Finally someone else understands what I’ve been saying about the emerging church as a movement. I think Alan Hartung may have reached this conclusion independently of my comments, but the point remains… everyone’s busy reacting to being a certain kind of movement and saying we aren’t one because we aren’t that kind of movement, without considering that there may be other kinds of movement that better describes the emerging church. Alan and I commented somewhat similarly in response to a post by John O’Keefe on this point… my response was last week and didn’t go into much depth on the subject of a postmodern movement, as I’ve written about it several times here before, beginning with The Trajectory of a Movement, then The Trajectory of a Movement, Part 2 and later, The Trajectory of a Movement, Part 2 (yes, I inadvertently have two “Part 2’s”) and most recently, the aforementioned Emerging Movement?. All this following my prediction in an older post, Saulâ€™s Armour: 2005, The Year of the Emergent Movement that during 2005, the emerging church will be recognized as a movement… and no matter what we call it, it’ll be dubbed a movement by those outside and it’ll eventually stop mattering what we call it.
So. the emerging church is a movement, but not the same type of movement we’ve seen before… follow the referenced posts to start sorting that one out. Now, can we all get back to business?