I just read a great blog post and wanted to share it….

Ξ June 13th, 2008 | → 0 Comments | ∇ Cultural Architect Stuff, general life stuff, podcasts, stuff found on the internets |

OK, so I just read an amazing blog post responding to a statement that Mark Driscoll said explaining how the Emerging/Emergent Church does not have Converts….

“And all the nonsense of emerging, and Emergent, and new monastic communities, and, you know, all of these various kinds of ridiculous conversations — I’ll tell you as one on the inside, they don’t have converts. The silly little myth, the naked emperor is this: they will tell you it’s all about being in culture to reach lost people, and they’re not.”

you find the link to the statements audio here.

And so, David Fitch over at his blog wrote an amazing blog post on his blog explaining Emergent/Emerging churches and how Driscoll could come to this conclusion. And it really resonated with my heart so here are a few quotes from his blog.. and I encourage you to go over to his blog and read it all. (then he has a follow-up blog post continuing the discussion here.

Quotes from David Fitch’s blog:

“I get this kind of remark often in places where I speak. It usually goes something like this: “We love the missional theology. But does it work? How many converts have you had in your missional church? Is it (like it’s some kind of strategy) reaching the people you’re talking about?” And so it goes, the modernist drive to measure success raises its ugly head. Yet this does not offend me because these are important questions. For I believe if we are not seeing people transformed by the gospel then “missional” in the end means very little.

So my response to Driscoll would go something like this:

1.) I agree. There is a stunning lack of sustainable communities in the movements addressed by Driscoll and I think this is disturbing.”

—————————–

“2.) Regarding missional churches, it is difficult to survive as a sustainable missional church (versus your standard Driscollesque mega church). Missional church ecclesiology is organic and incarnational. It does not fit easily with denominational expectations. This creates economic pressures for the missional leaders. I believe it takes 5- 10 years to nourish a missional community into a true functioning existence.”

——————————

“3.) Regarding emerging churches/Emergent Village, I don’t believe they intend to plant church communities that would lead to converts. Instead at least Emergent, (and a lot of emerging folk depending on which stream you’re talking about) promote conversations (cohorts?). They seek to foster critique and seek “reform” within Christianity.”

——————————–

“4.) Having said all this, the number of conversions for missional church communities could still match the mega churches on the basis of percentages (if we were counting). This is Brother Maynard’s point. I think that the missional communities that do persist may have a higher conversion rate than the Drsicollesque mega church. Missional churches are so much smaller. 6 conversions from a group of 25 over ten years would match (or exceed) the percentage growth of a typical mega church. I think it would be interesting to measure how much dollars per conversion are spent in missional churches versus mega churches five to ten years from now when conversions start manifesting themselves in missional churches.”

——————————–

“5.) We must also recognize that “missionary conversions” take longer than mega church conversions. They are also more difficult to measure for often “conversion” happens as a process within a community (I could give you several examples within our own church). I argue that a conversion of a post-Christendom “pagan,” who has had little to no exposure to the language and story of Christ in Scripture, requires five years of relational immersion before a decision would even make sense. If you do not have this immersion/context, any decision that is made is prone to be a consumerist one. It in essence is a consumerist decision. It is made based on the perceived immediate benefit. It lasts as long as this perceived benefit remains important. It does not lead to discipleship.”

———————————

“The bottom line is then, if we would reach the lost souls of post Christendom, the church in N America must go missional, incarnational, organic. We must become intertwined with those we seek to reach. Yet this will take time and appear to be highly inefficient in the terms we have become used to in the church growth/mega church world.”

======================

OK, so I wrote a comment on the origional blog post and wanted to share it here with yall:

Living in a Missional/Emerging Church Plant within the United Methodist Church, I cannot tell you how you have hit the hammer on the nail! Big time! Great response! And I just wanted to share one way that I have explained “Conversion” to the older generation UM pastors and laity.

“Most churches and traditional church plants focus on the “conversion” first and then take the “converts” through a long/lifelong understanding of discipleship. If Discipleship is becoming a “student”/”apprentice” of Jesus, then in the missional “model/way of being” their understanding of discipleship happens first, and then in (as you say) 5 years of wrestling with God and the Bible and doing it within community, the “decision” of “conversion” Is made with pure conviction and depth. They know exactly what they are getting into and how important this relationship with Christ is, but are already living out a lifestyle of Christianity. It is not an emotional response or a pressure tactic. They really know, and are living lives that are constantly search to know Jesus more just like a student/apprentice would do with a teacher, and therefore being a Disciple in the truest understanding.

This explanation has helped tremendously in the past and present, but I am currently at the end of my 3rd year, and the funding will be dropping by 25% in Jan. and I am prayerfully discerning looking into part-time working at the Apple Store or Starbucks, just because I believe so much in this way of being the church! But, also, more than the money I realy believe that I could develope relationshipsmore effectivly beyond the walls of the church if I worked in customer surface kinds of places.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Well, what do yall think? sorry for the long blog post it just excited me! heh heh.