Supplemental Assignment

The Role of Spiritual Development in the Cross-Cultural Reentry Adjustment of Missionaries Thomas R. Kimber

BiolaUniversity

Mis study investigated the relationship between spiritual development and cultural reentry adjustment in a group of missionaries. One hundred and two missionaries com- pleted a questionnaire that correlated the Spiritual Assess- ment Inventory (SAI) with Pve cultural adaptation and transition scales. Me study found signiPcant relationship between the Reentry Distress Scale and the SAI Disap- pointment and Instability scales. Mere was also a signiP- cant relationship between the SAI Awareness scale and the Transition Change Scale. Me study also explored the rela- tionship between reentry distress and calling, regularly practicing spiritual disciplines, and returning home to a supportive community. Me implications of the study are discussed in relation to missionaries, mission agencies, and local churches in order to provide meaningful care for mis- sionaries during cross-cultural transitions.

]e most recent statistics indicate that there are ap- proximately 42,000 long-term missionaries from North America (including the U. S. and Canada) serv- ing overseas (Ja^arian, 2008). ]ese are deaned as mis- sionaries who have served overseas for more than four years, and include both traditional and bi-vocational missionaries (tentmakers). At some point, most of these missionaries will return to their home culture. While the successful transition from home culture to host culture has been the emphasis of training and re- search, more recent studies are a_rming that the end- pointof thecultural transitioncyclemust includeone’s transition back to his or her home country. While much is understood about the challenges of learning to live overseas, researchers are discovering more about

the challenges of reacculturating into one’s home culture.

Many returning sojourners report feelings of isola- tion, confusion, and not feeling “at home” in their home culture. Previous studies have largely attempted to understand this phenomenon from a cultural iden- tity perspective. Cultural identity is deaned as the de- gree to which the sojourner identiaes with his or her home country or country of sojourn (host country) (Sussman,2002).Whileearlier studies focusedprimar- ily on culture shock and cultural adaptation, more re- cent studies tend to focus on the deeper issues of iden- tity and multiculturalism (Onwumechili, Nwosu, Jackson & James-Hughes, 2003), including sociocultu- ral and psychological adaptation (Ward & Kennedy, 1993), relationships (Martin, 1986), communication (Cox, 2004), multiple reacculturation (Onwumechili etal.,2003),andgrief (Butcher,2002).Duringreentry, there may be the discovery of changes in worldview (Butcher,2002)andcultural identity(Sussman,2000). Amidst the growing aeld of reacculturation studies, no research could be found that attempts to understand the role of one’s relationship with God during reentry.

Missionaries and Cultural Adjustment While research a_rms that reentry stress is attrib-

uted to multiple variables and not any one single factor (Moore, Jones & Austin, 1987; Sussman, 2001), very few studies on spirituality and cross-cultural adjust- ment have been conducted. Studies comparing the ac- culturation patterns between missionaries and non- missionaries in Nepal have found that missionaries register more direct contact with locals while other expats report less direct contact with nationals and

JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY & THEOLOGY 2012, Vol. 40, No. 3, 211–219

Copyright 2012 by Rosemead School of Psychology

Biola University, 0091-6471/410-730

211

JPT40n3_text:JPT_40n3 9/6/12 8:30 AM Page 211

higher levels of social support (Navara & James, 2002). Studies report that missionaries and non-missionaries cope and adjust with perceived stress in di^erent ways. When missionaries perceive higher levels of stress, they are more inclined to engage in activities such as pray- ing, seekingpastoral support,ortrustingGodtorelieve the stress (Navara & James, 2005). Hall, Edwards and Hall (2006) found that spiritual development in mis- sionaries is positively related to psychological develop- ment and other aspects of sociocultural adjustment. Missionaries with lower levels of psychological devel- opment may be more vulnerable to the e^ects of spiri- tual di_culties during cross-cultural adjustment.

Missionaries who regularly practice spiritual disci- plines, experience support from their mission agency, have a clear vocational call and have greater spiritual life satisfaction also tend to experience greater adjust- ment to the mission aeld (Andrews, 1999). Further, missionaries who report better awareness of God also report better relationships with their teammates; con- versely, those who exhibit lower levels of spiritual de- velopment are more prone to having di_culties while overseas (Barnett, Duvall, Edwards & Hall, 2005). Of- ten, sojourners do not and the support and help needed to make the transition back to his or her home country, resulting in deep feelings of loss, grief, and even abandonment (Furuya, Stevens, Oddou, Bird & Mendenhall, 2007; Gaw, 2000; Selby et al., 2009). ]ese feelings of grief are exacerbated by a loss of church community and a loss of spiritual connection with God (Selby, et al., 2009). Studies of returned short-term missionaries report that even those who havebeenoverseas foras littleas twoweeksmayexperi- ence many of the same feelings of reentry distress, as well as a renewed look at their own spirituality and sense of purpose in life (Walling, Eriksson, Meese, Ciovica, & Gorton, 2006).

