Reservations revisited
Saturday, January 26, 2008 at 10:47AM Last Saturday night we sat by the pool in a nice hotel in an impoverished country. Compassion Canada had paid our costs to be there. We had just been on a plane full of other Christians visiting Honduras. I tried to capture some of the reservations and concerns we felt as we wrestled with being there and how we got there:
Is this just Christian tourism? Is this a sales pitch, like a glorified timeshare presentation? Are we coming here with all of the answers? We got knowing nods from some who've been here before. They've heard the objections; they felt the same the first time they came. They didn't say much, except to wait and observe.
I remember how one member of the group put it: are we being set up to drink the "Compassion Kool-Aid"?
It turns out that we Canadians are a cynical bunch, but these are all valid questions. It's impossible to go on a trip like this without wrestling with all the contradictions and realizing that a lot of things just shouldn't be the way that they are.
It will be something that we continue to wrestled through. I was thinking of this as I read some of Bene's questions about our trip this morning (in the comments of this post). I don't know if I have all of the answers but I will give it a try.
Are you saying you couldn't afford to go if these donors didn't send you?
I think we can afford whatever we value. Before this trip I would have said we couldn't afford it. Now that the trip is over, we are looking for ways to save up to send our daughter to Indonesia to visit the child she has sponsored for a couple of years, which will cost a lot more than visiting Honduras. It's probably more a question of priorities and values than money. Sadly it took a trip like this to change ours.
Are you saying that we (the rest of the church) are so ineffective, ignorant, slothful, blind, deaf, hard hearted and selfish...
Oh my. Yes. A thousand times yes. Except not the rest of the church. Me. I am one of the worst.
...that we have to have ministers accept freebees to 'fire' us up? What, are you saying a Rev will reach more people, speak more eloquently because you have a captive audience?
No, I don't think it takes just ministers. In the almost ten years I've been at Richview, I think we've sent close to two dozen people on trips like this. None of them have been ministers. They have been people of all ages. In some ways it's better when they aren't ministers. It can carry more weight.
In each of these cases, people have returned and spoken before the entire church. In most of the cases they have done a better job than I could do. I have seen many tears.
These 'others? Are they church staff, or just us insensitive incompentent pew warmers?
Hmmm....I will skip over the "insensitive incompetent" jab.
This was a small group, so I don't know if it was representative. In this case it was just Charlene and I, a denominational leader and his wife, a Compassion staff member, and another pastor and his wife who are Compassion reps. As I say, I appreciate being able to go. In 17 years of pastoring we've sent lots of people on this sort of trip who aren't pastors, but it's the first time for me.
People are not an it, sponsorship is not an it, the poor are not an it, children are not its, sponsorship or field work is not an it.
Compassion is an it. It is a ministry.
No kid should ever do without because as a Rev. you are handed an opportunity that most of us will not have.
You're absolutely right. It's probably the biggest issue we wrestled with. This is ministry money and there is a huge need.
It helped us a lot to realize that not a penny of sponsorship money was spent to send us. That helps a little, although not completely. I wish ministries like this didn't have to spend a penny on communications and marketing, but sadly that is not the world we live in. They wouldn't have trips like this if there wasn't a net benefit for the ministry.
Compassion has made some good moves. One of them is moving from a focus on marketing to building relationships with churches. I think that's why a trip like this came about.
Oh, I should mention - we raise money for trips like this all the time. In this case I could have raised the money directly from Richview. I appreciated not having to do so though. I'd rather that we supported our church members who want to go on trips like this.
I also appreciate that they aren't just sending big names from huge churches. I'm not a pastor of a huge church. I'm a nobody. It says something that they would send me, and I would have understood if they didn't.
You have blogged sensitively about your trip as payback to the organizations Exposure Tour donors?
No. The only condition of going on this trip is that if we believed in what Compassion is doing after being on the trip, we would share the ministry with our church. If we didn't believe in what they were doing, we were free to say so and never have anything to do with Compassion again.
One last note: I really appreciate these questions as they are all good, but some of them may have been worded in a less accusatory manner.
As I say, I don't have all the answers. I also have to admit that I am not unbiased in what I write. There are way more tensions than we've even covered in this post, not just with this trip but with many of the ways that we operate as ministries.
