Money and Missionaries and Questions

[lionfamily1999]

My question is, do we(Christians) ever really hold ourselves to the same standards that we hold others to? I know I don't. I see others faults very well from the outside. I'm sure others do the same to me, looking at my life from the outside. But many of the things people get to judging others for are a matter of conscience or conviction. While we are asked to avoid things that make others "stumble" we are also asked not to judge, to let God do the judging. I've been reading this thread from the start and I just had to say that FWIW

:grouphug::grouphug::grouphug::iagree:

 

Very well put.

[mommaduck]

Heather should report what she has witnessed. It is bothering her conscience and she is seeing things that are for her and the country in which she lives, red flags of the abuse of goodwill and charitable funds. I agree with her that women who are supposed to be there "doing good", hanging out at the mall and having their nails done or whatever, is WRONG! If it costs the school $10,000.00 a year to educate a kid, then the US supporters need to provide that or I guess, those missionaries need to subject their kids to the crappy government schools or come home to the States or Europe or wherever they are from...the school should not suffer for scholarships it can not afford to give. Those that are in the country earning a living that would allow them to pay for full tuition should be paying full tuition..applying for an unneeded scholarship that the school can ill afford to offer, is WRONG!!! Please Heather, write some letters, make some phone calls, talk turkey to some people, and blow the whistle. This is best for all involved!

 

As for homeschooling, this is one reason that Dh rejected the job in Kuala Lumpur. We couldn't quite afford, on his salary from the private sector job he was offered, to have a home for five in a decent neighborhood, and decent medical coverage (another killer was also the lack of expert pediatric cardiac care available and ds must have access to this should his condition worsen), and some household help for me so that I could volunteer for the relief group we wanted to work with, and $15,000.00 per year tuition to Heather's school for three children. We came pretty close to a budget that would have gotten us in the ball park, but tooooooo close for comfort. No wiggle room. Homeschooling is severely restricted in Malaysia though many do it illegally. There is a very, very limited set of circumstances under which a person can gain approval for homeschooling from the government. You must have government approval, applications take 6-12 months to be processed and that's if they aren't lost to begin with. We researched this heavily as an option to not paying tuition for the school and this is what we found out. Thailand did not regulate homeschooling amongst expats and the quality of pediatric care in the capitol city was much better which is why he considered that Oracle DBA job and there was a relief agency that we would have really liked to work with. Once the guerilla wars began in the city. we decided that we'd stay put.

 

Abuse happens; Look at what happened at United Way several years ago - this is a secular organization so Christians aren't the only ones with these kinds of woes. It needs to be dealt with....I am however, very concerned that in this thread the general attitude is that all individuals who go with a religious organization to another country to try to help the poor, sick, etc. are at best, merely bad parents, and at worst, money sucking leeches whose work is of no value.

 

So that those who feel that religious missionaries are evil, I will relate to you a true story of a family who did what most of you think is "appropriate" for charitable aid workers and the consequences thereof.

 

The American young couple found out they were expecting their first child. The country - Haiti. Mid-way through the pregnancy, the mom got into a health crisis and the medical clinic on the mission compound, operated by independent doctors from the US, felt she should come home. They didn't have the means to deal with her issues effectively and were very worried for the health of the baby. The mission's board said, "No, you must experience pregnancy and childbirth in the village in the same way as the women to whom you minister. This will strengthen their trust in you." She stayed...the baby was born premature and though she survived, was severely brain damaged because of the lack of neo-natal care...the clinic doctors did not have an intubation kit small enough for the baby. The little girl is now ten years old and functions at about a six month level. As for quitting and coming home, they didn't have a credit card (had to be surrendered so that they would not be able to live "above" the villargers" in order to book their own tickets and the mission's organization took in all of their money from supporters and then parted it out monthly. They didn't have enough to purchase the tickets. They were stuck. Of course, when their term was up...three months after the birth of their now irreparably damaged daughter, they told the mission's organization where to go and when to get there. They live stateside and are very hard hearted about relief work. Literally, as far as they are concerned, no one should lift a d*mn finger to help any one in another country because you are d*mned if you do and d*mned if you don't.

 

So, for you all that believe that missionaries should live in the same conditions as the people they seek to help, you can be happy to know that we personally know and have tried to help a couple who did exactly that and their US supporters can be gratified that they suffered exactly what the families of the village face every day the death or near death of their infants and irreparable damage from lack of access to appropriate medical care - except now those villagers face worse because this couple brought serious agricultural expertise as well as built single home water purifiers for the residents of the village - now they are without that help.

 

Gone is the huge community garden that their knowledge helped the villagers maintain for both food and the sale of produce which brought in vital income. Water purifiers that need repair aren't being repaired and new ones aren't being built...the rates of disease and parasitical infections has skyrocketed again. The orchard, in a fledgeling state, did not survive once they left the country. And a little girl will suffer terribly for what short life she has left. Does everyone who is bitter against Christian relief workers feel warm fuzzies now? Exactly what has been suggested multiple, multiple, multiple, times in this thread happened. They subjected themselves to the exact same conditions as the people they sought to help. So obviously, under this "logic", the outcome is acceptable if not welcome. Right??? Heather, I am not suggesting in any way, that you personally feel that Christian relief workers should live in poverty and not have access to adequate medical care or that it is right for their children to suffer. What you are seeing is very, very different from that and on the other extreme of the pendulum's swing.

 

Personally, the same Jesus who did ask his men to forsake all and follow him also said, "Suffer not the little children to come unto me" and suggested that anyone who would deliberately harm a child should consider tying a mill stone (ever seen one of these things....THEY ARE HUGE) around his neck and throw himself in the sea! I have to say, I don't think He'd be pleased by the few missionaries abusing charitable giving and I am very certain he isn't pleased by the other extreme either.

 

Faith, who is heart broken by this whole discussion and should really just get off the boards and go teach an unhappy child his algebra lesson.

Faith, I think you misunderstand (though I agree that the last ex was an abuse of the mission board). People here aren't saying that medical care should not be provided, etc. There is a difference between basic needs being met and living in a huge house, fancy car, mall shopping, and expensive private school. There is living slightly better and living with such a huge gap that people have to wonder why you are even there and do you really understand and care about the people around you.

[Embassy]

But what chaps me? They apply to our school as missionaries and get a 50% discount when they are MORE than able to afford the full rate. It is because we offer mission discounts to half of our student population that my teachers make such low salaries ... barely enough to get by.

 

 

Sounds like you need to change your policies. Paying your teachers enough to live on is important. I think most people would take a discount when it is available. Charge everyone $10K and offer scholarships to lower income students.

[mommaduck]

Sounds like you need to change your policies. Paying your teachers enough to live on is important. I think most people would take a discount when it is available. Charge everyone $10K and offer scholarships to lower income students.

My oldest attends a Catholic school. We are only able to do this due to the scholarship he received. We only received it because of our income vs family. Because of how low our income is due to our size of family and basic living expenses (and we do not live in middle class luxury...some of the things listed as to what the missionaries Heather is dealing with are having and doing are extravagant to me living here, not just as missionaries living elsewhere!). Maybe there needs be an accounting of each family's income and true ability and work on a sliding scale from there.

[freethinkermama]

I don't think anyone is saying here that missionaries should re-use their toilet paper. . . to go that route does nothing to further the conversation.

 

Of course, I've been surprised at how many people are defending Ed Young, exhorting, and leading his congregation though giving his church their banking information during a Sunday morning sermon. Having them write out their routing and account number on slips during the preach. Guiding them through the process with a huge overhead video.

