Comments on: the nature of presbymergent

By: Drew Tatusko

Drew Tatusko — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 00:09:53 +0000

Thanks!

I totally agree with you. My whole angle with PMergent is to think of goals and outcomes that will bring change to the PCUSA in ways where we can form new relationships and adapt to changing environments. Let the Spirit breathe in the midst of what we want to do. Ideologies are hard to cling to if we keep our focus outward. I discovered that I am really not a liberal nor conservative but a pragmatist because of my anti-ideological posture. But to be "anti" is like another ideology itself! Pragmatism makes a good way around that problem by focusing on what works based on what we actually know. That's why I would like it all to be pragmatic…

By: Rev. Eric Ledermann

Rev. Eric Ledermann — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 23:08:27 +0000

Hey Drew,

You asked me to read this a while back (February?) and I did. But, just coming off the CG meeting I was kinda burned out on Presbymergent. For some reason I stumbled across it again and just read it, with some distance from the CG. I think I like this even more now. The focus is less on "ideology" as it is on "relationship" and "dialogue." As followed Emergent and the birthing of Presbymergent, it was these aspects of relationships in dialogue and then being open and engaging in continual reforming of structures that reflect back on what is happening in those relationships that first drew me to the emerging Emergent movement.

My one critique is not about your statement but about the structures that have developed in Emergent and now Presbymergent. My critique is that I'm not sure this is where Presbymergent is going. It is fast becoming an ideology and I think that is antithetical to the concept of emergent/post-whatever. Just wanted to finally answer your question, some 5 months later!?

Hope you are well.

Peace,
Eric

By: Drew Tatusko

Drew Tatusko — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 19:09:53 +0000

Thanks!

By: Rev. Eric Ledermann

Rev. Eric Ledermann — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 18:08:27 +0000

By: if not ”emergent” what then? –

if not ”emergent” what then? – — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 19:07:54 +0000

[...] As in Jim Bonewald''s case, my church is also a small congregation in a blue-collar part of the country (and churches with 150 on the active roll or less are about 50% of PCUSA congregations BTW). I also ask the same question but not only because of this. This is a continued conversation following the Presbymergent gathering in Louisville, KY last week. My initial response is here. [...]

By: Drew Tatusko

Drew Tatusko — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:38:55 +0000

thanks for the comments and the contributions as well! to the last point, that also makes sense and why i think 'faithful' is good not to have there, nor is any qualifier for 'follower of Christ' here. once you qualify that, you are make unclear assumptions and are therefore automatically exclusionary with the very thing that we should be open with! my question is also what works and therefore what does not. i want to get past whining and move the whining into specific achievable goals that will elicit change. i moved from postmodernism to pragmatism a while ago and found that if we can re-phrase ambiguity in terms of outcomes, more people will listen.

By: Melissalynn25

Melissalynn25 — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 15:55:54 +0000

Drew, stumbled into this post after twitter from you to check out another. This is a very helpful thought process.There is a lot of loaded termanology but that always goes without saying. What struck me was the idea of structure. I am life long PC(USA) and now clergy, serving at various levels of the denomination. It is a journey and I am always asking mysef: What is working here? It is so easy to name the mile long list of what isn't, and no one else seems bashful in their complaining and whining either. But, what is working? I want to ask what is faithful to God's call for us as the church. That word "faithful" is tough, it doesn't have one definition. And if it is faithful now, will it be later. So glad to be part of these conversations.

By: Bryce Elliott

Bryce Elliott — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 02:54:08 +0000

I can't agree more. A newer member at my church is a professional artist. I find myself often wondering what amazing contributions this person could make if our congregation would allow this person a little freedom. Hopefully down the road we will find out.

I've been following the #pmergent stuff on twitter. I appreciate you pushing folks on the language used to be part of the emergent conversation. It shouldn't be dumbed down but to clearly "sell' others on a vision, help them take ownership/build trust (even if they just allow it to happen), it has to be accessible for a greater number of people to follow and understand. If not, it will be tough to "influence our local communities of practice" especially if $ is involved to get things started.

By: Drew Tatusko

Drew Tatusko — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 15:06:54 +0000

Thanks for the input and I hope this is useful. Since you are coming with the coaching frame of mine two things I share off the bat are be pragmatic and be useful. That translates into do what works, do what works well, and then describe how you know it worked and how you can do it better. In every team sport there are fundamentals of what works well based on a lot of experience and trial and error. But those basic skills don't crowd out unique talents and all that great stuff you "just can't coach". I hope that's what we recognize. We all have a share in the same bread and butter which we need to define, but we all have very unique contributions and positions in which to perform that vision. My hope and prayer is that we can grab onto that same vision to influence our local communities of practice.

By: Bryce Elliott

Bryce Elliott — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 04:01:28 +0000

Drew thanks for putting this together. I'm just trying to start in on this conversation, new to twitter, and tried to follow. But the pieces of information I was picking up were too fragmented. So I appreciate your effort to get something cohesive put together.

I fell into working in the church and the longer I work in the church the more I'm convinced that clear communication backed by strong relationships goes a long ways.

There has to be a starting point that people can agree on or everybody is just chasing down their special agenda. I coached high school football for a while and if everyone on your team doesn't know what offense you're running and buy into the system not much can get done. Also when things start to go badly in a game everyone has to know what your "Bread and Butter" is. When things get tough you keep it simple and do what your best at.

You have a good start to "Presbymergent is..." but now what is a tangible, concrete example that Presbymergent folks can point to and say, "Here's an example that is working. Here's our "bread and butter".

I'm a visual person and I like to learn through experience. What does a successful example of presbymergent look, sound, feel, taste, like? Obviously there will be masses of variety but what are a few really good examples out there?

I'm curious as a group of us in our presbytery are beginning to envision a new approach, getting it down on paper, and trying to clearly communicate our plan and goals through the existing structures.

Love your #2 description. I love to lean and push on the walls of institution in my church for this exact reason.

Thanks,