One of our fine readers offers this to start our discussion of a definition:
"A self-sustaining, 'cooperative' body of people in geographical proximity, having its individual parts working together in harmony for the on-purpose continued health, growth, safety, prosperity, and inclusion of other members."
What do you think?
Additions ? subtractions?
missional, missional church, Missional Living, Leadership,
Sunday, October 22, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Um...er...what about non-members? Is the only blessing we wish for them their potential "inclusion"? Isn't it part of the missio Dei to work to bring the other blessings listed to non-members too, whether or not they become "members" (though of course we hope they will - if not of our community, then of some Christian community)?
Actually, is "membership" all that important a category, anyway? (I would say it is, in the original meaning of "members of the Body of Christ", but these days, I think it's built up a meaning that's laden with ingroup/outgroup overtones and the technicality of presence on "membership rolls", as contrasted with real conversion and discipleship.)
Anyway, that's my initial two cents.
Peace,
Mike
I know it's a different approach, but can we start with the bible and work backwards? For example:
[Scripture]
This means that in our culture we are to be: [this and that]
Post a Comment