Ship of Fools: Mission Trips and Local Needs

Thread: Mission Trips and Local Needs Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=027800

Posted by Komensky (# 8675) on :

Why do some churches and/or denominations spend so much money to travel abroad for so-called 'mission trips' when there are almost always local people who need food, money, love and support? I'm not suggesting that churches stop sending money abroad, I'm just suggesting that rather than send their own missionaries to Africa or Asia, they use the money to feed the hungry on their own doorstep. In short, I am arguing that feeding people is more of a Christian act than travelling the world to tell them about Jesus (or their particular take on him).

K.

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :

I think there is a whole complex of answers here.

For instance: people who are in work can give of their vacation time, young people can get experience of life in developing countries, something like an intensive building programme can get a job done very quickly.

On the other hand, it can be little more than "charity tourism", it can lead to huge problems if the visitors make cultural gaffes, there can be problems of language, it can "tie up" the personnel and resources of the host church, it can mean that "First World" volunteers are used when local workmen are desperate for employment ...

You will realise that I (who served for 5 years in a foreign country) am not too keen on these mission trips. Dare I say that they happen because "they can", given the ubiquity of relatively cheap air travel.

And may the "glamour" of taking part in such trips blind people's eyes from the more mundane needs on their doorsteps?

Posted by Horseman Bree (# 5290) on :

There is an educational point in getting some of the congregation to actually see the problems.

BUT there is also an educational point in getting some of the congo to see that actual problems nearer to home, like, right on your street. Unfortunately, this is complicated by the attitude of the congo, if they see that "the wrong kind of people" are the ones needing attention. You have to get them past the "welfare queen/bum" or "undeserving" poor syndrome somehow.

And there is a huge problem with people taking several trips, a week/ten days/fortnight, as a form of do-gooder's holiday, so they can come back and be proud of all the good work they have done while ignoring the charity they received from the poor they were supposedly helping (special meals that are bigger and better than what the locals eat, for instance, or the chance to hear evangelisation pointed at the locals but done in English for the do-gooders)

Net effect: over-all negative, for both the travellers and for the receivers of the "gifts". And, in the end, probably negative for the congo, who got to ignore the local situation while feeling vicariously good about something they haven't really done.

PM me for further gory details

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :

You put it more strongly than I did - but I don't disagree!

Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :

For some years our church had a little ministry which sewed fleece blankets, to be shipped to Uganda to a hospice we supported. I have always been in two minds about this. The blankets are bulky and not easy to ship (although when used as padding material in a shipping container full of computer and medical equipment it was effective). And every blanket sent from the US is in theory a blanket not purchased on the local economy from some local vendor. I have felt that it would be far, far better to just send cash.

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

I've been involved in a number of church exchange visits between the Netherlands and Brazil. I'm on some kind of list, they know how to find me [Smile]

You'll notice that I call them 'church exchange visits' instead of 'mission trips'. I guess this already gives away a bit how I think of it.

When I was living in Central America, I've also been able to see some 'mission trips' taking place. Maybe it is my prejudice showing, but my image of those has been overwhelmingly negative.

I think one thing to keep in mind in these trips is: if you're going to visit a country you don't know very well and of which you don't speak the language for just a couple of weeks, there isn't much you'll be able to do. Whether your goal is evangelizing (which isn't really my thing), or building something, or alleviating poverty ... The effect you will have in achieving any of these things will be very small. If it exists at all, it could probably be achieved more efficiently by other means.

However, there is one thing these visits can be very good at: building relationships. And that's significant. I don't have the solution for all the world's problems, but if there is one, understanding eachother will surely be part of it.

But whether this understanding will be achieved depends heavily on the attitude of the people involved.

