RESPONSES to “I like Emergents

 

 

 

Larry said...

Like you, Keith, I like the same things about Emergents that I liked about Boomers--when we were younger!
Beatniks, hippies, yippies, Jesus people--we all started out hip but wound up square--just like our parents.
Why will this generation be different?

Sunday, January 08, 2006 7:29:28 PM

Nathan Crawford said...

Coach D,

I think that emergents will be different. Mainly I believe that because I am this generation. I have no boomer in me. However, it seems to me that we have been taught by those who still hold to that "idealism" - the Drury's, Bence's, Bounds', etc. This "idealism" has become much more real to us. We didn't think it up, but it was just given to us. It's not revolutionary to us, but is actually what we are supposed to do. I think that will be a bit different.

Sunday, January 08, 2006 8:07:22 PM

Dean said...

IMHO, this is the most accurate and insightful post you have ever written! From a tail-end boomer, I believe that you hit the direct center of the bullseye and I agree with you 100%!!!

Sunday, January 08, 2006 9:49:25 PM

The AJ Thomas said...

Good stuff. I don't have anything intelligent to add, just good stuff.

Monday, January 09, 2006 12:42:06 PM

Matt Guthrie said...

As an early Gen X'er, I'm more Boomer than Emergent, but I too really like a lot of what I see in the Emergent crew. I feel more at home with them.
It will be interesting in 30 years when at General Conference I get my 40 year service medal and I look at the then current leadership. Heck, will there even be a General Conference once the Emergents take over?   But I digress. I appreciate the warning against individualized spirituality that comes at the intentional neglect and avoidance of the church. I see that move a natural result of the "give me what I want" mentality of the Boomers. I don't think it will happen. I think the authenticity and desire for theological correctness will win the day as we see a real NT church emerge. Then again, that's what all of us have said we were creating, isn't it?

Monday, January 09, 2006 1:23:49 PM

Laura said...

I didn't realize until reading this article that this was strictly a generational movement. As a former bell-bottomed high-school Jesus Freak who's now a grandmother, most of what I've heard of the "emergent movement" sounds to me like solid biblically based church.

Our congregation had the privilege of being pastored a few years ago by a 30-year-old "intentional interim" who pointed us back in the direction of what God's Word has to say about being reconciled to God and one another, and being formed by Christ into His Living Body - a true Christian community. It wasn't until after this young man had completed his ministry among us that our church began to learn that his teaching was called "emergent". All we knew was that we had been reminded that Christ needed to transform us to love Him and one another fully, and our old stick-in-the-mud church was alive again. God bless these folks - I trust His Spirit has the capacity to guard them from error, and I pray that the "emergent church" remains willing to submit to Him.

Monday, January 09, 2006 1:35:14 PM

 

JohnLDrury said...

Thanks for the shout-outs to Barth and Bonhoeffer. I agree that this is the more crucial reading material to which we should turn after having been "turned on" to theology by McLaren, Pagitt, Bell, et al.

Barth's "Humanity of God" is a great place to start to find his mix of the centrality of Jesus and a world-affirming spirituality.

The last chapter of Bonhoeffer's "The Cost of Discipleship" is all about the church, and he saw it as the "point" of the book. "Life Together" also describes this vision of church life.

Thanks for the warnings and the suggesting guides!

Monday, January 09, 2006 1:37:41 PM

JustKara said...

Laura you raise an excellent point--what Drury describes here (perhaps all "generational" movements?) is more than an age-related phenomenon. It may have started out as a generational thing, and it might be led by one generation, and it might be more common among the “emergents” than others, but as I see it many of these shifts are where the church at large is headed. Does God use “generations” to correct the church? I mean, when the boomers were “emerging” was God just as powerfully at work correcting and adjusting the church with their emphases ad He is now doin with emergents? If so then no generation can “own” for long these shifts…and curiously this shift might just wind up being led by boomers who have always been fast on their feet to adopt whatever is new and novel. That would be a hoot—what will we younger ministers do when the gray-headed boomers start spouting this sort of stuff? My guess is many emergents will have to find other characteristics to tout so we can be unique and different from our boomer senior pastors. -JustKara

Monday, January 09, 2006 5:48:19 PM

sally apokedak said...

great post. great points. great warnings. I agree with your likes but would have given in to the temptation to hedge each one a bit, probably.

I must say, I find it incredible that you have to warn people, though, that there is no Christianity without Christ. I think you do need to warn them but I wonder why that is. Why do they not know that, do you suppose?

Monday, January 09, 2006 6:15:16 PM

daniel said...

@Sally,
I think we all know there's no Christianity without Christ. The thing is, when non-believer's say things like, "So, you think Gandhi is going to Hell?" Nobody wants to say, "Yes, I think Gandhi is condemned to live an eternity in torment." ... and then see the forthright roll of the eyes and hear the inevitable, "that's ridiculous" muttered under their friend's breath.

