Who to work with on a Mexico Mission Trip
About the Author
Aaron is a mission trip coordinator for a small non-profit working in Tijuana, Mexico. The organization builds homes for the poor and operates an orphanage where he can often be found helping out with the children.
Below is a list of the three most common options for organizing a mission trip to Mexico (most of this applies to other countries too). Each have their own unique advantages and disadvantages — no one is better than the other. The job of a group leader is to know his group’s strengths and weaknesses — especially his leadership and organizational abilities — and to decide who to work with based on that.
Short Term Missions Organization
A short term missions organization (STMO) is probably what most groups coming to Mexico go through. All they do is organize mission trips so you can expect them to generally be more organized, professional, and easy to work with than the others. Their disadvantages can be very serious to some, making other options look more appealing.
Advantages:
- Easy. Most of them have packages you can sign up for. Get on their calendar, send the money in time, and you have yourself a mission trip.
- Organization. There are few surprises working with STMOs, especially ones that have been around for a long time.
- Accessible. Most all of them have contact numbers and websites where any concerned parents can go to get their questions answered.
Disadvantages:
- Cost. The cost of working with a STMO may leave you wondering how they can call themselves non-profit.
- Control. When you work with one of these organizations they are in control of what you do and when you do it. Some are flexible, others aren’t.
- Vacation. Some STMOs tend to treat groups as though they are on vacation and whatever representative is heading up the trip is the tour guide. Ministry can often take a back seat to shopping, sight seeing, and generally trying to make everyone happy.
Your Missionary
Your church sends a check each month to a family that comes home on furlough once a year with exciting stories of life on the mission field. Wouldn’t it make sense to try and team up with them to take the youth on a mission trip? Maybe. I have heard good and bad stories from some of the groups we work with who have taken teams to work with their missionaries. On one hand it can be rewarding for teams to go down and get a taste of the mission field from these families they already have a relationship with. On the other hand sometimes the missionaries aren’t set up to work with them.
Advantages:
- Relationship. You already have a relationship with these people which should make planning and working with them easy.
- Further support. The missions committee has always wanted to do more for these guys, now they can send a whole team down there to help out for a week.
- Church is happy. When you get back you can report first hand on all the great ministry the church is supporting.
Disadvantages:
- You get in the way. That’s a tough one to write, but I have had numerous group leaders tell me that they went down to help support their missionary and came home feeling like they had gotten in the way more than they had helped.
- They aren’t prepared for you. Preparing for a mission trip group isn’t rocket science, but it does require planning and a lot of running around. Arranging beds, meals, and the occasional shower for a group of thirty youth takes a fair amount of work, not to mention work projects and other ministry opportunities to keep them productive during the days.
Local Pastor
It seems like more and more group leaders are trying to cut out what they see as the middle man (usually a STMO) and work directly with a local pastor they have met on previous mission trips. A lot of STMOs get really upset with this and advise the pastors they work with to not court the groups and that they are not allowed to work with them directly (sort of like a non-compete agreement I guess). I’ve seen some really aggressive pastors around here and we try to avoid working with them. However, if a group thinks they are more effective working directly with a local, then I don’t see the foul. The disadvantages are similar to those of the missionary with some unique twists.
Advantages:
- Cost. With no U.S. or Canadian administration the overall cost should be dramatically less than working with an STMO.
- Street Smart. A local pastor knows all the ins and outs of the community. Where a VBS will be most effective, what family needs praying for, who needs a roof on their house.
Disadvantages:
- No organization. A lot of pastors here are total fly-by-night kind of guys. It works for them and their ministry, but it might not work for yours.
- Communication. Obviously the language barrier, but also simple things like calling to confirm projects can be remarkably difficult cross-border.
- They aren’t prepared. Same as #2 with missionaries.
That’s my list of who you can work with to organize a mission trip and the advantages and disadvantages of each. If you have anything to add please do so in the comments below.
Further Reading:
February 12th, 2007 at 11:58 pm
We’re kind of combining all three. Our church is the main sponsor for a Christian orphanage and school called Rancho3M in Guadalupe. It’s like working with a missionary, because we pay the salaries. We (and other Sovereign Grace churches) send teams down for short term mission trips to support what the ranch is doing - construction to expand the facility, cleanup and repair, and community outreach, mostly. We’ve also had people called to stay down there for a year at a time. And it has elements of working with a local pastor, since it is a local Christian organization with strong community ties.
