Ivy Beckwith Reflects on Recent Emergent Summit

by Ivy Beckwith

I looked forward to the Emergent Leadership Team Minnesota summit meeting in June with high anticipation. Not only was I looking forward to spending a few days with some of my favorite people in the world in a beautiful spot, but I was excited about talking about the amazing array of possibilities embodied in the next few years of Emergent growth and evolution.

And I was not disappointed. The possibilities for Emergent (or whatever we decide to call ourselves) to be a force in God’s movement to change the church and, ultimately, to change the world are enormous and widespread. But as we looked at these possibilities we knew we’d not get a lot of chances to harness them, to make the possibilities a reality, if we didn’t act soon and decisively. And that meant getting ourselves more organized.

We, also, knew that we’d broken a lot of promises to people. We’d made several false starts on ideas and projects – good ideas and projects all – but ones we’d failed to follow through on because we’re all volunteers with jobs, school, family, and life that kept getting in the way of bringing these ideas to full blossom. And we knew we’d disappointed many of you in the process. We wanted to become people of our word and to do that we knew that meant getting ourselves more organized.

And, as much as many of us may loathe the idea of it, in order to do many of the things we’d promised and to harness the energy of the possible we knew we needed money. Usually, people with money to give like to give it to people who seem to know what they are doing and who will put the money to good use. In order to be those kinds of people we knew we needed to get organized.

So we created an organizational structure which you’ve been reading about and commenting on the last few weeks. None of us believes this structure is perfect. None of us believes this structure is the answer to all of Emergent’s shortcomings or the complete answer to Emergent’s future. And all of us know that any kind of organizational structure if not carefully monitored and reviewed presents a danger to a movement that has identified itself as an open and egalitarian conversation. However, it is a step toward propelling this group toward accomplishing something significant and important for the kingdom of God.

I’m now a member of the Board of Directors. I look forward to sharing this new role with Brian McClaren, Tim Keel, Chris Seay, and others who will join us. The Board’s role is not to micromanage Tony Jones or the Coordinating Group but instead to work hard to give Emergent both roots and wings.

Comments

[Jamie Arpin-Ricci]

Thank Ivy. It is good to get another perspective into the realities of where the journey is taking us.

I have a question re: Emergent. Assuming that, for legal and cultural reasons, it is primarily a US entity (organizationally speaking), is residence and/or citizenship in the US a qualification requirement for board members, organizing teams, etc.?

I would love hear, our of curiousity, as a Canadian engaged in the conversation and praxis of much we dialogue about here.

Peace!

[Rob Auld]

Hey All,

The organization of emergent worries me. With the need for money comes the incredible danger of becoming an attractional body of people. How can you remain honest if some of your ideas change? Your support will be directly linked to whether people agree with you.

Please work hard not to let this happen.

All that being said, I trust the individuals I see on the Board. Keep working hard to get quality staff like Tony.

Jamie, I too am I Canadian, and would love to start an Emergent conversation in Canada. Please email me if you're interested. Any Candian's interested in the emergent conversation can email as well.

Thanks,

Rob Auld

[Dan-D from Canada]

Looks like we're all canucks here!

I do have a question for the first two commentators; is starting an "emergent conversation/organization" in Canada really necessary? or can canadians who are interested in emerging ideals work for change within their current contexts? because that would seem to me to be a healthier, more logical way of going about things as opposed to starting your own party.

Just a thought.

[Graham Corcoran]

I will be diffrent I am a brit living in southern Ireland I expect we will get and probaly get a branch of the emergent church,we seem to get every thing here,from the states and it is never excepted that we have our own
culture,american Evangelicul culture is always always trying to swamp us and when one fad goes another takes its place and local christians have to clear up the mess.so please before you come think of that.Thanks

[Graham Corcoran]

I will be diffrent I am a brit living in southern Ireland I expect we will get and probaly get a branch of the emergent church,we seem to get every thing here,from the states and it is never excepted that we have our own
culture,american Evangelicul culture is always always trying to swamp us and when one fad goes another takes its place and local christians have to clear up the mess.so please before you come think of that.Thanks

[Graham Corcoran]

I will be diffrent I am a brit living in southern Ireland I expect we will get and probaly get a branch of the emergent church,we seem to get every thing here,from the states and it is never excepted that we have our own
culture,american Evangelicul culture is always always trying to swamp us and when one fad goes another takes its place and local christians have to clear up the mess.so please before you come think of that.Thanks

[Rob Auld]

Hey,

I want to clarify my comments. I was just wondering out loud of the experience of the Emerging Church is different in Canada? If so, we need to begin to think about what that looks like. The organization and structure of Emergent seems like a logical time to have that conversation.

