Tim Samoff pointed out the above linked blogger who is “Post-Emergent.”
I have some thoughts about the whole “post-” thing and applying it to Emergent. For one, I’m a little weary of adding the word post- to everything, even when it actually makes sense. It is now done so frequently as to enter into cliche. As I write that, I know that one of my new favorite sites is Robby Mac’s Post-Charismatic site. But when does it end?
Here’s why it does not make sense to me for the topic at hand: Emergent. Emergent has been quite focused on the fact that they are fostering a conversation. While I have issues with the emerging church as a whole being called a “conversation,” I don’t necessarily have these qualms with Emergent. So the question comes in, can you be a conversation?
Why are people even branding themselves “Emergent” and not just participating in the conversation? If Emergent is really a conversation and not a movement, then you can’t “be” Emergent, and thus, you really can’t be “Post-Emergent” either. If you’re done with the conversation or the people participating in the conversation, that’s fine. To me, though, being “post-Emergent” would be identifying the conversation with the movement and practice of all churches and individuals in the conversation, which is quite broad despite Emergent (the organization) being mostly white males as Andre points out.
One of the things I’ve been considering is that Emergent may be one of many entry points to the broader emerging church. We communicate best with those we have common interests with, and the backgrounds of many of the Emergent folks mean those who share similar backgrounds will probably more easily engage with the broader issues facing the church by conversing with those who are part of, or friends of, or whatever you want to call them Emergent. So if Emergent has a conference, of course more white males are going to show up than any other type of person. This is not inherently a bad thing, especially for a “conversation.” In my opinion, efforts are made by Emergent to include alternative voices from those of other races, the “other” gender, and from various global cultures. However, expecting large amounts of those persons to just flock to Emergent events is unreasonable at best, but I’m getting a little off-track here.
Another reason I am critical of “post-emergent” usage by Andre Daley is that I feel like Emergent may have been his entry point (though I’m not sure, and he doesn’t fit the type I described above), but it does not seem he is walking away from the movement. From what I can tell, Andre wants to see the things talked about actually play out in his life and in local churches. So he is moving beyond the conversational aspects of Emergent and into the much more diverse world of the emerging church.
I hope Andre finds the practice he’s looking for and brings it into conversations where others who are part of the emerging church movement can be encouraged and learn from him. I know I’m striving for more practice to my theory, and I hope to continue to share what I can as I go with all who want to talk about it.
On one thing he is right: We do talk too much and act to little…
Nuno Barreto
February 27th, 2006
Thanks for the link.
Yeah, I think your points are valid as well… And, what’s wrong with using Emergent as a starting point for developing your own “movement” (even if a personal one) for developing faith and praxis. I think that’s great.
As for me — even though I didn’t mention this in my Blog post — I don’t really like using any labels. But, since I find myself in the midst of Emergent (and others who call themselves friends of Emergent), I am hopeful for what will follow.
Emergent may very well remain a conversation, but it doesn’t mean that we (as individuals) can’t act on what is being discussed. (A good case in point, is the church I call home.)
If all Emergent ever turns out to be is a place where people can come to regroup their mindsets and their reevaluate their faith-boundaries (etc.), then I’m all for it, label or no label.
timsamoff
February 28th, 2006
Alan, Tim,
I’m simply using post to mean beyond which is how I understand it to be used in post modern etc. I sure I could have used something else but post was handy
I’ve been emerging for quite some time but emergent give me a name to express what I was feeling and experiencing. I have engaged emergent conversation but never felt fully connected for the reasons stated on the blog.
I think one thing I and others have done is to make emergent church and emerging church synonymous. I think that was a mistake as it narrowed the point of view in a way with which I was not comfortable.
I appreciate your thoughts
Andre Daley
February 28th, 2006
Great thoughts on this one, Alan!
As an aside, I really wrestled with the idea of calling my own project “post”-anything, for the same reasons you mentioned. Too trendoid.
I finally made peace with calling it “Post-Charismatic” because (A) it’s a term already in use by quite a number of people, so why reinvent the wheel, and (B) the focus is on the critical recognition that post-charismatics dare not become deliberately or functionally post-Spirit.
robbymac
February 28th, 2006
Andre -
Thanks for the comment. I’ve written before about emergent and emerging church being used synonymously. I agree with you in calling that a mistake.
I hope I didn’t sidetrack some of the greater issues your post deals with. I think you raise important parts for the emerging church to consider, and I hope visitors to this site pick up on those themes as well as the topic of post what have you and emergent/emerging.
Robbymac -
I figured you had good reason for naming the site what you did. I guessed it was not something you just overlooked, but something you thought about in coming up with the name. Glad to know I pegged you right on this one ;D
Alan
February 28th, 2006
Robbymac, from that I came to call myself, “Post Evangelical, but not Post Scripture.”
But many who call themselves post-Evangelical seem to be more or less ultra-fundamentalist because they don’t see enough of what I dislike about Evangelicalism. How ironic.
David Cho
March 1st, 2006
2006: The year that is emerging… less word, more work….
……
Subversive Influence
September 18th, 2007