Deeper understanding of the sojourner’s relation- ship with God would provide vital insight into the ex- periences of missionaries who live cross-culturally for religious purposes. In order to address reentry more completely, it is necessary to understand how the re- turned missionary experiences his or her relationship with God. Of particular interest is whether the mis- sionary is aware of God’s presence and the quality of that relationship throughout the sojourn and reentry transition.

Summary and Hypotheses Previous reentry research has provided important

information about the sociocultural, psychological, and practical issues of cross-cultural adjustment. How-

ever, no studies could be found that attempt to under- stand the spiritual issues associated with cross-cultural reentry. Based on theoretical, theological, and empiri- cal support, it was hypothesized that there would be a signiacant relationship between missionaries’ relation- ship with God and cultural adaptation to the host country, acculturation to both home and host cultures, awareness of transition change, reentry preparedness, and reentry distress.

Method

Participants and Procedure ]e target population for this study was long-term,

U.S. Evangelical Protestant missionaries who had repa- triated home to the U.S. Six mission agencies were ran- domlyselectedandinvitedtotakepart inthisstudy.Of the six agencies, four were a_liated with a denomina- tion, and two were not. ]e agencies ranged in size from 256 long-term missionaries to 4009 long-term missionaries, serving overseas. All agencies emphasized evangelism, discipleship, and church planting min- istries. Each of the agencies was asked to identify mis- sionaries according to the following criteria: (a) mis- sionariesmusthave livedoverseas forat least fouryears; (b) be over 21 years old; (c) have returned to the U. S. permanently and not be on any temporary assignment, furlough, study leave, or sabbatical; (d) have not re- turned to retire, but intend to continue working; (e) have been back in the U.S. more than six months but not longer than ave years; (f) lived in the U.S. prior to living overseas, and consider the U.S. their home coun- try. Agencies did not include missionaries who were askedtoreturnhomebecauseofdiscipline, involuntary termination, or other personnel issues. A web-based questionnaire format was selected in order to facilitate research among a population scattered across the U.S.

]e six participating agencies initially sent a com- bined total of 255 invitations to missionaries they de- termined met the criteria of the study. Of those, 13 were returned undeliverable and 10 missionaries in- formed their agencies that they did not qualify for the study, reducing the number to 232. ]ere were 125 to- tal responses for a response rate of 54%. Of those, 21 were incomplete and 2 exceeded the acceptable length of time back in the States. ]is yielded 102 usable re- sponses. Respondents were not asked to identify their agencyandall responseswerecollectedandanalyzedin a single batch.

Of the 102 qualiaed respondents, 62 (61%) were male and 40 (39%) were female. ]e majority of re- spondents (95) were married (93%), 5 were single

212 MISSIONARY REENTRY AND RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD

JPT40n3_text:JPT_40n3 9/6/12 8:30 AM Page 212

(4%), and 2 were widowed (2%). Ages ranged from 32 to69withanaverageof52years.Dataonethnicitywas not collected for this study, though all participants in- dicatedthattheU.S. is theirhomecountry.]eaverage length of time overseas was 15 years, with a range of 4 to 36 years. ]irty-one (30%) of the respondents had beenbackintheU.S. foroneyear,22hadbeenbackfor 2 years (21%), 20 had been back for 3 years (19%), 16 had been back for 4 years (15%) and 13 had been back for 5 years (12%). Forty-one had served in Europe (40%), 30 had served in Asia (29%), 16 in Latin Amer- ica (15%), 13 in Africa (12%) and 2 in the Middle East (2%). While living overseas, 55 (53%) lived in a me- tropolis (more than 1,000,000 people), 12 (11%) lived ina largecity(500,000to1,000,000people),11(10%) in a town, 9 (8%) in a small city (50,000 to 100,000), 9 (8%) in a village and 6 (5%) in a medium city (100,000 to 500,000).

Measures ]e research questionnaire was comprised of six in-

struments, which had been used in similar studies. Five additional questions were developed by the researcher as a result of a theological study connected with this research.

