A Living Alternative

As someone who has gone public with a very real personal struggle, I end up having a lot of conversations with others who struggle with serious temptation or sin patterns.  Through the years, such conversations (and my own experience) has shown an interesting pattern.  It goes something like this:

-Bob tells John, Jim & Jerry about his struggle.

-John, Jim & Jerry are supportive and affirming.

-John, Jim & Jerry check in with Bob once or twice.

-John, Jim & Jerry never really mention it again.

Now, this is not to suggest that the 3 J’s don’t care about Bob or his struggle.  And in fairness, they are likely to be unsure about what to do or say as time goes by.  However, as many of us have experienced, especially in cases of particularly “difficult” issues, the initial support and affirmation soon disppears.  It isn’t replaced by judgment, by any means- it isn’t replaced at all.

I am deeply grateful that the church- or least, many Christians- has gotten much better at responding with love and care with issues like homosexual orientation.  This is a significant step in the right direction and must be acknowledged.  In the 15 years or so since I have been open about my own struggle, I have a steady improvement in this respect.  However, it is but one step in a much longer journey.

We are in such need of genuine community, community that is defined by the mutual acknowledgment and support of brokenness.  We expend so much energy creating and sustaining an image of unity and life that we often forgot the journey, the work and the cross required in order to genuinely achieve it.  Community is the messiest necessity of the Gospel.  Failing to provide it isn’t simple a matter of not measuring up, it means people continue to struggle alone, disconnected and afraid.

If we genuinely want to offer hope to people we are going to have to face the hard reality of what that will cost.  Too often we are motivated to help to ease our own discomfort, but it does not extend beyond ourselves.  This must change.  It will cost us the comfort and order of our individual faiths and require stepping into the discomfort and uncertainty of walking with people in their brokenness.  It will also require the trust and vulnerablility of sharing our own brokenness in turn.

Again, this is not about theology or effectiveness, it is about God and the people He deeply loves.  He loves them enough to die for them, so we must be do no less.  It is more than about “being willing”, it must be our the active priority in our commitment to love our neighbours.

When I decided to participate in this “What Is Missional?” Syncroblog, I was initially nervous.  After all, I am not a theologian or a particularly accomplished “practitioner”.  However, I am passionately committed to follow Christ, along with my community, to become the peculiar people He has called us to be.  After all, the stakes are high.  I am not exploring this out of curiosity or intellectual interest, but because I see in my inner city neighbourhood (and moreso in my own life) the desperate need for saving transformation.  And so I will try to wrestle it our here.

Perhaps one of the biggest reasons that the term “missional” get so over-used, misused and abused is that it cannot be understood apart from the “mission” that is at its root (both etymologically and conceptually).  At the heart of God’s mission is the Gospel.  While “What is the Gospel?” could be a Syncroblog in and of itself, I have always started with this very basic premise:

“The Gospel is the glory of the Triune God made manifest in His work to reconcile every person to union with Himself, communion with others, to fullness of life, and to harmony with Creation, in the context of community for the good of all.”

(Before I move on, some have expressed concern that I make no mention of Jesus and His work on the cross, so let me make it clear.  I firmly hold to the belief that our salvation comes through the redemptive and atoning work of Christ’s death and bodily resurrection.  The above definition is not meant to be comprehensive, but rather offer a framework for the wider understanding of the Gospel, which has been God’s intention from the beginning.  Jesus, as I will show later, is central to what it means to be missional.)

God, in His infinite and uncomprehensible wisdom, choose to make manifest His work through us, His imperfect people (even if only in part).  Therefore, our whole lives must be shaped, guided and redefined by the purposes of God.  Here, for me, is the first lesson about being missional: Missional is about implication, not application.  By this I mean that the mission of God cannot be something we add or fit into our lives.  Nor is it even something for which we simply sacrifice to make room for.  Rather, it is about examining the very real implications of what it would mean on every level of life if we were defined my this divine agenda.

