http://www.alanhartung.com/podcasts/a-different-perspective-16.mp3
Tony and I discuss various issues related to Emergent and the emerging church in this podcast. A few topics covered: the difference between Emergent and the emerging church, responding or not responding to critics, moving forward, and spiritual formation.
Show Notes:
- :24 Crash Wins!
- 1:25 Maybe K.C. won’t be able to afford T.O.
- 2:30 Long overdue conversation series begins: Tony Jones
- Another conversation podcast… next week! John O’Keefe of Ginkworld
Subscribe to A Different Perspective
Listen to other podcast episodes: http://www.alanhartung.com/blog/index.php/category/podcasts/
A Different Perspective is sponsored by SoCal Websites
Own your name (if available) in a .com for just $7.85! Buy a domain now
Other TLDs available, prices vary
TO in KC … I think that sounds brilliant! The only thing better would be him heading to Oakland. Imagine the glorious dysfunction there!
Joe Burnham
March 9th, 2006
I enjoyed listening. Thanks. I’m actually in the middle of reading Tony’s book, “The Sacred Way” at the moment, so it was kind of cool to have a voice to go along with the words.
Oh, BTW - there are underwater-safe iPODs. Or, rather, waterproof housings for “regular” iPods that let you use them underwater. But they’re not cheap.
Dwayne
March 9th, 2006
Okay… Sorry it took me so long to get around to listening to this…
I’m listening at this moment.
My thought as I hit play… “I wonder if Alan will ask him about the name change thing?”
Bingo! Right out of the gate!
I had no idea I had toadies!
More in a bit…
Bob Hyatt
March 17th, 2006
Bob -
So what’d you think?
I had thought about talking more about Emergent/emerging issues than I did. Tony had obviously given it some thought, and I liked where the conversation went. I felt like pushing the issue would have been antagonistic, and he had already pretty clearly stated his thoughts.
Saying what he said made me go back and think of which I heard first, emergent or emerging. While I do think Emergent Village may have spawned the name emerging church, it morphed almost immediately to describe those who were seeking to do something different and not those directly affiliated with an organization. Something I think Tony understands well.
My biggest question for those listening to this podcast is what do you think about Tony’s desire that we would all just participate in Emergent rather than distance ourselves, as some are doing?
I myself wonder how I’m not already participating in the “conversation” without publicly identifying as a friend of Emergent, though as I’ve said before I have friends in Emergent
The sad reality may be that as long as critics of Emergent focus on the theology of a few, it is more of a hindrance for some of us to participate in a recognizable way. Or maybe we should take an attitude of ignoring the critics, at least the venemous ones who obviously are not trying to dialogue in any way shape or form.
Giving it more thought myself…
Alan
March 17th, 2006
I listed to the Tony Jones/Alan Hartung Podcast interview available through Theoblogy and I realized that a big reason why Emergent/Emerging C/church/es are getting so much heat is because at the end of the day there is really no theology going on, but rather they (sorry Tony, “we”) spend 99% of the time talking about themselves (sorry Tony, “our selves”). In that 60 minute interview the entire thing was devoted to talking about themselves, but no theology/ecclesiology/spirituality. It was more about blogs, blogosphere, blah blah blad…it gets old.
It comes off as very ego-centric, and I now understand what others have been saying all this time. For a theology group, or “conversation,” or “friendship” we sure do like to talk about ourselves and not others. That doesn’t sound very “friendly” to me.
It was also somewhat disheartening to hear Tony talk about how much “we” (emergent/ing) could help big mega churches like…we mentioned one called woodnut hills, or chestnut creek church? I’m not sure. But maybe “we” should be saying, “yes, we can help them and they can learn from us, but we can also learn from them and they can help us.” If “we” adopt the attitude Tony is proffering, then we become no better than they (i.e. the evangelical fundamentalist) who think they can help everyone else. If we expect to help and teach others, then don’t we need to be willing to learn from and be helped by them as well?
Just some thoughts I’ve had
PS A friend of mine listened to that same podcast and told pointed out a big error. Apparently it doesn’t look good that “our†own national coordinator doesn’t know the etymology or derivation of the term “emerging church.†My friend taught me that the term was coined back in 1981 by Johannes Baptist Metz, a Catholic Political/Liberation theologian from Bavaria who wrote a book called “The Emergent Church.” This predates “us†by 19 years. Just a good thing to know if we expect others to take us seriously.