 

 

 

Some people get a pass because they're "sacrificing so much by doing the Lord's work." Some people are actually being sacrificial, but just going into the "mission field" or being a career Christian doesn't mean you are. Case in point.

 

T.

[Renee in NC]

My question is, do we(Christians) ever really hold ourselves to the same standards that we hold others to? I know I don't. I see others faults very well from the outside. I'm sure others do the same to me, looking at my life from the outside. But many of the things people get to judging others for are a matter of conscience or conviction. While we are asked to avoid things that make others "stumble" we are also asked not to judge, to let God do the judging. I've been reading this thread from the start and I just had to say that FWIW

 

This is true to a point - I can decide where to send my money based on my convictions and/or beliefs.

[Jean in Newcastle]

Families sending their kids away to boarding school so they can do Christian work? Would Jesus have ever told people to send their children away to do some work for him? That's incomprehensible to me.

 

 

 

Now I'll address this one since I was one of those children sent away to boarding school so that my parents could do Christian work. What I want to say is that this is changing in many cases.

 

Back 50 years or so, when my siblings and I were born, there were not a lot of opportunities for education in Japan, where I grew up. The country was still rebuilding after the war - including their own education system. The mission boards did what most mission boards did in most countries back in those days, they built a boarding school in a main city.

 

My parents did not want to send their kids away to boarding school. Some other ex-pats (not all missionaries) in our much smaller city got together and made a 1 room school house and hired a teacher from the US. My eldest 3 siblings attended there. But then (I don't know why because this was before my time) the school closed. The mission board said that my parents had to send the 3 children plus the 4th who was now old enough for school down to the boarding school. My parents were told, "You need to choose ministry or your children." They tried to choose both at the expense of their own married life. My mom moved down to the boarding school and lived there for a year with the children in a small apartment near school. The next year, the 4 kids stayed at the school and she went back to my dad because she had ministries too that had been neglected. It was heart-breaking for my parents.

 

I'm much younger than my siblings. When I got to school age, there were enough ex-pats in our city so my parents got together with others and started another 1 room American school house. I went there for all of elementary. (The education wasn't necessarily the best but that's another thread.) But by the time I was 11 (7th grade) it was time for me to go to boarding school. I went with my next older brother who was now a Sr. in high school.

 

The school itself was great. I had a wonderful education and had lots of opportunities to explore sports, the arts, etc. as well.

 

The boarding part was hell on earth for me. It isn't for every person. At our school it was ok for the week but bad on the weekends. At our school there were abuses that went on: we had our windows bolted so that we couldn't run away (it was a major fire hazard), the older girls hazed us by dragging us clothed into freezing showers and other "fun" stuff (I regularly woke up screaming in the middle of the night on the fire escape at age 11), we had a dorm parent who bugged our rooms (we found it and he was censored by the head master), we had a suicide in the boy's dorm one year. . . There are other things that I just do not want to discuss. This does not happen at every boarding school but it happened enough over enough years so that our school is no longer a boarding school as such.

 

Two years I graduated, my school had a major change. They took away the boarding department. Now each mission has a small house with a missionary couple who lived family style with the mission kids. They opened satellite schools in some other major cities and have a big homeschool support system so that missionaries can homeschool but still do some of the extra co-op type things even on the mission field. I've heard that many of these kinds of changes are happening in other locations of the world.

 

My parents have so many regrets. My mother cannot talk seriously about boarding school without crying. My dad says "I didn't get to know my own kids". We have an unwritten rule in our house that we don't talk about the boarding part of school even among us kids. It's just too painful even though we've been gone from there for 25 - 35 years ago.

 

I know that it isn't this way for all my boarding friends. I have some who say that those were some of the best years of their life. They happen to be the kids who didn't get touched by abuse. Boarding school is kind of like foster parenting. It can work wonderfully. But it can be a place where abuse can grow hidden and nurtured by policies that aren't in the parents and children's best interest.

Edited November 12, 2010 by Jean in Newcastle

[Embassy]

I don't think anyone is saying here that missionaries should re-use their toilet paper. . . to go that route does nothing to further the conversation.

 

Toliet paper was an exaggeration, but people have saved used tea bags to send to missionaries.

 

Of course, I've been surprised at how many people are defending Ed Young, exhorting, and leading his congregation though giving his church their banking information during a Sunday morning sermon. Having them write out their routing and account number on slips during the preach. Guiding them through the process with a huge overhead video.

 

This isn't related imho. I wouldn't defend him for anything, but I do think it is hypocritical to judge missionaries because of the house they live in or the car they drive especially if they are businessmen/women who are living off the proceeds of their business while doing missionary work.

 

We don't know a person's financial status from their car or their house. Because a person bought a $300K house doesn't mean they were able to do so because they were a well-off missionary too. So many factors can come into play.

 

Going into the mission field and living in a developing country, imo, is sacrificing. You sacrifice a "normal" life for your children. You sacrifice time with extended family. You get the idea...

[Renee in NC]

Don't you know missionaries are supposed to use recycled tea bags and toilet paper?

 

Seriously, it is hypocritical to suggest that a missionary should live at a lower standard that his peers in the Western hemisphere. Are you willing to have a lower standard of living in order to give to missions? I'm not talking about cutting a little off a tight budget. Are you willing to downsize your living space, cut down on your food options, and have unreliable transportation for the sake of missions? If you are or if you are doing so then and only then do you have the right to complain. Missionaries have given up the comfort of life in the West for the sake of the Gospel and we are picking at them about the house they live in?

 

Some missionaries may have a few comforts that you wish you had, but they are probably living on much less than you are. In many countries the cost of living is ridiculously low. Dh and I are looking into moving to that part of the world. We can get a mammoth house for a fraction of the tiny place we are renting now. $200 could mean the difference between a typical place in that country and a huge house. A family could live very well on only $1000 per month in some places.

 

We can pay doctors huge salaries. We can pay athletes huge salaries without a problem. But if a missionary happens to have a nicer house or car than you they are being paid too much? Really? What do we value anyway?

 

I think the problem is that larger mission organizations require a high level of support for the family. So, in your example, while the family could live very well on $1000 the organization still requires them to raise $3000 a month (just a random number.) So, the budget allows them to live very, very well in that locale.

 

Should they? That is the question. Obviously, the organizations don't care and most of the people supporting them probably don't care. If they are being honest with their support disclosure and churches still contribute, then really it is their business, isn't it? However, *I* personally couldn't do it. I probably wouldn't live as poor as the poorest, but I just couldn't live an American lifestyle in an area where most people are much, much lower than that.

 

As for lowering my standard of living - I am not sure that is possible!:lol: Would I sacrifice to give to missions? - yes, if I felt called to. What would that mean in my life? I don't know. I won't say that we couldn't cut anywhere because I said that before and we're living on approx. 20% less than we were then.:tongue_smilie:

 

BTW, most doctors don't make huge salaries when you take into account the tremendous amount of money that medical school costs. Athletes? Yeah, that's nuts.;)

Edited November 12, 2010 by Renee in FL

[mommaduck]

 

Should they? That is the question. Obviously, the organizations don't care and most of the people supporting them probably don't care. If they are being honest with their support disclosure and churches still contribute, then really it is their business, isn't it? However, *I* personally couldn't do it. I probably wouldn't live as poor as the poorest, but I just couldn't live an American lifestyle in an area where most people are much, much lower than that.

 

As for lowering my standard of living - I am not sure that is possible!:lol:

 

I think you stated this very well.

