|
 |
|
|
|
Okay, I confess, I have been emerging guy. I have been “Mr. Purveyor of All Things Postmodern.” Yeah, I have been that guy. The pomo conference roadie. The central PA expert on the latest “Emergent” book, the Brueggemann quoter, the lone true-blue Jesus follower who doesn’t sell-out to consumerist Christianity, the one who proudly and publicly questions a basic tenant of orthodox Christianity from time to time. The one who searches the internet and used eclectic bookstores for hours to find some new, eastern, educational meditation technique that no-one has heard of yet so I can bring that up at a “conversation” and maybe, just maybe, McLaren will be intrigued and mention it in a footnote in his next book in the middle of one of his over the top gracious apologies to evangelicals as he disagrees with them. Yep, that has been me.
I know what you are thinking . . . you are thinking, “Wow, this guy is trying too hard, he doesn’t get it. I have met that guy at a conference, I mean “conversation,” before. Yeah, that guy has issues . . .” Well, okay, you have some points. But, I wasn’t completely post-western, post-critical, post-evangelical guy. I have short hair, no goatee, I don’t wear Birkenstocks, I have no tattoos, and I am not currently making plans to move to an arts district. Okay? But honestly, you might be “emerging guy,” (I’m sorry . . . I don’t want to be gender-centric), or person, and you don’t even know it yet. That my friends, is the worst kind. Let me share a little more about my “story.” I do want to use narrative here, hell, I won’t be caught dead being propositional! See if you are not “emerging” person . . .
I never fit in completely in church, even as I took paychecks from them. And so A New Kind of Christian was like an alcoholic tasting the first drop of cold brew. It was only the beginning. I devoured all of McLaren, then Willard, then Wright, then Brueggemann, then St. John of the Cross and friends, then Wallis, and so on, and then on to the more intellectual and never heard of authors. (When you are reading people that no one has ever heard of, then you really are an emerging person.) All the while I did a lousy job of fulfilling my duties as a pastor, except for relationships. I was becoming a full-fledged “community” guy. You know what I mean? One of those who never really does anything, because that is after all part of the “consumerist/empire machine thing” and just being its chaplain. So I just hung out with a lot of people and tried to learn about various beers so I could talk intelligently about micro-brews. And you know, doing “community’ is a great way to get everyone else reading all the stuff you read! It was great, I found out who the real followers of Jesus were, the ones who would go to conferences with me, and found out who the goats were, that silly majority who still “worship the man” in their form of church. I started losing people from my ministry- but you know it was great, it proved I was following the way of Christ. And I started turning every conversation into a philosophical/theological treatise complete with big words or words I was inventing. I was being a “linguistic artist.” Oh yes, I was finding myself.
After taking a few knocks for the kingdom, being called a heretic, changing denominations, losing some friends, etc., you know- the usual, I moved to begin a new church. Now, don’t get me wrong, it wasn’t an “emerging” church-plant, because we all know, if you call your church an “emerging” church it really isn’t one. That is the litmus test for being the real-deal. You never use the word postmodern or emerging. That is for the posers, those jumping on the bandwagon. You got me? We were going to sit around and read Kierkegaard, and do communal art, and practice contemplative prayer, and tell jokes about Rick Warren, and smoke cigars, and wear clothes from a thrift store, and drink fairly traded coffee. Wow, we were going to be the “real” Christians. (I mean, not that we are intolerant, we are just one expression- one limb on God’s big tree, we just happen to be the one that God is really personally into at the moment.) But then Jesus showed up in my life again. And the way He does in the emerging world. Through a heady, neo-Buddhist, philosopher’s book. Isn’t that just like Jesus!
Ken Wilber, A Theory of Everything. Wow. If you haven’t read it from McLaren’s recommended reading list on his site, you have too! That’s the next step. But man, I got a big huge freakin spanking from God.
