Another Taxonomy for the Emerging Church
In case you just haven’t been satisfied with Scot McKnight’s “Five Streams of the Emerging Church” or Mark Driscoll’s three streams, there’s a new taxonomy on the block, thanks to Darrin Patrick, pastor of The Journey church in St. Louis. Patrick shared his categories at the Fall 2007 Francis Schaeffer Lectures at Covenant Seminary (download MP3 here):
Emerging Conversational — They are mainly after theological revision for the church. These folks are really interested in trying to re-imagine theology in light of our postmodern situation. They often challenge traditional understandings of evangelical theology and cast doubt on many of the insights of the protestant reformers of the church. They tend to focus on the mission dei (mission of God) that takes place outside the local church.
Emerging Attractional — They are mainly after methodological revision in the church. These folks are really interested in trying to re-imagine methodology in light of our postmodern situation. They often challenge traditional understandings of evangelical church programming and tend to focus on reaching people in and through corporate worship experiences.
Emerging Incarnational — They are mainly after structural revision in the church. These folks are really interested in trying to re-imagine ecclesiology in light of our postmodern situation. They often challenge the complex structures of the evangelical church. They tend to focus on reaching people through relationships and simple church structures.
Patrick adds, “Let me be clear that these classifications are only so helpful. ... These classifications are simply my attempt to help bring clarity for those who are peeking over the fence and trying to understand the emerging church. I know my categories are not perfect, but I hope they are helpful for those who are seeking to understand the emerging church.”
What do you think of these categories?
(HT: Brad Andrews)
Bookmark this article using Remarkable!
Welcome to the Reader's Forum
Maybe we could blend them together cleverly like the new AT&T Wireless commercials and call it:
ConversIncarnAttractional
If we could morph them into overlapping continua or think of them as centers of gravity they would likely be helpful.
But we do so enjoy categorizing.
I went to the lectures, I thought they were more of a way to mark who was “dangerous,” and who is not. He made a significant distinction at the seminar between emergent and emerging churches.
Gentleman: This is new territory for me as I have not followed any conversations with “merge” in the middle, but I sure as heck identify with the “Emerging Incarnational” category. I need to get out more and find out what you folks are up to.
Peace,
Mike
I think he totally ripped these categories off from me and just changed the names.
Though to be fair, I ripped them off from Ed Stetzer. ;)
Add Emergent Village to
Join our mailing list:
Subscribe!
You can subscribe to the Emergent Village RSS feed or get the same updates e-mailed to you.
Recent Weblog Posts
Current Podcast
Reader Comments
- Spica (What Are Emerging Churches Doing to Reproduce Themselves?)
- Ron Cantrell (Eternity, Evolution, and Emergence)
- Atone (The Palatable Gospel)
- frank Speer (The Palatable Gospel)
- Michael Dixon (How to Be a Spiritual Person)
- Michael Dixon (How Churches Are Like Record Labels and Newspapers)
- Michael Dixon (The Palatable Gospel)
- ScottL (The Palatable Gospel)
- Andrew Hendrikse (The Palatable Gospel)
- Chad (The Palatable Gospel)
Best Weblog Posts
Links
I can’t help but think that too many people fall between these categories for them to have any practical use. Which, I guess, is the weakness of many category systems.