Jamie from Emergent Voyageur has an excellent piece on how the emerging 'Emergent Canada' group might fit with the other Canadian groups, especially Resonate. Jordon Cooper “seemed to think that the two groups could coexist happily, because Resonate was more regional, more fringe, and looser.” Link
My take on it is this:
Technorati Tags: puppy
I think every country should have 2-3 networks that represent the focus of what God is doing in the emerging culture and the structural forms and focuses that arise . . [i nearly said 'emerge'] A few countries may want to use the name Emergent and be connected with Emergent USA - and thats fine - no one has a monopoly on the name Emerge, Emerging or Emergent - they have been used by many groups in many countries, and Emergent USA are happy to connect, although they do not want to colonize.
At the moment, most networks have their own identity but relate to other groups as peers and colleagues on equal footing - which I tend to favor. And this seems to be what is happening organically in Latin America, Asia, Europe, Australasia and USA.
[before you Canadians comment below, you need to know that i intentionally said 'USA' instead of 'North America' in that last sentence to get a rise out of my Canadian friends who just LOVE to be lumped in with that other somewhat geographically smaller country just south of them . . . AY? . . . AY? AY??]
Indigenous national networks need to rise up with the redemptive gifts of their particular country and be able to offer those gifts to other countries. God does not want us all to be the same - there will be many tribes and tongues in heaven - so let the Canadian (and other) networks and movements be strong, be connected to the residual church, be visible at the Kairos time, be redemptive in their own country and have a gift for the nations when they come together for global events.
Anyway, thats what I think. Here on top of the world in Scotland [ay??] and at 4am in the morning. What say you?
UPDATE: The conversation comes to a head here.