tony, as i think about missions, not having trekked to a third world country, i wonder about that Great Commission injunction of Jesus. Didn't he say to go into 'all' the world? What about folks in the inner cities right here in the U.S.? To really stir things up-is the church pre-occupied with 'world' missions to such an extent that neighbors in the local church's backyard are going 'hungry'? I wonder..

Well said, Tony. I have 2 boys (8 and 5) and I want so much for them to have an undertanding of the great needs so many people have - not just material ones but also for Christ. That being said, we live in Houston: you don't have to go far to find people whose lives are very different from our own. So for now, we're focusing on our own part of the world. In particular, for my 8 year old: (1) he helps me read to pre-school kids at a neighborhood center, and hopefully someday will be able to tutor in reading, (2) we attend a church with a wide range of social/economic backgrounds - he has already had the unfortunate experience of helping a good friend mourn the loss of his older brother to gang violence, (3) we work on witnessing (in word and in deed) to friends at school who don't know Christ, (4) he helps me cook meals for weekly Bible study and bake communion bread - in other words, he has a world of service right at his doorstep. Later on, after some volunteer experiences of his own here in town - and as he gets older - if he feels called to go abroad (and teach English for a summer, or something longer-term and more useful than what you can accomplish in a week) then I'd love for him to go. But before that I'd like to see him develop the heart for such things, and the skills to make himself a real blessing to the people he's sent to help.

Two asides: (1) Our former church has, as one of their many mission trips, a family trip to a former Eastern Bloc country, where they run a VBS for a week. All that way, all that money, to run VBS in an existing church? They couldn't have sent a few people a year or 2 in a row to train the locals? Help! (2) The pastor at our current church recently announced that "some of you are going to need to go to Africa this year" (to work on projects related to water wells we're helping raise money for). But the next sentence out of his mouth was "But most of you are going to need to stay here and give financial support instead - this is not a glorified vacation, folks." He wants teachers, carpenters, doctors and nurses who can commit to a month or so of work and training - but he does not want all of us to pack up and rush off, just because we need to have some spiritual experience of our own. Can you tell one of the reasons why we're in a new church?

Thanks so much for all your writing. It's a joy to read.

First, read the research by Ram Cnaan about how much the average church does for its neighborhood. He uses Philadelphia as the research base and found that each church of 100 or so people did almost $300,000.00 annually in social good. Second, read, "When Charity Destroys Dignity" by Glenn Schwartz, a missions exec. to evaluate when a project is helpful or harmful.

I have been establishing training centers internationally for many years and a lot of church mission trips are harmful.

A well-considered viewpoint, Tony (as usual). I was immediately defensive (at the title), but should have known you'd thought about the issue carefully.

I have seen some change in some youth as a result of foreign trips, but have also seen churches going overboard with trips to faraway lands, the purpose of which not seemingly justified by the huge expenses.

I rather like the model our current church uses: for the international trips (of which there might be two a year), it is mostly adults; the youth instead pack into vans and drive a state or two away to work at summer camps for disabled children, or do something on a Native American reservation (at a cost obviously MUCH below any trip involving a flight).

Although a "big" overnight trip can theoretically be a good thing, I'm left wondering about the lack of day-trips. The lack of consistancy. Not just volunteering for a few days, but showing up one day each week for weeks on end.

It feels like we're trying to force the issue of spiritual change (ie "give me patience right now). Coupled with glamour and the "must be fun or youth won't do it" attitude. Seriously? We NEED a party after each youth "event"?

I have to wonder. What do we REALLY want these trips to teach our youth? If we REALLY wanted to teach them about service, wouldn't we embrace programs with better results?

Perhaps we WANT to support them going on these trips because we want to believe our own lack of local service is ok. Sure, we say we want our youth to change, to be on "fire" for the Lord. But really? Most congregations would face a nightmare of epic proportions if their youth group came back spiritually changed from a trip!

Can you imagine a youth group encouraging the congregation to volunteer locally, to embrace the poor, to welcome the downtrodden into their midst regardless of their personal hygiene issues? Sadly, I suspect that we want a youth group we are comfortable with, not one thats realized a significant spiritual change for the better.

Tony - I enjoyed the article at WotW and the comments. Questioning missions work is a hot-button for some folks.

Raymond Ibrahim over at Victor Davis Hanson's site gave great coverage on Father Zakaria Botros. Now that is a missionary! He also has his own website. Would our missionary $$ be better spent supporting his ministry than sending a group to the Middle East? Probably safer ...