Spiritual Assessment Inventory. ]e Spiritual As- sessment Inventory (Hall & Edwards, 1996) is a mea- sureof spiritualitybasedonobject relationstheoryand contemplative spirituality literature. ]e instrument includes 54 self-report items scored on a 5-point scale in which 1 is “not at all true” and 5 is “very true.” A highscore indicatesthepresenceofthetraitbeingmea- sured. ]e SAI is designed to measure spiritual matu- ritybasedontwodimensionsofone’s relationshipwith God. ]e arst, Awareness of God, relates to a person’s ability to be aware of God’s presence in his or her life. ]e second dimension, Quality of Relationship, is measured by four subscales: Instability, Grandiosity, Realistic Acceptance, and Disappointment. ]e Im- pression Management subscale was added later as a means of addressing a person’s test-taking attitude, and ishelpful in identifying illusoryspiritualhealth. Inpre- vious studies, each of the subscales demonstrated good internal reliability (alpha scores between 0.73–0.95). In the current study, all scales except one demonstrated good reliability with alpha scores ranging from 0.77 to .094. Only the Grandiosity scale was a little low with a 0.61 reliability rating and did not yield any signiacant relationships with the other scales. Replication studies have correlated the SAI with other instruments thus supporting the construct validity of the subscales. ]ese include the Bell Object Relations Inventory

(Bell, 1991), the Intrinsic/Extrinsic—Revised (Gor- such & McPherson, 1989), the Spiritual Well-Being Scale (Ellison, 1983), the Narcissistic Personality In- ventory (Emmons, 1984, 1987), and the Defense Style Questionnaire-40 (Andrews et al. 1993).

Sociocultural Adaptation Scale. ]e Sociocultural Adaptation Scale (Ward & Kennedy, 1999) is a 29- item questionnaire that assesses the skills needed to manage the everyday aspects of living in a new culture. It has been found to be particularly useful for research in investigating both psychological and sociocultural aspects of cross-cultural adaptation. ]e original in- strument (Searle & Ward, 1990) was based on Furn- ham and Bochner’s (1982) Social Situations Question- naire. It included 16 items that assessed intercultural competence and the behavioral aspects of cross-cul- tural adaptation (e.g., “making friends,” “using the transport system” and “going shopping”) as well as other areas of adaptation such as “anding food you en- joy“ and “dealing with the climate.” ]e more recent version also explores cognitive domains (“understand- ing the political system,” “taking a host country per- spective on the culture”). ]e self-report instrument uses a 5-point Likert scale in which 1 indicates “no dif- aculty” and 5 indicates “extreme di_culty.” Lower scores indicate a higher level of cultural adaptation to the host country. ]e SCAS has demonstrated good reliability in previous studies with alpha scores of 0.75 to 0.91, (α = 0.91 in this study).

Acculturation Index. ]e Acculturation Index (Ward & Kennedy, 1999) measures two dimensions of acculturation: the sojourner’s relationship to his or her culture of origin (home culture) and to the culture of contact (host culture). By evaluating these two realms, four acculturation strategies may be identiaed: both home culture maintenance and intergroup (host) rela- tions;homeculturemaintenance; intergrouprelations; and neither home nor host culture relations. Respon- dents are asked to consider two questions about their current lifestyle: “Are your experiences and behaviors similartootherAmericans?”and“Areyourexperiences and behaviors similar to people in your country of mis- sionary service?” Respondents rate the 21 cognitive and behavioral items on a 7-point scale measuring how similar their personal preferences and characteristics are to his or her home culture and host culture. ]e questions rebect items of everyday life including “clothing,”“paceof life,“and“food,”aswellasdeeper is- sues such as “worldview,” “self-identity,” and “political ideology.”Lowerscores indicate lowercultural identia- cation while higher scores rebect higher cultural iden- tiacation. In previous studies, the instrument has

KIMBER 213

JPT40n3_text:JPT_40n3 9/6/12 8:30 AM Page 213

proved highly reliable in both home culture and host culture identiacation with alpha scores ranging from 0.89 to 0.96. Alpha scores in the current study were 0.93 and 0.90.

Transition Change Scale. ]e Transition Change Scale (Sussman, 2002) is a 4-question scale designed to measure the overall change in cultural identity experi- enced by the sojourner acer returning to his or her home culture. Transition change is built on the notion of the sojourner’s perception of self-change through their interaction with host nationals. Subjects respond on a 7-point scale (1 indicates “strongly disagree” and 7 indicates“stronglyagree”)toquestionssuchas“Ifeelas thoughIchangedasaresultof livingandworkingover- seas” and “I have tried to incorporate some interna- tional customs and ways of thinking into my work en- vironment.” Higher scores indicate greater change as a resultoftheinternationalsojourn.]escalehasproved reliable inpreviousstudies(α=0.88).Analphaof0.64 in the current study is a little low, which may be the re- sult of a small number of items in the scale. Scale relia- bility may be improved by increasing the number of items (Salkind, 2008).