It is not surprising, then, that as interest and engagement with the concept of missional develops, so to does the conversation and exploration of what the church looks like.  This was lesson number two for me: Missional cannot be understand apart from ecclesiology (or vice versa).  The mission of God speaks to the very nature, identity and vocation of the Church.  While it should go without saying that, when I say “Church” I am not merely referring to the building or the Sunday gathering, it sadly does not.  The challenge is that, even when we acknowledge this fact with our lips, our lives and language often fall back to this false assumption.

The most important lesson for me on being missional, on which I will spend more time developing, is this: Missional is incarnational.  This is to say that, as a people of God, we relate and engage the world after the way that God relates and engages the world.  This is expressed primarily, though not exclusively, in the person of Jesus.  Let me offer three core points in this:

Community: I say “not exclusively” in Jesus, because I believe that when Scripture teaches that we are created in God’s image, that is primarily in reference to God’s Trinitarian nature.  Just as God is Three-Persons in perfect Oneness, so to are we called to be in genuine community, seeking to be many united as one.  We are not able to become gods in our unity, but rather, through the work of Jesus on the cross, we die to self and are resurrected into His Body, bound together in the Spirit.  I believe our being His Body to be more than an analogy, but a defining description of our nature as the Church.

Like the Trinity, our commitment to unity and community does not require the irradication of the individual.  While we must resist the disintegrative force of individualism, true community always celebrates and nurtures healthy individuality.  In fact, it is only within the Chirst-community that individual identity can truly be realized.  This is perhaps the single greatest tension we face- the battle between rampant individualism and soulless uniformity.  However, I genuinely believe that in the Western world, we are in more danger from the former.  I would go so far as to say that a person cannot be truly missional apart from community, because that very community is essential to mission and the Godhead that gives it form.

Contextualization: Jesus, fully God, entered into our world as fully man, the ultimate contextualization.  He divested Himself of many things that were His right in order to make a way for God’s mission of love and redemption to happen.  In the same way, we must enter into the world around us in such a way that allows people to encounter Christ in ways that they understand.  It means that we must give up many things that we (may) have every right to, but that get in the way of representing Christ’s incarnational presence in our neighbourhoods, cultures and world.

In 1 Corinthians 9, we are to “become all things to all men so that by all possible means” other will be saved.  So we do not simply contextualize, we contextualize as Christ in the culture (which we will discuss more in the next point).  It is important to note that, while we seek to “become all things to all men”, we cannot be all things at the same time.  This is why singular expressions and models copied elsewhere can undermine the effectiveness of being truly missional.

Countercultural:  As I suggested in the previous point, we are be an incarnational expression of Christ in culture, but simply an adaptation (or compromise) with the culture in general.  Going back to my reference to “implication not application”, we must recognize that the incarnational presence we are called to represent is not compatible with all aspects of our the world around us.  Be it individualism or consumerism (two of the most serious threats to the Church today), we cannot and must not attempt to accomodate aspects of culture that would undermine the mission of God, but rather live boldly apart and even against them.  We are called to be a peculiar people in that our radical obedience to Christ will set us apart, not simply through rejection and isolation, but by engaging the world as living alternatives.

We must be careful here too, for we can call all sorts of isolationism “countercultural”.  Further, we can even begin to gain an identity around those things which we reject (as many Christians seem to be defined by their anti-gay or anti-abortion stances, or more subtley and closer to home, by being anti-program or anti-institution).  As a Canadian, I can tell you that there is little stability in an identity defined by what we are not.  Again, we are to be countercultural, not in what we oppose, but through the living alternative we represent before a watching world.

