A little over a year ago, I told a friend and frequent critic of the Emergent Church that I believed the EC had died as we knew it. There were things happening there that simply were going to cause people to figure out where they stood on some things. I have maintained that the EC, like all movements had a center, a left and a right. What was interesting to me was the fact that I thought those who were more left were going to be the one’s to cause this shift.
The other day, I read an article by a friend and fellow student Jeremy Bouma. He called his post, “Goodbye Emergent, Why I’m taking the theology of the Emerging Church to Task.” Jeremy lays out how he got to the point he is at and explains where he intends to go with his series. The comments range from thoughtful to what was that person thinking?
I doubt that Jeremy’s departure from Emergent will really signal a great shift in anything other than the fact that I think he is one more guy who is asking what does it mean to be emergent, and how does that effect my beliefs? Of course, the watchdogs watchblogs have made mention of his post and even some emergents writers have loaded up for bear.
This is an interesting time. I think we’re going to see some more clear definitions laid out for us over the upcoming months. I think that will be good, not so we can decide who’s in and who’s out but so that we can honestly know where we all stand. It will make it harder for some who like to use a broad brush to do so and that is always a good thing.
47 Comments(+Add)
I’m smiling on the inside.
smile on the outside. it’s good for you
When I read this, I guess my question is what exactly was the “EC as we knew it”? It seems like the “as we knew it” would be different for almost every person you ask. For some people, showing a Nooma video means you’re Emergent. For others, it means something completely different.
I do think that there are people in the movement who for all intents and purposes are simply theological liberals, and who would blend in in many of the mainline denominations. However, I do think that some good has come out of it.
The one thing that I see is that, for the most part, the whole thing kind of had an air of eggheadedness about it. Really, if a movement can’t explain why it’s different without getting into esoteric theological debates, the common person won’t really care. I mean, I’m all for esoteric theological debates, but if it doesn’t really change things on the grassroots level, it won’t do much. I actually think this is why people like Frank Viola, who writes in a very homey and personal level about the house church movement, will resonate with people more than some of the people associated with the EC.
Ultimately, I think the future of the Church is going to look much more ethnically diverse and Pentecostal than the EC ever was. Africa will soon overtake the US as the center of global Christianity.
Phil,
I think that’s true about almost every denomination/movement. I also think that your question is exactly what I meant. I think that some of the “more liberal” thinkers in the EC will make it abundantly clear what it means to be in the EC, which will mean the amorphous EC we currently know will somewhat cease to exist.
BTW, are you complaining about my article?
There’s sort of an irony in that, isn’t there? I mean it almost never existed in the first place. How many people who would in some consider themselves associated with the EC actually attended a truly EC church?
Joe,
You never cease at failing to meet my expectations…
Or, as we have seen, it becomes a catch-all phrase to demean anything ya happen to disagree with… such as those who call us Emergent for who know what reasons.
Phew.
When is Mars Hill going to go away?
Fortunately for us, only Jesus himself as the one who ‘walks among the lampstands’ has authority and final authority over which congregations meet their demise. So, John’s angst notwithstanding, I hope Mars Hill as a congregation stays around for a long time.
I don’t always agree with Pastor Bell, but I have also learned a great about discipleship from him.
What I wonder is, when will all the churches so filled with hatred for brothers and sisters in Christ (churches not unlike the one John presumably belongs to) realize that they are not the only Christians, but Christians only. The sooner those churches go away, the sooner the corrective (which is, in large part, the so-called Emergent church) will no longer be recognized as an entity in an of itself.
Some may think that Pastorboy is a plant, one of us with a second identity just saying the most ridiculous stuff imaginable just to prove our point… as far I know he’s real.
Okay, I will bite.
What exactly?
BTW, I do not hate anybody in any way shape or form.
I love them enough to warn them.
If the EC is emergent village, well, who cares if a network of relationships still has notoriety or not?
