Archives For emerging church jive

Forget everything except…

bob —  June 24, 2010

"For I decided that while I was with you I would forget everything except Jesus Christ, the one who was crucified." -St Paul, 1 Cor 2:2



Kruishandkl  
For me, the last few years of thinking, praying and preaching have largely been an exercise in coming to grips with this thought: 
forget everything except Jesus Christ, the one who was crucified.

Like many who started off in evangelicalism and especially in youth ministry, the trap of seeing preaching/teaching/pastoring as largely a matter of helping pretty good people become slightly better people is one I fell into face first. For me, it was about "How God Wants Us To Live." The Bible was the Handbook for living and my job was to help people understand what God wanted them to do

Oh, sure- there was something about Jesus in there. It's like He was the ticket in to the dance, but it was really all about how you moved and what you did once you were IN.

And I was constantly surprised when that moralistic do-better message failed to capture anyone's heart or move anyone to anything beyond incremental change. My efforts seemed to produce not a group of people so captured by an overwhelming love for a Savior who would lay down His all for them that they would lay down their all for Him, but rather groups of (interestingly enough) slightly guilty, slightly self-satisfied religious people who always berated themselves for not doing better and salved that guilt with the thought that at least they were doing better than those people. Who "those people" were changed over the years. First it was the Catholics, then "liberals" (anyone to the left of us), then finally as this all took on a slightly emergent sheen, "evangelicals" or "fundamentalists" (anyone to the right of us).

At the peak of my frustration with all of this, I was introduced to Tim Keller. As a recovering Calvinist, I was at first a bit leery of the Presbyterian pastor from New York. But in the same way that CS Lewis speaks so well to the secular skeptic, I think Keller speaks to those skeptical of Reformed theology- those who don't want to end up like so many of the bitter Calvinist trolls who seem to populate the corners of the internet. 

At any rate, his assertion that the Bible is not about YOU, but rather about Jesus, about the story of God's redemption and Redeemer was game changing for me. 

Suddenly, my role was not to tell people how to be like various Bible heroes (who really weren't all that heroic if we're going to be honest) and how to do better/more, but to do what Scripture actually did- point them to Jesus, always and only, let their hearts and minds be moved by the Good News of what God has done for them in Christ and allow the Holy Spirit to take that heart movement and alchemize it into Christ-likeness in their lives individually and communally. 

Practically speaking, this means I approach texts (even head-scratching ones from the OT) with the basic questions of "How does this point us to Jesus?" and how does the Gospel answer the questions that people will be asking around this text/issue? We always end up back where we need to be: At Jesus and what He's done for us, and though we often get to what we need to do as a response, the first thing we always need to do is see how His work on our behalf is enough- how Jesus Christ crucified is the answer that leads to all the other answers. 

So that means answering practical questions about things like self-image, success, money, sex with some variation of "Until you are freed from your need for success, a failure you will remain." That is, until we see that in Jesus and His righteous life and sacrificial death imputed to us we have what we need, we will always struggle. As long as we look to other things (in biblical language: idols) to save us and until we put our hope in the only One strong enough to bear it, we'll continue to live lives of either overt unhappiness or, even should we largely get what we are striving for, an undercurrent of "is this all there is"?  

And thus change happens, individually and communally, not when we try harder to do better, but when we are able to lay down the need to do for ourselves what God wants to do for us in Christ, all our little self-salvation projects, and lean more and more into and onto Jesus.

The challenge, on an individual level (and speaking personally, it IS a challenge) is to live this. And on a leadership level to creatively move to this through all my counseling, preaching, teaching. To find 100 different ways to say the same thing. Honestly, I think I've got maybe 5 (some who listen to me preach regularly might think that generous). I need more. 

But… I think I finally know what Paul meant when he said "I decided that while I was with you I would forget everything except Jesus Christ, the one who was crucified." My job isn't to help people understand what God wants them to do. My job is to help them see, understand and be moved by what God has already done. That's the difference between good advice and Good News. Out of that, as they follow the One who has captured their heart, God will speak and I can help them listen, process and respond appropriately- but it all flows first and foremost from the ground of how God is redeeming us and the world through the work of Jesus on our behalf. 


