short-term missions: part 4

Previous posts on short-term missions from a missional perspective...as always Copyright Josh Cooper 2008.

1. Introduction

2. Individual Level

3. Congregational Leadership Level

This post focuses on short-term missions from a denominational perspective.

Section Four – Denominational Level
In addition to looking at short-term mission trips from the perspectives of individuals and congregations, we also met with and interviewed representatives of the Reformed Church of America (RCA) and the Christian Reformed Church (CRC) to understand better the denominational perspective of short-term mission trips (STMTs).

Both the RCA and CRC and their agencies have and continue to support various types of short-term mission opportunities. These trips range in size from individuals to groups and include a wide variety of activities including community development, relief, pastor to pastor visits, church to church visits, service learning opportunities, and vision casting / discovery trips. The main role of the denominational organizations is to serve as a focal point for linking together those (individuals, groups and churches) wanting take part in a STMT with those (organizations, churches and mission partners) open to receiving such trips. During the 2007-2008 year, CRWRC facilitated 437 short-term mission opportunities.

Legitimate and beneficial?
In talking with these denominational representatives, it was clear that their perspective in evaluating these trips tended to be wide (broader in scope than a single trip) and long-term (longer than a single trip). Most of the representatives also talked about the role of these trips in supporting the mission partners who receive the trip participants, and that a trip is legitimate and beneficial if it works within the context and goals of those mission partners. As such, both denominations mentioned that one of their goals was to “do no harm” to their partners and both emphasized the importance of partnership. The CRWRC representative noted that CRWRC designs all of the opportunities for teams they send out in such as way that they “contribute to the plans of the (host/partner) community to meet a legitimate need.” The RCA concurs stating in their global mission strategy that:
We work with mission partners. We are committed to working whenever possible with partner churches and mission agencies within the context of ecumenical relationships, affirming the primary responsibility of the local church to set the agenda and invite the participation of the global church. Partnerships necessitate mutual praying and planning. They also witness to the unity of the church in the world (John 15:34-35).

Another benefit/requirement mentioned by both denominations was the need to build mutual/reciprocal relationships, where both those who go and those who receive are transformed. As the RCA states:
God calls us to mission, not because God would find no other way to accomplish God’s mission in the world, but because we need to be engaged in mission to become the men and women, children and teens, that God intends for us to be.

Norma Coleman-James expanded on this idea:

They [the trips] become beneficial if there is a reciprocal relationship formed where the folks who go are transformed by the experience and come back to the local church to further equip the local church to make an impact for local ministry. Sometimes we can easily see the needs elsewhere, but “step over” needs here at home. However, if those going on the trip go with a western “fix-it” notion, then the trips are not legitimate. If folks go with that notion, they themselves cannot be transformed. Both those going and those receiving them need to be transformed. The transformation for those going is learning from the experience and going back to serve those back home.

Lastly, one representative from each denomination placed the ultimate legitimacy of short-term mission trips within a larger framework of mission. Roger De Young stated that “ultimately, our goal is to share the love of Christ.” Nancy Coleman-James stated that these trips need to support world mission “in fulfilling the great commission.”

Missional?
When asked about their denomination or denominational agency definition of “mission,” all responded with elements contained within our provisional research definition of a missional church: “The church as called and sent by God to be God’s instrument in the in breaking of the reign of God.” For example, the CRWRC representative stated that:
Within CRWRC we believe that it is first of all God’s mission, not ours, and his purpose is to reconcile the WORLD to himself in Christ, and that means ALL THINGS – see II Cor 5, and Colossians 1. Our work is THE MISSION – living in the world in such a way that we reflect and point to and participate in what God is doing through Jesus.

The RCA similarly reflects these values:

… the Reformed Church in America defines mission as:
our personal and corporate participation in this work of God
by intentionally crossing barriers
from church to nonchurch, faith to nonfaith,
to proclaim by word and deed
the coming of the kingdom of God in Jesus Christ,
in works of evangelism, witness, reconciliation, healing, and diaconal service,
gathering people into the church
through repentance and faith in Jesus Christ
by the work of the Holy Spirit
with a view to the transformation of the world
as a sign of the coming kingdom of Jesus Christ.

