Wimber Redux?

The Vineyard itself is too varied a movement in and of itself to exactly say it’s “this” or “that,” (i.e. you might suspect differences between the Anaheim and Kathmandu Vineyards) but I suppose that in and of itself might remind you of the EC.

I am within the Canadian Vineyard, and I (along with several others) just yesterday met with our national “church planting” task force (I use scare quotes because they’re not a fan of the term but don’t have a better one yet) to discuss new and emerging forms of church…

I came away from our time having been not only encouraged, but commissioned to do church in ways that looks little to nothing like what the previous generation was doing, to promote multi-racial, kingdom-focused, missional community.

As someone who has been in the Vineyard family for about 5 years, I will say that the things I’ve been hearing in the Emergent/emerging church conversations has been nothing new or revolutionary in terms of challenging the status quo and questioning received evangelical dogma. And hey, we received a John MacArthur “scare” book too…

One other thing of note is that the Vineyard’s self-consciousness about movement-institution dynamics from its very inception has kept us keen to prevent institutional ossification. God’s kingdom, not the Vineyard, is our ultimate focus (even if we miss it a ton) and that lead a certain international Vineyard leader to say to us last night that “If pursuing the kingdom means that the Vineyard is gone in 10 years, I’m all for it.” When statements like that can be made, I think that we’ve escaped Wimber’s expiry date.

I was talking about this very thing early this year with the national director of Vineyard in Australia.

I find Wimber’s Quaker influences really interesting when you consider the Vineyard movement. Wimber and George Fox both had a practical theology of the kingdom which was birthed out of personal experiences of the Holy Spirit’s power that placed them at odds with the theological options on offer. Partly because, to varying degrees, they were able to birth communities where these experiences of the Holy Spirit’s power made them critical power that “lorded it over others”.

I think this is why with very little work you can place Wimber’s theology into the vessel that J. Denny Weaver calls “Narrative Christus Victor”. There is a dangerous liminality and ‘third wayness’ of these two leaders that inspired communities to embody an alternative.

I pray that we would be open to the Spirit’s work in us at this time in history that the same might be said of us to the glory of the Christ.

I spent about 10 years in the Vineyard movement and have read most of John Wimber’s books. It was a helpful time in my spiritual life. The Vineyard is fairly progressive but only in terms of its worship services (60’s style folk music and relaxed atmosphere). I still have many friends in Vineyard churches. They do focus heavily on the “here and now” aspect of the kingdom but only in regards to supernatural events and superstitions (complete with speaking in tongues and exorcism). They would routinely say the “kingdom” is the supernatural realm of God that is breaking into our world through the spirit of Christ.

Charitable acts are stressed in the Vineyard and that may be what leads to this unfair comparison, but for most in the Vineyard, acts of kindness are mostly attempts to lure people into spritual conversations. Larger scale ideas about social justice are overshadowed inside the movement by more conservative theology and its focus on after-life and supernatual “healing”.

I’m sure many vineyard people are part of this emergent conversation, but it would be wrong to suggest it is the same thing.

It seems to me there is some conceptual overlap, but the two are not necessarily the same if that’s what the quote is getting at. Both movements challenge certain evangelical expectations and theological sacred cows, though I think the sorts of things the EC’s engagement with postmodernism leads us to question may be a bit more disturbing (which I take to be a mostly good thing) than the Vineyard.

I think the EC has maybe more of a chance at real ecumenical possibilities than the Vineyard mostly has so far, but as Matt said above it’s at best difficult to too strictly categorize either – so all bets maybe ought to be off the table unless one is dealing with segments of each that have more definably similar characteristics.

I don’t see many similarities between Emergent and Vineyard. A really brief way to put it would be to say that it seems that many Emergent folks did not have a happy childhood. While they are eirenic toward those outside the faith (or outside the mainstream of where they originated ecclesially), they maintain a polemical stance toward Mom & Dad. Vineyard folks on the other hand, seem much more mellow. They seem like the people who had a happy child hood and still visit mom & dad for the holidays.

Emergent folks also seem more interested in arguing theology – often defensively. Vineyard folks seem more interested in evangelism and worship.

I speak as an evangelical United Methodist attracted to both movements.

