Just glanced over a quick post on David Fitch's really good blog. He lists 8 things you would notice about a missional church. I think that we would have at least 6 of these. So, I just thought I'd throw it out there, are we more missional than emergent? Does it even matter?
I, for one, am not too concerned with how we define ourselves. Although I think definitions are interesting in the larger conversation because they demonstrate what people and groups are trying to achieve together. Also, there has been much conversation lately amongst the blogosphere about the so-called "death" of emergent in 2010.
So, although I'm asking the question, I don't think it's that big a deal - just something interesting.
Anyway, here's the short list, but please check out the post for the full info:
- No single dominating leader or pastor
- Service isn't produced
- Not many strangers at the gathering
- Socio and economic diversity
- Sunday morning greeters
- The "sending out" or "benediction" is an important part of the gathering
- Participatory gathering
- Ethnic diversity
Posts
1 comment:
Well for one I don't really like that list, i think it is kinda arbitrary, and not really well thought out, but more just Fitch's top of the head things he'd like to see in more communities.
I also don't think we're really missional as a community. There are some missional people who are involved, but we aren't all intentionally working together to "reach" people or anything. If we are missional in any sense of the word than our "mission field" or whatever is central ohio emergent thinking people. That's probably less intentional, and more just natural though. I think we really do try to make a good home, and safe place for emergent minded people to ask questions, experience community etc.
I think we might be more organic than anything really: the COEC just happens. Some people who lived in Columbus who had read some McLaren wanted to talk about it with other people, and so invited some others to meet in their home to talk about it. They were all so sick of their own churches they stopped going, and decided to meet regularly to not just discuss books, but to share communion, pray, sing, and read the bible together... sounds more organic house churchish to me.
here are my uneducated vibes about the movements, and most of them overlap, and swirl about postmodernism I think.
emergent -> for the disenchanted pastor, lay theologian, unchurched christians etc. who dislike modern church doctrines, policies etc. and are looking for a post-modern way of THINKING. lots of talk about HOW to do church.
missional -> for the people who are disenchanted with EVANGELISM or lack-thereof in modern american churches, and really want a post-modern way of SPREADING the GOSPEL. This might mean taking on a lot of emergent thinking, but at the core missional is less about how you do church, and more about WHO you do church with. You're not doing missional church unless you are being sent out into your neighborhood, tribe or whatever to live the gospel there.
Post a Comment