In my own words, Wilber talks about thought and world-view progression. He lays out steps that he feels people walk up if they stay open and keep learning. According to him, if we keep growing as people, we follow this same path. When our worldview changes and grows, we abandon it, and move to the next step on the list. One leads to another. I will slaughter his brilliance in my own thoughts below:
- Survival-Thinking. We start as infants thinking about nothing but eating and staying alive. If we grow, we move to-
- Magical-Thinking. We believe the world is full of magic and danger. We are two-year olds who know a monster is in the dark closet. Or there are tribal people who believe an eclipse is the end of the world. If we grow, we move to-
- Narcissistic-Thinking. We are self-centered, it’s all about me. College guy trying to get some action, drug dealer getting’ on the hustle and flow, normal guy absorbed in himself. (Think Joel Osteen.) If we grow, we move to-
- Moralistic-Thinking. Everything is black and white. Good versus evil. Right and Wrong. (Think Jerry Falwell.) If we grow, we move to-
- Pragmatic-Thinking. We do what works. We do what is popular. We do what leads to success. (Think Bill Hybels.) If we grow, we move to-
- Postmodern-Thinking. We are open-minded. We are thinkers and questioners. We care about social justice. We challenge the status quo. (Think of . . . well, yourself.)
I could you give you dates where I was on each step. This is like a chart of my personal growth. This is spot-on. According to Wilber, most adults are somewhere between Narcissistic, Moralistic, and Pragmatic, and once you are about 25 years old, you tend to stay where you are. Only about 10% of adults are Postmodern. They are the most intelligent ones. They have kept growing and thinking when most have stopped. (But, I already knew that, and so do you.) They have been exposed to the most. BUT, according to Wilber, they are actually the most dangerous . . .
You see, whichever step or level you are on- you are very confident yours is THE right one. And the danger of standing proudly on the Postmodern step, is that it deconstructs all the others. This person who raises their arms as the most enlightened, forgets that they think the way they do because they climbed up Narcissism, Moralism, and Pragmatism on their way. Those steps created who they are. Yet Postmodern guy, I mean “person,” turns around and sees all the shortcomings and cracks in the other steps. They see the vanity of Narcissism, the legalism and naiveté of Moralism, the shallowness and emptiness of Pragmatism and so confidently dismisses them all. Postmodern person gets a jolt out of not being on the lower steps and tries to find identity in deconstructing them whenever possible. This Wilber claims, is the downside of the university. Profs, by very nature of their brainpower tend to be Postmodern, and yet they are deconstructing the steps of Moralism and Pragmatism for a bunch of Narcissistic college kids. They are retarding their development.
(So maybe people didn’t leave my ministry or break-off friendships because they were “sell-outs” but because I was Postmodern guy subconsciously chipping at the steps they were standing on. I was being destructive for Christ. I was an enemy? Ouch.)
Finally, Wilber states, that the highest step, that less than 1% of adults arrive at- is the step of Integration. It is Postmodernism turned on its head. While Postmodern person clearly sees the faults of the other steps and gladly makes a life out of pointing them out to others and deconstructing growth and becoming a negative force in the world, Integrated person sees truth and reality and life in ALL of the steps, and while acknowledges that they are incomplete in themselves, they ALL have part of the truth. The answer for Integrated person is not to deconstruct these steps and attack those who stand on them, the task is to learn the truth and beauty and value in those steps and live the best of ALL of them in their life. And so while I thought I was brilliant, authentic, truly thinking Postmodern guy- all I was was negative, narrow-minded, destructive guy. I found a new piece of the pie of truth and threw away all the rest.
So . . . . this means, yeah, there is a lot to learn from the pomo emerging world. Social justice matters, human knowledge is limited, my perspective is my perspective, etc. However, for God’s sake, I better NOT jettison the other steps! I better give people a vision of all of the joys of following Jesus and do it with a smile (Narcissistic), I better really believe the Bible and be orthodox and seek to make disciples and live a moral life (Moralistic), and I better be relevant and practical and incarnational and organized and a good leader and manager (Pragmatic). Who are we to think this stuff is wrong? Talk about being arrogant and conceited? I better learn from Joel Osteen and Jerry Falwell and Bill Hybels, who do I think I am? Or I can minister to the 10% and think I am all that.
