Thanks for this series so far Richard, I resonate. I was a Baptist pastor and a second generation leader in an emerging church. Our founding pastor brought me on board initially to look after the worshipping community when his book/speaking/conference work was taking him away a lot. We would often have the experience of people leaving our town and moving to another where they were unable to find a church that was practicing faith in a way they had come to value in our congregation.
I would say that our church lasted well as an 'emerging' community by choosing not to take the label, just trying to be part of the Church, and faithful in our own way, and because the founding pastor had immense pastoral gifts and not much ego getting in the way.
However we faced enormous practical challenges when basically the whole demographic reached the parenting life stage and suddenly we had all these children to try and pass the faith on to, with a volunteer base that could no longer manage unstructured, spontaneous, and highly creative projects and gatherings, or meet to talk for hours about the inner workings of the community.
I am now an Anglican priest in what I consider a very 'ordinary' parish...the people aren't especially creative or cool, they have a much lower level of tertiary education on the whole, they don't prize doubt so highly, and they are already immersed in liturgical rhythms. Looking back, I can see that a lot of what we did in the emerging space was about style, taste and preference, and about a niche kind of tribe...belonging for those who'd long felt marginalized by the evangelical/charismatic church. But my current people wouldn't have felt at home there.
I left the emerging church when I found myself called no longer to share the tradition of the Church in a smorgasbord, pick'n'mix, reinventing the wheel kind of way, but to get as close as possible to the liturgical and sacramental headwaters (as close as a woman priest can get.)
But I still value my roots in emerging ministry because I have learned how to work creatively with the liturgy while honoring its integrity and I know the missiological importance of speaking the language of people's hearts not just the language of the church.
I've been following Experimental Theology ever since Rachel Held Evans regularly linked to it and celebrated it on her blog. For all these years, I've continued to assume that Experimental Theology remains one ever-evolving offshoot of the emerging church movement. So the movement still looks like it's thriving to me! Maybe it's too soon to make pronouncements on its legacy. These things sometimes go underground for a while and then burst into new and unexpected flower.
During that same era there was a comparable Emergent Quaker movement, articulated by bloggers like Robin Mohr, who is now Executive Secretary (Chief Executive Officer) of the Friends World Committee for Consultation Section of the Americas.
I was thrilled when, in the early 2000's, I read "A New Kind of Christian" by Brian McLaren. In my early fifties, it seemed this was what I'd been looking for since graduating from my Christian college. The writings critiqued not just the fundamentalist side of things but also helped me see the flaws of thinking based on the Enlightenment. I read many of the books and blogs related to the Emergent movement in the following years and have been blessed by them. Experimental Theology pointed me to some good ones, in fact. But I've never been able to figure out how to find a church home near me where the ideas would be accepted. Since we moved to a new city ten years ago, I've done a lot of on-line searching, even visited a few. Some would appear promising but inevitably, after clicking the "Who We Are" tab and learning their core beliefs, I would be disappointed. Whatever, Tripp Fuller is a lot of fun to listen to.
I have to agree and disagree. I really agree on the pushback and loss of income significantly hampered any growth. I came on the board of Emergent Village right as the publishing industry was beginning to change because it imploded. That loss of income was huge from some. It stopped EV from every creating any growth.
But I have to disagree with the idea that it was largely on blogs and social media. Yes it was online, but EV had a thriving network of conversations happening at the local level. I ran one for two years and we had regulars who were exploring doubts in a grace-based frame work. It worked. My reasons for joining the board was to grow those networks. But once the publishing stopped, it became virtually impossible for the growth to happen, especially because at that point the established mega churches were now shunning all things emergent. The backlash had as much to do with it as anything.
Could it be that Christ Jesus, who alone will build His Church, was not ever in the self-absorbed navel-gazing that essentially was or, at least, became the so-called "emerging church?"
I hope that I haven't stolen your thunder for tomorrow's edition of this excellent series. If I have, then I'm sorry for doing so, but at least you know that I'm fully engaged in this discussion, and my question at the start of this comment was just what popped into my head after I read your concluding question, "Why did the emerging church movement struggle so much in establishing churches of its own?"
Well . . . please tell my possibly imaginary Friend, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, "Hi!" for me the next time you do, Jonathan! Please tell Him that Majik said that he's trying to be good, but, regardless of that, he IS grateful. Thank you. :)
Thanks for this series so far Richard, I resonate. I was a Baptist pastor and a second generation leader in an emerging church. Our founding pastor brought me on board initially to look after the worshipping community when his book/speaking/conference work was taking him away a lot. We would often have the experience of people leaving our town and moving to another where they were unable to find a church that was practicing faith in a way they had come to value in our congregation.
