I think that presenting the gospel of Jesus Christ to the world is the most important thing that Christians do. Mission work is vitally important. It is the most important thing that we can do.
How we do it, though, is also very important. And I think that we can do better. Especially in the area of short term missions.
One missionary organisation that I know of is called Mercy Ships. Mercy Ships own a boat that is a floating hospital. On board of that boat are trained medical staff who volunteer their time and services to do two things:
1. They provide medcal treatment to the poorest people in the world (currently West African nations) who couldn't otherwise afford or fnd people to do it. They bring skills and opportnities to the countries that they otherwise wouldn't have had.
2. They tell the people that they treat about Jesus and his eternal healing. They offer the gospel to everyone who becomes their patient and many more besides.
I think that Mercy Ships does great work and that, for the most part, short term missions with them are valuable and worthwhile. This is because they fill a material/social/medicinal need in the world that otherwise wouldn't be filled and with that they also bring the gospel of Jesus Christ. This is, I think, how it should be.
There is a type of short term mission, though, that I do not approve of. It usually involves a group of young people going together to a very poor part of the world and seeing what is going on there. It might be called a mission awareness trip or somethig of the sort. The group would visit a few different places, see some churches in action, perhaps visit a missionary or two. They might give a few talks to a congregation that doesn't see many white people and perhaps work with some children. This is the kind of mission trip that I have a problem with.
My problem is that there seems to be no value to the people that they see, or if there is, it is disproportionate to the costs and possible benefits if they did not go. In fact, a mission trip that is seen as a 'go and see' experience, seems to me to be a little perverted. It doesn't seem that much different to going to the zoo.
I also have a problem with the way that these trips are marketed. Such as:
- These trips are not mission trips. A missionary brings the gospel to people who have not heard it before. Going on one of these trips does not make you a missionary.
- People often marvel that they have seen the world's poverty in its starkness, but they haven't. Very rarely do these mission trips encounter the world's 1 billion hugry people. Instead they pass them by from a moving vehicle. The people that they spend time with are usually people living in what we would call poverty, and are certainly living from day to day, but are not the world's desperate.
- Too often the result of such missions sounds like this: "I can't believe that the people were so happy even though they have nothing. I am going to try to be more grateful for what I have and let stuff control my life less." When it should be: "I have seen the world's poor and destitute and there is not enough help for them. I will live a life that allows me to help these people as much as I can, rather than continuing to help myself to whatever I want at their expense. I will do this because I love Jesus and I love my brothers and sisters."
Posts
I just wrote a long comment and it got deleted. Bah.
ReplyDeleteWhen I cool down maybe I'll comment again. Thanks though Graham, I agree, though I doubt many will. The big problem, I think, is that people may agree in principle, but would never agree with respect to their particular STM experience. Only one person I know who has done an STM no longer thinks it was a worthwhile use of resources. As far as I can tell, about 95% of them are.
It's a simple matter of dollars and cents for me.
But I think the zoo comment is a fair one. We treat the world as our zoo, and our right to view it that way as read. Christians, I believe, can think in particularly poisonous ways, by justifying their gawking by doing some good.
I am the same. I almost did what I consider to be a worthwhile STM (for reasons I won't get into) a couple of years ago. Looking back though, I really wanted to go for the experience, it sounded amazing. Who cares?! That's not what it's about! I hate to be so 'nominally-Calvinist', but maybe for a while I should only serve in ways that I don't like, so I can learn to be joyful in serving, not joyful that I can serve in ways that I enjoy anyway...
The way we view the world and our money and that thing called experience can be very toxic indeed.
Incidentally, the value of mission as to improve one's own outlook is not mission - it's self-service. And if one cannot be generous without going on an STM and seeing these things for oneself, then there are some serious problems here.
I think I agree with you too Graham. Although I'm pretty supportive of school trips who do house building in Cambodia and similar, especially when there is an ongoing committment from the school. I know of people who have adopted AIDS babies from Cambodia and who regulalry go back on house building trips.
ReplyDeleteI suppose there are many possible consequences and impacts on peoples lives from being involved in STM or house building projects. It is hard to determine that in monetary terms.(It could be that the impact of a trip costing $5000 results in an individual giving $500 000 in their lifetime to worthy causes, maybe).
I've never been on a STM but I did go to Nepal when I was 22 with my sister because she wanted to go on a trekking holiday. I learnt lots of things about 'another' culture and even more about myself. For me it is despicable to 'spectate the poor'. On the positive side I had an opportunity to see some missionaries at work and an opportunity to explain to some non-christians what the missionaries were doing. I was able to support the tourism industry of that country that improved conditions for many locals. I experienced Hindu and Buddhist temples which gave me spiritual insights that I wouldn't have otherwise gained. I got a tummy bug that seriously and longterm made me sick, I am still affected today. The thing I remember most strongly (apart from how awesome the mountains where and how emposered I felt after climbing them) was being told by our guide that a particular man had 2 wives, I asked "is that a Hindu or a Buddhist thing?" he said "no it is a man thing", still makes me laugh although it probably isn't funny!
My problem with the going to build houses thing is that it is largely self serving.
ReplyDeleteUsually a team of people go over somewhere to build a house or something together. There might be one builder and the rest just wanting to help. So they spend thousands on plane tickets, go ver there, build a house or something using more labout than is required, because they actually don't know what they are doing and need to be directed at every step. Then at the end of it the community has a house, which is good, but it can be better.
What if, instead of that, the group didn't go overseas, but gave the money instead to the one builder who is licensed and experienced andhe goes overseas, uses the money to employ some local men and gets them to help him build the house. Then the local economy is stimulated, the money spent is going back into that place and just maybe, some men who were struggling to look after their family's material needs are pad for a time, and also acquire a set of skills that they can use for future employment.
Now you have a situation where some rich folk just gave up some money and all of the benefit and experiences go to those who need them, rather than those who can afford them.
I think that the money issue is a secondary issue. I am saying that there is something seriously wrong with the western church when we know that our brothers and sisters are struggling beyond our comprehension and we seek to make ourselves good by alleviating their suffering, but before we can do that we must spend thousands of dollars each to go and see it for ourselves.
The problem is with our attitudes and perception of what is ok and what is not. We are too self serving in almost everything we do.
I find myself wanting the most ridiculous things even though I do not need them and too often I indulge, even knowing that I then have less to give away to others.
Too often we say that we are a sinful people and won't be perfect here. That isoften the end of the statement, but t should finish with something along the lines of 'but Jesus says that we will be held accountable for our actions, so we'd better try damned hard to love our neighbours as much as we love ourselves.' I think that the reformed western church leaves this off because it does not fit well into our society, into our culture, nor is it the comfortable or convenient.
I think many humans feel the need to connect with what they are giving their time and money and prayers to! Perhaps this is a 'western culture' phenomenon. But I'm inclined to think that that is why these STM continue and are successful in some ways. And some people (not me) are infected by the travel bug. I'm not convinced that it is a less holy or self-serving than my own past-times. I honestly think there is only one answer: God can and will and does change the desires of our hearts. NIV Psalm 37:4 Delight yourself in the LORD and he will give you the desires of your heart. I would interpret this to mean that God removes (open heart surgery) the toxic selfish desires and 'gives' us new desires. And whilst church and preachers and blogs and conversations seek to persuade people to Godliness it is really only acheived when God does something. Not meaning to be negative Graham! But the battlefeild is hearts and minds and spirits, not clean water and cash. Surely lots of talk will only have an impact if there is also lots of prayers.
ReplyDelete