# Short term missions for reformed churches



## Pergamum

What do you think about them?

Is the trend Good, bad? Is it biblical?


How do you maximize their impact?

Who should go? What agenda should be laid down for the trip? What should the trippes do BEFORE the triip, DURING the trip, and AFTER the trip.


Any stories? Good or bad examples?


----------



## Mushroom

My personal take is that sending overweight unqualified adults and children to swing hammers or any other work that could obtained locally at a tiny fraction of the cost is an arrogant waste of resources. Our South American or African brothers and sisters don't need a bunch of teeny bopper or golf enthusiast great white 'saviors' waltzing in and helping them build a block Church bldg that they could build much cheaper AND give work to locals as well as perhaps present the gospel to those workers. The hilarious part is that the "missionaries" usually don't even have the slightest concept of how arrogant and spoiled they appear to the locals, who for the most part are snickering in their sleeves, and would be agog to ever see how much these all-thumbs carpenters have spent to come "help". Just send the money, and if you want to take a vacation, do that on your own, but don't insult your brothers by making a pretense of 'missions' out of it. If you care about missions, then give. Don't go seeking "experiences" by making a gazingstock of your less prosperous brothers.


----------



## Mushroom

You asked for examples, so here's one that sticks in my mind. A PCA Church that I was once a member of (no longer for reasons such as this) sends a bunch of teenagers to Tokyo every year to provide childcare during an annual Church conference. Seems to me that childcare for a week could be had for far less than the $2000 per teen they are spending. That's just sick. SEND THE MONEY, not the kids in dog collars and spiked hair. What a joke.


----------



## TimV

> My personal take is that sending overweight unqualified adults and children to swing hammers or any other work that could obtained locally at a tiny fraction of the cost is an arrogant waste of resources.



That's been a pet peeve of mine for years. Small examples was using a good chunk of the Deacon's fund to send young men and women to work at another PCA church in LA after Katrina, where their labor probably cost 50-60bucks an hour after you do the math.

A much bigger source of hair pulling was running into American missionaries in Southern Africa. For the price of one of those, you could fund 4 better educated Afrikaners who already speak the language and understand the culture, and pump valuable resources into the Reformed Afrikaner community, which needs it.


----------



## jambo

I don't know whether my understanding of the term 'short term missions' is the same as those responding previously. I would not consider a building/childcare project a short term mission as this can be done by local Christians.

For me 'short term missions' is a person giving up anything from a whole summer to a two year period or so to help a local church in evangelism or development. 

When we were on the missionfield we benefitted greatly from short term teams (over a summer) or short term workers (up to 2 years). The advantge in a church planting situation were:-

-so much more ground could be covered in a shorter time.
-the gifts of the team members combined making it more effective.
-it was hard for one person to come to a bible study with one person whereas with a short term team people are coming to a group where they have perhaps befriended one of the team.
-after the short term team/worker leaves there is always plenty of follow-up.
-people can pray more effectively for the work when they return home and indeed correspond and encourage some of the people they have contacted..

Advantages to the short termer are:-
-helps them to realise how their gifts and abilities fit in.
-helps them to assess whether they are suitable candidates for long term missionaries.
-the resident missionary can assess them and give practical advice. Some of the ones who came to us have in fact gone on to be full-time missionaries whilst others realised it was not for them. Others were just unsuitable.

Disadvantages (to the resident missionary)
-time is spent initially giving cultural orientation
-when a short termer makes some mistake, he can go home after the summer. The resident missionary however has to pick up the pieces. 

I believe it is a good trend provided the short term worker does not think of it as his national service where he does his bit for the kingdom then does nothing afterwards. Also it is wrong when people just go out because it is expected of them or they want some sort of an adventure holiday.

Although the apostle Paul was a full time missionary, he was "short term" in various cities (Ephesus, Coinith, Philippi etc) planting churches and appointing elders before moving on. The short term work was important to the long term objective. I feel a lot of churches have been established by one missionary using teams of short term workers.

There are countless examples of benefits and pitfalls, and we experienced many more benefits than pitfalls, but the church I was connected with in Clonmel in the Irish Republic came about from a two year Operation Mobilisation team.


----------



## Pergamum

Would black africans hear the Gospel from white Afrikaners with a history of apartheid?


----------



## Pergamum

How about short term medical trips, such as dental clinics, cleft palate repair, cataract surgery in places where local healthcare cannot provide these things? Even if fat American doctors came and helped blind catact-ridden people, I am sure that this would be appreciated.


----------



## ericfromcowtown

If I could play "devil's advocate" (probably a poor choice of words on the PB!!), I have had this conversation before and have raised the same concerns with short-term mission trips that are being raised here. More often than not, I am told that short-term missions serve more than one purpose. Yes, a church building in Trinidad gets built, which is good even if the cost is high, but a bunch of spoilt suburban kids also get exposed to poverty and want (maybe they won't be quite as spoilt when they get home) as well as getting to interact with their brothers and sisters in Christ in a foreign country (maybe when the get home they won't visualize the saved only as mirror images of themselves). What do you think of that reasoning?


----------



## TimV

> Would black africans hear the Gospel from white Afrikaners with a history of apartheid?



That was always the excuse I heard from English speaker South Africans, but as an American a bit more non-partisan I came to the same conclusion most other European non English speaking South Africans did, that Black Southern Africans get along better with Afrikaners than with just about any other White people.


----------



## Mushroom

Pergamum said:


> How about short term medical trips, such as dental clinics, cleft palate repair, cataract surgery in places where local healthcare cannot provide these things? Even if fat American doctors came and helped blind catact-ridden people, I am sure that this would be appreciated.


Those sound like real ministries to me, Pergs, something that in most cases cannot be provided locally and less expensively. My personal (and unimportant) view is that those are excellent works for the Church to be engaged in.


----------



## Pergamum

Here is a link to a whole issue of Missions Frontiers about the topic:

Mission Frontiers January 2000


----------



## Pergamum

If we changed the wording from short term missions to "Summer Internship" would this matter?

If we chose only those people considering missions to go and placed on them a study and retreat focus so that the kids or young adults come out, do a spiritual journal, engage in hard study and prayer, and then go back and give a report to the churches, what do you think?


Most long term missionaries have done at least 2-3 short term trips BEFORE their long term entrance into missions.


----------



## Pergamum

Here is a link: Mission Frontiers January 2000


----------



## raekwon

ericfromcowtown said:


> If I could play "devil's advocate" (probably a poor choice of words on the PB!!), I have had this conversation before and have raised the same concerns with short-term mission trips that are being raised here. More often than not, I am told that short-term missions serve more than one purpose. Yes, a church building in Trinidad gets built, which is good even if the cost is high, but a bunch of spoilt suburban kids also get exposed to poverty and want (maybe they won't be quite as spoilt when they get home) as well as getting to interact with their brothers and sisters in Christ in a foreign country (maybe when the get home they won't visualize the saved only as mirror images of themselves). What do you think of that reasoning?



I don't find this to be a devil's advocate position by any means. Short-term mission trips are often as advantageous for the missionaries as it is for those who are being ministered to. People return from these trips with a new (or renewed) vision for God's world mission and sometimes return to the field full-time years later.


----------



## Mushroom

> but a bunch of spoilt suburban kids also get exposed to poverty and want (maybe they won't be quite as spoilt when they get home)


So our brothers' difficulties should be used to correct the bad parenting that we are guilty of that produces "spoilt" children? Is that not making a gazingstock of our poorer brothers?


