Doug Pagitt, an early leader in the emerging movement, presented third at the seminar. He opened with some nice remarks that I thought were humble, about how this isn't the "new cool thing" that should make all pastors feel guilty because they don't know what is going on. Also, Doug's presentation was the most informal and "anti-notes", he began with a video and explained how his feelings mirrored those expressed in the video. Here's some great stuff I gained from his time:
>> this whole thing has to be felt before it is thought
>> The culture and the gospel is inseparable - both for moderns and pomo's
>> we need to understand the reality of the world so that we can know the good news for it; this is a sublte difference from repackaging for relevance
>> Doug called himself a traditionalist...from the first century
>> He expressed a desire for a non-church-centric view of the kingdom of God (free from dogmatics and the "who's got the gospel" issues)
>> He also noted that the way that we form our beliefs is, in fact, a practice. This is where the real differences in modernism and postmodernity exist. Modernism neglects the fact that the medium of spiritual formation carries a large message - perhaps is the greater message.
Challenges from the panel...
>> a call was put out to a community who will form into a gathered worship group?
>> the relationship between Luke 4 (Jesus in Temple) and the beatitudes (Luke 6) was discussed
>> I thought that I cannot become a pastor who is just waiting for grandma to die so that we can have the keys to the car. And I know pastors my age who are like this - we need to go out and get our own car. And not PIMP it.
>> I thought of this also: I wonder how these relationships work and if I need to read some on this:
Abraham (all people) --------> Moses (Jews)
Jesus (kingdom) --------> Paul (church)
Where is that chart going? Is there a relationship? Can we learn from the Old Testament tales of the Jews in order to make our churches a better representation of the original ingredients?