Are you “emerging” person? Are you pissing people off, doing nothing but reading philosophy and going to art shows? Are you angry person who thinks you “get it” while no one else does? Are people leaving your ministry or not checking things out to start with? Are you one of the enlightened few who doesn’t give in to consumerism? Can you talk about God without using words like community, global, justice, post-foundationalism, art, etc? Are you “emerging” person?
Or are you ready to actually love Jesus again and his big staircase and not simply your personal little step? I think I remember someone saying something about “becoming all things to all men . . .” Are you becoming Narcissistic and Moralistic and Pragmatic AND Postmodern to meet people on their step to introduce them to Jesus? Or are you doing your own self-absorbed personal journey on your own little step? Are you REALLY being authentic- Mr. or Ms. emerging person? Or just selfish and self-absorbed? Do you remember it is ultimately about Jesus and not Derrida? And maybe, most troubling, could it be all of your former friends and church members have seen this about you all along?
Please feel free to contact me-
Brian Ross
brian@koinoschurch.org
|
This is a great article. But I would ask you this question: Are you not deconstructing and judging those who are in the angry, deconstruction phase? I have noticed that each time we make a transition developmentally, we are a little insecure in it and prone to judge those toward whom we feel just slightly superior. Fresh first graders mock kindergartenders, newly liberated postmodernists mock moralists and pragmatists, newby integrationists preach at deconstructionists. And yet being truly integrated means you recognize the value in each, as you said. Including the value of fully moving through the "angry deconstructionist" phase. There are people out in the secular world who can't stand Christianity or the name of Jesus because of Christian moralism and narcissism, and for them, having their deconstructionist anger validated by a Christian in a postmodern phase might be genuinely a relief - a feeling that, "I am not alone," and perhaps a sense that God could be real and meaningful for a person like them. After all, God is God of babies and old people, moralists and postmodernists. God is the ultimate Integration of all things, the One in whom all things hold together. Personally, some days I feel moralistic, others narcisstic, or pragmatic or integrated or angry deconstructionist. I do hope five years from now I will spend more of my time feeling and acting integrated.
Jemila,
Yes, you and your criticism are correct. Thanks.
I really appreciate your openess and humility. Thanks.
Can we choose to be integrated? Or is it a place the Holy Spirit grows us into (into us)? Just because my kid wants to be and independent adult doesn't mean she gets to be right now.
Good points, but-I agree with Jemila-you seem bitter--projecting perhaps?
Yes, I can talk about God without using words like community, post-fundamentalism, etc. I use words like "love," and "truth," but more importantly, phrases like," What do you think?" "How do you feel about that?" and "What can I do for you?"
This is very reminiscent of Paul's words to the very Sectarian Corinthians, those who were saying they were of Peter or Apollos or Christ. He said that everything is ours. Writing to the Thessalonians, he said that we were to test ALL things and hold on to the good and reject the bad; ie be discerning but don't reject anything out of hand. If emergent becomes another sect it's truly lost its way!!
Brian,
Thanks for writing - good article!
I must say that I tend to be very wary of authors who make statements proclaiming themselves "the lone true-blue Jesus follower who doesn't sell-out" (and rightfully so, I think). I'm also a believer that while it helps to have a church to "fit into," community can happen anywhere.
I've got five McLaren books on my shelf, blog about peak oil and the crisis that consumerism will soon bring about, yet I'm a member of a church in the thick of American evangelicalism who is struggling to pay for a building campaign. And after a year of being "called out" and having the authenticity of my faith impugned for "putting myself under the leadership of heretics" and teaching the very same, I've been asked to facilitate a community group built around the questions, "What is the Kingdom of God, and what is His mission in human history?" And I thank God for the transformation he is bringing about here.