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :

OK, I'll start by laying my cards on the table: I am a long term mission partner with the Anglican Church in Kenya. There I've said it- but the important clue is in the name...I am not a missionary (though I'd say they definitely still exist) but I am a partner working with the Anglican church to achieve its goals in this diocese. Those goals are both spiritual and material and I'm a lot more comfortable with some than with others! But I'm here and I believe it's where I'm mean to be.
My husband and I came at the invitation of the Bishop here after years of undertaking short term mission trips in several African countries.

Like the rest of you |I have several concerns about what you have described.
But IF (and its a big if) they are done well short term mission trips can be a positive experience for both those who come and the receiving communities.
But it requires many things: adequate cultural and personal preparation (including addressing the rescuer myth), adequate dialogue with and ownership by the receiving community would be two key areas.
Next year we are going to receive a pilgrimage of young people from a diocese in the developed world. And it is called a pilgrimage for a good reason. The young people are mainly from non-church backgrounds but have expressed a desire to do something to help with the challenges facing our diocese. They also know that this trip will be part of their own spiritual formation and time is given to that process both by interaction with local people and personal reflection. They will stay in a small guest house, profits from which are the only secure funding for the diocesan project I work with that serves children with disabilities. Their stay will boost our coffers and help make the work here sustainable.
So done well, in my opinion such trips can work and work for all parties.
Done badly, then God help us all!

None of the above negates what has been said about serving our own local communities- that is a given IMHO.

Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on :

There are equal issues with just sending cash - as it can also distort the local economy.

I would not disagree with them having an overall negative effect. I've been in situations (in the US) where mission trips were largely in the only foreign trips some people made. So in that sense it was mind expanding - though somewhat skewed in terms of only seeing foreigners as victims, as well as not gaining an appreciation of how poverty affected things locally).

Similarly, the mission trip as a Christianised Gap Year can expand the mind - but can also fall prey to all the pitfalls identified above.

Perhaps trips are best when they are a month or more, and focus on talking a particular skill set someone has and applying it locally (the Mercy Ships model would seem to fall most clearly into this category).

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

@MrsBeaky: I agree with your post. I read your blog from time to time, and I'm impressed by what you and your husband are doing in Kenya.

I especially agree wholeheartedly with this:

quote:
MrsBeaky: But it requires many things: adequate cultural and personal preparation (including addressing the rescuer myth), adequate dialogue with and ownership by the receiving community would be two key areas.

I just want to add one thing. If your (general 'you') church is going to raise money so that a couple of its members can visit a church in another country, great. The next year, also raise money so that some people of their church can visit you.

Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on :

There's also the issue when churches send mission trips to already Christian countries - they're just not the 'right' kind of Christian.

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :

quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc I just want to add one thing. If your (general 'you') church is going to raise money so that a couple of its members can visit a church in another country, great. The next year, also raise money so that some people of their church can visit you.

I so agree with this and know of a couple of situations where churches have done this and it's been fabulous.

P.S. Thank you for your kind words and the encouragement! [Hot and Hormonal]

Posted by seekingsister (# 17707) on :

We had missionaries from abroad based at our church for a summer. In London. Yes, they came from other countries to evangelize London. I admit that I don't know what they were actually doing, as we're a fairly evangelistic parish as is.

Meanwhile some of the members of our church had done mission work in the Middle East or Eastern Europe in the 1970s/80s before the wall came down. The ones we hosted just didn't really match up in comparison.

So in some cases it does appear to be a "Christian gap year" more than anything else.

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
There's also the issue when churches send mission trips to already Christian countries - they're just not the 'right' kind of Christian.

I know. The same thing is also replicated within the the receiving countries too.It breaks my heart quite honestly.And makes me want to swear....

Mission is far wider than many Christians perceive it to be, perhaps?

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

Right now I am sitting in a room with quality managers from perhaps thirty countries from Kazakhstan to Australia via Ecuador (I am just a humble interpreter; this is for an industrial group and not a Christian meeting at all).

This is not an unusual state of affairs in my experience.