[freethinkermama]

Toliet paper was an exaggeration, but people have saved used tea bags to send to missionaries.

 

 

 

This isn't related imho. I wouldn't defend him for anything, but I do think it is hypocritical to judge missionaries because of the house they live in or the car they drive especially if they are businessmen/women who are living off the proceeds of their business while doing missionary work.

 

We don't know a person's financial status from their car or their house. Because a person bought a $300K house doesn't mean they were able to do so because they were a well-off missionary too. So many factors can come into play.

 

Going into the mission field and living in a developing country, imo, is sacrificing. You sacrifice a "normal" life for your children. You sacrifice time with extended family. You get the idea...

 

If they're "tent-makers" making their own money, I have no beef with that.

 

My point about Ed Young was that people will take money and use it for anything. Not all Christian workers have the best intentions.

 

For most missionary families, the sacrifice is one they're willing to make. If not, they wouldn't go. I've never heard one person say, "I hate mission work. I hate where we are, but we have to stay because this is where the Lord has sent us." Generally, what happens is that they decide the Lord doesn't have that in mind for them anymore, or they misunderstood their call. . .whatever. But, for most people, the sacrifice is one they're willing to make. I can't feel too badly for them. For those who are really helping others in tangible ways on earth, I admire them a great deal!

 

I have a dear friend, one whose conversion I was instrumental in, and she's been in China doing mission work for 10 years. Her husband just came back for seminary, and they never stop talking about how much they love China and they don't like the US and they can't wait to go back.

 

There are good people doing all sorts of work, even work I don't agree with. Some are honest, and some are not. Some are truly sacrificing, some are not.

 

Having been a missionary for nearly 10 years and having ministered with many organizations, I don't hold missionaries, as a whole, in any sort of esteemed position.

 

(Used tea bags is crazy.) :)

[mommaduck]

(Used tea bags is crazy.) :)

LOL, agreed! Instead, how about using your own tea bags several times (I've done it...read about Corrie Ten Boom doing it during WWII and decided to give it a try) and then sending the tea bags you've saved (unused) by doing so to the missionaries ;) (of course, depending on where they are, they might have better tea :lol: )

[FaithManor]

Mommaduck,

 

My point was the logic of the argument in the first place. The argument is that an American should not live "above" the standard of the people they seek to help. You say in your last post that I have misunderstood, that no one here feels that a missionary should live without the basics including medical care, but, that is not the truth of the argument as stated by many.

 

If one seeks to minister to those who don't have the basics, then by virtue of having them, the missionary is already living "above" the local population. So, yes, people on this board are, unless they change their thinking, suggesting that relief workers should live without the basics. The reality of living in what has been, until recently, the richest nation in the world, is that our definition of the basics is access to reasonably safe food and of a high enough vitamin/mineral/caloric content to sustain life, emergency medical care if not even preventative care and certainly prenatal care - a pregnant cocaine addict can get free prenatal care here - a home that adequately shelters one from the elements (I think everyone agrees on this board that homelessness or makeshift crates and what not is BAD), literacy or the ability to gain literacy and even far more than that educationally is considered "basic", and reasonably clean water. This is what even a "poor" existence in America has become. So therefore, an American can not live in a third world country as even a "poor American" and not be living "above" others. Therefore, the "how does it appear to others, they shouldn't live a lifestyle above the indigenous population, etc." demands that aid workers sacrifice the crudest of basics.

 

I absolutely argee that luxury and high class living funded by charitable monies should not exist and this is why I encouraged Heather to speak out to the mission's boards that control these people. But, there is huge fallacy and hypocrisy in many of the arguments made about "living above the standard" of the local population unless one truly believes that aid workers should live in abject poverty. If the locals live in abject poverty and die without the basics, then any foreign worker who does not also, lives above the standard and even by having the basics, lives above that standard by a HUGE degree. Either people need to rethink their arguments and follow the natural consequences of that argument or think seriously about whether or not they would be willing to subject themselves to any work, any where in the world and live this way and if not, do they have a right to point fingers at anyone else who does seek to help others and does not.

 

Maybe I am a little jaded because dh and I try to help several foreign aid workers as much as possible. We see their suffering, though they take great joy in helping others, and we are not impressed by the attitudes of most of the Christians we meet in terms of how they believe missionaries "ought to live."

 

My argument is logical and the "living above the standard is bad", is not.

 

Faith

[sleepymommy]

I saw this same sort of 'extravagance' in India. Palatial homes, cars with drivers, cooks and cleaners, gardeners the whole nine. I know not all missionaries live like this, but there are great deal more than most people think that do.

[mommaduck]

Mommaduck,

 

My point was the logic of the argument in the first place. The argument is that an American should not live "above" the standard of the people they seek to help. You say in your last post that I have misunderstood, that no one here feels that a missionary should live without the basics including medical care, but, that is not the truth of the argument as stated by many.

 

If one seeks to minister to those who don't have the basics, then by virtue of having them, the missionary is already living "above" the local population. So, yes, people on this board are, unless they change their thinking, suggesting that relief workers should live without the basics. The reality of living in what has been, until recently, the richest nation in the world, is that our definition of the basics is access to reasonably safe food and of a high enough vitamin/mineral/caloric content to sustain life, emergency medical care if not even preventative care and certainly prenatal care - a pregnant cocaine addict can get free prenatal care here - a home that adequately shelters one from the elements (I think everyone agrees on this board that homelessness or makeshift crates and what not is BAD), literacy or the ability to gain literacy and even far more than that educationally is considered "basic", and reasonably clean water. This is what even a "poor" existence in America has become. So therefore, an American can not live in a third world country as even a "poor American" and not be living "above" others. Therefore, the "how does it appear to others, they shouldn't live a lifestyle above the indigenous population, etc." demands that aid workers sacrifice the crudest of basics.

 

I absolutely argee that luxury and high class living funded by charitable monies should not exist and this is why I encouraged Heather to speak out to the mission's boards that control these people. But, there is huge fallacy and hypocrisy in many of the arguments made about "living above the standard" of the local population unless one truly believes that aid workers should live in abject poverty. If the locals live in abject poverty and die without the basics, then any foreign worker who does not also, lives above the standard and even by having the basics, lives above that standard by a HUGE degree. Either people need to rethink their arguments and follow the natural consequences of that argument or think seriously about whether or not they would be willing to subject themselves to any work, any where in the world and live this way and if not, do they have a right to point fingers at anyone else who does seek to help others and does not.

 

Maybe I am a little jaded because dh and I try to help several foreign aid workers as much as possible. We see their suffering, though they take great joy in helping others, and we are not impressed by the attitudes of most of the Christians we meet in terms of how they believe missionaries "ought to live."

 

My argument is logical and the "living above the standard is bad", is not.

 

Faith

AGAIN...I REPEAT...living above standard, aka maybe a small permanent house instead of a hut and having being permitted to go home for medical reasons is drastically different than "Living Above Standard" aka the Large home, FANCY cars, and mall shopping regularly. I would have thought, due to what you stated to Heather, that you and I would agree on this.

 

On the impoverished in America, please go back and read the posts about the truly impoverished that don't get help and that we have worked with.

Edited November 12, 2010 by mommaduck

[Renee in NC]

Mommaduck,

 

My point was the logic of the argument in the first place. The argument is that an American should not live "above" the standard of the people they seek to help. You say in your last post that I have misunderstood, that no one here feels that a missionary should live without the basics including medical care, but, that is not the truth of the argument as stated by many.

