Missional & Location: Inseparably Connected – UPDATED
Previous Post – Carnivorous Bunny & Winged Watchers
UPDATE (June 10, 2007): I just had lunch with Brother Maynard and I think we understand each other better. We didn’t even have to resort to trading fists (wink). I want to add that in order to understand this post, please go and read the comments at Bill’s blog I link to below. When I quoted BroMay, I presumed readers would get the context by read those comments first. That was a mistake, meaning that some would have read the excerpt of his comment out of context and got the wrong impression.
BroMay, obviously believes that location/context is important. What was at issue was that he felt I had not clearly communicated my concept, leaving the impression that I believed everyone must relocate to be missional. While he & I may still disagree on some of the details on the issue, we understand the others position better.
The other day, while reading over at Achievable Ends (one of my daily favourites), I noticed a link to a new blog by Allelon called “Moving into the Neighborhood”. Admittedly, when I saw that title I made the assumption that it was (at least in part) about relocating for missional purposes. When I realized that this was not the intention of the blog, but rather about being missional engaged in suburbia, I expressed my disappointment in the comment section. Here is where the misunderstanding began.
I was not disappointed that Allelon was launching a blog on this topic, but rather, as I was excited about the prospect, I was disappointed that my assumption had been wrong. In fact, I think few organization are better poised to explore this important issue. Perhaps now more than ever the need for an intentional engagement of missionality within the suburban context is necessary. For those who find themselves in this context, I believe this blog will be invaluable.
However, the discussion that resulted between myself and my good friend Brother Maynard has sparked some interesting questions for me. Is location a significant aspect of missionality? Brother Maynard suggests:
Missional to me is about incarnating the message, embodying it… and on that basis, location doesn’t matter. The inner city is of course a concern and needs people to embody the message there, but that’s not the same issue. People need to act/engage missionally. End of sentence.
I agree that missionality is incarnational. Location certainly does not centrally/exclusively define how missional a person is. However, I do believe that location cannot be separated so definitively from missionality. From an individual perspective, location becomes a much more clear issue- no location or vocation is more important than any other. However, if we look at the big picture of the larger Church, it’s importance becomes more significant. Let me try to explore this from my own context.
I was first introduced to the importance of relocation over five years ago when I first met my late friend, Pastor Harry Lehotsky. He made pioneering the YWAM ministry in Winnipeg possible with all the ways he served us, but on one condition- that we would move into the neighbourhood and make it our own. We gladly agreed. He then gave us a copy of “Restoring At-Risk Communities: Doing It Together and Doing It Right” by John Perkins. Relocation was one of three R’s Perkin’s advocated (the others being reconciliation & redistribution). After five years, I am more convinced than ever.
I live and minister in an inner city neighbourhood that is populated by dead and dying churches (that said, those that remain are often amazing examples for us all). The need for missional communities to become part of the neighbourhood is desperately needed. While I am not advocating every Christian abandon their rural and suburban neighbourhoods, I believe for communities to be missional they must consider intentionally rooting their lives in specific communities as an essential expression of their missional commitment. One cannot be missional without prayerfully considering their location, not letting it be incidental to the incarnational faith.
Again, I am not saying everyone must relocate. Rather, I am saying that to be truly missional we must all, as individuals and communities, consider if our location in the context of our missional vocation, both in the specific vocations and the universal vocation of the whole Church. The great narrative of God through history as seen throughout the entire Bible seems significantly rooted in location. We cannot assume that we are called to a location simply because that happens to be where we are- that may end up being the case, but the question must be asked.
What do you think? Is location critical to missionality? Am I overstating things as a result of my own choices and vocation?
Hey BroMay,
I agree. I used MBTI as it is most commonly known, though I tend to blend results from MBTI & KTS. I use more of Keirsey’s material by far.
I have an excellent program that describes the relationality of any two KTI types. I will show you on Tuesday (so if you get there before me, try to get a bigger table).
As for Jesus, I doubt he was rich, but fairly established in a family of tradesmen. Given the culture of his day, there weren’t many nuclear families, meaning that Jesus probably grew up around uncles, aunts, cousins, etc. When Joseph died, he & Mary & family would have been taken care of within that context. From the research I have read, there is perhaps less speculation than you suggest. Or at least, no more than in the assumption that He was poor. Again, I am not saying His family was wealthy, but I doubt they were (that) poor.
