First, some historical perspective (that a young buck like Nick lacks): there have been fallow times in emergent before this. For instance, in 2001, we left the auspices of Leadership Network, Andrew Jones had moved to the UK, and Mark Driscoll jumped ship (or was pushed overboard, depending on whom you ask). A group of us met at Tim Keel's favorite monastery outside of Kansas City. For two days, we parceled out jobs -- events, website, writing, networking, church planting -- and left with a great deal of energy. And then...nothing happened. No one did anything they'd agreed to. Why? Because everyone was doing emergent at the margins of our lives, and so it wound up on the priority list below family, work, friendships, and many other things. It wasn't until the Emergent Convention in 2003 that we gained any real steam, and that was only because of the energy of Mark Oestreicher and Youth Specialites. To be honest, I pretty much throught he thing was over until that convention.
Second, none of us signed up to start a movement, so your disappointment is misplaced. You wrote -- and others have recently -- that you hoped that emergent would revolutionize the church in America (in 5 years?!?), yet you dropped out of church and toured the world with a book contract under your arm. Meanwhile, every one of the founders of emergent is deeply engaged in a community of faith, doing the hard and private work of maintaining personal relationships and dealing with the messes that are inevitable when people live in community.
Third, I bet you're not disappointed with Shane Claiborne. That's because, to this point, Shane has made the very noble decision to live a chaste life, and he has committed his whole self to an irresistible revolution. Meanwhile, most of the founders of emergent are raising children and paying mortgages and coaching YMCA t-ball. Martin Luther King didn't coach t-ball; neither did Ghandi. Start a revolution if you want, but that's not a price that I'm willing to pay.
Fourth: In the comment section, you note your disappointment that no one took you up on your idea that we develop " some sort of unemployment for pastors that got let go because of theological reasons." To that I have two responses: 1) That's what denominations do, and we're not a denomination, and 2) If that what you want to see happen, then do it! That's what we've done in emergent -- we've tried to make things happen. Now that you're back from your world tour, I'm looking forward to seeing what you do to make your corner of the world into what you want it to be.
Fifth, many of your commenters bemoan the fact that the leaders of emergent have "sold out" with book contracts and paid blogs. Since you are under contract to write a book, you know that there's very little money in religious non-fiction writing, and the money is getting less. And I don't know to whom they're referring other than me. For the record, I make $5 per day blogging for Beliefnet. I've made less than $1,000 on book royalties so far this year. So everyone can stop casting aspersions on our finances.
Sixth, some commenters wonder why Brian, Doug, and I have "stepped back" from leadership. First of all, that's not really true. And secondly, I've seen lots of guys who started organizations and ran them for the rest of their lives: Dobson, Falwell, Schuller, Wallis, etc. I have no interest in that.
Seventh, you and your commenters seem to suggest that, while we've made suggestions about changing the church in the past, we've quit doing that. Instead, all we do is fight the critics. In fact, Doug and I are throwing a big party this fall called Christianity21 -- it will highlight many new voices in the movement and will give the microphone exclusively to women. Will you be there? Will any of the commenters who say that nothing new is happening and that new voices aren't being heard? Those who started emergent were at the National ReEvaluation Forum in 1998; those who will take it into the next chapter will be at Christianity21.
Lots of stuff is happening:
The only question for you, Nick, and for everyone else is, What part will you play?
Third, I bet you're not disappointed with Shane Claiborne. That's because, to this point, Shane has made the very noble decision to live a chaste life, and he has committed his whole self to an irresistible revolution. Meanwhile, most of the founders of emergent are raising children and paying mortgages and coaching YMCA t-ball. Martin Luther King didn't coach t-ball; neither did Ghandi. Start a revolution if you want, but that's not a price that I'm willing to pay.
Fourth: In the comment section, you note your disappointment that no one took you up on your idea that we develop " some sort of unemployment for pastors that got let go because of theological reasons." To that I have two responses: 1) That's what denominations do, and we're not a denomination, and 2) If that what you want to see happen, then do it! That's what we've done in emergent -- we've tried to make things happen. Now that you're back from your world tour, I'm looking forward to seeing what you do to make your corner of the world into what you want it to be.
