(e)mergent Voyageurs

It has been two months since I first wrote about what it means to be missional in a rural context.  I promised to elaborate on some more specific ideas, but with the busyness of summer, I put it aside.  More than that, I wanted to spend some time in a rural context, talking to people who are actually living missionally in such settings.  I was able to do that this summer, visiting my folks in my old home town, something I wish I could do more often.

I will start by clarifying that most of my comments here will not center around the proclamation of the Gospel.  This in no way reflects that I think it is unimportant or less than central to our vocation as missional communities.  Rather I want to focus on way in which rural churches can intentionally bridge the gap to their community in order to build relationship with those they are called to serve and minister to.

Many times on this blog I have talked about “third places” and their importance in every society.  Most societies are built upon three places where I lives playout: Home, Work and Social.  Historically, these three places were often the same (or at least very overlapped), but with the Industrial Revolution and the rise of individualism, the lines dividing the places became more firm, with the third place (the social contexts) fading in importance.  That is why many missional Christians are emphasizing a need for missional third places.

However, given this emphasis on third places, we could also stand the risk of forgetting the other two.  In fact, they actually exsist in something of a hierarchy of importance, with home topping the list, followed by work, with the third place coming in at the end.  This is not to say that the third place is unimportant, but rather that as essential as it is for a healthy society, it is the place that costs us the least to lose.  In the end, we need all three.  But again, I am getting off track.

When we consider all three places, they present a basic framework or set of lenses through which we can view our communities and our missional “strategy” to reach it.  In a rural community, it is far more achievable to address these places intentionally.  Let us consider a few ideas through each of the places:

Home/Family:  The quality of familial relationships (especially spousal and parental) is crucial to health of any community.  This means the church in a rural community has a wonderful opportunity to provide relational support and guidance to community families.  It is critical, however, for the congregation to be commited to genuine relational wholeness in their own families.  While it could exsist in the form of programs, rural communities often provide relational connections that allow for something less formal and (perhaps) more effective.  Of course, for this to work, relationships need the time and context to develop (but I am getting ahead of myself).

Another possibility lies with physical homes.  One thing that I loved about living in a small town (that I rarely see in urban contexts, though I am sure there are exceptions) was how the people in the church came together to help each other with the practical needs.  Whether it was simple repairs or clean up after a flooded basement, the collective skills and resources of the congregation were frequently at work serving one another.  What if this extended outside the church?  Not only could it serve many in the community, but those outside the church could participate along side the church, both building relationships and offering participatory modeling of serving others.

Work/Vocation:  We all know the importance of having a means to support oneself and ones family.  Sadly, as many rural communities are suffering economic hardship (a topic for another post), the role the church could play in this second place is critical.  In my home town, my father stepped out of some responsibilities in the church to participate in the local chamber of commerce.  This was not out of neglect for his Christian responsibilities, but rather out of an intentional decision to connect and serve the community through his giftings.  In small towns, few places are a greater collection of gifts and resources as churches.  In my small, childhood church (in a town of 1000) our congregation has teachers, parents, doctors, police officers, nurses, missionaries, carpenters, etc.  What a dream team!

Another way to serve in this second place, albeit not as obvious, is in the area of understanding spiritual vocation.  While people should not have their identity defined by their job (or lack thereof), few people know (Christians included) that God has gifted and called each person to play a role in His purposes.  Even before people are Christians, being a part of community where their presence and giftings are welcomed and valued can be a powerful witness.

Social:  In the “Home/Family” section, I mentioned how much the church could invest into relationships with people in the community.  However, like many churches, it is very easy for rural churches to become very busy with internal programs and events.  Too often the church becomes the entire relational/social network (and a busy one at that).  As a result, not only are no Christian engaged in social relationships outside the church, but those third places that do exsist suffer from their lack of involvement.  (An example of this can be seen in the lack of pub culture in North America, while the “seedy bars” thrive).

It will take a very significant shift of thinking and organization for churches to step back from the level of time and energy consumption that internal programs demand.  When we have done this, we can better engage in genuine relationships in our communities.  Participating in exsisting third places in the community is critical- in cafes, libraries, social clubs, etc.  Rural communities provide some of the greatest flexility for the use and creation of third places.  Where they don’t exsist, the church could consider creating them- youth drop-in centres, cafes, book clubs, day care, community picnics/BBQ’s, etc.