Meetings like this drive home to me the way that often, when it thinks of mission the Church appears not have noticed that globalisation has happened and involves people travelling worldwide as a matter of course during their business obligations. We are out of step.

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :

There is also the point of having visits FROM our mission partners. Right now our URC Eastern Synod has a group of Pastors from the Zimbabwean Presbyterian Church visiting churches - this is part of an ongoing programme of visits in both directions which are made with a view of broadening outlooks and fostering relationships within the World Church. This, I think, is quite a good thing as it is equal and reciprocal. It does, of course, cost!

I wouldn't be surprised to hear that some churches from Nigeria, South Korea or Brazil send folk to big cities such as London to carry out short-term mission campaigns, either. I don't know if that is good or not - but it is very similar to Brits and Americans going to do similar "work" in Africa.

Neither of the above quite answer the dilemma posed in the OP.

[ 08. October 2014, 15:38: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]

Posted by monkeylizard (# 952) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
Why do some churches and/or denominations spend so much money to travel abroad for so-called 'mission trips' when there are almost always local people who need food, money, love and support?

I've long thought a main reason is the definitive start/end of a mission trip. I can commit a week to do something far away, and when it's over it's over. Sure there may be some further communication with the people I've met, and I may be asked if I'd like to go back next year, but by and large the commitment is fulfilled.

If I commit that same week to something local, at the end of the week I'll be faced with the fact that the need still exists, and a constant flow of requests from the local organizer for more of my time.

The missions trip organizer doesn't ask people every week if they want to go to Haiti, but the person organizing the wintertime homeless shelter does. I also never see the hungry foreign kids after I leave a foreign location, but the homeless guys I helped serve a meal to last night will be on the corner outside my office the next day.

I guess that's a long way of saying I think part of the appeal of a foreign mission trip is that it's short-term and then out-of-sight-out-of-mind. It's expensive, but it's easy. Local work is continual, in-your-face, and hard. It doesn't have to be, but in many churches that's the way it's handled.

[ 08. October 2014, 17:55: Message edited by: monkeylizard ]

Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :

Before my parents went to Guyana (South America) in the 1970s we all went to Ottawa for a week of intensive cross-cultural and "cooperant" training sponsored by CIDA (Cdn International Development Agency, disbanded now, but was a gov't agency that provided matching funds for projects). My point in posting is the the very issues named about existed 40 years ago, and I would be hard pressed to accept any excuse for the inappropriate sorts of missions discussed. My sister who served for a decade in Brazil has many, many comments about this too.

Which leads me to a sore point. Our church went in on a project to build some housing in Mexico. I had to simply avoid it all. My parents retired to rural Mexico, non-resort, traditional area. I felt the whole focus of the project "to build housing for" was all wrong. The participants enjoyed themselves apparantly.

Posted by Fr Weber (# 13472) on :

I had a discussion recently with a friend of mine who lives in the SF area. His family attends a church on the Peninsula (an area full of tech companies and very well-off people), and their parish sends youth groups on mission trips to various places around the country/world. From his point of view (and he has two daughters who have participated in these events), they're junkets for the affluent rather than truly sacrificial exercises in Christian charity. Just a few miles from this parish lies East Palo Alto, populated largely by working-class and poor Latinos and African Americans, yet there's no outreach to this community at all.

I get the feeling this is more common than not, sadly.

Posted by Merchant Trader (# 9007) on :

This is an area where I certainly cannot generalise but:

Some communities, not just Christian, really appreciate the encouragement and knowing that they are not forgotten : we did a trip to Palestine and came to understand this both from Christians and Moslems

Working in partnership with local efforts seem the best course if doing so a servants.

Only doing what we would appreciate at home (and indeed our local parish has greatly appreciated the ministry of folks from overseas).

Which leaves me wondering about much: in Russia I do remember the frustration of an American Presbyterian missionary, who had leaned how to work in partnership with local churches, with new wet behind the ears protestant missionaries who seemed convinced they knew better than anyone on the ground.
I also remember stories of such asking Orthodox whether they were saved oblivious to the fact that those who they spoke to may well have suffered for their faith under previous regimes.

