(e)mergent Voyageurs

When Kim & I decided to move to one of Winnipeg’s inner city neighbourhoods to pioneer a missional community through YWAM, one of the first things we did was to visit local pastors, churches, social agencies, etc. to see what the needs were and where we might fit into the existing work being done there.  We were surprised at the top answer: they needed someone to help recruit, train and organize short-term volunteers who were always contacting for them for involvement.  Winnipeg is somewhat unique in that it has one of the highest volunteer rates (per capita) in North America, leaving many of the ministries, drop-in centres, etc. scrambling to organize them.

For those of you who know YWAM, the organization is best known for its short-term missions experiences.  As you might expect, I have always been somewhat uncomfortable about with how the short term model can insulate people from the poor and the unchurched, allowing for those involved to feel good about ministry and service, but requiring no long term relationship or systemic change to worldview or lifestyle.  When we moved to Winnipeg, we hope to forge a new approach to missions within YWAM, while still honouring the values of our organization.  And now we found ourselves being asked to create a system and structure to draw, train and organize short-term volunteers!

It drew us into a time of serious prayer and reflection.  In the end, we believed that there was a place for short term missional experiences, given they are done with careful intentionality to avoid the dangers.  The fact is that millions of Christians are going to spend significant resources, time and energy on short term missions trips.  Many go with excellent, but misguided intentions, but do what we may, they WILL go.  The question we were left with is whether we should do anything about it.

In the end we decided to offer short term missions programs that would place a significant emphasis on challenging worldview and lifestyle, specifically in the areas of injustice in the urban culture.  We try to subversively use the short term model to undermine the pervasive assumptions and models that can sadly contribute to the problems rather than work for their betterment.  We seek to redeem the model as a transitional tool for transformation.

Have we made mistakes along the way?  Without question!  Whether through overlooking a detail, being too tired, making assumptions or whatever else, people will walk away failing to see the deeper truth, truly connect with the person they are ministering in, even on occasion exploiting for their own “experience” those they are called to serve.  I can’t tell you how steamed I get when the lesson people learned from their time with us is that they are “so much more grateful for all we have”.  I want to shout (and sometimes do) when groups spend the day sorting desperately needed food for the poor, then complain and criticize because it was “boring”.

However, when we looked at our ideals and deep rooted values, we knew that there is a great gulf between them and the reality of most of the Western Church.  We asked ourselves what we were to do in response.  Should we  stick to the strictest ideals, knowing that our missional integrity remained untouched and hope that our example would influence others for the best?  Without a question some must take this option, far more than are already doing it.  But should all of us demand such exacting commitment?  I am not so sure.

Over the last few years I have had the privilege of encountering women and men who have chosen to live some of these ideals in such powerful ways.  While I do not want to take away from what they have accomplished, I have also noticed a common trend among many of these groups.  In their commitment to these ideals, they often alienate the larger Christian community as a result.  This isn’t entirely their fault, but often their (legitimate) critique of other Christians and their strict adherence to their theologies and practice keep others at a stark distance.  Having lived in an inner city community for several years, I can understand the frustration, exasperation and even cynicism that would drive them to such a response.  However, I believe we need to be mindful of this tendency and resist it.

Rather, I believe that we must be as committed to the transformation of the whole Body of Christ as we are to the ideals that we seek to live out.  In order to do this, we have to be willing to meet our sisters and brothers in Christ half-way (or more).  Is this compromise?  No more so than being willing to contextually adapt to reach people in various cultures or religions.  I would rather work for greater, broader change with the potential of seeing so many more believers becoming transformational, missional agents of the Kingdom than be right and alienated.  And just as the adherence to the strict ideals is not a universal calling, neither is this attempt at bridging the gap.  However, it is part of my vocation.

To that end, we believe that short term missions has a small part in being that bridge.  As I have already stated, it is not without its dangers.  There is the constant tension between compromise and over-protection.  The workers are far too few to make this mistake.  Does this use or exploit the poor for the purposes of personal spiritual growth?  That is certainly a risk.  However, it is equally as likely and wrong to use and exploit the poor to protect and bolster our own sense of moral idealism or superiority.

The methods and models used in short term missions need serious and regular evaluation, nor should they be used without an intentional connection to the long term works of missional communities.  The powerful experiences that people often have on these trips cannot be underestimated or dismissed.  The ability for these experiences to create startlingly authentic community (or as Alan Hirsch would call it, communitas) is something we cannot ignore or brush off as selfish emotionalism.