All of the above are just a few of the examples of how a rural church can engage their community, building the genuine relationships that provide the context in which our shared lives can incarnationally (and proclamationally) represent Christ to our neighbours.  Many of these ideas are not restricted to the rural setting, but I believe they are often better situated see them happen.  I genuinely believe that as we impact these three areas through selfless service, the quality of these communities will be impacted, contributing to position and authority of the church to speak into them.

What do you think?  What are your ideas for these three spaces?

Ten years ago Manitoba was hit by such an intense flood from the overflowing Red River it has become known to locals as “The Flood Of The Century”. The province suffered waters of 7.5 m deep, causing 28,000 people to be evacuated and $500 million of damage. Even Winnipeg, despite the millions spent on flood protection, was almost completely overwhelmed. In the face of such widespread destruction only one other aspect of the flood captured peoples attention more- the incredible solidarity and generosity that people across Canada & the US- but especially Manitobans- demonstrated in response.

Time & again, we see this incredible human response to crisis and suffering, such as in the 2004 tsunami, hurricane Katrina and the increasingly promising response to the HIV/AIDS crisis throughout the continent of Africa. Despite the realities of human weakness and failings, people seem to increasingly demonstrate their commitment to the greater good, especially when there is nothing in it from them.

Now, I am not suggesting that crisis and suffering should be a strategy for human unity and service, nor that they are, in themselves, effective foundations to build such generosity. However, we cannot ignore the two significant common factors- first, that we have no end to very immediate and critical human suffering across the street and around the world; and second, that there is an exponential power and impact when people collectively rise up to face such challenges.

This is why we so desperately need to confront the culture of comfort and entitlement that we are fed from the cradle to the grave. While I could argue that, intrinsically this culture is flawed, even if it were a valid lifestyle to pursue I believe it to run entirely contrary to the very heart of the life Christ led and called us to follow without consideration of the cost. In fact, in the words of Bonhoeffer, when Christ bids us follow, he bids us come and die.

The beauty is that, as we resist the self-serving lifestyle the world tells us is our right, we begin to not only discover God’s purposes, but we also begin to discover each other. Suddenly the limitations that seemed to hold us back from truly making a difference fade away through the collective and collaborative power of true community. The solidarity we see in the face to these major disasters does not have to be a rare and fleeting experience, but a way of life born out of shared purpose and love.

While we are beginning to see this disconnect between a culture that teaches us to insulate and isolate ourselves from discomfort and a Christ that calls us into a glorious hope through suffering and sacrafice, have we really gone far enough? How many of us are truly willing to ask the difficult questions about how and where we live; what and why we do what we do; and all the other questions that Gospel demands? Are we willing to make the changes that could cost us our financial security, hard earned comforts and even family safety to follow Christ?

I hope so.

Emerging Church, Missional

In an attempt to further develop the ideas I articulated in my article, “The Community Coming To Be Known As Missional”, I have been exploring it in more detail what I did and did not mean. I am examining each section, trying to share the heart of what I hoped to communicate, where I think it should go or how it should look and why it is important to me. Here is Part 3:

“We are the Community Coming To Be Known As Missional. Each among us is our leader, each among us is led. We honour the diversity of our community by leading from along side or beneath, not from above. Every gifting, perspective, experience and individual is valued equally, not according to position or power. Each among us is our teacher, each among us a student. We honour the wisdom of every individual, especially those on the margins, as Christ Himself identified with their trials.”

I am not advocating anarchy or anti-establishmentism, but rather challenging how worldy models of power and hierarchy based authority have usurped God’s intended community of mutuality, service and humility. Not surprisingly, the world is beginning to see the wisdom in this, impacting science, business, government, etc. embracing truly Biblical values with stunning positive impact. Recognizing that there are times people need leadership, the nature and excerise of the leadership can be very different than what we are used to.

We recognize that when one leads it does not reflect on their value nor on the value of those who follow. While we would give lip service to such beliefs, (again) in practice it doesn’t always seem to happen. Language of “roles”,”giftings” and “equal but different” can be used to subtly determine who can and cannot lead based on a positional power-based model. We then see language like “anointing” and “chosen” to defend position or silence protest. “Submission” can be robbed of its beauty when used as a weapon to control in worst cases.