I do think it is a stretch to say that, should Jesus have come from a wealthy family that it inevitably fuels the prosperity Gospel. Sure, some might use it that way, but that doesn’t really argue for or against its accuracy.
Geez, we could be the new Siskel & Ebert of the emerging missional church, eh? I think I might post on this topic.
Peace,
Jamie
I was thinking more Laurel and Hardy.
That’s funny. Thumbs up!
You’re right that Jesus’ means shouldn’t be used to fuel prosperity but they make a big deal of it… I had one guy try to sell me investment advice with the apologetic, “Jesus and Paul and all those guys were rich.” Needless to say, I bailed. As a tradesperson with brothers, if they were also skilled and all of them were old enough when Joseph died, they could support the family probably in a middle class kind of way. Family and Synagogue connections should have upheld them, but I do wonder what lasting effect Mary’s unplanned pregnancy would have had in the community. Given that there’s very little information outside the canon, all that either perspective has is conjecture based on knowledge of social norms at the time. Hardly something to build any doctrine upon!
I’d like to see the KTS stuff you have… I’ll have to book off more than an hour, we keep loading up more topics!
As for the “missional type” I would suggest that the “I”s are more drawn to missional engagement as a mode of “evangelism” since the street-preaching of the “E”s is a non-starter for us. Missional is more low-impact and accessible across all types than would be most forms of evangelism we’ve seen in the modern era. This is one of the reasons I’m drawn in… it’s low-key enough that even I can be involved without the pressure of behaving like an “E.” That’s good, because I’m very “I”. ;^)
Interesting. After much prayer and waiting on the Lord as we’re endeavoring to do his will where we’re at, we should be open to what specifically may be on our hearts to do in obedience to God. And location certainly is a factor in that. If it’s on our hearts to minister to a certain group, then we’ll have to be where they’re at. And the best way to do that, normally, would be to dwell among them (John 1:14).
What I pick up in the discussion here (and I haven’t read it all) suggests not that much difference. Good to be able to talk things out in this open forum, and better yet over coffee.
Bill,
That’s funny only because it’s true!
Peace,
Jamie
BroMay,
Anne Rice did some very thorough research on this issue for her excellent novel “Christ the Lord”. Worth reading.
We’ll talk KTI on Tuesday.
Peace,
Jamie
Ted,
You’re right. An issue arose in expressing the manner in which location is important… as I’ve mulled it over I wrote some notes on how I think this works and how it can be expressed clearly — I’ll review this with Jamie and publish something after that. There’s a lot of very subtle nuance in it, such that expressing it just slightly differently can result in a vastly different meaning given the semantic range of the words we use, but I think I’ve stumbled on some really good stuff toward defining missional… another pet project of mine.
Think about Marshall McLuhan, and we’ll talk more on Wednesday <em>;^)</em>
Ted,
Thanks for weighing in. I am sure there will be plenty more discussion to come.
Peace,
Jamie
hehehe … okay, I know this line of discussion is likely dead as I’ve now read all the comments. But I was gone all day yesterday. AND I’m somewhat of an MBTI aficianado … so here’s my $.02 for whoever is still here:
I think the blog-o-sphere is the perfect environment for us I’s, especially IN..’s. It’s a great place for us to express ourselves. So we’ll make up the majority of the people who claim to be talking here about missionality. However, my guess (and it’s just a guess) is that out in the real world there is a much more even distribution of the types. As is probably evidenced in our marriages as well.
Having met David irl … I’d say, he’s probably on the fence, but falling to E. But then, I could just be ornery.
Thanks for the links, Bill, I will check them out.
Sonja,
I agree with you. IN’s are very likely to be drawn to this kind of conversation. However, my wife, who is very actively missional, has little to no interest in it.
Peace,
Jamie
Well, as I promised Ted and had mentioned to others, I’ve now published something on this. First, Location & Missionality: Prelude to a Thesis, which is an explanation of where this conversation when wrong between Jamie and me, and how we missed one another, got pitted against each other, didn’t mean to disagree with each other, and eventually explained it all to each other. It also starts to explain how I think missional is important and is irrelevant at the same time. To that post, I add the (imho important) followup, “How Location is Affected by Missional Engagement” which is my view on just what the title suggests, but is also what I hope will become a conversational exploration of missional mechanics. It ends with an opener on the transformation of missional participants, and I’m hoping that we can have some good discussion there as we begin to unpack some of those themes.
Thanks BroMay!