Sam
March 24th, 2006
Sam -
The podcast was about… well, a conversation between Tony and I about Emergent and the emerging church. And “A Different Perspective” generally means my perspective which is different from yours…
So, I”m not at all surprised the conversation was about what Tony and I think. It was the topic, after all.
And as far as etymology, the word “fag” used to mean either a bundle of sticks or another term for cigarettes. Just because someone used the same word does not mean the used it the same way. Tony’s comments were about the labeling of a movement and the labeling of an organization. He spoke from his experience. Criticizing him for not knowing about an obscure theologian… just does not make sense. I don’t think too many others are sitting around going, “Tony Jones doesn’t konw about Johannes Baptist Metz book? I shouldn’t listen to anything he says.”
Alan
March 24th, 2006
Johannes Baptist Metz is an obscure theologian ?!?!?!?
I see, you are obviously an amature and have very little theological knoweldge…typical of emergent
Sam
March 29th, 2006
I agree with Sam, if Tony expects people to take him seriously and if he is after all, a “phd” candidate, then he should be good at research right? Well, maybe he should’ve researched the name “emergeing church” before he decided to start a movement and become the first pope of that movement. Especially when someone as big as Metz coined it. So to answer your question Alan, YES, precisely becuase Tony does not know about Metz’s book means that we should not listen to him. It would be different with it were you, because no one expects anything from you. But Tony is supposed to be the leader, smart, learned, in the know, and it’s ignorance like this that makes emergent continue to look self-centered and dumb.
Martha
March 30th, 2006
Sam and Martha -
Degrading and name calling should not be the way to make a point.
I’ll just mention a couple of key points here and move on.
One: Tony may well know about Metz, but because someone titles a book “Emergent Church” it does not mean it is the source of the label today. He has no need to mention every obscure book (it’s out of print, by the way) that is clearly not the reason the organization “Emergent” was named.
Two: Emergent chose the name “Coordinator” to describe Tony’s position for a reason. He’s not a “pope” type, as has been suggested. And while many in the emerging church consider Tony a leader, I’m not sure any one would label him the leader, and he wouldn’t want them to label him such.
Beyond those two things, when persons call others “amateur” (okay, actually I was called “amature” but I’m an editor…), suggest someone has “very little theological knowledge” because someone considers one of their favorite theologians “obscure,” and thinks an organization looks “self-centered and dumb” because the coordinator does not acknowledge an out-of-print book which has nothing to do with the coming about of today’s labeling, their statements say much more about themselves than the persons towards whom the insults were directed.
Alan
March 30th, 2006
You guys just don’t get it. Alan, you call Sam and Martha name callers but you do the same thing. You are calling their “favorite” theologians (which, by the way, they did not ever say that he was their “favorite”) obscure. That is, in a way, insulting.
The same, actually even more so, could be said about Tony Jones, Doug Pagitt, Brian McClarent, etc etc. These people are truly obscure and they are not even theologians. They are ex-youth pastors from conservative protestant evangelical backgrounds who are beginning to see (thankfully) the problems with the tradition from which they came. But to label it the emergeing church or church emerging confuses the whole issue. They are they one’s emerging, but the protestant church is not. The Catholic/Orthodox traditions have already emerged/are emerging. It is like watching 3 little kids (Tony, Brian and Doug) grow up and finally realize the stupidity of the conservative evangelical wing on Xianity. They are not there yet, but they are headed in the direction of maturity, and I’ll make the bet that libertion/political theologians like Johannes Baptist Metz will help them on their way. After all, Metz traveled this road back in the 80’s and wrote a book about it. Which, by the way, most theologians in academia are very aware of.
It is true, emergent churches (like the ones represented by tony, brian and doug) are the protestant version of latin american Catholic base communities. It only takes a few hours of research to realize this. Also, one will learn that this was all done back in the 70’s.
Sordid Melanchton
March 31st, 2006
I’ve had Metz’s book on my shelf for years. But his book had nothing to do with the name we chose.
Tony Jones
April 20th, 2006
And one more thing, I have never been from the conservative, evangelical wing of Protestantism. I grew up as a mainline Congregationalist.
Tony Jones
April 20th, 2006