These and many other examples argue for a cautious optimism towards short term missions.  Further, it also should make us realize that, perhaps, far more within the established, Evangelical, modern, etc. church offers redemptive promise that we need to humbly consider as we seek to serve God faithfully.  And so, in this and many other areas, I will remain a cautious advocate.

Emerging Church Missional

With the harvest season upon us, it is time to celebrate Canadian Thanksgiving. Kim, Dino & I are heading off to northwestern Ontario for an extend long weekend, so things will be quiet from this end. Have a restful weekend and fruitful harvest season in all things.

A few months ago I outted myself as moderate fan of Oprah. In the spirit of openness, I want to say that have also gained grudging respect of Dr. Phil McGraw over the last few years. Sure, the show can sometimes slip into voyeurism now and then, but having read several of his books, I have been astonished at the simple, yet profound wisdom of much of his perspective. I won’t go into a lengthy apologetic on Dr. Phil, but let me just put it on record: there are far more problematic public voices for anyone to waste time attacking someone with his integrity.

That being said, I was wondering this afternoon what would happen if we applied some of his home grown wisdom to the our journey as the church. While this is largely just for fun, I think we might be surprised by what we learn. In addition to posting general ideas, I will also post some questions Dr. Phil might ask and I would really love to hear your feedback on them. Here’s goes.

-The best indicator of future behaviour is past behaviour. Change takes time, so if we truly want to see sustainable change, we have to create a new history. We cannot expect people (whether they be people in the church or outside of it) to just believe us that we have changed or found a “better way” of being church. We need to regain credibility and trust, we have to create a new history that will prove a new future. This takes time, patience and humility.

-We are not victims of our choices. While the church of today inherited a great deal of failures of the past, and that they need to be addressed, we need to own the choices we make from this day forward. If we perpetuate the negative or fail to work against it, we must own that as our own failures, not the fault of “modernity”, “fundamentalists”, etc. We may have been “victims” in some respects, but we are not victims of the choices we make as a result.

-Define our payoffs and cut them off. While there are most complex issue of theology, etc. involved, often we hold onto practices, ideas and even beliefs because we get something out of it. What are the payoffs for holding onto some of these realities? What excuses do these payoffs give us that convince us not to work for the change that is becoming increasingly clear we need? What would it take and/or cost to cut these things off?

Emerging Church Missional

This past weekend, my wife & I had some time to relax, so decided to rent a movie. As Kim is the athlete in the marraige, we choose sports films from time to time. This time Kim decided on “The Rocket”. In this excellent historical true story, the life and career of legendary Québécois hockey player Maurice “The Rocket” Richard. Those who know of The Rocket’s career will know that he was one of the most masterful players to ever play the game, but also the source of great controversy.

Richard played in an area where French Canadians were often treated as second rate citizens by other Canadians (and often as poorly by American teams and fans). Matching his talent on the ice with pointed critique of the inequity within the National Hockey League against French Canadians, reflecting the deeper prejudice that permeated the larger culture. This injustice played itself out during game play, which Richard reacted to forcefully. While his violence was perhaps excessive, if understandable, in 1955 it earned him a suspension for the remain season and the playoffs. The result was a massive riot by fans which remains infamous to this day.

Watching this film stirred something in me, perhaps even opening a deep and long forgotten wound. As many of you know, my family on my mothers side is French Canadian. The heritage of the Aprin/Trudeau family (yes, Pierre was a relative) are rich, rooted in this nation since before the Battle on the Plains of Abraham. And yet, like many of my cousins, the French heritage has been lost to me. I do not speak French (though I understand a fair bit) and have lost much of the cultural characteristics that were once a part of our families life. Several years ago I added “Arpin” to my last name as an attempt to honour that part of my history, but I have found it difficult to do more to recapture it.

Perhaps this is why the issue of my previous two posts (Redemptive Taxonomy & Why I Am…) were so personal for me. I do not want to add dividing labels or brands, nor do I want split the church into opposing camps. However, I know how misguded we can get at times, even with the best intentions, in trying to forge unity through uniformity. People keep saying this like “Can’t we just be followers of Christ?” or “We should find our identity in Christ”. Of course I agree with this, but these comments tend to be more sentimental than substantial, doing nothing to work through the real issues of our diversity.

I don’t want to beat a dead horse with this issue. However, I wanted to shed some light as to one of the reasons why this has been so important to me. I haven’t wanted to put things in boxes. I haven’t wanted to contribute to division or parochialism. I haven’t been attempting distance myself from one group/theology or another. Rather, my desire has been to try to contribute to an environment that allows for the diversity that is so essential to our identities within Christ and to our unity as His Body.

Ok, I promise to move on and mix up the topics this week. Au revoir!

Emerging Church Missional Identity Culture