Not to detract from our American brothers/sisters, but I would argue the experience in Canada is much closer to European than American. Especially in Quebec and most of Southern Ontario.

That being said, emergent conversations are happening all over Canada. Whether it's a structure or just a group of people praying for each other or whatever.

I believe there are already structures in place as someone nicely pointed out in an email to me. Thanks to EmergentUSA for starting me on this exciting journey. Canadians, let's continue to dialogue as we are the Body of Christ together.

Rob

[Jamie Arpin-Ricci]

Graham, Canada often experiences the same thing as you mentioned happening in south Ireland. So I share some of your concern. A few notes, however, to add my perspective.

First, while American Evangelicalism does create interest all over the world, we locals have to own our own over-eager enthusiasm and hasty involvement.

Second, and probably more important, I think that Emergent in the US is not another trend in American Evangelicalism, but something different. While it has some roots in that tradition, I believe it is broader than that.

[Jamie Arpin-Ricci]

Hey Dan, seems odd to reply to you here having just emailed you on other matters, but I felt the questions you asked deserve answers, so I will throw my two cents here.

First, as for starting an Emergent organization in Canada necessary, that remains to be seen. If enough people want to organize together, we cannot be covered under US systems (legally speaking). So, if an organization does not need to happen here (which, as I say, remains to be see) then that brings me to the next part of that question.

Does Canada need its own conversation? In my opinion, absolutely, but not one isolated from the American conversation(s) (or other national conversations). Aside from the obvious cultural differences between our nations, there is also a huge cultural gap in the church(es) in both nations.

Because of our shared context, I think we can benefit from a Canadian conversation IN ADDITION TO and IN RELATIONSHIPS WITH the existing movement.

In the end, we can learn a lot from sites like this one, but many conclusions are contextually inappropriate or incompatible with Canadian contexts. So, I do feel that it is in fact healthier and more logical to continue the already existing and thriving Canadian conversations.

For more insight on this, the emergent movement in the UK has a great deal of wisdom on the importance of this.

Thanks for the great questions, Dan!

[Gerald]

Ivy,

How are you going to give Emergent both "roots" and "Wings"?

[J@mes]

As a Canadian I think it's got to be noted that Canada is at least 10 years ahead of the US in postmodern culture.

Sadly, the church's "reaction" time to cultural shifts usually occurs about 10 years after the US.

[Burt]

James,

What do you mean that Canadia is 10 years ahead of the US in postmodern culture? How? In what way? Please define for us a working definition of "postmodern culture." The term "postmodern" has becomes so ambigous and broad that it is virtually impossible to tell what one means when he or she uses the term. I really want to know what you mean and why you say what you say, but you must define your terms first. Thanks for the great blogging...I've got blog fever.....

Burt

[Dan-D from Canada]

Jamie - thanks for the response. I hope that we can do what you say and keep the conversation connected in as many contexts as possible.

[Rob Auld]

I think right now the only way to define Postmodern is say what it isn't. (A terrible way I know). Canadians have rejected Church and most other forms of Moral Authority. We are truly a post-christian nation. Even the most conservative of Evangelical's acknowledge their lack of influence.

Unlike the U.S. we are a multi cultural country. Meaning that when you come here we seek to integrate you and your culture into ours. Much different than the melting pot of the U.S.

For example, ultra conservatives in Canada can be for same-sex marriage and still get elected. To be conservative in Canada means fiscal and social conservatism, not religious fundamentalism. The Converstive Party's base is not by definition religious. Rural perhaps but not religious.

These realities are forcing the Canadian church into Missional communities at an apparently much quicker pace than our counter parts in the U.S.

Much like Europe many small churches have closed or merged together or just become completely irrelevant and are aging themselves out of existence. Young people (Under 30) are virtually Christian free.

From what we (in Canada) see from the American media, the experience seems to be quite different.

[Steve K.]

Hey! I'm not Canadian, but I believe the emerging church conversation in Canada is going strong at Resonate.ca (http://resonate.ca/).

Shalom,
Steve K.

[Steve K.]

Hey! I'm not Canadian, but I believe the emerging church conversation in Canada is going strong at Resonate.ca (http://resonate.ca/).

Shalom,
Steve K.

[Steve K.]

I'm not Canadian, but I believe the emerging church conversation in Canada is going strong at Resonate.ca (http://resonate.ca/).

Shalom,
Steve K.

[Uncle Sam]

Rob,

First, you've committed the great sin of trusting any media...especially the liberal drivel that comes out of the US. I suggest spending a good amount of time in the US (both urban and rural) and I suspect that you will find that the US and Canada really arn't that different.

Second, I don't know where you get the idea that Canada is MORE multi-cultural than the US??? You must be joking? The US is the most diverse country in the world. I suggest spending a week in the greater Los Angeles area and then tell me what you think.