 

If one seeks to minister to those who don't have the basics, then by virtue of having them, the missionary is already living "above" the local population. So, yes, people on this board are, unless they change their thinking, suggesting that relief workers should live without the basics. The reality of living in what has been, until recently, the richest nation in the world, is that our definition of the basics is access to reasonably safe food and of a high enough vitamin/mineral/caloric content to sustain life, emergency medical care if not even preventative care and certainly prenatal care - a pregnant cocaine addict can get free prenatal care here - a home that adequately shelters one from the elements (I think everyone agrees on this board that homelessness or makeshift crates and what not is BAD), literacy or the ability to gain literacy and even far more than that educationally is considered "basic", and reasonably clean water. This is what even a "poor" existence in America has become. So therefore, an American can not live in a third world country as even a "poor American" and not be living "above" others. Therefore, the "how does it appear to others, they shouldn't live a lifestyle above the indigenous population, etc." demands that aid workers sacrifice the crudest of basics.

 

I absolutely argee that luxury and high class living funded by charitable monies should not exist and this is why I encouraged Heather to speak out to the mission's boards that control these people. But, there is huge fallacy and hypocrisy in many of the arguments made about "living above the standard" of the local population unless one truly believes that aid workers should live in abject poverty. If the locals live in abject poverty and die without the basics, then any foreign worker who does not also, lives above the standard and even by having the basics, lives above that standard by a HUGE degree. Either people need to rethink their arguments and follow the natural consequences of that argument or think seriously about whether or not they would be willing to subject themselves to any work, any where in the world and live this way and if not, do they have a right to point fingers at anyone else who does seek to help others and does not.

 

Maybe I am a little jaded because dh and I try to help several foreign aid workers as much as possible. We see their suffering, though they take great joy in helping others, and we are not impressed by the attitudes of most of the Christians we meet in terms of how they believe missionaries "ought to live."

 

My argument is logical and the "living above the standard is bad", is not.

 

Faith

 

I do think that any aid workers/missionaries/what have you that are working with the poor *have* to have a somewhat higher standard of living. You can't help others if you don't have the basics for yourself. What the "basics" are is up for debate, I am sure!

 

I guess I just wouldn't support any person who was living at the extravagance mentioned in the posts before. That's my perrogative just as you can set the standard for who you give to anywhere you want. If that means that I am judgmental or weak, then I am.

 

As far as would I go? In a heartbeat! However, my dh will not.:tongue_smilie: I have said before on this board that if money were no object I would be serving the poor somewhere, anywhere.:tongue_smilie:

 

No running water would take an adjustment. No A/C? I would adjust to that, too (hopefully the houses are built in such a way to make it livable without A/C.) Clothes wouldn't matter as what I own now fills up half a laundry basket.:D Food? I'll eat what the locals eat, except bugs - I just can't eat bugs. Home? How much do we really need? I'd adjust, I'm sure. We don't need much space. Or stuff. I would REALLY miss a washer and dryer.

 

The dc would have to go to school somewhere, though - local schools may work, depending on the location. I wouldn't go to serve the poor and sick with the idea being that I would homeschool - then I wouldn't have time to do anything else!

 

Maybe when they are grown I can drag dh off somewhere.....

[freethinkermama]

Now I'll address this one since I was one of those children sent away to boarding school so that my parents could do Christian work. What I want to say is that this is changing in many cases.

 

Back 50 years or so, when my siblings and I were born, there were not a lot of opportunities for education in Japan, where I grew up. The country was still rebuilding after the war - including their own education system. The mission boards did what most mission boards did in most countries back in those days, they built a boarding school in a main city.

 

My parents did not want to send their kids away to boarding school. Some other ex-pats (not all missionaries) in our much smaller city got together and made a 1 room school house and hired a teacher from the US. My eldest 3 siblings attended there. But then (I don't know why because this was before my time) the school closed. The mission board said that my parents had to send the 3 children plus the 4th who was now old enough for school down to the boarding school. My parents were told, "You need to choose ministry or your children." They tried to choose both at the expense of their own married life. My mom moved down to the boarding school and lived there for a year with the children in a small apartment near school. The next year, the 4 kids stayed at the school and she went back to my dad because she had ministries too that had been neglected. It was heart-breaking for my parents.

 

I'm much younger than my siblings. When I got to school age, there were enough ex-pats in our city so my parents got together with others and started another 1 room American school house. I went there for all of elementary. (The education wasn't necessarily the best but that's another thread.) But by the time I was 11 (7th grade) it was time for me to go to boarding school. I went with my next older brother who was now a Sr. in high school.

 

The school itself was great. I had a wonderful education and had lots of opportunities to explore sports, the arts, etc. as well.

 

The boarding part was hell on earth for me. It isn't for every person. At our school it was ok for the week but bad on the weekends. At our school there were abuses that went on: we had our windows bolted so that we couldn't run away (it was a major fire hazard), the older girls hazed us by dragging us clothed into freezing showers and other "fun" stuff (I regularly woke up screaming in the middle of the night on the fire escape at age 11), we had a dorm parent who bugged our rooms (we found it and he was censored by the head master), we had a suicide in the boy's dorm one year. . . There are other things that I just do not want to discuss. This does not happen at every boarding school but it happened enough over enough years so that our school is no longer a boarding school as such.

 

Two years I graduated, my school had a major change. They took away the boarding department. Now each mission has a small house with a missionary couple who lived family style with the mission kids. They opened satellite schools in some other major cities and have a big homeschool support system so that missionaries can homeschool but still do some of the extra co-op type things even on the mission field. I've heard that many of these kinds of changes are happening in other locations of the world.

 

My parents have so many regrets. My mother cannot talk seriously about boarding school without crying. My dad says "I didn't get to know my own kids". We have an unwritten rule in our house that we don't talk about the boarding part of school even among us kids. It's just too painful even though we've been gone from there for 25 - 35 years ago.

 

I know that it isn't this way for all my boarding friends. I have some who say that those were some of the best years of their life. They happen to be the kids who didn't get touched by abuse. Boarding school is kind of like foster parenting. It can work wonderfully. But it can be a place where abuse can grow hidden and nurtured by policies that aren't in the parents and children's best interest.

 

Oh, Jean. That's horrible. I'm sorry to hear you all had those experiences.

My mission boarding school friend didn't have it that badly, but she did say she wished she'd been with her parents. :( I can't imagine.

T.

[jld]

Jean, I am so sorry. I am so sorry for all that happened to you. My heart hurts for you. I realize your parents may not have realized what was going on, and maybe that organization didn't realize it, but it was wrong. Probably unintentionally, but it was wrong that children went through that. Children need to be with their parents.

 

You know, the more threads here I read, the more convinced I am that school, any school, really needs to be approached with a very discerning spirit. There are just so many possibilities for abuse. I am more grateful than ever that we homeschool.

 

Once again, I am just so sorry, Jean, for you and for every child hurt by that school, or any other. :grouphug:

[jld]

Faith, I think you and I come from a different faith background, and likely this is why we see this so differently.

 

I don't think children need to be on the mission field. Therefore, if you are called to have a family, you likely aren't called to be on the mission field.

 

Because I come from a Catholic upbringing, I'm not sure of the need for a mission field, anyway, except as it relates to helping people in a practical way.

 

When I think of missionaries, I think of Mother Theresa. She only had what people gave her. She refused the comfort of the motherhouse that she lived in previous to starting her own order. She and her sisters ate the same food as the poor they were ministering to. Once, when one of the poor was complaining about the food, one of the sisters pointed out that the sisters were eating the same thing.