With everyone writing obituaries and whatnot for the emerging church movement, and with myself coming across more and more as a critic, I feel a personal push towards taking a time-out to recollect some positives and praise for a movement, that while mixed, and in many ways losing momentum and splintering, has been significant for me in my journey. 

1. My initial intro to the emerging church movement came in a seminar with (yes, believe it or not) Doug Pagitt and Mark Driscoll together. On a personal level, at a low point in my life and faith, feeling burnt out and burned, they talked about a postmodern (hey! Remember that word??) approach to faith that was more about Jesus than institution, and more about life in the way of Jesus that made a difference in the world and less about a focus on getting people over the goal-line of decision and their rears into heaven. All of that resonated with me deeply. Brian McLaren's books The Church on the Other Side and More Ready Than You Realize, Len Sweet's Postmodern Pilgrims, an Origins conference with Erwin McManus (and many of his books)… all of these kept my vision and heart for faith and church together even while I worked out on a personal level some things I needed to get sorted that threatened to shipwreck me. And even though now I find myself more often than not pushing back against BOTH Driscoll and Pagitt from my tiny speck of middle ground, I'm eternally grateful that at just the right time, God allowed our paths to cross. 

2. On a theological level, whether they were ever really connected with the emerging church or not, people like Todd Hunter and Dallas Willard, Rob Bell and Ruth Haley Barton all became introduced to me through the EC. And they have all had profound impacts on my thinking about God and faith. Todd Hunter gave me an expanded view of the Gospel and the Kingdom that continues to shape me today- and he did it at various Emerging Churchy type things like the Emergent Convention (remember those??) and Off the Map. Rob Bell, while cool and all, and inability to boil down the Gospel to 140 characters aside (I kid, I kid), proved to be a game-changer for me, mainly by introducing me to William Webb and the redemptive hermeneutic, something that has been massively forming for me. His simple explanation of Webb's take on the redemptive arc in Scripture set in motion for me a internal movement that led me to a completely different view of women in leadership and has shaped Evergreen for the better.

3. On a pastoral/church level, the emerging church conversation broadened my ecclesiastical horizons and helped me to see God at work in all kinds of expressions of Church. But even more so, it gave me the freedom to think outside the boundary lines I had previously limited myself to in terms of what Church could and should be. It introduced me to ideas of a more organic approach, helped shape my thinking on flattened leadership structures and, in a sense, gave me "permission" to try something as crazy as church in a pub.

4. On a missional level, it's largely been through the emerging church that I've been turned on to voices in the missional stream of thinking, like Michael Frost and Alan Hirsch, voices which continue to shape my way of thinking and orientation in the world and which continue to challenge, stretch and even confound and frustrate me- all good things and sorely needed. 

5. Finally, I credit the emerging church movement/impulse with a renewed emphasis in my own heart, in my city, and in the American church in general towards justice and the poor. If you think the emerging church has just been all talk, and no practical good in the world, you haven't had your eyes open for the last ten years. The amount of influence the emerging church has wielded in terms of getting the sleeping giant of the American church off its rear and into the game in terms of helping the poor both locally and globally has been WAY out of proportion to its size and influence in other areas (though it has had influence in other areas). While the biggest churches in America ten years ago were hosting conferences on how to grow your church even bigger, today they host conferences about, push people towards and resource (for example) the fight against AIDS in Africa, clean water around the world and more. Ten years ago much of evangelicalism in the West had its head in the sand in regards to global poverty and today the landscape looks very different. And while a concern for justice and the poor didn't originate with the emerging church, I think a renewed consciousness about and concern for the poor among  can largely be credited to the "prophetic" emerging voices of people like Shane Claiborne and feeling the pressure of all these small emerging communities (some of which have grown into big, city-impacting churches like Imago Dei) that were getting it done in ways that their more-established and better-resourced churches weren't. 

All in all, I'm grateful for the impact of the Emerging Church on my life- while I feel like we've grown apart in some ways (I just need to see other movements… really, it's not you, it's me. Okay, it is kind of you), and while I feel like there's some significant tares in amongst all the wheat there, for today, I'm choosing to see and be thankful for the good. 

Wow- Stephen Shields has posted an encyclopedic meditation/restrospective on where the emerging church has been and is now. It's fantastic and you should read it. 

