Are there "dangers" with mission boards?

By Joel Tetreau Thu, 11/19/2009 - 2:09pm
11 replies [Last post]
Login or register to post comments
Joel Tetreau
Joel Tetreau's picture
Offline
ModeratorUser
Joined: Wed, May 6 2009
Posts: 368

I'm wondering if any one else is becoming "unsettled" about the way some Baptist mission boards work with church property deeds of ministries "over-seas"? If a mission agency holds the "deed" of a church and then threaten's the leader or congregation with the loss of the building if they don't follow the will of the mission agency (vis-a-vis the will of the congregation), doesn't that seem more like Presbyterianism approach to polity than a Baptist one?

Help me understand why the "indigenous principle" would not be honored on the field by people who say it is a universal Baptist disctinctive?

Straight Ahead!

jt

Top
Thu, 11/19/2009 - 8:00pm
#1 permalink
Rob Fall
Rob Fall's picture
Offline
User
Joined: Tue, Jun 2 2009
Posts: 380
If the ministry was fully and

If the ministry was fully and properly 'localized", then the board should not have their fingers in the pie. The situation may have come about because the property was in the board's name when a missionary ran the show.

__________________

Hoping to shed more light than heat..

Top
Thu, 11/19/2009 - 9:07pm
#2 permalink
Joel Tetreau
Joel Tetreau's picture
Offline
ModeratorUser
Joined: Wed, May 6 2009
Posts: 368
Right

Rob,

I can certainly understand that from time to time a MB might need to help a local assembly in a "special situation." I think what you are saying is that as a general rule a church oversees, even if planted by an American Missionary helped by a mission board, should carry it's own deed - not the missionary or even the mission board. That is what you are saying?

Shalom!

jt

Top
Fri, 11/20/2009 - 8:32am
#3 permalink
Mike Harding
Offline
User
Joined: Tue, Jun 30 2009
Posts: 157
Good point

Joel,

I think you have a point here. Therefore, I am meeting with the board today and we will vote to allow you to keep your church! Good News!!!!!

__________________

Pastor Mike Harding

Top
Fri, 11/20/2009 - 10:36am
#4 permalink
ssutter
ssutter's picture
Offline
User
Joined: Tue, Jun 2 2009
Posts: 67
"Help me understand why the

"Help me understand why the "indigenous principle" would not be honored on the field by people who say it is a universal Baptist disctinctive?"

Part of it is stewardship. I think there's cases where the majority is wrong. If i bought a building overseas - gave it to a church as a church, then over time the church decided to do something crazy, I'd use whatever leverage I could do bring it back to the gospel. - But, just my 2c, i don't know the context at all of the conversation.

__________________

_______________
www.SutterSaga.com

Top
Sat, 11/21/2009 - 7:16pm
#5 permalink
Rob Fall
Rob Fall's picture
Offline
User
Joined: Tue, Jun 2 2009
Posts: 380
I'm saying I understand how a

I'm saying I understand how a deed could be in a Board's name when the work is not fully indigenous. This is because from what I understand are the various local property laws and customs. You don't want a property in the missionary's name as he may or may not continue on the field. Also, in some countries, having an individual foreigner hold property leads to complications. However, once the work is handed off to the locals, the name on the deed needs to be changed. It's not so much a special situation. It's where a work can have a building of its own before the local leadership is developed to the point of being able to take it over.

Joel Tetreau wrote:

Rob,

I can certainly understand that from time to time a MB might need to help a local assembly in a "special situation." I think what you are saying is that as a general rule a church oversees, even if planted by an American Missionary helped by a mission board, should carry it's own deed - not the missionary or even the mission board. That is what you are saying?

Shalom!

jt

__________________

Hoping to shed more light than heat..

Top
Sat, 11/21/2009 - 10:16pm
#6 permalink
Rob Fall
Rob Fall's picture
Offline
User
Joined: Tue, Jun 2 2009
Posts: 380
Of Mission Compounds

It could also be a vestige of the old missionary compound mode of operation both in board policies and in local laws overseas.

Rob Fall wrote:

I'm saying I understand how a deed could be in a Board's name when the work is not fully indigenous. This is because from what I understand are the various local property laws and customs. You don't want a property in the missionary's name as he may or may not continue on the field. Also, in some countries, having an individual foreigner hold property leads to complications. However, once the work is handed off to the locals, the name on the deed needs to be changed. It's not so much a special situation. It's where a work can have a building of its own before the local leadership is developed to the point of being able to take it over

__________________

Hoping to shed more light than heat..

Top
Sun, 11/22/2009 - 1:03am
#7 permalink
Joel Tetreau
Joel Tetreau's picture
Offline
ModeratorUser
Joined: Wed, May 6 2009
Posts: 368
Thanks for your vote Mike

Mike,

That's wonderful. Thankfully our congregation holds the deed on our property, not the brethreim of Troy! What a thrill!

jt

Top
Thu, 01/21/2010 - 11:50pm
#8 permalink
tlange
Offline
User
Joined: Thu, Jun 4 2009
Posts: 30
Property

The agency that I used to be affiliated with, did not hold deed to any property. Better situation for agency and missionary.

Top
Fri, 01/22/2010 - 12:34pm
#9 permalink
Jim Peet
Jim Peet's picture
Offline
ModeratorUserUser accounts adminEditorAdmin
Joined: Wed, May 6 2009
Posts: 3507
I'd like to see Mission boards fully report their finances

Some do .... eg. : Baptists for Haiti: http://www.bhm.org . If you go to Guidestar.org you can view their 990 reports. Additionally on their website they have a link with an overview of their finances and an opportunity to request more detailed information.

Others do not provide 990's nor any publicly available financial reporting:

Like:

http://www.abwe.org
http://www.bmm.org

Why is that?

Guidestar link ... free signup for basic reporting. Check before you give: http://www2.guidestar.org/

__________________

| Cold Fusion Guy | 4BYA.info | FaceBook | Doctrinal Statement | Biography | My testimony | Anatomy of a malicious lie

Top
Fri, 01/22/2010 - 12:58pm
#10 permalink
Jim Peet
Jim Peet's picture
Offline
ModeratorUserUser accounts adminEditorAdmin
Joined: Wed, May 6 2009
Posts: 3507
Reluctant / negligent in GAAP and financial transparency

Why are fundamental organizations reluctant / negligent to provide thorough financial reporting in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles?

http://www.ecfa.org

See "best practices" here: http://www.ecfa.org/Content/ECFABestPractices.aspx

Here's other fundamentalist agencies doing it right:

Generally Accepted Accounting Principles would include and income and expense statement and a balance sheet showing fund balances.

I am very suspicious of organizations that request and accept money while not providing these basic statements !

__________________

| Cold Fusion Guy | 4BYA.info | FaceBook | Doctrinal Statement | Biography | My testimony | Anatomy of a malicious lie

Top
Fri, 01/22/2010 - 1:24pm
#11 permalink
Anne Sokol
Anne Sokol's picture
Offline
User
Joined: Tue, Jun 2 2009
Posts: 504
you probably

should just ask them.

__________________

www.birthinukraine.wordpress.com

Top