In summary: we may be called to support our fellow Christians and their efforts but should beware organising to impose our views in an insensitive manner.

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :

A few years ago I was puzzling how to respond to requests from friends to help pay for their one week mission trip to an orphanage in Uganda. They were expected to go not at their own expense but raise the money by asking people to donate. Note the subtle guilt if I don't donate, don't I care about missions to the third world? Don't I want to help my friend fulfill a dream of being a missionary?

I don't think they were scheming "I can get a free vacation at other people's expense", I think they really did see it as a mission trip. They really did see themselves as helping the orphanage for a few days, leading songs, or teaching a Bible class, some of the men hammering some nails. And each was required to raise a couple hundred more dollars than needed as a donation to the orphanage. And the leaders talked about the importance of personal connections instead of just sending money.

One friend has gone every year for half a dozen years, same orphanage. He has brought back lots of elegant souvenirs from that country but no child art from the orphanage, no indication of personal interest in the specific individuals "served." Maybe I'm being too critical.

Several years ago when I asked Googel about short term mission trips, I ran into a comment by one Mexican pastor that his church gets painted every year whether needed or not, one year it got painted four times.

My guess is there is sometimes well thought out helpful short term work, but also a lot of feel good "lets send the teenagers on a mission trip, it will be fun for them and use up some of their energy" travel going on.

Anyone want to contribute to a trip to Uganda for me? I've never been there and I'm sure the orphanage would welcome my help doing - something.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by MrsBeaky:
OK, I'll start by laying my cards on the table: I am a long term mission partner with the Anglican Church in Kenya. There I've said it- but the important clue is in the name...I am not a missionary (though I'd say they definitely still exist) but I am a partner working with the Anglican church to achieve its goals in this diocese. Those goals are both spiritual and material and I'm a lot more comfortable with some than with others! But I'm here and I believe it's where I'm mean to be.
My husband and I came at the invitation of the Bishop here after years of undertaking short term mission trips in several African countries.

Like the rest of you |I have several concerns about what you have described.
But IF (and its a big if) they are done well short term mission trips can be a positive experience for both those who come and the receiving communities.

I would also agree with pretty much all the critiques that have been offered here, but would like to highlight one thing from the above-- that the way we get long-term effective mission partners is thru short-term (possibly ineffective) mission partners. If we disallow short-term international work altogether (as has been advocated in some of the circles I travel in) you won't have effect long-term cross-cultural ministry-- because no one will be exposed to that sort of ministry, you'll have no opportunity to observe who may or may not be suited for it. And the end result of that would be that our churches become more insular and provincial, less connected to global needs and less likely to support the needs in other parts of the world.

To the excellent and spot-on observations above, I would add a couple of things: short-term missions are more about the one going. It's something that benefits us more than the others. That's OK-- there are lots of things like that we do-- retreats, conferences, camps. Cross-cultural experiences are more transformative than most anything for a lot of reasons. But recognizing that it's of more benefit to you than it is to them is important because it should make us more humble, and less likely to think we're the great savior coming in to help them out by painting their church for the 4th time that year. It should make us grateful (in both tangible and intangible ways) for their hospitality and the time it takes to usher us around and the grace it takes to overlook our cultural faux pas. It should cause us to honor those ministry partners as mentors and leaders, not as victims in need of a handout.

The financial aspect should always be kept in mind. Short term int'l missions are shockingly expensive. But there are good and necessary reasons for them. But don't take it lightly how much waste there is involved; don't take it lightly that a check would go so much further to the people with boots on the ground. If you're able to find a service that you can provide that is rare or hard to obtain in the area, that's ideal. But the reality is, most likely some indigenous person could provide any service you can for a fraction of the cost and thereby build the local economy. Don't take that lightly. Make financial decisions carefully and prayerfully.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
There's also the issue when churches send mission trips to already Christian countries - they're just not the 'right' kind of Christian.

