Open Missional Question: To Commute Or Not To Commute? - UPDATED: April 1, 11am
Since we agreed to partner with the Mennonite Church Manitoba to plant and pastor a new church in our inner city neighbourhood, I have spent a great deal of time reading, studying, praying, etc. about the plan. I have also been seeking the input and advice from others who have been on (or are currently on) this journey. I have been learning a great deal, perhaps more than anything that I have a lot more to learn!
One topic that has drawn a varied response has to do with commuting members. One of the missional values we feel is important is that the church would be shaped by and move according to the culture and rhythmes of our community. As we have looked at how to do this, we have been advised to resist becoming a commuter church- that is a church that is primarily made up of members from different parts of the city. Others, however, have said that we should not discourage commuters, as they will essential parts of community.
Obviously we would not disallow commuters from attending. I do believe there is a benefit to a diversity of people in a missional community. However, we have seen the very real, measurable and negative impact of primarily commuter congregations in our community. We have also seen the beauty and impact of locally shaped missional expressions. So, we know there is a dynamic tension at play in this issue.
So the question is this: Should too many commuters be discouraged from attending? If so, how do you do that?
We would love to have your input, so have at it.
UPDATED: (April 1, 11am) Given the discussion below, I suspect I was not clear enough. Let me try to bring some clarity. First, I am not suggesting that we close doors to commuters. As I did clearly state above, we would want and welcome a diversity of people to our community.
The challenge is that a congregation that is primarily a commuter one has a very unique culture and nature, especially in its formative years. While this is not necessarily a bad thing, it can often be incompatible with the unique cultural context of our inner city community. This neighbourhood has a long history of being the "recipient" of outside altruism, both government and private, Christian and otherwise. While these things can and sometimes do help, it has created a significant divide between the "givers" and "receivers".
Like any missionary, over the last 6 years of living here we have listened to our community and one message is consistant. If you want to be truly trusted and accepted by the community, then you must become a part of it. We have found this to be deeply true. To that end, we have tried to be intentional to build a missional community for, in and with the local neighbourhood.
This does not mean that commuters have no place, but rather that we have seen the very real possibility (especially in its formative years) that the church would become primarily commuter based. In our context, like it or not, that has had negative results. The question above is seeking to find the healthy dynamic between two potential extremes.
Finally, I ask that, should you disagree with the premise, please ask questions to understand (as Cindy has done very well below) and not call peoples motivations, theology or character into question. We ask because we want to do this well. We ask because we really don't know. Thanks.
Missional Missional+Community Christianity Mennonite+Church+Manitoba Mennonite Church+Planting Jesus YWAM Youth+With+A+Mission
Great question. I would put myself unapologetically in the company of those friends of yours who would say that commuters are to be discouraged as much as possible. Allowing commuters to be in any way "essential" undermines the essence of community and being a missional community. The best that can be hoped for for them is something akin to Benedictine oblates.
Some ideas towards discouraging commuters:
1) emphasize those aspects of mission and community that are non-Sunday gathering (if indeed you have one) oriented as being central to the life of your community
2) in Sunday gatherings, emphasize the continuity of that gathering with everything else that is happening in the community throughout the week.
3) When/if commuters feel alienated by the above 2 things, frankly say that's because they cannot take part in the community outside the community.
4) Be proactive about converting commuters to members of the local community by keeping your eyes peeled for apartments, houses and other living opportunities.
5) similar to 4), as you get to know commuters and their gifting, constantly be on the lookout for ways that they could serve the community if they lived there and tell them about these things. invite them to consider (non-coercively, of course) that this could be the invitation of the Holy Spirit into participating in His mission to your "parish."
6) be diligent about keeping your focus on embodying Christ to your community rather than the inevitable hurt feelings and disgruntlement of commuters. gently remind them that you are here for the community, not their feelings.
6) pray. it's gonna be tough. (Comment this)
Good question. We are living in the midst of the commuter-noncommuter tension with our church plant. This is how we are negotiating this issue:
1. We live in the neighborhood ourselves
2. We teach/preach and demonstrate the value of being in the neighborhood so that others will pick up and move into the hood with us.
4. We covenant to be involved in the neighborhood regardless of where we live.
5. We don't advertise or promote ourselves in any way that would appear to people beyond the neighborhood.
6. We create relational ways for people who live outside our neighborhood to connect with people in the neighborhood (community garden, book clubs, coaching sport teams...)