But I'm not writing to criticize you, of course -- thanks again for the article, and I'm glad to hear that you've found a home at Koinos! I'd love to read Ken Wilber's book but again am wary of his six-step progression. If I've reached the apex of the pomo-pyramid, should I expect no more physical, mental, and spiritual development in the next 50 or 60 years of my life?
Here's my contribution: We must be very cautious of presenting ourselves as the pinnacle of Christian thought, practice, and spirituality. The social consciousness that is emerging in many Christianities around the world is beautiful and alive -- indeed, I regard it as an embodied expression of the revolution Jesus inaugurated in His resurrection. But we should take care not to project our particular expression of this revolution as better than anything that's come before, lest we merely wind up taking a "self-absorbed personal journey."
Wow, consider this an almost complete retraction and whole-hearted apology! After writing, I re-read your article more closely. Somehow, I'd managed to completely miss your point and am quite embarrassed.
In that light, I think my comment stands as an affirmation of exactly what you're saying. We've got to stop being "pissed off" and live the revolution that Jesus proclaimed.
As McLaren wrote in "The Last Word...," the purpose of deconstruction is to take something apart with the hope of building something new. You're absolutely right - if we do nothing more than tear stuff down, we've missed the point entirely.
Let's keep building! :-)
grace --> peace,
- Scott
Thanks for the article. Well thought through and quite articulate. I have been labeled a "rebel" within my own ranks due to my incessant questioning during staff meetings or pastors meetings. "Why are we doing this?" "What's the purpose?" "How will this reach people for Christ?" - you get the picture.
I think my questions are valid and for the most part I'm not looking for everyone to see it my way. Rather I'm interested in having an intelligent, engaging conversation about whatever is being discussed. Let me attempt to persuade you to see it my way and vice-versa. And while decisions must eventually be made by an individual or a small group of people, I believe there needs to be much more dialogue amongst church staff.
With that said, I have concluded that the church is a rather beautiful organism because of it's "target group," that being all human beings. I'm thankful the church I attend does a rather succesful job of reaching people in their 80's while also reaching people in their teens. It's a balancing act that at times I wish we could do away with and just focus on my age group - play the music I like, discuss the things that I'm dealing with, reach out to people in my stage of life. But there will come a day when I will be much older than the senior leadership and I will have to rely on them to not just focus on the "up and coming generations," but also remember little old me.
In the end I think we need to continually challenge methods, philosophies, mission statements, etc, all the while realizing the church has been and needs to continue to be open to my son, myself, my father, and my grandfather.
I really loved this article. Brian was able to communicate his point in a way that I wish I could. Thank-you for bring this subject up.
I am not someone who fits into the evangelical christian subculture. While I have sympathies with the emerging church, I do not fit into their culture either. But that doesn't matter. I am a member of the Body of Christ.
Christianity has an all too familiar pattern in history. God gives revelation in one spot, and He moves on to do something new. He doesn't change, but He keeps moving. His standards don't change, but He moves on to make all things new. Christians, on the other hand, have this tendency to stay in the one spot where God was and put up a flag and pitch a tent. That is where a lot christians stay for a long time. My concern about the emerging church movement is that it is becoming "another spot." People plant the flag and pitch the tent. There is a condescension toward those who don't live in the emergent camp. I have heard some say, "Well, emergence is fluid. We don't have labels and cliques." I have to disagree. While there is a lot of good things from emergent thought, some have a tendency to idealize their visions and views contrasting them to all those bad modern christians who are supposedly out of date and incapable of producing good fruit.
The Body of Christ needs one another, and we need to learn how to function together. We don't need another subculture with new status quos. The Body is the real movement that God wants to unleash into the world to share the gospel, make disciples, feed the poor, heal the sick, etc. Everyone in the Body is invited -- emergent, modern, or otherwise. Perhaps I am idealizing here. But the "Body of Christ" is in the Bible. If we believe in the Bible, how can we ignore God's design for the Church?