Monday, January 09, 2006 6:31:55 PM

matt said...

coach,
First of all, this hits too close to home to merely be the perspective of an "outsider" looking in. Which is why I'm convinced that "emergent" church theology/ecclesiology has a lot less to do with age than we think. Sure, there may be generational tendencies, but in my experience working in a local church, I run into many 20 year olds who think some of the items on this list are completely heretical. And at the same time I run into lots of people who are more than twice my age who it completely 'clicks' with. Great insights. Carder

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 2:05:56 PM

 

David Drury said...

This is good to read as the emerging church is beginning to "pop out." Last week at www.next-wave.org Tony Jones (the Emergent Coordinator) said that 2006 was the year of criticism for the emerging church (a confirmation of Brian MacLaren's earlier prophesy). It's nice to get your constructive criticism wrapped up neatly in some affirmations.

Such an even handed "1 for 5" approach is a style we all could learn from in giving our points. Glad to know there are a few "grey heads" like you are still into what we're saying. Of course, last I checked Len Sweet was grey and MacLaren was bald. So perhaps age has little to do with it.

By the way = Laura's note here in these responses is so incredibly cool. What an amazing anonymous story. You ought to pass that note out to your students so they know how they can make an impact with a christ-like attitude merged with an emerging ministry mojo.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 2:36:06 PM

Steve Packer said...

Dear Grandma Laura,

I had the same feelings as a boomer Grandpa! Let's encourage every Christian to allow Christ to emerge as central to every relationship in the church and outside the church; especially us old white haired boomers (if we have hair anymore)!
Come to think of it I know some emergents who no longer have hair!

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 5:12:06 PM

Jo said...

It's so REFRESHING to hear affirmative comments about we emergents from someone with influence. Thanks! I get so tired of trying to fit a description of my faith-action into either "the box" or "outside the box" categories (boomer enjoy categories ever so much). For God there simply is no box, and there never was one.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 9:44:37 PM

Jason said...

Great post Coach. One question though: (and this is coming from a youth)

- In your viewpoint, what did your generation succeed at? We like to look and see all of the things that we didn't like, the things that didn't work, and the new ways of making something better. But we seem to do that and forget that in some areas, the wheel ain't broke. I would love to see a post from you about a couple main successes that must be carried through in this generation, not just changes, but continuing a powerful ministry that is already in place. What do you think?
-Jason

Wednesday, January 11, 2006 12:26:21 PM

 

Rev. C. S. Roberts said...

I will only say that I am tired of apologizing for all the mistakes and crap the boomers have done to the Church.

I just wrote about this on my blog.

I also know that my generation, gen-x, will make our mistakes in the church. Yet, I have hope that even when we do... the mistakes won't be as "absolute." We emergents have backed ourselves into a corner by having that A/B approach to ministry.

The journey is good but Keith the journey is tough out here in the cornfields of Indiana. It is almost as if the cornfields are boundaries of the real, post-modern, post-Christian world.

And don't worry about Jesus and the Church -- pluralism won't polarize us or cripple us like it has the boomers.

Wednesday, January 11, 2006 12:55:28 PM

Thinking in Ohio said...

I'm grateful for your article. I found your praises to be encouraging, concrete and affirming. Unfortunately, your warnings all too serious.

One point you made about the process as opposed to the crisis of evangelism sparked a thought. I may be wrong, but... it seems to me that 50 years ago there was a "foundation for evangelism" set by family, church and culture. It made evangelism as crisis possible and frequent.

Today I'd argue that the foundation has been smashed to pieces (occasionally) but more often than not, never laid to begin with--especially within the 40 and under crowd. This primarily due to secularism, pluralism (and with it a diminished view of scripture) and the lack of family discipleship (due to divorce, apathy, time-constraints, whatever).

In most cases today, the foundation must be reset and re-laid through what emergents would call "spiritual frienships". Then the crisis may occur.

It seems the apostles faced the same obstacles when introducing a new faith to a pagan world, but as I study the book of Acts "signs and wonders" often accompanied the proclamation of the gospel thus compelling men to believe. I don't see the signs and wonders in the church today like in the Early Church. Maybe genuine love, time, and friendship is a miracle itself in today's world?

Wednesday, January 11, 2006 12:57:19 PM

Anonymous said...

I believe what Dr. Drury is saying at the end of his post is that left to our own devices all good ideas and things come to ruin. As an early boomer I've seen plenty of it.

Tom

Wednesday, January 11, 2006 5:10:07 PM

Kris said...

nothing to add or ask, right on though.

Thursday, January 12, 2006 12:43:33 PM

Ryan Schmitz said...

From some of your descriptions about Emergents I think that we sound extremely confused, but the good thing about them is that we are brave enough to admit it. I guess that's true, I still spent a lot of time around future pastors and I worry about their understanding about the Church, the authority of scripture and absolutes, but they do admit to their lack of understanding.

Maybe students are doing themselves and disservice in their studies. After sitting in class at IWU, this is what I can remember:

- Bible classes were about sharing student opinions with each other. I don't ever remember anyone being told that their opinion was wrong.

- Theology classes were about students arguing with each other or with a professor.

- Practical ministry classes allowed students to complain about the past or current problems in ministry, but rarely offered new ideas as replacements.

- And Church History, well most students slept through Church History.

