Hey Chuck,

Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Awhile back I was regular at the Axis fellowship, and blessed was my time there. I have since found a home church in Thousand Oaks -- actually convicted by a message you gave about getting connected in my local community. Thank you for that.

I wrote a piece On the Emergent Church (as well as Brian McLaren, and homosexuality) some time ago when I, too, was noticing the seemingly exponential use of the term.

I think there are some honorable, but also some dangerous theological implications springing from the emergent church -- and those at the fuzzy forefront of the movement. Understanding that defining labels can at times be a useful exercise, I think we should worry more about the (at times post-modern) teachings of many in the movement than the label itself.

I'm not sure you belong in the emergent category -- whatever that means.

Just throwing the conversation out there.

Blessings.

_tcm

ya know.. it turns out I was sort of raised in a prototype for the 'emergent' movement, and didn't even realize it... now... some 30 years later here it be...
With some key differences.

When I think of Emergent (or Emerging) and see how it plays out locally and among my fellow beleviers here in the area and in others 'fuzzy' (as it's called in the previous comment) is an excellent word to use.
It seems to go more the 'deliberately vague.'

I'll give you an example... If I'm driving my 'pickup' down the 'street' make a 'left' onto 'sixth,' go 'right on the frontage' -down to 'Carls' and make another 'left' and head out on a 'clear' 'day' and say it's '56 degrees outside.'
Those are all pretty innocuous descriptives that help people to understand what I'm saying, and help me to convey what I'm trying to tell them. It's just being clear, with a definite follow up, should there be questions, --to be more clear... '...no, not North 6th, South Sixth,' '...yes, CarlsJr. not Uncle Carl...' '...yes, it's a Pickup... a green and white one... with a dented fender... -see me?... good!'

Whenever I read stuff on Emergent or Emerging... be it for incorporation into existing worship settings, describing what's being done in a church, or even hearing from an 'emerging-emergent' pastor? I can almost count on two things:

1. really undefined lingo that is so open to interpretation that it feels more like one big 'swim at your own risk, the management takes no responsibility for this bathing area, the management takes no responsibility for this sign.'
or

2. this really obvious 'new' definitions to things that, after awhile seems to have the opposite effect of what was intended, and you can spot it a mile away... (sort of like when I was in artschool as a freshman... you could tell who we all were because we went so far out of the way to look 'different and unique' --that we wore the same style clothes, hair, and smoked the same clove cigarrettes '...being unique and individual.'
--worse, --understanding what's being said half the time is like learning the lyrics to a SHINS song... I mean it sounds cool, but your and mind have to rival a russian gymnast on steroids to even begin to fathom half the words and meanings...
(you feel kind of exhausted from re-inventing the wheel every other hour...)

It plays as very self-absorbed and enigmatic (when) what I need is quart of milk, a pound of galvanized 8penny nails, and a package of 'sized large' cotton socks.

Emerging/Emergent may have some good things to say... or not.

What I find most concerning is how deliberately indirect so much of the points are, and the foundations to those points are so periphial and lost in the sauce as well...

I mean, I do a lot of technical stuff and work in some pretty technical fields, --even medical, and even psych...
And that's after a whole bunch of theological crosstraining....
And believe me... you'll find a lot of different angles and descriptives, ---but the goal usually can be split into two parts...
1. -those who are being really detailed and talking as directly as possible to convey the truth of the situation to those who need to know and work with it (kind of like giving report as you turn over a patient/client.
-vs-
2. -stuff that seems to enjoy being vague, cool, and hipster because there really are no clear definitions based upon solid-much-of-anything.
-and if you question to get deeper or a firmer grasp of what's being said and claimed, --there's this mystical look in the eye like '..father forgive them, for they just don't get it...' whimsey.

It's one thing to really impress folks with the elegance and directness of communication that gets to the point and saves time and lives. (it's why things are so standardized in the medical field... hello... metric system?) ---even then, a quick romp through a PDR will show that nothing is completely 100percent, --so you need to know the fine print, --but you can pretty much tell what 1000mg of aceteminophen is going to do to the average 200lb male with a headache...

And now Emergent/Emerging is wanting to gain attention (further) by saying
'...We were never here, don't pay attention to us anymore, don't call us that anymore, it's a dead label, we're organic...' --this done out loud to raise further inquiry...
(nice.)
I don't know...
Prince changed his name to 'the artist formerly known as prince' --and adopted a symbol for a reason... 'Saturn' for all it's warm fuzzies and 'entirely new company' still had GMAC financing... (it's because it always was GM.)

I think of one particular author/sociologist from back in the day, Tony Campollo...(sp?) and I remember reading his books and listening to his lectures... (I also am reminded of other 'breakthru' writers and pastors, --Gayle Erwin being one.)
--and I do a compare and contrast between they and what a lot of these new guys (who aren't that new,) are saying.

Back in the day, --if you were going to go after a perception (right or wrong) of he church or society,
-you had scriptures, you had study, you also made every effort to communicate with who was paying attention so that they could effectively see where you were coming from (and) reference for themselves and consider your views, (no matter how 'out there.')
-It was weird meat and potatoes at times, but at least it was solid meat and potatoes, and the effort was to accurately discuss the opposing sides in full understanding (then) show where you were now going...
It was a solid appeal.

You don't find that so much anymore.
Maybe it's because we're in the 'post judgmental/concrete' church era.
Maybe it's because we're tired of being handed bent-scriptures and proof-texts that were out of contexts and made dupes of those who thought they had a deeper understanding --and a lot of accessable texts to help us understand (like a Strongs.)

But for whatever reason... the anchor pins are no longer driven deep into much of anything,
--but affixed firmly in '...how do you feel about that.'
And this hazy deliberate cheshire cat now playing the Holy Ghost.. who no longer really seeks to ground folks in the Scriptures... (and show how excellent the Bible is for darn near everything,)
---but futher? fans this purple cloud of how Christianity has become
'one big I don't know,' and
'only Siths believe in absolutes.'

There are some things we as believers will never be able to really pin down... (like: the trinity... like predestined or free-will, like so many things that God is like... 'okay, you can chew on that, but that's not what I'm giving you for Dinner...'

I just smell a lot of key truths being dissolved, reconfigured, or never really stated.
And I don't see that as being healthy as a baseline/norm...

I remember the Bible saying something about:
one's 'Yes being Yes,' and 'No being No,' and a lot of calling to clarity and (yes, being open) but not redefining things to the extreme that 'street,' 'left,' 'carls' 'sixth,' can become 'duck,' 'right,' blibshki,' 'and gee I dunno' --according to how you feel about it.

We're warned against a lot of things, definitely against empty religious exercise, and being judgemental/damning... but we're warned against vagueness and told of a time where the church will profess a belief in something, --but no longer the power of it...

Regardless of whom I'm talking to, what the Gospel is, who Christ is, what we are, where we are, and what Gods heart is, --and how to reconcile and walk with God remain remarkably simple and blunt... (not mean, not narrowminded, not luddite or frozen in a time devoid of truer and more better insight... --just basic truth that has not changed in thousands of years...)

Be this a 'true movement' of God or not?
It's going to be very interesting to see how, --down the road this whole behavior went in futhering a sincere and waterproof hope and salvation (through Christ)
-or how it messed it up...

Either way...
It's nice to know God does not change, and is in control of the whole 'meh.'