I appreciate your openess, I too am open and struggling. I to have realized that there can be a danger in throwing out the baby with the bath water. We should reap the best of all steps. Steps that I have stood on. Some have shaped me for good and others for bad. Yet each one was a step, a sense of progression. Maybe integration is the out working of the verse that says, "Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ." Many times I believe it comes down to balance. To many times we get caught up in extremes(either left or right). Just tonight at a coffee and dessert time after a Christmas program I was talking to another man of my age. Both of us are willing to think outside the traditional fundamentalist, conservative box said we should call ourselves NeoDinosaurs. We want to move forward, with what is culturally relevant yet hold on to the old truths that work. Good or bad each step affects how we take the next one. Keep on climbing those stairs. John You can read more of my desire and story in the comment section of On the Road Again II
Hey brian, That was a wonderful article and i think it really stepped on some toes (in a good way) We must alway be a part of the solution. I just love even reading the other reviews b/c most of us have a tendency to try to defend how we are or are not like the "emerging guy"... very nice man.. you're a great writer.
I was worried for about the first two-thirds of your article that you were a self-righteous, pomo bigot, but was relieved with the climax which put the former in perspective.
Nice employment of satire. Although it did come across as a bit condescending. However, thank you for your main point, complete with the explanation of the steps of maturation. I especially applaud the observation of the danger of the university system. I'm persuaded that all professors need to engage this reality and proceed with care in their classrooms.
There is a way to teach deconstructive theories and philosophies without destroying the student (as so many currently do), which involves at least a humility in the classroom and ideally, personal mentorship outside of class. The latter obviously is utterly unrealistic at large universities (which is why I favor smaller ones), which places even more responsibility of big school profs to tread carefully in their deconstructionist endeavors.
Thanks for stirring good conversation.
Brian,
I'm personally grateful for your critique, as it begs a question so many of us wrestle with, as has every follower of Jesus since the time of his work in the world.
Am I following Jesus, or simply reacting to what I left in each new found spiritual adolescence I go through? Would my faith live in post-Postmodernism, and in post-postmodernism-modernism?
One reacts against the evangelical world by throwing out all things "character and conservative," and another reacts against political Christianity by building a personality around deconstructing and critically approaching anything that tastes like the "old way."
To live beyond reaction, and to move in appropriate response, enables us to embrace the gifts of our past and enliven them with fresh understanding, and at the same time dispense with faulty understandings while never shutting the door on their merits completely.
To respond, and to follow, will keep us true.
Brian,
I find your article very intriguing. First, I have only been to church meeting once or twice since moving to Virginia in May of 2005. It was unusual in the sense that I sat and was entertained. The worship band played a rousing version of REM's "Losing my religion" and the pastor sought to de-bug the DaVinci code for me through both a message and a dramatical interpretation.
I somehow feel that there is more to Christ than what I have seen in my life and walk. Your treatment of this issue has helped me to see that there are others who feel as I do. Thanks for your words.
Brian,
Wonderful article! I can identify with a lot of what you have said here. I think that this is very true, at least in that many "emerging persons" really do more damage than good in the great realm of things. Myself included, and quite recently in fact.
While I wouldn't quite call myself "emergent," I do see many things I don't agree with that go on around me in the church of believers, and there is quite a bit of what I have learned from speaking to "emerging people" and reading books by people like McLaren, Miller, and Bell that I find to be very true. At times, to family members in arguments and occasionally other Christians, I have been the guy who "pisses people off." I think that the key here is that if "emerging persons" do nothing but pick apart people and such, they are no different from that which they are trying to separate themselves from.
Thank you for reminding me of this, I truly hope I will remember this the next time I just really want to "lay into" someone, and also for a new book to look into (Wilber's).
