an offensive notion

I’ve known several missionary kids personally, and though I believe you’re mostly right, I think the word “rich” should be removed from your statement. The whole point of it is that it’s a free trip which the church (or church community) is paying for because they’re doing the work of God while away. Rich kids don’t need such a guise; they just ask their parents for the money.

I dunno. My father-in-law is a minister; he and kids from their youth group went and did a few mission trips while his kids were in their teens. They did real and good things, not proselytizing at all (if anything they learned more about local religious custom than they promulgated). Yes, certainly the kids got something out of it, but it was hardly a vacation. The stuff they got out of it was wacky ideas like “we are very lucky to have what we have” and “people are generally good.”

The stuff they got out of it was wacky ideas like “we are very lucky to have what we have” and “people are generally good.”

That’s horrible. :(

I didn’t get to go on my church’s trips, but I got the distinct impression from the kids who did go, and the pictures they brought back, that it was 2 weeks of back-breaking labor (they’d go help build schools and whatnot in poor areas of the US and South America), some “sharing the Good News” with the locals, and a chance to see how fortunate they (the church kids) really were.

For the record, my church had a few super-rich kids and a lot of well-off kids, but also a fair number of poor to middle-class kids, and I don’t recall anyone really noticing much who was which.

P.S. Also, I believe our church’s trips were funded by the kids and their parents either out of their own pockets or through fundraising efforts.

We also did a ton of fundraising for our handbell choir tours each summer.

what cubes describes are more like the mission trips i went on. self funded, building stuff or putting on vbs’ for smaller churches, a little bit of fun having maybe one or two nites in a week. we had kids of all demographics too, and you wouldn’t know it from looking at all of us cut up and hang out.

I would hope that ‘Most’ could be replaced with ‘Some’ in your topic of discussion. I believe it would be safer to say that rich families tend to vacation more in foreign countries than traveling overseas for mission work (and there are notable exceptions).

Regardless of motive, foreign travel and exposure to different cultures can be benefical to both the visitor and the host country whether that exposure is cultural, humanitarian, faith-based (or combinations of the previous).

…and if you are interested in going to some place like Honduras for a week or two with a student group sometime, airfare is generally around $700, the remainder could be as low as $20 per day. Belmont and MTSU will be sending teams out on humanitarian trip 3 or 4 times in 2006. Having an experienced writer and blogger would be a welcome addition…that is, if traveling so that one can blog isn’t offensive *smile*

Given how the Christian Liberal Arts college where I spent the first 2 years of my post-high-school education handled this, I’m hard-pressed to disagree. We had what was called the “J-Term”–during the month of January, people would either take one or two intense classes or go on a “missions trip.” Let’s look at some examples from Chapel Witnessing after the event. Actual Examples. I’ll never forget them till the day I die:

Bahamas–“we played volleyball on the beach and really had the opportunity to minister to people who noticed us and came up to talk.” Jamaica–“Even people who work at the hotel pool need to be witnessed to. It was a life changing experiencing FOR ALL OF US WHO WENT. (emphasis mine)” Paris–“You can really feel the presence of God when you tour Notre Dame. It ministered to me.”

Yeah.

Now, there are some mission trips that are notlike this. My husband lived several months in Alaska, where he helped build a church and several homes. That’s a bit different. My rule of thumb is this. If at any time you can wear a bikini, it just might not be missions that you’re really doing.

I can’t imagine you’re going to get much but anecdotal “evidence” one way or another on something like this, so hey, why not add mine? The trip I went on, growing up as a Methodist, that was billed as a work trip, involved going to Louisiana in the summer and spending a week trying to recover a flooded camp from the overgrowth that had occurred. There was no “proselytizing” (a word that I believe means ‘evangelism except I want to make clear I’m opposed to it’) going on because we honestly didn’t have the time or energy after tearing at waist-high weeds with garden equipment all day in the heat. So, there’s that.

Jim Butcher tells a good yarn about a missionary trip he was on as a kid in South America (I don’t recall the exact details) and got a curse pronounced upon him, but I guess that’s neither here nor there.

At any rate, I agree with the person who said rich kids don’t need an excuse. They just go abroad.

-R

Some of my Mormon friends in HS were planning on doing their missionary trips in Asia. However, unlike their church authorities wished, heir goal wasn’t to convert people to their faith. Instead, it was an opportunity to learn about different cultures, and speak new languages, then bring that perspective back to inform the rest of their lives and their local community.

With 20 years of hindsight, I think that was the local hierarchy’s goal as well.

Of course, I did “meet” a group of Fijian Mormons in Nadi (pronounced nandi) Fiji as they were heading out on a missionary trip to… Utah. I happened to be walking next to their van as they exited en masse and accidentally carried me with them into a Chinese restaurant. It was an interesting abduction, and a neat story about their plans.

Again, though, it was a ‘broaden the horizons’ deal on their part as well.

Chris, you talk about proselytizing like it’s a bad thing.

I was discussing proselytizing with my friend Jay the other week. His dad and stepmother are Primitive Southern Baptist. One of the distinctions between primitive and missionary Baptists is that missionaries proselytize and primitives don’t. He said that when he went to church with them there was maybe a dozen people, and they were all ancient. (And there aren’t many primitive Baptist churches to begin with, even in the foothills of East Tennessee.) Churches that don’t proselytize and recruit new members don’t survive.

And if you’re against proselytizing religion, well, what other forms of information flow, discussion, and exchange of ideas are you opposed to? What is political blogging if not proselytizing for your political beliefs.

Churches that don’t proselytize and recruit new members don’t survive.

I dunno, the Jews seem to be doing okay so far, but I guess they ARE a pretty young religion.

I don’t think you’re right.

I went on an evangelical Christian mission trip overseas, and there was a definite push to proselytize.

As for whether it’s wrong – I’m part of a Christian faith tradition that doesn’t push proselytizing. I’m not big on “evangelism”. I’d rather convince people to be decent human beings and live in peace than I would that they all believe exactly the same theology that I do.

Evangelism, especially when practiced by American Christians, tends to be domineering, insistent, imperialistic in its approach to the “unsaved.” It’s disrespectful and arrogant in way that only appeals to those for whom authoritarianism is attractive. At best, it preys upon people in their times of need and provides them not with comfort but with brainwashing.

I love the hotel pool comment.

“I dunno, the Jews seem to be doing okay so far, but I guess they ARE a pretty young religion.”

They’ve survived due to a strong sense of identity and community, but they’ve hardly flourished in numbers. The world’s one Jewish country is a speck on the map. Contrast that with, say, the number of Muslim or Christian (and especially Catholic) countries.

Churches that don’t proselytize and recruit new members don’t survive.

You’ll forgive me if I don’t lose any sleep over this. (You knew that was coming)

And if you’re against proselytizing religion, well, what other forms of information flow, discussion, and exchange of ideas are you opposed to? What is political blogging if not proselytizing for your political beliefs.

By definition, proselytization is conversion to a faith, which pretty much rules out a process of reasoned debate, making it a pretty different thing.

“By definition, proselytization is conversion to a faith, which pretty much rules out a process of reasoned debate”

Again, this is different from most political blogging how? :-)