...and we can start by discussing your thoughts on this Christianity Today article.
Five Streams of the Emerging Church
Key elements of the most controversial and misunderstood movement in the church today.
by Scot McKnight
Showing posts with label Emerging Church. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Emerging Church. Show all posts
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Emerging and Missional--Part Two
Based on the reading I've done in both emerging and missional literature, and conversations I've had with people who claim to be both, it seems there are some fundamental differences between the emerging and missional churches, but that they are not mutually exclusive and many people are bringing the two together.
It is much easier to deduce the basic principle of the missional church. As Alan Hirsch says, "the church's true and authentic organizing principle is mission." This is the starting point for anything that can rightly be included under the label of missional church. The focus is on a spiritual and physical redemption of individuals and the world. Things like community, worship, gathering, prayer, service, and study sprout up through the soil of mission and in its support. This does not mean that any of these things are purely utilitarian, but the Christian life is a whole that grows best in the context of mission. It is mission that shapes our prayer life to be more about God's kingdom than ourselves, worship to overflow from the fullness of a heart that is seeing God at work, community that is forged in the heat of shared endeavor. All of these things are a part of what it means to be the people of God in this world, but they are informed by mission--it is their context.
The missional church also has an inherently anti-institutional bent. As institutions grow they take more work, time, and resources to support themselves. All of this can naturally lead to an internal focus, which is anti-missional. There are some institutional churches that are very intentional about being missional, but institution has not proven to be the most conducive setting for fostering mission. (I would also say that being anti-institutional doesn't automatically make you missional. I think less institution fits better with mission but neither necessitates the other.)
The emergent church is a little harder to pin down. From my reading it seems to be more interested in engaging the predominant Western theology and pushing its boundaries. This has led to some wonderful discussion, but the outcome of it isn't always clear.
The emerging church movement also seems to fit better with the institutional church than the missional movement. There is more discussion of how to tweak and work within existing forms to make them more artistic, participatory, and engaging.
Both the emerging and missional church movements are disproportionately fueled by people under 40, but there are strong voices in each who are older. It will be interesting to see how each of these movements continues to take shape in the future.
It is much easier to deduce the basic principle of the missional church. As Alan Hirsch says, "the church's true and authentic organizing principle is mission." This is the starting point for anything that can rightly be included under the label of missional church. The focus is on a spiritual and physical redemption of individuals and the world. Things like community, worship, gathering, prayer, service, and study sprout up through the soil of mission and in its support. This does not mean that any of these things are purely utilitarian, but the Christian life is a whole that grows best in the context of mission. It is mission that shapes our prayer life to be more about God's kingdom than ourselves, worship to overflow from the fullness of a heart that is seeing God at work, community that is forged in the heat of shared endeavor. All of these things are a part of what it means to be the people of God in this world, but they are informed by mission--it is their context.
The missional church also has an inherently anti-institutional bent. As institutions grow they take more work, time, and resources to support themselves. All of this can naturally lead to an internal focus, which is anti-missional. There are some institutional churches that are very intentional about being missional, but institution has not proven to be the most conducive setting for fostering mission. (I would also say that being anti-institutional doesn't automatically make you missional. I think less institution fits better with mission but neither necessitates the other.)
The emergent church is a little harder to pin down. From my reading it seems to be more interested in engaging the predominant Western theology and pushing its boundaries. This has led to some wonderful discussion, but the outcome of it isn't always clear.
The emerging church movement also seems to fit better with the institutional church than the missional movement. There is more discussion of how to tweak and work within existing forms to make them more artistic, participatory, and engaging.
Both the emerging and missional church movements are disproportionately fueled by people under 40, but there are strong voices in each who are older. It will be interesting to see how each of these movements continues to take shape in the future.
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Emergent Discission
In a post on the Jesus Creed blog, Scot McKnight summarizes a book called Inside the Organic Church. Especially interesting to me is that Bob Whitesel, the author of the book, found in his study of 12 "organic" churches that they were very orthodox in their theology. One of the things emergent has become known for it pushing the theological envelope, so I thought this was an interesting and encouraging finding. Check out the full summary on the Jesus Creed blog.
Labels:
Books,
Church Culture,
Church Forms,
Emerging Church
Monday, February 12, 2007
Is the Emerging Church Missional?
Are “emergent” and “missional” connected? Both of these are words that are being used to describe movements in the church, especially (though by no means exclusively) in the West. But what, if anything, do they have to do with each other. I have run across books and websites that indicate that they are very closely tied and others that make them seem almost completely separate.
Before I give my thoughts on this I thought I’d see if anyone else has a perspective on this question. I think it is an important one because these two terms are being lumped together by some and it is important to know if this is a plausible thing to do.
Before I give my thoughts on this I thought I’d see if anyone else has a perspective on this question. I think it is an important one because these two terms are being lumped together by some and it is important to know if this is a plausible thing to do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)