Skip to main content

Here I am again... Two things:

I made a mistake on the Sol del Valle (that's in East San Fernando Valley, greater Los Angeles) web site if interested:     It is

www.sdvccenter.org      We set that up to deal with the community needs and oportunities after starting the church of the same name.

And more importantly, I DO (shout ok on that?!) want to "affirm" any and all who are out there witnessing.  It strikes me a lot of this is our categories; STMs yes come in many variaities, but still is a category that needs lots of clarification.  I'd be interested to hear more about the church/agency/organization involvement and guidance in some to the overseas efforts.

May I suggest that we do some more research (lots of web info is "out there" on this topic) and reading...?

Lou

Good morning all, tho this  is especially for Ken.  I'd written: "I DO (shout ok on that?!) want to "affirm" any and all ," to ,,,,,," ","...

....to which you commented "that wasn't nice".  Truthfully that didn't bother me at all - we long-time missionaries perhaps get a bit thick-skinned.  Or maybe its being of Dutch/Frisian descent!  So no apology needed, Ken. 

I notice that Karl has bowed out of the conversation for now, and I want to follow suit.  Let's all do some reading and reflection on this important topic, and maybe revisit it after the Livermore/VerBeek book comes out.    Adios. 

Fraternally, Lou

Snowbird travel and transition got me behind on reading this link.  On 11/11 Steve wrote:

"And there is a qualitative difference, it seems to be, between the short term missionary who travels to a place where she doesn't speak the language or understand the culture, and the person who has invested deeply and over decades in understanding the uniqueness of the people with whom she is sharing the Gospel. "

"Qualitative difference" - we can't afford an inferior witness.  And the Holy Spirit notwithstanding, even in God's economy to a large extent "you get what you pay for."  STMs are misspending a lot of our mission resources.

For me - and I belive for the American churches - this is a foundational question that still needs a lot of clarifying debate and resolution.  After reading Fikkert's When Helping Hurts, I pretty much came down again on my original side of the fence I've tried to straddle out of convenience (if you can't fight them, join them), but now I'm 90% in favor of not sending STMs abroad, for both missiological (as per the discussion) and economic reasons. 

Who is carrying on the best discussion of that?   Are we close to resolution?

Lou

Karl, your poetic and flowery verbiage obviously didn't register well with the first respondent.
Since I know you well (we are out of the same green house/flower bed) I worked through it, and you have a point. Here is mine:

For quite some time I've had the feeling that our deacons - and here I have to say that the focus is Classis Holland - are good at starting and maintaining institutional type responses
to specific needs (example, My Brothers/Sisters houses) but less so at equipping themselves for the very concrete one to one needs around, both in and outside the congregations.

What does deaconal leadership at the denom level have to help overcome that?

Steve, I'd be interested to know a bit of trivia, which in turn may or may not have much significance. I find that here is no uniformity at all in what such committtes are called:
mission committee, evangelism committee, GO committee, outreach committee, and increasingly
the deacons are just asked to handle mission support requests.
Any sense of the percentages on this, and what importance this may have?
Lou

Posted in: Local and Global

Lou Wagenveld on March 3, 2010

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Mark, in Global and Local you said "I think it necessitates looking at where we erred in our history" (or to that effect). I'd like to mention one dimension of that that has marked the DNA of our denomination (and others, like the Presbyterians as well).
Humanly speaking I owe much of my initial missionary vision and calling to the "Women's Missionary Union" meetings of a generation ago. But later as I went around on the tours speaking to them, I realized that Union should never have come into being. It did because the male-run consistories never took on that responsibility, and "missions" became largely the domain of the ladies, bless them. They had the support of a minority of so-called "mission-minded" ministers, but the congregational leadership focused elsewhere: mostly internally.
It is hard to undo history, or, to use the other metaphor "get missions in your blood" when your DNA doesn't have it.
I'm very concerned that now in this generation so much of the vision and initiative is seemingly in the hands and actions of another fringe element: the youth group! Or worse, the young short-term enterpriser, off to save the world. It is now increasingly difficult to even find a "Missions Committee" in local churches that answers to the Council; often the deacons have to field the funding requests, knowing little about the plan or person (other than that she is so-and-so elder's niece and the letter she sent sound like they have a challenge)
The solution? If the CRWM Board hasn't found it, will it apprear in this Network discussion?
I'll be following the conversation. For now, this historical (sometimes histerical) reflection.

Posted in: Saludos

Desde Marzo 2010 no ha habido "movimiento" en este sitio!!!  Que quiere decir eso?  

Quien va a lanzar un tema como para calentar el ambiente un poco?!    - "Metiche" Luis    

Hace DOS angos este formidable intercambio, y alli muere?  El tema en sus muchas dimensiones ha sido tratado en otros ambitos que yo desconozca?  Donde estan las voces de los obreros del campo? Sospecho, como adelanta Jano, luchando para sobrevivir bi-vocacionalmente.   Ay, Senor.....

The meeting was billed as sponsored by both agencies, including CWRM.  Any partnerships developed with them?

Good suggestions for the planning processes.

It must be exasperating when CRWM has been doing most of those right along.  There must be some underlying malaise in churches that pastors don't know how/can't overcome.

 

A pet peeve of mine is when worshiip leaders include songs with reference to raising hands, and then they don't!  Better then to not use a song with those lyrics, lest this detail show us to be less than sincere.

We want to hear from you.

Connect to The Network and add your own question, blog, resource, or job.

Add Your Post