I have noted references to the "emerging generation" a couple of times on this and other ECC blogs, and I find it very frustrating.  I am not a member of the emerging generation, but I am a very strong proponent of the emerging Church.  I am against the idea of generation-chasing, the idea that we must constantly be repackaging the Good News to be palatable to a specific demographic.  That process invariably makes the Good News exclusive to those who don't fit the demographic, and because of the nature of demographics, very few individuals fit perfectly.  Often, characteristics of a particular demographic are in conflict with Christian ideals, and configuring an appeal to a group like that can be very difficult, and can result in compromises that are not spiritually healthy.  In addition, because the demographics are only available to study after the data have been identified and collected, those seeking to appeal to a demographic are always chasing what is just past. 

But the emerging church movement (yes, yes, I know) sees a cultural change moving across the landscape, one that affects all ages and demographics.  That is worth pursuing.  At our church, after much prayer, study, and consideration, we started an emerging service.  What I mean by that would take considerable explanation, and that is more than I want to get into here.  My point is that the appeal of that service is not limited to a generation.  We have quite a cross-section of ages and generations that attend that service - from a couple of the oldest people in our church, to college age and younger.

"Emerging generation" does not, repeat NOT equal "emerging church."  Using that term to identify an age cohort makes the emerging church sound like just another generation-chasing exercise, rather than an effort to be relevant in the context of an overall cultural change.

I never liked or used the term "authentic worship," for some of the very reasons you explain.  But I do know of those who found a particular kind of worship to be shallow and "unauthentic."  This kind of worship was worship by rote.  People got up on Sunday morning, put on their Sunday best, drove to the church, greeted people they had no involvement with or interest in, stood when they were told to stand, knelt when told to kneel, turned to the right page in the hymnal, sang the right notes and words, and listened to the message.  They then went back to lives that had little if anything to do with the worship service they had just completed.

Don't get me wrong.  I believe it is perfectly possible to offer heartfelt worship in the above situation.  I believe that people can have life changing experiences, can worship in Spirit and in truth, in that environment.  Lives can be transformed, and people can follow Jesus.  However, in those cases in which there was no evidence of the transformational power of relationship with Jesus in the majority of those attending, some questioned the authenticity of the worship being offered.

I don't think rote worship is limited to one worship type or another.  It certainly was and is present in traditional worship services, but I think it also was and is present in seeker services and contemporary services.

I think "authenticity" was a reaction against "rote" (not to be confused with "ritual", which can have incredible power and strength).  The problem was that, like all labels, it lumps people who do offer genuine worship in with those who are just going through the motions.

Luke

Luke,

Understood.:) "Emerging Church" is not the same as "emerging generation". By "emerging generation" I meant: those coming of age at a certain time. 

Thanks for bringing this up. Emerging Church is a vast, reasoned response to cultural realities. It has little to do with the language/style trends I mentioned. The movement (whether one appreciates it or not) is not a generational or passing thing. I've not noticed unfriendly talk on the blog re emergent. Say more if you want to....

You aptly note how our collective worship life can be dull or lifeless or in need of change. I noticed that the worship trends of the past 40 years seemed to be rooted in healthy change, but somehow digress into this thing that smacks of "in" and "out" groups-- the fashionable and the frumpy. We know it's reached that point when there's labeling and name calling: dead, inauthentic, cheesy, happy-clappy, entertainment... I'm not saying these things aren't happening in worship. They are! But... shouldn't we be patient and loving with all God's Church? If our neighbor (church across town) is in a rut or chasing a trend, saying those things about them (often in public) doesn't help. It just makes us sound/look smug or superior.

There's usually fear behind labeling and bad-mouthing. Quite honestly, I don't see or hear much of that in the overall emerging church movement; for, as you note, the movement is substantial and not about piddly preferences in worship style.

God's best this week,

Katie 

One of the things I love about the Emergent Church (and in some ways, the ECC was Emergent before Emergent was cool - the approach to baptism springs to mind...) is that it doesn't apply the modern concept of linearity to everything.  My way doesn't have to be viewed as lying somewhere along a continuum of good-to-best practice...  ;-)

In Him,

Luke

Luke. What you detail here, about your church's motivations in adding the second service, seems key to me. You assumed a posture of Love (love hopes all things) and you believe in the genuine quality of the worship expressed in that gathering (love believes all things).

The emergent movement has given us all a real gift. They've given us permission to stop measuring things in terms of good, better and best... either-or,  or... my way or the highway. Our collective worship-lives will grow deeper and richer as we focus our collective energies on the Spirit and Truth, rather than what might "work".

Nice compliment you pay to the ECC-- and true. 6 years ago, my husband and I were "shopping" denominations. My passion has always been the local church, but I had become very lonely on staff at an independent church. Anyway, I began downloading and reading documents from the ECC website-- Cov. affirmations and other short publications. In reading Called and Gifted and Theology of the Child, the Covenant won my heart.

God's Best,

katie