dissertation

32
Reflection on these recent developments produces the following three observations.
First, it seems likely that the term ‘emerging church’ will in time be used less, 7 while
‘missional church’ will become more popular – although the terms people use may
change again in the years to come. 8
Second, although interpretations of the terms ‘emerging’ or ‘missional’ may differ,
there are convergent interests among participants in the Emerging-Missional milieu, in
particular concerning the importance of having a missional mindset and way of life. 9
Third, a fuller understanding of the historical roots and general theological characteristics
of the Emerging and Missional Church Movements may help the reader to appreciate
the diversity within the movements and to understand some of the controversy
that surrounds them.
We hope that the present chapter will provide a better understanding of this background.
Its overarching goal is to answer the first research question: What is the historical
background of the Emerging-Missional Conversation and what are its main theological characteristics?
In answering this question, the emphasis will be on the Emerging Church Movement.
One reason for this choice is that, as indicated above, confusion particularly
reigns on the subject of this movement. Our discussion is meant to deal with some common
misunderstandings. Another reason is the conviction that it is of particular importance
for theologians, pastors and other leaders in the church to listen carefully to ‘lay’
Christians, 10 which is what many participants in the Emerging Church Movement are. 11
In the process, this chapter describes points of divergence or convergence between
‘emergers’ and ‘missionals’ when this seems useful. In this way, the Emerging-Missional
7
During his ethnographic research in America, anthropologist James Bielo found that the label ‘Emerging
Church’ itself is “increasingly of little interest to adherents as a meaningful self-identifier, but the movement
it was intended to capture continues to thrive.” James S. Bielo, Emerging Evangelicals: Faith, Modernity,
and the Desire for Authenticity (New York: New York University Press, 2011), 5, cf. 204.
8
The following advice therefore seems wise, “We encourage our readers to resist the urge to become too
attached to any one descriptor (because it is likely to change), but rather to increase understanding of our
changing world, and discover how the timeless message of Jesus Christ – the one who was, who is and is to
come – might be proclaimed in this age.” Mary Gray-Reeves and Michael Perham, The Hospitality of God:
Emerging Worship for a Missional Church (New York: Seabury Books, 2011), 3.
9
James Bielo interviewed ninety ‘Emerging Evangelicals’ from forty communities and eleven denominations
in America. He found many differences among them in matters of theology, worship styles and methods,
ecclesiological preferences, and the social contexts of their ministries. “By contrast, the desire to be
missional was shared without exception.” Bielo, Emerging Evangelicals, 11, 23, 119, 122. In the UK, Doug
Gay – after twenty years of experience in the movement – speaks of a “deep sense of missional understandding
and commitment” in large segments of the Emerging Church. Doug Gay, Remixing the Church: Towards
an Emerging Ecclesiology (London: SCM Press, 2011), 98, cf. 97.
10
Cf. Henk de Roest, Communicative Identity: Habermas’ Perspectives of Discourse as a Support for Practical Theology
(Kampen, NL: Kok, 1998), 359.
11
As explained in the introductory chapter (1.1.1.1), many leading voices in the Missional Church Movement
are academics, belonging to mainline churches, while ECM authors often have a low church background
and are not professional theologians.