What mission work are you supporting.

[mike]

Our local church currently has a young man in Sicily, a young man serving in VS at a home for the mentally handicapped, a couple serving for six months in Central America, and a couple serving long-term with CAM disaster response. Most or all of these receive nominal support of one kind or another, from what I would guess.

[barnhart]

Neto, I agree broader organizations like conferences are beneficial for supporting missions, but what I hoped to capture in the poll is those sent from your local fellowship. I suspect some are choosing poll options to reflect conference wide support.

[Neto]

Neto, I agree broader organizations like conferences are beneficial for supporting missions, but what I hoped to capture in the poll is those sent from your local fellowship. I suspect some are choosing poll options to reflect conference wide support.

I wonder if independent congregations do a better job of getting their own members involved in various ministry opportunities, than do conference congregations. I hadn't thought of this question before, but a congregation in a conference can use their conference missions contributions as a sort of "excuse" not to attempt to motivate their own people.

Has anyone mentioned supporting All Nations Bible Translation (yet)? We have casual friends who are involved in it, but have never had anyone from the mission come to speak in our missions-focus meetings. (I have no control over this - not serving on the missions committee anymore.)

[Ken]

Neto, I agree broader organizations like conferences are beneficial for supporting missions, but what I hoped to capture in the poll is those sent from your local fellowship. I suspect some are choosing poll options to reflect conference wide support.

I wonder if independent congregations do a better job of getting their own members involved in various ministry opportunities, than do conference congregations. I hadn't thought of this question before, but a congregation in a conference can use their conference missions contributions as a sort of "excuse" not to attempt to motivate their own people.

Has anyone mentioned supporting All Nations Bible Translation (yet)? We have casual friends who are involved in it, but have never had anyone from the mission come to speak in our missions-focus meetings. (I have no control over this - not serving on the missions committee anymore.)

A better question is this:

Which type of congregation on average provides greater support to overseas (or domestic) ministries?

Independent congregations or congregations that are part of a conference?

[Neto]

Neto, I agree broader organizations like conferences are beneficial for supporting missions, but what I hoped to capture in the poll is those sent from your local fellowship. I suspect some are choosing poll options to reflect conference wide support.

I wonder if independent congregations do a better job of getting their own members involved in various ministry opportunities, than do conference congregations. I hadn't thought of this question before, but a congregation in a conference can use their conference missions contributions as a sort of "excuse" not to attempt to motivate their own people.

Has anyone mentioned supporting All Nations Bible Translation (yet)? We have casual friends who are involved in it, but have never had anyone from the mission come to speak in our missions-focus meetings. (I have no control over this - not serving on the missions committee anymore.)

A better question is this:

Which type of congregation on average provides greater support to overseas (or domestic) ministries?

Independent congregations or congregations that are part of a conference?

That's also a good question, but what I'm getting at is
Which type of congregation does the best job of MOTIVATING people to get involved in ministry work?

I grew up in a conference congregation, and I see many advantages in that type of organization. But at least in the MB conference, there were sort of "expectations" (from the conference leadership) regarding how much each particular congregation should contribute toward conference mission work. I can see how that could limit the amount of finances available for ministries of a different type than those organized and funded by the conference, ministries in which individual members in that congregation had special abilities, interests, and callings. (I'm here thinking outside of my normal box.)

[Ken]

I wonder if independent congregations do a better job of getting their own members involved in various ministry opportunities, than do conference congregations. I hadn't thought of this question before, but a congregation in a conference can use their conference missions contributions as a sort of "excuse" not to attempt to motivate their own people.

Has anyone mentioned supporting All Nations Bible Translation (yet)? We have casual friends who are involved in it, but have never had anyone from the mission come to speak in our missions-focus meetings. (I have no control over this - not serving on the missions committee anymore.)

A better question is this:

Which type of congregation on average provides greater support to overseas (or domestic) ministries?

Independent congregations or congregations that are part of a conference?

That's also a good question, but what I'm getting at is
Which type of congregation does the best job of MOTIVATING people to get involved in ministry work?

I grew up in a conference congregation, and I see many advantages in that type of organization. But at least in the MB conference, there were sort of "expectations" (from the conference leadership) regarding how much each particular congregation should contribute toward conference mission work. I can see how that could limit the amount of finances available for ministries of a different type than those organized and funded by the conference, ministries in which individual members in that congregation had special abilities, interests, and callings. (I'm here thinking outside of my normal box.)

So when an independent church sends missionaries overseas, do they do it completely independently? Or do they still work under the auspices of some larger group like CAM but just with direct sponsorship from the specific congregation?

[RZehr]

We have sent no one from our congregation. Our ten original families were sent here to start this church plant. There have been people who have moved here since then from 2,000 miles and 350 miles away. Do they count as missionary’s?
Our church just sends money each month to several foreign missionaries that we know, to support them.

[Neto]

A better question is this:

Which type of congregation on average provides greater support to overseas (or domestic) ministries?

Independent congregations or congregations that are part of a conference?

That's also a good question, but what I'm getting at is
Which type of congregation does the best job of MOTIVATING people to get involved in ministry work?

I grew up in a conference congregation, and I see many advantages in that type of organization. But at least in the MB conference, there were sort of "expectations" (from the conference leadership) regarding how much each particular congregation should contribute toward conference mission work. I can see how that could limit the amount of finances available for ministries of a different type than those organized and funded by the conference, ministries in which individual members in that congregation had special abilities, interests, and callings. (I'm here thinking outside of my normal box.)

So when an independent church sends missionaries overseas, do they do it completely independently? Or do they still work under the auspices of some larger group like CAM but just with direct sponsorship from the specific congregation?

One of our current long-term missionaries initially worked independently, somewhat under an African ministry while there. Since then a State-side counterpart has developed, to manage workers while they are not on the field.

My question was to compare and contrast (in the conference setting) workers who are under the conference mission agency vs those from the congregation working with a "third-part" mission agency. (Such as we did, under WBT, while I was still a member of the MB congregation where I grew up. Because we lived in Brazil, not anywhere here in the States, I left my membership there for the first 10 years of our missionary service. My home congregation supported us, actually more than any other congregation - about 1/3 of our support, as I recall - but no other MB congregation gave toward our ministry expenses, only individual MBs in other areas, mostly family.)

And then to also compare & contrast that conference situation with an independent congregation - how they give & relate to the worker as opposed to the conference congregation who had "conference missions obligations" in their budget. The MB missions agency had a different support system, in that they were "salaried", instead of being responsible to develop their own support base for prayer and monetary expenses, as is the case with missions like WBT. The main difference I see is that the relationship between the conference mission workers is thus more "impersonal" than those in mission agencies like WBT. However, the MB mission department did try to create a more personal connection, by "assigning" individual missionaries to different congregations.

[Josh]

In my church it is routine for people from many different congregations to go and do missionary work. This now includes people from Nigeria who go and do mission work in DR Congo and other places.

It is conference supported in terms of funds, but the actual shortage is people ready to go serve.