For me, I thank God for the conversation because it highlighted the centrality of relational engagement in the post-modern context that we ALL labor in, regardless of label.
it’s always baffled me how people have tried to evaluate/hold the conversation to standards and goals they never claimed for themselves.
that being said, who cares?
some conversations end…sometimes they continue with different people…
but all this sturm und drang from pro and anti voices is just really immature.
I know that the people I love are the ones whose names I twist into something offensives, who I declare unsaved, who I mock repeatedly… I love them enough to warn them thus.
oh, yeah,
PB…
are you going to apologize for lying about me and saying i have hatred for people who do open air preaching?
well if that’s how people “love” i’d never want to experience “hatred” from them.
John, I believe I have blogged enough about what I have learned here at PPP. You can review those blog posts yourself.
Funny, he never mentions Mars Hill or Rob Bell… what does that say?
Jerry, I was referring to discipleship specifically. I cannot remember anything about Rob Bell and discipleship.
Neil, Paul made fun of specific individuals who were wrong doctrinally, and still loved them. I think I can do the same. The fact is, Rob Bell is no better than Joel Osteen in my view as far as the proclaiming of the Gospel is concerned.
Love is Hate
War is Peace
2+2=5
Ok, so honestly the title was picked because I had the song, “It’s the of the world as we know it…and I feel fine” running through my head. Is that even the title?
I agree EM won’t die, but I do believe the context of the conversation is changing and I think that is probably a good thing.
One other note about the thread linked to, it amazes me how downright rude some of the people are. They’re ready to throw him under the bus and label him the illicit love child of the angry bloggers. Amazing
Joe, thank you for bringing this to our attention.
My love for emergent in the past was mainly because of the openness in conversation. The question of how to effectively reach my peers with the Gospel is never far from my mind. In the past I found that the emergent conversation has voiced and tried to answer similar questions about Christianity that has been asked by my peers. However, I have noticed that the emphasis in emergent has moved from conversation to a few authors who are now seen as the “leaders” of emergent. Previously they were just instigators of conversation and in the conversation there was agreement and disagreement with them but now it seems that if you disagree with them that you’re out of the conversation. This is just my perception.
Perhaps the emergent conversation did what it had to – shake the evangelical church out of it stagnant state. The community I am involved in has been hugely impacted by emergent and like Jeremy says in his post “taking my faith in Jesus Christ seriously and asking a whole lot of questions.”
Might it be that when love for a movement becomes stronger than the love that started that movement, the time has come for it to end (or give birth to something new)?
I did’nt think anyone was rude there, not even close to what sometimes happen here. But then I’m a very charitable(or perhaps naive) reader. Or… did I not read the same thread as you?
It will morph into another name/names. Anm open conversation about being more proactive in reaching humanity with the gospe and works of compassion would have been constructive. Instead it spiraled down into who could out heretic the other with sails, gay marriage, political activism, and how all religions lead to God.
It will continue along with its own brand of preacher idolatry.
i would agree with people are saying here…
the root concern was ministry in the setting we find ourselves.
thinking about what it is to do ministry in our particular zipcode…NOT create some monolithic new “style” of doing church.
i’m thankful for that…
i agree with another writer on another blog that there is some frustration that such a conversation about being missionaries to our culture somehow got turned into a conversation about epistemology and gays.
that’s partly the fault of some key voices…AND that’s partly the fault of critics that framed the conversation for their own political/gatekeeper ends…
By the way, I just ordered Brian McClaren’s new book yesterday, so I don’t know that I’d say the EC is quite dead. I guess as long as people are willing to buy books written by the people associated with the “conversation”, it will still have some legs.
In a way, it’s hard to measure the real impact of some things. There are a lot of writers who the general public is pretty unaware of, but they end up influencing someone in a church or in a denomination, and that, in turn, causes that group to go in a different direction.
It’s kind of like the old saying about the band The Velvet Underground – only about 3000 people bought Velvet Underground albums but all of them started a band.
McClaren’s new book is summed up with one sentence:
“All roads lead to God”.
Save your money.
Take a walk on the wild side.
Lou Reed.
#27: Rick, you read it already?
I watched his interview with Burke.