This, of course, only brushes the surface of what I believe missional to be (and much of it could do with some serious qualification, but that’s what the comment section is for, right?).  However, the beauty of missional is that it is a communal reality.  Check out the others who are blogging the topic:

Alan Hirsch  Alan Knox  Andrew Jones  Barb Peters  Bill Kinnon  Brad Brisco  Brad Grinnen  Brad Sargent  Brother Maynard  Bryan Riley  Chad Brooks  Chris Wignall  Cobus Van Wyngaard  Dave DeVries  David Best  David Fitch  David Wierzbicki  DoSi  Doug Jones  Duncan McFadzean  Erika Haub  Grace   Jeff McQuilkin  John Smulo  Jonathan Brink  JR Rozko  Kathy Escobar  Len Hjalmarson  Makeesha Fisher  Malcolm Lanham  Mark Berry  Mark Petersen  Mark Priddy  Michael Crane  Michael Stewart  Nick Loyd  Patrick Oden  Peggy Brown  Phil Wyman  Richard Pool  Rick Meigs  Rob Robinson  Ron Cole  Scott Marshall  Sonja Andrews  Stephen Shields  Steve Hayes  Tim Thompson  Thom Turner

Missional Synchroblog What Is Missional? Missional Community Gospel Jesus

On Monday I will be taking part in the “What is Missional?” Synchroblog, along with 50(+) others.  I have already written it, though I am letting it brew for a few days, editting as I see fit.  I am eager to see where this joint effort goes, as I think it is critical that the term and concept(s) not be lost to popular trends and catch-phrases.

As I was writing my post, I realized that “missional” is, at its simplest, an adjective, meaning it is a descriptive word, a word that describes a noun. While this distinction does shift the meaning of “mission”, that root still requires definition.  Part of the reason that the word “missional” gets misused is that the underlying definition of what the mission is.  Of course, many people simply use it too casually and thus misrepresent it, but there are others who use it as an adjective for their different understanding of mission.

I strongly affirm and advocate for our effort to present a better, truer and more Biblical paradigm of missionality.  However, just as other terms and concepts within Christianity are used differently than we might (even if they are used improperly), we must be careful to become to proprietary about the term “missional”.  Without intending to we can communicate that we have the corner of God’s mission, thus alienating and even dismissing our other sisters and brothers in Christ.

I say this, not because I feel that the Syncroblog is wrong or representing the problem I just stated.  Obviously, as a participant, I believe it is well worth the time and energy.  Rather, I think we must be intentional the approach this conversation- as with any conversation, be it theological or otherwise- with humility, grace and openness.  Not the patronizing, lip-service acknowledgment of others, but a genuine commitment to respect and attend to others who see things differently.

At any rate, I am excited about Monday’s posting for everyone.  See you then!

Missional Synchroblog What Is Missional?

Over the last few weeks I have been spending a great deal of time pondering the future of our minsitry. As we move towards the church plant, we are realizing that it is just one part of the great shift in our little missional community. I have talked a great deal about the values and ideals that we embrace, but it often lack concrete examples to flesh it out.

For the past 6 years, we have been a small group of YWAM missionaries living and serving in Winnipeg’s inner city. For the past four of those years, we have all lived together in a duplex my wife & I bought- a former gang house that was restored by Lazarus Housing and sold to us by our friend and neighbour, the late Harry Lehotsky. While we were primarily program-centered for the first few years, we differentiated many YWAM centres with a strong theology of place alongside our theology of going.

As we have shared life and ministry together over the years, we have begun to see the importance of being more intentional as a community. To that end, we have slowly been adopting a pattern or rhythme of life together. We take time every week together for prayer, worship and spiritual/missional formation. Our single staff have begun leading out in sharing meals together regularly. We all love extending hospitality (despite our predominance in introverts), so have been more disciplined to reach out and invite in.

Interestingly, though it was never an explicit goal, we are realizing that what we are moving towards reflects many of the marks of the “New Monasticism” (though, as missionaries relying on charity for our livelihood, we have dubbed ourselves “Missional Mendicants”). While none of us are primarily called or gifted to activism, we have felt a deep calling to be an open, vulnerable and missional community within our wonderful, but wounded inner city neighbourhood.