The knowing glances I received last week came because these questions are not new. I don't think Compassion has all the answers either. But from what I have seen they have thought through the answers. Although imperfect, they're doing a better job than I could have expected in almost every area I saw. I went because I saw how it had changed my friend Tim's life. Now I understand why.
Reader Comments (13)
Won't fight semantics, Compassion is an organization, made up of well trained people giving their lives, their time. Yes, you are correct, I stand corrected. Compassion is an it, Bell Canada or Walmart is an it, Richview an it. I see organizations such as Compassion, Habitat, World Vision, Sally Ann, Richview as people taking up the pull of God's love, giving what they've been given. I don't see 'it's.' You are not a nobody, you are a pastor who can testify (fire up) others from a pulpit, your office, your conversations, your blog. You are being an ambassador. I agree advertising doesn't work well anymore, we've become cynical and saturated. "...but some of them may have been worded in a less accusatory manner." Indeed. I was too direct.:^( While I did not intend my questions to be accusatory or harsh. I see how they can be perceived that way. I was surprised, taken off guard. You didn't need that. I too can be naive. Intent and motive does not excuse how you heard my queries, and I am sorry if you were hurt. Many aid groups know junkets reach donors far better than advertising dollars. I may not know how to address that reality, and the dynamics of inter-dependence; it's not my place too. You went from extreme temps, long travel hours, extreme contrasts in environments, spiritual and emotional disconnects, you didn't need questions. What you say does not lessen your testimony and experience or the needs you witnessed because Compassion paid you. I think you said something else that bears repeating: North Americans think we can create a quick fix. We don't give up on healthy, transparent and experienced groups of people because they've re-directed their advertising dollars, we never give up on our calling and our hope. We don't give up any of us God has sent, whether it be in third world countries or Canada's pulpits. We don't turn away from the need beside us, or half way around the hemisphere because someone paid in the hope eyes would be opened. Thank you for clarifying. Thank you for your grace in the face of insensitive unhelpful directness, I will shut up and listen.
Hey Darryl, I appreciated your posts on your trip. My wife and I went on a similar trip in 03 and it was life changing for both of us and a turning point in my wife's life as we witnessed God at work in amazing ways. I like what you said when you wrote this: "I think I now understand some of the differences between Compassion and World Vision. Both are amazing ministries. Compassion's focus is on child development; World Vision's is on community development. Both are needed; both have strengths; both have limitations. The one thing I really like about Compassion is that it is holistic and includes a strong spiritual emphasis. With Compassion you know that every child learns of Jesus' love for them. " If Compassion is about teaching children about Jesus and encouraging them to live for Him, along with helping them practically, then of course, from a Christian perspective, that is where our money should go. (or similar Christ exalting ministries) I think it's clear World Vision is more of a humanitarian organization now as opposed to one that seeks to share the Gospel along with their aid. If you come back and have seen how God is at work through Compassion and you then pass that on to your people and that fires them up to sponsor a child and give money and help out in others way, then it has definitely been worth it and God bless the donors that can make that happen. I sure wouldn't be dwelling on BD's questions or let that discourage you. You can now speak from first hand experience after seeing what you did and may God use that to inspire others.
Bene: You raised some important issues, and I appreciate that. If I blog about it I need to be open to questions. Many of the issues you raised are ones I'm wrestling with. And please don't feel you have to "shut up and listen." I don't have all the answers. And you are right: sadly, there are no easy or glib answers about poverty or many of these other issues. George: A trip like this is a turning point. I know I'm not the first to go through it. I also know that the effects of a trip like this can be short-lived sometimes - I hope that some of what I'm processing stays with me. Thanks for the encouragement.
