PC(USA), Emergent, and a Savior
So I’m copying Shawn and will post my response to Adam WC as well.
For the context, Adam Walker Cleaveland’s post is here. In it he opines the fact that some mainliners are looking for emergent to save the mainline church. He argues that presbymergent is emergent, and should not be confused as a PC(USA) revitalization movement.
I appreciate how Shawn just muddied the waters in his post. His final question to Adam WC is a good one. “If you are not concerned about the dying PC(USA) then why be a part of it?” In fairness to Adam WC, I don’t think that’s what he was saying at all.
Perhaps there’s a theological way to ground this discussion. A few weeks ago I spoke at St. Columba on eschatology. After the talk, a retired minister came up to me and said, “I’ve been a minister for 50 years. I can’t recall one sermon I ever preached on eschatology. Nor do I remember hearing one.”
Eschatology is about hope–hope in Christ’s return, hope in Holy Spirit’s continuing work within and without the church, hope in God’s faithful love. Many mainliners don’t speak about hope much, but it’s exactly what we need in the PC(USA). (And, by the way preachers, it’s all over those Advent texts. Tom Long just wrote something on it, if I recall correctly.)
To confirm my church nerd status, I’m going to use an illustration from General Assembly a few years back. Then a small group of young people, but mainly a guy named Tyler Ward, led a campaign handing out buttons that said boldly, “I’m enthusiastic about the PC(USA)!” The campaign was a success and many hundreds of buttons were passed out. I think the Presbyterian News Service even did a story on it (props to someone who finds it.) Part of what Tyler aimed to visibly instill hope within and for the denomination. And for many commissioners, seeing young people handing out “I’m enthusiastic about the PC(USA)!” did the that.
So to strike a balance between Adam WC and Shawn, I think folks are discerning a strong hope attached to emergent. That’s great, and we can all pray that God is doing a new thing with emergent. We can also pray that a more palpable hope becomes established within the PC(USA). One should not cover the other. Part of the very nature of emergent, in fact, is that its difficult to confine and may very well help instill hope in the mainline denominations. Adam WC just doesn’t want denominational-recharing to be their focus, and I’m cool with that.
I might as well end with the Bible. Romans 5:1-5
Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we rejoice in the hope of the glory of God. Not only so, but we also rejoice in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope. And hope does not disappoint us, because God has poured out his love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom he has given us.
Thoughts? I’m particularly interested in what folks outside the PC(USA) think about all this.
Connect Online
Thanks for joining this conversation thread, Adam.
First, a clarification: I’m not sure I really argued that “presbymergent is emergent.” You’re right in that I don’t want it equated with PC(USA) renewal movement (perhaps my own theological bias comes out when I let on how irked I can get when people think we’re the next PFR). But I don’t want to just say that presbymergent = emergent. I think Emergent is going to look different in whatever context it finds itself.
So, emergent in the PC(USA) – is gonna look different than emergent coming out of a more evangelical, non-denom type of church context.
Shawn does ask a good question – and one that I have struggled with for quite awhile. I’ll have to reflect on that for my next “essay”/post.
This stuff is so complex. The gospel always needs new wineskins. And the old ones always go away. Maybe some group keeps an old name, but their practice changes to the point where they have no real connection.
I care that I be a good steward of what I have and when I live and among the people to whom I’ve been given. I’m interested in the rest, but it is hard for me not to give in to a “what will be will be” attitude.
Hey Adam,
I don’t know if I count as one “outside the PCUSA” or not…but for the moment, lets assume that I do.
I have started going to an Emergent group in Atlanta recently and have learned a lot about the movement as a result. It seems to me that there a couple types of people who go to Emergent.
- People like myself, who are not fed up with traditional ways of doing church but are interested in exploring other nontraditional ways of being God’s people together.
- People who are disillusioned with the current state of the Church (be it evangelical nondenominational or traditional protestant) and need another way.
- People who are uncomfortable with the idea of Church altogether but are willing to try an informal and more personal/less intimidating setting.
This list is by no means exhaustive. But I do think it is representative of the general kinds of people who attend an emergent/presbymergent group.
As someone who was born to be a little schizophrenic when it comes to denominational identity, I can appreciate the Emergent movement in all its forms. I especially appreciate it as a movement (or conversation) which draws nondenominational Christians into deeper understandings of tradition, theology, and community; or as a conversation that introduces people from traditional denominations to more personal, discipleship oriented worship.
The question is (and this is a very naive question), what is at stake for presbymergent in maintaining its presby leaning if it neither sees itself as part of the broader mission of the Presbyterian Church nor wishes to “draw a line in the sand” regarding theological issues that make it distinctively presby (or reformed) in the first place? [Please note: I am really not making a dig at Adam WC (I dont believe he and I have ever met!). I am honestly asking the question based on my own experience in a presbymergent group. My question, ultimately, may just be a more specific version of Shawn's.]
Regardless, I am not willing to throw the baby out with the bath water…The “house church” will never go out of style. It was where the Church began, in a sense. And it may very well be where it ends up. Who knows.
I am just as curious as the next guy to see where all this leads.
(sorry for the long post!)
Please see related content about Preterism & Emergent Eschatology, especially as it relates to a recent interview with Andrew Perriman on the subject.
http://opensourcetheology.net/node/1653