The year was 2003.  I was in college and I was reading Brian McLaren’s A New Kind of Christian.  It was unlike anything I had ever read in Christian literature.  The book simultaneously bothered and encouraged me.  I thought I understood about half of the issues discussed, but in all actuality, grasped far less.  Despite my ignorance I was hooked, even though I didn’t fully know why.

To varying degrees I think many church leaders, whether paid or otherwise, have had a similar experience with their first contact with the Emerging Church Movement.  Perhaps you were like me and you had no context to process what McLaren and others were proposing.  Or perhaps you were well-versed on the rise of postmodernity and its seemingly contradictory nature to
evangelical Christianity.  The emerging church is in many ways an enigma (perhaps intentionally) that even those within the movement have a hard time defining.

In my experience, reactions to the emerging church have been incredibly polarized.  Many of my
contemporaries’ embraced the ideals and postures of the emerging conversation and have sought to live it out in their various contexts.  Sadly this move towards emerging postures is commonly dripping with cynicism and bitterness towards the existing church.  In the last few years as I have served in paid church ministry I have found that nearly all existing church leaders are at least leery of the movement and, in more than a few cases, downright hostile towards it.  These reactions do not give me hope.  Cynicism and hostility are simply not acceptable options towards any tribe of Christians.

This brought me to a question.  Is there an “Emerging for the Rest of Us?”  What I quickly learned through research and conversation is that you have to go looking for it.  J.P. Jones at First Christian in Champaign, IL, shared with me his frustration:

“Overall, I think my attitude towards the movement is fairly open; however, in some of the materials I’ve read it seems as though the movement has some spirit of cynicism towards the local church that I don’t believe is appropriate.”

In reading many emerging church leaders it is clear that they have little hope for the existing church. An explicit and implicit pattern tends to emerge in their writing: leave the existing church and start over with something new, because the modern practices of the established church are far too entrenched to be changed.  I have no interest in a model that gives up on local churches.

Maybe you are like many and are not open to the emerging church and the postures embody.  For many (myself included) the postmodern characteristic of relativism is a sticking point.  When carried to its fullest conclusion all truth becomes subjective to the individual.  Student Pastor, Ryne Isaac from the First Christian Church in Moweaqua, IL describes this tension:

“I think the greatest challenge of postmodernism is relativism. Relativism is a complicated cop out. It allows us to do what we want and warrant it as okay because it is 'right for us'. . . Relativism is a stark contrast to message of Christianity. It would be a great challenge to get a person to lay down the comforts of relativism when it allows them to justify any actions or decisions in their lives.”

The challenges of relativism are real, but a reality in a postmodern age.  Interacting with this perspective will be incredibly difficult, but no more difficult than evangelistic challenges faced at other times.  No matter the level of acceptance you may have with the emerging church movement it is hard to deny that they have had success in communicating the Gospel of Jesus Christ to people of all ages that aren’t darkening the doorways of many existing churches.

We find ourselves at an interesting point.  We can choose to remain at a place of only two options: full embrace or complete condemnation, or we can try and forge a third way in which we learn and selectively apply principles.  If you have chosen the latter I would like to offer three basic concepts that the emerging church seems to be living out well.

Rediscovering Mission

My guess is that your church has a mission statement.  Ideally this is the essence of your church boiled down to a memorable phrase or sentence.  However, for many of us it is an unrealized goal of which we only occasionally catch glimpses.  Our local churches should serve as base camps to engage the local community and hospitals for the spiritually wounded. Too often they become museums, preserving something good from the past. Museums are important, but hospitals are essential.

D.A. Carson characterizes the emerging church as a protest movement.  One of the main critiques that the emerging church leaders have lobbed towards the rest of us has been that many in our churches are compartmentalizing their faith. These “Sunday Christians” show up to church regularly, sing along, and even take a few notes but lack any discernable changes come Monday.  I resonate with this charge because, although not universal, it is accurate.  Paul Mumaw, Lead Pastor at Genesis Church in Noblesville, IN talks about getting away from the Sunday “Big Show” mentality. The Sunday performance mentality is great to draw new people in, but it can prevent spiritual depth from developing.

To counteract this many churches, both emerging and modern, have embraced the mission field
approach.  Shawn Case, the Weekend Experience Leader at Southbrook Christian Church in Miamisburg, OH, had this to say:

“It is my hope that we can help people understand and embrace that they are the church and are already in their mission field and that buildings and programs are tools and resources and not the end goal.”

The emerging church is has been associated with the missional movement because they so strongly stress community involvement.  The existing church must take the mission statements and not just commit it to memory but commit to action.

Honesty and Humility

Recently there have been several studies that painfully describe just what those outside the local church think about those within it.  Justly or unjustly many who visit our churches come into those situations with negative preconceived notions.

In modernism, certainty is king.  In school we learned the scientific method as the tool to understand the world around us.  If it couldn’t be tested or valued it was suspect.  The goal was to convince intellectually.  Modernism is not inherently good or evil in fact there have been many great benefits for society. Without it we wouldn’t have the Apollo program or the polio vaccine. In contrast, postmodernism is much more comfortable with mystery and uncertainty.

As modernism sought out certainty and answers, much of the ecumenical structure was concerned with transferring the correct information.  Church leaders who are more postmodern tend to be comfortable not having an answer and seem to have a tendency to be more transparent.

If moderns strive for certainty and a well thought out defenses, postmoderns make relationship and community a priority.  Titus Benton, the Associate Student Pastor at First Christian of Florissant, MO, points out the obvious:

“An emphasis on personal relationships is classic emerging church movement, but it's also classic New Testament.”

A real focus on relationships means that we have to be willing to say “I don’t know” and acknowledge when we have made mistakes.  Pursuing transparency through honesty and humility is dangerous, but it can have incredibly refreshing effects within our local churches.

Share Authority

The professionalization of ministry has led to more qualified leaders and preachers, but at the same time it has instilled a sense that ministry is only done by the pros.  Those in paid ministry realize the danger of this unintended consequence. Emerging churches have embraced various models of egalitarian authority that engage an unhealthy perspective. However, if you went into the next Elder’s meeting and demanded that the entire paid staff step down you would probably be asked to leave.

The natural tendency for leaders is to hoard authority, but successful leaders must empower others with responsibility if they want to be sustainable.  I return to Shawn Case because of the direction his church is pursuing:

“We are exploring how we can shift our church culture from one that relies heavily on the staff to provide programs people can benefit from to a culture where we (staff) can help equip people as they live out the reflection of Christ in their communities.”

Perhaps your mind is thinking of a person who has been angling for authority for years. However, he or she most likely isn’t the person you need to invite to the decision-making table.  Instead ask the person who never gets asked for feedback, talk to people in other ministry areas, and open yourself and your ministry up to honest dialog.

Live in the Tension

It is easy to draw nice boundaries and walls, in fact many of my above statements may be lacking nuance, but all those boundaries do is limit you and your church.  You may not agree with what the new church down the street or across the country is doing but I know you can learn something from them. Maybe their critiques sting for a reason.  Working through something is harder than writing them off but it may be just what you and the church as a whole needed to hear.

Josh Tandy is the Student Pastor at Genesis Church in Noblesville, IN. This article is an adaptation of his Master's thesis for Lincoln Christian Seminary.