I would say that our church lasted well as an 'emerging' community by choosing not to take the label, just trying to be part of the Church, and faithful in our own way, and because the founding pastor had immense pastoral gifts and not much ego getting in the way.
However we faced enormous practical challenges when basically the whole demographic reached the parenting life stage and suddenly we had all these children to try and pass the faith on to, with a volunteer base that could no longer manage unstructured, spontaneous, and highly creative projects and gatherings, or meet to talk for hours about the inner workings of the community.
I am now an Anglican priest in what I consider a very 'ordinary' parish...the people aren't especially creative or cool, they have a much lower level of tertiary education on the whole, they don't prize doubt so highly, and they are already immersed in liturgical rhythms. Looking back, I can see that a lot of what we did in the emerging space was about style, taste and preference, and about a niche kind of tribe...belonging for those who'd long felt marginalized by the evangelical/charismatic church. But my current people wouldn't have felt at home there.
I left the emerging church when I found myself called no longer to share the tradition of the Church in a smorgasbord, pick'n'mix, reinventing the wheel kind of way, but to get as close as possible to the liturgical and sacramental headwaters (as close as a woman priest can get.)
But I still value my roots in emerging ministry because I have learned how to work creatively with the liturgy while honoring its integrity and I know the missiological importance of speaking the language of people's hearts not just the language of the church.
I look forward to the rest of the series!
I've been following Experimental Theology ever since Rachel Held Evans regularly linked to it and celebrated it on her blog. For all these years, I've continued to assume that Experimental Theology remains one ever-evolving offshoot of the emerging church movement. So the movement still looks like it's thriving to me! Maybe it's too soon to make pronouncements on its legacy. These things sometimes go underground for a while and then burst into new and unexpected flower.
I hope it does, like you say, "burst into a new and unexpected flower".
During that same era there was a comparable Emergent Quaker movement, articulated by bloggers like Robin Mohr, who is now Executive Secretary (Chief Executive Officer) of the Friends World Committee for Consultation Section of the Americas.
I was thrilled when, in the early 2000's, I read "A New Kind of Christian" by Brian McLaren. In my early fifties, it seemed this was what I'd been looking for since graduating from my Christian college. The writings critiqued not just the fundamentalist side of things but also helped me see the flaws of thinking based on the Enlightenment. I read many of the books and blogs related to the Emergent movement in the following years and have been blessed by them. Experimental Theology pointed me to some good ones, in fact. But I've never been able to figure out how to find a church home near me where the ideas would be accepted. Since we moved to a new city ten years ago, I've done a lot of on-line searching, even visited a few. Some would appear promising but inevitably, after clicking the "Who We Are" tab and learning their core beliefs, I would be disappointed. Whatever, Tripp Fuller is a lot of fun to listen to.
I have to agree and disagree. I really agree on the pushback and loss of income significantly hampered any growth. I came on the board of Emergent Village right as the publishing industry was beginning to change because it imploded. That loss of income was huge from some. It stopped EV from every creating any growth.
But I have to disagree with the idea that it was largely on blogs and social media. Yes it was online, but EV had a thriving network of conversations happening at the local level. I ran one for two years and we had regulars who were exploring doubts in a grace-based frame work. It worked. My reasons for joining the board was to grow those networks. But once the publishing stopped, it became virtually impossible for the growth to happen, especially because at that point the established mega churches were now shunning all things emergent. The backlash had as much to do with it as anything.
Could it be that Christ Jesus, who alone will build His Church, was not ever in the self-absorbed navel-gazing that essentially was or, at least, became the so-called "emerging church?"
I hope that I haven't stolen your thunder for tomorrow's edition of this excellent series. If I have, then I'm sorry for doing so, but at least you know that I'm fully engaged in this discussion, and my question at the start of this comment was just what popped into my head after I read your concluding question, "Why did the emerging church movement struggle so much in establishing churches of its own?"
Gee, I seemed to see him all the time in the emerging church.
Well . . . please tell my possibly imaginary Friend, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, "Hi!" for me the next time you do, Jonathan! Please tell Him that Majik said that he's trying to be good, but, regardless of that, he IS grateful. Thank you. :)