dissertation

108
which Christianity is dominant, with this dominance being backed by social or legal
compulsions. 106
Since the turn of the century the literature advocating different kinds of church and
mission “after Christendom” or in the “post-Christendom” context has expanded considerably.
107 Perhaps the most well-known use of the term ‘post-Christendom’ in Emerging
Church circles – at least in the Netherlands 108 – is its use in the After Christendom
series, written by members of the Anabaptist Network (which has existed since 2004).
Stuart Murray, one of the foremost members of this network, suggests that in some
parts of the Emerging-Missional milieu there is an increased interest in Anabaptism,
particularly when participants “perceive points of contact between this earlier emerging
church movement and emerging churches today.” 109 Murray is probably right in this
perception. 110 The following quote from the influential book Missional Church well illustrates
this: “[the] contemporary voices of the Radical Reformation have an important
contribution to make to the formation of a missional ecclesiology in a post-Christendom
context. They have grappled for centuries with the tensions that result from their theological
decision not to support automatically the dominant culture with its principalities
and powers. That witness should instruct the church today as it recognizes its own cultural
captivity in functional Christendom.” 111
4.4.3 ‘Post-Christendom’ and Alternative Labels
Alternative terms to ‘post-Christendom’ used in Anabaptist writings, as well as in EMC
publications, are ‘post-Constantinian, and ‘post-Christian’. Does the label matter? Stuart
Murray has written an insightful article on this question. 112 Three of his points are
particularly pertinent, and these are paraphrased here with some additional comments.
106
See Alan Kreider, introduction to Alan Kreider, ed., The Origins of Christendom in the West (Edinburgh:
T&T Clark, 2001), viii.
107
See, for example, Charles H. Bayer, A Resurrected Church: Christianity after the Death of Christendom (St.
Louis, MI: Chalice Press, 2001); David Smith, Mission after Christendom (London: Darton, Longman and
Todd, 2003); Alan Kreider, “Beyond Bosch: The Early Church and the Christendom Shift,” International
Bulletin of Missionary Research 29, no. 2 (April 2005), 59-68; Wilbert R. Shenk, “New Wineskins for New
Wine: Toward a Post-Christendom Ecclesiology,” International Bulletin of Missionary Research 29, no. 2
(April 2005), 73-79; Craig A. Carter, Rethinking Christ and Culture: A Post-Christendom Perspective (Grand Rapids,
MI: Brazos Press, 2006); Bryan Stone, Evangelism after Christendom: The Theology and Practice of Christian
Witness (Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press, 2007).
108
See “Post Christendom”, http://www.postchristendom.com/, and “Emerging Netwerk,” http://www.Em
ergingnetwerk.nl/voor-dummies/postchristendom (accessed February 22, 2010).
109
Stuart Murray, Changing Mission: Learning From the Newer Churches (London: Cromwell Press, 2006), 12.
110
Cf. Jack Niewold, “One must recognize that much missional church energy comes from the direction of
a renewed Anabaptist movement, which explains the prevailing countercultural ethos of the discussion.”
Jack W. Niewold, “Set Theory and Leadership: Reflections on Missional Communities in the Light of Ephesians
4:11-12,” Journal of Biblical Perspectives in Leadership 2, no. 1 (Winter 2008), 50.
111
Darrell L. Guder, ed., Missional Church: A Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America (Grand Rapids,
MI: Eerdmans, 1998), 124.
112
Stuart Murray, “Post-Christendom, Post-Constantinian, Post-Christian…Does the Label Matter?,” International
Journal for the Study of the Christian Church 9, no. 3 (August 2009), 195-208.