Stephen Clark
Brian, Thanks for the informative if somewhat tongue-in-cheek article. I have to say that I find myself on all those levels also. Unfortunately, I seem to find myself changing from day to day! One thought about Wilber's progression. I find that outlining steps in a linear fashion does create exactly the situation you described. If we are progressing along a line, the automatic thought is that first, we are better than the steps behind, and two, we never encounter personally those steps again. The Okinawan martial arts found a solution that seems to really help me, that of interlocking circles. In formal martial arts, you begin with the basics, the core techniques. Your circle of knowledge and experience is small. As you continue to study and practice, more techniques, knowledge, and the experience of using them are added. Larger circles are overlaid the original one, however all circles join in one area. So as we learn and experience new things in this circle, we are brought back to all the previous circles and must continue to practice what is now applicable. The only limit to additional circles is your choice to stop growing or death. (and death is probably debatable) This path of interlocking circles is why some advanced martial arts practitioners continue to grow even though they are not studying with a "master."
To completely abandon all the "steps," or circles that we grow through is to abandon an important part of what and who we are. I was raised evangelical, left the fold many years ago, now full time in the PCUSA as a Music Minister. Some days I would like to think that I have left completely behind my evangelical roots, especially on days Jerry Falwell says something outrageous. But when I am truthful with myself, I admit that I can never leave it behind, and must constantly integrate the good I learned as an evangelical. Others may have the exact opposite path!
Any way, my two cents.
Brian,
Thanks for saying what has been running around in my heart and head for a while. I have often been one who has sacrificed truth in the name of truth, thus living out a confused view of the Body, my place and the Lord. Thanks for reminding us all that truth ought to bring freedom and truth is coming at us from outlets we may have rejected in the past or new ones yet to be stmbled upon. In the end it ought to be about knowing and following Jesus even more fully and more passionately and with compassion for all those we encounter.
I think that the message of this article is spot on. While I haven't read Ken Wilber's book, the synopsis reminded me of some other stage theories from the psychological world, i.e., Lawrence Kohlberg's theory of moral development and Erik Erikson's theory of psychosocial development. plus several others that come to mind but can't be applied as directly. Maybe Wilber had some of these stage theories in mind in his own work?
I was also thinking as I read the article that this emergent stuff going on arises from a yearning to reach that 1% level of maturation... even though I think few realize such yearning enough to name it directly. I figure that's because most of us usually dwell very comfortably someplace in the middle stages and it's hard not to settle in where you dwell. So we have self-righteous moralists, and "if you're not for me then you're against me" narcisists, "whatever" pragmatists, and self-satisfied postmoderns. The interesting thing is that, mentioning the link between Wilber and psychology at large, there must be something innately human in such development... that such stages aren't just applied to Christians. So the whole Church in every age with all it's movements, and factions, and denominations, and spiritualities has been made up of people in every stage. That's an amazing thing to me. That makes me want to grow and develop all the more. It also makes me want to look back as well as forward, both at the Church and it's development, as well as my own life and faith. If I take a honest appraisal of my own faith, then I see where I've come from and where I want to get to... and realize a whole lot of fludity between stages in the here and now. Still I want to get to that 1% place... I yearn for it. Not like I'm heading to a finish line, but because I long to see myself as a mature Christian in authentic relationship with God. In some spiritual traditions that 1% level would be considered "union" or "perfection". or "sanctity"... which is always a paradox because those at such stages of maturity are always painfully aware of their frail humanity and so empathy, integration, wisdom seems to flow easily from them. They're also gloriously aware of grace and mercy and love that flows infinitly from God, through Christ and the Spirit. That's what I yearn for... and I think that's what God yearns for me...
It's weird being 18 and having gone through all these phases already. I'm not saying that to be conceited.. but for me everything happened in 3 years.
I am currently in between Postmodern and intergrated. I call it "Silence" I have officially stopped expressing my ideas, views, or advice.
