so frustrated
This morning, our church had a service performed by our 2006
In a nutshell, it was, to me, the pinnacle of American ethno-centrism masked by good intentions. I'm not trying to bash anyone's thoughts, his/her feelings from going, or his/her intentions. But I am trying to say this- short term mission trips are beginning to really annoy me. Comments I heard that annoyed me: "Everyone needs to go," "They need us there," "I didn't want to go back home," "I think we got more from being there than they did"... I've heard that last one too many times. While it may be true, I'm not sure I like it.
First (comment), everyone does not NEED to go. Everyone needs to serve, needs to be involved in helping others and in showing God's love and justice. That does NOT require going to another country, or even another town. Everyone should be involved in God's work, but going to another country isn't the only way to do so. And as a matter of fact, it is the most expensive way to do so! If you're really all about serving, then it shouldn't matter whether it's
Second (comment)- They do NOT need us there. As a matter of fact, us going as short termers often times makes things more messy than before. They got along without us before we went, they can do so after. Our team built two houses- Guatemalans have built houses before and did not need us to do so. We put shoes on kids who needed them- we could have sent the shoes and national ministers and full-time missionaries could put them on. And they sent the Jesus film- which we could have sent and not just taken. While it's good service, and the projects were very other people centered, they did not NEED our people there to do it. Our people were simply helpers. To say that another country needs us is the most ethno-centric comment one could make. It somehow implies that God is not going to get the word out without you, and it implies that we have the answer they are incapable of finding unless we go. We have abilities they do not have. This is not true. There are lots of people who have the answer (Jesus) who can share it who live there and don't have to spend thousands of dollars each to be there. Beyond that, there is a little boy who is now being supported by one of our couples who went. Now, it may well be expected that people from every missions group will "adopt" through support children there. Dependency is created because we think they need us.
Third (comment)- You must come home. Even if you don't want to. And being in that state of mind will make you hate home. But beyond that, you have only had a one week glorified version of missions. If you were to be there for a month or more and without a full team of friends around you, you would get a better view of what full-time missionaries and missions work is all about. If they all left and you stayed to continue to love the people there, it would be hard. A friend of mine on my second
Fourth (comment)- while it may be true that you got a lot, that's not the most important thing. And it's not the most important thing to take away. The motivation needs to be serving and giving, not receiving. After you return, if you're only focused on what you've received, it makes you want to go again and soon because you want the experience again. If you only focus on how you felt for it, you may have that as a motivation from then on. And it leads to people saying stuff like "Everyone needs to go"- because I had such a great experience, others would get that experience too. But when push comes to shove, next year when the trip comes up, people who have gone will not willingly give up their spot so someone else can go, even if they said that everyone should go. just doesn't happen.
other thoughts from the service... Not trying to say it was a waste of money, but if $26,000 was raised for the trip, could it have not been spent better if $26,000 were sent to national ministers and missionaries to spend- paying for workers on the houses and people to do what our team had done? They likely could have built more than 2 houses and done a
more other thoughts- Some parents are talking about their 9-year-old or younger children going next year. I think that they don't have a good understanding of the right motivation. I have seen it before and it has never worked out well to have young children on mission trips. The child is not as able to help with the physical work and the VBS stuff, they are ministered to, not ministers. The parent is also made almost useless because he/she is always concerned about and watching after the child(ren). If you really see missions as about serving the people you're going to, then leave the children home. If you want your children to go, you can't honestly think they have the ability to make the cost of getting them there worth having them there. It's gotta be about my child having the experience. If it costs 1000 for travel for each person, then it's a waste of not only $1,000, but actually $2,000 because the parent's impact is lessened. Also, one woman in our church is going to
another thought: We're going back next year. To the same country. While I know there is a lot of work to be done there, there are other countries. And I also agree that it is good to make a difference in one place because it can feel like too little if going to many places. But I don' t think that's the thought behind it. And I don't think that's a good enough reason to get everyone to think about only one other country. It's great to get others thinking outside of their own country, but it needs to be world minded, not just
Another thought (not missions related): the music was sub-par. The guitar/leader was very folky sounding. And they practiced last week for a sound check, then changed the whole thing. Added two more singers and sang with mics in stands instead of holding them (which meant the voices didn't get picked up because the singers were so far away). As the sound guy, it was not a good way to start for me. And the music hurt me... It was... hurtful to me. I couldn't really handle it... If I came for this service, I wouldn't have been back. I'm not trying to say I'm all that, because I'm not, but I think that the music I do is more reaching of younger people.