----------



## Pergamum

Brad said:


> but a bunch of spoilt suburban kids also get exposed to poverty and want (maybe they won't be quite as spoilt when they get home)
> 
> 
> 
> So our brothers' difficulties should be used to correct the bad parenting that we are guilty of that produces "spoilt" children? Is that not making a gazingstock of our poorer brothers?
Click to expand...


You could also phrase this as reaching out in love and mutually learning from our overseas brothers. The motivation is not to gawk but to help.


----------



## Grace Alone

I certainly agree that short term trips by those with scare skills such as doctors, nurses, and dentists are extremely valuable. But the typical short term mission trips we often see around here are 7-10 day trips where there is some building project going on combined with perhaps a VBS for the local children.

I pretty much strongly agree with Brad that the local labor should be used for building and the money (often $1000-2000 a person) sent instead. This brings to mind the (works-based) "mission" trip to Mexico that my 81 year old father-in-law went on with his PCUSA church a couple of weeks ago. He knows a LOT and used to be able to do almost anything related to building or mechanics, but lets get real. The cost of his trip could have paid for 10 local men to have worked on that project. Yes, it might be good for one contractor-type person to go to coordinate, but I'm just not buying that our men are needed for the labor part.

Mostly what I see is people go and feel really good about themselves for going. It has not been my personal experience that they end up going back for long-term trips.


----------



## Arch2k

I think that there is a legitimate use to what is refered to as "short term missions", and also an abuse of it. 

As a younger boy (about middle school age), our church "youth group" took a "short term missions" trip to Arizona to an Indian school. Our job was to spread gravel by hand (with wheel barrows and shovels) that dump trucks had dumped into piles around the dirt parking lot. Looking back, this almost angers me that we would be sent to do this work as it was completely USELESS. I can't think of any other reason than it was to make us feel good about ourselves. If the dump trucks had only drove slowly as they dumped out the gravel (the normal way of spreading gravel), there would have been no work to do. 

That being said, I don't think that *always* "sending money" is the right thing to do. I think that us Americans don't like to get our hands dirty, and that we think that we can buy our way out of doing just that. I think that people NEED things everywhere. You don't have to look far. A perfect example of a legitimate "missions trip" in my mind is a young woman from our church who is currently helping clean up after the hurricane in Louisianna. That is fulfilling a NEED.

So I think that there is a balance in these "missions". We should imitate Christ in fulfilling needs around us, and even other parts of the country/world. But at the same time, I believe that we are called to be good stewards of the time/resources God has given us, and that to squander them on useless activities is vain In my humble opinion.


----------



## jogri17

Depends on the nature of the mission. Make sure its not for little kids so they don't get in the way of hard work if thats the nature. However, being apart of L'église reformée st. mark here in québec city we have an «english bible camp» for 3 weeks in the summer in which we reach out to the community and we invite native english speakers to come and help out for 1 week. They can see Québec in the evenings and help with 30 + kids during the day in their own language just doing VBS basically. I love it and I think it is great. When it comes to emergencies given Canada is socialist if your canadian they will work with your provincial insurance and if your American its very easy. Show them the evidence and they will automatically bill your insurance company and you don't have to worry about it there. Forewarning if you come make sure you ask for someone who speaks french to come to the hospital with you because chances are there are not many doctors so the nurses and the employes' english is terrible generally. We had this problem this year. And be prepared to wait a long time depending on the nature of the problem. Ear infection =7-8 hours! But I encourage you if your Church is interested next year to contact our pastor. I know someone on the board has visited the church before to do a evangelization project at english cafés before. 

website: ERQ


----------



## jogri17

another thought... these short term trips may be means by which God uses to call full time real biblical missionaries. They can give men and women tastes of the calling and God can (and does often) use them like that.


----------



## ColdSilverMoon

raekwon said:


> I don't find this to be a devil's advocate position by any means. Short-term mission trips are often as advantageous for the missionaries as it is for those who are being ministered to. People return from these trips with a new (or renewed) vision for God's world mission and sometimes return to the field full-time years later.





I agree completely, Rae - you beat me to it!


----------



## ColdSilverMoon

Brad said:


> My personal take is that sending overweight unqualified adults and children to swing hammers or any other work that could obtained locally at a tiny fraction of the cost is an arrogant waste of resources. Our South American or African brothers and sisters don't need a bunch of teeny bopper or golf enthusiast great white 'saviors' waltzing in and helping them build a block Church bldg that they could build much cheaper AND give work to locals as well as perhaps present the gospel to those workers. The hilarious part is that the "missionaries" usually don't even have the slightest concept of how arrogant and spoiled they appear to the locals, who for the most part are snickering in their sleeves, and would be agog to ever see how much these all-thumbs carpenters have spent to come "help". Just send the money, and if you want to take a vacation, do that on your own, but don't insult your brothers by making a pretense of 'missions' out of it. If you care about missions, then give. Don't go seeking "experiences" by making a gazingstock of your less prosperous brothers.



While I understand the point you're making, Brad, in reality it has no Scriptural basis at all, and comes across as very condescending to those who sacrifice their time and money to make very worthy short-term mission trips. Several points:

1. The "locals'" perception really has very little basis in missions in general, including short term missions. Please show me some Scripture reference that qualifies mission work so as not to appear silly to the local culture. So what if they snicker at the "overweight unqualified adults" or "teeny boppers?" Does that make their work any less valid? It is very pretentious of you to judge people who sincerely work to further the Gospel in a sacrificial and Christ-centered fashion. Nowhere in the Bible does it say to labor for the Kingdom only if you are "qualified" or are not white. 

2. Your entire post smacks of class envy and frankly, racism. Your characterization of all short-term missionaries as vacationing white folk who are lazy, incompetent, overweight, spoiled golfers is absurd, superficial, and offensive. Maybe those wealthy upper class people really want to help and serve their missionary brothers overseas. Who are you to judge their intent and their effort? Undoubtedly there are those who vacation under the guise of short-term missions, but there are also many who do not. To characterize all short-term missions work as "a joke" is shameful. 

3. Please show me some evidence from the Bible that short-term missions are bad. Otherwise, I would encourage to support those called to spread the Gospel, in whatever capacity and in whatever time frame that may be, rather than making snide remarks and unfair caricatures.


----------



## Mushroom

> 1. The "locals'" perception really has very little basis in missions in general, including short term missions. Please show me some Scripture reference that qualifies mission work so as not to appear silly to the local culture. So what if they snicker at the "overweight unqualified adults" or "teeny boppers?" Does that make their work any less valid? It is very pretentious of you to judge people who sincerely work to further the Gospel in a sacrificial and Christ-centered fashion. Nowhere in the Bible does it say to labor for the Kingdom only if you are "qualified" or are not white.


It not only makes it less valid, it makes it completely INVALID, friend. If these folks really care about helping the indigenous Christians in expanding their ministry... SEND THE MONEY... not the useless fat kids and dads at 10 times the cost. This is silly to even have to point out. You might call it pretentious, but I've been on the other side and seen the loud, pasty American "missionary" brats arrive en masse complaining of the heat, the smells, and the bugs, and accomplishing 1/10 the work at, again, 10 times the cost, so they can have an "experience" that makes a gazingstock of those they call their brothers. You may not like that assessment, perhaps because you or folks you love have in the past been on of those pasty "missionaries", but the facts are the facts. The local Christians put on a happy face to be able to recieve what help they can, but I can assure you from experience they are by and large not impressed to have to play caretaker while their families and culture are used as zoo exhibits for spoiled American kids.


> 2. Your entire post smacks of class envy and frankly, racism. Your characterization of all short-term missionaries as vacationing white folk who are lazy, incompetent, overweight, spoiled golfers is absurd, superficial, and offensive. Maybe those wealthy upper class people really want to help and serve their missionary brothers overseas. Who are you to judge their intent and their effort? Undoubtedly there are those who vacation under the guise of short-term missions, but there are also many who do not. To characterize all short-term missions work as "a joke" is shameful.