As we look to the future, we are realizing that we need to redefine our identity to extend our welcome to others. Up until this point, our community has been made up of (primarily) YWAM staff, students and volunteers. While all of us feel called to remain as YWAM missionaries, we are working to create an expression of our identity that is more inclusive, hoping it will make space for others to come alongside us.

One of the ways we want to do this is open our home. Our house (which we are in the process of naming), is a large duplex. Kim & I live on the one side (currently preparing to add a child to the mix), with out three single staff living on the other side. However, at this time, much of the other side of the duplex remains largely unused- or rather only used on occassion. Therefore, our hope is to see other singles, whether they are working, going to school, etc. join us by living in the house.

We are also hoping that others in the community (and, yes, some outside of our immediate community) participate as well. We want to form an intimate community of people who are committed to God, to each other and to our neighbours, joining together in an intentional way of life. We believe that this means consistant weekly meals together (at least once a week, if not more), regular times of community prayer, worship, formation and service. It could range from creating alternative options for young sex trade workers to weeding our little community garden.

We are being shaped by many examples and tradition, but two stand out to us: Anabaptist and Franciscan. I have jokingly called myself a Franabapist, but it does give a clear touchstone of who we hope to be. Some of the core values we embrace (which must in turn be expressed as tangible and incarnational virtues) are as follows:

-Justice & Mercy: Again, while we are not primarily activist, we do believe that we are called to “Do (make, form, inspire, provoke, etc.) Justice” through our lives and community. Inseparable to this is living lives of compassionate mercy, tempered by the humility of mutuality, not paternalism (Micah 6:8). This includes responsible economics, ecologics, etc., as well as advocacy and training to help others better embrace these virtues.

-Simplicity & Generosity: As we live among the urban poor (and work with the global poor), especially in the midst of a rampantly consumeristic and selfish culture, we want to live lives of simplicity and generosity, both within our immediate community and to those outside of it (even to the ends of the earth).

-Peace & Reconciliation: This is our biggest challenge. While I love the sense of community and the diversity of our neighbourhood, it is also torn with violence (gang related, domestic, random, etc.). As white expression in a very multiracial community, we have learned that racial and cultural reconciliation is a desperate need, but one that will not be solved with programs (though they have their rightful and necessary place).

This new direction will mean many changes. It means that the dynamic of the YWAM ministry will have the addition of both the church plant and the intentional community expression- all inter-related and connected, but somewhat distinct and unique. It means the YWAM programs will have to make room for these other expressions, but we are VERY strong that these programs are a part of who we are and will be an expression of the larger whole. Again, while I talk about three expressions, they will all be integrated into a whole.

Now we are praying for God to bring the people who will share life with us. Interested? Questions?

Missional Missional+Community Church+Planting New+Monasticism St+Francis Anabaptist Mennonite Church

If there is anything time is teaching me it is to better understand myself, both my strengths and weaknesses. With that knowledge comes the very real tension of know where to accept your limitations and where to push beyond your comfort zone and experience. This is especially true of our missional life in our inner city neighbourhood. Frankly, I am at something of a crisis of identity in this respect.

As I consider example who inspire me- people like Erika Haub, Shane Claiborne, Jarrod McKenna and so many others- I realize that I fall far short of their examples of sacrifice and dedication, not to mention their creativity. Many of them are daring and creative activists. It is here that I feel most inadequate. While I know I could (should) do more in this respect, I also know that it is not a central part of my gifting or vocation.

Let me be clear: there is an aspect of activism that is a universal vocation of the Church, to be a prophetic voice for justice and righteousness, especially to call to accountability those in authority and the people of God. It is a holy vocation, which means that it cannot fundamentally be the same as the world’s activism in religious clothing. That, however, is a topic for another blog post.

However, it is very important for us to realize that to “do justice” must not be limited to activism alone. In fact, for the majority of Christians, an embrace of our vocation of justice will not primarily be as activism. In fact, I daresay it will be far more difficult and demanding, because it is a call to a radical reallignment of every aspect of our lives- the way we earn and spend our money, where and how and with whom we live- and a relinquishment of our “rights” pursue the purposes of Christ.