Finally, while not creating an equal opposite to this problem by elevating them to sacrosanct level, we acknowledge that those on the margins have much to teach us. By this I am not suggesting that they are better suit to teach or lead (though in some cases that is true), but rather that in relating with them in love and service, the challenges it raises teaches more deeply than any sermon ever could. Those challenges will stem from their sin and brokenness- trust me, many of the poor would not think twice about accepting a gift with one hand, while stealing with the other (sounds like some businesses I know…) and/or they will stem from our own sin and brokenness- such as our complicity with consumerism and individualism or our abandonment of our vocation of missional justice to the state.

“We celebrate the differences amongs, even that which we cannot reconcile, not in denial of the absolute, but in the gift of humility that those differences require of us. Without denying our differences, we no longer allow them to categorize us or divide us. It is in the diversity that the image of God is most fully reflected in and through us.”

This is not the uncritical tolerance that denies absolutes, but the unconditional love that is absolute. It recognizes that, as important as issues of doctrine and theology are, if we define our relationships and missional commitment upon that exchange, we miss the heart of the Gospel. Jesus said He IS the Truth and that Truth will be found (not exclusively) in our missional engagement with the world and service to the other.

We do not embrace uncertainty with the pride of enlightened postmoderns, but humbly in our acknowledgement that Scripture, history and our lives demonstrate time and again that God’s people get it wrong. Yes, this is a dangerous tension to live with, but the false safety of taking refuge in the extreme- be it easy relativism or unmovable fundamentalism- will only kill the seeds of hope that we are called sow. Again, our differences and how we respond to them in loving and godly ways is a reflection of the Trinitarian nature of the God in whose image we are created.

“We are the Community Coming To Be Known As Missional, but we are not there yet. We acknowledge our weakness and foolishness, as it is the weakness and foolishness of God. We are flawed, broken, proud and afraid. While we are committed to becoming this community without apology, we acknowledge that our becoming is dependant on the whole Body of Christ. While we believe we have something to offer the whole Church- something critical and prophetic- we also acknowledge that we need them equally as much. Above all, we need God- Father, Son and Spirit- to complete in us what we are created to be.”

Finally, and most importantly, we end where we began. We are moving towards something on a path that is somewhat unfamiliar to us. We are not masters of our domain, but travellers in a journey towards God (voyageurs, in other words). We are daring, bold and commited on the one hand, but often pushy, cocky and stubborn on the other, for which there is no excuse. Sometimes, however, our foolishness and weakness are the keys to truly being missional- like the shared brokenness of a 12-step program, we don’t have to have it all together before God loves us or we love each other. What a hope for the world to see!

Some may not feel as strongly as me on this point, but I deeply believe that the best future for this community will emerging alongside the traditional church, seeing both sides informed and guided by the other. Most of us would not be where we are without the traditional church, sometime for worse, but more often for better I think. We need each other.

In the end, though, no model, theology, value system or manifesto will truly change anything. Only by the grace of God, through the power of the Holy Spirit will any lasting good be birthed from this shared journey towards becoming the community known as missional.

Anything to add? Fire away!

Emerging Church, Missional

Previous Post – Tuesdays With Harry – The Cost Of Being Wrong

In an attempt to further develop the ideas I articulated in my article, “The Community Coming To Be Known As Missional”, I have been exploring it in more detail what I did and did not mean. I am examining each section, trying to share the heart of what I hoped to communicate, where I think it should go or how it should look and why it is important to me.

“For us, generosity trumps obligation, for all that we have is Gods. We give what we have, both financial and otherwise, because we cannot help but want to see His purposes come to fruition. We offer hospitality, opening our homes and our lives to welcome the other. 10% is more likely the amount that remains than what is demanded, and in our mutual generosity, none of us goes without.”

In a culture that teaches consumption and greed, we cannot be too careful on how this impacts our faith journey. In case some think it arrogant, this paragraph represents more of an ideal I hope to see emerge than a common reality I see practiced. While there are those who do, it is fairly rare. I am not opposed to tithing- when people are hesitant to give, it is a good rule of thumb to teach. However, it can become a cop out (even sin) when we end up thinking, even unconsciously, that the 10% is God’s and the rest is ours. Further, as church leaders, we need to be using those previous resources with a brutally demanding integrity.

Hospitality is, perhaps, one of the most significant and powerful aspects of being missional that has been lost to most of the Western church. While I am not arguing that “house churches” are the only or best way of doing community, I will say that in order to have true loving relationships and community, we must live our lives together, demanding that our homes be open to each other more than brief events or meetings. So much of the New Testament cannot be understood fully until we recognize the degree to which the early church embraced this communal hospitality, not only to each other, but also to the outsider.