Dude, the last thing you should be accusing me of is racism... you have no idea of what you speak, and I'm not going to honor your accusation with an explanation, I'll just tell you you're wrong and leave it at that. My characterization is very much factual in regards to the silly "mission/vacation" garbage that I am addressing, and I will judge whether you like it or not, because I have seen it many times, and it is a joke, and a sad, arrogant waste of the Church's resources.


> 3. Please show me some evidence from the Bible that short-term missions are bad. Otherwise, I would encourage to support those called to spread the Gospel, in whatever capacity and in whatever time frame that may be, rather than making snide remarks and unfair caricatures.


If you really need scripture proofs that would show that a waste of resources and time used to make a gazingstock of your poorer brothers and pamper spoiled American children and their myopic parents, then I think you may have missed a few aspects of scripture by a long shot already, and pointing them out would seem futile.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian

Agreed Brad. I have been the recipient of short-term missionaries in West Virginia when I lived in the "boonies" and we had some preppy kids from Fallston, MD come "fix our stuff". Made me feel like I lived in a Zoo.


----------



## ericfromcowtown

Brad said:


> So our brothers' difficulties should be used to correct the bad parenting that we are guilty of that produces "spoilt" children? Is that not making a gazingstock of our poorer brothers?



No, but it's easier to have empathy for the plight of others when you've experienced it first hand, even if only for a couple of weeks. My point was that it might be over-simplifying things to determine the worth of a short-term mission trip only in terms of $ / square feet of construction.


----------



## Arch2k

*Mod reminder* Let's keep the conversation civil and on-track everybody!

Brad, while I agree that many times money is the answer, would you not agree that there are legitamate needs that we can help others with? Christ helped feed the poor, and heal the sick did he not? I think I understand your point, but I question if you have not thrown out the baby with the bath water.

I think also a definition of "short term missions" could be helpful here. I believe that the office of "misssionary" has passed away, but still believe in the abiding responsability to feed the poor, and help those in need. If this meaning is used, one could help out in the local soup kitchen, or lend aid to your neighbor.


----------



## Mushroom

Just as an example, the median income in Haiti is $270 annually. A roundtrip ticket from Dulles Airport is around $600. I would be ashamed to stand next to a Haitian brother swinging a hammer knowing that just the transport costs for me to get there to help like that was costing more than he will make in two years. I would rather send him the check.

The reason real missionaries support this kind of travesty is because they know it is the only way they'll get their selfish and arrogant countrymen to do anything to help. They'll only give if they're gonna get something in return like an "experience" that will make them appreciate their prosperity more. This is a sick joke.


----------



## Mushroom

> Brad, while I agree that many times money is the answer, would you not agree that there are legitamate needs that we can help others with? Christ helped feed the poor, and heal the sick did he not? I think I understand your point, but I question if you have not thrown out the baby with the bath water.


Brother, there are short-term missions that are quite valid... Doctors going in to perform surgeries and procedures that the locals would never be able to get except through that is one, and there are many others of similar vein. But what I am addressing is the common summer "mission trip" of teens and parents who go to someplace like Haiti and help build something or put on an outreach that is ridiculously wasteful and by and large ineffective due to expense, lack of qualification, and bereft of linguistic training.

My apologies for the intensity of my posts, but this is one subject that really gets my goat.


----------



## TimV

Brad may be using some hyperbole, but the point it sound, and there's no racism there that I can see, but rather the contrary, since he is advocating more money to local non-Whites.

Instead of 12 middle class young Americans, one grizzled contractor matched with someone who speaks the lingo and understands the culture would get a lot more done.

Not to say short term missions aren't valuable; they are. But they should all be overseen by very wise, older men, and not enthusiastic "youth pastors".


----------



## Pergamum

Is the bottom line financially really the main focus here?

The US has a LOT of money. It is the American way to throw money at the problem and leave it for others to fix. Let's not let this thinking affectmissions too. We need to get involved.

We need to send PEOPLE too. If not just for their sakes, for OUR sakes as well so that the US churches are taking part in the Great Commission.


So concerning costs, this shouldn't be the final factor in condemning short term missions. Long term missionary families also cost 10 times per year more than a local evangelist as well... should we eliminate long-term missionaries too and merely send money overseas like KP Yohanan thinks?



If done right, short term missions can be very beneficial:

It can be beneficial for locals if a clear and reachable objective is planned. Medical clinics, dental clinics, well digging. 

For those that take the trips it can be beneficial as a first step towards long term missions. These trips can be life changing, if done right. I suggest pre-reading, a spiritual journal, concentrated prayer times and post-trip reading and discussion, almost like a course of study.


Brad, you seem to over-speak very often. Are you trying to be offensive? Have you ever been on a short term mission or out of the country. What were your experiences?


----------



## Mushroom

> Brad, you seem to over-speak very often.


Hmmm... I was unaware of this. I apologize.


> Are you trying to be offensive?


Not knowingly. Again I apologize.


> Have you ever been on a short term mission or out of the country.


Never. Wouldn't waste the resources like that. I don't have anything to offer that couldn't be purchased locally for far less.


> What were your experiences?


Grew up in the far east, 5 years Thailand, one year Taiwan, 3 years Philippines. Parents also later worked in Nepal, Ghana, Indonesia, Uganda, Russia and Grenada. Saw many come and waste resources and embarass their local brethren. Had many friends and neighbors that were missionaries and their dependents. Been a member of Churches that engaged in these extravagant practices, and saw the blind arrogance that enables them. It may be that none of that qualifies me to comment on this subject, and if that is so, then again I apologize.


----------



## Pergamum

Brad said:


> Just as an example, the median income in Haiti is $270 annually. A roundtrip ticket from Dulles Airport is around $600. I would be ashamed to stand next to a Haitian brother swinging a hammer knowing that just the transport costs for me to get there to help like that was costing more than he will make in two years. I would rather send him the check.
> 
> The reason real missionaries support this kind of travesty is because they know it is the only way they'll get their selfish and arrogant countrymen to do anything to help. They'll only give if they're gonna get something in return like an "experience" that will make them appreciate their prosperity more. This is a sick joke.




My supporters are anything but selfish and they regularly give self-sacrificingly.

I really think that a lot of Stateside church members really want to help and they are looking for the best way to do so. 

Impugning them for good intentions seems wrong. The solution is to use the existing trend of short term missions for good and channel it to productive ends. 

Short term missions does seem to be the current trend and why not....you can hop on a plane and in several day get almost anymore. This sort of freedom to travel I think if a positive thing to tie the global church together. 


Personal note:
I am having locals build my house right now for just that reason, it is cheaper and they can last longer and they know how to termite proof better. Plus, I can put a local foremen in charge and demand more accountability.


But I do welcome any short termers out here, because merely them seeing the place and reporting what they see back to their home churches is worth the cost of the trip. It would be a time for those open to missions who want to come out, do some soul searching, pray and think and see the world, and record some things and report what they saw back to their churches.


----------



## ColdSilverMoon

Just a few points, Brad:

- If you're saying ALL short-term missions aren't worth the money, well-intentioned or not, I would argue that you have no Biblical or financial basis for that belief, and would invite you to provide evidence to the contrary.

- If you are saying that all people who embark on short-term missions are lazy, spoiled, upper-middle class white people, then I would say that statement is unfounded and borderline racist against white people, or at the very least an extreme caricature.

- If you're saying some short-term mission projects are poorly planned and executed and a waste of money, I would agree. But if you believe we should abandon all short term missions because a few are bad then I would again disagree.