That is challenge I face. I am no Shane Claiborne (though I have much to learn from his example and that of his community), but I find myself a part of a small community called to live and serve in an inner city neighbourhood that suffers under systemic injustice. I genuinely find myself struggling to know what the next step is for us. We know some of the broader details- The Dusty Cover as a missional third place and the church plant with the Mennonite church- but we all know we need to engage in our community with more intention, out of our communal identity.

It is here that struggle. It is here that I am find myself in the best possible place (though the most challenging)- helpless before God for the direction and power to follow His will for us. Of this we are sure: we need people to share this journey with us. They do not have to be YWAM staff, but simply Christians who will make this community and our mission here their own, who will carry this burden with us.

Please pray for me- for all of us- as we seek God in this. And perhaps He will call you to join us.

I originally wrote the following article here on January 18th, 2007 (slightly editted):

As I consider the nature of missionality, specifically missional community, I realize how much my own experiences and context(s) have shaped the emphasis that come to mind. As I read articles and blogs on the topic (such Tim Conder’s great recent post “Missional Buzz” at the Out of Ur blog), I am thrilled by what I read. And yet, when I consider what missional community means to me, the emphasis that comes to mind is often different.

Of course, most writers are (understandably) writing from the context of the local church, whereas the focal point of my missional endeavours (in fact, of my faith as a whole) is from within the missions community of YWAM in Winnipeg and the broader organization (especially the Western Canada region). I have wondered, and still do, if some of my ideals for missionality are not practical or realistic for the local church context. That being said, I want to share some of my ideas/concerns and get your feedback on them.

Perhaps my biggest concern when reading and engaging missional community ideas is that they don’t seem to go far enough, specifically in how we define and practice what it means to be a local congregation. What I mean is that much of the writing attempts to integrate missionality with the existing models of church. I am not suggesting that we abandon the existing systems (at least not completely), but rather that I think the very nature of being missional has far greater implications on how we live our whole lives together than can be reduced to application to our current situation.

Above all, the idea of what it means to be community is the most challenging. While there is a great deal about being community that can be explored through the ideas and values of how we relate, we rarely genuinely explore the implications these values have on the nitty-gritty of every day life. Even when it is explored, it is even more rare for people to make the radical changes that would, in my opinion, best embrace the missional dynamics.

As I have explored in previous blog posts, the idea of intentionally rooting our lives and homes in specific neighbourhoods is, for me, an important (even essential) missional focus that needs to be embraced by more Christian communities. Too often people who do this are seen as admirable anamolies rather than the natural product of pursuing our missional responsibility and calling as the church.

My wife & I have followed this calling, albeit awkwardly and with difficulty, into one the of abandon places of the urban world, an inner city neighbourhood. However, I am not suggesting that an urban calling is the only way to be missional. By no means! While I genuinely believe that a significant number of Christians should reclaim these lost regions, and while I find it offensive how wildly Christianity in the West is equated with a culture of respectability and privilege, I also know that missionality can be- must be!- faithfully pursued anywhere. However, without question, too many of us are using this fact to justify our unwillingness to ask and/or respond to God’s call to some contexts.

This is not a call for a random movement of disconnected individuals, but rather something that, against our cultural tendency, should be a communal movement. This requires that we begin to recognize that the majority of missional living will find expression outside the walls of the church. If we restrict our pursuit of missional community primarily to our Sunday (and, perhaps Wednesday night) gatherings, we miss the vast majority of what true missionality and true community are all about.

I am not in anyway trying to discredit any missional community that has been expressed within the church walls. These are exciting manifestations of what could and should be. Rather, I am calling us to ask ourselves how deep our commitment to pursuing missional community runs. Take some time right now and ask yourself if you are genuinely willing to ask the question of whether or not you would uproot your life as you know it to reroot it elsewhere. For some this will include actual geographic relocation, but for all of us it means a radical reorientation of how we live our lives in relationship to God and neighbour. It is a costly process.

