Outside of Modernity - Outside of Emergent
Mark Hardgrove, wrote some comments regarding Socialization and Emergent Movement. I appreciated his thoughts. In fact, while not totally agreeing, I share many of the same concerns regarding the open-endedness of emergent theology. Brian McClaren, the face of Emergent gives me the chills. He pushes me outside of Emergent...far outside.
However, when I read and follow Mark Driscoll's thoughts, I get fired up. Driscoll was a part of Emergent when the movement was finding its voice. He shares an orthodox view of Christ and the Church as well as a general dissatisfaction with the state of the church. But, he has been outspoken against the lack of Scriptural fidelity found in the statements of McClaren and other Emergent leaders. Joel VandenBrink gives a brief brief glimpse and links to the articles and responses in order. I was thankful for those public conversations of which Driscoll later apologized for his tone. In my opinion, Driscoll makes the emerging church appealing to me with a call to orthodoxed theology and unorthoxed practice.
I believe that much of modern church is failing. It is a gut feeling. It may be in my gut because of peer pressure. Ed Stetzer points out that it is also a factual reality. Stetzer summarzes that problem well in "Planting Missional Churches." Again, here are those statistics:
So, I am left dangling outside of modern church practice and outside of emergent theology, unable to resonate fully with either. I don't know exactly what you call that. But, that's where I am. I know other guys like that. But, I don't know what its called. I believe I fall within some kind of a "Missional" label.
This week, I will participate in our denominational conference which will determine direction for our World Missions organization as well as other denominational issues. I am simulataneously aggravated at the non-missional, non-core focus of many of our initiatives and excited about the passion I hear from pastors. I just came out of a meeting with one of our denominational guys and about 6 pastors. What we discussed would be fantastic for the city of Miami. It would also address some of the things that some people find aggravating. I am encouraged by that and pray for the missional focus of our group to be expanded and to influence what I see as an all too often corporately safe, modern church organization. My prayer is that we will find ourselves outside of modernity- yet fully within orthodoxy.
However, when I read and follow Mark Driscoll's thoughts, I get fired up. Driscoll was a part of Emergent when the movement was finding its voice. He shares an orthodox view of Christ and the Church as well as a general dissatisfaction with the state of the church. But, he has been outspoken against the lack of Scriptural fidelity found in the statements of McClaren and other Emergent leaders. Joel VandenBrink gives a brief brief glimpse and links to the articles and responses in order. I was thankful for those public conversations of which Driscoll later apologized for his tone. In my opinion, Driscoll makes the emerging church appealing to me with a call to orthodoxed theology and unorthoxed practice.
I believe that much of modern church is failing. It is a gut feeling. It may be in my gut because of peer pressure. Ed Stetzer points out that it is also a factual reality. Stetzer summarzes that problem well in "Planting Missional Churches." Again, here are those statistics:
In 1900, there were 28 churches for every 10,000 Americans. In 1950, there were 17 churches for every 10,000 Americans. In 2000, there were 12 churches for every 10,000 Americans. In 2004, the latest year available, there are 11 churches for every 10,000 Americans.
The state of the church in America is unhealthy. This in itself is not an argument for emergent. But, it is an argument against the status quo. In the past, we could say it was an argument against mainline denominations. Now, even the Church of God which in the late 90's was the fastest growing denomination in the US is experiencing decline in some statistical categories. In 2005, the Church of God closed more churches than the denomination opened. It is now a widespread American Church problem.So, I am left dangling outside of modern church practice and outside of emergent theology, unable to resonate fully with either. I don't know exactly what you call that. But, that's where I am. I know other guys like that. But, I don't know what its called. I believe I fall within some kind of a "Missional" label.
This week, I will participate in our denominational conference which will determine direction for our World Missions organization as well as other denominational issues. I am simulataneously aggravated at the non-missional, non-core focus of many of our initiatives and excited about the passion I hear from pastors. I just came out of a meeting with one of our denominational guys and about 6 pastors. What we discussed would be fantastic for the city of Miami. It would also address some of the things that some people find aggravating. I am encouraged by that and pray for the missional focus of our group to be expanded and to influence what I see as an all too often corporately safe, modern church organization. My prayer is that we will find ourselves outside of modernity- yet fully within orthodoxy.
Español | Deutsche | Français | Italiano | Português
posted by Johnson at 7/20/2006 09:03:00 AM 
4 Comments:
Travis, I relate to your "in-between-don't-fully-fit-in-any-main-box" feeling. That's where I'm at as well.
Most of my connection with the emerging church has been with people in Australia like Mike Frost, which is thoroughly orthodox theologically, and has a strong missional thrust to it.
I'm a little worried that the "emerging" label is getting narrowed down too much when it represents a wide range of people come from different perspectives. This is no different from a typical mainline denomation.
I'm mostly enjoying living in this time of tension, where the church is rethinking church praxis. I trust that theology won't suffer any more than it ever has at the hands of a minority.
Believing everything Brian McLaren says does not an emerging thinker make.
It's quite a bit broader than that.
I'm sure you don't agree with every COG practice yet you are still COG.
BTW it's called assembly not "conference" that's the AG. ;)
McClaren is a big face on Emergent. I have a problem swallowing the title simply because of him and a few others who have taken liberal theology and rebranded it with an emergent logo.
I do not believe they are the only face of the emerging church. But, their presence is prominent enough that it gives me the chills.
To me, Mark Driscoll is the guy that I am hearing. He says things that resonate with what I am thinking. Plus, he's no pansy. I appreciate that.
Smulo, thanks for the link to the Bob Hyatt's blog article regarding Driscoll. There are some good comments developing.
Mike, concerning COG nomenclature...thought I'd contextualize a bit. Conference seemed easier to explain than "General Assembly." Will I see you there?
Of course the Church in the United States is in a pitiful shape. Here's the evidence:
1) Most churches (and the people who LEAD them) are doing just that: being LED....The pastoral staff has been hired to be "leaders" and "CEOs" rather than shepherds of God's sheep.
2) We are really more concerned with the ABC (attendance, buildings, cash) than we are with being the "community of saints." Our "collection of individuals" suits us just fine. Show up, pay up, and shut up. You'll fit right in. If we want your opinion, we'll eventually give it to you.
3) The local church is no longer the barometer of most communities. Our opinions no longer matter to those around us, or so it seems. How did we get to that place, any way?
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
posted by <$BlogBacklinkAuthor$> @ <$BlogBacklinkDateTime$>
Create a Link
<< Home