Both of these statements reflect an understanding that the church’s mission is framed from within God’s mission, and that the church is called and sent by God to carry out that mission in the world.

When asked specifically whether the STMTs that they have been involved with fit into their definition of mission, each of the respondents stated that they “can and do,” but “not always.” The RCA representatives stress again the need for long-term relationship in order to achieve true partnership which leads to a fuller expression of mission through STMTs. To achieve this Roger De Young says, “We encourage short-termers to work with the long-termers who better understand the culture and language and have a deeper understanding of the local situation.” This is also reflected in the RCA’s global mission strategy:

We make long-term commitments. We believe that effective cross-cultural mission depends upon sensitive mastery of language, custom, and history in the context of genuine relationship. This itself is essential work of mission. It takes time. On a spiritual level, we reach out to make and baptize disciples, then stay long enough to teach the disciples to make and train other disciples (Matthew 28:19-20).

Norma Coleman-James seemed to agree, stating that one short-term trip cannot completely fulfill the great commission, “we cannot get it done in one short trip, especially if those going are serving their own interests or working from their own ideas without forming a partnership.” Though taking more time, both of the denominations agree that partnerships are a way to achieve their mission more completely. CRWRC puts it this way:
CRWRC’s STMTs provide the opportunity to connect the Southern with the Northern in a way that builds relationships and contributes to future involvement and transformation in those that participate on both sides. With the shift of the global church to the South, we can no longer talk about a “sending church” in the way we used to. We need to be a “Partnering” church.

As noted below, the RCA sees the lack of such long-term, strategic relationships as a pitfall for individuals or individual churches that attempt STMTs on their own; often these individuals or individual churches lack a deep relationship, or at least, a commitment to a long-term, deep relationship with those they visit. Otherwise, it is unlikely that a true partnership will develop, one in which both feel comfortable to disagree, “to really give their opinion rather than agreeing to whatever the North Americans want.”

Pitfalls
Respondents at the denominational level were able to articulate many pitfalls associates with short-term mission trips from their own experiences. These included:
Short-term Focus- Focusing on “the trip” itself rather than seeking and exploring a wider perspective of personal and communal faith journeys, and the journey and context of those they travel to. All too often, said Jay Harsevoort, this leads to a situation in which when the trip ends, so does everything else, where the “life-changing” effects of the short-term trip are themselves short-term.
Task Focus- Focusing on tasks rather than relationships, and wanting to “do for” rather than “do with.” Norma Coleman-James notes that without reciprocal partnerships and deepening relationships, STMTs can waste money, cause dependency and reinforce stereotypes.

Being Closed-minded- In the same way, a lack of willingness or openness to learn from those we visit can inhibit participants from learning and seeing how God is working through others, and the things God would like to teach us through them. We need to ask ourselves, do we have the openness to learn from others, especially others that are not resource rich?

Going it alone- Many churches or individuals try to set things up on their own without the denomination. Because of this, Norma Coleman-James says that they “lose all of the experience and insight” of those that have gone before them. The RCA representative shared this sentiment sharing that the denomination means has over 100 year experience on “what to do and what not to do,” and that long-term RCA missionaries and mission partners have the local experience and relationships, neither of which individual congregations or groups have on their own.

Response to Pitfalls
In response to these pitfalls, the denominational representatives all agreed that planning, preparation and follow-up are essential. Norma Coleman-James felt that preparing folks before they go through orientation would help “to remove the scales from their eyes of how God is working in other places.” Her organization also does debriefing and follow-up. Mary Dykstra likewise stated that CRWRC finds careful preparation, competent coaching and careful follow-up helpful in mitigating the pitfalls listed above. She also noted that CRWRC as an organization is willing and committed to change as they learn at the denominational agency level.