Fifth, many of your commenters bemoan the fact that the leaders of emergent have "sold out" with book contracts and paid blogs. Since you are under contract to write a book, you know that there's very little money in religious non-fiction writing, and the money is getting less. And I don't know to whom they're referring other than me. For the record, I make $5 per day blogging for Beliefnet. I've made less than $1,000 on book royalties so far this year. So everyone can stop casting aspersions on our finances.
Sixth, some commenters wonder why Brian, Doug, and I have "stepped back" from leadership. First of all, that's not really true. And secondly, I've seen lots of guys who started organizations and ran them for the rest of their lives: Dobson, Falwell, Schuller, Wallis, etc. I have no interest in that.
Seventh, you and your commenters seem to suggest that, while we've made suggestions about changing the church in the past, we've quit doing that. Instead, all we do is fight the critics. In fact, Doug and I are throwing a big party this fall called Christianity21 -- it will highlight many new voices in the movement and will give the microphone exclusively to women. Will you be there? Will any of the commenters who say that nothing new is happening and that new voices aren't being heard? Those who started emergent were at the National ReEvaluation Forum in 1998; those who will take it into the next chapter will be at Christianity21.
Lots of stuff is happening:
- Amazing new voices have risen up -- Nadia Bolz-Weber, Sara Miles, Pete Rollins
- I regularly read some blogs of people I think will be the next fresh voices.
- Books are probably not the future
- Tim Keel, Chris Seay, Karen Ward, and Danielle Shroyer are faithfully leading churches
- Gatherings are being planned
The only question for you, Nick, and for everyone else is, What part will you play?
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
I don't really understand all this drama. Why do we need to label ourselves and make organizations and leadership teams or whatever else is going on in Emergent? It seems to me that worrying about creating more institutions and organizations and movements and groups and camps is only going to make people disappointed. Our salvation lies in Christ, not our specific theological tribes.
As a big fan of what I suppose can be considered emergent literature (McLaren, Bell, Claiborne, what have you), and somebody who is ever increasingly discontent with status-quo Christianity, I'm disappointed that the emergent response to the insufficient parts of the American church is simply to create another little party for like thinkers to group together and battle those in other camps.
Just love Jesus and serve Jesus, and have a dialogue in that context. These labels and arguments accomplish nothing but perpetuation of a broken system.
Hi, everyone.
I am new to this conversation, I hesitate to call it a movement. As I have read and thought and prayed about the emergent church I have become excited by the potential. I believe passionately that the emergent church (people like us) is called to bring about the presence of Christ within existing church structures. We are to embrace and encourage each other where we are. If this "conversation" becomes just another breakaway church movement it will be dead as a world wide phenomenon within 5 to 10 years.
Right now I am having conversations with people across the whole spectrum of Christianity and even beyond. I am connecting with people that I would find it hard to function with in a church context. These "conversations" are helping me come to the realization that my "understanding" of theology and doctrine is maybe not as important as supporting and in turn being supported by my brothers and sisters in Christ.
Given time, the "emerging" Christians will gather as we are drawn together not by doctrine or theology but out of a genuine relationally grounded care and love for one another. I believe that this will happen through a "gentle rain" rather than in a flood, at least I hope so.
I appreciate the honest and humility in point 4. I admire Shane and his vision greatly. My wife and I long to be used significantly by God, but with two little girls, a rented house still unsold in New Mexico while we serve in the UK, the price often feels so steep already that we struggle to think we could sacrifice any more. Thanks for validating our struggles.
Austin - I'm not emergent, nor do I want to be. But I was reading this thread and I thought it was hilarious that you are rebuking your leaders for "grouping together and battling those in other camps" instead of just "loving and serving Jesus". Hmmm. Why even "battle" on this blog, then? Why not just "love and serve Jesus" and hope for the best instead of "battling".
how can i get in on this $5 a day deal? wowo
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.