Reactions to the Emerging Post
It has been fun, interesting, discouraging,encouraging and enlightening to see the various reactions to the posts on the Emerging Church. As you would expect, there have been both positive and negative reactions. I thought that I would take the time to post links to some of these here so that you could get a balanced view of how people are responding, positive and negative.
One of the most common problems with the reactions is that most of these reactions either only post the chart or they only link to one part of what became a six-part series. Because of this, the main thrust of my intentions were sometimes misrepresented, being taken out of context. This is why I am going to follow this with a post that combines all parts into one. Hopefully future links will go to this complete post instead.
Positive:
Negative:
Finitum non carpax infiniti (who has a chart of his own!–nice.)
Neutral:
Jesus Creed (Whole lot of comments. I dialogue a bit there)
Phoenix Preacher (lots of comments)
Our ministry is a partner based ministry. This means that the majority of our support comes from people like you. Please consider supporting Reclaiming the Mind Ministries as we make theology accessible. Donate today.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
- Reactions to the Emerging Post
- Am I Emerging?
- Top Twenty Signs You are Taking this Emerging Thing Too Far
- Would the Real Emerger Please Stand Up? Part 1
- Would the Real Emerger Please Stand Up - Part 4 - Comparing Fundamentalists, Evangelicals, and Emergers
Matt Scott on 25 Feb 2008 at 7:34 pm #
Thanks for the link, and again, look forward to more well thought out posts.
Jeromy on 25 Feb 2008 at 8:09 pm #
Michael. I suppose you can place my post under ‘negative’ if you’d like—your blog, your distinctions. My post was about our human need and tendency to label things and I used your post as an example of needing to find a nice place/box for all the labels. It was more a reflection on “labels” then on your post.
You actually got a pretty good chuckle out of me with your list of “20 signs you are moving from emerging to Emergent.” But to be fair, I have to ask you and clarify, was the intent of the 20-list humor, a playful stab, or flat out slamming?
Oh, and by the way, the other night I was drinking a beer while playing with my Play-doh when all of a sudden…
Blue like Elvis on 25 Feb 2008 at 9:13 pm #
After I published the post that contained simply the chart, I posted further comments the next day. You might be interested to read it and the comments that followed.
Though I disagree with some of your conclusions, I appreciate this series. It is obvious that you put a lot of time and thought into your discussion….something many people are not willing to do when it come to things “emerging.”
bluelikeelvis.wordpress.com
C Michael Patton on 25 Feb 2008 at 9:30 pm #
Jeromy, I don’t mind it being negative. I think people need to see the variety of reactions. The emerging conversation is not about having positive things to say about everyone or everything all the time.
My top ten lists are not non-descrimanitory! They are just meant to be fun. Check them all out. Soon, I will come up with one about Evangelicalism. I haven’t done any “top ten” of anything that I don’t feel connected to.
In other words, they are not in the Pyromaniac vain! Hope that makes sense.
Jeromy on 25 Feb 2008 at 9:52 pm #
Michael—I also agree that there is great fruit in seeing the variety of interactions. Thanks for the clarification, though from one who uses sarcasm to (it seems) another, there is always seems to be a glimmer of stabbing-truth behind the veil of “fun”, no? Ugh, I’ve had to learn the hard way from my wife. ~Peace~
C Michael Patton on 25 Feb 2008 at 10:29 pm #
Well, it is an easy way to be self-critical.
I could use this of the evangelical church:
“When you hear the ‘history of the church’ the only referent you have is the history of your local building program.”
There is a lot of truth to this.
Discussing Emerging Church Taxonomies « faithmaps blog on 25 Feb 2008 at 11:08 pm #
[...] michael patton has helpfully provided a metapost of blogosphere comment to his recent contribution to discerning the various flavors of [...]
art on 26 Feb 2008 at 12:18 am #
Michael,
I like the idea of “mapping” the emerging movement, I just wish that the placement came with a little more explanation (I see now that it was part of a series. I’ll have to check out the entire series to see if the placements come with an explanation). You obviously have put in a lot of work and thought on the issue, so I hope that my post didn’t come across as snide or rude in my critiques of your map. If you put theology onto a map, just like when you put theology into words(!), you are bound to have disagreements because people will see things a different way and/or be coming from different starting points.
And my map was just a joke
I hope you didn’t think I was making a stab at you.
Blessings.
C Michael Patton on 26 Feb 2008 at 12:26 am #
Art, not at all. Your post was a fine post. I certianly expect disagreement. I also read these disagreements being ready to change. If I rewrote it today, I would nuance things a little different, but isn’t this what the conversation is about?
I really liked your chart. It was great.