emergent name change act 2
I love the Shaping of Things to Come by Frost and Hirsch. When they had cheap, slightly damaged copies at CBD, I was buying them and handing them out like business cards. The writers, who are Australians, have written a response to DA Carson and his "Becomng Conversant with the Emerging Church" (which perhaps might have been better titled "My Issues with Brian and Steve").
You can get that response here
Now... the interesting thing is that Tony Jones, the new Coordinator of "Emergent" (the organization) ain't none too happy (scroll down and read the comments). He says:
All I can say is: I think this type of thing will happen as long as "Emergent" continues to be confused with "emerging church."
Those who are currently steering Emergent (the organization) tend towards the theologically, shall we say, "adventuresome"... And because there are people all along the theological continuum who wish to identify with an "emerging/missional church", those who are less theologically "adventuresome" will feel the need to clarify certain things- and even distance themselves from certain positions held by "Leaders" in "Emergent."
It seems as if one of two things is going to happen. Either "Emergent" will change its name (again, unfortunately for them), or those who resonate with the emerging church movement, but tire of defending themselves against critics of Brian, Tony, et al. (for theological positions or ideas they don't really share) will settle on a different expression (like "organic church" or "missional church movement") to tie them together and begin eschewing the word "emergent."
I wouldn't necessarily think this a good thing, but it may happen nonetheless...
I've said before, and Tony has disagreed with me, that Emergent needs to change its name. I know as an organization they want to serve the Emerging Church. But as long as they, and therefore their own individual theologies, are confused with the emerging church as a whole, people are going to continue the distancing, especially as the criticism ramps up.
my 2cents...
You can get that response here
Now... the interesting thing is that Tony Jones, the new Coordinator of "Emergent" (the organization) ain't none too happy (scroll down and read the comments). He says:
"I continue to believe that position papers that draw lines within the emerging church, taking sides for and against organizations, and the like will be supremely unhelpful, and I ask people to please STOP IT."
All I can say is: I think this type of thing will happen as long as "Emergent" continues to be confused with "emerging church."
Those who are currently steering Emergent (the organization) tend towards the theologically, shall we say, "adventuresome"... And because there are people all along the theological continuum who wish to identify with an "emerging/missional church", those who are less theologically "adventuresome" will feel the need to clarify certain things- and even distance themselves from certain positions held by "Leaders" in "Emergent."
It seems as if one of two things is going to happen. Either "Emergent" will change its name (again, unfortunately for them), or those who resonate with the emerging church movement, but tire of defending themselves against critics of Brian, Tony, et al. (for theological positions or ideas they don't really share) will settle on a different expression (like "organic church" or "missional church movement") to tie them together and begin eschewing the word "emergent."
I wouldn't necessarily think this a good thing, but it may happen nonetheless...
I've said before, and Tony has disagreed with me, that Emergent needs to change its name. I know as an organization they want to serve the Emerging Church. But as long as they, and therefore their own individual theologies, are confused with the emerging church as a whole, people are going to continue the distancing, especially as the criticism ramps up.
my 2cents...
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home