there is a great work of reconstructing this part of the kingdom but the time is now and we are moving towards a time when we want to start seeing solutions and not just diagnosis of whats wrong

I think the point about establishing ongoing relationships is a very positve one. Return visits help build community and hopefully contribute to something of lasting value to the receiving church or town. Although I agree with the point Jake makes, if that’s not possible, returning and building on what’s gone before does go a long way towards helping young people understand the culture and context. If connections can be maintained throughout the year, the ‘mission experience’ unpacked and built upon back home, then understanding will deepen.

I also think its really important that leaders think beyond the benefits to their own group and ask the question, ‘What real diffence can we make here?’, whether its a compassion or evangleism (or both) driven opportunity. OK, the trip is an investment in your young people, but I wonder if it should also be a wider kingdom investment too?

I agree with all the comments that ‘mission trip’ is not a good label and I guess the term has been devalued by a few who equate to it to ‘mission holiday’. I wish I had a simple answer, but I dont! Perhaps thinking more along the lines of ‘engaging in mission’ with the emphasis on ‘mission’ rather than the ‘trip’.

Matt, I think you’re on the right lines with thoughts of a local mission ‘experience’. Your next mission opportunity might be just across town. OK, I know it doesn’t headline as well as going to Europe or Mexico but I wonder if its provides a better context for continuity,ongoing relationships, immersion and learning.

Thanks for your thoughts and the opportunity to throw a few back.

Sadie, I listened to a recording of Chap Clark from the 2007 National Youth Workers Convention in St. Louis. He was speaking about the difference between service and justice (the gyst of his new book). The point he was making was that there’s a difference between acts of service and acts of justice. One quote that really stuck with me was this: “Service dehumanizes those who receive it. Justice restores human dignity so that both the giver and the receiver become one.” It seems to me that we need to rethink the whole “mission trip” idea so that our goal is justice rather than service. It seems to be a more wholistic approach that lends itself to lasting change rather than “one and done” types of experiences which seem to have a greater impact on our students rather than those we go to serve.

Jake, I hear you. The thing that strikes me is that when we begin to approach missions in a way that you articulate it also forces us to completely rethink so many other things we do. It requires a complete ecclesiological overhaul. What we think of and expect out of church would have to change.

I remember reading an article in a magazine probably last year that talked about this sort of thing. I think you’re right with the idea of renaming it…nomenclature has a big influence in how we perceive something. I remember the author of the article saying that to be in a different culture for a week is not sufficient. You need to be there for a time (he suggested three months) in which you start to develop real relationships with people, you get physically sick (if it’s a more third-world location), you get homesick, and you see the real ups and downs of mission activity. That’s when you get a real taste of it. Otherwise the tendency is to return back after a week with a tan and a “spiritual high”, when you really haven’t learned all that much.

It’s food for thought, I think. It was for me. It may be a little excessive, but is a definite step towards breaking away from the detached nature of mission trips that you talk about.