“We are the Community Coming To Be Known As Missional. Our success is measured by our obedience to Gods calling on us, most evident in our love for Him, for others, for ourselves and for Creation. While we passionately work to build a Kingdom that will change the very course of history, we celebrate the transformation of even one life as though it were the greatest triumph of all, because it is.”

Too often we fall into the trap of defining our success by the worlds standards, as though numbers, exposure, bottom-line, etc. were what reflected it. While these things are important, they are secondary to our commitment to serve God regardless of the “pay offs”. I articulate the ideas of this paragraph in more detail in my series “What Is The Gospel?” (Parts 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5). As the final sentence explains, we believe and work towards the transformational impact of God’s love on the whole world, but believe it is also demonstrated in the “smallest” victories.

“We are ruthlessly committed to people over programs, demanding that the latter always serve the former or it will be abandoned. We cooperate, not compete, not seeking to win the praise or demand the submission of others. Neither do we serve buildings and budgets, but they must serve us as we serve others. We seek our greatness in our pursuit to becoming servants.”

Few can argue with the value of the opening sentence, but in practice it can be difficult to achieve. Programs represent investment in time, energy and passion. More often than not we expect people to adapt to the programs rather than considering their continued merit (see my post on systematic planned abandonment). This trend also reflects at times how much we have been shaped by our consumeristic culture, endeavouring to produce the best product for our customers.

Following this trend, we can easily become driven to be the biggest and the best, not primarily out of a sense of excellence or obedience, but in a competitive drive to be on top. While rarely expressed this blatantly, it is too common a pattern is rapidly growing communities, as numbers, programs and buildings become a status symbol of our “success”. In when driven by the right intention to see others drawn to the message of hope in Christ, the medium itself is a message that often contradicts the Gospel we are called to live and proclaim.

I have seen a pattern, both in churches and “parachurch” missions/ministries, where a newer and/or bigger building is looked to as the solution to growth. And yet, far too often, the realities and expenses of such facilities require an approach to ministry, fundraising, etc. that is more directed by sustaining the monster than following the mission. Growth itself is not enough, as we need to be guided by the “DNA” of Christ’s Body. Again, this is not saying mega-churches are wrong (in fact, I have seen quite small ministries fall into this trap while huge churches avoid it), but rather common enough of a problem to merit examination.

What say you?

Emerging Church, Missional

I have been encouraged to see Bill Kinnon’s provocative polemic, “The People Formerly Known As The Congregation”, make its rounds through the blogosphere, inspiring and provoking conversation. I am also honoured that he considered my piece, “The Community Coming To Be Known As Missional”, part 3 of a series inspired by him (Emerging Grace write Part 2; John Frye Part 4; and most recently, Greg Laughery Part 5).

In an attempt to further develop the ideas I articulated in my article, I thought it could be beneficial to explore in more detail what I did and did not mean. I will examine each section, trying to share the heart of what I hoped to communicate, where I think it should go or how it should look and why it is important to me. In order to avoid an overly lengthy piece, I will break it up over a few days.

“The Community Coming To Be Known As Missional”

The title obviously intentionally played off the title of Bill’s original piece. However, where Bill’s piece expressed what he no longer identified with, I wanted to try and identify with that which I hope we could become. As a Canadian, I know how easy it is to define ourselves (immaturely) by what we are not (i.e. “I am not American!”)- something that became apparent to me as I learned to embrace my Canadian/American dual citizenship.

Further, I used the phrase “coming to be known as” to reflect that we have not arrived yet. This is so critical, given the often heated engagement of missional ideals with established Christian traditions. It should ground us in the humility that we are very new to many of these ideas and expressions, therefore requiring us to extend (and request) grace to(/from) those outside our experience.

“Let me introduce you to The Community Coming To Be Known As Missional. There are millions of us, but even very few of us will change the world around us.”

While I do believe that (globally) millions of Christian identify with these values, both in belief and in practice, the second sentence is intentionally written to demonstrate that such numbers are not what is important, not lending us any sense of legitimacy or authority, but rather that the conviction and commitment of even a few holds the capacity to do great things through the Spirit of God.

“We are community because it is the incarnational reflection of the Triune God in whose image we are created. We are a community that prefers walking rather than sitting, going where the Spirit has already gone before us, be it in our neighbourhood or ends of the earth. We are united by relationship and vision, not locations and buildings.”