7. We continually talk about the neighborhood and the needs of the neighborhood so that anybody who comes knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that we exist for the sake of this specific place.
7 months into our church plant we've seen a number of people make the move into this place with us and a number of others who are actively looking and preparing to move.
Just some thoughts from what we are learning and doing,
Scott Cripps (Comment this)
I think it's possible to not exactly discourage people but let them know what's at stake. Let them know that it's tougher for commuters to play the necessary role in the community, while still welcoming them in. (Comment this)
Excellent and helpful points. Thanks! Many of these are already a part of our values and practices as a small ministry team, so it will be a natural transition to include the church in this way. Thanks!
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
Not only are your ideas very helpful, it is great to hear about them out of your context. Thanks. Each point is very practical.
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
Yeah, that is important. We need to allow the Spirit to guide people, not strong arm or manipulate. It is a dynamic tension with dangers on both side- being too lax and being too controlling. Thanks!
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
Having said that I am solidly in the 'DO NOT discourage commuters' camp. I base this solely on my experiences at Riverwood... I have no other frame of reference, hence my bias... and the following rant.
We planted that church in Elmwood with nearly 100% commuter attendance... and a 110% commitment to transform that neighbourhood. We have seen many in Elmwood join our family. We know we have impacted many more in Elmwood who've never set foot in our church. People who have never come to our church have reversed decisions to move out of the neighbourhood, stating Riverwood's impact as the reason.
As we've grown, commuter attendance has grown as well and probably remains at a fairly high percentage of overall attendance. I truly believe God has blessed our impact in Elmwood not in spite of commuters, but by using them and their sacrifices and services to the fullest.
There are two things we've greatly relaxed our opinions on, due to experience, that seem to cause great angst and tension in other churches: transfer growth and commuter attendance.
What we do is raise the bar high for serving and sacrificing in Elmwood. If that doesn't scare you off you're welcome to stay and we'll be more than happy to channel your time, energy and resources into a disadvantaged community that needs your help. And you'll be more than happy to do it because of where your heart is, not where your house is. We pray and sing "for our inheritance give us the lost" and try not to tell God how to do that.
It quite frankly boggles my mind that any fellowship would intentionally create tensions, and set up road blocks to God funneling in the resources, skills and ministry of those living outside the neighbourhood, who have a heart for the poor and want to obey the directives of Jesus and feel led to do it through your fellowship.
To alienate commuters (no matter how gently) in the name of some preconceived, untested notion or fear of commuters somehow being detrimental to the flow and integrity and "purity" of a church plant's efforts to build community in a given neighbourhood is uninformed and niave at best, borderline-narcissistic and judgemental at worst.
Limiting God right from the outset like that is, imho, one of the worst mistakes a church plant can make. Plants fail for a lot of reasons - commuters with a heart to serve your neighbourhood isn't one of them.
We've never had any indication or feedback in all our years in Elmwood that any resident that we've connected with had any sense that we were fake or insincere or hypocritical because we might live somewhere else. It's never even come up that I'm aware of. Be very weary of projecting your philosophical issues surrounding commuters onto those living in the neighbourhood that you're trying to reach. Our experience has been it's a non-issue for them when it comes to transforming the community and building up the pride of Elmwood residents in their own neighbourhood.
It reminds me of the fable of the man on the roof in a flood who turns down two boats and a helicopter because he trusts God to save him. If you're not familiar with it, the man drowns and when he gets to heaven God says to the man "I sent you two boats and a helicopter - what more did you want?!?!"
Let God send you two boats and a helicopter. I'm guessing they weren't from the neighbourhood that was under water and I'm guessing this wasn't an issue to those who took them up on their offer to help.
That's not to say a neighbourhood is incapable of helping itself - God does things differently in every context. And not every commuter is beneficial to your efforts. By all means, discourage those with a mighty-mouse attitude of "here I come from the suburbs to save the day!". Better yet, show them a better way and pray God breaks them and softens them. But as the quote goes, don't deter those whose liberation is bound up with those they want to serve.
I welcome any reproof that would convince me this is a biblical issue as opposed to a purely philosophical one. You can tell me till your blue in the face that God told you to limit commuters, and ultimately I can't say He didn't, but I will push and prod and test you on that till I'M blue in the face.
