Comments on: The Church in Emerging Culture http://brandoncozart.com/archives/2005/10/21/the-church-in-emerging-culture/ Tue, 06 Jan 2009 08:10:45 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: the Foolish Sage http://brandoncozart.com/archives/2005/10/21/the-church-in-emerging-culture/comment-page-1/#comment-279 the Foolish Sage Sat, 05 Nov 2005 05:04:45 +0000 http://rmfo-blogs.com/cozart/archives/2005/10/21/the-church-in-emerging-culture/#comment-279 My experience with emergent churches here in Philly is similar to that of Mr. Wellcome's. They see engaging the culture missionally as something quite different from the attractionalism of "seeker sensitive" churches. Missional churches seek to live the implications of the Gospel radically in and before their communities. Seeker-senstive churches try to market themselves to unbelievers through entering into entertainment-oriented pop culture. My experience with emergent churches here in Philly is similar to that of Mr. Wellcome’s. They see engaging the culture missionally as something quite different from the attractionalism of “seeker sensitive” churches. Missional churches seek to live the implications of the Gospel radically in and before their communities. Seeker-senstive churches try to market themselves to unbelievers through entering into entertainment-oriented pop culture.

]]> By: cozart http://brandoncozart.com/archives/2005/10/21/the-church-in-emerging-culture/comment-page-1/#comment-272 cozart Sun, 23 Oct 2005 00:24:41 +0000 http://rmfo-blogs.com/cozart/archives/2005/10/21/the-church-in-emerging-culture/#comment-272 also, it appears there are very different ideas of what "missional" actually means. Ed Stetzer states, "I think that a church becomes missional when it remains faithful to the gospel message while simultaneously contextualizing its ministry (to the degree it can) so that the gospel can engage the worldview of the hearers." that is the most common definition of "missional" that i have heard and why i made the comment i did about these churches "contextualizing [their] ministry," "in order to be more relevant and attractive to nonbelievers". at least that's what i think one is saying when they describe "missional" churches as Mr. Stetzer has. also, it appears there are very different ideas of what “missional” actually means. Ed Stetzer states, “I think that a church becomes missional when it remains faithful to the gospel message while simultaneously contextualizing its ministry (to the degree it can) so that the gospel can engage the worldview of the hearers.”

that is the most common definition of “missional” that i have heard and why i made the comment i did about these churches “contextualizing [their] ministry,” “in order to be more relevant and attractive to nonbelievers”. at least that’s what i think one is saying when they describe “missional” churches as Mr. Stetzer has.

]]> By: cozart http://brandoncozart.com/archives/2005/10/21/the-church-in-emerging-culture/comment-page-1/#comment-271 cozart Sat, 22 Oct 2005 21:05:10 +0000 http://rmfo-blogs.com/cozart/archives/2005/10/21/the-church-in-emerging-culture/#comment-271 hey brandon (great name! :) ), thanks for your comments. certainly that is not the focus of everyone in the conversation. but i have found that, at least around me, that a lot of those involved in the Emergent conversation are interested in that. not all Emergent churches are "seeker-sensitive," but many are. i suppose it may be an overgeneralization for the sake of introducing the arguments, and certainly would describe those in the "park" clearing as they look to the wider culture, according to Sweet's introduction, to find new ways of method to incorporate in their services, resulting in "seeker-sensitive" services. the very term "seeker-sensitive" implies tailoring a service to be sensitive to "seekers" in order to make them feel more comfortable in a worship service. this may not engulf the entire movement, but i think it's fair to say that it does engulf much of the movement and is a concern for many of those within the Emergent conversation. but we'll see what i'm saying after i finish the book, particularly those chapters that have to do with the "park" and "meadow" clearings of the conversation. thanks again for your comments and i look forward to hear more of your critique of my critiquing! hey brandon (great name! :) ), thanks for your comments. certainly that is not the focus of everyone in the conversation. but i have found that, at least around me, that a lot of those involved in the Emergent conversation are interested in that. not all Emergent churches are “seeker-sensitive,” but many are. i suppose it may be an overgeneralization for the sake of introducing the arguments, and certainly would describe those in the “park” clearing as they look to the wider culture, according to Sweet’s introduction, to find new ways of method to incorporate in their services, resulting in “seeker-sensitive” services. the very term “seeker-sensitive” implies tailoring a service to be sensitive to “seekers” in order to make them feel more comfortable in a worship service.

this may not engulf the entire movement, but i think it’s fair to say that it does engulf much of the movement and is a concern for many of those within the Emergent conversation. but we’ll see what i’m saying after i finish the book, particularly those chapters that have to do with the “park” and “meadow” clearings of the conversation.

thanks again for your comments and i look forward to hear more of your critique of my critiquing!

]]> By: brandon wellcome http://brandoncozart.com/archives/2005/10/21/the-church-in-emerging-culture/comment-page-1/#comment-270 brandon wellcome Sat, 22 Oct 2005 20:29:38 +0000 http://rmfo-blogs.com/cozart/archives/2005/10/21/the-church-in-emerging-culture/#comment-270 ". . . in order to be more relevant and attractive to non-believers." Not so sure about this. Some in this dialogue may be saying that, but I can assure you that many more are actually discussing the antithesis of an attractional way of church. In fact, the very definition of the term "missional" describes this idea. If you're really interested in what's being said about these things, I can point you to a few helpful resources (though I realize you could easily find them yourself). I've read the book that you're reading and evaluating, and I must say that it represents a very thin slice of the discussion. Having said that, I'm interested in your evaluation and will try to remember to stay tuned to your commentary as it develops. “. . . in order to be more relevant and attractive to non-believers.” Not so sure about this. Some in this dialogue may be saying that, but I can assure you that many more are actually discussing the antithesis of an attractional way of church. In fact, the very definition of the term “missional” describes this idea. If you’re really interested in what’s being said about these things, I can point you to a few helpful resources (though I realize you could easily find them yourself). I’ve read the book that you’re reading and evaluating, and I must say that it represents a very thin slice of the discussion. Having said that, I’m interested in your evaluation and will try to remember to stay tuned to your commentary as it develops.

]]> By: Geof F. Morris http://brandoncozart.com/archives/2005/10/21/the-church-in-emerging-culture/comment-page-1/#comment-269 Geof F. Morris Sat, 22 Oct 2005 18:29:25 +0000 http://rmfo-blogs.com/cozart/archives/2005/10/21/the-church-in-emerging-culture/#comment-269 Lookin' forward to it, Brandon. Lookin’ forward to it, Brandon.

]]>