While many speak strongly about community engagement, few are able or willing to develop sustained and consequential programs and practices that further it. Many faculty are, in fact, dubious about an educational reform that appears too a-theoretical, too co-curricular, too much like yet another under-financed fad. In this article, the author suggests that community engagement is not just about reconnecting institutions of higher education to the real-world lives of their students and to the communities surrounding them. The goal is to provide faculty with an additional set of tools by which to do their jobs effectively. In talking with faculty about service learning and community engagement, the author has found that faculty respond to the pragmatic goal of "focusing their aim" through community-based models of teaching, learning, and research. The author also suggests to reconceptualize and refocus community engagement as inherent to faculty members' work as teachers and scholars. In order to fruitfully understand community engagement, the author discusses four distinctive typologies, namely, (1) technical; (2) cultural; (3) political; and (4) anti-foundational, including each limits and possibilities. He has found that explicating the limits and possibilities of each mode of doing community engagement is a powerful means of de-escalating the all-too-prevalent faculty tensions. (Contains 1 table.)