And I will remain very thankful that God never told us that at Riverwood. And I think Elmwood is thankful for that too.
You may have discerned I have a certain amount of passion around this. I have no qualms about coming across harsh or having my opinions harshly challenged... because we are on the same side and the stakes are too high to not speak our minds. However I am far from perfect and riverwood is far from perfect and I would stress that I have no intention of any individual feeling judged or condemned by me for having a different opinion. Groups of individuals might be another story... :) (Comment this)
Thanks for your very honest and passionate response to the question. Again, I am not opposed to commuters absolutely. As you know, not only do I commute to my church, but it is the same church you pastor at, so clearly I believe in it on some level. When we plant this church, we will leave Riverwood, though not out of anything other than to follow this next step in our minsitry. We greatly appreciate Riverwood in all that they have done for Elmwood and for us personally.
The reality is that urban development is quite unique these days, with city planning making commuting a necessity for most personal, economical, social, etc. dynamics. Therefore, many churches will inevitably need to be commuter churches. Other factors also contribute to this need, so again, I want to be clear that I think there is room for it.
I would hesitate, however, to equate successful service and impact as proof of a valid missiology (just as apparent failure might not be a proof of its lack of merit). By God's grace, even our flawed attempts can be blessed, and by necessity must be, as we are always getting something or other wrong! I simply want to caution that the success you point to does not, in itself, demonstrate merit in the strategy.
You wonder why anyone would throw up "road blocks" to "God funneling" in people from the outside. That statement makes a huge leap in presupposing that just because people come that God has sent them. You spoke from your experience, so let me speak from mine. In our inner city community, there is an endless flow of people who come in to serve and save people. They do really good things and help in many ways.
However, there is a very real sense in which has created a paternalistic dynamic. Some people in the neighbourhood resent it and limit trust and relationship, even if they accept the help. Others, and perhaps more damaging, accept the help along with the unintentional role in this symbiotic relationship that, in the long run does not help them.
We have spent 6 years living and serving in this community, listening to people- pastors and community members- who have lived here for lifetimes. The message is very consistant: Come share our lives with us and let's work together. This is not them or us telling God how to do it. It is being incarnational in our expression of mission, just as believe Christ modelled with His own life.
There is a real challenge we face on a daily basis, Greg. And that is genuinely loving Christians who have a "heart for the poor", but don't understand what it means to truly bring lasting change into their lives. Their hearts are right, their ready to put their convictions to action, but they often rush in without understanding the complexities of what it means to do so. The history of Christian missions is littered with wonderfully well-intentioned believers rush into a culture with little understanding of its dynamics, and while good is ultimately done, the price is very high. We are simply seeking to lower that casualty rate.
I must also take great exception to your use of termonology on this issue. First, "alienating" is a word loaded with prejudgment about intention and results. Second, to say this idea is untested is simply ignorant, as this is advice we have received from seasoned church planters who have experienced both sides of the issue many times over. Third, it is not about "fear" of commuters, but rather a commitment to our communities best. It has nothing, NOTHING to do with "purity". To call the idea "uninformed" demonstrates that you are, in fact, uninformed. To call it naive, borderline-narcissistic and judgmental is hurtful, unfair and overstated.
Nowhere in this post or question did I suggest that commuters are responsible for the failure of a church plant. Rather, it suggests that the shaping of the church is deeply impacted by this issue. It is suggesting that, if we are more intentional about this from the outset, it will better define the direction our community will take in the long term. Do not suggest that we (or others who comment here) are limiting God by doing this, but rather are responding to deeply seeking of His will in prayer and Scripture.
Greg, I know that you and I agree on a great deal. I guess I am frustrated that you loaded up this question with all the assumptions that you did. You say you will be convinced by Biblical truth, yet provide little of that for your own position, presenting your own philosophy in response- though excellent philosophy. There is a great deal of Biblical theology and missiology on this topic, which I have read a great deal of. This isn't just our philosophical ideal.
You don't want anyone to feel judged by you, but that is clearly what you did here. Judged and harshly. No clarify questions. No attempt to make sure you understand. No acknowledgement that the post and the commenters affirmed the place for commuters within the larger context. I have to say that I am hurt, though not angry.
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
This is probably a subject for another post, but I'd love to hear your thoughts on what healthy community looks like for suburbanites, bedroom communities and travellers.
