A public discussion “emerges”
I’ve consumed plenty of books on theology and Christian living. I’ve read C.S. Lewis, Dorothy Day, Anne Lamott, NT Wright, Henri Nouwen, Donald Miller, Brian McLaren, Erwin McManus, Rob Bell…and I’ve got a whole list of other thinkers to get to in my lifetime.
In this group (especially the latter authors) I’m continually struck by how fresh, revolutionary and highly missional they can be. As a writer, I’m insanely jealous. As a disciple, I’m encouraged. They’ve been the Christian version of “get off your ass, Ally.”
These thinkers have shaped my view of God - perhaps as much as the Bible and any church sermon. They have amazing ideas about how big Christ should be (bigger than I knew). They delight in shaking loose any spiritual dead weight (condemning ideas) and watering to the fertile ground.
Though I was conscious of their ideological influence, I hadn’t thought too much about the “leaning” of their message. Were they “Evangelical?” “Methodist?” “Community Church-goers?” I guess I didn’t think of it because it was too confusing to figure out. They thought like me and that was cool. Frankly, after the way I’d seen Evangelical and Catholic churches work, I was just as happy to be non-identifiable. I liked that they made me look at Jesus in a different, more communal way.
I hadn’t given much thought about titles and leanings until I found this article in Christianity Today (which has been getting a lot of buzz on Christian blogs). It breaks down the emergent/emerging movement within Christianity.
If you’re confused, the article provides an overview of the term “Emergent” from two guys affiliated with it - Eddie Gibbs and Ryan Bolger (from Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures):
Emerging churches are communities that practice the way of Jesus within
postmodern cultures. This definition encompasses nine practices. Emerging
churches (1) identify with the life of Jesus, (2) transform the secular realm,
and (3) live highly communal lives. Because of these three activities, they (4)
welcome the stranger, (5) serve with generosity, (6) participate as producers,
(7) create as created beings, (8) lead as a body, and (9) take part in spiritual
activities.”
Lots of technical stuff aside, some of the authors I’ve listed above and my pastor at Jacobs Well believe in to some of these ways or ideas about how to “do church.” Since I believe in the above practices and go to a church that does too, I guess I’m “Emergent.” It’s not a bad thing to be associated with, but I’m kind of let down.
For three years now, I’ve thrown my heart, soul, mind and guts into learning all that I could about Jesus and letting him transform me. Isn’t that enough? It is for me. It’s working out beautiful, miraculous things in my life.
Maybe it’s idealistic, but I would hope that other Christians are throwing themselves at their own faith this way. And if they are, then why do we waste time defining or criticizing the way we should do it?
I mean, I can’t worship or pray or sing or believe EXACTLY the same as anyone else…even if they are “emergent.” Ergo, the exercise of definition seems futile. Shouldn’t we “do church” the way we do it and let it be?
I don’t have any answers today. Just a lot of questions. After all, I’m still new at this whole gig and I’m sifting through it.
So I want to start a dialogue. Is this back and forth within the church strengthening us at all? How is it making Christ look to people who don’t believe? How is it enriching our faith and helping us serve?
Consider your thoughts solicited…
Update: Thank you to Marlies for the great article suggestion. McLaren nails how I feel. Especially with this sentiment:
"Those of us who see religion in a different light – who see religion as a
powerful motivation to care for the widow and orphan, to seek justice and peace,
to love our neighbors and our enemies – shouldn't feel superior, but we should
keep practicing, and preaching, with humility and focus. It's so easy to get
distracted, and a lot is at stake."
posted by Ally @ 4:57 PM
3 Comments:
Wow, good hard question, Ally... I guess it's mostly posed at Christians who read your blog, but I'm gonna say a few words anyway as a Muslim, but more just as a fellow human being...
"Labelling" how you do church, or anything, doesn't have to be bad, it can just "be"... My "data engineer" side (which is my work identity, and how I inherently think) leans towards putting things in categories, albeit recognizing that these categories are simply helpful ways to think about things, quick identifiers, and definitely not the whole story...
My "open" side says once we categorize, we tend to judge, and quick judgement is very bad.
But in truth, I think the issue is that as human beings, we need to categorize and label things simply to understand them and communicate about them. This is the essence of language (nouns) and one of the things that differentiates us as humans from the rest of God's creatures. In Arabic the word for book and the word for knowledge come from the same root, mainly I think because knowledge can't be comprehended and ingested by human beings without language, and language is simply a way of communicating our "labels". As long as you don't lose sight that the label is just a tag you've stuck on this concept, and not a holistic summary of its characterstics, etc., I think you're good.
"As long as you don't lose sight that the label is just a tag you've stuck on this concept, and not a holistic summary of its characterstics, etc., I think you're good."
Noha, as usual, thanks for jumping in to the debate. I'm so happy that you've joined the dialogue.
You're right - though there are good and bad categorizations we do need labels of some kind to sift through the muck and give differentiation to things. That's the GOOD part of it - clarity.
But the problem, specifically in Christian circles (I'm finding) is that there's this tendency to identify other Christian denominations in a negative light. Definition seems to define worthiness - or who's doing it "right."
For instance, just because this emergent group (and myself personally) aren't focusing on evangelism to non-believers as the main goal of Christianity, other evangelicals can tend to believe we're getting it wrong.
That's where it breaks down for me - making me curious as to how this affects people who are legitimately searching for a safe place to find their own connection to Christ.
this is similar to noha's comment and doesn't really comment on other christian groups, per se. I just read Brian's mclaren's latest blog and thought it appropriate. What I got from it is: why does it matter and is it taking energy away from what we should be doing. anyhoo, here's the link: http://www.beliefnet.com/blogs/godspolitics/2007/01/brian-mclaren-religion-of-mass.html I struggle w/ labels on everything. In one way, it helps me "name" something, which Tim says taking control over (remember God taking to Moses, 'I am who I am'--Ex 3:14?). But one the other hand, I don't want other people "naming" me: white, female, christian--b/c I am more than just words.
Post a Comment
<< Home