, community outreach, and a variety of other contexts. By presenting their opportunities through this lens of missional pilgrimage, mission agencies and churches will give a more honest portrayal of the true nature of short-term mission, one that values both participation in the mission of God and the transformative impact of such participation.