Peace,
Trevor
(Comment this)
Thanks for sharing from your perspective. Jaime' response covers most of what I would have said, so I'll just add a couple of thoughts from my context.
1) Regardless of heart or motives, to drive into a neighborhood dispense your goodwill and charity and then drive away communicates something. You may have just given some clothes and food to a disadvantaged person but you have not fully identified with them. We have to be careful we are not 'petting the poor' as Joyce (Heron) Rees describes. In my neighborhood, you would be viewed as an outsider if you parachuted in and out. Flat out wouldn't work.
2) Living in the neighborhood allows your heart to really beat to the rhythm of that neighborhood. Daily you have eyes to see, ears to hear and your heart softened to the people and needs around you. It gives the ability to sit on neighborhood groups to be an advocate for the church in that community and it provides credibility when you speak out with regards to community issues.
3) Proximity is one of the strongest means to build community both within a church and without. It isn't the only way, but it is highly effective. When I can walk into our neighborhood grocery store and see a member of our church and also see my neighbors its a beautiful picture. We are doing life and allowing the monday-saturday reality to demonstrate God's kingdom. And we can share neighbors, how wonderful that I don't have to bear the burden alone of being a witness to the gospel to the people in our hood.
4) Encouraging and striving for a neighborhood based community of faith is also a discipleship question. By living in the same community as your church is trying to bless and serve you are moving towards wholeness. Instead of working here, living over there, going to church back there, doing recreational activities over yonder, shopping here, kids going to school there... By placing a neighborhood focus on all those things your life becomes less fragmented, your connections to your neighbors becomes much deeper, and you are actually accomplishing some measure of justice as you reduce your consumerism, gas consumption, and help out the small businesses instead of the big box stores while reducing your carbon footprint.
Greg, I served at a church for 10years where myself and 95% of this particular 400strong congregation drove in and drove out. We had clearly distanced ourselves from the people right across the street and we had no tangible witness to them or among them. In fact, it was when this church decided to add-on to their building and further distance themselves from the economically challenged folks across the street that I step down from staff and gathered some friends to go plant a church where the context defined us instead of the other way around.
It's great to hear about your church and how as commuters you've been able to overcome what my previous church never could. But because that is my story, I'm going to press the neighborhood focus, I'm going to allow the tension to exist for commuters and I'm going to try my darndest to not repeat the mistakes of my past ministry.
Scott Cripps (Comment this)
Thanks for your comment. Not sure if you saw, but in my reply to Greg's comment I mentioned dynamics that make situations like your inevitable. I think connecting locally is ideal, but not an absolute.
As for advice about being missional in the burbs, I have never lived or served, so have little to offer. I will say this: I think it is an important question, one that deserves a great deal of attention, because I think it is a real challenge. There are some great materials out there about it.
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
Great questions. That is why I posted it here, because of the nature of the problem. The people who have encouraged us to be cautious of becoming primarily a commuting congregation are people who I respect and have relationship with, so I had to take notice.
Before I go on, please read the update above, as it seems I wasn't as clear as I thought I was. I hope that helps.
Perhaps the best way to look at it (though not the only way) is contextualization. If we were planting a church in a unique culture overseas, few people would question the need to make sure that the Christian involved in forming it were prepared to relate to this unique culture appropriately. History is full of examples of well intentioned cultural and theological colonialism.
Our neighbourhood is a very unique culture, one in which there is a long history of commuting people who serve the needs and feed in resources. While some of that has been good, it has also fed into a culture of "camps", with outsiders being cautiously trusted at best.
This may not be true for every context. In fact, I would say it is absolutely not true of every context. However, it seems to be with ours. We are just trying to navigate that in a better way.
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
I'd be very interested in your recommendations for good materials about being missional in the 'burbs. I haven't found much yet.
Trevor (Comment this)
"The Suburban Christian" by Hsu is good. I have heard good things about "Justice in the Burbs", though my copy has yet to arrive. I'll do some digging, as I know there are a few more. Allelon has some good material on their site. Check them out too.
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
There's so much I don't know. Thanks for your clarifications. I've been starting to learn, in baby steps, the damage from colonialism around the world- esp. Africa, but I have a long way to go in understanding. That small insight, though, does give me some sense of what you are rightly concerned about.
