Subscribe to Christianity Today
Subscribe to Christianity Today
May 14, 2008
Free E-mail Newsletters:
RSS Feed | More Feeds | RSS Help

Home > 2007 > FebruaryChristianity Today, February, 2007  |   |  
Five Streams of the Emerging Church
Key elements of the most controversial and misunderstood movement in the church today.



ADVERTISEMENT

It is said that emerging Christians confess their faith like mainliners—meaning they say things publicly they don't really believe. They drink like Southern Baptists—meaning, to adapt some words from Mark Twain, they are teetotalers when it is judicious. They talk like Catholics—meaning they cuss and use naughty words. They evangelize and theologize like the Reformed—meaning they rarely evangelize, yet theologize all the time. They worship like charismatics—meaning with their whole bodies, some parts tattooed. They vote like Episcopalians—meaning they eat, drink, and sleep on their left side. And, they deny the truth—meaning they've got a latte-soaked copy of Derrida in their smoke- and beer-stained backpacks.

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.

In this article, I want to undermine the urban legends and provide a more accurate description of the emerging movement. Though the movement has an international dimension, I will focus on the North American scene.

To define a movement, we must, as a courtesy, let it say what it is. Eddie Gibbs and Ryan Bolger, in their book, Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures (Baker Academic, 2005) define emerging in this way:

Emerging churches are communities that practice the way of Jesus within postmodern cultures. This definition encompasses nine practices. Emerging churches (1) identify with the life of Jesus, (2) transform the secular realm, and (3) live highly communal lives. Because of these three activities, they (4) welcome the stranger, (5) serve with generosity, (6) participate as producers, (7) create as created beings, (8) lead as a body, and (9) take part in spiritual activities.

This definition is both descriptive and analytical. D. A. Carson's Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church (Zondervan, 2005) is not alone in pointing to the problems in the emerging movement, and I shall point out a few myself in what follows. But as a description of the movement, Carson's book lacks firsthand awareness and suffers from an overly narrow focus—on Brian McLaren and postmodern epistemology.

To prevent confusion, a distinction needs to be made between "emerging" and "Emergent." Emerging is the wider, informal, global, ecclesial (church-centered) focus of the movement, while Emergent is an official organization in the U.S. and the U.K. Emergent Village, the organization, is directed by Tony Jones, a Ph.D. student at Princeton Theological Seminary and a world traveler on behalf of all things both Emergent and emerging. Other names connected with Emergent Village include Doug Pagitt, Chris Seay, Tim Keel, Karen Ward, Ivy Beckwith, Brian McLaren, and Mark Oestreicher. Emergent U.K. is directed by Jason Clark. While Emergent is the intellectual and philosophical network of the emerging movement, it is a mistake to narrow all of emerging to the Emergent Village.

Emerging catches into one term the global reshaping of how to "do church" in postmodern culture. It has no central offices, and it is as varied as evangelicalism itself. If I were to point to one centrist expression of the emerging movement in the U.S., it would be Dan Kimball's Vintage Church in Santa Cruz, California. His U.K. counterpart is Andrew Jones, known on the internet as Tall Skinny Kiwi. Jones is a world-traveling speaker, teacher, and activist for simple churches, house churches, and churches without worship services.





E-mail this pageWrite CTPrint this articlePost a comment





  


Subscribe to Christianity Today and get 3 free trial issues. No credit card required.

Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery. Offer valid in U.S. only.

If you decide you want to keep Christianity Today coming, honor your invoice for just $19.95 and receive nine more issues, a full year in all. If not, simply write "cancel" across the invoice and return it. The three trial issues are yours to keep, regardless.


Click here for international orders2-for-1 Gifts!

[Reader Reviews]
Average User Rating: 

Displaying 1 - 3 of 168 comments.See all comments
Anonymous Posted: January 31, 2007 12:50 AM
I notice that commenters have problem with those Christians who vote Democrats or those who support pro-choice or abortion? Do these same commenters have problem with those Christians who vote Republican or those who support war or collateral damage? What makes one murder and not the other?

Anonymous Posted: January 25, 2007 9:36 PM
I see this as just one more "ploy" to eradicate Christianity from being an influence in your democratic religious culture (the left wing if you will). There appears to be a lot of smoke blowing out there and I cannot figure out why anyone who praises themself for being a democrat whith such idotic hogwash as I have just read can actually call themslf a Christian. If you are trying to be something your not it don't make any sense. To convince the world that you are a Christian while living in a religious/political camp that supports abortion, homosexuality, and a host of other things is about as clear as swamp muck and tastes like pooh (from a spiritual standpoint). You make your argument sound like it is "theological correction" intended for the saints of God but I think you will find that one day when the rubber actually meets the road that all your spin toward evangelical Christianity will come back to haunt you.

Ray Ciervo   Posted: January 19, 2007 2:11 PM
McKnight gets it wrong right out of the gate. To paraphrase C.S. Lewis, "If you want to know what the water is like, don't ask a fish." Those with a movement are not the best ones to give the description, especially in a movement that disdains anything analytical. His rebuttal of D.A. Carson's book is one example of not "hearing" what others are saying. I continue to find Emergent/Emerging leaders smug and guilty of the very thing the accuse evangelicals of . . . thinking they're right and everyone else is wrong. "Consciously and deliberately provactive" gives the heart of EM away - they think they're right. Here's another one EM always does - the picture of church buildings being "rows of wooden pews . . ." just who is he writing about? Is this what we call a "straw-man" argument? Where EM gets it wrong continually is not understanding orthodoxy and orthopraxy. You will live out what you believe . . . doesn't it somewhere say, "as a man thinks in his heart, so he is?"

sponsors 








[Browse More Christianity Today]

Search





















Search by Name
Or use Advanced Search to search by program, region, cost, affiliation, enrollment, more!

Search by:





Books & Culture
Christian History & Biography
Christianity Today
Church Law & Tax Report
Church Finance Today
Ignite Your Faith
Leadership Journal
Marriage Partnership
Men of Integrity
Today's Christian
Today's Christian Woman
Your Church
ChristianityTodayLibrary.com
PreachingToday.com