- However, if your point is that in some instances the short term projects are wasteful and accomplish little, and that those should be refined as much as possible, but without doing away with short-term missions altogether, I would agree with you 100%.

Anything we do in life should have some sort of Biblical directive, or at the very least precedent, especially when concerning something so important to the life of the church as missions. So again, if you can provide any Scriptural basis whatsoever that short-term missions are generally bad, I would invite you to share it with us. Otherwise, your opinions are just that - opinions with no basis at all, and which multiple people on this forum perceive has hyperbole at the least, and offensive bigotry at the worst. I think I understand the gist of your post, but it is difficult to wade through the unfair generalizations, exaggerations, and baseless assumptions.


----------



## Leslie

I agree with Brad for the most part. This trend has driven me crazy. It's not only a huge waste of scarce money for missions but also, on the field, the care and maintenance of these short-termers is a major headache for real missionaries who must sacrifice real ministry for taking care of them. It's utterly draining. For a long time it was impossible for us to find mission housing in Addis at all during the early and late summer time because the guest house was full of short-termers with their paint brushes. The guest house management laid down the law and now we can't even have a relative or single short-termer who comes at our invitation stay a night there with us. What is worse is that these people are inappropriately generous and/or easy rip-offs so they are hounded and "befriended" by any locals who speak any English and can give a sob story or deceive them. It's a waste of money as well as morally corrupting for the locals.

That being said, real ministry is done by those with specific skills that are needed. The local hospital has a team of cataract surgeons once a year. My clinics are enhanced by my being able to promise the patients, "Next October you come with 100 birr (about 11 bucks) and then you will be able to see again." Likewise, I currently have a teenager, education major, who has totally taken over my school program for the summer. She's a HUGE asset to the kids, with major spiritual input to those who know English, and absolutely no problem whatsoever in terms of consuming my resources or time. It has freed me up tremendously. I'd welcome others to come likewise--to fill a niche that cannot be locally hired and/or that requires specialized expertise.

It's true that some of the useless short-termers end up coming long-term but it's only a very small percentage at most. Those screened by church missions committees, mature, and really interested in long-term service should perhaps go, one or two at a time, for longer periods as in 3 months, not weeks.


----------



## py3ak

As an MK myself, I can understand where Brad is coming from. We had a lot of visitors come through, and some of them were helpful and some were not. Fortunately my dad refused to have organized missions teams, so we were spared a lot of grief. Here are several ways that short-term missions trips can be helpful:
1. Someone coming to be a mother's helper or to help with tutoring kids in some particular subject in the homeschooling. There are situations where no local is both qualified and trustworthy,and it can be a big help to the long-term missionary family. Try not to be a financial burden to the missionary family. 
2. Missionaries sometimes get lonely and having fellowship with people who are familiar can be helpful (though this can be exaggerated). Bring them good books! We were delighted to have Laura come visit us (and she brought us some things Heidi needed and some good books).
3. Missionaries sometimes need a break or have to return to the States for a while, but the congregations are not always in a good situation to be left alone. Having someone come in as a replacement for the time they're away can be a feasible option. This is what I did in Mexico and Panama, and it seems to have gone well; the people in Mexico would tell you it was worthwhile (I've been able to stay in touch with them far more than with the people in Panama).

But the perspective I developed on it is that short-term missions trips are an investment, hoping that the people who come will be sobered, profited and perhaps give their lives to spreading the Gospel. Whether that investment is warranted will depend on many variables. But if there weren't the hope of recruitment I think a lot of long-term missionaries would prefer not to have such groups come down.

Very often the long-term missionaries and the local Christians bear a massive burden from these trips that the short-termers never imagine because everyone is so gracious and unobtrusively self-denying. And as Brad has remarked, there certainly are times where sending money is far kinder than going yourself. There is no point in me going to the remote tribes in Lapland, and if I went I'd probably be more of a burden than anything else; ditto on a construction project, or a medical missions trip. We should be unselfish AND realistic in our assessment of what we can contribute.


----------



## py3ak

And ditto to Mary's excellent suggestions.


----------



## Mushroom

> - If you're saying ALL short-term missions aren't worth the money, well-intentioned or not, I would argue that you have no Biblical or financial basis for that belief, and would invite you to provide evidence to the contrary.


Never said that.


> - If you are saying that all people who embark on short-term missions are lazy, spoiled, upper-middle class white people, then I would say that statement is unfounded and borderline racist against white people, or at the very least an extreme caricature.


Never said that.


> - If you're saying some short-term mission projects are poorly planned and executed and a waste of money, I would agree. But if you believe we should abandon all short term missions because a few are bad then I would again disagree.


Agree with the first sentence, never said anything akin to the second.


> - However, if your point is that in some instances the short term projects are wasteful and accomplish little, and that those should be refined as much as possible, but without doing away with short-term missions altogether, I would agree with you 100%.


Then we are in agreement.


> Anything we do in life should have some sort of Biblical directive, or at the very least precedent, especially when concerning something so important to the life of the church as missions. So again, if you can provide any Scriptural basis whatsoever that short-term missions are generally bad, I would invite you to share it with us.


Do you really need a prooftext to support the idea that foolishly wasting the Church's resources is a bad thing? I am not indicting all short-term missions, and I think you know that.


> Otherwise, your opinions are just that - opinions with no basis at all, and which multiple people on this forum perceive has hyperbole at the least, and offensive bigotry at the worst.


You are the only person here who has accused me of bigotry or racism, and the one who mentioned hyperbole agreed with my position. This is an argumentum ad populum undergirded by your own unsupported assertions. That's pretty tricky debate there, but it holds no water.


> I think I understand the gist of your post, but it is difficult to wade through the unfair generalizations, exaggerations, and baseless assumptions.


If you'd ever set eyes, from at least an expat's perspective, on a crowd of American teens and their keepers arriving in a third world country to "help" the locals, you wouldn't say that. It is an embarassing and nauseating sight.

I am addressing one particular type of short term missions that I think you and everone else on this board is quite familiar with; that of teens and accountants going to do construction or some other such silly thing that they are unqualified to do, or that can be done locally far cheaper, mainly for the purpose of exposing the little darlings to the 'harder' side of life by making a gazingstock of their foreign brothers. I tell my children explictly about the suffering of their brothers in other countries, we see videos and pictures of the horrid living conditions, and read accounts of the hardships they endure, and they have great compassion for them. I don't need to spend $2000 to have them experience it firsthand to gain for them a clearer picture of that when that brother they would be perusing needs real help. And if after all that they don't have a good grasp of the severity of it, it would indicate they are not yet spiritually mature enough to understand, so why would I send a spiritually immature Christian out to do missions?

If you really think what I've described are "unfair generalizations, exaggerations, and baseless assumptions", then neighbor, you have your head firmly implanted in the sand, and nothing anyone says will remedy that. Enjoy your "mission" trips. Put 'em on your Visa card. But please stop falsely accusing me of sin.


----------



## Pergamum

Some suggestions:


--Turn any short term trip into an internship.
--Select a small manageable group or 1 at a time
--Select only folks open to coming long term
--Require pre-reading (Piper's let the nations be glad, Thomas Hale's On being a missionary)
--They keep a prayer journal and use the trip's down times as a spiritual retreat
--They come with a list of solid questions to answer and subjects to read up on (such as depedancy, culture shock/stress, language learning, marital and family stress on the mission field, interacting with nationals, contextualization, indigenous missions, etc)
---They bring the long-term missionary some stuff, like books or needed medicine(I like the sound of this one)
--The carry mail back to the US after the trip,
---They don't engage in meaningless "ministry" or spend time building a building, but use the time themselves to learn.
--They agree not to give anyone money without your permission. 
---They agree to dress and act in accordance with the long term missionar's instructions
---The long term missionary is the top in the chain of command and if there is an issue, all orders come from him.
---They record or document the trip and when they return they are debriefed by the elders
---They use themselves as a means to send word to other churches or supporters about what they saw, so that the missionary (who might be a poor communicator or in a place where it is hard to communicate) can get news back to his churches in the US. They committ to calling the pastors of the long term missionary's other supporting churches to give a quick report, "Hello my name is so and so and I just saw your missionary for 2 weeks in Timbuktu and this is what I saw and what he would like to report to you..."


