Emergent-less conversations

Brother Maynard has a post up, " Emerge-ed ?", about how folks are distancing themselves from the label/brand " Emergent ". It's a good read, with various people like Andrew Jones, Scot McKnight, Bob Hyatt, and Grace weighing in raising some good points.

On the radar screen of " emergent ", I am but a dimly lit blip, hardly recognizable as anything noticeable or worth tracking. But I have been involved in church leadership in various roles for almost 30 years, and following the emerging/emergent conversation for 10 years, there are a lot of us dimly lit blips wandering around the screen.

I think, sadly " emergent " evolved into the the thing it despised...a brand/label, a product to be marketed in the local Christian book store. Things emergent in the far dimly lit corner, sort of like the XXX section in a video store, restricted entertainment ( just joking ). But what initially was a wide open table of gracious imaginative conversation around faith, culture and evangelism, became insular and closed with a sense of hierarchy. One can understand this evolution unfolding with a loud dominant voice of critique arising from those who did not understand the emerging conversation. Maybe, not intentionally it seemed barriers were erected as to who was in, and who was out. It became a chess game in which each side had to counter the others move in defense. One might say, the conversation has reached a stalemate. So maybe one needs to forfeit the name " emergent/emergent ", so that imagination can be rekindled, and the conversation continued.

In February 2007, Scot McKnight, wrote an wrote an article on the emerging church, in which he opens up with these words; 

Along with unfair stereotypes of other traditions, such are the urban legends surrounding the emerging church—one of the most controversial and misunderstood movements today. As a theologian, I have studied the movement and interacted with its key leaders for years—even more, I happily consider myself part of this movement or "conversation." As an evangelical, I've had my concerns, but overall I think what emerging Christians bring to the table is vital for the overall health of the church. ( italics, and emphasis mine )

It's a great article in which Scot McKnight describes  " 5 Streams of the Emerging Church ". I think it important to realize what he describes is not a label or brand. I love the metaphorical image of 5 streams. Streams feed a rivers, one feeds the other, here is a sense of constant motion...it does not become a stagnant pool. Or the idea, the river is more important than the streams.

And these words from years back by Pete Rollins of Ikon, " While the term ' emerging church ' is increasingly being employed to describe a well defined and well- equipped religious movement, in actual fact it is currently little more than a fragile, embryonic and diverse conversation being held between individuals over the Internet and at various small gatherings. Not only does the elusive and tentative nature of this conversation initially make it difficult to describe what, if anything, unifies those involved; the sheer breadth of perspectives held by those within the dialog makes terms such as ' movement ', ' denomination ', and ' church ' seem somewhat inappropriate. "

"Our first attempt to understand this network will often leave us with a certain frustration, as its kinetic and dynamic nature seems to defy easy reduction to a single set of theological doctrines or ritualistic practices. what we are presented with instead is a diverse matrix of relationships that bridge a number of different communities. Even a cursory glance over this network will show that the participants are unified neither by a shared theological tradition, nor by an aspiration to one day develop one. The word ' emerging ' cannot, then, be understood as describing a type of becoming that is set to one day burst onto the religious scene as a single, unified, and distinct denominational perspective ( analogous to a caterpillar that is soon to break its cocoon, and arise as a butterfly ), or a becoming that can be carefully charted ( like the trajectory of a bullet )." ( again italics and emphasis mine )

Thankfully many are coming to recognize the importance of imagination in spiritual formation. Dr. Kevin Vanhoozer, author of The Drama of Doctrine and professor of systematic theology says:

" Imagination has been a dirty word for too long...The imagination enables us to see parts of the Bible as forming a meaningful whole. But we can go further still. The imagination also enables us to see our lives as part of that same meaningful whole. This is absolutely crucial. Christians don't need more information about the Bible, trivial or otherwise. What the church needs today is the ability to indwell or inhabit the text."

In Kester Brewin's book " Signs of Emergence ", Alan Jamieson, reflecting on James Fowlers , " Stages of Faith: The Psychology of Human Development and the Quest for Meaning ", talks about Stage 5 as being a place of humility, with none of the brash arrogance of a permanent equilibrium of closure on all theological question. It is a place where people can hold things in tension and appreciate mystery...akin to the realization that the behavior of light needs to be understood simultaneously as wave and particle, even though this is rationally impossible. It's a place of complex simplicity. A place where there is more than one view, multidimensional...where truth can be viewed from two or more angles simultaneously, like wave and particle.

There are many people in this place, remember, I'm one of the dimly lit blips on the radar. We as a " church " need to acknowledge that, or people will continue to hemorrhage from the church like a severed artery.

In the lull of conversation, in the stalemate we may forfeit the name " emergent/emerging "...but may the game continue. This gracious wide open table of wild imaginative conversation of faith, culture and evangelism needs to be rekindled...ignited with redemptive imagination of Jesus and His Kingdom.

Comments

[grace]

Ron,
Early on I recognized you as one who has an imagination of the Kingdom. The rest of it, I don't care so much about. However, I believe the church needs voices like yours to remind us and encourage us with what you see.

Paige says dido

[jim]

"What the church needs today is the ability to indwell or inhabit the text."...I think if we have truly been born into the kingdom, Ron, as Paul put it in Titus 3:5 "RE"-newed in the Holy Ghost, then we, the Church, actually do have the ability to indwell, inhabit the text. The text is alive and within us. We just have to learn to relax and become one with the indwelling. Not in some arrogant, self-assumed claim of our own interpretation; but as secure in a confirmation that He, indeed, goes with us. I'd rather follow a "dimly lit blip" than a puffed up neon light show any day. There's an old song Janet Paschal sang called "Choose You Again" that spoke of learning how glory came not necessarily from battles won, but from trudging through the dry, deserted places with Him. Wish I still knew all the words, for it expresses the journey as I have found it to be....

[Randy Hein]

Great post, Ron. I think your Fowler insertion is particularly insightful. What has happened to the 'emergent' network is inevitable to any explosive movement that moves into a state of permanence.

About 8 years ago, I came to the realization that perhaps the best thing I could do as an 'emerging/missional' pastor was to indigenize and unplug myself from 'the machine' and go grassroots. Although, in retrospect, I can see that I made some huge mistakes and hurt some people, I think it was a good move.

All that being said, I still see myself as part of this stream. I'm happy to be in the company of the likes of Brian McLaren, DOug Pagitt and Tony Jones. They have become easy targets these days, and that makes me very sad.

After almost 30 years of leadership in the church, I've seen a lot of stuff. I have lived through the Third Wave, the Shepherding Movement, the Cell Group phase, too many propositional "fill in the blanks" sermons, the Toronto Blessing, the Liturgical revival and the Seeker Church phenomena. Conpared to these other movements the Emerging conversation - and even most visible expression the Emergent Network - has stood out as both a theologically redemptive and spiritually refreshing oasis for me.

[ron cole]

Randy, I like indigenous, I think faith communities have to work it out in the context they find themselves. Although we share similarities...there are subtle differences. Sadly I think people have seen Brian McLaren, Doug Pagitt, and Tony Jones as being the so-called trinity of the " emerging church."They would, and never have spoken solely fro the emerging church. I believe there main goal has been to invoke the conversation, and the rekindle the imagination of the Kingdom. Like you I think in this era of post-christendom, the church is an alien. We need an oasis, that is theologically redemptive to engage the culture again. Lets pray the conversation is rekindled with the imagination of Christ.