 

I also read once that the Missionaries of Charity (I think that's the name) don't plan. They simply live with what people are moved to give them.

 

Maybe there is a different way of seeing this, and the evangelicals must see it differently, because their model looks very different, based on what I've read here, than what I am familiar with from my Catholic background.

 

I just see Jesus as living among the poor, sharing the life of the poor, truly being with them. I don't see that in the examples Heather gave, or some of the other posters. There is a lot of benefit to that WWJD? campaign, and I think it could be applied here.

 

All this said, it really isn't my business what evangelicals do with their money. If they are satisfied with what their missionaries are doing, hey, it's their money. But it sounds like a pretty good gig for some of those folks, if you ask me.

[Embassy]

Paul said in 1 Corinthians:

 

5Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?

 

6Or do only Barnabas and I not have a right to refrain from working?

 

7Who at any time serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat the fruit of it? Or who tends a flock and does not use the milk of the flock?...14So also the Lord directed those who proclaim the gospel to get their living from the gospel.

 

Paul worked and received money from churches to support his ministry to the churches. Sounds like many of his counterparts did not work a side job.

 

The model of the apostles shows that wives accompanied the spouses. I assume that children did so as well.

[Laura Corin]

Some missionaries may have a few comforts that you wish you had, but they are probably living on much less than you are. In many countries the cost of living is ridiculously low.

 

When we lived in China, our living expenses were very low. That didn't mean that we had to live in an enormous house or drive an expensive car - we lived as we had always lived, it just cost us less. There's no reason why expatriates can't live comfortably without consuming conspicuously; there's no reason why missionaries can't say to their sponsors, "The cost of living is very low here; please take back part of our allowance to invest in other works."

 

Laura

[jld]

Why would they ask for the missionary discount at the school then, if it's a cover? I'm assuming what is paid is private information between the family and school officials.

[Elaine]

I have a question, and it is borne out of ignorance of your journey.

 

How "legal" is it for these people to be there as missionaries?

 

Are they in danger in any way if they are discovered to be missionaries?

 

If Christian missionary work is illegal or dangerous in the area you are in, there may be some element of camouflage in what is going on. It's OK for them to be there if they LOOK like oil execs or something.

 

And, if it is illegal or dangerous, I am concerned that this discussion is taking place on so pulbic a forum.

 

If it is "just fine" that they are there, then please accept my apology for piping up about the posting, and I have no contribution to make.

 

I do have reasons for asking this question, and they are related to mission work in danger zones. That's all I'm going to say about it though.

 

:iagree:

 

A friend of ours is a missionary somewhere in China and he and his family have to use the utmost discretion in all communication.

 

It seems irresponsible to me to come here and discuss the lives of missionaries, where they live, and where their children attend school in a country where Christianity is not looked upon favorably.

[Heather in Neverland]

The government knows they are here. It is legal to be a missionary, you just can't evangelize to muslims legally. Hindus, buddhists and the undecided is fine. There are tons of christian churches here. It is not hidden. They were playing Chris Tomlin over head at the mall the other day. :D

[freethinkermama]

:iagree:

 

A friend of ours is a missionary somewhere in China and he and his family have to use the utmost discretion in all communication.

 

It seems irresponsible to me to come here and discuss the lives of missionaries, where they live, and where their children attend school in a country where Christianity is not looked upon favorably.

 

 

These countries know there are illegal missionaries in their countries. We're not giving cities, organizations, addresses.

 

And don't you mean "Southeast Asia"? :) That was the special secret word we were supposed to use when referring to missionaries being in China. *rolls eyes*

[Elaine]

These countries know there are illegal missionaries in their countries. We're not giving cities, organizations, addresses.

 

And don't you mean "Southeast Asia"? :) That was the special secret word we were supposed to use when referring to missionaries being in China. *rolls eyes*

 

No. I meant China.

[Kate CA]

First you said this:

 

So we have people who have come to Malaysia to share the gospel with the Hindus, Buddhists and Muslims here ...

 

And now you are saying this:

 

The government knows they are here. It is legal to be a missionary, you just can't evangelize to muslims legally. Hindus, buddhists and the undecided is fine. There are tons of christian churches here. It is not hidden. They were playing Chris Tomlin over head at the mall the other day. :D

 

So what you are really doing here, on a very public forum, is outing those who might be doing something quite dangerous. Everyone knows where you are, at what school you teach, as you share these things both here and on your blog.

 

Why don't you take your concerns to the mission board(s) of these people where something is likely to get done rather than here where it only serves to bash missionaries in general?

[jld]

These countries know there are illegal missionaries in their countries. We're not giving cities, organizations, addresses.

 

And don't you mean "Southeast Asia"? :) That was the special secret word we were supposed to use when referring to missionaries being in China. *rolls eyes*

 

Lol. Dh just laughed at the idea that these missionaries are operating under the radar. The gov'ts don't want this activity to get too big, but they're happy to take any money the missionaries want to spend. And sometimes they are doing something for the country, too, like providing education or practical help.

 

Dh did say it might be truly dangerous in a country like Saudi Arabia, or in a remote area of a hostile country (say in a tribal area).

[jld]

When we lived in China, our living expenses were very low. That didn't mean that we had to live in an enormous house or drive an expensive car - we lived as we had always lived, it just cost us less. There's no reason why expatriates can't live comfortably without consuming conspicuously; there's no reason why missionaries can't say to their sponsors, "The cost of living is very low here; please take back part of our allowance to invest in other works."

 

Laura

 

Okay, now I understand how the missionaries can come back and buy the $360,000 house. If their allowance is, say, $3000 a month, but they only spend $1000, they pocket the other $2000 and save until they go home. I just didn't understand before how this could work.

[freethinkermama]

Lol. Dh just laughed at the idea that these missionaries are operating under the radar. The gov'ts don't want this activity to get too big, but they're happy to take any money the missionaries want to spend. And sometimes they are doing something for the country, too, like providing education or practical help.

 

Dh did say it might be truly dangerous in a country like Saudi Arabia, or in a remote area of a hostile country (say in a tribal area).

 

Yes, yes. S.A. would be quite dangerous, but. . . seriously, some places are just thrilled to see the missionaries coming in. :) It's just a game. You pretend to hide, we'll pretend not to see you. Sometimes we'll "catch" some of you and send you home. You give us enough goodies, teach English, whatever, we'll acknowledge each other with a wink and a nod.

 

The pseudo cloak-and-daggerness of it is kind of thrilling, to some folks, I think. At least in places where lives really aren't at stake.

 

I think this OP is savvy enough to know what she's doing and not be putting her school, family, people in danger.

Sorry, OP, I can't remember your name.

[Heather in Neverland]

Yes, yes. S.A. would be quite dangerous, but. . . seriously, some places are just thrilled to see the missionaries coming in. :) It's just a game. You pretend to hide, we'll pretend not to see you. Sometimes we'll "catch" some of you and send you home. You give us enough goodies, teach English, whatever, we'll acknowledge each other with a wink and a nod.

 

The pseudo cloak-and-daggerness of it is kind of thrilling, to some folks, I think. At least in places where lives really aren't at stake.

 

I think this OP is savvy enough to know what she's doing and not be putting her school, family, people in danger.

Sorry, OP, I can't remember your name.

