In another life I was an industrial engineer. Classically, that profession was all about time efficiency…is it any wonder I have a bent to want to multi-task.
This morning was one of those times; I was riding the exercise bike while reading a few posts. Jamie at (e)mergent Voyageurs raised a question about being missional in a rural context. For me, I was reading that post on the heels of one dealing with the challenge of being missional in suburbia. In both cases I was left wondering whether common usage of the term “missional” was not becoming too closely identified with the urban context. Does not “missional” transcend any one particular context?
As some have expressed all mission is contextual. I agree, but I would rather express it that all mission is incarnational. As God embodied himself in earthy humanity to proclaim that the Kingdom was near, the church is empowered to continue to incarnate Jesus to earthy humanity. In that sense we don’t “do mission” but rather we “be Jesus” to the people that we encounter and live among.
As I see it, being missional in the suburbs or in a rural community (or in the city) is about being Jesus to people where they are at. It is about embodying the passion and compassion of the Master-Teacher-Healer.
July 11, 2007 at 3:02 am |
Great point. The challenge comes on knowing what that looks like given the context. Missionality is for all contexts, but like the diversity of Christ’s Body, so to must there be diversity in our incarnational expressions.
Peace,
Jamie
July 11, 2007 at 11:55 am |
Jamie, I agree for sure it is challenging and it will be diverse and I doubt it ever will be formulaic.