Missionary experience

In Laura Parker's opinion, some things should take priority if one were to enjoy a fruitful missionary experience overseas.  She regretted, and advises newer missionaries to:

• Concentrate on learning language first, singly and wholeheartedly; rather than to try to mix ministry with language-learning at the initial stages;
• Take your vacation while going to the mission field - instead of trying to squeeze that in before leaving the home country, or trying to do it while on the field;
• Take time to absorb the culture, learn your place, etc; instead of diving in and trying to be productive asap;
• Bear in mind that community is essential - surround yourself with peers who have similar goals; rather than trying to be a solo-pioneer;
• Expect disappointment, even though it is good to be optimistic.

Would you agree with her?  Why or why not?

From my experience, and from having many missionary friends, I appreciate the gems in Laura's advise.  I see that many missionaries would benefit from bearing in mind what she said and taking effort to follow those guidelines.  In fact

• Some mission organisations insist that their missionaries concentrate on learning language first, before setting out to do any "real" work;
• Some missionaries have suffered burn out, and not gotten along well with co-workers and the locals of their host country; and consequently had to return home for not taking enough time to absorb the culture or learn their place;
• Most missionaries see the need to connect with a church in their host environment.  Some of my friends would minister with the locals most of the week and on Sunday mornings, but make time to be with other expats in an international church in the evenings.

However, I can also imagine possible exceptions to the rule.  Eg;

• Supporters expect results and want to see results.  So taking time to be at the "dock", as Laura puts it can turn off these supporters who might think the person that they are supporting is wasting their time and money and are impatient to see them get on with the job;
• The job is important and needs to get done; quickly and efficiently.  Especially one who has gone in to share their management skills, engineering skills, teaching or administrative skills.  Such missionaries do not need so much language and culture.  To lose a year to learn language when this is not their gift or their area of service is seen as a "waste";
• People are perishing.  Why vacation?  Why take time to venture slowly out of one's comfort zones?  Don't we need to get the message out hastily?
• Vacation in the home country gives the missionary a longer time to stay connected with their home culture and environment.  Vacation in the host country gives the missionary time to connect with the host culture.  Why lose it vacationing in another place that gives neither benefit;
• Some are sent on pioneering missions.  For them to try to avoid going out solo and to stay at the "dock" is not for them to fulfill the mission for which they are sent.

 Do you agree with these exceptions?

How do you think a missionary can strike a good balance between the pros and cons of their choices?

Is there still a need for missionaries to venture out cross-culturally and pioneer new work?  Or is the world so connected via the Olympics and the Internet these days that we do not need such missionaries anymore?

What do you think?  What do you believe?  What would you do if you were called to be a missionary?