As I said earlier, I question whether this is fair or realistic. Am I being unfair? Do you believe missional community requires this level of intentional living in such a radical and (possibly) disruptive way? I genuinely want your take, so let me know.

Missional, Missional Community

As we continue to prepare to plant and pastor our new church plant, I am becoming increasingly aware of how important it is that understanding and establishing our community as God’s missional strategy for His people must be the our first priority. To begin with the nature of missional leadership fails to recognize that the pastoral role (as with other leadership roles) are sub-vocations of the over all general vocation of the church.

Of course, this is a far easier premise to begin with when you are planting a new community. When you are leading an existing community, making the transition to a genuinely missional community identity is not only vast more difficult, it is often resisted by the very assumptions and expectations that established and empowered the leadership in the first place.

In these circumstances, those in leadership are faced with the challenge of using their position and authority to empower the community in a way that does not make their role central to the nature of the missionality. It can be a very challenging experience for all involved. And yet I am convinced that discovering how to forge this new path will help usher in a move of God through His Church like not seen for some time.

How have you seen this transition done well? What questions do you have about the process?

Missional, Missional Community, Leadership, Christianity

Steve Wiseman posted the other day on the real challenges of being missional in the suburban context. I posted this affirming comment (which he has since made a post unto itself- thanks, Steve!):

As someone who lives and serves in an inner city community, I couldn’t agree with you more. I am a very strong advocate for increased Christian involvement in the inner city, but only because that it the context to which I am called and can see the need. However, I am not blind the broader needs.

I have said it many times before, but it is worth saying again: Suburbia is a far more challenging context in which to be truly missional than the inner city in so many ways. While the problems in the inner city are many, they are also largely out in the open for many to see. Further, because so few Christians genuinely engage the community missionally, there is a freedom to explore and experiment with creative ways of serving God and our neighbours.

In suburbia the culture of respectability and privacy means that the very real problems are often hidden behind a veneer of manicured lawns and smiling faces. Further, the culture is less forgiving about innovation in ministry. All this to say that, while many people pat me on the back for living and working in the inner city, my heroes are those who genuinely contend with the culture of suburbia for Christ without abandoning it or compromising within it.

As I considered this, along with my recent and heated dialogue about church planting and the commuting culture (here and here), I have increasingly been considering how these two contexts could/should relate to one another. The most common ways they interact is through short-term service and financial support. While these are not in and of themselves bad (in fact, they are important), it is primarily uni-directional and lacks a relational connections.

I am convinced that part of the journey towards genuinely missional Christianity will require intentional and mutual relationships built between these very different contexts. In order for this to truly happen, however, both groups will have to embrace a new perspective and divest themselves of their assumptions and judgments of the other. Both groups have much to offer the other and, ultimately, our understanding and relationship with God will be strengthened.

Like any engagement between cultures, this will take time, patience and grace. We cannot arrive at an ideal all at once, so we need to allow ourselves the freedom to move towards relationship through redemptively transforming our exsisting connections. Further, as we seek to resist extremes (such as paternalism in service to the poor), we must not take it to an opposite extreme (such as cutting off all financial support or volunteerism). Through dialogue and understanding, we will negotiate another path together.

What might this look like? In what ways could we build these bridges of mutuality? Where have you seen this done well before?

(It should also be noted that, while the dynamics are different, there is also a need for this kind of relationship with other contexts, including rural and international)

Missional Missional Community Christianity

While I was reading Time magazine today, I came across a story about the city of San Marcos, California. When San Marcos residents received their electric bills, they also saw their usage as compared to their neighbours. The result? I marked decline in their own eletricity consumption. According to behavioural economist Richard Thaler and legal scholar Cass Sunstein (both University of Chicago professors), these residents had been nudged.