Repatriation Preparedness Scale. ]eRepatriation Preparedness Scale (Sussman, 2001) is a 10-item scale used to assess the sojourner’s psychological prepared- ness for returning to the home culture. Participants are asked to think back to the time period immediately prior to returning home from living overseas. On a 7- point scale (1 = “strongly agree”; 7 = “strongly dis- agree”) subjects respond to statements such as “I ex- pected that coming home to the U. S. acer an overseas assignment would be di_cult,” and “I felt comfortable saying goodbye to my host country friends.” Lower scores indicate less psychological preparedness for re- turning home while higher scores indicate a greater de- greeofpsychologicalpreparedness. Inpreviousstudies, the RPS has reported alpha coe_cients ranging from 0.66 to 0.75 (a = 0.66 in the current study). Reliability was improved by eliminating one question (a = 0.75).

Repatriation Distress Scale. ]e Repatriation Dis- tress Scale (Sussman, 2001) is a 4-item scale used to as- sess psychological discomfort experienced by sojourn- ers acer returning to their home country. ]e scale was developed through the author’s Cultural Identity Model of cross-cultural transitions, based on the the- orythataweakhomecultural identityresults ingreater repatriation distress while a strong home cultural iden- tity would likely be associated with lower repatriation distress.]escalemeasuresthepsychologicalaspectsof reentry through statements such as such as “I feel lonely or have homesick feelings for the overseas coun-

try/assignment,” or “I am more anxious and irritable since I returned home.” Participants respond on a 7- pointscalewith1being“stronglydisagree”and7being “strongly agree.” Higher scores indicate a greater level of repatriation distress. ]e RDS has been used in sev- eral studies and proved reliable with alpha coe_cients ranging from 0.77 to 0.80 (α = 0.81 in the current study).

Additional questions. Five additional questions were developed from a theological study associated with this research and were added by the researcher to the instrument. ]ese explored sojourners’ experiences of calling, relationship with God, practicing spiritual disciplines, and being received home by their commu- nity. Participants responded on a 6-point scale (1 indi- cating they “disagree strongly” while 6 indicates that they “agree strongly”) to the following statements: “I felt called by God to go to the mission aeld”; “I felt called by God to return to my home country from the mission aeld”; “During my reentry transition, I felt se- cure inmyrelationshipwithGod”;“Duringmyreentry transition, practicing spiritual disciplines (i.e., prayer, Biblereading,etc.)wasaregularpartofmylife”;and“I came home to a supportive community.” Because these wereanalyzedassingle-itemmeasures,Cronbachalpha measures for reliability were not applied and must be considered in generalizing the results.

Results Correlation statistics were performed on all scales

in order to discover relationships between the SAI and all cultural adjustment scales (Table 1) and between the researcher-designed questions and all cultural ad- justment scales (Table 2). Several signiacant relation- ships were found.

In regard to relationship with God and transition change, the results showed a positive correlation be- tween the TCS and SAI Awareness scale (r = .30, p = .002), indicating that missionaries who were aware of God’s presence during their reentry transition also re- portedagreaterawarenessofchangeinthemselves.]e results also showed signiacant relationships between theTCSandtworesearcher-designedquestions:“Dur- ing my reentry transition, I felt secure in my relation- ship with God” (r = .32, p = .001), and “During my reentry transition, practicing spiritual disciplines was a regular part of my life” (r = .25, p = .010). Conversely, there was a negative relationship between the AI- Home scale and regularly practicing spiritual disci- plines (r = –.25, p = .01), indicating that during the reentry transition missionaries who maintained a stronger home culture identity did not practice spiri-

214 MISSIONARY REENTRY AND RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD

JPT40n3_text:JPT_40n3 9/6/12 8:30 AM Page 214

tual disciplines as frequently as those who reported a stronger host culture identity.

Regarding relationship with God and reentry dis- tress, this study found signiacant relationships be- tween the RDS and SAI Disappointment (r = .28, p = .005) and SAI Instability (r = .20, p = .039), indicating that missionaries who experienced a greater degree of reentry distress also experienced greater levels of disap- pointment with God and instability in their relation- ship with God. ]e SAI Impression Management scale showed a positive relationship with the AI-Host (r = .21, p = .028) and a negative relationship with the SCAS (r = –.24, p = .012). ]e RDS also showed a sig-

niacant relationship with the statement, “I came home to a supportive community” (r = –.37, p = .000), indi- cating that those who experienced a greater degree of reentry distress also reported lower levels of commu- nity support. ]e study also found that 57% of the re- spondents indicated that they returned to a supportive community, while 43% indicated they did not return to a supportive community.

