The "Emerging Church": What is it?

So there is a lot of talk these days about the so-called "emerging church." Sometimes this term is used interchangeably with other terms like the "postmodern movement," or the "postmodern church," or "Emergent Church" (which is actually somewhat different), or just simply "liberals." Most of the time, these other terms are employed polemically--meaning people use them to argue why we should not like the "emerging church." I want to simply introduce this topic of the emerging church to the blog, and hopefully clear up some of the misunderstandings.

First of all, attempting to define the "emerging church" is like attempting to answer the question, "What color is the rainbow?" Probably the first and most important thing to note is that the "emerging church" is not a monolith--it does not have one face. The "emerging church" spans many denominations, theological traditions, political affiliations, worship styles, etc. So if anyone says something to you like, "We don't/do embrace the emerging church because the emerging church is __________," ask them which part of the "emerging church" they're talking about. Even the simple question, "Who is a part of the 'emerging church'?" will be answered differently depending on who you ask. Also, make note that words like "postmodern" and "liberal" are oftentimes just as slippery terms as "emerging church"--they mean very different things depending on who is using them. We need to do better with the way we use these sorts of terms. Vast misunderstandings--which often lead to arguments, dissension, and even downright hatred--are formed when we begin to use terminology like this in sermons, lectures, and casual conversation without realizing what we're saying.

So, I will not attempt to give a once-for-all definition of the "emerging church" precisely because I know that this would not be possible. (Be critical thinkers regarding those who say it is.) However, I think it is possible to attempt to identify certain themes which run throughout many--but not all, nor all the same--parts of the "emerging church" movement. Once again, these themes do not represent all churches that could be considered a part of this movement, nor would each church in this movement have to have elements of each of these themes. It is a very diverse movement, but here are what I believe are some themes that we might be able to begin the conversation identifying as common within many strains of the "emerging church" movement:

(1) Dissatisfaction with and criticism of 20th-century American Evangelicalism: Many "emerging churches" in the U.S. have arisen as a result of simple dissatisfaction with the status quo of modern, American, evangelical churches. The criticisms are often that this sector of the church has been too politically slanted, or that it has become too obsessed with "personal/individual faith," or too consumed with a specific version of the "saved--vs.--unsaved" question, or that it has lost touch with the historical faith of the Church and substituted an "American Christianity" for it.

(2) Anti-institutionalization / anti-denominationalism. Denominations are seen as a construct of modernity (i.e., they only occur after the Reformation, during the Modern Era [usually dated at 1500--2000]). Denominations are often seen as only divisive; however, many "emerging churches" recognize that the even non-denominational congregations become a sort of denomination, and they attempt to reconcile this fact with their faith and mission.

(3) A belief (they might say "recognition") that the wider culture in the West has moved past modernity into "post-modernity," while the church in the West seems to have dug its heels into modernity. This is an important point to Brian McLaren, one of the founders of Emergent Village--which is a title for a distinct coalition of churches within the "emerging church" movement. (Check them out at http://www.emergentvillage.org/) The point here is that "postmodernity" is not so much a good or evil worldview or perspective as much as it is a description of where Western culture is at today--in a world that looks much differently, and looks at itself much differently, than it did 500 or even 50 years ago. More importantly, the point is that the church in the West is failing to speak to this postmodern culture, because it is stuck, not in a Christian or biblical worldview, but in a primarily modern worldview--and the problem, as it is argued, is that the church in the West can't tell the different between the modern and the biblical/Christian worldview.

(4) A cry for social justice on a global level, and a partnering with anyone of any creed who shares this conviction. This is not a particularly new development--many are familiar with the Social Gospel of the 60s--but this "social gospel" has grown to maturity in many "emerging churches" where the emphasis is not so much on evangelizing to the world as it is on serving the world. Thus, these churches are also very ready to partner with organizations of other faiths or secular organizations to do, what it considers, "the work of the kingdom."

(5) A renewed interest in the ancient and medieval traditions, rites, liturgy, theologians that have been neglected by almost all Protestant churches of the past 200 years. An author like Robert Webber would be a good resource for surveying this thinking. There is a real hunger amongst many in the "emerging church" movement to sort of "get back to real basics"--not just back to 1950s Protestant, "Leave it to Beaver" America, but to get back to early (1st-4th c.) and medieval (5th-12th c.?) church practices--like the remembrance of saints, or a revival of ancient Eastern liturgical practices.

(6) A very missional-mindedness that (to me) sounds very Wesleyan, honestly. Many of these churches stress the missional nature of the church (see Rob Bell's home church's website at http://www.marshill.org/). The church is not an institution, but a community with a mission--now as to how that "mission" is defined... once again it's a diverse movement.

(7) An emphasis on the ancient, Hebrew origins of the Bible--they (and I also) would very much dislike the "American Patriot's Bible" which I mentioned in my first blog. Also check out anything written/produced by Rob Bell on this. He is really the main guy I am thinking about when I say this, but he is extremely influential in this so-called "emerging church" movement.

(8) An attempt to transcend the "liberal vs. conservative" divide. While most of the evangelicals who would be critical of the "emerging church" often dismiss the entire movement as "liberal", the emerging church movement, for the most part, seems to hate both the terms "liberal" and "conservative." They often try not to find "common ground" between the two labeled sides, but to simply go entirely beyond the arguments posed by the two sides. (For instance, in his A New Kind of Christian series, Brian McLaren speaks several times about other religions and salvation. Whereas "liberals" often want to argue for a more open salvation, and "conservatives" often want to argue for confessors' salvation only, McLaren proposes that perhaps the appropriate stance is to say, "What business of it is mine to decide who gets into heaven?".)

Well, this is obviously not an exhaustive list, but it will hopefully give you a better idea of what we're talking about when the very ambiguous term "emerging church" is being used. Really, I think the best idea is to converse about individuals and individual churches within the "emerging church" instead of trying to tackle the entirety of the "emerging church." The reason for this is that anytime someone attempts to argue any point about the "emerging church," an exception (and often, many exceptions) can be found to disprove their argument.

So, be careful little ears what you hear--because many want to say "The 'emerging church' is good/bad because of __________." A sentence like this is mostly nonsense, and its speaker is probably just parroting something they heard anyway. But I am finished with this lengthy blog, and the dialogue is open...!