Hmmmm, Great question….

I think for me, in prompts a couple more….

Can we really “start” a community, or does a true community only arise once you first have a group of people who have genuine relationships with each other….?

What does the term “missional” actually mean?

For us, the church we’d hope to be a part of would be one where Jesus is the defining factor in the relationships of everyone involved. In that sense, there wouldn’t a clear distinction between that individual “church”, and the Church as a whole. The church would simply be the people of God, and understood as not contained by buildings, or regions, or specific names, etc. It would not be centered around any single personality, and ideally, not be dependant on any particular people in order to exist. Jesus would be actually treated as the functioning head of the church, able to lead his people in their gatherings and throughout their everyday lives. Everyone who has received the Holy Spirit through faith in Christ would be encouraged to contribute to the group as a whole, and the Spirit would guide the topic and flow of the meetings. If there is a “mission”, it would simply be the same mission given by Christ before He ascended, to “go and make disciples…”, which would be carried out in a context of relationship and transparency, instead of programs and crisp presentation. It would be a mission built around a commitment to being completely real with one another, where everyone’s weakness and sin isn’t subtly pressured to be swept under the rug, but can be out in the open, where it can be nailed to the cross. It would be a gathering where leadership is defined by really serving others, not by noteriety or talking the most. It would be a place where the world, if they were to come and taste it, would say, “this is truly different from anything I’ve ever seen before…”

Daniel