There’s a growing buzz about the emerging movement, and depending on your point of view, its robust growth and rising influence are worthy of applause, scorn, or perhaps just puzzlement. Fitting for a movement that eschews hierarchy and dogma, emergents defy simple definition. Perhaps the best one can say is that they’re new-style Christians for the postmodern age, the evangelicals of whom the late Rev. Jerry Falwell disapproved.
Postmodernity is nothing new. Philosophers will tell you we’ve been living in the postmodern age for decades. But its expression in the context of fervent Christianity, in the form of the emerging church, is a fairly recent phenomenon, only about a decade old.
Like the postmodern philosophy it embraces, the emerging church values complexity, ambiguity and decentralized authority. Emergents are quite certain about some things, nevertheless, especially Jesus and his clear instruction about the way Christians are to live out their faith ”” not primarily as respectable, middle-class pillars of status quo society, but as servants to the poor and to people in the margins. In the words of Gideon Tsang, a 33-year-old Texas emergent who moved himself and his family to a smaller home in a poorer part of town, “The path of Christ is not in upward mobility; it’s in downward.”
“The path of Christ is not in upward mobility; it’s in downward.”
The path of Christ is not mobility at all. It is the salvation of souls, whether up OR down.
It’s not an “either/or”. It’s a “both/and”.
Groan squared. As soon as one see “post modern” you know that no good will follow it. We need a new fad the way we need a bad kidney. And this is a fad, a new way of trying to create meaning in a world where one is meaningless. This won’t establish a real identity, just make the participants feel “in,” “cutting edge.” But it is pretentious to a degree: I will feel important by joining the poor and the down trodden so I too can feel poor and downtrodden which makes me feel virtuous and good. Larry
That is a refreshing new way of approaching the faith, IMO. It won’t appeal to the Rite 1 crowd though.
Ask McKinley whether he and his community are evangelical Christians, and he’ll tell you yes — and no. “We’d say ‘yes’ in terms of what we think about the authority of Scripture and those things,” says McKinley …
Emergents tend to be more tolerant than establishment evangelicals on issues such as abortion and homosexuality.
In other words, “no†and “no.â€
I wouldn’t be too quick to dismiss the emergent church. It may be something of a protest movement to some extent – many church movements are – but there is a lot in modern Christianity to protest. As one example, given the quality of many of our bishops of late it isn’t too hard to see how the decentralized authority valued by the emerging church may have an appeal for fed-up Anglicans. If you want a glimpse into Imago Dei have a look in the former New York Times Bestseller ‘Blue Like Jazz’ by Donald Miller.
The path of Christ:
“I have learned, therefore, in whatever state I find myself, to be content.”
“Humble yourself, therefore, under the mighty hand of God, and he will exalt you!”
The first shall be last, the last shall be first.
etc.
The path of Christ is whatever He chooses and wherever He leads. I don’t think we can flat out say “Christ will not lead you here (i.e., upward mobility”)” as a dogmatic statement (unless you are speaking of sinful behavior, of course Christ will not lead you there! That’s a place we can find on our own without help… being led into holiness — that’s where we need His guidance).
Our individual walk depends on Christ leading us as He Will.
The communities that Gideon & McKinley work with are doing really great work – it is certainly on the edges of mainstream American churchianity.
It is really hard to look at the life that Jesus lived and argue that He is in favor of upward mobility.
This quote waqs in Friday’s Upper Room devotion – seems spot on:
THE ONLY THING CONSTANT in our world is change. Every moment differs from the last; every instant brings something new; this is the action of a creating God, as Jeremiah tells us: “The LORD has created a new thing on the earth†(Jer. 31:22). … One great sign of God at work in the hearts and minds of a praying people, then, is that fear of change evaporates. The typical default to “No†when a need to change presents itself disappears. The community starts from the perspective of saying yes to the work of God as discerned in their midst and therefore yes to wherever God leads.
– Daniel Wolpert
Leading a Life with God
Isn’t the “emerging church” [i]so[/i] 2005?
Postmodernity is a reality. We can either hide our heads in the sand of the premodern or modern (good ol’ fashion liberalism), or we can try to figure it (postmodernity) out and appropriate those elements that are good while filtering out those elements that are bad, The anti-rationalist elements in postmodenity wouldn’t encourage this, unfortunately, but there are many schools of thought in this reality that would allow for reason in making the ethical distinctions.
TEC seems to be a church that claims postmodernity by default, but doesn’t try to define its structures (it’s still in the ‘fluffy-wuffy’ stage). The emergent church is starting to affect TEC (I know that our Diocese of Olympia is attempting the first steps in figuring it out).
I think the emergent church could bring new life to TEC, but one of postmodernity’s failures is a lack of historical awareness. That could make us a little liberal evangelical enclave without the rich roots we now have in liturgy and tradition.
Yes, Bob, but He never condemned His wealthier followers:
Nicodemus, Joseph, (by some accounts) Lazarus, even Zaccheus wasn’t commanded to ‘go poor’.
Yes, there were rare occasions when He DID tell people to go sell all they had and follow Him, but that was because “in His heart” He knew they loved money more than God.
