For MCC (in N Amer) –  (Reshaping) structure, program, relating to churches - - -Ray Hamm, Manitoba

1    There can be//should be more  global church networking, global MCC could be part of this - - - central coordinating council, some central coordinating staff, but programs come from and through national entities.   Other countries should not have to follow the mission/MCC model.  (Umbrella or confederation would be the model from the Reshaping MCC. . . paper. - - -Wow, a lot of work went into that paper - - thanx.)

2    We should try to minimize the damage we do with our structures to the faith and theology of believers in other countries. Jesus sent disciples to preach, to heal, to cleanse.  He did not have to choose whether to send mission workers and/or MCC workers.   For better or for worse, our structures reveal our faith, our world view, the way we deal with power.. . . . .   If the model with which people must come to the table is the predetermined N Amer or western model, then half the agenda is erased.   Federation model would be too ‘tight’ for this.

(“Weirdness” of structure should not be a major factor.   Current MCC structure already is weird and wonderful - - - no real connections between accountability, funding and decision-making. . . .  None of the models in the Reshaping paper are church agencies.  Church based, church ownership. . . . is not an excuse but it should be a real factor. )

3    Separate entirely MCC in Canada and in the US.   Reassign binational staff.  If anything, leave a few people to serve coordinating functions.   There could be a central coordinating council, but all programs, funds, . . . . are done through national offices.  (On p 12 of the Reshaping paper, both of the diagrams are restrictive.   Cuba or N Korea or formerly China, could not be touched through either one of those.    Another option is needed - - umbrella or confederation.)

4    Rework Information Services; rework websites or create a new ones.    Change, extend the tone and content of reporting.  Tell me about schools, teachers. . . .  in Zimbabwe, I want than isolated stories of an MCC teacher in Zimbabwe.   I need to hear to hear about water (and politics) in Israel and Palestine, not only about one well or a community cistern.   We need to know that we are living in 2009, not in  1967 or. . . . . Scripture says that the Father in heaven is aware of every sparrow that falls - - - I wonder if the Lord would like more help in that.    Let’s think through what it means to provide safety and security in urban centres. in war zones, in Palestine, in deserts,. . . . .    What can we do so that fewer “sparrows,”  “widows and orphans,”  need to die alone?

4A    As a result of connections we (conferences and MCC) have around the world, we could provide the best news service in the world.   Let’s do it.     Ideas from Christian Science Monitor or International Press Review could provide beginning steps.  We don’t need embedded journalists, we don’t need press clearance from the White House.    Create interest groups, watchers, those who watch and care for the ‘sparrows,’. . . perhaps starting with alumni, MCC and conference.   Internet and related tools can be very helpful here.  Find ways for these to be working, action, groups.

5    Eliminate geographical designations of departments.   Why would there be a Latin America desk in ‘Akron’ when there would be a Latin America partner at the table?   Let’s all work at water (drinking, sanitation. . .), health (public health, AIDS. .), food, peace, disaster relief, refugees.   “New”  (to us) topics would include dealing with climate change, public security and personal liberties, sustainability (might be in some existing projects) - -needs more prominence, (esp in N Amer.)

6    Build Bridges - - - - interfaith dialogue, in many places and on many levels.   Bridges between groups and people, bridges between individuals who want to share and those who need partners.

7    Spend a week or whatever it takes to create new ways, new concepts and methods, for dealing with information.   Some board members are less active or aware than others.   Many people scattered through out the congregations are well-informed and would do more ‘homework’ if they could.   Programs (MCC and conference) have become large and expensive.   Need informed decisionmaking (not just by staff!!) and we want loyalty and commitment from our members, from our body.   What are some new ways?   This would also have major implications for whatever global federation is proposed.

8    There needs to be a series of major discussions in Canada, probably also the US, between congregations, conferences and MCC.   Hold up the light, fly the banner, sound the trumpet!   Congregations, conference and MCC need each other.   MCC used to be our vehicle for service (adventure learning. . . ) for our young people; in Canada, at one point, it was agreed that MCC would be THE channel for this.   The poor are still with us, young people still have compassion and energy, but structures have changed.   For better or for worse, it used to be that MCC , not conferences, would do peace work, peace education.   Not sure what is happening in that area.   What is needed in 2009 for the light from the city on the hill to be warm, bright and inviting?  (Do we really need 11/12 MCC’s in North America??)