I'm going to watch and pray as you struggle through this. I need to learn what you have and are learning. I don't think I know anything, really, about making a long term difference in the lives of the poor. (Comment this)
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
Perspective 1: We want our church to be incanational...and that means that we want our very lives to be interwoven into the fabric of the neighborhood. That is something that most commuters cannot do...though some can. Because we live in a society where lots of people "attend" churches in ways divorced from the context of that church, we feel it is important to challenge commuters to think through what it would be mean to be a part of our church.
Perspective 2: Commuters are people too. They have dreams for the city and time and resources. Why would you want to discourage such folks from being a part of what you're doing? I understand what you're saying, but you seem like you're being elitist when you say you want to discourage commuters.
Does that sum it up?
Here's my take. We've been dealing with this dynamic for over 4 years. Our church (Missio Dei in Minneapolis) started with a strong commitment to the neighborhood. Early on, we had a lot of folks driving in from the burbs to attend a service. What resulted was an identity crisis. The folks that lived in the area and were a part of one another's lives in a regular rhythm outside of an "event" had a very different experience than those whose identity was based upon attendance of a couple events a week.
After a time of lots of 1:1 conversation, our church restructured and shrunk considerably. We made it clear that membership in our community meant centering your life in a particular place. Not just serving in a place. Not just attending in a place. Centering life in a place. Can commuters center their lives in a place other than where they live? Sure. But its harder.
This isn't about elitism. It is about sharing life. Most people who come in from the suburbs or other parts of the city aren't as equipped to share their lives with the people in a place as neighbors are. If every commuter truly understood the challenges with that, then there would be no reason to challenge commuters on this issue. (Comment this)
Thank you so much for saying to concisely and clearly what I obviously was failing to get through. So, how did you guys make that work in your context?
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
Well, we didn't make it work at all for the first year or so. After our "restructuring" we simply made it clear that our community exists for the West Bank. We articulate our commitment to a ministry of presence on the West Bank on our website (www.missio-dei.com) and in our rule of faith.
It helps that our sunday gathering is low bells and whistles. It isn't the sort of things that folks long to attend. It is structured round an honest discussion of how to live out the way of Jesus in our context. When someone who isn't a part of our context comes, they either feel drawn into the context or leave.
When folks contact me with a desire to attend our gathering (most people don't simply show up because of the nature of our community) we explain to them the focus of our gatherings and the structure of our community life.
In other words, we try to make sure visitors get the big-picture early on. Non-Christian visitors are almost never commuters. (Comment this)
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
Excellent. We will work it out at some point. Thanks again!
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
Commuters reinforced a divide between those who were poor and those who were not. Those of us who weren't poor drove to the church building in our cars, carrying in drive-thru coffee, and would complain about having to scrape the ice off our windshields before we left in the morning.
Our poor walked or rode their bicycles to the church building, regardless of how deep the snow, and drank the (sub-par) coffee we provided during the service.
Commuters didn't think much about events scheduled in the evening, while our poor faced a cold, dark walk home.
Now, had we been intentional, all of the implications that come from this rift could have been bridged... but that never really happened.
All this to say, when everyone can walk or bike for gatherings, and when everyone drinks great coffee made on the premisis... a lot of other stuff gets taken care of in the process.
-Erin (Comment this)
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
Scott's (2) comments make sense to me.
I don't have any experience with either a commuter church or an incarnational expression, but I do remember our interesting and formative six years as part of one of the original Vineyard churches. John Wimber and our own pastor were constantly reiterating Vineyard values and why they were valued. We weren't beaten over the head with them, but there were themes that came up over and over again, explicitly and implicitly in "public" speech (sermons, etc). While no one was excluded, the ethos was always "out front" so that people were able to catch it and decide if that's where they needed to be.
That made an impression on me, and it has stayed with me all these years. The values really did become a part of who I am.
Dana
(Comment this)
That is really helpful. It reflects my intention where the question missed it. My ultimate question has less to do with discouraging commuters and more to do with how to primarily promote local participation. "Discouragement" would only really be an issue if we became something contrary to our values. Thanks!
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
mea culpa.
In the light of day, my last post made me wonder "what blunt object wrote that?!" I'd love to blame my tone and a few particular paragraphs on the late hour, too much wine or a glitch in the Matrix but no such luck.
I love my church and how God has used it in our context and honestly didn't feel this conversation was questioning that... yet I managed to come across as inexplicably defensive and angry... which would have been understandably confusing.