Regarding relationship with God and reentry pre- paredness, none of the SAI scales showed signiacant correlations with the RPS. However, the correlation between the RPS and calling home from the mission aeld showed a positive relationship (r = .36, p = .000),

KIMBER 215

TABLE 1 Correlations forSAIandCulturalAdjustmentScales

Awareness Scale Management Acceptance Disappointment Grandiosity Instability Impression

SCAS –.030. .10 .13** –.04 .12 –.24* AI-Home –.150. –.08 .01** –.09 .08 –.04* AI-Miss .09 –.01 .04** .14 –.00* .21* TCS .30** –.00 .07** –.06 –.08* .01 RPS –.140. .03 .03** –.04 –.01* –.10* RDS .04 –.05 .28** –.08 .20* .08

*p < .05 (2-tailed) ** p < .01 (2-tailed) Abbreviations: SCAS: Sociocultural Adaptation Scale; AI-Home: Acculturation Index-Home Country; AI-Miss: Acculturation Index-Missionary Country; TCS: Transition Change Scale; RPS: Repatriation Preparedness Scale; RDS: Reentry Distress Scale

TABLE 2 Correlations forCulturalAdjustmentScalesandResearcherDesignedQuestions

Called to Called Home Secure Spiritual Supportive Scale the Field From the aeld With God Disciplines Community

SCAS –.14 .14 –.14** –.05** –.11** AI-Home –.03 –.10** –.18** –.25** .02. AI-Host .01 –.06** .15 .16. .13. TCS .15 .18 .32** .25* –.00** RPS –.08 .36** –.06** –.06** .03. RDS .10 –.13** –.10** –.11** –.37**

*p < .05 (2-tailed) ** p < .01 (2-tailed) Abbreviations: Call to the Field: Called by God to the mission aeld; Called Home: Called by God to return home from the mission aeld; Secure with God: Secure in relationship with God during reentry; Spiritual Disciplines: Regularly practiced spiritual disciplines during reentry; Supportive. Community: Returned home to a supportive community

JPT40n3_text:JPT_40n3 9/6/12 8:30 AM Page 215

indicating that missionaries who had a greater sense of calling home from the mission aeld tend to prepare for the reentry transition. While 99% of the respondents indicated that they felt called by God to go to the mis- sion aeld, responses to the statement, “I felt called by God to return home from the mission aeld,” were muchmoremixed.Most indicatedthattheyfeltasense of calling, (strongly agree = 37%; agree = 23%; agree somewhat = 12%), yet 26% indicated that they did not feel a sense of calling to return home (disagree some- what = 10%; disagree = 7%; strongly disagree = 7%).

Given the number of variables correlated, to reduce the risk of Type I errors, a standard multiple regression analysis was conducted in order to test the hypotheses (Table 3). ]e andings were similar to the Pearson product-moment analyses.

Discussion ]e results of this study indicate that relationship

with God is a signiacant factor in the reentry adjust- ment of missionaries. ]is study found that missionar- ies who were aware of changes in themselves during the reentry transition also reported an awareness of God’s presence and that they felt secure in their relationship with God. Additionally, these missionaries also re- ported that they regularly practiced spiritual disci- plines during the cross-cultural transition. Previous studies have found a relationship between awareness of God and spiritual well-being, especially in one’s satis- faction in relationship with God (Andrews, 1999). Whiletherelationshipamongthesevariablesshouldbe explored further, these andings could be an important key in understanding the role of relationship with God in accepting the changes in oneself during cross-cul- turaltransitions,aswellastheimportanceof intention- ally cultivating that relationship through the practice of the spiritual disciplines.

Conversely, this study found signiacant correla- tions between reentry distress and feelings of disap- pointment with God and instability in relationship with God. ]e SAI Disappointment scale may rebect excessive and unrealistic demands of God (Hall & Ed- wards, 2002), while the Instability scale measures the degree to which people have di_culty trusting God and viewing him as loving. ]e combination of these variables may rebect an unstable relationship with God and a fear of rejection (Hall & Edwards, 2002), and it may indicate the potential vulnerability of the return- ing sojourner.

