Presbymergent or Presbymerging?
Christianity Today has an article written by Scot McKnight, professor of religious studies at North Park Theological Seminary in Chicago. The article is called “Five Streams of the Emerging Church.”
In the article, McKnight points out the distinction between “emerging” and “Emergent.” Here’s what he says:
To prevent confusion, a distinction needs to be made between “emerging” and “Emergent.” Emerging is the wider, informal, global, ecclesial (church-centered) focus of the movement, while Emergent is an official organization in the U.S. and the U.K. Emergent Village, the organization, is directed by Tony Jones, a Ph.D. student at Princeton Theological Seminary and a world traveler on behalf of all things both Emergent and emerging. Other names connected with Emergent Village include Doug Pagitt, Chris Seay, Tim Keel, Karen Ward, Ivy Beckwith, Brian McLaren, and Mark Oestreicher. Emergent U.K. is directed by Jason Clark. While Emergent is the intellectual and philosophical network of the emerging movement, it is a mistake to narrow all of emerging to the Emergent Village.
So, here’s my question. Is this site intentionally designed to line up with the “Emergent” network (as the name Presbymergent seems to imply) or is it intended to be open to the wider “emerging” conversation?
Comment by Michael Kruse on 8 February 2007:
I was teasing at my site the I prefer Emergyterian. I think your point is well taken, though. Emergent is coming to be seen as an entity within the larger phenom of the Emerging Church.
Comment by Neal Locke on 8 February 2007:
I’m at the beginning of the inquiry process for my Presbytery, and have begun to apply to seminaries. I see the process (and eventual ordination) as a way to “formalize” the relationship I already have with the PC(USA) — a deeper commitment, if you will.
Because of this, I see a parallel here:
Most of us in this conversation are already “emerging” to some degree or another, I think. So perhaps, by calling ourselves “Presbymergent” instead of “Presbymerging” we are doing something similar–identifying ourselves as more formally connected and committed to Emergent — an organization that is at the driving core of the emerging church conversation.
It’s a good (and needed) thing for us to discuss, though. Some might not be as comfortable with that commitment as others — but if we are indeed “Presbymergent” I think we can still welcome both Presbyterians and Emerging Church types alike.
Besides, as Presbyterians, I think there is something within us that likes order, organization, and affiliation. Being connected to Emergent is kind of an extension of our whole “connectional” church thing. I know that labeling and categorizing often run contrary to the emerging and postmodern ethos, but perhaps we as “loyal radicals” are able to find the middle ground that is desperately needed in both camps.
Comment by Kris Weinschenker on 9 February 2007:
Scot McKnight is a false prophet.
Comment by Brian Wallace on 9 February 2007:
Kris-
Would you care to explain why you think McKnight is a “false prophet” ?
- Brian
Comment by Adam Walker Cleaveland on 9 February 2007:
I am very comfortable aligning myself with Emergent, and have become friends with many of the people who helped begin what is today known as Emergent Village (Tony Jones, Doug Pagitt, Brian McLaren, Tim Keel, Karen Ward and all the others).
I have also seen many people co-opt (in my opinion) the phrase Emergent or “emerging church” and apply it to whatever “cool new thing” they may be trying to do at their service because they think that “emergent” is the newest church-growth fad and that will help bring all the cool and hip twenty-somethings to their church…
That is one reason I prefer to use the phrase Emergent (or Emergent Village) when I talk about where I see the hope in this conversation.
I am going to post more a little later about differences in “emerging churches” — it’s a cateogorization, which as Neal pointed out above is contrary to a postmodern ethos, however I think it might be helpful for this conversation.