I am probably guilty of most of these, but Church History was one class that I hated missing. Maybe that is why I thought the Creeds were such a big deal. Didn't the Church put a lot of emphasis on Creeds to limit the amount of confusion faced by the Emergents in the early Church?

Thursday, January 12, 2006 7:57:50 PM

Anonymous said...

I don't know how old Ryan is but this is not the IWU I attended -- Church History was my most interesting course of all. Bounds' theology was rigid in insisting on classic orthodoxy and was certainly not just students arguing in ignorance, Coach D's practical courses may have even offered TOO many new ideas to ever apply in an average church. Smith and Lennox taught Bible courses that brought me to tears and something to my knees (especially Psalms).

So I didn't have a similar experience to Ryan's. If anything I found the program unrealistic in being TOO spiritually minded--I've found the church to be far less spiritually-minded than IWU--that has been s a real adjustment for me. minded. So, either IWU has changed a lot since Ryan attended, or maybe different students have widely varied experiences attending college and describe them as if they went to a totally different school. -J

Friday, January 13, 2006 8:06:23 AM

Ryan Schmitz said...

J,

I think that you misinterpreted where my frustration was directed. I am not complaining about the quality of the professors or the education provided by IWU (I did say that I would never want to miss Church History because I really enjoyed it).

My frustration was with a lot of my fellow students and with current ministry students. Of course there are many exceptions and it sounds like you are one of them.

I think that many students are missing out their education because they don't think there is anything spiritual about excelling. Or they pick and choose with classes are worth their time and effort and this results in missing classes, sleeping through class, or getting excited when a prof. cancels class.

Again this may not be you J, but there were several student that fit this mold in the late 90s and I see these students today.

Ryan - Class of 2000

Friday, January 13, 2006 11:14:43 AM

D.M. Rose said...

Coach,
As always, I enjoy being prodded to thought by your writings (as over the top as they are at times). I do have a concern with the emergent church. I too have a catholic spirit- I want to see less denominational division and more of a universal church. On top of that, some of my colleagues are correct; Christianity is about the deeds- how we live and by that who we influence. Yet I fear that the emphasis on the creeds is so lacking at times that we may forget the errors and sins of our fathers (Count Zinzendorf, anyone?).\

Wasn't it Christ who said, "I have not come to bring peace but a sword to divide...?” The message of Christ is not one of peace but of "falling off the log" and division. Si vis pacem para bellum.

Friday, January 13, 2006 12:44:51 PM

Comment Deleted

This post has been removed by the author.

Friday, January 13, 2006 12:45:03 PM

blind beggar said...

Keith: Wonderful and well stated.

Being a "child" of the 60's and influenced by the Jesus Movement of that era, I can relate to many of the elements the Emerging Movement espouses including a holistic view of the role of the church in society and a belief in the journey of faith, both individual and as a community. Many were exploring and practicing them as part of the JM and we still adhere to them today. I’m pleased to see you pass on your wisdom and only pray they have “ears to hear.”

I had the same desire and posted on four lessons I thought emergents could learn from the JM of our era.

Friday, January 13, 2006 5:08:45 PM

scott m said...

I guess I need to note that the 'not-boomer' line, however it is drawn (and that varies), never includes me. And I'm not just north of 30, but actually 40 and nearing 41. And I'm the child of boomers who were definitely at the more extreme edge and a parent of adults and a grandparent ...

With that said, I greatly appreciate your validation of our ability to hold apparently opposing views simultaneously. I can't explain it either. But I appreciate that someone who doesn't experience it sees it and affirms it.

Interestingly, I strongly affirm your "journey" comment. And I was not one of those raised in a "good, Christian home". Trust me. It's mostly journey.

And I strongly empathize with your appreciation for our ability to integrate. That does seem the point, doesn't it?

And I actually don't understand how it is possible to read the NT and have anything other than a catholic spirit. I mean, it's what the text says, isn't it?

I'm not actually part of any "emerging" church. That's not where God wants me. And believe me, I have no intention of losing Jesus or the Church. I hope we are able to recover both.

Saturday, January 14, 2006 7:16:33 PM

THIS WEEK'S original column: "Dear Emergents--an open letter"
posted at http://www.drurywriting.com/keith/dear.emergents.htm

So what do you think? What do YOU like about emergents? What are YOUR cautions?
I welcome your stimulating comments.

P.S. I'm leaving the moderation off so your post will appear immeditely (as long as we are kind to each other...(and the porno posters stay away). --Keith Drury

 

KEITH DRURY WINDS UP

Thanks for the kind comments this week. Several things emerged (pun intended) from your comments online and by email to me.  It is clear that all this isn’t age-related—for when a major shift is led by a generation they often find great allies in older generations.  And I think the comments on Christ-centrism being a hard-sell to our culture are insightful. Some boomers too timid to post made considerable comments to me on the short-comings of emergents by email (most cited were “weak work ethic  and “delayed adolescence”)  As for you Jason—good idea—what are the good things that boomers have stood for or done??? I’ll write that now.

 

There it is done… comment now on boomers ;-)   --Keith