For their part, the RCA created an office of Volunteer Services with a Coordinator to help facilitate the relationship with those who “want to go” with those who “are there,” to “plug-in” short-term trips into longer-term strategies, partnerships and vision. RCA Global Missions also offers twice annual workshops for mission team leaders, misters of mission and pastors of large churches who are moving in this direction to help them make wise choices: “We are committed to helping every local congregation become an effective mission station, locally engaged and globally connected.” RCA Global Mission also provides a six-session course entitled “Building a Mission Minded Church” in an effort to further empower congregations to make wise decisions about missions. They have also developed a mission trip orientation video entitled “Walk Humbly; An Orientation for Christian Servants.” Lastly, in the Spring 2008 edition of the denominational publication RCA Today, Jay Harsevoort makes these suggestions to make sure that trips make a lasting difference:
• Make your short-term trip part of a bigger commitment to mission by supporting missionaries annually.

• Focus at least as much energy on follow-up and debriefing after the trip as you do on preparation before you go.

• Build time into the schedule for getting to know the community you're serving.

• Be flexible. God has provided amazing opportunities when plans fall through--will you be open to them, or unwilling?

• Remember that mission is a part of your life rather than something that happens for a week once a year.

• Make the trip a beginning rather than the end by raising money for a related project after you get back.

Summary of the Denominational Level
As noted by each of the denominational representatives, short-term mission trips may or may not be missional. They may or may not serve as a legitimate way for the church to act as God’s instrument in brining in the reign of God. From the denominational perspectives surveyed here, one of the keys to achieving legitimacy is for STMTs to exist within mutual/reciprocal partnerships, where both those who go and those who receive are transformed. From their perspective, this calls for longer-term investment and a broader perspective than one-off, short-term trips taken from a North America perspective. In other words, there is a need to incorporate short-term activities and experiences within longer-term plans and wider perspectives for both those who go and those who receive.

The Ver Beek study reflects these values in what Ver Beek calls “missed opportunities,” the opportunity to building strong relationships and mutuality. In her forward to Mission Trips that Matter, Dorothy Bass also makes that point that such trips need to be beneficial for both those who take the journey and those who receive them. Ver Beek also hypothesizes that the key to lasting change among the STM participants is for the trips to be “just one piece in a structure that also include support and accountability before and after the trip.”
As persons preparing for leadership within the church, these views highlight for us the importance of framing STMTs as part of a longer-term strategy formulated between mutual partners for the transformation of those who go was well as those who receive. As noted above, it calls for careful preparation/orientation as well as follow-up and debriefing. All of which the denominational representatives believe they are well equipped to provide as they journey together with the would be short-term missions trip participants.

Lastly, while there was some mentioned about the importance of prayer and the Holy Spirit in the RCA’s Walk Humbly video, very little else was said about these in the interviews. Similarly, we were surprised that the legitimacy of STMTs was not initially linked to the mission of God’s mission, missio Dei. In other words, we had hoped to see a deliberate indication that short-term mission trips were an intentional part of the wider mission of the church as we have defined it, as God’s instrument for God’s mission. Only after the mention of the term “missions” was this link clearly stated (though indirect links were made if one assumes that the goals of partners are linked to this framework). We had hoped to see a stronger fit of short-term mission into the larger framework of mission, and more dependence on the Holy Spirit to formulate, empower, sustain and even transform that mission. As Guder et al. state:

Missional communities are called to represent the compassion, justice and peace of the reign of God. The distinctive characteristic of such communities is that the Holy Spirit creates and sustains them. … they are not formed solely by human intentional and efforts, individual or collective [even in mutually beneficial partnerships], but instead by God’s empowering presence” “the Spirit of God is the dynamic, live-giving power of the Church, the unseen Lord, Master, Guide and Inspirer of the Christian community.

Likewise, Newbigin stresses the importance of the Holy Spirit in mission:
By obediently following where the Spirit leads, often in ways neither planned, known, nor understood, the church acts out the hope that it is given by the presence of the Spirit who is the living foretaste of the kingdom.