Are you talking about that one where they’re driving around in the car?
Yes. He talked about coming out and really saying things that will shock people because at this point he doesn’t care. I think he mentioned the divine streams in all religions. Even people who used to like him are hiding.
Rick,
Of course there is a “divine stream” in all religions. In every religion there is a common denominator – people seeking God. The Holy Spirit is actively at work in ALL the world (thus, all religions). There is truth to be found in Islam, Hindu, Buddhism, Judaism and even Christianity.
Saying there are “divine streams” in all religions is not the same thing as “all roads lead to heaven.”
“People seeking God”
Or people inventing a god. We will see. If McClaren is true to form the gospel (cross, resurrection, and all that stuff) will get very little pub if any.
“There is truth to be found in Islam, Hindu, Buddhism, Judaism and even Christianity.”
I refer you to my spittoon metaphor.
As to the OP and EC changing/dying, I don’t know. Obviously there is some change in the air but this was to be expected (or should have been). I think whatever happens the journey was worth taking and will still continue.
I have noticed some of the leading voices in Emergent taking some positions and drawing lines in the sand that to me sound counter-productive to the ethos of emergent that first attracted me. I think much of the sentiments expressed by these key figures are good and worthy but some of the language used to make their points are not so good. IOW, more care needs to be taken when they try to make their points so as to not come across as setting up an “us vs them” paradigm.
I responded to Philip Clayton’s recent article on The Ooze titled “Theology after Google” in a two part series on my blog. That is just one example of sharing the same sentiments (denominational reform) yet differing in how it is said or even done.
Rick, I wish you could try to look at this from the perspective of others. Suppose a group of Muslims were having a theological discussion on their own blog just like we are. Imagine one of them insinuating that you (Rick), rather than truly seeking God only invented one of your own making.
Now, neither you nor the Muslim can stand outside of time and space and declare which of you is absolutely true. However, you can both answer that you are not just making this stuff up and “inventing” something to make yourself feel good. You would both say you are seeking God as best you know how with all your heart, soul and mind.
So it’s not very fair for you or anyone to claim they are the only one’s truly seeking God whereas everyone else who thinks differently than you is merely “inventing” gods.
I guess it all comes down to how one views the Scriptures. There is only one God – Jesus. All the rest are evil inventions of blind hearts.
I would say it may be fair to say that other religions have some element or elements of truth in them, but I would also say that mankind does invent other gods, as well. Isn’t that what Paul is getting at here:
Humans were made to worship the true and living God, and they often turn that created longing toward something else.
There is a way that seems right unto a man but they are the ways of death.
Two Bridges. Both have wood; both have rails; both are bridges; both can hold a man; and both are nicely painted.
But only one spans the entirety of the chasm; the other goes only half way across. So yes, there is truth in other religions, but that truth is wrapped in death.
True, we do create gods and idols (even Christians). My point is only to say that from the perspective of one inside one of the world’s longer lasting religions they do not think of themselves as following after an “invention.” If they did, they would change religions.
Well, of course they don’t think that they’ve invented their gods. No one but a crazy person would worship a god that he knew he invented.
They are trapped in the prison of idolatry. And as you say, I’d say many Christians are as well. That’s why it takes a personal experience with Christ to be freed from this prison.
And some people are more committed to their false gods than are some Christians committed to Jesus. (i.e. 9/11)
it is one thing to say that there is truth taught in other religions. it is quite another to say that other religions are true… or that they seek the one true God.
we will have to wait and see what McClaren means – but when he speaks of divine streams in all religion it smacks of all streams leading to the same ocean.
Agreed – we’ll have to wait and see (I’ve not read the book and probably won’t for some time).
I agree it sounds like that but I trust McLaren is more nuanced than that. If not, it won’t be the first time I disagreed with someone that I had long agreed with.
” it won’t be the first time I disagreed with someone that I had long agreed with.”
And it will not be the first time McClaren has openly revealed his estrangement from Scripture and orthodox Christianity even if we limit orthodoxy to redemption itself.
fixed it.
Exactly.