Lou Wagenveld

Wow, am I glad I am basically out of this conversation that supposedly was started by me (see 1st post -top - a year and a half ago) but went quite in another direction.  I'm very interested in that (development/business) also, but can't contribute for a couple reasons right now..  

   One is because I am following closely - maybe hoping to lead - the pivotal things that are happening in CRWRC with the survey sent out to 10,000 people over the last weeks, purportedly about a "possible name change."  I'm writing and talking with people about what the means for "word and deed" in the ministries of the CRCNA.  Please pray with me for wisdom.      -Lou      

PS And keep up the good conversation; Greg, much appreciated your anticipated participation....sometime we have to get Karl Westerhof in on this as well.

PPS  If anyone reading this blog/forum has insights into matters related to what I started with at the top (that Conversation about a Concept of a Global Missions agency) PLEASE contact me directly at    [email protected]   ( I hope that is OK to do; otherwise tell them you got my address from the Yearbook: Lou Wagenveld)

Mike, I am so but so encouraged to see you rejoin this conversation in where it went as whatever you want to call it: Dan, what handle do you put on" Business as Mission"?  I don't remember; would it be" Business as business for Christians"?). Welcome back after a couple months away, Mike.  Very much to the point.... of where this was going.

Forgive me if I steer some people away from this to what I got heavily involved in when CRWRC sent out its survey about a "possible name change."  There is always much more behind something like that: sure, "marketing" but "brand recogniton" isn't the whole story either, I'm certain.  So next I copy a little piece of my last Aug 26 entry:

If anyone reading this blog/forum has insights into matters related to what I started with at the top (that Conversation about a Concept of a Global Missions agency) etc.   Well, maybe you saw - otherwise I ask - you to see the NEW blog posting, on this same Global Missions site/link? - entitled: Together Again? Word and Deed.  Please visit/comment some of the incoming responses.  From my career perspective, this is a major moment for the CRCNA and her agencies; more importantly, for her minsitry.

As to the present topic, do carry on.  I support you, even when for time and perhaps expertise I won't be contirubting much!

Oh boy, Daniel!  Thanks for picking this up after nearly 10 months of no posts (I hope Steve's guess that some are reading it  is correct.  And here I'm going out on a limb to see if we can provoke a few more comments:  In the light of how little we know of the real reasons for our E.D. (in the computer generated Spanish translation that went out that became "erectile dysfunction"!) Jerry Dykstra's resignation, might it even be that this long-time super sticky issue was one of the things that generated conflict?  I have no way of knowing and am not trying to start a rumor (yes, maybe surface some facts!).  But as Steve alludes, that closer cooperation between agencies (read especially CRWM and CRWRC) which is "not easy" and  "there are a lot if issues" could very well be one of the areas that continues to plague our denomination.  The latest rumor I hear out this direction (Holland MI) is that CRWRC would like to work more indepentedly so as to have a still wider influence.  ??? (fair/ "appropriate"?) (Now please re-read the initial post on this topic, above)

   Daniel, I was a translator for Partners Worldwide last year, and came away with a couple books and a video that have been informative.  And with ongoing involvement in support of a very small and often ineffective Word and Deed Project in Central America I am well aware of the realities and aspirations of different sectors.  I would caution you on the use of words such as "reaching the globe" (OK we must be World Christians in an age of Globalization) and "huge amounts of capital." While there is tremendous potential in the CRC and others that think and act like us, we still must be duly aware both of the scope of the challenge and the humble limits of our potential.  I'd almost suggest you send your ideas to the IMF!

And know that I am a (retired) "missionary pastor."  I am of the period that experienced the transition from more ecclesiastical mission models and methods to the enterprise and business way of doing the Lord's work.  The jury is still out on what the results of that will be.  Your suggestion that the CRC business community is capable of making a "huge economic transformation" is saying quite a bit; maybe too much?  And to introduce a fascinating ideological element into this discussion, until more of our CRC businessmen genuniely understand where a lot of the developing world is "at" on the   questions of economic models and production methods, we have a lot of work to do.

   Too long already... over to you, and hopefully some others as well, especially non-staff folk (whose services I very much do appreciate).    Lou

Great to get your input, Mike.  Your dad (who forwarded my note to you)  and I have been friends and missionary colleagues two continents apart for all these years; so good now to get some perspective from the next generation.  Our son John is presently in Tanzania and South Africa doing what you suggest: training trainers (in church strengthening and growth.

You've put out a lot of suggestions that our leaders, in the various dimensions of mission, will have to take into account.  Those are in many ways more complex than some of the things we did in our roles.  But if that is what it takes then we must gear up for that.     -Lou

Thanks, Wendy... I'll likely need more clarification as to what you mean by "fiscal autonomy."  You say "our agencies...."

In relation to what Daniel writes an hour later, I'm a bit puzzled.  Not sure who you are in Ethopia with (I know the OPC has had a lot of work there years ago; had to leave, I believe.  You mention "presbiterians."    What I'm wondering is if you have seen what a CRWRC spin-off - Partners Worldwide - is doing.  Check out their websire, see if you can get some ideas from them. They have quite a bit of info online, and some publications. 

Limited time just now, but this to keep us going.     Fraternally, Lou

Hi Wendy, Fronze, and Daniel; what a trio, what a trip!  Wendy, this site (?) went without a post for over a year.  In another of your posts you use the tantalizing word "lurkers" - I hope there are many who come out of the shadows on topics like this.

