...on both our houses

Found this interesting for its reflections on gender and biblical and trinitarian models

I am writing my theological reflection on my ministry experiences over the last few weeks for college. I have just begun to realise the interactions that would have been impossible had I not been ministering in a mixed gender team. I am coming to understand the practical implications of partnered ministry in which both men and women work today in response to the Missio dei.

There would have been particular outreach opportunities that I could not have involved myself in had it not been that I was accompanied by a man and similarly we would never have been able to reach out to the young girl had I not been present. Now how to express this as just a tiny aspect of what I learnt without getting too fired up on the issue?

I am exploring adaptation and inculturation but I suspect that I am going to conclude that the church must be in constant dialogue with those to whom it reaches out. I am finding I am growing increasingly uncomfortable with terminology such as 'marginalised' and 'reaching out'. Who are the reached? I was changed too by my interactions? Who are the real marginalised now that the church seems to sit on the periphery of everyone's vision, perhaps we are in a better position now to engage than we ever have been, we understand better how marginalisation feels. Am I just reflecting in a way that is typical of someone inhabiting a post-modern universe? Flips - lots to think about but the occasional blogging distraction helps.