Dr. George M. Flattery commented on the Indigenous Principles and created a subsequent strategy in his paper, “Cooperative Multinationalism: An Emerging Philosophy of Missions” (1969). He provided three strengths of the Indigenous Principles missions philosophy:

“One strength of the indigenous church philosophy is that it teaches nationals to rely directly on God rather than foreign churches for guidance and sustenance.”

“Another strength, related to the first, is that nationals are taught the virtue of self- reliance. … It seeks to build men, to build the kingdom of God, and to give them a sense of pride, worth, accomplishment, and fulfillment.”

“Finally, the indigenous church philosophy is strong because it recognizes cultural differences.”³

Dr. Flattery then identified the weaknesses:

“Because of its emphasis on indigeneity, the indigenous theory can be weak in its recognition of the commonalities in cultures and human nature. In the final analysis cultures and human nature are really very similar in many ways wherever you go.

Although marriage customs vary in different cultures, some form of marriage exists in every culture. Similarly, although people laugh and cry about different things in different cultures, they all laugh and cry about something. Given the limitations we have in terms of personnel and funds, a great deal of attention should be given to what is common to man everywhere.”

“Another weakness of the indigenous church theory is that it may not give adequate consideration to the universality of the gospel or of the church. … Further, the church, though organized into various autonomous groups, is really universal. While we will continue to speak of national churches, we should also speak of the supranational churches.”

“Still another weakness of this theory is that the three self can easily be overemphasized. When this happens, the national churches tend to become self- centered.”

“However an overemphasis on self-government can keep national churches from working together toward common goals. The reason for this is that cooperation, even though it may be voluntary, requires a degree of submission.”

Concerning self-propagation: “An overemphasis of this concept will cause a national church to become self-centered, resulting in its own loss. … The churches of every nation should remain open to God’s blessing through the ministries of the foreigners.”

Concerning self-support: “Unless the national churches are taught, however, to give to foreign missions as well as to their own churches, they can easily become self- centered    Rather, we have preached that the way to build a strong base is to start with a world vision. We have believed that there is gain through loss, blessing in giving.”⁴

The themes that Dr. George Flattery mentioned when considering the weaknesses of the Indigenous Principles proved foundational in the creation of two global ministries that he founded: International Correspondence Institute (later called, “ICI University” and now, “Global University”) and Global Colleagues (now called, “Network211”). The themes are commonalties in culture and human nature, universality of the gospel, and cooperation in ministry. These themes led to the creation of a subsequent missiological strategy that he called “Cooperative Multinationalism”: “This philosophy, including both theory and practice, emphasizes the cooperative participation of many national churches in the task of world missions. Because of this, it may be called cooperative multinationalism.”⁵

Flattery believes that two important values for churches on a national level are “nationalism” and “internationalism.” The former addresses the desire for each church to have independence while the latter reveals the need for churches to work in voluntary cooperation with other churches around the world. Groups must address fundamental questions when attempting to work in cooperation: (1) Who will be in control? (2) Who will do the work? and (3) Who will provide the finances? By answering these questions, people can structure their working relationships. In any venture, if progress is to be made, these issues cannot long be ignored.⁶ In a cooperative multinational relationship, churches desire to be in control and yet know that if they work with churches in other nations, together, they can accomplish so much more when it comes to fulfilling the Great Commission on a global scale.

Flattery provided a realistic observation about cooperative fellowship:

As we might expect, world missions is greatly affected by the forces of nationalism and internationalism. Strong advocates of both forces can be found within the body of Christ. In church life, as in politics, an overemphasis on either force can be detrimental.

Nationalism in the extreme selfishly ignores the universality of the body of Christ. On the other hand an internationalism that promotes the organizational unity of all saints is unwise. It does not recognize the inability of men, though saved, to wisely and justly administer so much ecclesiastical power. Until Christ comes to rule over the earth, the ideal for the sons of God is cooperation and spiritual unity within a degree of organizational diversity.⁷

The framework of Indigenous Principles can be operation within the Cooperative Multinationalism strategy. Churches can be self-governing but work together with other churches with the value of mutual respect. They can be self-propagating to address their own situations and, at the same time, learn from other churches and call on them to consider the needs that they cannot fulfill alone. Finally, they can take responsibility and be self-supporting and yet bless and be blessed by others as they pool their resources to complete a stated task. The main tenets of Cooperative Multinationalism are cooperative governance, cooperative propagation, and cooperative support. As with Indigenous Principles, these three must work together in the harvest. Cooperative Multinationalism is built on and expands the influence of Indigenous Principles.

━━━━━━━━━━

3. George Flattery, “Cooperative Multinationalism: An Emerging Philosophy of Missions” (City, ST:
Publisher, 1969), 16-17. This was retrieved from https://georgemflattery.com/index.php/articles/cooperativemultinationalism/
cooperative-multinationalism-an-emerging-philosophy-of-missions.

4. Ibid., 15-21.

5. Ibid., 1.

6. Ibid., 2.

7. Ibid., 9.