Haiti Kidnapping

[temporal1]

A rather obvious observation is that it may be time to focus more on other countries and less on Haiti. CAM and Anabaptists in general give an overwhelming amount of focus on Haiti.

A bigger question is why the focus on foreign missions at all. Are there not enough mission fields in the U.S. and Canada?

Some parts of the world are far, far more receptive to the Gospel than here in this country.

Take prisons, for example.
If in another country, missionaries can preach or speak to whole dormitories, one after another, of men or women who listen carefully, and have open hearts to repenting and trusting Christ, how does that compare to our prisons? Far less freedom to reach prisoners here. And I certainly appreciate prison ministry in this country.

Or schools.
While in the last century, my own family reached hundreds of small schools in this state, this is no longer possible to that extent.

But African schools, many of a thousand or more "learners", welcome the preaching of the Gospel.
To compare the coldness of even some Christian schools in this country, to the teaching or preaching of the Bible, say to a mosque school, where the principal welcomes an evangelist who is straightforward: "No, you don't have to refer to Him as Isa--you can call Him Jesus--they'll know who you're talking about."

They understand that the rampant crime, murder, rape, insurrection isn't getting any better: they are hungry for peace!

The harvest is urgent, and we need to minister wholeheartedly wherever God calls us, whether at home or abroad.

Wow. Truth. Thank you, Joy.

[Neto]

In regards to taking children (or women, for that matter) into "dangerous environments" (especially in regards to organized criminal danger) I would suggest that a distinction be made between short-term "missions" (especially such as building projects) and long-term (for example, 15 years or more) missionary work.
[Even medically related dangers should receive more attention in cases of short-term mission trips. Long-term missionary candidates receive special training and precautions (at least in the case of organizations like WBT) in regards to the dangers of things like malaria, cholera, amoebic dysentery, etc. Of course we sometimes had visitors come into the village that got off of the plane wearing rubber boots (because of the "snakes"), while we walked out to great them in our sandals. Some some are very cautious, and others won't listen to basic advice, like staying inside (or using special protection) during dawn & dusk hours in malaria areas. Some are inclined to "flaunt their faith", throwing caution to the wind. Living long-term with these dangers is the price of doing ministry, but getting malaria or Dengue on a 1 or 2 week stay because of a lack of proper precautions is, in my opinion, over the top. (Disclaimer: None of us caught malaria, Dengue fever, or Cholera, although it was around us at various times during our years in the Amazon. I had amoebic dysentery on various occasions, apparently being very susceptible to it. It can turn a 10-day work project into multiple days on a starvation diet, unable to do any useful work. All it takes is a soft drink with ice made with tap water, a salad with lettuce that was not properly washed, or a fruit "smoothy" made w/ tap water or "tap ice". Or, just touching your lips after handling produce in the market or grocery store.)]

I can completely agree. Where people would bicker is what length would turn into long term.

For practical reasons, a married man shouldn't be away long term from his wife and children. Much more then a month would be problematic in my eyes. Doesn't mean it can't be done, but I think it isn't wise.
As far as special training goes, its only as good as the level of complacency the person has. Ebola is a contact disease, yet "highly trained" nurses and doctors got it. Why? they suck at taking suits off, not to mention the CDC guidelines for removing them isn't safe or effective
I'm also not very fond of short term missions... I think its far more effective to live with people for years to build relationships and contacts rather then change them every 1-3 years. Of course... that would require people to sacrifice too much

WBT did not allow for a couple to be apart more than 6 weeks for any one stretch. I was away that long one time, on the first trip to the village to build the airstrip. Then my wife was away for around 4 weeks twice, to the States while I stayed in Brazil. Once it was for a medical reason, and I came up when it was decided that she would have surgery, and the other time for her aunt's wedding.

There ARE advantages to short-term mission trips, it's just that in my experience very seldom did any of those "advantages" impact the people. More than once a young person came down with Team Missions or some other similar agency, and then later came back for a year or two, to do office-type support work. (We generally didn't remember them, but they remembered us.) Some others went to Bible college for training, and took a full-time missionary assignment. Others just learned to have a burden for mission work, and advocated for it in their home congregations. The other benefit which I certainly do not want to pass over w/o mentioning, is the encouragement that the missionaries can receive from these visits. Sure, it generally make a fair bit of extra work for the full-time people, but generally it is worth it, at least from our experience and perspective. Actually, we did get quite a few visits in the village when we first started, because it was one of the most isolated places WBT Brazil was working, and it was also just newly opened for easy access via the airplane. (It took us 4 days to get there that first time, and we had flown an hour to a nearby river town the day before. That 4 days on the river was 12 to 15 minutes in the air later on.)

