The End of the Emerging Church
September 22, 2008 Posted by Amy Hall
The Emerging Church is officially dead…at least, the name is dead. Dan Kimball says of the term, “I can't defend or even explain theologically what is now known broadly as 'the emerging church' anymore, because it has developed into so many significantly different theological strands. Some I strongly would disagree with.”
“Emerging Church” is being dropped by people across the theological board. It's no surprise that the term has become useless, for it doesn't define what must be the most central aspect of any church movement: the God they worship. The many conceptions of God and Christianity that evolved without boundaries among the emerging churches couldn't be united on the lesser issues of evangelism and mission, as important as those issues are. And when such a thing (uniting as an “Emerging” movement) was attempted, the result was often a greater focus on people and community (the subject of evangelism and mission) rather than on God simply because of the nature of the way the movement defined itself. Beginning with defined doctrine is a much better way to make Christ the foundation–the focus–of a movement.
Dan has a new network in the works that will try to make a fresh start in the direction he originally intended when he created the “Emerging Church” term:
The still unnamed network has agreed to start with the inclusive but orthodox theological foundation of the Lausanne Covenant, and they intend to emphasize mission and evangelism. They appear to have learned from the emerging church’s mistake–define purpose and doctrine early so your identity doesn’t get hijacked.
(HT: Stand to Reason)
Related posts:
- Book Review: The Emerging Church by Dan Kimball
- ETS 2006- Brett Kunkle: Essential Concerns Regarding the Emerging Church
- Defining the Emerging/Emergent-Church/Movement/Conversation
- ETS 4- John Hammett on the Emerging Church
- The Corporate Church- An Emerging Church Update
- Modern Reformation #1- The Emerging Church by D.A. Carson
Posted in Amy's Posts, Emerging / Emergent Church, Main Page
content rss
September 23rd, 2008 at 9:10 pm
Good news, indeed. “Emerging” came to mean something vague like “new and improved,” but failed to identify the key points of agreement with historical Christianity. Thus it was applied to orthodoxy and heresy both. I'm glad to see it go, and to hear that Kimball wants to construct a solid theological framework for whatever will supersede the emerging movement.