Or,

Select a group with specialized skills (cleft palate repair, cataracts, etc) and give them a task and an area and make sure they are supplied.




One thing I would love is for pastors and elders to choose many of their missions locations to come to and vacation at, talking to their missionaries in the meantime. Lots of folks like to visit SE Asia anyway, why not visit a missionary. Most missionary locations are NOT 2 days walk from the nearest airstrip but most are in or near large 3rd world cities. I know folks in Chang Mai Thailand, in pretty parts of other countries and in other postcard perfect locations.

[you have an open invitation gentlemen!]. Celebrate that 20th wedding anniversary at the same time as devoting a day or two to seeing a missionary, who can probably help you find the best place to spend your honeymoon.


----------



## ColdSilverMoon

Brad said:


> Do you really need a prooftext to support the idea that foolishly wasting the Church's resources is a bad thing? I am not indicting all short-term missions, and I think you know that.



Actually we don't know that, which is the problem. You blasted away at all things short-term missions in your original post, and said that you would "never" go on one because you wouldn't want to "waste resources." 

OK, so we're in agreement that some short-term missions aren't well-planned and are a waste of resources, but that in general they should be continued. I suppose we should leave it at that. But please re-read your original posts and consider whether any reasonable person would have come to the conclusion that is what you believe. A straight forward, reasonable post would have saved us all many unnecessary posts and off-topic discussion....


----------



## Mindaboo

I have seen good and bad short term missions trips and have to admit most of what I have seen isn't that great. We were attending a church where we sent kids to Japan to babysit during a conference and that seems a little over the top. We were paying at least $2000 per kid and having host families take care of the rest. I don't think that is a wise use of resources for the church. The other trip we often saw them take was a trip to NC where the youth group was going down to lead VBS. The problem was that these kids, at least most of them didn't know the gospel themselves, how could they possibly explain it to someone else? It was a very sad experience and we were appalled to see so much money wasted on "fruitless" endeavors. We also sent a boy to do construction work in Chile and he broke his thumb the first day on the job and got the rest of the time off. He came back laughing and joking about it and our congregation thought it was cute. Brad and I have been in a couple of churches where it was just a glorified vacation. When you spoke to the kids, they didn't learn anything except they didn't have a local Bible book store and they felt sorry for the locals. 

On the other hand, our family doctor does go to Africa once a year for three weeks to do short term missions trips. We think that is great, we love that he does that and are thankful that he does it. We also have a young man from our church that goes to Uganda every year to help the locals learn about agriculture and his stories are incredible. I think short term missions trips are great if they are well planned and if the people are trained on some level. The young man going to Uganda is studying agriculture so he can go to Africa and help them. 

Brad speaks from his own experiences from being overseas and he has seen first hand some of the poverty that I have not. This is a topic close to his heart and always has been. His father was involved with helping third world countries get on their feet. His dad's conclusion was this; get these people drinkable water, give them jobs and help them become productive members of society. He said when we go in and do all of the work for them they never learn to stand on their own and that most of the locals he dealt with were frustrated that we would come and do all of the work. Most of these people are poverty stricken, the best thing we could do is give them the jobs and improve their lives, and let them feel like they have accomplished something. I think most people want to be taught, they just don't want us doing the work for them.


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih

Back in 2004/2005 over the Christmas break I went on a short term mission with my local charismatic church (back in the day). 

I think both good and bad came out of it (or at least potential for bad, rather than bad). One bad thing is that young students do not take things seriously. There were dozens of times we were in an inch of getting someone in serious trouble because we didn't have the common sense that is lacking in the west. The other thing is we lacked cultural understanding and there was always a feeling we should be happy and positive. Without being boastful I was one of the more keyed in people on the trip and I saw this from the beginning. This is where the good things start to happen.

The good things (and I speak for myself here) were that 1) I learnt the importance of understanding the local culture. I purposefully withdrew throughout the short term mission and focused on learning from the locals rather than going out like the others and thinking I knew it all. 2) I was driven into the belief I should learn a second language. When home from the mission I changed my degree and now speak the language well. 3) My eyes were opened to other cultures and how they see the world. I was no longer than naive-charismatic-everything-is-happy I had been beforehand.

You see here that all the good things were for myself and all the bad things for against the community. For me it was a success story as going on a short term mission persuaded me to get involved in the culture and go back afterwards when I had learnt the language (I subsequently studied there for a year). 

That short term mission trip without a doubt was one of the biggest success factors in my life so far. Did it honour God? I don't know. Maybe it has equipped me for more work in the future. Does it work every time? No. Out of eight people I can honestly say that I was the only one who went back home and realized we had to change the way we did things. The others had not looked at their situation and seemed to live on in ignorance.


----------



## kvanlaan

What I don't understand in all this is why the _church_ is spending the money to send folks on short-term trips. If they are so moved to go, tell them to pay their own way. End of problem (for the most part). 

I can't believe some of the abuses that have been listed here (and no wonder some of you guys get so ticked off.)

My father has been doing what some might consider "short term" mission trips for years. It is classically short term in that they are only there for a week or two at a time, but they have set up long-term programs (micro-credit unions, the construction of a school, the construction of wells and piping water to locations with poor sanitation conditions, etc.) that they check on and further develop a couple of times a year in their one and two week visits. The village benefitting from each project MUST participate in a significant amount of the labour and must give reports on the use of the previously done work during subsequent visits. These visits are to existing congregations, and do encourage the believers there greatly. I understand the concern shown by some of the Saints here (especially in light of the abuses), but when I see how my father has set up this program, I don't see much to find fault with. 

However, for those of you who don't like the idea of dedicating large amounts of resources to low-volume returns, do remember that we who adopt get this same (in principle) criticism: Why spend so much on one child when that $25K will go so much further being given to a group of the poor, there are so many more pressing needs that could be so much better spent...

The usual rejoinder to that is: So when is the last time you gave $25K to world needs/the poor/anyone? Most often, they just stare. (Not saying that anyone here would feel the same way, but it's not a great leap from one to another.)

$.02


----------



## Mushroom

> Actually we don't know that, which is the problem. You blasted away at all things short-term missions in your original post, and said that you would "never" go on one because you wouldn't want to "waste resources."


In each of my posts I think it was evident that I was speaking of a particular type of trip. Early on I agreed that there were some that were beneficial when those going had something to offer that could not be obtained locally for far less expense. I stated I would not go because _I had nothing of value to offer that couldn't be had cheaper locally_. I'm not sure why you have missed those comments, or the entire context of them, but more bewildering is why that would move you to accuse me of racism, class envy, bigotry, and lying


> OK, so we're in agreement that some short-term missions aren't well-planned and are a waste of resources, but that in general they should be continued. I suppose we should leave it at that. But please re-read your original posts and consider whether any reasonable person would have come to the conclusion that is what you believe. A straight forward, reasonable post would have saved us all many unnecessary posts and off-topic discussion....


