Emerging
This morning, I emerged from underneath my covers. I emerged from my bedroom for a bowl of cereal. That is what it means to be emergent for those of you who were wondering. I know I was.
I kid, I kid, but not really. I think my definition is about as complete as some of the others out there. “The Emerging Church” has officially moved from an idea to becoming a buzz word, and as a buzz word, it is a football we can toss around when we need it. If you want to attract a certain crowd, label yourself as emergent. If you want to rail against the dangers of this post-modern world, go after the emergents. It is a word whose meaning is trapped by its connotation, and it all depends on who you talk to. Like so many things in the church, our response is to accept it or reject it without understanding it. “Emergent is what we need to be”, or “Emergent is bad, and that’s all you need to know”. That’s the reaction you’ll get from most.
So, what exactly does it mean to be emergent? While the modern use of the term can be closely tied to the Emergent Village, a looses association of churches who have the common vision of reaching out to postmodern culture, the term is certainly not new. Dan Kimball, pastor and author of the book The Emerging Church, had this to say about it on his blog:
The term “emerging church” isn’t new, it was used for a book called “The Emerging Church” in 1970 by Bruce Larson and Ralph Osborne. I have read that book and it was mainly about change needed in the church for the advancement of the gospel in the “emerging” world of 1970. When I wrote the book of the same name in 2003, that was pretty much the same thing but 33 years later. There will always be change needed in the church for the mission we are on as different time periods of history emerge and cultures change and develop. Perhaps in 33 more years the term will resurface again and someone who is 5 years old right now will write a book caled “The Emerging Church” about what is “emerging” and changing in the mission of the church in the year 2042.
I don’t claim to be an expert on the modern emerging church movement, nor do I have the time or energy to break down the little I do know. That’s what wikipedia and google are for. But what the emerging movement is doing is asking questions about how the church can move forward in the 21st century. To move forward, the movement is looking backward, and it is attempting to address the church’s shortcomings. That process is never pretty.
I think one of the biggest challenges the emerging church faces is how to deal with the general sense of bitterness felt by many in their churches. Their young, white, mop-haired congregation is full of hurting kids. They grew up in fundamentalist, conservative denominations that often celebrated legalism and conformity. They couldn’t measure up (no one can), and now they are mad about it. They find grace in the emerging church, and with grace comes freedom, but they often take their freedom and pepper it with the bitterness they hold as their parents continue to question them about their cigars and penchant for imported beer. In the emerging church, they finally get to be “cool”, but what they need is healing.
I think that’s what the church needs the most. That’s true for the emerging church, the mega-church, and the traditional denomination on the corner. Our nation is hurting, and the church needs to look and see where they have caused pain. I think the emerging church is taking the lead in identifying where the pain is, but it is one thing to identify the injury. It is quite another to heal it.
I am an optimist. I believe traditional churches have a lot to learn from the emerging church, and the emerging church would be wise to not throw the baby out with the bath water as they re-imagine the way they practice Christianity. I believe this can happen. But it begins with a spirit of healing and forgiveness.
So there. Go do it.