Missionaries who reported higher levels of reentry distress also indicated they did not return home to a supportive community. Previous studies have found

the need for community support in all stages of the overseas experience (Furuya et al., 2007; Werkman, 1986).Morerecentstudiesamongfaith-basedagencies have found a relationship between organizational sup- port and perceived support from God (Eriksson et al., 2009).

Missionaries who feel called by God to return to their home country also report a greater degree of preparedness to return to their home country. So- journer studies have emphasized the need for reentry trainingandrealisticexpectationsaboutthereentryex- perience (Grove & Torbiorn, 1985; Krapels & Davis, 2005; Rogers & Ward, 1993; Wang, 1997). Addition-

216 MISSIONARY REENTRY AND RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD

TABLE 3 MultipleRegressionAnalyses forRelationshipwithGod andCulturalAdjustmentVariables

Dependent Independent Variable Variable β t-value

Awareness SCAS .03. .29 AI-Home –.08 –.76**

AI-Host .06. .59 TCS .28** 2.71 RPS –.13** –1.25 RDS –.06** –.62

Disappointment SCAS .18. 1.66 AI-Home .02. .19 AI-Host .16. 1.47 TCS –.01** –.18 RPS .08. .77 RDS .34** 3.22

Instability SCAS .15. 1.44 AI-Home .07. .66 AI-Host .10. .92 TCS –.15** –1.41 RPS –.00** –.00 RDS .27* 2.59

Supportive SCAS –.08** –.84 Community AI-Home –.04** –.39

AI-Host .03. .35 TCS .07. .74 RPS –.04** –.39 RDS –.41** –4.02

Called Home SCAS .04. .45 From the Field AI-Home –.17** –1.73

AI-Host –.06** –.61 TCS .20. 2.14 RPS .40** 4.17 RDS –.12** –1.27

*p < .05, ** p < .01

JPT40n3_text:JPT_40n3 9/6/12 8:30 AM Page 216

ally, preparation for reentry has been found to reduce the e^ects of reentry distress (Forster, 1994; Sussman, 2001). ]is anding suggests an important link be- tween the missionary’s sense of calling and preparing for the transition from host country to home country.

]ere are several limitations that must be consid- ered in generalizing the andings to a larger population. First, while a 54% total response rate and a 44% usable response rate is somewhat typical for sojourner studies, the percentages are such that the andings may be lim- ited in their generalizability. Second, there is need for cautious and limited acceptance of andings related to researcher-designed questions. Questions 114 to 118 in the survey were developed from the theological study as part of this research. Each of these correlates a single question with an entire scale. In the cases where the andings were signiacant, they must be accepted with appropriate caution. Further research could ex- plore each of these variables more fully. ]ird, because of the particular sample demographics, the andings may not necessarily generalize to other populations.

Implications for Missionaries Missionaries who report a greater awareness of

God’s presence and security in that relationship also re- ported a greater awareness of the changes that had oc- curredinthemselvesduringthesojournandreentryex- perience. ]is study found signiacant relationships between practicing spiritual disciplines and feeling se- cure in relationship with God during the reentry tran- sition. Andrews (1999) found that a vital spiritual life among missionaries was nurtured through the regular practice of spiritual disciplines and the awareness of theircallingfromGod.]econsistentpracticeof spiri- tual disciplines, including prayer, Bible reading, fast- ing, worship, retreat, solitude, silence, etc., may en- hance one’s awareness of God’s presence throughout the sojourn and reentry transition, thereby providing much-needed stability during a potentially turbulent time.

Missionaries who reported feeling called home from the mission aeld also reported a higher degree of preparedness for the reentry transition. ]is suggests the importance for missionaries to assess their reasons for making such a transition. It may be helpful to fur- ther investigate how prayer, silence, solitude, reading God’s Word, spiritual direction, and counseling play a role in discerning God’s leading. Preparation for reen- try transition has been found to alleviate reentry dis- tress, while lack of preparation has been found to exac- erbate di_culties in reentry (Forster, 1994; Sussman, 2001). ]erefore, prior to reentry it is helpful for mis-

sionaries to intentionally cultivate an awareness of God’s presence through regular practice of spiritual disciplines including prayer, meditation, and spiritual direction, in order to discern God’s particular leading in the reentry transition.