George - pay attention. Questions aren't wrong. My timing was. We're grown ups and dealt with it. Butt out and get over your myopia. Move beyond your little world, stop firing at will and adolescent triangulating. Compassion staff and World Vision staff read this blog. Congrats- you finally lift your head out of your little world and begin to hear Darryl say agencies have different focuses, responsibilities and goals. This isn't about you. This isn't about me. Spare us self rightous spiritual dramatics. Compassion and World Vision workers are reading Darryl and Charlene's recent experience, thier processing of their trip is important, leave your ad hominem attacks at home. Google Compassion Canada and World Vision Canada's financial statements. Both organizations are open, transparent, accountable; spending 10 percent on administration and marketing. If you went out on a call and needed Victim Services, they'd come, and their work is not seen as lesser than yours. I'm sure World Vision workers will be thrilled to read you don't think they are Christian enough. Compassion and WV are pros and used to uniformed judgemental opinions. Shutting up and listening might help you too. since 1997 (UN) 2 million children were killed in wars, 6 million were seriously injured or permanently disabled and 12 million were left homeless. 600 million children are currently at risk - poverty related hunger, disease, displacement,exploitation, family loss. Got that? 600 hundred million (over 1/2 billion children) are at risk. Grow up.
I have a hard time approving comments that say "Butt out" and "Grow up." Express your opinions strongly but please keep your sticks on the ice. Bene: I think we can agree that WV and Compassion both do important work. Both are needed. The fact that Compassion includes evangelism in what they do is a real difference. That will be seen as positive by some and negative by others, but it is worth considering. One thing I like about WV is the community development. I hope over time we'll see the two organizations work more closely together. I think both organizations already have respect for each other.
Darryl, thanks for blogging through your trip - it was great! Our family is going to be much more committed to writing our compassion kids thanks to your feedback on much it means to them. George, I'm glad WV exists but like you when we decided which organization to support it was basically a no brainer due to the spritual side that compassion does. Bene, you don't hide your obvious disdane (hate?) for George very well. It is sad to see you spew such personal venom towards him all over the web.
Yep. This is your rink. Remove my comments.
Jacob: What you see isn't disdain, nor is is hate. It is anger. I have no respect for George. None. Zero. You state: "...towards him all over the web." Please provide proof.
Bene, I'm not going to go searching through the comment sections of various blogs. I remember several times you giving opinions of George (often personal attacks). You need to deal with your anger.
Agreed Jacob, I am not responsible for others behavior. What you see here is called triangulating. The questions I need to ask are: What is may part in this, and how do help I change or break the pattern? There are two instinctual responses, escalate or walk away. The third option fosters interdependence. Direct confronting: listening to the emotions behind the response and addressing the flaws or errors in the argument. In addressing conflict directly, offering options is appropriate and necessary. a) George felt he needed to defend Darryl from questions. b) He felt a need to compare aid agencies. c) He then brings me into his comment, triagulating Darryl's emotion or perceived emotion, and not addressing me. The question George can ask himself is why? d) Triangulating is about power imbalance or perceived power imbalance. Darryl addresses both George and I directly and restores balance. e) I address George directly. Jacob, you again point out my error (which was already adequately addressed) f) I will address George directly again. George: I understand you felt a need to defend Darryl. I believe you felt I was being disrespectful to Darryl, Charlene and Compassion Canada donors. I think you needed to express loyalty to Darryl, Charlene and Compassion Canada and you were trying to express empathy and shared experience with them. I think how you chose to do so was disrespectful, toxic and abusive. How I chose to bring the topic back to point indicated my lack of respect for you. Darryl asked me not to avoid, de-escalate my language, and acknowledge the power play. (I relate to the hockey analogy, I played defense) Jacob: I trust your question has been adequately addressed as well as your concerns about how I think/feel/behave.
Okay Jacob, I have a couple of questions for you. Who is conspiciously absent from this conversation? (perhaps lurking but not participating) Why do you think (the absent I've asked you to identify) are not choosing public contribution?
Hey Bene, not lurking, just seeing it now. All I can say is, have a great week-end.
You aren't the answer to my questions to Jacob, George. Everything isn't about you. Answer: Staff of Compassion Canada. If you worked in marketing at/for CC, you'd be lurking, it would be your job. Compassion Canada is paying church leaders out of a promotion budget to go on a trip, it is not unreasonable to ask if this aid agencies financial and media departments are weighing out cost/benefit, disclosure policy, etc. Blogging is a relatively uncontrolled medium and the audience isn't a predictable pew sitting user friendly congregation giving the agency X$ because a minister/priest/lay person does a poduim/pulpit face to face about their trip and is pre-stocked up on promo literature to hand out. What lessons will be learned by Compassion Canada at the sponsor/web end? Have a great week.