Anyone who knows me or reads this blog frequently will know that true community is a deep and residing passion in my life. My conviction is that being created in the image of God is significantly (possibly even central) a reflection of His Trinitarian nature. Therefore, it is when we live and love together in the sacramental unity that we best reflect God. That is, in large part, righteousness.

It is the very Trinitarian-centered community nature that drives us out of the doors of our churches- not in rejection of them- into the world where God is already at work, calling us to join Him. As my good friend Brother Maynard is fond of saying, “The best theology comes in boots, not books”. Not a rejection of theological understanding and knowledge, it is rather an attempt to respond to the dynamic tention between our beliefs and our lives. While too few Christians have been involved in their own communities, I do not believe that this move towards local missionality should come at the expense of global missional endeavours. Christ calls us to the end of the earth.

Whether it is churches, “parachurches”, volunteer organizations, etc. people tend to find themselves involved and commited on the basis of two major influences: relationships and vision. If you are there for the relationships, but do not embrace (or believe in) the vision, you risk creating nothing more than social clubs. If you are there for the vision, but do not work towards true relationship- well, as Corithians tells us, “if you have not love…”. It is not a rejection of locations or buildings, just a rearrangement of their priority. (I will explore the relationship to buildings and programs in a later post in this series)

What do you think? Anything you would like to add to each point?

Emerging Church, Missional

In this final post in this series, I want to explore the final emphasis and intention that I shared in regards to the creation of a missional “third place”:

3. To model and “proclaim” the Gospel in a mutual pursuit of salvation.

Some might question the wisdom, even morality, of placing this as the third and last in the list of objectives we aim to achieve in the creation of “The Dusty Cover” used bookstore. Does this not reflect a misplaced value and importance on the Gospel, which should be of primary (if not exclusive) emphasis? It is a fair question.

The order of these three aspects do not reflect value, but rather process. Ultimately, without the third point- without the emphasis on the Gospel- the former two have limited value and, for me, not a great deal of hope for lasting impact. However, I also know that we are created by God to function in very specific ways, building relationships and understanding according to certain general processes.

To that end, I believe that the creation and/or engagement within safe, mutual and neutral places are necessary for the development of relationships. For our message to have authority, especially given the long, sad history of hypocrisy within the church, we need to demonstrate our commitment to serve without expectations. Once these dynamics are met, we are then in a place where our hearts, minds and relationships are naturally situated to embody and articulate the message of salvation in Christ.

This is not to say that this process is always necessary. This is NOT a formula, nor is it a list of essential elements to the success of every missional endeavour. Scripture (and I am sure your own experience) is filled with examples where the Gospel has been preached on the spot with powerful and positive impact. These are genuine and should not be belittled. However, the danger is when we see these examples as the norm or pattern for all or most evangelism. The result, as we have seen, is easy believism, increasing (and justified) critique of the Christian community and consumeristic, efficiency-based approach to “saving souls”.

Within this process, upon the creation of such an environment, we will find ourselves living our live with the people in that community. Rather than inviting people into a Sunday morning church environment (which, we must admit, is largely and intentionally artificial), we naturally engage life, family, relationships, works, etc. within this shared relationships (just as they share their lives with you). Our lives, then, and not just our words, become the primary evidence of our faith.

This will essentially require that we take very seriously the impact our faith has on every level of our lives. I am not suggesting that it will require us to be perfect and without fault (though higher standards of ethics and morality should be a result). This thinking is what has made it so natural and attractive to have the very controlled and manufactured Sunday worship service be the central tool for missional commitment. Rather, as we are real and authentic with our own pursuit of wholeness out of our very real brokenness- without judgment, but with grace- engaging the transformative work of Christ in our lives and our communities, people will recognize hope from within their own brokenness. Anyone who has seen a 12-Step recovery group will see the power of this idea.

And this is what makes this expression of the Gospel a mutual pursuit of salvation. We must recognize that the freedom and salvation of our neighbour is caught up in our own. I am not suggesting that there is no individual component to salvation, but rather than when we die to self, we are resurrected into one Body. This is a process from individual disintegration to shared wholeness. In that sense our salvation is caught up together with our neighbours. The beauty of this understanding is that it undermines the paternalistic and arrogant superiority that has governed even well-intentioned evangelism attempts in our culture.

