Mission ministry is giving work. There is an expenditure of energy, time, ideas and funds. Most often than not, the last item may be the most important. I liken funds to be the lubricant for the engine of growth.
But then some disagree with the giving of funds to the mission field, period. And they have reasons. Suffice to say the differences are not over Biblical giving. The primary objection is that giving creates unhealthy dependency.
After spending many years and having expended many dollars in the mission field, I have concluded that it is productive to give. The fruits are there for all to see. My mentor in missions has a straightforward target in giving. He said, “Give. Make sure it goes to the furthest and the poorest!”
He did not even address the dependency problem and I think for a good reason. We have the wisdom of God not to allow that to happen to the recipients. And crucial still, the recipients will not allow funds to create friction, competition, jealousy and all things unhealthy that are detrimental to their spiritual dynamism and hunger.
Resources are to be shared. We need not give to all and sundry though. But when we offer, there should be no expectation of its return in any form. Before the giving, let there be careful consideration on the how’s, what’s, why’s and where’s.
After that, check if the funds are used as designated and with care. These two conditions are to be honoured by the recipients. The donors must also have some mechanism for feedback for check and balance.
Let us consider areas that are worthy of funding.
Indigenous Work
Partner’s International supports many indigenous ministries all over the world. It is a dynamic agency, which has an income of US$20 mil in 2019. That year they spent fifty-five percent of their funds on workers on the ground. No wonder, the workers started four hundred churches and 1000 small groups in 2019.
Paul Gordon Chandler, a past president, has this to say, “We train for a purpose: to send workers to the unreached. But they cannot be sent unless someone supports them. The small size of the indigenous church and the low economic state of their countries hinder the launching of these strategic ministries. This is where Partners comes in: identifying innovative opportunities and coming alongside and serving God’s servants in the hard places.”
Mostly, indigenous works are more ‘cost- and result-effective’ in comparison to the placement of a foreigner/missionary. They need no acclimatization, language learning, visa and facing a host of cross-cultural issues. In my experience, indigenous workers can go further (distance), address local concerns and culture in their messages, take advantage of the citizenship’s privileges without arousing suspicion of the authorities and distrust of the locals.
Frontline Workers
In Restricted Access Nations, a lot of funds go into the workers’ training and support program. Governments persecute these church esp. those in the villages and ethnic groups. A church can lose 90% of its membership in severe persecution. But with proper training of the local leaders, it can reduce the rate of attrition.
The Cham church was in the top priority list of the AD2000 and Beyond unreached people groups. The church was in shambles because of persecution in the mid-’90s. Today it has, through a combination of funding for church planters and training programs, has grown in size and leadership to become a viable force for evangelisation.
Frontline workers have the right to access proper training and support. They are the tip of the spear and often found in the most challenging environment. Unless funds are forthcoming from external sources, there will be no training and support for them. These projects will not go wrong if we look for transformational results in the partnership. Problems usually surfaced when we used transactional short-term and short-sighted policies.
Strategic Work
George Soros, the currency speculator and democracy advocate, has a soft heart for human rights victims. He has pumped millions in socio-economic programs to help these countries. Before the breakdown of the Iron Curtain, he has poured in his millions to aid democracy’s activists. Readers Digest credited George Soros as instrumental in the downfall of the Romanian regime. George Soros foundation has a powerful guiding principle in its funding. They build capacity in people living in dictatorial and autocratic nations.
Besides, frontline workers in church planting and evangelism, strategic work may include many other approaches like Bible School, social support programs in restricted areas, frontline work to the least reached and unreached peoples group.
In my experience in South East Asia and South Asia, some don’t need and don’t want monthly support for their frontier pastors and church planters. But they gladly receive the offer of support for his frontline workers’ training program and other forms of assistance. In other areas, they want funds for training and church planters’ support. Some supports were for a long seven years due to difficulty in their socio-economic and religious realities.
Vietnam has an excellent example of a successful model for the support of workers. They support the urban and rural church planters with up to 35-60% of the tithes and offerings of the congregation.
Funds can initiate and propel a work, but it can also create jealousy, favouritism and greed. One thing for sure, each local group will have to learn how to use these funds for the good of all.
Conclusion
Many hard places around the world are smitten with poverty. That’s not the main reason for funding. The primary goals were listed above. With such compelling reasons, there is no stopping the transfers of God’s blessings from the haves to the have-nots. Let us not put ourselves in a straitjacket. Training programs that build capacity and empower should have top priority in our consideration for funding.