I doubt that short-term evangelistic missions would be effective in any country that didn't already have an effective Christian community. And, as you rightly note, when there is an effective Christian community, it's just, well, rude-- as well as culturally inappropriate.

A better model (to say explicitly what others have alluded to) is to partner with whatever existing (ideally indigenous) Christian community already exists in the place. Let them set the agenda. Ask them what they need or what would be most useful to support the ministry they are already doing. Let them dictate whether it's a painting project or a VBS or a literacy project or something else altogether. Find out what you can do to build up and support that Christian community-- the one that will still be in place, doing the work of Christ, after you leave.

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

quote:
cliffdweller: the way we get long-term effective mission partners is thru short-term (possibly ineffective) mission partners.

Agreed.

Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Anyone want to contribute to a trip to Uganda for me? I've never been there and I'm sure the orphanage would welcome my help doing - something.

Go and see the musical Book of Mormon before you go, it might decide you on another destination for your Very Good Mission.

Posted by Net Spinster (# 16058) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
I had a discussion recently with a friend of mine who lives in the SF area. His family attends a church on the Peninsula (an area full of tech companies and very well-off people), and their parish sends youth groups on mission trips to various places around the country/world. From his point of view (and he has two daughters who have participated in these events), they're junkets for the affluent rather than truly sacrificial exercises in Christian charity. Just a few miles from this parish lies East Palo Alto, populated largely by working-class and poor Latinos and African Americans, yet there's no outreach to this community at all.

I get the feeling this is more common than not, sadly.

Probably true. I'm also Silicon Valley and the churches and ministers vary widely on what they do. East Palo Alto isn't even the area most in need; in January 2013, Santa Clara County (aka the Silicon Valley) had a known homeless population of 7,631 of which 1,957 were in emergency or transitional shelter, the rest were living rough (San Mateo county, which includes East Palo Alto and points north towards SF, had another 2,281 homeless people). 9% in Santa Clara were children under 18 (509 in emergency shelter, 214 living rough). Most of the local cities have been trying to push the problem out of their city (only a handful of local churches have battled this).

The local university does have alternative spring breaks which one could consider a bit like secular mission trips though more thought out (the students have to take a 1 unit course in the quarter before the trip). Some are local and some are not. Pre-meds might go to inner city hospital (or an Indian reservation health clinic). An assorted group goes to El Salvador and visits everyone from government ministers, senior academics to villagers after learning about the current situation and the history over the last few decades (quite a few former refugees from the strife there live in the area, one of the people involved in the course is a local minister with a strong interest in liberation theology).

Posted by Komensky (# 8675) on :

I think there are some theological aspects to unpack as well. First, there are clearly different ideas of what 'mission' means. Several comment above about building schools and other community projects. Others will consider 'mission' to be travelling somewhere and 'telling people about Jesus' or 'sharing the Gospel', etc. I was rather annoyed by a recent flyer through my door from a Christian charity that showed a starving African child with the caption [along the lines of) "he needs a Bible!". No he doesn't, he needs food and medicine (and this is surely being done on many missions, I grant).

At some points missionary work becomes about the missionary ("I'm doing the Lord's bidding!") rather than about those that need the help. My brother-in-law in a southern US state is planning to take his children out of school for three months and drive around in an RV 'on mission'. The rental cost of the RV alone is $10k. They live in a poor state (though they are pretty wealthy) and surely that money would help the poor much more in applied to reputable charities nearby? I feel similarly about 'missions' from Canterbury churches. One local (evangelical C of E) church raised a lot of money to send some students to Uganda. They came back with what most white missionaries come back with—pictures of themselves with poor African children. They didn't build anything. They prayed with some local people and one of English students described a young African girl who the locals had told her had slowly lost the power of speech. Our enthusiastic evangelical students did what their youth leaders always tell them to do and prayed for the girl (who, after hearing this, I was pretty sure had epilepsy). In telling this story, the student pointed out that although the little girl wasn't healed on the spot, but rather she experienced "a Holy Spirit moment' [sic] and then student described what sounded like a seizure—and here is my point. Rather than send a doctor to this village in Uganda, they send some students along who who were unable to recognise what was happened and rather than helping, many have hampered a little girl's chance of surviving epilepsy.