 

Yep. This is exactly how it is here. Malaysia LOVES the money coming in...the country is thriving on it. They even have programs now encouraging foreigners to retire here...knowing full well the majority of them are not muslim. The whole "secret" part of it is not as secret as I thought it was when I first got here. Our school database actually lists people as "mission" or "business". They know we are a christian school...we have been on this island for 40 years. We even have muslim students that attend our school openly and I am going to a huge party at one of their houses tomorrow.

 

I swear the more I find out the more I think it is all a big scam. The native Malays are forbidden by law to convert from Islam and the rest of the people they don't really care about...be whatever you want...just spend your money here.

 

Perhaps what mission organizations should really do is send missionaries where thay are actually NEEDED...where there are no churches, where they don't know of Jesus, etc. Because there are hundreds of christian churches here and christian book stores, etc. Doesn't seem like quite the "mission" field I thought it was.

 

And for the record...I am NOT discouraging mission work. I think missions is wonderful. I AM discouraging this KIND of mission work as it gives real missionaries a bad name. So please let me encourage all of you to give to missions...just know WHO you are giving to.

[PineFarmMom]

First you said this:

 

So what you are really doing here, on a very public forum, is outing those who might be doing something quite dangerous. Everyone knows where you are, at what school you teach, as you share these things both here and on your blog.

 

Why don't you take your concerns to the mission board(s) of these people where something is likely to get done rather than here where it only serves to bash missionaries in general?

 

 

:iagree: Yes, Please, follow this advice!!!

[jld]

I swear the more I find out the more I think it is all a big scam. The native Malays are forbidden by law to convert from Islam and the rest of the people they don't really care about...be whatever you want...just spend your money here.

 

Perhaps what mission organizations should really do is send missionaries where thay are actually NEEDED...where there are no churches, where they don't know of Jesus, etc. Because there are hundreds of christian churches here and christian book stores, etc. Doesn't seem like quite the "mission" field I thought it was.

 

 

I hear you, Heather. Thanks for informing all of us. This has been an interesting discussion.

[jld]

The pseudo cloak-and-daggerness of it is kind of thrilling, to some folks, I think. At least in places where lives really aren't at stake.

 

 

 

Everybody needs some excitement in their lives, I guess . . .:D

[lionfamily1999]

Heather, isn't there just a little bit of violence against Christians where you are?

 

I'm thinking that the missionaries and local Christians in Chinese prisons might disagree about the government being so welcoming.

 

My aunt and uncle are missionaries. They have a laptop and satelite internet. That alone has raised them well above the standard of living of those around them. They also have a house that they built, a car that was given to them, and a boat they use when the tribe they live with migrates back into the forest. These things could make it seem like they're living really high off the hog. They also have goats, a garden, sheep and an ocean front home here in the USA.

 

They bought the things they still have here BEFORE they went into the field. They built, were given, and bought the things they have there in order to benefit those around them. How does their house benefit those around them? Because it keeps them alive :)

 

This whole thread is really bumming me out. Heather, I've prayed for you consistently and felt such joy to know someone like you. I'm disappointed that you would air your greivances here, in a place where the discussion is not merely among like minded people, but among those that this could give cause to move further from God.

 

:grouphug:

 

I really think there are better ways to handle this. Like approaching them first, or else going to whomever has payed for them to be there.

 

I don't mean to be harsh, but this feels like an open Christian free for all. Missionaries are spreading God's word and we, as their "brothers and sisters" in Christ should be supporting them, not disparaging them.

[mommaduck]

Oh goodness...now people are wanting to make missionaries into a "sacred cow".

[rwilliams]

Similiar situation I have observed.....Money that is donated/collected to help the handicapped children is often not used wisely in the group homes or the public school system. Seeing this first-hand makes me reluctant to donate.

[Jean in Newcastle]

This whole thread is really bumming me out. Heather, I've prayed for you consistently and felt such joy to know someone like you. I'm disappointed that you would air your greivances here, in a place where the discussion is not merely among like minded people, but among those that this could give cause to move further from God.

 

:grouphug:

 

I really think there are better ways to handle this. Like approaching them first, or else going to whomever has payed for them to be there.

 

I don't mean to be harsh, but this feels like an open Christian free for all. Missionaries are spreading God's word and we, as their "brothers and sisters" in Christ should be supporting them, not disparaging them.

 

I agree.

[Melissa in Australia]

I think this had been a good thread.

I personally have no problem with missionaries living in mansions with heaps of servants etc. as long as everyone that gives them money to live like that knows about it. Isn’t that what this thread does? Increase people’s awareness?

What I have trouble with, and I think the Op has as well, is people donating money and thinking those poor missionaries.

That is the problem I have with big aid agencies. They go on about how the whole thing is run on volunteers etc. but it turns out that is just a way of getting out of paying tax.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I think this had been a good thread.

I personally have no problem with missionaries living in mansions with heaps of servants etc. as long as everyone that gives them money to live like that knows about it. Isn’t that what this thread does? Increase people’s awareness?

What I have trouble with, and I think the Op has as well, is people donating money and thinking those poor missionaries.

That is the problem I have with big aid agencies. They go on about how the whole thing is run on volunteers etc. but it turns out that is just a way of getting out of paying tax.

 

The problem is Heather is not one of the people supporting the people she is accusing. She has no access to real information on who owns the properties they use or how the money is collected or distributed. As has been pointed out, an agency that is buying property to be used over time for a number of varying people and purposes might very well choose to get something that is of higher quality than an individual might, precisely because of the kind of usage they are envisioning over time. Or as has also been pointed out, monies could have come from private sources - whether it were inheritance, money saved in previous endeavors etc. She's looking from the outside at one variable - their perceived cost of living vs. her own and is judging their character as a result. It could very well be that the people are greedy avaricious people who are out to live very well on another person's dime. Those people do exist in missions as well as elsewhere. But you cannot judge on appearances alone.

[ChrisOR]

I found the information enlightening ... I guess I was naive about the finances of some missionaries, though I don't think most missionaries experience that degree of wealth.

 

I agree that this public forum is not the place to discuss real people at a real school. It just seems like gossip and I wonder how the OP can be assured that the people discussed won't read this. (Not just singling out this thread, but I wonder the same thing when people post about troubles with a homeschool co-op, etc.)

[Heather in Neverland]

The problem is Heather is not one of the people supporting the people she is accusing. She has no access to real information on who owns the properties they use or how the money is collected or distributed.

 

Quite a leap. As a matter of fact I WAS giving money to a missionary family here before we came. Now I give that money to a family who actually needs it.

 

1. Not sure how many different ways I can say this but again...this thread is about people who live in a luxurious fashion while those who support them back home struggle.

 

2. I am not "outing" anyone...if you came here you would know what I mean. Missionaries are pretty open about what they are doing here and like I said, our databases (which the government has access to), lists who is missionary and who is not.

 

3. For those of you who think I shouldn't talk about something naughty that some Christians might be doing because it might make non-christians think poorly of them...I am pretty sure the Catholic church thought the same thing with their own scandal. Sorry. I'm not big on "cover-ups". I am not saying that it is so huge that it is worth a headline on CNN but it IS a concern. Will I take my concerns to the mission boards themselves? Well, at first I wasn't planning on it. But now that I know it's not just happening here on the island...I just might.

 

I am sorry if I offended people by bringing something like this to light. But if it raises awareness of mismanaged money then it is worth it. There ARE missionaries out there who DO risk their lives and who ARE good stewards of the money given to them and my hope is that THEY will benefit from having others who abuse the system removed from it.

