"Missional" Defined

As noted in a recent post, Dan Kimball's Out of Ur article has generated significant discussion and prompted numerous, in-depth responses from theo-blogians. Andy Rowell is tracking these (Thanks, Andy!), but I wanted to post here a link to Michael Frost's Out of Ur video discussion, posted yesterday, "Defining 'Missional'".

Also of note are Brother Maynard's responses, "Missional Misgivings, or Missional Misunderstandings?" (Tues) and "The Missional/Attractional Divide: Dan Kimball Unpolarized" (Fri), which are more nuanced, I feel, than Dave's treatment of the issue (on which he is consistent).

Of particular help are BM's comments in yesterday's post:
But the point is this: while we have multiple cultures waxing and waning, we need both styles of church. And both styles of church need to be asking questions about effectiveness. Such questions should not be allowed to threaten the very model itself, as both have been proven theoretically and experientially in their own contexts.

That concurs with Tim Keller's response at Dave's blog that, ultimately, numbers are not determinative of effectiveness in mission. At most, the size and model of church ought to appropriately correspond to factors of mobility, population density, and cultural dispositions of its surrounding community.

Popular Posts