{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019973368841544607, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.592105263157895, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The art of the possible: A call for political intelligence (PQ) in missiological reflection

Missiology has always drawn heavily from other academic disciplines, particularly sociology and cultural anthropology. With the desire to engage intelligently across cultures, missiologists employ specific anthropological tools and methods and stress that missionaries need “CQ” or “cultural intelligence” in order to be effective. Similarly, missiologists have increasingly argued that the gospel necessarily includes a political dimension. However, unlike the sophisticated engagement with “culture,” the calls for political involvement rarely go much deeper. Researchers often point to political structures and problems and call for the church to respond, without offering any ideas on how to effect change practically. Furthermore, there is a glaring lack of engagement with political science and other disciplines that specialize in how policies are changed in the real world. I argue that “PQ” or political intelligence is desperately needed in order to inform and support missiological reflection and strategy on political issues. It is not enough to simply want to influence political systems for Kingdom purposes, we must seek PQ. This is acquired through missiological interaction with political science and the adoption of best practices from the non-academic activist community. I end by presenting several political science concepts that will guide missiology moving forward in its embrace of PQ.