Questioning short-term missions
Christianity Today is following up on the study, reported several weeks ago, questioning the value of short-term missions and implying that they may be poor stewardship.
This week, they will be running an e-mail dialogue between the author of that study and another writer with further details about the subject.
I would like to think that LEAMIS, with its more intensive training and de-brief, is more likely to permanently change the attitudes and actions of participants than some of the missions programs which were reflected by this study. The study points out that, for the amount of money it takes to send one volunteer over on a construction mission, you could hire a whole team of locals.
LEAMIS, as best I can tell, is getting away from construction-for-construction’s sake. When LEAMIS does construction, there’s more likely to be some sort of educational component to it — teaching a new technique or project to the native workers. Of course, our big focus in Kenya will be cottage industry, just as it was last year.
I think the CT pieces raise some valid points for discussion, which all mission programs should keep in mind. But I believe that my STM experiences have changed me and will continue changing me in the years to come.


Add New Comment
Viewing 3 Comments
Thanks. Your comment is awaiting approval by a moderator.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Add New Comment
Trackbacks
(Trackback URL)
July 16, 2005 at 5:37 pm
[...] One of my previous posts prompted some debate about the validity of short-term mission trips. Debra Snellen, co-founder of ...
June 1, 2006 at 1:19 pm
[...] The Christian Science Monitor has added to the critique of short-term missions, on the heels of Kurt Ver Beek’s ...