 

Incidentally, I went to a Deepavali party last night. It was at this mansion of a home owned by some wealthy Indian people whose children attend our school. Their next door neighbor is American which is VERY unusual for that neighborhood. Our Indian friend told us the American living in the mansion next door to him is a missionary. My dh and I just looked at each other and started laughing. Well OF COURSE he is. Sheesh. :tongue_smilie:

[jld]

3. For those of you who think I shouldn't talk about something naughty that some Christians might be doing because it might make non-christians think poorly of them...I am pretty sure the Catholic church thought the same thing with their own scandal. Sorry. I'm not big on "cover-ups". I am not saying that it is so huge that it is worth a headline on CNN but it IS a concern.

 

 

 

You're right, Heather, and that is a good point. I wouldn't defend the molestation of kids in the Catholic church, either. It's not how Jesus would want those kids treated, period.

 

It's sad that there is such pridefulness in religion. Why not just admit faults, clean them up, and go on?

 

This was an enlightening thread. Thanks again.

[freethinkermama]

The problem is Heather is not one of the people supporting the people she is accusing. She has no access to real information on who owns the properties they use or how the money is collected or distributed.

 

Quite a leap. As a matter of fact I WAS giving money to a missionary family here before we came. Now I give that money to a family who actually needs it.

 

1. Not sure how many different ways I can say this but again...this thread is about people who live in a luxurious fashion while those who support them back home struggle.

 

2. I am not "outing" anyone...if you came here you would know what I mean. Missionaries are pretty open about what they are doing here and like I said, our databases (which the government has access to), lists who is missionary and who is not.

 

3. For those of you who think I shouldn't talk about something naughty that some Christians might be doing because it might make non-christians think poorly of them...I am pretty sure the Catholic church thought the same thing with their own scandal. Sorry. I'm not big on "cover-ups". I am not saying that it is so huge that it is worth a headline on CNN but it IS a concern. Will I take my concerns to the mission boards themselves? Well, at first I wasn't planning on it. But now that I know it's not just happening here on the island...I just might.

 

I am sorry if I offended people by bringing something like this to light. But if it raises awareness of mismanaged money then it is worth it. There ARE missionaries out there who DO risk their lives and who ARE good stewards of the money given to them and my hope is that THEY will benefit from having others who abuse the system removed from it.

 

Incidentally, I went to a Deepavali party last night. It was at this mansion of a home owned by some wealthy Indian people whose children attend our school. Their next door neighbor is American which is VERY unusual for that neighborhood. Our Indian friend told us the American living in the mansion next door to him is a missionary. My dh and I just looked at each other and started laughing. Well OF COURSE he is. Sheesh. :tongue_smilie:

 

Good for you, Heather!

[Embassy]

I agree that this public forum is not the place to discuss real people at a real school. It just seems like gossip and I wonder how the OP can be assured that the people discussed won't read this. (Not just singling out this thread, but I wonder the same thing when people post about troubles with a homeschool co-op, etc.)

:iagree:

 

The place to go with this concern are the mission agencies involved.

[Embassy]

Incidentally, I went to a Deepavali party last night. It was at this mansion of a home owned by some wealthy Indian people whose children attend our school. Their next door neighbor is American which is VERY unusual for that neighborhood. Our Indian friend told us the American living in the mansion next door to him is a missionary. My dh and I just looked at each other and started laughing. Well OF COURSE he is. Sheesh. :tongue_smilie:

 

But don't you realize this is based on perception and not fact? If you went to the mission board you may receive facts. Because it is not based on facts it could be termed gossip. Maybe this person is wealthy and not receiving any donations. You don't know. Assume the best until you have facts otherwise.

 

I think the true problem here that you can identify and do something about is the discounts for missionaries at your school. It sounds like your discounts were put in place to financially help missionary families. That may not be necessary. Pay your teachers better. Charge all families the same and offer a specific number of scholarships to lower income students. This will enable you to help needy missionary families and keep your teachers paid better.

[2boysmom]

I have tried for days to avoid this thread...Ugh! I'm too busy to get involved. But, it's just been really, really bugging me for days...I give up.

First of all....to the OP.

 

Frankly, Jesus is just the type of guy I could imagine hanging out at "Starbucks and the gym." Afterall, isn't that where people tend to gather for conversation these days? I'm a missionary in Japan. (have been for 14 years now) I don't but, I know many missionaries go to the gym in Japan, not just to keep themselves motivated to keep their stress levels down (which keeps them on the field) but also to just meet people in a non-threatening way. They have met tons of people this way, and it's been a natural setting for conversation about the Lord and inviting people to church.

 

Secondly, you criticised the Mission as business model...Well...

We are starting cafe type ministries all around here. (Using the "business as mission" model). BTW: read the book and you might understand it's premise. Just in the last 3 months, we made over 350+ contacts, by serving in this way. We are hard pressed to get 5 new people inside a church building the entire year here...It's truly remarkable and thought provoking....Thinking outside the church walls, looking to go to the people, instead of having them always come to us. I imagine that Jesus would be very happy that we are making an effort to connect with people, rather than just "holding up" in a "stoic-churchy" like building. I think many missionaries today are trying to be "relevant." Isn't that a good thing????

 

If Malayasia has a Starbucks, then that's where I'd go if I were a missionary there. Missionaries here go to Mr. Donuts. They become regulars, they meet the regulars, they make lots of contacts. If I were there, I'd be guilty too. Forgive me, but I'd go where the people are, where the young hang out, where I could try to reach people who might just have a chance at making a difference in society. And I would spare no expense, because that's what people have given me a salary to do. I'd buy the car that would give me the most bang for the buck, especially if I needed it. Is that a crime? Why should I waste my supporters hard-earned money on something that's going to fall apart and need to be fixed constantly? (We have a very humble used van BTW)

 

What's the good of having a tiny house, when you can't have people in it? Our house is our church. It's our place of ministry. Many nights a week we have people, Bible studies and English classes. If you looked at my house compared to others, you'd think it was huge (esp. in Japan), but my point is you must know the reasons behind it. YOU, try to have a church in your house every week, with English classes, and counseling sessions and people in and out all day...It's a lot better having a larger house to meet the needs around here. Children can have a place to homeschool (we homeschool because we can't afford Christian school), a little privacy for the family on occassion. I think you must understand that most missionaries are on call 24/7 and their homes are a part of their ministry.

 

Japan may be different than Malaysia, I don't know, but I think you have to look at ministry in a new way. You seemed to have stereo-typed what a missionary should do and be, but personally that's between them and their supporters and God of course. You've got to know all the facts before you make such statements on a board such as this.

 

Also, missionaries may appear to have much, but most have no retirement fund, no college fund, no savings. They are just getting by. If you looked at me, my clothes are very nice. Why? My mom has sent me clothes and given me a nice wardrobe every few years, because she knows I couldn't even go out and buy a hair clip without reporting it to my mission. I used to have only 30$ to spend every few months to enjoy a day out from time to time with friends. I stretched that money as far as I could. I loved having just a little something that I didn't have to claim or turn in a receipt for. Now, the dollar is so low that that's been gone for a while. One coffee at Starbucks might be my only treat a month, but I'd cherish that time alone, because I'm frantically busy 6 days a week. (Actually I haven't had time for myself or to even get much exercise because I'm so swamped. It's been since the spring that I visited Starbucks)

 

Another case in point....Our wonderful supporters just sent us "date night" money...So, if we are seen at a nice restaurant do you suspect we used our ministry funds? No. We were asked to only use that money for "us" because Jesus "layed it on their hearts." You might catch us doing this one day and make a jugdement and boy would that hurt especially since we were given a precious and dear gift. I'm saying this because you just can't judge a book by it's cover.