Implications for Mission Agencies ]e implications for mission agencies suggest the

need to provide adequate support throughout the so- journ and reentry transition. Mission agencies fre- quentlyprovidespecializedtrainingtopreparethemis- sionary for a life of service and ministry in a foreign context, as well as on-going training and support while on the aeld. ]e andings of this study suggest the im- portanceofprovidingadditional trainingthat familiar- izes the returning missionary with the unique chal- lengesofreenteringtheirhomeculture.Trainingtopics should include the practical, cultural, and psychologi- cal challenges of reentry as well as the importance of growing in one’s awareness of God and deepening in one’s relationship with God throughout the reentry transition. If possible, it is best if some aspects of train- ing could be covered before the missionary has lec the host country in order to help them plan their good- byes and to leave in a positive and healthy way. In addi- tion, debrieang with aeld sta^ and home sta^ should take place as soon as possible acer the missionary returns.

Further, it would be helpful for mission agencies to continue providing missionary care to their returned missionaries throughout the entirety of the reentry transition. ]is includes access to missionary care providers who are familiar with the challenges of tran- sition and are trained to deal with the unique issues missionaries face. Periodic follow up with missionary care providers, spiritual directors, and mission agency sta^ who have been through reentry, may provide both practical and spiritual support during the season of transition. Mission agencies serve a vital role in provid- ing these resources for their missionaries not only to enhance their ministry potential but their own per- sonal spiritual growth and vitality.

Implications for Local Churches While the mission agency is ocen the legal em-

ployer of the missionary and has an important role in missionary care, the local church is typically the place of immediate contact where the missionary ands a place of community. Previous studies have shown the need for events designed to receive the returning so- journer back into the community (Werkman, 1986), commemorating the completion of one stage of life

KIMBER 217

JPT40n3_text:JPT_40n3 9/6/12 8:30 AM Page 217

and the beginning of a new stage. Because of the nature of cross-cultural transitions, it is suggested that such welcoming events take place as close to the time of reentry as possible (Pirolo, 2000). Airport greetings, welcome home parties, and reports to mission boards are important moments of re-bonding between the missionary and his or her community.

Returned missionaries may have unique spiritual needs that require special care during reentry. Feelings of disappointment with God, disconnection from one’scultureandcommunity,grief,andlossofministry arecommon.]eseneedsmaybemetthroughspiritual direction, counseling, and pastoral nurture through thereentrytransition.Returnedmissionariesmayneed a safe person with whom to talk about the challenges and stresses of resettling in their home country, as well asthe joysandstresses fromtheirtimeofministryover- seas. Along with providing for the immediate practical needs of returned missionaries, it is helpful for churches to be aware of the deep emotional and spiri- tual challenges many missionaries struggle with upon arrival in their home country.

]e returning missionary who is received by a sup- portive and loving community of faith may reasonably expect to experience lower levels of reentry distress as well as a more healthful reentry transition, being re- established in a community of faith, giving to others through meaningful ministry, and deepening relation- ships and meaningful roles in his or her community.

References Andrews, L. (1999). Spiritual, family, and ministry satisfaction among missionaries. Journal of Psychology and ]eology, 27(2), 107–118.

Barnett, K., Duvall, N., Edwards, K., & Hall, M. E. L. (2005). Psy- chological and spiritual predictors of domains of functioning and ef- fectiveness of short-term missionaries. Journal of Psychology and ]eology, 33(1), 27–40.

Butcher, A. (2002). A grief observed: Grief experiences of east Asian international students returning to their countries of origin. Journal of Studies in International Education, 6(4), 354–368.

Cox, J. B. (2004). ]e role of communication, technology and cul- tural identity in repatriation adjustment. International Journal of In- tercultural Relations, 28(3–4), 201–219.

Eriksson, C. B., Bjorck, J., Larson, L., Walling, S, Trice, G., Fawcett, J., Abernethy, A., & Foy, D. (2009). Social support, organizational support, and religious support in relation to burnout in expatriate humanitarian aid workers. Mental Health, Religion and Culture, 12(7), 671–686.

Forster, N. (1994). ]e forgotten employees? ]e experiences of ex- patriate sta^ returning to the UK. ]e International Journal of Hu- man Resource Management, 5(2), 405–425.

Furuya, N., Stevens, M., Oddou, G., Bird, A., & Mendenhall, M. (2007). ]e e^ects of HR policies and repatriates self-adjustment on global competency transfer. Asia Paciac Journal of Human Re- sources, 45(1), 6–23.

Gaw, K. (2000). Reverse culture shock in students returning from overseas. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 24, 83– 104.

Grove, L. C., & Torbiorn, I. (1985). A new conceptualization of in- tercultural adjustment and the goals of training. International Jour- nal of Intercultural Relations, 9, 205–233.

Hall, M E. L., Edwards, K., & Hall, T. (2006). ]e role of spiritual and psychological development in the cross-cultural adjustment of missionaries. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 9(2), 193–208.