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

I think one of the most theological things you can do on this kind of trips is to listen.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
I think one of the most theological things you can do on this kind of trips is to listen.

this.

Posted by Komensky (# 8675) on :

How about helping? I get this shit all the time in academia. "We travelled to outmost regions of the Andes to listen to starving peasants singing their harvest song in the hopes that the Gods will bring them a crop". They close their notebooks and head home. Why not teaching them how to farm properly? Get them food and medicine? It's a special kind of arrogance.

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

quote:
Komensky: How about helping? I get this shit all the time in academia. "We travelled to outmost regions of the Andes to listen to starving peasants singing their harvest song in the hopes that the Gods will bring them a crop". They close their notebooks and head home. Why not teaching them how to farm properly? Get them food and medicine? It's a special kind of arrogance.

I agree that being an academic keeping your distance to your research objects isn't the right way. You're there to share something.

But teaching them how to farm properly can't be done in a couple of weeks, you'd need a far longer mission for that. Besides, it's quite probable that they know a lot more about farming than a middle-class person in the UK or the US. I'm not much in favour of giving food or medicine either. Just listen, and then decide what you can do together. I think cliffdweller expressed very well how to do this here.

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :

Food, medicine, farming help--that can all be very useful, though best applied under the leadership of the local church and long-term missionaries, and only after the whole thing's been worked out in advance in detail and okayed by both groups. You don't want to insult people, you don't want to build dependency, but equally you don't want to say "there's nothing we can do" and give up, when a couple of brain shunts or instruction on crop rotation and composting could be a real blessing.

it's true though that a lot of settings can't really take short term mission trips. We used to have people inquiring about making our community a destination all the time, but really--we didn't need painting etc. because our people either rent or are wealthy enough and young enough they can do their own painting; we didn't need toys for tots because the young families would have felt insulted (they were working very hard to provide for their kids, and said so loudly); we didn't need food (well, sometimes we did, but never the kind of food that could be collected among Americans who shop at American grocery stores, and who wouldn't know rao mung from a whole in the ground!.

What we desperately needed were people who would commit to six months or more teaching English, citizenship, and basic health and safety; tutoring school children; and building friendships with family groups and elders, particularly the shut-in. But nobody has the time to do any of this (plus it scares them, since it demands close contact with people they can't fully communicate with)--they want to be in and out in a week or less.

We sort of gave up after several years.

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :

So much of what has been said so far on this thread resonates with me.
And yet, and yet.....if we can get it right there can be a mutuality in mission (both short and long term) and help can be given and received, faith can be explored (two of the best conversations I've had here have been with Muslims) and deepened and at the risk of sounding like a missionary [Eek!]

something of the Kingdom of God (You know justice and mercy to name but two aspects) can be established.
I lurch between despair and hope!

Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on :

I share a lot of the disquiet expressed so far.

In a previous parish, the diocese had a strong relationship with a linked diocese in East Africa. This relationship had developed over many years. There were regular trips (usually twice a year) from the UK to the linked diocese. Ordinary parish members were encouraged to go and spend some time with people in the link diocese, to find out for themselves what life was really like. I have to say that this was really successful. There was a real sense of partnership and mutuality. As a result, the UK churches helped to sponsor people in the link diocese to come across and see OUR churches.

I think that the key elements in the success of this were the development of strong relationships between the senior staff in both dioceses; and the long-term commitment to sharing and growing together.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0