   In High School Mr. Hero Bratt was my "hero" also, as Ref Doc teacher, and as debate coach.  To this day I can quote one year's "Propostion: that US Foreign Aid should be limited to technical assistance and disaster relief."  That has served me well all my career as I seek to evaluate economic justice issues and "best practices" of development agencies.

Here I'm just chiming in on your blog.... you have helped keep one of mine alive.  This question for people whose academic and field experience have prepared them for this debate about foreign aid a whole lot more than my pre/seminary studies:  What is it going to take to get people to care about this?  Yes, "church people"?!  Three posts in 16 months!

May I also refer your lurkers to the great conversation that Fronse and Daniel had ongoing where now a "missionary kid" from Nigeria has jumped in with a very cogent experiential piece:  Mike Kiekover, on another blog on this page, way down on one of the most read blogs on the site:  Concept of a Global Missions agency.   -Lou W

Above you see: "Changing administration will not necessarily improve the connecttion between word and deed.   It might, but it is mostly about an attitude....That attitude will cause those in home missions to talk to those in the Back to God hour.   That attitude will cause those in CRWRC to talk to those in foreign missions and home missions, and vice versa.   Pick up the phone...." etc.

But instead of picking up the phone and calling as you suggest, CRWRC is picking up its marbles and going to a different playground!  They for all intents and purposes a year ago right now by intentional default did not participate in the conversations that were suggested by denominatinal leadership precisely to that end.  In August the signal came loud and clear... we have our own ideas as to where we want to go. The "possible name change" survey was circulated to 10,000 people.

And now if any are paying attention - the Banner is mute on this - the survey results suggeststhat while they want to continue a relationship with the CRCNA it strikes me that might end up being pretty tenuous.  Does anyone out there have a handle on some of this?

It been a little while since I visited here again... what I quoted or implied was at most "tenuous."It isn't so easy to find information, but a conversation with a CRWRC functionary led me to believe that some significant change may be in the works.  So I read with interest the Banner online report of the February Board meeting, and now this from BOT:

1. Discussed at length and eventually tabled until the May 2012 Board meeting a decision about whether to endorse a proposal by the Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) to change its name to World Renew (see news story). A delegation of CRWRC board and staff members told the Board of Trustees that CRWRC’s name no longer accurately reflects much of the work that it does or its many partnerships outside the Christian Reformed Church. They said the new name would enable CRWRC to expand its mission by engaging more effectively with a broader range of people.
2. Adopted recommendations formalizing a number of areas in the relationship between the denomination and CRWRC. These included recognizing the 14-member Joint Ministry Council as CRWRC’s governance entity and recommending that synod approve CRWRC’s request to submit single nominees for at-large positions on its board.

Can we trust that the BOT heard enough rumblings so that those "recommendations" will keep the agency in not only the CRCNA sphere, but tighten its planning and working relationship with other ministries/agencies?  Crunch time will be May.  Yes, I did see the "comments" after the Banner article.  Is there any other site/blog/forum where this is being discussed; clue me in, please. 

If anyone wonders where "Lou" has been, he's been prayerfully watching the comments on this site, and for the meeting of the Synodical Task Force which met this week.  Joel Boot informed me that they saw the "open letter" and will be talking about it again in their November conference call meeting.  I hope they also see all your comments, as John says, Dan's points and perspective "should become a starting point for discussions about CRWM and CRWRC."  Lets hope they are reading this also.

But for the sake of clarification, I want to ask Dan and Rich whom he quotes: "uniting word and deed is a great idea. Merging these two agencies is not. Something essential is bound to be lost.”  What might that "essence" be, and what is lost on me that I don't understand the logic of that sequence?

Dan et al.  This note from El Salvador where I´m spending ten fascinating days again visitng a place where "at the end of last century" we spent five years very existencially living these questions.  The focus of my visit now is talking through a ¨Word and Deed Project" with the small CRC of ES churches.  But I want to respond anecdotally yet pointedly to your wondering about "in Nigeria" (it was Argentina) "did he always have the full force of the resources of CRWRC available to him and the churches he was nurturing?!

Precisely, NO!  It was already by then becoming evident that the agencies were not always on the some page.  I stand to be corrected, by my memory says that three times our Argentine Field Council formally requested a survey visit  by CRWRC to coordinate with needs we missionaries were encountering there, and for which we had neither training nor budget.  One of the reasons we were given from afar for never coming was that "Argentina is a bread basket county"!  Is it lost on any readers now, that not so many years ago Argentina formally went backrupt?!  And to her eternal credit, Catalina Griffeon from the Netherlands spent 30 years practically on her own among the poorest of the poor indigenous in the Chaco region; her earthly credit came from the Argentine government in the form of a Congressonal medal last year.  How wonderful if someone like her and our missionaries related to that ministry could have received a recognition in name of the CRCNA and not just as an individual.   

So lets keep the conversation going.  I´m told we have lots of readers... accompany the Synodical Taks Force on Structure and Culture (hey, if you want to experience a complex one, join me sometime here on a visit to ES!) in their task, and share your perspective on the issues under consideration and discussion.   Yes, HERE! Go for it!  WHO?!  You in the woodwork!