I mixed a couple of bad habits I have when engaging in discussion or debate face-to-face with embarrassing results. One is to play the devil's advocate to the extreme on a counter-point. The other is to use the word "you" generically when a more accurate word would be "one" as in "One should consider this".
So to quickly clarify (not justify) a few points...
Whenever I said "you" I wasn't referring to Jamie or other commentors.
Yes I lean hard towards not discouraging commuters.
Yes my opinion is based on my very limited experience of one success story in one context. One that's maybe an exception rather than the rule when it comes to commuter churches.
Yep... I demonstrated assumptions, presumptions, careless words and an inexusable tone and Jamie was right to call me on it.
Ending a judgemental tirade by saying "I don't mean to judge anybody" doesn't magically make it ok.
Ug.
Having to live with the embarrassment of careless words is one thing but most of all I regret hurting a friend, hijacking the tone of an important discussion and reflecting badly on Riverwood.
I appreciate the grace of subsequent commentors who looked for the baby in all the bathwater of my post.
(Comment this)
Thanks again.
Peace bro,
Jamie (Comment this)
There's much that I could talk about, but I think that Mark and Erin really say things better than I. I've been a commuter to an inner-city church (Winnipeg Centre Vineyard) and it always left me feeling like I was guilty of being the Starbucks-drinking colonial do-gooder who didn't have a clue.
Jamie, I'd love to sit down and chat with you about some of this stuff some time... I'll be moving back to the 'Peg pretty soon and there's even a good chance that I'll wind up in the West End... (Comment this)
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
i was a commuter to the church i worked for. that was my biggest obstacle. i would never do it that way again. it's also about solidarity.
peace. (Comment this)
I think I'm firmly on the fence. Looking with great anxiety in both directions. I really do understand your perspective and predicament. I also understand the tension you're living in.
Here's a little of my perspective. I currently live in the suburbs and have done so for almost 20 years. I really hate it for a number of reasons, but my life seems to be pretty well rooted here now. If I were to hear about a church like yours in the inner city I would find it very enticing, and winsome on one hand. I'd want to attend and be part of it.
OTOH ... would I be able to (at this moment) uproot my family and life to do so? It might be that that is a journey as well. Something that takes time to achieve.
So, I guess I'm wondering if discouraging commuters outright and altogether might not be overly heavy handed. It may be more of a dance that you'll want to engage in with individuals, rather than a policy that you create. Does this make sense? (Comment this)
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
While I agree that it would be heavy handed to discourage them aggressively, if too many commuters come it will literally shape the nature and culture of the community. The reality is that, in our context, this has already proven to alienate our local community. This isn't theoretical, as we have seen it happen.
We are planting a church for the express purpose of missionally engaging this specific neighbourhood. So the question is how to be welcoming to all while protecting the project from becoming primarily a transfer of Christians? It is a very tough to navigate, thus the question.
Thanks for your honest response from your own context. That helps us understand how others might "read" it.
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
I very strongly feel that to be missional and incarnational does not allow me to commute. I'd far rather "be" the church than simply "go" to church. I will be moving back to Winnipeg into the heart of the West End in a month or so, and this issue continues to give me a lot to think about.
I completely support your decision to intentionally encourage a local community. (perhaps a better way of saying "discourage commuters")?
My experience has taught me that things are always more complex than my ideals.
Basically, you gotta start somewhere.
My heart for the poor began as a commuter from the prosperous Osborne Village to the North End's Winnipeg Centre Vineyard. I was little more than a naive young church-shopper. But something about the place kept me going back.
I have slowly learned through that wonderfully diverse community that I now strongly feel commuting is not an option.
My point is that arriving here is a process that won't necessarily happen overnight.
I am ashamed to say I can relate almost perfectly to Erin's comment about scraping car windows (often taking the bus) and grabbing Starbucks on the way to Sunday morning service. But I vow to not go back to that way of life.
I also have little sympathy (perhaps I should) for people who think they can't move, and are "resigned to the suburbs". That's crap! They will make a long list of excuses, which may actually be good reasons, but honestly, if you are actually serious about what you believe, selling your house and moving is not actually that hard to do in the grand scheme of life. Especially in Winnipeg, where housing in the city centre is very affordable.
(Comment this)
Thanks for weighing in. I appreciate your passion and commitment. Of course, I hope not all Christians leave the suburbs- it is perhaps the most challenging "mission field" in our Western culture! Thanks again!
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)