Yet, even had the technology worked perfectly it could not wholly capture what is made in relation. Relationality, in its spontaneity, is a poiēsis. This word comes from the Greek word, poien meaning “to create, generate.” Relationality is a “creating” or “generating,” embedded in the moment and as such is silent and almost invisible to anything outside the moment, be it event program and schedule, technology, or even memory after the fact. The general point is worth considering for any notion of using technology for what is essentially relationally dynamic: evangelism, discipleship, and collaboration.
The Neglected Dynamic of Urban and Rural Mission
There is another facet of de Certeau’s notion of strategy and place (lieu) that I wish to note. This is that of the idea of the differentiation of the environment to be acted in.
At the Congress city ministry was put forward as a high need and a vital endeavour at culture-building in our nations. In support of this emphasis, statistics on urban growth were shared, showing that the world is now majority urban with expectations this will grow.3 That urban growth is highest in informal settlements, which are urban environments outside government control and regulation—or in other words “slums.”4 Such growth is occurring at the highest rates in Asia, Africa, and Latin America where Christian influence over society is needed.5 As to the importance of the work, cities are critical nodes of governance, education, and economy, so if the church wants to influence the institutions that influence our nations than cities need robust Christian presence. Such a vision differentiates that growing need, and those institutions and influence as key strategic targets.
The facet of de Certeau’s notion that applies is one he expands in an essay detailing how such distinctions result in a displacement, creating a boundary between otherwise connected fields.6 I think such a displacement is being made between the urban and rural. I am not making the point that giving voice to the great need for leaders and resources to engage the urban mission marginalizes the rural mission.7 The point I wish to make is that the strong emphasis on urban mission neglects the dynamic interrelation between urban and rural environments and as a result unhelpfully restricts the scope of thought and practice of mission. Even as there is a dynamic interplay between rural and urban contexts, so should our mission work reflect that dynamism. Even so, when we treat the urban context in isolation from its dynamic relationship with the rural, we can fail in our mission. Authors Conn and Ortiz helpfully note that to isolate the urban as a target for mission is to ignore its social and cultural linkages to the rural.8 The danger is that even as urban mission is emphasized and resourced it leads to disorder and disruption within rural mission.
Conclusion
One of the conclusions of the first Lausanne Congress was that the separation of gospel declaration (evangelism) from gospel display (social imperatives) ultimately hindered the integral mission of the Gospel. It rightly noted that the command to disciple all nations must be paired with the command to do justly, love mercy and walk humbly with God. Fifty years on and we are suffering from new disorders caused by an overemphasis on one sided-strategy, corporate technologizing at the expense of relationality, and urban mission at the expense of rural. The main problem that we face in our mission endeavour is posed by the disparities we create around human and social experience when we identify and order imperatives based on narrow strategies and measurable practices. Like the people of Scripture, we look to grand movements and large scales and miss the still small voice of God. We create strategies to accomplish and to measure, and we miss out on the hidden work of the Holy Spirit.
3 While this was stated at the Congress, no citation or source were given that I recall. According to the United Nations, however, “55% of the world’s population live in urban areas, a proportion that is expected to increase to 68% by 2050.” See, https://www.un.org/uk/desa/68-world-population-projected-live-urban-areas-2050-says-un (accessed October 1, 2024)
4 “Informal Settlements,” State of the Great Commission, pp. 178.
5 “Cities,” State of the Great Commission, pp. 177.
6 Michel de Certeau, Montaign’s “Of Cannibals”’ in Heterologies: Discourse on the Other. Trans. Brain Massumi, (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2010), p.67-79.
7 Even as today 45% of the global population is rural and If the trends noted bear out it means 32% of the global population will still be rural in 2050. I see in the State of the Great Commission Report statistical focus is given to issues of unreached peoples, region, race, age, gender, income inequality, and other important considerations aimed to demarginalize groups giving voice to underrepresented peoples. There was no category differentiating rural mission. How many Congress participants represented the rural, nearly half the global, population? Apart from one interest session being held Friday afternoon I heard or saw no reference to rural mission as distinct from urban mission.
8 “The ideal models of city and country created by academic scholarship in the past needs modification. Those models were microvisions that assumed the city and the peasant village were static isolates. The cultural systems of today must be drawn on larger scale, a scale that takes account of social and cultural linkages between cities and between city and country; one that sees the city integrating itself with economic, social, political and religious institutions outside its border without obliterating the still meaningful distinction between city and country.” Harvie M. Conn and Manuel Ortiz, Urban Ministry: The Kingdom, The City & The People of God. (Downers Grove, IL., IVP Academic, 2001), p. 218.
.){kind=link}