Another thought: I feel like we've got our people bringing American Christianity instead of the seed of the gospel there. Kind of a side effect I'm sure of our pastor seeming to try and bring "Alabaman" Christianity to
Both Rachel and I had a hard time with the service. We actually have wondered if we're really supposed to be here because of this and some other things (particularly how the church is more elderly people than we thought and while the pastor loves young couples and families, I don't see him actually drawing them in- his preaching style is very mellow and almost emotionless sometimes- hand motions that distract and don't add anything, and mostly, modern preaching that often times is not challenging). All things equal, this service did not help us feel more like we belong. It gave me another "we disagree with this pastor on yet another issue." (do not take this the wrong way- I still feel like we're ok here. I'm not considering moving, and I'm not considering another church. I'm not thinking I don't belong. I'm just venting... It's frustrating to feel like opposite sides on a lot of issues with the senior pastor. We're ok, though. For now- but pray for us)
Final thoughts- I don't feel I can support the trip next year. In fact, I'm not sure I'll go on another mission trip again. If I feel like doing something internationally, I will send my money where they can use it all, not only part of it because I had to spend money to go. If a person cannot do service locally, they do not need to go. The Great Commission is to make disciples, not to go on short term mission trips. And making disciples can be done more cost-efficiently and often times effectively (because nationals understand the culture better) without short term trips. I think people need to think of others, but the glamour of going outside the country can be... enticing and give wrong ideas.
I don't really know how to end this, but.. I'll just call it quits.
1 comment:
This was a topic of much conversation at Houghton as well. No concensus was reached, of course, but this is what I took from those conversations:
Short term missions trips can sometimes have a positive affect on those ministered to. Take medical missions. If a clinic is sustained by the visits of medical professionals I believe a worthwhile thing is being accomplished. The difference between this sort of visit and the one to Guatemala you mention is that the skills brought to the field did not exist there without the missionaries.
Some people who have been on missions trips (I have never been on one) mention the value they received as an unexpected result. As you state, this can often be the main reason a person returns to the field. There is one other unexpected result: passion. Although not supported by any empirical data, I suspect that those who have been on short term missions trips are subsequently empassioned to be concerned for and support foreign missions, which all too often Americans tend to ignore.
The next topic you discuss is American imperialism through missions. For all the good things that can be said of Constantine, this is one negative result of his institutionalization and endorsement of Christianity.
Western culture and Christianity are too closely related for us Americans to be able to divide one from the other and this is to our detrament. The biggest mission field in the world today is the North America. African and South American churches are sending missionaries to the US and Canada, and it is for good reason.
A friend of mine is in the middle of divorce proceedings. While I believe divorce is not God's will for any couple, it is, I believe, a legitimate avenue for a select few people. This is a view my friend does not aspouse. I tried to explain my point by asking him whether a Japanese grandmother would read a scripture passage the same way we would. Of course she would not because she has completely different life experiences than we would. The Holy Spirit not only inspired the writing of the scripture but inspires its reading and interpretation. It is we who miss out if our communities do not include minorities, people from different cultures and of different ages.
Now back to foreign missions: how do we evangelize the third world without bringing American culture to bear any more than is necessary? I think the key is long term missions performed by minorities themselves. There are certainly things that are evil no matter what culture we are speaking of, but too many cultural intricacies are neither good nor bad, and by stamping these indifferent characteristics out is wrong. Most tribes are, for example, communal and not based on trade. Our American capitalist society is so associated with freedom and democracy that we inevitably bring our economic theories with us when we evangelize. If we sent people who experienced God's redeming love through Christ while still in their own cultures they would be perfectly suited to help other cultures learn Christ's love as well.
As for worship quality - there is nothing that can excuse ill-preparedness. We are certainly all told to make a joyful noise to the Lord, but that does not address worship leadership. I would no more want to have a social worker, no matter how well-intentioned or good-hearted, handling the church's finances when CPAs are in the congregation. Likewise, a person who is gifted in worship leading or who is trained musically should be leading worship.
There are my two cents.
Post a Comment