In their new book “Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth and Happiness”, the authors apply to public policy an approach that is shaped by our idiosyncratic choices- for example, why we stress more about plane crashes than car crashes (or why we fearthe influence of Harry Potter over rampant materialism, to draw a Christian example). By understanding our illogical actions and responses, they demonstrate how people can be influenced in more positive directions.

While the book is far more complex (and interesting), the story of San Marcos caught my attention. When these families had the bubble of their own lives pierced by a simple fact about their peers, they began making simple, but measurably better, choices. In the same way, as long as Christians allow individualism and our “right” to personal space and privacy to extend to the point where genuine community is possible, we will continue to make illogical and ineffectual choices.

Conversely, as we allow our lives to informed through the intimacy of shared lives, the knowledge and understanding will impact our choices positively with little effort. The beauty of this approach was not that it was aggresively seeking to coerce people into conformity, but rather through understanding and simple accountability, people natural gravitated towards better choices.

How often do we as Christians rage against sinfulness, but live in such relational isolation (often behind a cloak of external “morality) that we negate this potential impact on each others lives? On the world at large? Are we willing to take the risk and live our lives in vulnerability, even before others do the same?

I hope that my life (and my blog) will reflect an increasing honesty and transparency. Keep me honest, folks! Thanks.

Over the last few months, our ministry (YWAM Urban Ministries Winnipeg) has been in dialogue with a denomination to partner with them in the planting of a new church in our inner city neighbourhood. As we were still in conversation about possibilities, I kept many of the details under wraps. However, we are now at a place in this journey where both groups are confident that we are going ahead with this exciting partnership, therefore allowing me to share with you more details.

Last year, my good friend Norm Voth, Director of Evangelism and Service Ministries for Mennonite Church Manitoba, approach Kim & I about the possibility of partnering with us (YWAM) in forming a new missional church plant in the heart of our community. While we had always dreamed of the possibility of seeing a new church plant emerge from our life and ministry in the area, we were particularly encouraged at the potential to partner. Norm is a guy I have come to deeply respect for his passion, wisdom and vision. He is also someone I am happy to count as a friend. This dynamic played a big part in our openness to the possibilities.

As part of his role for the MC Manitoba, Norm is responsible to see new church plants happen. He plays an important part in identifying potential church plants, developing resources and working with the developing congregations. Through relationship with us and his excitement about our new missional thid place, The Dusty Cover, Norm felt the partnership would be a good one. While YWAM is not denominationally oriented, our local expression resonates deeply with many of the values and practices of the Mennonite Church and Anabaptist tradition.

Our vision is to see a locally rooted group of missional-minded Christians who will make the choice to orient the rhythmes of their lives, not only with each other, but with the neighbourhood we are called to love and serve. To this end, we hope to intentionally resist becoming a commuter congregation, looking rather to see it as a church by, for and with the local community. To that end, our desire would be that the most significant portion of our church community would be from the neighbourhood. Few things could make me happier than seeing those outside our area who wish to be a part our new community choose to relocate their lives to the neighbourhood to missionally align with our vision. However, it is the local residents where our primary commitment is focused.

Our hope is to meet for worship in The Dusty Cover as an intentional resistence to identifying with any place or building as “our church”. This will offer three promising dynamics- first, it will challenge us to live our lives in the open to the neighbourhood; second, it will encourage us to practice the discipline of hospitality in our homes; third, it will link us to a place (the bookstore) of missional engagement with the community. We vision would be that the bookstore as a missional third place might grow alongside our growth as a missional community.

We are under no illusions that this will be easy. I have already had several sleepless nights considering what we are getting ourselves into. While Kim & I have essentially been pastoring a small community for several years, it is more akin to leading a monastic/mendicant order than a more “traditional congregation”. We also know that partnering brings it’s own challenges.

However, we are excited and confident about the future. We will keep you all posted. If there are any in Winnipeg who are interested in being a part of this new vision, please drop me a line.

Missional Missional Community Christianity Mennonite Church Manitoba Mennonite Church Planting Jesus YWAM Youth With A Mission