Due to a busy schedule lately, I haven’t made much progress reading A Generous Orthodoxy by Brian McLaren, but that’s no reflection on the book — I’m finding it very thought-provoking. Here’s my second post with reactions to the book (here is my first) .
At one point in the book, McLaren starts describing everything as post-something: post-modern, post-protestant, post-liberal, post-conservative, post-evangelical. I’m not very familiar with post-modernism, but I always thought the label was a bit of a dodge. Post-modern doesn’t tell us what it is, only what it follows, what it isn’t. If we can’t describe what it is except to say that its after modern, then it must not be anything very meaningful.
But the post- prefix is starting to grow on me. I have posted before about the importance of leaving the red state/blue state divisiveness behind, with Republicans and Democrats of faith working together to find common ground. And here is McLaren talking about post-liberal and post-conservative:
When I imagine what a generous orthodoxy can become, I realize I must seek to honor both conservative and liberal heroism. And when I do, I want to consider myself both liberal and conservative. I must learn from their mistakes, and when I do, I don’t want to be boxed in either category. Instead they can look up for a higher way and look ahead to the new fields of opportunity and challenge that stretch from here to the horizon, where the terms post-conservative and post-liberal may be helpful for a while, and then the whole polarizing vocabulary can be, I hope, forgotten. [Emphasis in the original.]
Similarly, McLaren talks about a post-Protestant Christianity. The Reformation has been a story of ongoing fragmentation, with each new denomination emphasizing some fairly minor doctrinal differences to justify splintering off as the sole keepers of “true” Christianity (see here and here). A post-Protestant Christianity would reverse this trend with Christians joining together because of all that we share, and all that we can accomplish together to the glory of God. Denominations could become cherished traditions, preferred forms of worship, and church bodies within the Body instead of a way to divide the faithful from the apostate.
The post- labels, instead of being a way to avoid talking about what comes next, are a way to describe what we are moving from. They lead us to think and talk about what is coming next, but prevent us from putting verbal boxes around what all it might entail. This is where I have finally come to understand and appreciate the term emergent Christianity. Like the post- labels, “emergent” lets us acknowledge that something new and Godly is emerging in Christianity today, but allows us to patiently wait for it to take full form before we try to pin it down with more precise (and constraining) labels.
All this time I’ve been a post-modern emergent Christian without realizing it.
[...] 217;s latest book on Emergent Christianity, A Generous Orthodoxy. I received a thoughtful comment to the post questioning whether the Emergent movement has anything to offer mainli [...]
[...] led under: Progressive Christianity — Bob @ 5:09 pm
A few weeks back, I posted about McLaren’s latest book on Emergent Christianity, A Generous Orthodoxy. I received a [...]
Bob… What is going to be the unifying factor around which emergent Christians will gather?
Good question. I’m just starting to learn about emergent Christianity, so instead of trying to answer your question, I’ll just point you to some resources I’ve recently found — Emergent Village seems to be a collection of all things emergent, and Brian McLaren has his A New Kind of Christian site. Christian Century had an article last year on the topic (I haven’t read it yet but am meaning too), and there is an emergent Lutheran blogger at Xphiles.
I checked out Brian McLaren’s web site and the article in Christian Century. What I read is that the “emerging church” is a movement within the Evangelical brand of Christianity. Scott Bader-Save writes in the Christian Century:
“…the professed goal of many in the “Emerging Church” is to embody an alternative to the model of the Willow Creek, seeker-driven church that blankets the contemporary evangelical landscape like kudzu on a southern hillside.
Webber’s critique gets to the heart of a major question for the “emerging church”: as younger generations of evangelicals find themselves dissatisfied with the dominant expressions of “contemporary” church, will they simply engage in a change of style, seeking relevance for a new generation, or will they engage in a change of substance, including a more radical rethinking of the evangelical project?
Brian McLaren, one of the most important figures in the Emergent conversation, would be the first to agree that a change of style alone would miss the mark. To make evangelical revivalism hipper or louder, he says, does not change the fact that it is still just “emotional manipulation.” Neither rap music nor video loops will provide the needed change, since, as he emphasizes, “the real core of this thing is theological.”
Though Brian McLaren says “the real core of this thing is theology”, I don’t see him defining what that theology is. Yes, he says we need to stop labeling one another as liberal or conservative, and Evangelicals need to be less rigid, and that Evangelicals ought to see the good side of liturgy… but none of that is theology. The key theological questions are who is God, what is sin, is the atonement an actuality or a possibility? How do we understand the “Word of God”? What does God expect from us? Speaking for the Lutheran (ELCA) tradition, we let our theology shape our worship: we prepare ourselves for Word and sacrament and respond with thanksgiving and praise. Our worship becomes an expression of who we are, who God is, and how we encounter one another. In contrast, the “emerging church” seems to be saying: “let’s find a way of communicating and then decide what it is we want to say.”
Aside from new ways of packaging, I’m not sure the “emerging church” has much to offer mainline denominations.