Third, I don't know where you get the idea that the base of the conservative party is religious by definition. What definition?

Rob, you are makeing some rather bold and ambitious claims based soley on media. I suggest you consider many more resources before makeing such statements. But then again, from what I know, Canada is an ice-box full of fish eatin bleeding heart liberal socialists who drink beer and play hockey....at least that's what we get from the media....of course I am joking but you see the point.

Try to avoid making blanket statements that sterotype whole nations. It usually doesn't come accross well, nor is it very accurate.

Cheers!

Sam

[Terry]

Canada is not AHEAD of the US, but behind. That is why canadians are always flocking to the US. They copy the US in everything. They are behind. They want to be like the US and the fact that all these canadians are posting here on emergent-US and not emergent-Canada is just another example...

[Dan-D from Canada]

Terry - alot of us also post on tallskinnykiwi and other european sites that were "doing" emergent long before the states was. So do plenty of americans. Does this mean you all want to be like the Europeans?

In terms of Canada being ahead/behind, I agree with you that alot of your popular culture gets shipped north and is welcomed by the masses. But the vast majority of polls in Canada show the national attitude towards the states is negative/condescending. That's because we are a more "liberal" country - politically, religiously, etc. which some people see as "farther ahead", and so on. We are posting here because we believe in unity between our two countries and we want to be involved in your conversation (as many americans are posting at canadain emergent sites as well - and we welcome them to). Unless you were perhaps making a joke?

Sam - I'm afraid I don't understand your objections to Rob's statements about conservatism. Could you please clarify? And have you spent time in Canada and the US (urban and Rural) like you urged him to? Because if you did, where did you get the idea that canada and america aren't all that different? In your own words, "Try to avoid making blanket statements that sterotype whole nations. It usually doesn't come accross well, nor is it very accurate." We have two very different cultures as any sociologist, anthropologist or historian will tell you. I don't think Rob said he was getting all his ideas from american media. Maybe he'd like to clarify too?

Now if you'll excuse me I'll go drink some more beer, eat some more fish and hugs a few trees.

[Dan-D from Canada]

Of course I am joking with the last sentence. I prefer single-malt.

Cheers!

[Jamie Arpin-Ricci]

Terry, I am afraid you are VERY off on this mark. Sadly, Canadians are more likely to define themselves on how NOT American they are. While we are influenced by US culture (both by proxity to it and by its powerful, widespeard influence), Canadian culture is very different.

Additionally, while there is no "Emergent-Canada" there are many Canadian dialogues, which are thriving. The reason some Canadians are here (for example, myself) is that I believe this conversation, while unique to national contexts, is larger than them, just like the church itself.

And Sam, diversity and multiculturalism are not the same thing. Canadian culture is far more integrative, while the US is assimilative (these are terms developed by American sociologists). Where the US is a Melting Pot, Canada is a Mosiac. NOT a value judgment, just a difference. Canadians are more likely to identify themselves by their ethnic heritage before saying Canadian.

Multiculturalism is a very postmodern term that has strong ties to pluralism and integrative diversity. Canada is far more multicultural. Again, this is not a judgment.

As for the language of who is "ahead" of who, come on! Is this going to become a national pissing contest? As a dual citizen on both nations, having lived, worked and ministered in both countries, such evaluations have been proven shallow and unhelpful.

The last thing this site (or any site, for that matter) needs to become is a competitve forum for cultural, national or spiritual superiority. It goes against the best vision of the emergent conversation and the tenets of the Church.

Peace,
Jamie

[Jamie Arpin-Ricci]

Dan. Well said. Jamie

[Rob Auld]

Hey Sam,

I didn't mean to offend or make any blanket statements. Just observational generalities. Of course not everyone fits into every category nicely.

I would like to clarify one thing. Defining liberal as good and conservative as bad is a very dangerous thing to do. So is defining modern as bad and postmodern as good. I was attempting to do neither.

My observation is merely this. In general, Canada seems more liberal and more post-modern than the U.S. Our experience is quite different in general. The reason I posted these comments here, is because as Emergent begins to organize itself, it is most likely going to need to take is context a lot more seriously.

Since, I would argue that the Canadian context is much different, the need for sites like resonate.ca become very important. Especially to Missional/Incarnational Churches. By definition these churches need to look at there contexts and discover attitudes, needs, social, geo, and political make ups. Otherwise they will become irrelevant in their own communities. Again, I didn't mean to make anyone upset, nor was I attempting to pigeon hole Americans or Canadians.

Thanks for your generosity in understanding my less than stellar writing.

Rob

[Shelly]

again,

"postmodern" NEEDS to be defined here otherwise conversation cannot continue..
Rob, if you say canada is more postmodern than the USA, then please define postmodern.