Sir, I can find nothing I posted that is not anything if not straightforward. It appears that everyone else who read them had no problem understanding the meaning, and you are the only one who has engaged in "unnecessary posts and off-topic discussion" while falsely accusing me of sin. I have no idea as to your motives in this, but I have to say that these accusations have been offensive. Taking comments out of context, using fallacious arguments, using them to justify a misplaced scold, and letting fly with false accusations with no evidence of conscience is simply strange behavior for a brother in the Lord.

As for me, I will abstain from any further interaction with you so as to avoid the temptation to sin on both our parts. I have made no accusations against you, and I would ask the same in return.


----------



## jogri17

Mindaboo said:


> I have seen good and bad short term missions trips and have to admit most of what I have seen isn't that great. We were attending a church where we sent kids to Japan to babysit during a conference and that seems a little over the top. We were paying at least $2000 per kid and having host families take care of the rest. I don't think that is a wise use of resources for the church. The other trip we often saw them take was a trip to NC where the youth group was going down to lead VBS. The problem was that these kids, at least most of them didn't know the gospel themselves, how could they possibly explain it to someone else? It was a very sad experience and we were appalled to see so much money wasted on "fruitless" endeavors. We also sent a boy to do construction work in Chile and he broke his thumb the first day on the job and got the rest of the time off. He came back laughing and joking about it and our congregation thought it was cute. Brad and I have been in a couple of churches where it was just a glorified vacation. When you spoke to the kids, they didn't learn anything except they didn't have a local Bible book store and they felt sorry for the locals.
> 
> On the other hand, our family doctor does go to Africa once a year for three weeks to do short term missions trips. We think that is great, we love that he does that and are thankful that he does it. We also have a young man from our church that goes to Uganda every year to help the locals learn about agriculture and his stories are incredible. I think short term missions trips are great if they are well planned and if the people are trained on some level. The young man going to Uganda is studying agriculture so he can go to Africa and help them.
> 
> Brad speaks from his own experiences from being overseas and he has seen first hand some of the poverty that I have not. This is a topic close to his heart and always has been. His father was involved with helping third world countries get on their feet. His dad's conclusion was this; get these people drinkable water, give them jobs and help them become productive members of society. He said when we go in and do all of the work for them they never learn to stand on their own and that most of the locals he dealt with were frustrated that we would come and do all of the work. Most of these people are poverty stricken, the best thing we could do is give them the jobs and improve their lives, and let them feel like they have accomplished something. I think most people want to be taught, they just don't want us doing the work for them.


well if a peron is hurt you really can't blame him.


----------



## a mere housewife

I went as a mother's helper for six months when I was 16; and I paid my own way. During that time we had a mission team come --it was a tremendous amount of work as regards cooking, cleaning, etc. for them --something the missionary's wife plans for months in advance. The lady told me that one of the happiest sights in life is seeing the back of the van carting them all off to the airport. She wasn't saying this bitterly (she had a great sense of humor), but she did mean it. I think the burden on the missionary's wife ought to be considered in all these trips. Sending a girl for 3 or 6 months is a way to help her in her workload and her isolation. Sending a bunch of kids who need to be cooked and cleaned for, and who go around sight-seeing with her husband while she does the work, is not. Of course she and her husband don't write home and say "The mission team drained us and we are glad they are gone." But it ought to be considered that the wife is very likely to feel this way unless something is done to help her.


----------



## TimV

> I went as a mother's helper for six months when I was 16; and I paid my own way



Yes, I did the same for a Bible translator when I was 24, and I paid my own way as my principles in the matter have been constant for all these years. Nowadays one can teach literacy without knowing the local language due to phonics based primers, and I was able to assist, and let others evaluate whether or not I would be a good candidate for the mission field. It turned out a negative, but I didn't drain church resources.


----------



## kvanlaan

I think both Tim and Heidi's posts raise a good question: who is the trip for? Is it, at its core, to help the local populace, be they fellow believers or not, or is it to provide disaffected youth with an "experience"? Visitors must pull their weight or they shouldn't be there. My wife, when she was a teenager, went as a translator for surgeons into the interior in Honduras. To me, that sounds useful and not a mis-use of funds or resources (she was already living in Tegucigalpa, so no plane ticket was needed). Instead, it allowed skilled doctors to work among the rural poor in Central America. There are definitely ways for teens to be useful, but it does seem like many examples given in previous posts are horridly wasteful.


----------



## Pergamum

kvanlaan said:


> What I don't understand in all this is why the _church_ is spending the money to send folks on short-term trips. If they are so moved to go, tell them to pay their own way. End of problem (for the most part).
> 
> I can't believe some of the abuses that have been listed here (and no wonder some of you guys get so ticked off.)
> 
> My father has been doing what some might consider "short term" mission trips for years. It is classically short term in that they are only there for a week or two at a time, but they have set up long-term programs (micro-credit unions, the construction of a school, the construction of wells and piping water to locations with poor sanitation conditions, etc.) that they check on and further develop a couple of times a year in their one and two week visits. The village benefitting from each project MUST participate in a significant amount of the labour and must give reports on the use of the previously done work during subsequent visits. These visits are to existing congregations, and do encourage the believers there greatly. I understand the concern shown by some of the Saints here (especially in light of the abuses), but when I see how my father has set up this program, I don't see much to find fault with.
> 
> However, for those of you who don't like the idea of dedicating large amounts of resources to low-volume returns, do remember that we who adopt get this same (in principle) criticism: Why spend so much on one child when that $25K will go so much further being given to a group of the poor, there are so many more pressing needs that could be so much better spent...
> 
> The usual rejoinder to that is: So when is the last time you gave $25K to world needs/the poor/anyone? Most often, they just stare. (Not saying that anyone here would feel the same way, but it's not a great leap from one to another.)
> 
> $.02



P.s. Speaking of 2 cents: I just read statistics that on average just 2 cents out of every church dollar goes to missions, all the more reason to have private personspay for short term missions and save this scant 2 cents for a long term missionary among the unreached.


----------



## a mere housewife

> P.s. Speaking of 2 cents: I just read statistics that on average just 2 cents out of every church dollar goes to missions, all the more reason to have private personspay for short term missions and save this scant 2 cents for a long term missionary among the unreached.



Wow. I'll personally match that two cents, and double it, if the average church would commit to give four .


----------



## ColdSilverMoon

ColdSilverMoon said:


> I think I understand the gist of your post, but it is difficult to wade through the unfair generalizations, exaggerations, and baseless assumptions.



Just a quick note: Brad called out my use of the word "exaggeration" as accusing him of lying by stretching the truth. I did not intend to do this at all. Exaggeration was a poor word choice, and I apologized to Brad for calling him a liar, though it was by no means my intent. I still believe his original posts were too broad in their stereotypes and generalizations, but should not have used the word exaggeration, which implies lying. I apologized to Brad privately, and apologize to anyone else was offended by this.

I realize we had a somewhat heated exchange on this topic, and while I stand by my posts, I did not mean to inflame the situation or make things personal. I believe Brad is a good guy with serving Christ as his goal in life, and did not mean to imply otherwise. I do strongly disagree with his original posts, but do not wish to impugn his character at all. The great thing about being brothers and sisters in Christ is that we can disagree (sometimes vehemently) on various issues, but still be unified in Him...


----------



## Pergamum

p.s. I am offering a short term trip to those who are really serious and open to coming out and seeing my country - the last week of January to the 2nd week of February. The objectives would not be to help me, I am actually going to "vacation" that week and help out the local church planting team. But this is an opportunity to go to the villages, see the work and committ to a time of intense praying and use this opportunity sort of like a spiritual retreat. Ideal for college agers who want to serve long term but need a confirmation. Pre-reading and post-reading and elder mentorship would be advised.

