Comments on: Emergent Church – Does anyone care?

By: Andrew Conard

Andrew Conard — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 02:19:47 +0000

Allen – Thanks, it is great to have colleagues like you as well. Agreed – Let’s keep the conversation going. I do wonder whether the denomination will be / is able to make the shift. I go back and forth between thinking that the UMC is best positioned among mainline denominations to make the shift and then wonder whether we will be able to do so as a community of faith. I do think that individual communities of faith are making the shift and leading the way for the rest of us.

Mark – I agree, the post-modern shift is here to stay, both in theology and in culture. You make an interesting assertion about the edgier thinkers continuing to move away from the mainstream. Do you think that this is / will be true?

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 16:23:45 +0000

I’d agree with much of what has been posted. The emerging movement has become “Emerging Evangelical Conservative Version 2.0,” true. It is sad to see the movement being high-jacked as a commodity and a look-good garment (instead of a mind-heart-lifestyle).

But, I also have had a fear that as this movement does gain acceptance (isn’t that the reason we’ve written books, blogs, etc.!?!), the more rebellious and independent thinkers will want to leave…instead of keeping to our path.

The Post-Modern shift in theology is NOT fad. It is here to stay. Call it what you will. Disregard your local Christian (trinket) bookstore at your discretion; however, we can’t give up on this shift. Emerging, Missional, Organic, whatever is not boring…and to become apathetic to the changes that must be made will be a death-nell to an already dying US church.

By: Book Note-The New Christians by Tony Jones « The Searching Sage

Book Note-The New Christians by Tony Jones « The Searching Sage — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 04:58:08 +0000

[...] of the writings coming from emergent types as rather mediocre and not that interesting, as some others have pointed out. I was skeptical about this book. But, I have to confess, I gave in. I’ve [...]

By: Allen Ewing-Merrill

Allen Ewing-Merrill — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 03:19:52 +0000

Interesting questions, Andrew. It seems to me our entire denomination needs to take up this question and find ways to restructure ourselves if we’re going to poise ourselves to engage those with a postmodern mindset. Like all things, it’s got to be fully embedded in the lives of local congregations if it’s going to have any impact, though — especially given the anti-hierarchy, anti-institutional bias of postmodern thinkers. Do you ever wonder, as I do, whether the UMC can make the shift?

I certainly wasn’t questioning your passion around renewing the denomination or engaging younger generations. I know those are pretty solid concerns of yours. Mine, too.

Let’s keep the conversation going. It’s great to have colleagues like you.

By: Andrew Conard

Andrew Conard — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 20:04:52 +0000

Allen – I do not want you to think that I am unconcerned about reaching future generations, or renewal within the UMC – both things about which I am very passionate. I think that you helped name it a bit more accurately for me in the response to the “emergent” label. I have tended to lean more toward the emerging movement within Christianity, but that does not always make sense to people in conversation (not that emergent necessarily does, but it does have more broader exposure).

I am looking forward to reading Intuitive Leadership and have received several good recommendations as well as your good words about it.

How do you think the United Methodist Church might best engage postmodernity? Do you think that it is something that can be done as a denomination? Or is it for something for local congregations? My initial reaction is perhaps both, but weighted toward the local congregation.

What do you think?

By: Allen Ewing-Merrill

Allen Ewing-Merrill — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 15:50:36 +0000

Thanks, Andrew – I agree with what you said. Yes, the danger is that when something becomes “trendy” and everyone jumps on the bandwagon, then it becomes more mainstream and loses its original edginess. My sense is this may be happening with the use of the label “emergent,” which, as you suggest, doesn’t always translate into faithful discipleship but becomes more about toting a trendy brand. Still, I think the conversation is very pertinent, and I’m still finding a lot of value in reading and learning that comes from the Emergent community. Particularly, I have just finished Tim Keel’s “Intuitive Leadership,” and I think what he has to say is really, really important.

Like you, I feel a deep passion around the renewal of the mainline church, and especially The United Methodist Church, which is my spiritual home. I feel pretty strongly that if the church of Jesus Christ is going to engage contemporary society in ways that have any relevance to younger generations who live and breathe postmodernity – and to a large extent, The United Methodist Church is missing this boat – then it’s important (for me, at least) to stay in the conversation.

By: Andrew Conard

Andrew Conard — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 15:14:26 +0000

Matt – Thanks for the tip. I read Guder’s book in seminary and agree that it is excellent.

Janelle – Thanks for your thoughts around churches – authenticity, vulnerability, communal living. Great stuff.

Allen – I do not think that you are slow on the uptake and I would assert that cultural trends are slower to get to Kansas. I have wondered if the transition to a postmodern mindset started on the coasts and is filtering to the center of the country. I have found other cultural trends to move in this way – particularly when visiting my wife’s family in North Carolina.

I think that you are right on with the contextual communities living out of a missional mindset. Maybe I am just tired of people talking about being “emergent” and not living as a disciple of Jesus Christ sent out to the community of which she or he is a part.

I appreciate your corrective. It makes me think a bit harder about this original post. Thank you for helping shape my thinking.

By: Allen Ewing-Merrill

Allen Ewing-Merrill — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 03:36:43 +0000

Andrew: I’ve been thinking a lot about this since first reading your post, because I’m actually not bored at all. Maybe it takes longer for things to find their way to New England, or maybe I’m just slow on the uptake — but it seems to me this is at the heart of what the emerging “conversation” is all about… It’s not about adopting a “brand” or opening an emerging franchise. It’s not about Rob Bell. It’s not about hype or technique or worship style, and it’s certainly not about candles. It’s about forming authentic communities within particular contexts and keeping a missional perspective. I’m not bored with the conversation, but I also don’t feel the need to use the “emerging” label all the time either. That anti-label, post-institutional approach seems pretty emerging to me.

By: janelle

janelle — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 07:55:34 +0000

I think that my thing is that I’m sick of the word, “emerging.” It’s not even what much of it stands for, it’s just the whole hype around it…interesting since much of what emerging is against is hype. I still think that churches should strive to be authentic, that leadership should be vulnerable, that there should be an emphasis on living in community within the church as well as outside the walls. Plus…I like candles. But yeah…done with “emerging.”

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 17:11:19 +0000

I won’t load you down since I’ve already helped incite a “wish-listing” frenzy in you! You may want to check out Missional Church: A Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America edited by Darrell L. Guder. It’s not as “catchy” as Hirsch, but still very good and foundational to the missional movement.