Six weeks ago, I lamented the state of the Wikipedia definitions for “Missional living” and the Emerging church movement. I got involved enough at the time to spearhead the removal of the list of “prominent figures” from the latter list to a separate document of List of prominent figures in the emerging church movement in an effort to stop spamming the list. This seems to have worked, since it hasn’t been updated since. Meanwhile the ECM article continues to involve, it’s last update having been made today. I haven’t been watching it, but the definition looks to be still evolving, and is now in need of some organization. So much for that page.
As I said before, the Missional living definition needs to be rewritten. The article now has the “Neutrality Disputed” tag on it, as most of the people I know in the middle of the missional fray would not likely recognize themselves in the definition as it was written. I noticed yesterday that Dave Winer has a similar problem — he started editing articles for the first time, and it seems he quickly got frustrated. He didn’t fix the article on RSS, he was a bit discouraged by having his first edits reverted within minutes… but he added a link to the RSS 2.0 Spec (since reverted) and then said, “most of that page is worthless, things that never happened, Rove-like spin from god knows who. That’s the thing about Wikipedia, it’s a free-for-all slamfest, and you don’t have a right to confront your accusers. Feh.” I figure Dave Winer should know a little something about RSS, and if he doesn’t like the article…
I guess our dislike of the missional description shouldn’t be that surprising — it’s obviously not isolated. Following my earlier mention of it, Rick Meigs and I have started work with a few others on massaging a better definition — hopefully it’ll appear on Wikipedia in due course, but as Dave notes, you never can tell. As part of the effort, I have begun to compose a missional reading list, or annotated bibliography. To that end, I’d like to throw it open and ask for contributions (use the comments below) of particular articles, papers, books, audio or video that attempt to define missional (pro or con) and which should be considered seminal works or important to the reading list for those wanting to gain a grasp of the topic. Well? Floor’s open!
Some months ago, I browsed Wikipedia for the entry on “Missional” and there was nothing. Not even a re-direct. I think I dropped Rick Meigs an e-mail, encouraging him to write something.
I just read the Missional Wiki again. It needs help! Last I checked, Rick’s missional.org website has a great definition/introduction, and resonates with what I think are the core ideas of ‘missional’ as most of us understand and use the term.
For the near-term, perhaps you or Rick could simply replace the existing Wiki entry with his introduction. At l;east that would provide a more solid starting point for further editing.
I haven’t had two spare moments to rub together lately, but this is of great interest to me. So the fact that I’ve not commented here is not out of indifference, but because I’m helping a friend care for her children while her husband has post-operative difficulties and I’m working with a teenager who is in crisis … not to mention caring for my own family.
The idea that I’m percolating on is that perhaps there needs to be some sort of tree format on the wikipedia site that incorporates the language that Rick and John use on their sites … perhaps some space that recognizes missional apologetics, and missional living … and the different aspects that missional can take on. While I think that everyone attempts to live holistically in a missional manner, no one can completely … so we pick and choose which parts to attempt. Some people are more focussed on creation care, some on living transiently and carrying a message from place to place … or perhaps that’s getting too detailed. Hmmmm ….