But back to the separation. Our daughter was 1 year old when I left that time, and when I got back, she didn't know me anymore. (I had to go to the door and leave the house so she would be willing to go to bed, then sneak back in after my wife took her to her bedroom.)

[steve-in-kville]

No, the opposite. If they get a ransom from the organization, they will do surveillance, and target them, because they know that they can collect the ransom. (Maybe it works this way more so with terrorist groups, like FARC, who took Chet Bitterman. But drug runners, too, I would imagine. And didn't you - maybe someone else - recently site some statistics about how much crime is drug related, or involves drug gangs?)

CAM may claim not to pay ransoms, but for all we know they have kidnapping insurance that will. And yes, such insurance policies do exist for situations exactly like this.

Has anyone heard any solid developments on this situation in the last 24 hours?

[temporal1]

No, the opposite.
If they get a ransom from the organization, they will do surveillance, and target them, because they know that they can collect the ransom.

(Maybe it works this way more so with terrorist groups, like FARC, who took Chet Bitterman. But drug runners, too, I would imagine. And didn't you - maybe someone else - recently site some statistics about how much crime is drug related, or involves drug gangs?)

CAM may claim not to pay ransoms, but for all we know they have kidnapping insurance that will. And yes, such insurance policies do exist for situations exactly like this.

Has anyone heard any solid developments on this situation in the last 24 hours?

This is speculation, i prefer to think CAM is being honest, not resorting to manipulative language/double talk.
At least until proven otherwise. Esp during an active volatile situation.

Throughout my life, i’ve heard the philosophy of some criminals, and others, to be something like,
“It doesn’t matter, or hurt anyone, if we steal, or burn a place down: because insurance pays!”

It’s a poor way to live.

In my small experience, insurance doesn’t actually pay.
They may pay an up-front sum, but, then they increase future premiums.
In my view, it’s more like insurance LOANS money, then recovers it over time.

Insurance companies are all about their own profits. Those giant insurance buildings aren’t built out of losses.

[Szdfan]

This is speculation, i prefer to think CAM is being honest, not resorting to manipulative language/double talk.
At least until proven otherwise. Esp during an active volatile situation.

Well…CAM wasn’t exactly honest and forthcoming about the Mast situation.

[temporal1]

This is speculation, i prefer to think CAM is being honest, not resorting to manipulative language/double talk.
At least until proven otherwise. Esp during an active volatile situation.

Well…CAM wasn’t exactly honest and forthcoming about the Mast situation.

i attempted to adequately qualify my words. i hoped the focus would remain on this active volatile situation.

WAPO:
American missionaries and family members kidnapped in Haiti by '400 ...
the six women, six men and five children who were abducted Saturday.

6 men, 11 women+children.
this is a time to focus on the present.

OP / Page 1

Just received word that 17 people have been kidnapped by a Haitian gang.
As far as I know they are under CAM, but not sure if they all are, or if some are not.
One of the kidnapped is my nephew who just arrived in Haiti yesterday.
Sounds like the group had gone to visit an orphanage.

Please pray for the situation.

This is a prayer request thread.

[steve-in-kville]

This is speculation, i prefer to think CAM is being honest, not resorting to manipulative language/double talk.
At least until proven otherwise. Esp during an active volatile situation.

Well…CAM wasn’t exactly honest and forthcoming about the Mast situation.

This is where my mind has been with this.

[Josh]

If one wants to evangelise Haitians, I hear there are huge amounts of them on both sides of the US-Mexico border. Presumably, the US side is not in danger of kidnapping.

[Szdfan]

This is speculation, i prefer to think CAM is being honest, not resorting to manipulative language/double talk.
At least until proven otherwise. Esp during an active volatile situation.

Well…CAM wasn’t exactly honest and forthcoming about the Mast situation.

This is where my mind has been with this.

I've been seeing FB posts expressing a deep sense of pain over how some conservative Mennonite churches are responding to this crisis vs. their response to Mast. There are certain kinds of crisises and tragedies that are easier to respond to than others. The disaprity between how some churches responded to the Mast crisis vs. how they are responding to this crisis is triggering for some.

[steve-in-kville]

Well…CAM wasn’t exactly honest and forthcoming about the Mast situation.

This is where my mind has been with this.

I've been seeing FB posts expressing a deep sense of pain over how some conservative Mennonite churches are responding to this crisis vs. their response to Mast. There are certain kinds of crisises and tragedies that are easier to respond to than others. The disaprity between how some churches responded to the Mast crisis vs. how they are responding to this crisis is triggering for some.

I wasn't gonna bring this up and I'm not even sure its wise to go down this rabbit hole... CAM was quick to find money to silence Mast's victims but somehow they won't pay a ransom here? I'm making this statement in a bit of ignorance as I am not involved beyond distantly knowing a few of the victims here.

I have faith its more complicated than that. I hope so, anyway