Emergent vs. Emerging

Tom Ascol yesterday provided commentary on an article with which I concur goes overboard in its response to what is known as The Emergent Church. Tom makes a proper distinction between 'emergent movement' and 'emerging movement.' I would like to offer a further explanation.

According to the article, the term 'emergent church' "refers to a loose association of people who share common values and attitudes toward, well, everything. It’s Christianity for postmoderns who don’t like truth, knowledge, science, authority, doctrine, institutions, or religion. They claim absolute or objective truth is unknowable, that the only 'truth' that can be known is rooted in communities of shared subjective experience–the infamous 'it’s my truth' of relativism." While the article is "over the top" in its criticism (Ascol, which I agree), this definition is pretty accurate. Some of the leaders in this movement are Brian McLaren (author and pastor), Stanley Grenz and Roger Olsen (theologians).

'Emergent' is a radical subgroup under a large umbrella of often referred to as 'emerging' though both terms are often used synomously. The leading spokesperson for the 'emerging' group is Mark Driscoll, pastor of Mars Hill Church in Seattle, WA. He gives about 4 minute distinction between 'emergent' and 'emerging' on YouTube. More info on the strain with which he identifies can be found at the Acts 29 Network. As you will note, they too are concerned about reaching our postmodern culture. However, they are not seeking to do so at the expense of truth and doctrine like those in the 'emergent' movement who have jettisoned truth altogether. While these two movements are often lumped together because of the similarity in name, they are very different in this regard. One has a genuine burden to reach this world with the truth of the gospel. The other does not, but seeks community in a purely social construct.

While I think there are dangers in both of these movements, the 'emergent' group (McClaren and others) quite frankly are heretical. While I agree to disagree with some (but not all) of the methods of the 'emerging group' (Driscoll and others), I would not and do not consider them heretical. In some ways I admire their passion and concern to reach this culture.

Tom, if I have misrepresented your distinction, then accept my apology.