So I don’t see Hm condemning ‘upward mobility’ at all.
When I’ve looked at some of what goes on in terms of emergent church worship I usually come away thinking about how idealy placed Anglicanism would be if we could only stop screwing it up. The liturgical practices in some emergent churches would make many Anglicans feel right at home.
Ross,
That’s an angle I haven’t seen before. Do the emergent Churches have or use liturgy in their services? I’ve always assumed that they were strictly based on the Pentecostal church service model.
Many of the emergent communities in the US are informed by liturgical settings & backgrounds.
In the UK, the emergent experience has animated much of the Fresh Expressions efforts.
The emergent church is in the third world. Hello! More Christians today find their spiritual roots in the Azusa Sreet Revival of 1904 than the Protestant Reformation. Someone once said that most liturgies today are designed to keep God at a distance or to mask his absence. Liturgies are better when the Holy Spirit is welcomed.
Pb,
God speaks to me very clearly when I worship in a liturgical setting.
In fact, when I worship with Christian brothers and sisters in a non-liturgical setting, even with the powerful sense of the Spirit, I can’t help but feel something is lacking in those services. The best mix I have ever experienced was that of the Catholic Charismatic Mass, where the liturgical setting is not changed, but the Spirit works WITHIN it.
For that reason, I chose to stay in a Liturgical service, which, as Justin Martyr shows in his “[i]Apologia[/i]” is the style of service of the Apostles and their successors.
The very notion that Christ cared one way or another about upward or downward mobility (at least in this life) is post modernity in microcosm. It is patently silly to think that Christ paid any at attention to what these catch phrases refer to -and I might add that these prases are simple cliches, devices t o take the place of thought , like a bumper sticker. Using a phrase like postmodern is to use a thought substitute to encapsulate a broad socio/intellectual movement as a single entity, which it patently is not. Indeed, we may safely say that no one can define postmodern accurately. If it has no real denotation, one should avoid its use entirely, because its use falsifies the real world. LM
That’s what we need. MORE fuzziness in doctrine. What can it hurt, right?
Emerging church? Rooted in pentecostalism? Good grief. I’ve never heard that one before.
Scot McKnight, quoted in the article, moderates – Pastors – one of the best, most thoughtful and Christ-centered blogs on the web – http://www.JesusCreed.org – and he’s a fabulous teacher. I’d give long and hard thought to anything he shares. I was a cynic about emerging stuff at first, too – i hate trends, and refused to read Blue Like Jazz for years just because everyone liked it – but I think this one has reforming potential for Evangelicalism that could renew us for decades – at least – to come.
Larry Morse, can you cite one story where Jesus is explicit in praising those who pursue economic prosperity ?
Jesus had a special sense of mission to poor and oppressed people. At the outset of his ministry, sometimes referred to as Jesus’ mission statement, Jesus stood up in the synagogue at Nazareth and read from the prophet Isaiah:
“The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.” (Luke 4:18-19)
The biographies of Jesus depict him repeatedly reaching out to those at the bottom of the social pyramid–poor people, women, Samaritans, lepers, children, prostitutes and tax collectors. Jesus was also eager to accept people who were well-placed, but he made clear that all, regardless of social position, needed to repent. For this reason, he invited the rich young man to sell all of his possessions and give the proceeds to the poor. (Matthew 19:16-30, Luke 18:18-30, Mark 10:17-31)
Jesus commanded, “Love your neighbor.” When asked to define “neighbor,” Jesus expanded the traditional meaning of the word–defining our neighbor as anyone who is in need, including social outcasts: “But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed.” (Luke 14:13)
In his portrayal of the day of judgment, Jesus pictured people from all nations gathered before him, separated into “sheep” and “goats.” (Matthew 25:31-46) To the “sheep” he says, “Come you blessed of my Father, for I was hungry and you fed me…” In their astonishment they ask, “When did we do that?” And he answers, “When you did it to the lowliest of my brothers (and sisters).” Conversely, to the “goats” he says, “Out of my sight, you who are condemned, for I was hungry and you did not feed me…”
Jesus himself cared for those in need by feeding the hungry. Crowds of four thousand (Mark 8:1-13) and five thousand (Mark 6:30-44) had assembled to listen to Jesus. They soon became hungry. When his disciples suggested that Jesus send the people away to buy food, he responded by saying “I have compassion on these people…” and “you give them something to eat.” He proceeded to perform miracles to feed these large crowds of hungry people.
#19
Amen on Prof. McKnight – his work at Northprak & Trinity (both mainstream evangelical seminary) and his writing has been exemplary. Even Christianity Today thought so – in 2004 they awarded him their general book award in the area of Christian living.
I adore his quote:
“I agree with the many who have commented that the Table is not designed for the pure, the righteous, or the perfect, but for the impure, for the unrighteous, and for the imperfect. I see no difference: if anyone is seeking God’s grace and God’s blessing through Jesus Christ, they should be welcomed to the Table of the Lord. The Table is for cracked Eikons, and only for cracked Eikons. The one thing clear from Jesus’ table fellowship is that his opponents wanted purity before fellowship, and Jesus created purity out of fellowship with him.”