Tony -
I’ve been holding off replying, waiting to see if any emergent readers might respond with some more insight. Since they haven’t, here is some idle speculation on my part. Maybe the emergent church doesn’t have anything to offer us Lutherans theologically, but maybe we have something to offer them…our theology. And in return, we might learn something from them about being “missional”, i.e. finding more ways to do ministry wherever we happen to find ourselves. But, at a minimum, in the emergent church Lutherans would find evangelicals much more open to ecumenism, and more respectful of what mainline churches bring to the body of Christ, and that can only be a good thing.
Lutheran – Emergent? Shared Realities
I was recently asked by Bob, over at iamachristiantoo, about what
If the so-called “emergent church” is sort of a “post-Protestant” body, why stop there? If you want
solid theology in a truly “post-Protestant” environment, why not just admit that the Reformation is
over and cross the Tiber. Given the perennially chaotic mess that constitutes Protestant denominations
it only makes sense to recognize the eternal truths of Catholicism and come home.
Instead of trying to label yourself, try investigating a few things first.
Try this website for starters:
http://www.evilbible.com/
i am a roman catholic trying to discern the hundreds of thousands of protestant churches.
What seems evident to me is that everyone has the audacity to start his or her own church.
It seems to me to be the land of mini-popes. Where does it end? Dialogue is great, but there
seems to me to be a lack of unity. Tradition is mentioned in the bible, some are oral some are written.
I just don’t understand how so many can deny the fact that 30 of the early Popes died for
Christain principles. The identity of Christ was established by these early fathers.
There seems to be no reference for that. Councils were held in the first century to
establish the churces foundation. There was a succession of these for centuries.
The succession was no longer needed aftr the reformation. It became a religious free for all.
Christ certainly would not have created a foundation built on clay. I see non-catholic, or
early protestant churches re-inventing the wheel, while our wheel continues to turn through history.
If you are seeking Christ, seek the full body of christ, he is not alone. He has generations
of worshippers with him. Yet you deny this body when you separate FROM THE form OF tradition.
I call Christ my savior, he manifest himself in variant ways. Just as the God of the old
testament reveal himself through burning bushes and angels.why then can he manifest himslef
through catholis traditions. The tragedy with all of these hurches is that you can now pick
and choose beliefs which suit you desires. Who gives you authority to intepret scripture?
God, are you the many thousands of christain churches all God’s prophets, If any of your churcehes
can boast even 200 years of existence it will be a miracle. Can you offer, in art music, and
culture a fraction of what the Catholic church offers. Do you ever listen to sacred music, or view sacred art.
It is important to refer to the past if we are to develop the future. Fear of these traditions
stems more from myth and misunderstanding, than truth. Preliterate society had bery different
needs the the church. Finally, Catholic teaching embraces the essential truths of Christ nature
and the reverence of his nature is clearly stated and acted out through our developed forms
of practice. This fraction of Christ is division of spirit. Spirit continues to have
revelation, but it does not create a brand new form evry few years as the denominations
of protestantism continue to do. One needs only to look at the end of the alter to see
the gospels meaning fitted on the cross. When we eat the body of christ, we hear and see his pain speaking to us form
this pivoltal moment of history, We don’t turn our backs on it, It is with us as we experience the
moment of our Lords Supper. How didactic is a traditional church. Yes Christ is glorius and
he is risen, but he has been present in the memories of catholics for centuries not just the past four centuries of
Protestantism. We know the Borgia Popes were not all that nice, but they still had the decency
to take communion. Hey, they still could have been justified by faith. Look, by the time
I finish writing this sentence there will be ten new churches claiming they are the true
church. Way to go. Tomorrow there will be a hundred more. Where does it all end??????
Spiritual anarchy!!!!
That’s why we say the “Apostles Creed”, so that we don’t make up our own.
I am so thankful to find some Lutherans that aren’t running to the emerging church! I find Brian McLaren to be a heratic (check out his book, The Secret Meaning of Jesus). In many blogs I see emergents putting dow traditional churches, but they forget that they are being supported by the very churches they chose to critisize. Their method of evangilizing is done in pubs while conversing over a beer or two. If you are 13 or 47 years old, you are really not in the right age group to be accepted into their church. (And they talk about our doors being closed!) They wanted to be diversified, but they are mainly attracting white males between 22 and 35 years old. Any theology I do see is a storefront for pagan practices.
Unfortunately, I found out that my Lutheran Church was sneaking in a relationship with the emerging church behind our congregation’s back. After two months of research, I came to the conclution that I could not be even remotely associated with the emerging church. I stepped down from my leadership position, withdrew from the transition trteam, preparing for a new pastor, I am refusing to worship at my church or take communion. What I am continueing to do is I am going to our fellowship times, helping with coffee hour and financing the refinishing of our sunday school. My connection is still with the people, not with my church. For right now, I worshipping at a nondenominational church that doesn’t support the emerging church and my family is celebrating communion at home. We are more in touch with our Christianity than we ever have been before.
Thanks for your Blog!
Thea