rix rantz ravz & revelashunz

The Gink on PoMoXianity

Got this from John O'Keefe's Postmodern Theology group:

i am not saying there is any test to be a postmodern church, but just claiming to be one does not make it so. if willowcreek today decided to call itself "postmodern/emerging" that would not be the case - if a church, just because it is trying to reach a "younger crowd" calls itself postmodern/emerging, that would not make it so. while i would never say there was a "test" i do have to say that there are standards
-

at ginkworld we get some 100 requests a month to be added to the church lisiting - which is vast and growing - but we may add only 10 to 15 (then we also remove some because they no longer are around). many of the requests are from churches that are very modern and very "willowback" in structure and style - but they desire to call themselves "postmodern/emerging" -
must i agree and post them? if left to a committee (very modern idea) to decide, who would be put on? but with all that being said, let me share with you some of the standards i think need to be present to be "postmodern/emerging"

a willingness to extend the self to the world around
a willingness to move past what is, and redefine what will be
a willingness to treat all people as equals
a willingness to hear the voices of others
a willingness to not be driven by programs, building or budgets.

while i think there are more, these are the core - for me - but the idea that there is no standards to be a postmodern/emerging church is just not the case. i
don't think anyone who has writen any book with a postmodern/emerging slant has ever suggested that there was no standard.

pax
jok