Long and short term missions

Photo of life with tribal war

Which is better: long term missions or short term missions?

Both have their advantages and disadvantages, of course. A long term missionary has time to really learn languages and cultures, to develop relationships, and to effectively work on projects or engage in types of ministry that take significant amounts of time. A short term missionary has opportunities to make a concentrated impact and/or to investigate future short or long term missions. So why would anyone even debate this issue?

Both have their potential disadvantages, too. Long-term missionaries risk creating unhealthy dependencies or burning out. Short-term missionaries risk doing damage because of inadequate understanding of language and culture, or by being more of a drain on mission resources than they are an asset. They are also more easily deceived. Do these disadvantages mean that we should abandon either strategy? Of course not! As with any hazard, we evaluate what we can do to minimize the negatives and maximize the benefits to the Kingdom of God. In all things, we seek the wisdom of the Ancient of Days Himself.

Which is better? Whatever the Lord has called you to do.

JournalPermalink

Comments are closed.