What is deputization?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SaggyWoman:
And why is it necessary?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

SaggyWoman,

You know it is sure hard to type in that name and not snicker a little.

I think you are referring to Deputation. It is a process that IFB and other non-denominational missionaries use to raise support to serve on the mission field. If this is what you are referring to I can go into more detail.

[ February 12, 2002: Message edited by: PackerBacker ]

 

Anyway, again, like I said,

IMHO I don't think in many cases it's necessary. It seems to me that it is sort of a "Baptist custom", and a bad one at that.

Why do large churches support a zillion missionaries a a dollar per month instead of sending a few of their own quickly to the field with full support?

 

Better yet, why can't they do what we as Southern Baptists do: pool our money where we can support thousands all over the world

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SaggyWoman:
And why is it necessary?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

SaggyWoman,

Are you still checking out this thread and are still interested? No sense answering the question if you have flown the coup.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pennsylvania Jim:
Anyway, again, like I said,

IMHO I don't think in many cases it's necessary. It seems to me that it is sort of a "Baptist custom", and a bad one at that.

Why do large churches support a zillion missionaries a a dollar per month instead of sending a few of their own quickly to the field with full support?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

While there are certainly cons to deputation, it is not as bad as Pennsylvania Jim’s exaggeration. Come on now. “Zillions at a dollar per month?” The lowest monthly support we ever received on a regular basis was $30, and that was from a very small church that was hurting but still wanted to have a part in world missions.

The idea of sending out a “few of their own at full support” sounds great as a theory at first glance but so does flying around the earth in a balloon. Neither is quite as simple as it might seem. First off, most churches we visited did not support “one of their own” because no one from their church had taken up the task of taking the gospel outside their area. Rather than wait for someone from their own group to spring up, they chose to help out others who were going. One of the biggest cons of having one church support a missionary is, what happens if that supporting church has problems. Since we all know that no local church is immune to problems, a missionary could be forced off the field with one problem from this one supporting church such as: a split, financial problems, or new leadership. Since we have been on the field, three supporting churches have gone through such events, which negatively affected our support. If we had only had those three churches supporting us, we would have been forced home to raise more support. By theory, one or two churches sending a missionary sounds great but making it reality is another issue. Some churches may be able to do it, which is great but they are the exception to the rule.

We noticed a change in attitudes in a lot of IFB churches while we were on deputation. There seemed to be a time in the past when it was popular or trendy to fill the church’s world map with many little light-bright bulbs, and the more the better. I can only remember one or two churches we were in that had bunches of missionaries and supported them each for little amounts of money. I fear that may have been done in the past for competition or boasting purposes but it seems to be a dying trend. We noticed that churches are taking on fewer missionaries for greater amounts of support.

As for deputation being a “bad custom,” there is really not many other options for non SBC or big denominational folks. For the missionary it is really what you make of it. It can be a wonderful experience of meeting others, spiritual growth, and trusting God or it can be a rotten, bad, and dreaded process. Like anything, it’s what you make of it.

 

I have mixed opinions about deputation. It seems a waste of God's time and money for a family to travel for 1-3 years raising support, yet at the same time I have witnessed how God has worked inthe lives of these families to increase their faith while on the road.

There have been countless testimonies of events that put family after family insituatins where they had to trust God. There was no other alternative. This is truly a benefit for when a missionary is on the field of labor he must trust God completely. He must be able to call on God for aid in support, and most of all to bring the people for the missionary to win, disciple,and send.

So maybe deputation isn't all bad.

Ernie

 

Packer Backer,

Well, I guess that "zillions at a dollar per month" was a bit of a stretch, even if they were to be sent to the field in hot air ballons.

However, I think that something like sixty missionaries at $50-100 per month is probably common, and for the bad reasons that you pointed out.

I am not saying that the "deputation" system may not, unfortunately, be the best thing available in some circumstances, as you point out. However, I also think that it should be avoided where possible. It is a tremendous waste of time and resources.

I often hear the argument that you gave as to "what happens if there is trouble in the sending church?". So what? If there is trouble in my company I get a new job. And, missionaries sent to the field for a few years who would have to return have already doen a few years more good work that ones that wasted the same years on "deputation".

It's a funny word. Seems like they should get badges and a sixgun or something. Anyone know the history of this scheme?

 

Thanks. I could have guessed the basic story but you filled in some intresting details.

PA Jim