 

Some Mk's grandparents pay for their grandkids to be "educated" at a private christian school. If I had that luxury, I'd sure take it. But I don't. But some of my other missy friends do and I think it's wonderful.

 

Futhermore...I recall some of the critics of Jesus...

 

for example:

 

Why are you allowing this woman to spend all this expensive perfume, Jesus!?! Matthew 26:9

 

Luke 7:34: Look at this man!!! A friend of tax-collectors and sinners!!!

(Look at those missionaries, how dare they go to....(heaven forbid) to Starbucks!!!!) They are supposed to be concerned for the poor and hanging out at the lonely churches!!!! "They can't be seen at such expensive joints...by all means they should be banned from service!"

 

I don't know your missy friends, but if you went to them and talked with them and then come here, I would be more apt to respect your opinion, but it sounds like you are making very harsh judgements without even following the biblical model which is "to go to your brother in private and show him his fault." Then "take a witness." If you find that they have no reasonable argument or reason for their extravagance after all that, then by all means expose them, but realize you will be putting yourself under the same scrutinous microscope.

 

Sorry to be blunt, but I did try to stay away. Wish I could have, but your remarks stung many here I'm sure who are serving, and are unfortunately possibly damaging the reputations of missionaries that we haven't the luxury of hearing their defense, and likely don't deserve that kind of criticism without being approached first.

 

Sorry to give that, but it is what it is...I hope you will rethink your position and try to talk with the people you are so upset about. I realize you may have written your original post in angst, but truly, this is something you should have thought through before posting on such a popular board.

 

I hope my supporters never feel that way about us. I never doubt that they know we are their ambassadors. Fortunately, we have wonderful people who understand what we need to do to get the job done otherwise, we'd be truly wasting their hard-earned money.

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

 

The place to go with this concern are the mission agencies involved.

 

:iagree:

 

There can be no solution to such a problem here and I think that unless your goal is to convince people here to never donate to missions again (which could bring down the good with the bad) that 16 pages of posting only serves to potentially endanger missions, missionaries and Christian schools around the world (given the recent history of violence against Christians including incidents you have mentioned here) and begins to look more like gossip or a grudge than a legitimate concern.

 

Secondly-one of my concerns in all of this posting is that some how the children of missionaries shouldn't have the best education offered locally. This is just silly-missionaries shouldn't be asked to let their childrens' education suffer or even be forced to homeschool if they are called to such service. I think that complaining that they pay for a school such as yours is uncalled for. If the sponsoring agency agrees to this sort of expense then it is perfectly legitimate.

[Jean in Newcastle]

The problem is Heather is not one of the people supporting the people she is accusing. She has no access to real information on who owns the properties they use or how the money is collected or distributed.

 

Quite a leap. As a matter of fact I WAS giving money to a missionary family here before we came. Now I give that money to a family who actually needs it.

 

1. Not sure how many different ways I can say this but again...this thread is about people who live in a luxurious fashion while those who support them back home struggle.

 

2. I am not "outing" anyone...if you came here you would know what I mean. Missionaries are pretty open about what they are doing here and like I said, our databases (which the government has access to), lists who is missionary and who is not.

 

3. For those of you who think I shouldn't talk about something naughty that some Christians might be doing because it might make non-christians think poorly of them...I am pretty sure the Catholic church thought the same thing with their own scandal. Sorry. I'm not big on "cover-ups". I am not saying that it is so huge that it is worth a headline on CNN but it IS a concern. Will I take my concerns to the mission boards themselves? Well, at first I wasn't planning on it. But now that I know it's not just happening here on the island...I just might.

 

I am sorry if I offended people by bringing something like this to light. But if it raises awareness of mismanaged money then it is worth it. There ARE missionaries out there who DO risk their lives and who ARE good stewards of the money given to them and my hope is that THEY will benefit from having others who abuse the system removed from it.

 

Incidentally, I went to a Deepavali party last night. It was at this mansion of a home owned by some wealthy Indian people whose children attend our school. Their next door neighbor is American which is VERY unusual for that neighborhood. Our Indian friend told us the American living in the mansion next door to him is a missionary. My dh and I just looked at each other and started laughing. Well OF COURSE he is. Sheesh. :tongue_smilie:

 

Heather, my point is actually that you are the one making the leap. You are taking an outward impression of their standard of living and are making assumptions based on that. You are also making assumptions that they are doing this while their supporters back home are struggling.

 

It is good for Christians to look at possible sinful trends within Christian "society". Yes, there are Christian workers who are unbalanced to the greedy end of things. I mean - look at some of the televangelist scandals. But to automatically say "all these people are greedy and unChristian" is wrong. Even the televangelists were actually investigated first.

 

I am distressed that this entire thread was not started as a genuine question - "Are there circumstances that are not based on greed and materialism that would explain what I'm seeing in these missionaries?" You didn't ask that question but you did get some possible answers to that. The underlying proposition in the OP was ""how could they be such materialistic hypocrites" - which is not a question but a judgment pure and simple.

 

It may or may not be appropriate to ask questions and to try and find out more. For the couple you were supporting, there is a direct reason for you to be asking these questions before just dumping them. It may be appropriate in your job description (I don't know the entire scope of what that might be) to find out if they genuinely meet the criteria for discounts.

 

You probably feel put on by my own questioning of your motives and underlying assumptions here. After all, how dare I question your Christian character based on some online communications? Well, I'm a Christian who sees a Christian trend of sinful judgment of others without knowing all the facts. I don't know if you meet that trend on all counts. And honestly it's none of my business if you do. But following your example, I will try to expose it's possibility. It is up to you to go before the Lord, to examine your own heart and to respond to His leading. Just as it would be for these missionaries if you lovingly confronted them as a fellow believer.

[Karenciavo]

The problem is Heather is not one of the people supporting the people she is accusing. She has no access to real information on who owns the properties they use or how the money is collected or distributed.

 

Heather, my point is actually that you are the one making the leap. You are taking an outward impression of their standard of living and are making assumptions based on that. You are also making assumptions that they are doing this while their supporters back home are struggling.

 

It is good for Christians to look at possible sinful trends within Christian "society". Yes, there are Christian workers who are unbalanced to the greedy end of things. I mean - look at some of the televangelist scandals. But to automatically say "all these people are greedy and unChristian" is wrong. Even the televangelists were actually investigated first.

 

I am distressed that this entire thread was not started as a genuine question - "Are there circumstances that are not based on greed and materialism that would explain what I'm seeing in these missionaries?" You didn't ask that question but you did get some possible answers to that. The underlying proposition in the OP was ""how could they be such materialistic hypocrites" - which is not a question but a judgment pure and simple.

 

It may or may not be appropriate to ask questions and to try and find out more. For the couple you were supporting, there is a direct reason for you to be asking these questions before just dumping them. It may be appropriate in your job description (I don't know the entire scope of what that might be) to find out if they genuinely meet the criteria for discounts.

 

You probably feel put on by my own questioning of your motives and underlying assumptions here. After all, how dare I question your Christian character based on some online communications? Well, I'm a Christian who sees a Christian trend of sinful judgment of others without knowing all the facts. I don't know if you meet that trend on all counts. And honestly it's none of my business if you do. But following your example, I will try to expose it's possibility. It is up to you to go before the Lord, to examine your own heart and to respond to His leading. Just as it would be for these missionaries if you lovingly confronted them as a fellow believer.

 

Excellent post Jean.