Curious Christian

Hope Street is an urban mission based in the inner city of Sydney, Australia. I thought is would be worthwhile putting their thoughts on incarnational ministry up for discussion:

Incarnational presence of ministry and workers: And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us’ (John 1: 14). The story of Jesus is the story of a God who was so passionately concerned for creation that in Jesus, God chose to become one with humanity. This concept of incarnation – a being, with, a living amongst, a ‘humbling of oneself’, translates in the urban context to a practise of mission and ministry that is distinct from paternalism. Incarnational ministry is the practise of one’s faith with others, not ‘to’ or ‘for’ others. Incarnational ministry means that those of us who come from the dominate middle class in our society, and who seek to be engaged with people who are on the margins of our society, or ‘the poor’, must first seek to listen to, and be grounded in the inner city context, in order to practise our faith in a way that empowers those with whom we share our lives and faith. Incarnational ministry is about living and being in the context, and earning the right to be identified as part of the context. This does not mean that those of us who come from middle class life experiences cannot engage in ministry to those outside our culture, but it does mean we must earn the right to do so in humility, and without an arrogant evangelism or paternalism. It means knowing the context, listening to those who live in it, and developing models of ministry with those who are there. It generally means a long term commitment to work in places where the church has been absent, or only present in the language of judgement. This approach does not project an image of ‘we have the answer for you’ by those in ‘professional welfare or ministry’ or by ‘incoming suburban professionals’. It is not a place for ‘parachute evangelism’, for those who come in for the evangelistic ‘hot drop’ without first earning the right to speak in the context.

Personally I liked how they drew out the distinction between incarnational ministry and more paternalistic forms of ministry. What say you?