missional?
At a recent meeting at Northern, we were discussing one of our congregations focus, purpose and mission. A paper had been prepared to orient our discussion and it made the point that we needed to regain a missional focus for this particular congregation. One of our leaders, who is a very wise and experienced former minister in the Church of Christ said:
“can someone please explain to me what is the difference between mission and missional? What does missional mean?”
Good question!
For a couple of us at the meeting our attempt to answer this, revolved around the idea that the words mission and missional have become associated with an empire approach to Christianity - a furthering of the ideas and trappings of civilisation according to western powers. This means that these words have become problematic and filled with some unfortunate connotations. We talked about how a number of people some years ago in North America came up with the word - some of the ones I could remember were Darell Guder, Alan Roxburgh.
My parents in hearing the word a number of years ago remarked that it wasn’t a word and they refuse even to this day to use the word as it is bad grammar. But putting my parents aside - what is your reaction and feeling about the increasing use of the word missional?
The word missional is being used a lot lately. Over the recent forge intensive and through out the presentations of Brian McLaren I kept hearing word. I like the word. We use it at Northern. I think it helps to reclaim mission ground that once meant largely what we did overseas and often that just meant sending our money to the brave and committed few that went overseas to “do mission”. The misso dei (the missionary sense of God) is at the very heart of who God is and we need to urgently reclaim mission as an fundamentally apart of who we are as the people of God and not an added extra or a program that we start. The questions is though - does the word missional help this?
So, how would you answer? What is the word missional all about?
February 28th, 2006 at 5:01 pm
exactly Dan
If I was explaining incarnational mission to those outside the bubble I would explain it differently.
I have no idea of any other understanding of the word incarnation, so I do not know what you guys are talking about. Perhaps you can explain to me what I am missing, because I really don’t get it.
the rev
February 28th, 2006 at 5:40 pm
Edited from http://www.dictionary.com:
in·car·nate, adj.
1a. Invested with bodily nature and form: an incarnate spirit.
1b. Embodied in human form; personified: a villain who is evil incarnate.
2. Incarnadine.
tr.v. in·car·nat·ed, in·car·nat·ing, in·car·nates (-nt)
1a. To give bodily, especially human, form to.
1b. To personify.
2. To realize in action or fact; actualize: a community that incarnates its founders’ ideals.
February 28th, 2006 at 8:11 pm
thanks got it
guess I have been in the bubble too long.
Sorry everyone, I will try to be less emerging in the future.
the rev
February 28th, 2006 at 8:32 pm
I’m with Rev words are words are words.
Every generation is faced with the challenge of responding to the gospel;I dont have too much trouble with all of the qualifying and descriptors or how many “posts” are required (post Christian.modern/history/industrial/collingwood, but in the end ,its what you do and how you respond.And I must confess I dont see very much evidence in how the “missional” responds.Yep lots of meetings,some great discussion,good books,and “heroes” (as someone called them) a plenty,but …..
I’m struck by both the similarities and the differences between my generation and what I assume is the generation which mucks around in phil/Dans backyard.
If Phil wants a good debate he drops sex or the bible into the threads - nothing changes.
While there is much analysis of the world we live in (the “West” somehow seems to take a new lease of life) when a response is invited - prisoners,Aboriginal mobs,WMDs,terrorism,Iraq,the powerles at the mercy of the churches etc very few respond.
Maybe i’m missing something…..if so forgive me and hopefully someone will put me straight.
February 28th, 2006 at 8:44 pm
Even a strong man like the Rev has limitations on how far above his weight he can punch. You mentioned problems (sorry, should I say “challenges for the post-modern world”) of varying scales, Alan. Some would be more effectively with dealt by larger institutions which can often carry more weight. In the universe of churches, it is the well-established traditional churches, Roman Catholic, Anglican, that have developed the institutional size and recognition that can make a difference in some of the areas you mention. I’m thinking of how recent Popes have travelled the world talking with various political leaders. Or the public pronouncements of leaders of these churches being publicly and widely reported. Not to mention their vast assets that can be used for charitable purposes.
Your small “emergent church” is unlikely to have that sort of impact. Size can be important. Maybe the emerging church should form much closer alliances with the larger established churches and learn from them, instead of reacting against them.
February 28th, 2006 at 9:24 pm
I believe the power of grass roots, movements has been shown, throughout history to be capable of great transformative power. Infact it was Jesus chosen method.
I am not sure what you are saying Alan, but the mob I have run with since I was a kid, is not going to any traditional church, no matter how cool it is. So should we just say, “bad luck”. And the fact that more and more of the young people in our western world are saying the same makes me ask, “what of the old tradition is absolutely necessary? And can’t we remove the stuff that repels people if it isn’t core? What I am left with is a simple message of Jesus, that can fit within cultures, as it was delivered in them. We need not export Rome, and Europe, along with it.
the rev
March 3rd, 2006 at 3:08 pm
[…] In the early pages of the book (pp10–11) there is this quote that I thought gave us further information for our discussion surrounding the use of the word missional. […]