Some crazy guy out there has been at it again trying to draw nice diagrams with things like boundaries and solid lines to describe the emerging church:
Actually the post is a really good one. Unfortunately the way the blogosphere seems to work it will mainly be this image getting passed around and commented on. His post is more nuanced than this image appears. His main point seems to be that lumping all emergents/emerg-lings into the same category is not an adequate description of the diversity of positions and theologies represented. That said…
What do you think about this picture? Are people in the right place? Why? How would you draw a better diagram?
Hey Lucas. You’re right that his posts are much better than just looking at the diagram. However, with that said, I find the diagram to be horrible. I just can’t see any constructive value in drawing circles, one representing “orthodox Christianity” and then putting real people’s names either inside or outside of the circle. Seems just a tad divisive to me. I also don’t want anything to do with advancing the distinction between “emerging” and “emergent.” I don’t like this at all. It’s not at all what I want to be about. However, I see this happening all the more. And it’s not just people in the “emerging” group separating themselves from “emergent.” It’s the other way around as well. I’ve spent some time this week with Tony Jones’ new book (The New Christians) and I think he only used the term “emerging” once – it was a negative connotation and involved Mark Driscoll. Every other time he referred to the movement he is part of as “emergent.” This bothers me. I don’t want to be making strict divisions of who is “in” or “out” etc.
i pretty much agree with you adam. i’ve heard and talked to tony enough to say that he probably agrees with you. language is problematic and so is audience… i.e. tony has to choose how to say what he wants to and also choose a particular group of people to talk to. TSK has a good review of this book and has some similar thoughts.
I think it would be more helpful if it said “evangelical,” not “orthodox.” but overall, yeah, not that helpful or realistic.
If I were feeling irreverant, I’d say that this diagram makes baby Jesus cry.
I have a theology to back that up, by the way.
What I wonder is (having yet to read the original post from whence the diagram comes), where are the emerging liturgical types, from the Lutheran/Anglican tribe? I’m thinking of Karen Ward, Ian Mobsbey, Ryan Torma, et. al.