Good thoughts from many others like Scot McKnight, Dan Kimball, the two Mr Jones (Tony and Andrew) and others as well. Nice work!

Picture 9

Scared and excited… what’s next?

bob —  December 9, 2008

FILE0178
About this time last year, we were a community approaching 120 adults, knowing that before too long our space in NW Portland simply wouldn‚Äôt hold us all, particularly our kids. 

The problem? We were out of Pubs in which to meet. We had started in SW, moved to SE, and then to NW as we outgrew each space in turn. So we prayed, discussed, dreamed and planned… and started the Hawthorne gathering, back in the second pub in which we had met, dividing the community into two worship gatherings, each with a primary teaching elder, but having the whole elder team/teaching team rotate between both spaces. 

We had some concerns- how would it work? Would we really be able to be one community in two locations? Would people step up and help do the work of the community that needed to be done? 

Fast forward… 


Evergreen has experienced fantastic growth this year of around 60%. We’re seeing people meet Jesus through our community, we’re seeing people reconnect to Jesus and to church community, and we’re continuing that wonderful Evergreen tradition- having lots of babies!

And so, here we are again- same time of year, same questions. About 190 adults and more kids (especially at Quimby) than we know what to do with. In addition, because of the hospitality and hard work of everyone at Hawthorne/the SE Gathering, not to mention its central location and smaller-than-the NW/Quimby meeting space, Hawthorne is filling up and is already at 80% capacity, that number at which things begin to get uncomfortable for folks. 

We gathered a few weeks ago to pray and listen, and to think specifically about the idea of a 3rd gathering. We‚Äôve continued to pray and we‚Äôve continued to listen, to God and to the other people in our community, and the elders are feeling as though, as another step on the road to preparing our community for sustainable church planting, we‚Äôre ready to move ahead with a third gathering. 


Can I be honest and say this scares me? 

The last time around, it was scary and exciting too- but maybe a little less on the scary side. We were packed out at Quimby, sending people just a few minutes away for a gathering at the same time, with Dustin, Chip and Tina heading over as elders and a bunch of really good people committed to making it work. 

This time (but I'm not going to go into ALL that I can see could go wrong here…), we'll be trying it without a dedicated teaching elder, but sharing the duties a bit more. We'll have to see who's on board to help us get it going, but right now, our Hawthorne gathering is the one that's fuller in terms of adults, and the Quimby gathering in terms of kids. I can see this new thing really working for parents with kids. My fear is not having enough Hawthorne people step up and make the switch, and still being packed out there… 

And yet- last time we did this, by everyone's estimation, it went smoother than any of us could have dreamed. People got behind it, were excited to help make something new and help make it their own… Aside from seeing that happen again, my dream is having another year of growth like this one, and getting to a place where we can start working with/training church planting apprentices with whom we can start launching out new communities all over Portland- wherever Evergreen people are living and loving their neighbors.  

We‚Äôre looking at and checking out a number of spaces, but so far, the church space we've met in for our prayer gatherings/Ash Wednesday gatherings and the occasional Christmas Eve is really appealing on a number of fronts, not least of which to the folks working with Children‚Äôs ministry who love the large, clean, dedicated space with multiple rooms as well as a large common area to work with, teach, and play with our kids. 

The opportunity to have a gathering in a different kind of space, at a time other than 10am Sunday morning is exciting- and scary. Once again, the same questions:  How will it work? Will we really be able to be one community in three locations? How will it change the dynamic of our community to have a worship gathering in a non-pub space? In (potentially) a CHURCH space??? Will people step up and help do the work of the community that needs to be done? 

We have an opportunity to ‚Äútest drive‚Äù a Sunday evening gathering coming up. Every year, we get bumped from the Lab for the Worst Day and Best Day of the year rides. This year the Worst Day of the Year Ride is on Sunday, Feb 15th. Here‚Äôs what we‚Äôre thinking- we‚Äôll cancel both Sunday morning gatherings (sleep in! Have breakfast with friends! Do a service project somewhere) and gather as one community that evening for a combined worship and baptism gathering. 

Lots to think about and lots to pray about. I had trouble sleeping last night. I have a feeling it won't be the last restless night for awhile…

Kimball’s Missional Misgivings…

bob —  December 5, 2008

Dan Kimball, a fellow OutofUr contributer, has earned my respect in a number of ways. 

