The S3K Emergent Gathering -- First impressions

Having recently returned from the historic S3K Emergent event held in Simi Valley yesterday, I will offer some first impressions while they are fresh in my mind.

S3K, newly formed, explained the vision of their ministry (not just this event) to us. They hope to create a place for Jews to ask questions about their faith. They desire to create a research institute that studies synagogue's lives. They want to host Jewish seminaries across the US to participate in these activities. They seek to foster and deepen relationships with 'emergent synagogues'. They want all their insights funneled into creating web resources (e.g. podcasts) to serve congregations throughout the US. For this meeting in particular, S3K had a learning posture -- they wanted to know how to attract young people to their congregations, and they hoped that Emerging Church folks would share their insights. With the emergent synagogues, they hoped to connect with them and begin a working relationship.

J. Shawn Landres, a primary mover in making the event happen, opened the lunch on Monday (the first of four meals together) with a few comments, and it went sort of like this: "To my fellow Jews, you are going to hear a lot about Jesus. Don't freak out. To my Christian friends, you are going to hear a lot about Torah." Again, the implication, don't freak out. S3K were great hosts like this. They would offer a narrative, a running subtext, to all that happened. It was as if the narrator would step in and explain to the characters what was going on...

There were four groups that participated in the event: one, the hosts, i.e. the leadership team of Synagogue 3000 (they formed the largest group), two, some key thinkers/practitioners in Emerging Churches, three, outside-the-box practitioners of synagogues in the US, and four, guests/academics. Most attendees did not know anyone from the other groups. Within the groups, the leadership team of Synagogue 3000 had met several times before and some knew each other fairly well, likewise, many of the Emerging Church folks knew each other quite well (some for over ten years), but the 'emergent' synagogue types had never met together (they had a double challenge -- not only did they not know the other groups, but they did not know each other). I don't believe the academics or guests had ever met as well...

The hosts created an environment of dialogue between and within the different groups. For example, the leadership of the Synagogue 3000 would meet with Emerging Church leaders while the emergent synagogue types would meet on their own. Then, they would switch and have the two emerging streams meet together while S3K and guests would meet on their own. They did this repeatedly. The format in each of these venues was highly conversational, often with a leader or speaker spurring the conversation in particular directions. In one set meeting, 'emergents' from both camps met one-on-one or in twos, walking and talking. These represented some of the most powerful moments for the participants as they got to know other 'emergents' across faith boundaries.

There were three of us who came as the 'academics' -- Wade Clark Roof, Sociologist of Religion from UC Santa Barbara, Steven M. Cohen, sociologist of American Jewry at Hebrew College in New York, and me. We had an evening of sharing, and we were called on at various times to comment on what we heard. Dr. Roof identified the differing expressions of congregations in American history. I found stimulating his discussion of 'intentional congregations' in the 1990s, with their flexible structures, their pursuit of authenticity, their embodied way of life, and their re-appropriation of certain traditions. Dr. Cohen's discussion was equally stimulating -- his knowledge of the minute details of the who, what, where, why, when, and how of American synagogues was so impressive. I have not met anybody who knows the church as Dr. Cohen knows American Jewry! I shared about the history of the church growth movement at Fuller seminary and how it is we came to understand the emerging church. I explained that the American church growth movement did not deliver on its promises -- although some American churches may have grown in numbers by following these principles, these churches did not produce the hoped-for transformation in individuals or structures. The study of Emerging churches required a shift in our approach to assessing congregations. Numbers were not important in this movement; instead, expressing a Christlike way of life within contemporary culture was the sole pursuit. In my presentation, I shared my hope that the leaders of S3K would learn from our mistakes, that in the evaluation of a community, it is not the numbers in seats that are primary but the depth of theologically rich activities (like serving, hospitality, etc.) that were of foremost importance. Thus, in the formation of their new institute, I encouraged them to root the evaluation of synagogue practices not in a consumer-focused narrative but in the narrative of the Torah.

There is more I want to relay about this event. I was touched deeply by some of the encounters I observed. I will explore these in tomorrow's post (and post some pictures too!)...

Technorati Tags: church growth, Emergent, Emerging_Church, J. Shawn Landres, S3K, sociology, Steven M. Cohen, Synagogue 3000, Wade Clark Roof

Comments

[John Divito]

Should Christians be sharing our missional insights and strategies with Jews? Isn't there something wrong with giving Jews more effective ways to grow and to reach others with their religion?

I blogged a little about this myself and would appreciate your thoughts.

[Ryan]

John,
I think, as Christians, we serve people when asked -- our stance is one of hospitality.

They asked, we came. We told our stories. They told theirs.

We connected to each other through many of these stories. Both parties are free to do with those stories whatever they wish.

[Dan]

I completely agree with you..

[Bible Timelines]

Jesus had no problem referring to God as Father - specifically. Several times referring to Him as Abba (Daddy). When people want to refer to verses in scripture which describe God as a mother hen or a woman in labor you are really misinterpreting the point. Those phrases are similes. The definition of a simile is a figure of speech that expresses a resemblance between things of different kinds - usually using ‘like’ or ‘as’. Every single one of those verses that were referenced earlier begins with the word as. That is a simile. It is a comparison to the original - not the real thing. Jesus repeatedly referred to God as Father. Why do we want to change that image? I understand people have had horrible experiences with earthly fathers, but come on - what better image then to compare that God our heavenly Father is NOTHING like that! Someone very close to me was raised by an abusive, apathetic, non-loving earthly father. In fact, the person will only refer to him as his B.F. - biological father. I don’t have time to tell you the things he suffered because and from this man. But he has NO problem whatsoever in seeing God as his Father. God is the Father he never had. He is the complete opposite of his B.F. It brings him comfort to know that God the Father is all of the things his earthy father was not. And now that he is a father himself, he strives to be like God the Father and not his BF. Though he admits his BF was a great teacher because he taught him that he did not want to be like him. I do not think that is a valid argument or excuse for people refusing to address God in the masculine form. It’s an excuse. Period.