Seems to me…that ecclesially the Vineyard/Jesus Movement are in step with where I see the EC going. Theologically though I don’t find them jiving. Most Vineyard “belief statements” read just like Calvary Chapels, S-baptists, and other middle-to-right leaning evangelical orders. The EC’s interest in opening the theological discussion of atonement, soterology (new paul perspectives, etc), nature of the afterlife (openness, varying views on hell, etc) don’t seem to jive with what I know about the Vineyards as a whole.

Like someone said above, Vineyard beat everyone to the punch on visceral worship…but theologically they borrow from more traditional schools than do the more progressive elements I see in the EC (Wright, McKnight, Shultz, and others).

Now very much an emergent, I have spent much time within Vineyard leadership circles as well. Back in the 90’s I led a leadership training program for the Canadian Vineyard in western Canada. And in 2003, I, along with a group of others, planted a church in Kelowna, B.C, out of a mother church in Langley- which was pastured by the then national director of the Canadian Vineyard, Gary Best.

I would agree with earlier comments that there is great diversity in the Vineyard. And one has to remember, for instance, that the Canadian Vineyard is a distinct entity (legally and otherwsie) from the US Vineyard. Now living in the US, I’d say my experience is that the Canadian Vineyard movement is further along on the postmodern spectrum than its US counterpart- not that that is surprising considering each movement’s native culture (i.e. Canadians in general tend to be more postmodern than Americans).

Now that being said, within my Canadian Vineyard background, I’d say that, yes, there is much common ground shared by the Vineyard and the EC. The Kingdom of God is the central calling card for both movements. However, as others have stated, the Vineyard saw this more in terms of supernatural experiences in the Here and Now, while the EC has focused on social justice in the Here and Now. Both reflect different Kingdom of God aspects. Both are important. Both can represent a reminder that the Kingdom of God is all about the reign of God’s will and values on Earth. And that can represent itself in physical (or emotional) healing, as well as the righting of socio-economic-political injustice.

For my part, I’d say the EC has very much been the natural progression of my Vineyard journey.

As a relatively new pastor in the Vineyard (3 years) but relatively old in life experience (60 years old) I do see a significant sharing of both theology and praxis between the Vineyard and the Emergent Church. I am a student of both and find I learn much from both. Having come through the Jesus People Movement, the Charismatic Renewal, the Vineyard Movement, the Toronto Blessing, and other movements of God’s Spirit I find Emergent Church, Vineyard and all the rest as a place I am residing in and not a life time unbreakable commitment. This does not diminish my current commitment to the Vineyard in any way but allows me to follow the Spirit’s leading wherever it might take me while still enjoying the stability of an established belief system.

I love the way the EC is challenging old ways of doing things and old ideas. They should be challenged especially is they are only based on cultural bias or half truths. My one concern is the EC may be one of the most culturally bias movements, following the crowd just to establish new ideas. However, I admire their tenacity and encourage those in this movement to continue forward. It was hard to come to the realization that my generation wasn’t necessarily the smartest, wisest, and most innovative generation in church history. I do believe we have added to the pool of knowledge. Vineyard is good, EC is good. Let us share in God’s good graces together.

I’m new to this Village discussion, but have found your discussion interesting. As a memeber of a Vineyard church for the past 6 six years I can only relate what I see as the key strengths in the Vineyard.

As an old pentecostal turned evangelical (in the willow creek fashion) turned Wimberite, I found that the Vineyard movement restored lost hope in personal restoration (the real physical and emotional kind), that God still does the miraculuous and that we all get to play. These, for me, have been key. I don’t see how retweeking theology will bring the nations to the church. I do see how proclaiming the year of God’s favor will. I think that is the thing that worries me the most, that we lose contact in our churches with the real, personal, miracle working God.

Jesus said “let the little children come to me, for the kindgom of heaven is like these.” There is a simplicity of the Gospel that we can’t afford to lose. If we do, we will be just like the pharisees who took greater pleasure in right doctrine than seeing people healed, delivered and set free.

It starts with the individual experiencing the power of the Holy Spirit first. Then as the nations see people experiencing real breakthrough (the my God is more powerful than your God kind)they will turn and look the church’s way.

If the Vineyard Church becomes just another movement with well thought out thelogy that substitutes for the enpowering of the Holy Spirit, it will miss its mission.