Hall, T. W., & Edwards, K. J. (1996). ]e initial development and factor analysis of the spiritual assessment inventory. Journal of Psy- chology and ]eology, 24(3), 233–246.

Hall T. W., & Edwards, K.J. (2002). ]e spiritual assessment inven- tory: A theistic model and measure for assessing spiritual develop- ment. Journal for the Scientiac Study of Religion, 4(2), 341–357.

Ja^arian, M. (2008). ]e statistical state of the North American Protestant missions movement. International Bulletin of Missionary Research, 32(1), 35–38.

Krapels,R.H.,&Davis,B.D.(2005).Cultureshockandreversecul- ture shock: Developing coping skills. Communication for a Global Society, 43,115–131.

Martin, J. (1986). Communication in the intercultural reentry: Stu- dent sojourners’ perceptions of change in reentry relationship. Inter- national Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10(1), 1–22.

Moore, L., Jones, B., & Austin, C. (1987). Predictors of reverse cul- ture shock among North American Church of Christ missionaries. Journal of Psychology and ]eology, 15(4), 336–341.

Navara, G. S., & James, S. (2002). Sojourner adjustment: Does mis- sionary status a^ect acculturation? International Journal of Intercul- tural Relations, 26, 695–709.

Navara, G. S., & James, S. (2005). Acculturative stress of missionar- ies: Does religious orientation a^ect religious coping and adjust- ment? International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 29, 39–58.

Onwumechili,C.,Nwosu,P., Jackson,R.&James-Hughes, J. (2003). In the deep valley with mountains to climb: Exploring identity and multiple reacculturation. International Journal of Intercultural Rela- tions, 27(1), 41–62.

Pirolo, N. (2000). ]e reentry team: Caring for your returning mis- sionaries. San Diego, CA: Emmaus Road International.

Rogers, J., & Ward, C. (1993). Expectation-experience discrepancies and psychological adjustment during cross-cultural reentry. Interna- tional Journal of Intercultural Relations, 17, 185–196.

Salkind, N. (2008). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statis- tics. Los Angeles: Sage.

Searle, W., & Ward, C. (1990). ]e prediction of psychological and sociocultural adjustment during cross-cultural transitions. Interna- tional Journal of Intercultural Relations, 14, 449–464.

Selby, S., Moulding, N., Clark, S., Jones, A., Braunack-Mayer, A., & Beilby, J. (2009). Back home: A qualitative study exploring re-enter-

218 MISSIONARY REENTRY AND RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD

JPT40n3_text:JPT_40n3 9/6/12 8:30 AM Page 218

ing cross-cultural missionary aid workers’ loss and grief. OMEGA: Journal of Death and Dying, 59(1), 19–38.

Sussman, N. (2000). ]e dynamic nature of cultural identity throughoutculturaltransitions:Whyhomeisnotsosweet.Personal- ity & Social Psychology Review, 4(4), 355–373.

Sussman, N. (2001). Repatriation transitions; Psychological pre- paredness, cultural identity, and attributions among American man- agers. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 25(2), 109– 123.

Sussman, N. (2002). Testing the cultural identity model of the cul- tural transition cycle: Sojourners return home. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 26, 391–408.

Walling, S., Eriksson, C., Meese, K., Ciovica, A., & Gorton, D. (2006). Cultural identity and reentry in short-term student mission- aries. Journal of Psychology and ]eology, 34(2), 153–164.

Wang,M.W.(1997).Reentryandreversecultureshock. InCushner, K. & Brislin, R., Improving intercultural interactions: Modules for cross-cultural training programs, vol. 2 (pp. 109–128). ]ousand Oaks: Sage.

Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1993). Psychological and socio-cultural adjustment during cross-cultural transitions: A comparison of sec- ondary students overseas and at home. International Journal of Psy- chology, 28(2), 129–147.

Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1999). ]e measurement of sociocultural adaptation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23, 659–677.

Werkman, S. L. (1986). Coming home: Adjustment of Americans to the United States acer living abroad. In Austin, C. (ed.) Cross cul- tural reentry: A book of readings (pp. 5–17). Abilene, TX: Abilene Christian University.

Author Information KIMBER, THOMAS. Email: [email protected]. Title: For- mer missionary with Evangelical Free Church of America; Adjunct Professor (Christian Ministry and Leadership, Biblical and ]eolog- ical Studies) at Talbot School of ]eology. Degrees: BA (English), University of Redlands; MDIV, Talbot School of ]eology; PhD, Talbot School of ]eology.

KIMBER 219

JPT40n3_text:JPT_40n3 9/6/12 8:30 AM Page 219

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.