Here is a question for everyone. In the midst of our blogging about strategic use of short-term missionaries, I find the timing of this appropriate.
How do you respond to a church who contacts you concerning their ongoing work in a certain part of the country with Primera Iglesia Bautista XYZ? I don't know why I was contacted but I guess they want me to work with them. All that they are doing is dependency driven and the national pastor with whom they are working doesn't have the best reputation as regards to volunteers and finances. I look at this and it is a field of landmines. I would normally not enter into the scene but having been contacted, I am looking for an easy way out.
On the one hand, I would like to politely tell them why I am not partnering with this pastor without offending the church in the states and creating a problem with the national church. On the other hand, this is the exact type of partnership that is doing much more harm than good. The bad thing is that those in the states look at it as a success because they see the buildings and pastors they are paying but in reality, it is just propping up a church that should have been self-sufficient 50 years ago (literally) and perpetuating the subsidy mentality. We also have personnel working in this area trying to begin reproducible churches but having the sugar daddy church in town that is doling out the dollars makes our low (no) budget works less attractive.
ARGHH!!! Any of you want to make this phone call for me? :)
3 comments:
One possible "way out" would be to contact the stateside group about considering helping YOU out in a project, and seeing if they might be able to divide their time between the national church and whatever you can come up with that would be more in line with the missionary task.
Good suggestion but I must confess, I have not found many projects that would work with the people group that would not create the same sort of dependency as we are looking to avoid. A motto of mine is to do as little as possible to see new churches started. It doesn't mean that we don't do anything, it just means that we do not do things that are unnecessary when it comes to starting new churches. I find myself frequently trying to come up with things that volunteers can do. They are not really needed but they are things that volunteers can do. The list is small but even on that list, I come back to my motto and ask the question, "Is this something that I really believe will see new churches come out of the effort or am I doing this so that I can use a volunteer team?"
This is a constant struggle for me. If I can use nationals to accomplish a task should I also invite in outsiders? Then I come back to the inevitable, they are coming whether they are needed or not, maybe I should find something to occupy them that isn't going to cause problems. I know that this sounds bad but it is a reality (confession) that I am dealing with. Somehow I don't think that just occupying their time is good enough but it is all I can do at this time. So often, the mere prescence of outsiders can cause danger for both the believer and the volunteer. It can close doors even further in already closed/hostile communities.
Thus, I come back to the reason for my
Crazy Idea Post.
Honestly, this is something that I struggle with frequently.
I think you need to politely tell them about the situation. If they do not receive the correction then tell them to get another tour guide.
Post a Comment