Here is a part of a conversation that I had on Alan's blog regarding a critique of the "Emerging Church". I would love to hear your thoughts. . .

I will say this, hopefully with tones and words of love:

In my opinion, many leaders in the EC have over emphasized things like the role of the pastor/leader, community and liturgy. I think this over emphasis will, in the end, will sidetrack the “conversation” into becoming just another denomination/flavor of Christianity, rather than a dynamic, relational movement of the Spirit.

Additionally, I think, in general, the EC has not gone far enough in challenging the role of the pastor/leader. I believe you have merely accepted a revised version of the modern pastor that, in the end, slaps a “relational” label on the same power structure the modern church uses, and puts external expectations and obligations on people to conform. I found it interesting that Kevin Rain’s blog just today touched on an angle of leadership that may be a symptom of what I’m talking about. You see, I so agree with Kevin’s “corrective”, but I wonder if that will happen because earlier Kevin says,

“We don't have enough agenda for those we lead. . . As leaders we know where we want someone to be moving toward. We usually have the mind of Christ on this too.”

From my point of view that walks the razor’s edge between power, authority and manipulation, and the natural encouragement that flows from the pastor/elder/deacon (yes, I believe these terms are more interchangeable than we make them out to be). I mean, is it just me, or if I believe I have the mind of Christ for someone else will I start trying to make that person meet my expectations and obligations of what I perceive to be the “mind of Christ”. Why not let that person have his own “mind of Christ”? I think this problem stems for an over emphasis on the role of the leader/pastor, which should be, very simply, to serve.

If you want to focus specifically on liturgy, it reminds me of Isaiah where they were giving sacrifices and expecting that God was present because they were doing the ritual. That is no different than gathering a bunch of people together in a building and singing songs and expecting that God is present. The comfort and safety of religious rules and rituals are always easier then living in the tension of relationship. I believe Jesus made it clear that He isn’t interested in rituals, but relationship. This is why I think it is foolish to make rituals such a large part of our experience of God. He may be present in them today, but what about tomorrow? A liturgy may demand my attention for a fixed period of time, but a relationship is continuous and demands constant attention. Some might say that the ritual forms me even if God is not present in it. I might concur, but the forming may not be positive.

I guess that is part of why I don’t feel a part of the “emerging conversation”, because much of the conversation is about things that are peripheral to Christ. In my opinion of course.

As for examples of what I am talking about, just pick some links on the “emerging” lists and see what people are talking about. Chances are there isn’t a whole lot of wrestling with Scripture. But, people are very interested in liturgy as a means to connect with God, they are very interested in learning how to lead with little or no mention of the headship of Christ, and they are talking a lot about community. While these can all be good things, they can also be totally void of God.

I can just tell you what I see, given my point of view and experiences. I really don’t expect anyone to be changed by my opinion. I do appreciate the dialogue though. Unfortunately, I am working nights and have a sick kid to be with all day, so no rest for the wicked today. . .I probably won’t be able to post again today, but I will check back. Peace to all here!