I got the latest Emergent/C (which is the newsletter/communication piece of Emergent Village) today and it included this quote.
We in Emergent Village are poised for an important year in 2007. A pivotal year, I’d say. Lots of people are watching—some with high hopes that EV might be a part of a re-birth of Christian faith, a revolution in what it means to follow Jesus. (Others, of course, are plotting our demise J.)
The part I highlighted above about revolution has got me thinking. Is that why some people are “plotting the demise” of EV. Would it be more accessible for people to think of the emerging emergent church as an evolution of how the church practices the faith rather than a revolution? Can the emergent folks make claim to being the vanguard of a revolutionary movement in following Jesus (especially when it is still so monolithic in its racial ethnic makeup)?
Kester Brewin in his book Complex Christ suggests that emergence is more closely connected to evolution than revolution. Revolution he continues correlates more with insurgence than emergence. The point of view from which we view the emerging church and emergent conversation determines how we pursue the developing practice of the faith and who ends up coming along for the ride.
So is it evolution or revolution? Maybe it is both and what say you?
Tags: christian_faith, emergence, emergent_church, emergent_village, emerging church, emerging_church, evolution, follow_jesus, Kester-Brewin, revolution, spiritual-practice
Loading ...