Do you see anything wrong with this?


----------



## Mushroom

ColdSilverMoon said:


> ColdSilverMoon said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think I understand the gist of your post, but it is difficult to wade through the unfair generalizations, exaggerations, and baseless assumptions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just a quick note: Brad called out my use of the word "exaggeration" as accusing him of lying by stretching the truth. I did not intend to do this at all. Exaggeration was a poor word choice, and I apologized to Brad for calling him a liar, though it was by no means my intent. I still believe his original posts were too broad in their stereotypes and generalizations, but should not have used the word exaggeration, which implies lying. I apologized to Brad privately, and apologize to anyone else was offended by this.
> 
> I realize we had a somewhat heated exchange on this topic, and while I stand by my posts, I did not mean to inflame the situation or make things personal. I believe Brad is a good guy with serving Christ as his goal in life, and did not mean to imply otherwise. I do strongly disagree with his original posts, but do not wish to impugn his character at all. The great thing about being brothers and sisters in Christ is that we can disagree (sometimes vehemently) on various issues, but still be unified in Him...
Click to expand...

Thank you Mason. We are brothers. We do disagree. I believe I speak from a more real experience, you can do with that what you will.

I do take issue with one thing in particular that you said in the post above; I am not by any stretch of the imagination a good guy. Any good that anyone sees in me is only a reflection of Christ in me, and that is present only by the grace of our Father overwhelming the seemingly constant effort on my part to the contrary. I do appreciate the sentiment, however.


----------



## Mushroom

Pergamum said:


> p.s. I am offering a short term trip to those who are really serious and open to coming out and seeing my country - the last week of January to the 2nd week of February. The objectives would not be to help me, I am actually going to "vacation" that week and help out the local church planting team. But this is an opportunity to go to the villages, see the work and committ to a time of intense praying and use this opportunity sort of like a spiritual retreat. Ideal for college agers who want to serve long term but need a confirmation. Pre-reading and post-reading and elder mentorship would be advised.
> 
> Do you see anything wrong with this?


People take vacations for any number of reasons, usually to pursue something that interests them in one way or another. To take a vacation to learn more about a particular ministry or mission is in my unimportant opinion a fine thing to do. To call it a "mission trip", to ask for donations to finance it, or especially to deduct the cost thereof for tax purposes, is in that same worthless opinion, improper.

Spiritual retreat, study vacation, or whatever you might call it, sounds good to me But if I were to do that, I would finance it entirely myself to avoid a misrepresentation of its purpose, to refrain from diminishing the import of true missions (like what you and Mary and others here do), and to not waste Church funds that otherwise could be used for real ministry. Just my opinion.

Have fun with it, Pergs.


----------



## jfschultz

I came across this thread after returning from a one week mission trip to Quito Ecuador.

The early comments that carried through much of the thread read like the pragmatic proclamations of an MBA ”bean counter” looking for the best “return on investment” for the next quarterly financial statement.

Riveroaks Reformed Presbyterian Church probably spent between $35,000 and $40,000 to send 21 youth and adults to Quito for a week to work on a roof for Sowers of Christ Church and lead a VBS program.

When we arrived at the Sowers of Christ Church, the outside walls for the back half of the second floor were done and ready for a roof. There was the rebar for two beams across the building in place but not completed. When we left all the needed rebar work was done and the base of the form for the concrete slab was in place. Also 9 tons of gravel and 9 tons of sand had been moved from the street to the second floor. All this was done while working closely with the members of that church. A couple of days after we left the concrete was poured.

Perhaps the money spent could have paid for a local crew to do the work. For that amount the local crew probably could have completed the entire second floor and perhaps a significant portion of the third floor. But like many government programs that just throw money at a problem, the “beneficiaries” would become more dependent on outsiders and less self sufficient.

But it did not stop there.


A culture that does not value young children saw them being valued and loved. Bonds were formed that made it hard to leave. 
A pastor learned by example how to reach out to young children, which in turn brought their parents into church to hear the Gospel.
A culture that looks down on the handicapped, saw a girl with one hand do just as much as the others in the bucket brigade. 
Two of the translators, a daughter of one of the PCA mission team’s national partners and a non-Christian cousin, spent a night with the girls at the guest house. From this the non-Christian girl learned about “good clean fun.” More importantly she was brought from having no interest in God to being open to the Gospel. 
The RRPC team grew as a family as bonds were formed between members who previously were just faces passing in the hall. 
Several of the youth are already planning on returning for a summer internship and at least one is considering going into full time missions after college.


----------



## Pergamum

Glad you had a good trip. IN your opinion, what long term benefits will be had for both those who went and those on the ground who were helped?


----------



## Mushroom

Brother, I hate to throw a wet blanket on your excitement, but you opened it up for examination. Let's look at these things from a perspective of reality, not "bean counting". The group spent almost $2000 per American teenager to put a roof on a building in Ecuador. According to the CIA World Fact Book, the average per capita income in Ecuador is $7200 annually, so this trip cost on average the annual earnings of 5 Ecuadoreans. That's FIVE YEARS of earnings to partially complete a roof and what else?

1. Regardless of the Ecuadorean culture's view of children, there is no reason to insinuate that _Ecuadorean Christians_ share that view. Most likely they don't; us American Christians by no means share American culture's view of children, and we certainly don't need Ecuadorean Christians spending exorbitant amounts of money to come teach us not to. Why would they need Americans to do so? That seems an arrogant presumption.

2. Why would a Christian Pastor need a bunch of inexperienced and spiritually immature American teenagers at exorbitant expense to teach him to reach out to young children? The Word is not sufficient? The Holy Spirit needs that kind of expensive and inexperienced help?

3. Again, it seems presumptious to assume that just because Ecuadorean culture doesn't value the handicapped, that Ecuadorean Christians don't, and therefore need a $2000 (more than a 3 months average salary) example to show them better.

4. The expenditure of 3 months salary to teach an unbelieving American teen that they can have "good clean fun" and be exposed to the gospel.

5. An American Church needs to spend $40,000 and embarrass their less financially blessed Ecuadorean brethren by sending inexperienced kids to work on their Church building so they can learn to love each other as they ought? That says some sad things about that Church.

6. Several and one. Why must they fly down on a glorified vacation to be motivated to the mission field? They don't believe the written reports from missionaries already in the field?

Now, if those involved want to be honest and call this an 'experience' vacation, use only their personal funds rather than Church money, not deduct any costs from their taxes, that would seem just fine. But if they really wanted to help their Ecuadorean brethren build their Church both physically and spiritually, they could have sent $30-35,000 and probably built two buildings, and used the balance for a real missionary to come put on a video presentation of real mission work and a game night and accomplished all the benefits that accrued to the congregants and their unbelieving friend.

Try to think about it. Have you ever been a part of a financially strapped American Church seeking to build or improve an existing facility? This would be the equivalent of say a Swedish congregation sending 20 kids to partially roof their building at a cost of $229,000 (5 times the average American income of $45,800), who would likely do a terrible job, and would want to teach you and your fellow members how to appreciate kids and the handicapped. You might feel a tad demeaned by that, on top of having to host a bunch of kids and their parents who would be looking down on your culture and wanting to teach you better, all the while chauffered around in the equivalent of limousines and eating the equivalent of caviar.

American arrogance is legendary in the third world. These types of "mission trips" do nothing to help that image among third world Christians, who contrary to popular opinion, likely tend to walk closer with the Lord than we do, due to the adversities they face.

I think perhaps most Americans don't have any idea they are behaving in arrogance. They buy into the American delusion of their own superiority without even knowing it. But Christians it sems to me should rise above that mentality. After all, both American and Ecuadorean Christians are citizens of a city whose builder and maker is God.