From my perspective, it seems like the best possible setup; all of the benefits but most of the disadvantages are reduced or ameliorated because we’re working with the same people and have close ties - almost like an extension of our church although they are independent.
February 13th, 2007 at 10:56 am
Aaron,
I was hoping to get more information on forming a small missonary organization. Missionary work is something I have been interested in for a few years now after attending many missionaries in Tijauana, Mexico. I was hoping to start something similar, but needed some ideas. Thanks again!
Myriah
February 14th, 2007 at 6:10 pm
Myriah: Glad this could be of some help. Let us know if you end up starting an organization.
Laura: Thanks for the perspective from your end. The combo could definitely work best for some teams but I wouldn’t go as far as calling it the best possible setup. I know a lot of churches for example who need to at least start out with one of the “Fortune 500 Ministries” (YWAM, Teen Mania, Adventures in Missions, etc.). They need the stability and organization only those guys provide.
[off topic: I cringe whenever I hear of one church being the main supporter for an orphanage. I've heard "ABC orphanage in Mexico closed because XYZ church in the U.S. dropped them from their budget" too many times.]
February 23rd, 2007 at 4:06 pm
I have been a long term missionary for about 10 years. The great flaw I see in groups who bypass the missionary or an agency and work directly with a pastor is that they’re usually leaving out sound missiology. They don’t understand the culture, tendencies of the pastors and etc. Many pastors will just let them do anything because they don’t want to offend and risk the possibility of loosing some financial benefit.
Please rethink your position on missions without any guidance from a missionary or agency. It’s like trying to drive a car without any help. It might look easy, however, much damage is and can be done. Most of the time, missionaries who are long term and agencies as well, have made it their profession to learn the culture. To just - go it alone - is leaving out all the wisdom God has provided. It might save a few dollars, but it’s very foolish.
February 26th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
Mike Fink,
First of all, thank you for your comment. I see from your website that you have a short term missions organization so it’s great to get your opinion on all this.
Sounds like you have had some bad experiences working with local pastors. I have too, but I don’t think it’s fair to say that it is never a better option than working with a missionary or short term missions organization. Some groups really don’t need us to guide them. A couple quick points 1) There are lots of pastors here who regularly work with mission trippers from the states and know how to teach and organize them, explain cultural differences, etc. 2) There are many groups who receive training from retired missionaries in their church and focus on “sound missiology.” Some fly leadership down months in advance to meet with the locals and discuss community needs as well as cultural issues to be aware of.
Other stuff:
You say “Many pastors will just let them do anything because they don’t want to offend and risk the possibility of loosing some financial benefit.” Wow, that was quite a statement. I believe short term missions organizations are much more concerned with losing financial benefit from a group than local pastors are. STMOs depend almost entirely on mission trip fees for their income. I regularly speak with leadership in one organization who refers to groups as ‘theirs’ and say things like “[local pastor or missionary] stole our group.”
You also said “To [work directly with a pastor] is leaving out all the wisdom God has provided.” Do you really believe that?
To reiterate the point of the article, I don’t think working with a local pastor is inherently better than the other options. I believe it works great for some groups and can be disastrous for others. The same goes for working with STMOs and missionaries.
February 27th, 2007 at 2:28 pm
I think you have misunderstood some statements, Aaron. We see a lot of groups who just come down to Mexico on their own and we see very poor missiology by most of them. We also know some pastors who will no longer receive some mission groups because these short term mission groups don’t understand the culture, dress, and customs. We have had wonderful relationships with the pastors we work with and we look to them for a lot of guidance on cultural matters. However, after almost ten years of working with groups and churches, we see some definite weaknesses and tendencies among pastors and churches down here. Oftentimes, they are driven by financial interest verses holding to their convictions. They’ll let groups do as they please so not to loose this. Like I say, this is the tendency.
