The articles that I am presenting here are things that I have had on my hard drive for many years. I welcome your questions and comments. Let’s discuss this in the comment section below this post and others.

MISSIONARY SUPPORT COST COMPARISON

TRADITIONAL VERSUS NATIVE

by David Learner

“Sirs: I view the attitude that is expressed in this comparison of costs between foreign and local workers to be one of the most dangerous trends in modern missions. The attitudes expressed are:

• - since it is more cost effective to have local workers than foreign workers, then foreign workers should not deploy or be deployed.

• - the best use of mission money is to send it to the locals, since it is more cost effective than sending missionaries.

• - the local community or the foreign community has no need for a relationship with other communities, and there is no need for interdependence or relationships, just send money.

• - it is OK to be dependent or to cause dependence on foreign funding.

• - locals have no need for the experience or knowledge of those who have been doing the job well for many years, and foreigners have no responsibility to share what they have learned.

• - it is OK to treat locals with less respect than foreigners by not providing adequate training, salaries, housing, transportation, medical care, retirement benefits, or program funding.

• - there is no need for one to go overseas or to another country because it is much easier, and perhaps better, to just send money.

• - there is no benefit to the missionary or the church who sent him or her when he or she is obedient to God, just send money.

• - money, not obedience to God, will solve all the problems related to missions.

• - our obligations to God can be fulfilled through money.

• - it doesn’t matter what the Bible says, or how the Holy Spirit calls and moves people from around the world, just send money.

The attitudes expressed appear to look at obedience to God’s call from an economic perspective, and use cost analysis to determine if one should be obedient. The Creator and Owner of the universe places a high value on obedience. … The Great Commission, and other Biblical imperatives, are not qualified or negated by financial analysis. Often, God’s commands make no economic sense at all from a human perspective. I don’t think that finances are the only issue in the comparative cost analysis of foreign versus local workers.

At the root are:

• - mistrust

• - refusal to cooperate with and love one another

• - bigotry on both sides

• - a refusal to see the world on a global rather than a provincial basis

• - a basic misunderstanding of the fact that the church of God is not defined by local perspectives but by the Word of God.

• - disobedience of God’s Word

• - sin

Rather than doing cost analysis in order to exclude people or avoid responsibility, we need to be working together to build relationships and partnerships that will bring to the effort of Global evangelization the strengths and resources of all involved by the grace of God.”

by Fred Moritz

A church has generally been considered indigenous when it reveals three characteristics.

SELF-GOVERNING

A self-governing church is one whose leadership is developed from men raised up by the Holy Spirit from among the converts within its own body. The missionary or church planter ceases to be the leader. As national leaders are trained, the missionary phases himself out of the leadership.

The Bible clearly states in Acts 14:21-23, that in each local church Paul trained and led in the appointment of leaders. Titus 1:5 succinctly supports the principle of self-government. Paul’s
instruction in church discipline to the Corinthians provides a further example. After advising the Corinthians, Paul allowed the church to govern itself in disciplining its membership (I Cor. 5:45).

Finally the principle of self-government is proven in Acts 6, when the first church officers were elected. The Apostles established the requirements for those officers but commanded the church to “look ye out among you seven men . . .”

SELF-SUPPORTING

A self-supporting church is one that does not subsist on outside or foreign money. The church in Jerusalem supported itself by tithes and offerings from the beginning. Acts 4:32-37 and Acts 6:1-3 show that this self support extended to the care of the needy within the church. Apostolic instruction includes giving to support the local church’s own needs as well as the needs of others in regions
beyond (II Cor. 8-9). Paul indicates that churches throughout Asia and Greece supported themselves (I Cor. 16:1-2); supported Paul in his endeavors (Phil. 4:10, 15, 16); and supported needy brethren in
Jerusalem (Rom. 15:26).

This approach is Scriptural and will be ignored and violated to our great harm. Nearly thirty years ago, Melvin Hodges, in his book, On the Mission Field, wrote a warning which rings across the decades when he said, “Missionaries who make appeals asking for money to support native workers, or to erect church buildings, etc., should carefully weigh the long-range consequences and be sure that their procedure will truly strengthen the church, not weaken it. The future of the church should not be sacrificed for the sake of temporary advantage. Missionaries who plead for funds, asking for foreign help to do for the native church that which it should rightly do for itself, should examine their position to see if they are on Scriptural ground.”

SELF-PROPAGATING

A self-propagating church is one that extends itself throughout its own region by its own effort.

The Church at Antioch, in obedience to the Holy Spirit, ordained and sent forth Paul and Barnabas (Acts 13:1-3). Thus, through the ministry of this team, and later through the two teams of Paul and Silas, and Barnabas and John Mark (Acts 15:36-41), the Antioch Church propagated itself and fulfilled the Great Commission. Paul twice returned to his home church to rehearse what God had done
(Acts 14:27; 18:22-23).

That other churches also propagated themselves is implied in Romans 1:8 concerning the church’s reputation. It is stated in fact about the Church of Thessalonica (I Thess. 1:6-8). The Apostle stated that the Philippian Church’s support of Paul would produce fruit to their account (Phil. 4:17).

When churches today financially and prayerfully support missionaries who establish churches, they propagate themselves. As those newly-established churches grow in their native environment, it is
incumbent upon them to “pass the torch” as they propagate themselves.

Check out bcwe.org