Karen Ward pointed me to an interesting article on dangers of the “emergent church movement.” The article cited Dr. Donald A. Carson (with his new book, Becoming Conversant with Emergent), Dr. R. Albert Mohler Jr. (President of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary) and the Kentucky Baptist Convention’s recent withdrawal of its speaking invitation to Brian McLaren.
One of the blessings and curses of the Christian Protestant tradition has been its willingness to adopt and adapt to changing times in part by critiquing its ecclesial peers and forbearers.
What might happen if Orthodox and Roman Catholic sisters and brothers would create a space for people like Brian and Donald to have ongoing face-to-face conversation; or what if the global Christian community came together for a type of Church Council addressing the issue of Christ and culture. Don’t get me w
rong I am not hankering for a credo statement on culture . . . but if the Protestant Reformation gave the Bible back to the people, maybe the postmodern turn could offer people “particularity” of context.
I hope and pray that through the conversations between people like D. A. and Brian each will bring their unique codividual selves to the other, demonstrating a oneness which transcends their obvious differences. Not negating differences: but stepping in to an “us” of “I “and “thou.”
In so many ways “emerging leaders” need Carson at least as much if we need McLaren. And “non-emerging” (if such a group could even exist) need McLaren even more than they need Carson. And of course, we all need God who creates and is working in/through all.
Peace, dwight
hey dwight,
sky here… we have a coffee on my boat many moons ago. as an orthodox christian, can you explain how the statement that the protestant reformation gave the bible back to the people applies to the vast communities in the eastern church?
also, what do you think the emerging church could offer the orthodox church in terms of addressing culture? coming out of the emergent movement, my sense is that when emerging christians use the word culture, they usually are referring to pop culture, pop media, and largely white suburban disaffected evangelicals. i agree with the argument that much (of course not all) of what passes as culture in america is fabricated by capitalism… which exists to form desire and sell into that desire, and so you have so many fractured, transient, self-created sub cultures. which seems somewhat similiar to the emergent movement, there are so many variations on the theme even in the emergent movement, with little that exists to shape or form a larger whole. how many emergent church movements are there in seattle? and so as you have skate churches and rave churches and collaged churches, the terms of faith expressions are so profoundly contingent that… well, what creates any real deep profound incarnational unity?
Dwight, I like your term "ultramodern" – the emergent church is not anti-modern, it incorporates elements of post-modernism, as well as amplifications of modern elements – elements done better and done in the right places.
As far as the reformation giving the Bible to the people, credit must be given to technology – printing, and organizational relationships – the emergence of trade and a skilled, educated middle class.
I think the decentralized leadership of the Orthodox Church is a good starting point for leadership, for the emergent ones. The emergent church has evolved as a number of elements, built around a core of "Coookie Cutter Christianity". This "ceinture spirituality" requires something different than a top-down leadership.