First, as the pastor of a successful "church within a church" he had the guts to admit that ultimately, it doesn't work. New wine in old wineskins never does. 
Second, I appreciate the balance he has brought to the emerging church conversation. Yeah- he's on the more conservative end of the spectrum, and let's be honest- it's a needed voice. (Who speaks prophetically to people more conservatively-minded? Liberals. And who speaks prophetically to people who are more liberally minded? Conservatives. See?)

And lastly, he always sends me comforting Facebook messages when I get myself into little brouhaha's, like over Tony Jones's recent comments on Beliefnet re gay marriage (a Facebook interaction that took place during my recent blog hiatus)

His recent post on Ur asks some good questions of the Missional Church movement. 

I'm all in favor of good questions. And furthermore, I think Dan is asking the right ones (e.g. are people meeting Jesus in "missional" churches).

A couple of thoughts in response, though. 

Dan writes:
"We all agree with the theory of being a community of God that defines and organizes itself around the purpose of being an agent of God's mission in the world. But the missional conversation often goes a step further by dismissing the "attractional" model of church as ineffective. Some say that creating better programs, preaching, and worship services so people "come to us" isn't going to cut it anymore. But here's my dilemma—I see no evidence to verify this claim."

I both agree and disagree with Dan here. 

When I was in the middle of conversations and thinking that eventually led to me leaving a megachurch and beginning this pub church experiment, I said (and still believe) this wonderful piece of obviousness: the megachurch is great at reaching the people it's reaching. And it's awful at reaching the people it's not. 
Deep, huh?

To me the question isn't "Is the megachurch done?" Clearly, it's not. 

To me, the question has always been, is something else needed to reach those the megachurch isn't (and can't), those the traditional, smaller evangelical church (like 1st Baptist or 2nd Methodist) can't?

And the answer for me then and now is an emphatic yes

I pastor a growing church (something like 60% this year) of people for whom the attractional, large-scale production church was a dead end. Many of them even attempted to be part of a large-scale missional church here in town (that rhymes with Montego Bay) and found that though they appreciated the missional emphasis (as do I- I think we have a lot to learn from them), the size and difficulty of getting "in" precluded their participation. 

Many of our folks are either coming back to Christianity, just starting out (yes, we have people meeting Jesus @ Evergreen), or are, not to put too fine a point on it, half-way out the door giving it one last shot with us. I've heard from people in ALL of those places on the continuum that the attractional, program driven church, or even large church in general just wasn't attractive to them.

And that's the key to this whole discussion. 

There's a group of people for whom the megachurch works just fine. I LOVE that there are churches where those folks can find community and find Jesus. But let's be honest, there are people for whom those communities don't make sense, and an alternative is needed. 

Here's my contention (and no, I can't prove it- we'll just have to wait and see)- The numbers of people for whom the megachurch "works" is probably going to shrink over the next couple of decades. Mega Churches will continue to grow and be used by God, but those who intentionally make themselves smaller through strategies like multi-site will grow the most. More and more people will seek out medium sized communities (bigger than the house church or small (‚â§40) church but not as large as big (‚â•400) or mega-churches), recognizing that what they long for is community and it's just easier (though never easy) to create in smaller churches. I think when they want to hear Driscoll or (shudder) Ed Young Jr, or others they'll just hit the pod/vodcast. When they want production, they'll throw on a Hillsong or Crowder CD. For worship, a couple of guitars and vocals will suffice. 

But not just smaller communities, these people will seek out communities that point to and hold up Jesus, that encourage, prepare and launch people out into missional living (so no, I'm not predicting the renaissance of the millions of corner churches that can't seem to crack that particular code). They'll want communities that run lean (so not many building programs), take care of the poor, and focus on relationship and relational health. 

So while I appreciate Dan's pushback, I think it's a bit more complicated than what he's both depicted as the "missional" mindset and the way he's answering it. 

Of course, I could be wrong. Maybe Osteen and Young Jr are on to something. 

But I doubt it :)

Okay- your turn- what do you think? 