I don't mean to offend, brother, but I do want to be honest and realistic.


----------



## Pergamum

So Brad, since this trip already happened - what things can be done to minimize the "damage" and use this experience for good?


----------



## Mushroom

Pergamum said:


> So Brad, since this trip already happened - what things can be done to minimize the "damage" and use this experience for good?


I don't know that anything could or should be done. I simply strongly disagree with this form of "missions". I view it as imminently wasteful of Church resources, using our foreign brothers as an embarassing gazingstock to make up for inadequate parenting and Church teaching, and burdensome to real missionaries while diverting needed resources of time and money away from their important work.

Another issue that is akin to the "shaming of them that have not" towards the indigenous Christians is what about those in the American congregation who can't afford to send their little darlings along? Those teens and their parents are not going to feel too very included in this sort of thing. I've seen exactly that, and I believe it engenders division within the Church. The ones who can't go feel like outsiders, and the ones who do go tend to separate out of a sense of exclusive shared experience and perhaps an uneasiness at being around those who aren't able. It tends to economically stratify the Church on many levels - among the kids, among the parents, and between Americans and our foreign brethren.

I don't know when or where these things got started, but I don't think they are in any way healthy for the body of Christ at home or abroad. But that's just my personal opinion.


----------



## TimV

> But like many government programs that just throw money at a problem, the “beneficiaries” would become more dependent on outsiders and less self sufficient.



I guess the PCA and OPC shouldn't pay pastor salaries and church rent for church plants then? Wouldn't want those original 4 to five families ending up like welfare Ecuadorians.



> A culture that does not value young children saw them being valued and loved. Bonds were formed that made it hard to leave.



John, all that trip did besides waste money was to reinforce your very unfortunate chauvinism.


----------



## Pergamum

TimV: Perhaps the analogy of wages for long term church planters is not appropriate here, sicne they do intend to stay for the long run.


----------



## Pergamum

Brad: How about summer internships for those "trying out" if they are able to take long term missions. Would this be a permissible option (long term missionary exploration).


----------



## Mushroom

Pergamum said:


> Brad: How about summer internships for those "trying out" if they are able to take long term missions. Would this be a permissible option (long term missionary exploration).


I've already said that I thought those were great previously, Pergs, along the lines that Mary and others had described. And again, this is just my opinion, and not to be given any real weight; I'm just a simple layman. 

Just to be clear, my problem is with these trips of kids or even adults sent for very short periods to perform work for which they are woefully unqualified with an underlying intent of giving the participants a "taste of the real world" by making a gazingstock of their brethren who have less, and calling them "missions". I don't think the Church should be involved in any way. For individuals to do so at their own expense, or even organized groups outside of the local Church, to me that's no different, albeit perhaps more commendable, than a group vacation to Disneyworld, or maybe closer to an "eco-vacation" to the jungles of Costa Rica by a tree-hugger club to watch birds or frogs or something. If someone wants to spend their money on something like that, that's their business. But it is not the Church's

All the others; qualified teachers proclaiming the gospel, doctors going to provide health care and procedures, other similar professional services, medium-term internships by individuals interested in the mission field & etc. are not what I am describing, and on the whole look fine to me.


----------



## Pergamum

Okay Brad, at least you are consistent.


----------



## Kim G

Maybe I'm clueless, but I've been on two mission teams and neither one looked like anything I'm reading about in this thread. In both cases, I spent my own money--plane ticket, food, place to stay, etc. No church gave me any money.

The first trip was for two months in South Korea. I stayed at some missionaries' apartment while they were in the US (and the apartment was ten times cleaner when I left than when I got there), and I taught at their Christian school because the teachers were in the US, and I played the piano at church because the musician was in the US. I bought and cooked my own food, visited students, passed out tracks, etc.

The second trip was for two weeks in Cameroon. We went to visit some missionaries who LIVE there. Not "now I'm on furlough, now I'm not", but missionaries who have a house they built on a mountain and they never leave. A small group of people (20-40 year olds, not teens) went to encourage the missionaries. One person in our group had taught at a seminary in Cameroon and was returning to speak at the graduation ceremony that was going on. While we were there, we held Bible studies, took medical clinics to the jungle, held a Bible Conference, helped build cabins for a Christian camp, etc. When I left, the missionary's oldest daughter (my age) told me that these were some of the most encouraging weeks of her life.

I guess as long as I call both of these my "vacations" that I paid for, then I'm okay. But if I call them "mission teams" then it was a waste of time and money?

Also, the church I attend now sends our pastor to visit our missionaries on a regular basis. He is able to come back to report what has been going on, how we can better pray for the missionaries, etc., and our missionaries tell us that one of the biggest encouragements they have is knowing that our church cares so much about them and their ministry.


----------



## Mindaboo

"I guess as long as I call both of these my "vacations" that I paid for, then I'm okay. But if I call them "mission teams" then it was a waste of time and money?"

I don't think anyone would say that your trips were a waste of time and money. But one thing you point out is that you spend your own money, that makes a huge difference. And it sounds like you were very productive over there, sending medical clinics into the jungle is a wonderful thing, and so is being an encouragement to a missionary. 

My impression of missionary trips was that the intent was to spread the gospel and you can do that in a variety of ways, but I think we have a responsibility to make sure those people know the gospel themselves. 

Sadly for us, (my husband and myself), most of the experiences were missions trips that involved teenagers, they were inexperienced in the work they were being sent to do, they didn't know Christ themselves, or they were sent on trips to Japan to babysit. These were all church funded, by the church itself or the congregant members.

There is a big difference, at least most of the time, between a 20 year old and a teenybooper. A pastor, a doctor, a person seeking to be a missionary, or an adult who has something to contribute should go. 

The purpose should be for the benefit of the gospel, the people we are helping and not giving our teenagers an experience they will never forget. It is not all about us, it should be about the good news of Jesus.


----------



## Mushroom

Kim G said:


> Maybe I'm clueless, but I've been on two mission teams and neither one looked like anything I'm reading about in this thread. In both cases, I spent my own money--plane ticket, food, place to stay, etc. No church gave me any money.
> 
> The first trip was for two months in South Korea. I stayed at some missionaries' apartment while they were in the US (and the apartment was ten times cleaner when I left than when I got there), and I taught at their Christian school because the teachers were in the US, and I played the piano at church because the musician was in the US. I bought and cooked my own food, visited students, passed out tracks, etc.
> 
> The second trip was for two weeks in Cameroon. We went to visit some missionaries who LIVE there. Not "now I'm on furlough, now I'm not", but missionaries who have a house they built on a mountain and they never leave. A small group of people (20-40 year olds, not teens) went to encourage the missionaries. One person in our group had taught at a seminary in Cameroon and was returning to speak at the graduation ceremony that was going on. While we were there, we held Bible studies, took medical clinics to the jungle, held a Bible Conference, helped build cabins for a Christian camp, etc. When I left, the missionary's oldest daughter (my age) told me that these were some of the most encouraging weeks of her life.
> 
> I guess as long as I call both of these my "vacations" that I paid for, then I'm okay. But if I call them "mission teams" then it was a waste of time and money?
> 
> Also, the church I attend now sends our pastor to visit our missionaries on a regular basis. He is able to come back to report what has been going on, how we can better pray for the missionaries, etc., and our missionaries tell us that one of the biggest encouragements they have is knowing that our church cares so much about them and their ministry.


Kim, both of those trips sound like real and helpful missionary work. They are hugely different than the types of shenanigans I am addressing. That's the kind of stuff I'd love to do myself, if I were qualified, and it sounds to me like you are.


----------

