The End of the Emergent Church?
After I graduated from college in 2005 I became very interested in the emerging church movement. I had become a bit disgruntled with Christianity. I began to read everything by Brian McLaren, Doug Pagitt, Tony Jones, and Scot McKnight that I could find. I gave money to the Emergent Village. I subscribed to ‘Relevant Magazine’. I signed up for newsletters from Sojourners. I joined the One Campaign. Eventually I went to Santa Cruz, CA, to visit the Vintage Faith Church as well as to meet with Dan Kimball before leading a short-lived “emergent worship gathering” in San Francisco.
Then I became a bit discouraged by the whole thing. As I read through the Gospels or the Pauline Epistles it became evident that being ‘relevant’ was not really an issue for the early church. Rather, it was all about being faithful to the gospel entrusted to us (which is partially why I have so much respect for the Gospel Coalition). It felt disconnected from the rest of the church. It felt like we spent more time critiquing the people of God than the worldly system that surrounded us. There is much that I learned from the emerging church movement for which I am grateful but overall I could no longer subscribe to their vision.
For a while now people have compared the emerging church to the Jesus Movement/Jesus People of the 1960′s. At first I disagreed, but now it seems like this might be correct. Is the end near for the emerging church?
Andrew Jones has written a provocative little post on his blog titled “Emerging Church Movement (1989-2009)?” (read here). In this post he writes, “In my opinion, 2009 marks the year when the emerging church suddenly and decisively ceased to be a radical and controversial movement in global Christianity” and “In 2009, the emerging church either grew up, stopped being offensive, switched gear from experimental to normal, became the new mainstream, or a bit of each”.
I think Jones is correct. I think my own experience has been mirrored by many others. There is not much attention being given to the emerging church these days. I hear less and less about it. There are some who have pushed it to the fringe of being sectarian. Others have remerged with the catholic church.
If it is the end of the emergent church what did it teach us? What have we learned (positive and negative) from this experiment? Or are we writing her obituary too quickly?
I don’t think the use of emergent and emerging can be used to mean the same thing even though the emergent are, in a way, a sub-group of the emerging group. This used to the confuse the heck out of me. But, I do know the names you mentioned are from the emergent, while the likes of Mark Driscoll & others would be classified in the emerging. I think those from the emerging, as of late, have moved into teaching that being faithful to the gospel is all it takes and it’s not about working so hard to be ‘relevant’ that will catch people. Eh, I’m still confused.
Anyway, I still like the fact that I was able to read so much stuff, some good and some bad. Every one came out with a book on something.
If it’s dying, I guess I’m sort of glad. I’d err with being faithful to the gospel.
Brian, I would echo your sentiments and experience regarding the emerging church. Ironically, while reading Ray Anderson’s An Emergent Theology for and Emerging Church that I became convinced that I was being called to ministry in what the ec calls the established church! Thanks for the thoughts.
Commenting on the emergent style of church I would have to say it is still being used, in some cases well and in others not so well. Elements of this style have been taken and used across all sects of Christianity to the point of becoming the norm. Like any good idea it becomes used by so many it is no longer a good idea. Success is a self correcting phenominon.
My own brief encounter with the movement led me to the conclusion that it was as much secterian as mainstream Christianity was/is.
I’m not sure the hunger for relevance is what killed the emergent church. I think it was absorbed into mainline Christianity.
Micah,
It is difficult to know if the emerging church has come and gone or simply changed b/c it never defined itself. Many saw Tony Jones, Doug Pagitt, and Brian McLaren as the mouth-pieces, but others argued the whole thing was much too broad for those three to hold such a role.
I find your statement “it was as much secterian as mainstream Christianity was/is” interesting. What did you mean by it?
True, the emerging church is such a wide-ranging concept that we cannot know what it means for it to demise (in some sense). But I think that over time Driscoll and company were not seen as being “emergent”. Driscoll is seen as Reformed with an innovative ecclesiology.
It may be that emergent became a theology, a type of post-liberal ecclesiology. This was what Tony Jones, Brian McLaren, and others of similar thinking seem to have represented. Maybe this is what people think is dying?
I feel like emergence was a trend and something new will come along, like the Jesus Movement of the 60s/70s and Focus on the Family in the 80s/90s, things come up that Christians glom onto. Doesn’t necessarily mean they’re bad, they just come and go with the times.
Stephy,
I’d have to agree, but I think those who are part of the emerging church would be disappointed to hear this. They wanted to change the church, not become another fad. They are becoming another fad.
But the church is Christ’s bride and that won’t change as fads come and go. Wanting to change things about the church can actually be about that person’s ego, in which case they’d get disappointed after their trend passed and a new one started.
Stephy,
Exactly! Your thought reminds me of a quote from Bonhoeffer that once changed my life (and partially became part of why I gave up on the emerging church as being very useful). He said, “Every human wish dream that is injected into the Christian community is a hindrance to genuine community and must be banished if genuine community is to survive. He who loves his dream of community more than the Christian community itself becomes a destroyer of the latter, even though his personal intentions may be ever so honest and earnest and sacrificial.”
This quote perfectly captures what I find wrong with the emergent church and even some other renewal movements. Renewal is not bad; neither is reform. It is when our vision of what the church should be is loved to the point where we begin to hate the church as she is.
Too many of the emergent types simply sound like they hate the church.
I wrote more about it here: http://nearemmaus.wordpress.com/2009/06/14/bonhoeffer-on-loving-the-community-as-it-is/
Oh wow, yes, I love these thoughts. Good on you!