"Big changes at EV, and I heard it first on Twitter, wouldn‚Äôt ya know it? ‚ÄúMINNEAPOLIS, November 1, 2008‚ÄîEmergent Village today announced a major change in structure that will position it less like a traditional non-profit organization and more like a social networking organization.‚Äù (from the press release). The Letter from the Board to Friends of Emergent Village has more information, including the results from their survey last year…"

Interaction with Doug Pagitt…

bob —  October 22, 2008

Dustin Bagby, one of our elders at Evergreen, has posted an interaction with Doug's A Christianity Worth Believing, particularly with Doug's view of sin and separation. Worth a read!

Doug on Emerging vs Emergent

bob —  September 19, 2008

Since at least 2005, I was advocating for Emergent (technically Emergent Village) to change their name. Already, at that time, there was confusion between the emerging church, a loose movement of those interested in exploring methodological, philosophical and theological movement and change and Emergent Village, a specific organization commonly associated with personalities like Tony Jones, Doug Pagitt and Brian McLaren. 

In my mind, though I would consider those guys friends, the confusion between what they thought/wrote/said and what the emerging church as a whole was about was too great. I believed (and others agreed) a way that Emergent could serve the emerging church as a whole was to change the name, thus stating clearly that while Emergent was a part of the emerging church movement, it wasn't the sum total of it (something they never claimed to be, by the way) and they didn't speak for everyone who considered themselves a part of the EC. 

Well, you know… the name remained. Too much had gone into building the brand, and the confusion not only remained, it solidified. In fact, people began to speak of the "Emergent Church" and far from looking to the churches that made up the movement, folks, critics in particular, began more and more to look at Mssrs. McLaren, Jones and Pagitt (as well as some others). 

Of course, at that point, many who had broad sympathies with the emerging church began to tire of constantly being asked to defend the theology of others as though it was their own. Speaking for myself- I like and love those guys, but I don't want to… I can't own everything they write or say. 
I thought for a long time that in the way all movements tend towards having a left and a right, so too the emerging church would eventually end up with a left of Emergent and Friends and a right of the "missional" church movement. And if the trends continued, eventually, I thought those who identified with the "missional" aspect of the emerging church would distance themselves from the words "emergent" and "emerging."

Well, I was right. Andrew Jones, a co-signer of Emergent's "Answer to Critics" has now stated that though he will stay relationally connected, the confusion between the emerging church and Emergent has become so problematic and so hindered the work he's trying to do (mainly by causing supporting churches and organizations to distance themselves) that he's dropping the use of the words.

As for me- I don't know if I'm done with the phrase "emerging church" yet- but just about. I know that when I say it, I'm more often than not now answering a question about what we aren't than what we are about- and that saddens me. I'm profoundly grateful for the emerging church conversation and for the role that guys like Doug, Tony and Brian have played both in it and in my life as well. 

But I do have some deep concerns about some of the things I see in the movement as a whole- and to be honest, though I once spent a lot of time defending the emerging church, I want to be about the Gospel. Answering questions about what someone else does or doesn't believe, even someone I consider a friend and influence in my life, just doesn't appeal to me any more…

New BMac Album cominatcha…

bob —  August 8, 2007

Naughtyboy162
Okay- for the record: I like Brian McLaren. To say a number of his books (most notably Church on The Other Side and More Ready Than You Realize) have been instrumental to me would be an understatement.

But there is this one little part of Brian that kind of disturbs me…

His ideas on hell? No, no…

His politics? No…

His ubiquitous blurbs on the back of every book published since 2001??? Again, no (but closer…)

It’s the guitar-playing, song-leading, let-me-teach-you-one-I-just-wrote Brian that makes me squirm a bit.

God love ‘im, but Brian is basically songwriter/amateur musician who happened to hit it big with his writing… and now occasionally uses the openings that provides to, uh… introduce crowds to his music.
If you’ve ever been involved in a BMac sing along, you know what I’m talking about...

So, he has a new book coming out, and a companion album with it.
And I think he’s been writing some songs…

Here’s one…

It’s not too bad until it hits the chorus. And then?

Whoa…

The chorus kind of makes me a little dizzy.
Deep breath…

Ok. Check out this scathing review from CCM Patrol  (tagline: "Where Christian Music is Allowed to Get Bad Reviews")

Ouch.

What do you all think?