You mention that STMO’s are more afraid of loosing fincial benefit than pastors. You sound biased Aaron. Maybe that’s true with some. However, like any church or ministry organization, they can’t exist in a vacuum. If they provide a meaning service is it wrong to receive something for this? Even Scripture says that, “Those who minister the Gospel deserve to live by it.” I’m sure you would agree that understanding the culture, customs, language and etc. are important. In the same way that a pastor, doctor or other professional is trained, a missionary and STMO are as well. Wouldn’t you agree that to tap into this wisdom would be wise? Yes, there might be a fee, but once again, just trying to save a dollar isn’t the most important factor in missions, it’s sound missiology. In many cases, the STMO is providing building materials, facilities to stay at, meals, ministry equipment and many other things in their cost. I’m not defending STMO’s my any means, but I will say loud and clear that any short term mission group should put as a high priority their understanding of missiology, the local customs, culture and etc. This can’t be done by just a pre-trip visit. It comes by living in and experiencing a culture. So to sum up, it all comes down to sound missiology and the need to acquire it. What we see in most short term mission groups, who go it alone, is a lack of it. How they get it isn’t the question, it’s whether or not they do and most don’t even know they don’t have it or need it. In most cases, its the STMO or a local missionary that is in the best position to provide that even if they must charge a fee for it.
February 27th, 2007 at 7:54 pm
Mike,
I think we are flying past each other here and this is quickly turning into a debate which I’m not interested in pursuing. We have a couple articles that touch on some of these issues that may shed some more light on the topic. Jim Cottrill guest authored one that was just posted here
http://www.moneymissions.com/jim-cottrill/short-term-missions/spearheading-a-mission-trip
and Ben is writing another that will be up shortly.
Since you are so passionate about this subject, maybe you would like to write a post for the site on how missiology is best applied to short term missions? I think we would all like to read it. Shoot me an email if interested.
Best,
Aaron
March 1st, 2007 at 3:12 pm
Aaron,
I thought the diologue was pretty simple and we were communicating quite clearly. I just responded to your article above mentioning that I see some big disadvantages by groups who go it alone and therefore, have a tendency to bypass sound missiology that can be gained by a missionary or STMO. Our experience has just simply brought this to the light and I wanted to share this with you and your readers.
God bless,
Mike Fink
March 2nd, 2007 at 5:55 pm
Mike,
Email me next time you will be in Tijuana and we can discuss this over tacos.
March 5th, 2007 at 1:22 pm
Perhaps no one wants to open up this topic any more :) but I’ve been waiting for a chance to sit down at the computer and add a few little thoughts.
I personally see a lot of value in working with a local church at home, a mission agency (with experience in short term mission, though not necessarily a short term mission agency), a local missionary and a local pastor. Naturally, this isn’t always possible, but in an ideal situation over the long term, I think it has value. Here’s why:
1) The local church - it’s where everything starts. The church knows its members (ideally) and has earned the right to work with them and encourage them as they head into ministry. This is the primary ingredient.
2) A mission agency always has an edge in certain things. They have experience and can specialize more than a local church ever can (generally). They can oversee short term projects over the long term - even over multiple generations.
3) The local missionary always has the edge when it comes to communicating with people from his own culture. “National” pastors and ministers can be very good at this, but naturally you can generally communicate better with someone from your own culture, and they understand you better. In a crunch, I would want to have a missionary from a similar culture to communicate with.
4) The “National” pastor or Christian worker will always have the edge when it comes to understanding his/her own culture, and the local situation. Generally speaking. Nothing against missionaries. A local pastor has a long term investment in the community (a missionary may also, but it’s generally shorter - even if only because the missionary arrived later). In a crunch, I would want to have a local pastor there to help deal with the situation.
All four have weaknesses and strengths. I think most of your general negative points can be avoided with a little planning and research.
That being said, I’m not suggesting EVERY mission team should ALWAYS work with all 4. For example, I believe short term mission agencies can train local churches to better send mission teams on their own, with less and less help from the agency. An experienced leader from your local church may be trained by missionaries and national pastors, and be able to be more independent in the future.
Wouldn’t it be great if we could network all these four together more and more, so that we could all share our strengths and minimize our weaknesses? After all, it’s not a competition.
May 2nd, 2007 at 7:05 am
I always send my friends to your website when they want advice on mission trips, thanks for your works here:) Great seeing you the other day to my friend.