So what of the articulation and verbal proclamation of this Good News? Is it to be discarded as unimportant? Of course not. However, we must remember two very key points. First, our words have their greatest authority when people see an authentic commitment to the values they expression. In the most important and crucial choices in our lives we reveal this in that we turn to people who have proven themselves, be it for health, auto care, counseling or parenting tips. This is even more true when we are talking about the Gospel. If our lives aren’t reflective of the work of Christ (and again, that doesn’t mean perfection), our message proves us hypocrites.

Second, and perhaps more importantly, the heavy emphasis and practice of preaching the Gospel verbally, aggresively and through a sale-pitch method (to varying degrees), largely in the form of propositional demands, coupled with the general inconsistency within the church to live and reflect the values of that same message, has made the world generally more suspicious of such a model. As a result, while this method could be (and has been) used in effective and healthy ways, it is increasingly less so as a result of these abuses. Therefore, we must now be more careful when and how we do so, making this process more crucial than ever before.

Again, as I stated in the first post, this is not a perfect reflection of the process, but some reflections based on our experiences in ministry here in the inner city of Winnipeg. I believe that, in general, they offer a theme of hope and promise (again, not a formula or set of “steps), and therefore worth exploration and experimentation.

What do you think?

Emerging Church Missional Third Place

Having had a month of intense, over- book schedule, I was a tad nervous going into last week of teaching on our Discipleship Training School (DTS), where I would be helping the students engage the ideas and practices of what it means to be a truly missional community.  A core theme of my teaching is building authentic and true community through a process of brokenness and restoration through the pattern of the cross (see this post for a general overview).  I tried to instill in them a sense that the depth and quality of the community’s relationships, lived openly before the world, is a central expression of missionality.

During the weeks teaching, one of the students was moved emotionally as they worked to break through the challenges that kept their relationships stalled.  Frustrated, passionate and crying, she said:

“How can we expect to be missional in the world if we cannot have open relationships with each other?”

It is an excellent question.  If the Gospel we proclaim is the promise of restoration and salvation in our relationships with God, each other, ourselves and Creation, yet fail to walk it out in our lives together, how can we expect our words to have any authority?  We are not saved by our work, but the work of salvation, by necessity, will produce- no, demand- transformational change in our lives together.

And yet, as I considered this, the reverse question also presented itself:

“How can we expect to live in transformed and restored relationship together as community if we are living missionally in the world?”

At the end of my week of teaching, I presented our students with a project: They were to come together as a team and consider a missional endeavour they engage together.  However, I required that they do so following the values and processes of true community in the process.  Immediate they began hitting challenges in the relational aspects of the project.  As a result, they (predictably) began to escape into organization, rules and efficiency- essentially the seeds of institutionalism.

Stepping in, I required them to go back to the the requirement that, no matter how frustrating or inefficient, their highest value was to do their task as a true community.  As they pushed past the discomfort and inclination to internalize their feelings, it took only a few short minutes for several people to be weeping, sharing deeply personal areas of brokenness exposed by the process.  Out of this experience, their “project” is being shaped by something far more personal, more real.  They are moving past “good” program and looking at call to restoration and reconciliation that is at the heart of our missional vocation as the Body of Christ.

So in the end, we all begin to see in a very real way that to be missional community is an essentially integrated whole.  We cannot be truly missional if we are not fiercely pursuing the costly process of restoration that only comes through the Cross.  Equally as important is the reality that it is truly when we are thrust into the missional context of a broken world that we presented with the environment and impetus to be that community.  One is not more important than the other.  Neither does one come before the other.  They are simultaneous and intimately integrated parts of the same whole.

To be missional community is more than simply adding a missional vision and practice into our current congregations.  This is important and healthy, but because the mission of God is significantly about the restoration of a dis-integrated Creation, a reconciliation of relationships that were meant to reflect and glorify the nature of God- because of this, it necessarily must redefine the very way in which we are community.  Missionality not only defines our posture towards the world, but equally towards each other within our communities and the larger Body of Christ.

In the same way, it is when we find ourselves in the dangerous and liminal reality of missional engagement with the world, if we resist the impulses to escape into institutionalism and shallow “false community”, that we are plunge into an environment that is rich for the formation of the true community.  When faced with relationships and circumstances that ask questions that do not fit our formulaic approach to faith, we are given the opportunity to explore within ourselves the barriers that keep us and others from discovering God.

Suddenly, Jesus revolutionary articulation of God’s ulimately command for His people becomes clearer:

Emerging Church, Missional, Community