:)
|
|
|
|
(17)
This is a great article. But I would ask you this question: Are you not deconstructing and judging those who are in the angry, deconstruction phase? I have noticed that each time we make a transition developmentally, we are a little insecure in it and prone to judge those toward whom we feel just slightly superior. Fresh first graders mock kindergartenders, newly liberated postmodernists mock moralists and pragmatists, newby integrationists preach at deconstructionists. And yet being truly integrated means you recognize the value in each, as you said. Including the value of fully moving through the "angry deconstructionist" phase. There are people out in the secular world who can't stand Christianity or the name of Jesus because of Christian moralism and narcissism, and for them, having their deconstructionist anger validated by a Christian in a postmodern phase might be genuinely a relief - a feeling that, "I am not alone," and perhaps a sense that God could be real and meaningful for a person like them. After all, God is God of babies and old people, moralists and postmodernists. God is the ultimate Integration of all things, the One in whom all things hold together. Personally, some days I feel moralistic, others narcisstic, or pragmatic or integrated or angry deconstructionist. I do hope five years from now I will spend more of my time feeling and acting integrated. Posted by Jemila | Posted at 11/30/2006 10:28 AM
Jemila,
Yes, you and your criticism are correct. Thanks.
Posted by Brian | Posted at 11/30/2006 10:59 AMI really appreciate your openess and humility. Thanks. Posted by Jemila | Posted at 11/30/2006 7:31 PM
Can we choose to be integrated? Or is it a place the Holy Spirit grows us into (into us)? Just because my kid wants to be and independent adult doesn't mean she gets to be right now.
Good points, but-I agree with Jemila-you seem bitter--projecting perhaps?
Yes, I can talk about God without using words like community, post-fundamentalism, etc. I use words like "love," and "truth," but more importantly, phrases like," What do you think?" "How do you feel about that?" and "What can I do for you?"
Posted by Patchouli | Posted at 12/01/2006 7:05 AMThis is very reminiscent of Paul's words to the very Sectarian Corinthians, those who were saying they were of Peter or Apollos or Christ. He said that everything is ours. Writing to the Thessalonians, he said that we were to test ALL things and hold on to the good and reject the bad; ie be discerning but don't reject anything out of hand. If emergent becomes another sect it's truly lost its way!! Posted by Martin Clacker | Posted at 12/01/2006 8:44 AM
Brian,
Thanks for writing - good article!
I must say that I tend to be very wary of authors who make statements proclaiming themselves "the lone true-blue Jesus follower who doesn't sell-out" (and rightfully so, I think). I'm also a believer that while it helps to have a church to "fit into," community can happen anywhere.
I've got five McLaren books on my shelf, blog about peak oil and the crisis that consumerism will soon bring about, yet I'm a member of a church in the thick of American evangelicalism who is struggling to pay for a building campaign. And after a year of being "called out" and having the authenticity of my faith impugned for "putting myself under the leadership of heretics" and teaching the very same, I've been asked to facilitate a community group built around the questions, "What is the Kingdom of God, and what is His mission in human history?" And I thank God for the transformation he is bringing about here.
But I'm not writing to criticize you, of course -- thanks again for the article, and I'm glad to hear that you've found a home at Koinos! I'd love to read Ken Wilber's book but again am wary of his six-step progression. If I've reached the apex of the pomo-pyramid, should I expect no more physical, mental, and spiritual development in the next 50 or 60 years of my life?
Here's my contribution: We must be very cautious of presenting ourselves as the pinnacle of Christian thought, practice, and spirituality. The social consciousness that is emerging in many Christianities around the world is beautiful and alive -- indeed, I regard it as an embodied expression of the revolution Jesus inaugurated in His resurrection. But we should take care not to project our particular expression of this revolution as better than anything that's come before, lest we merely wind up taking a "self-absorbed personal journey."
Posted by Scott Andreas | Posted at 12/01/2006 11:10 AMWow, consider this an almost complete retraction and whole-hearted apology! After writing, I re-read your article more closely. Somehow, I'd managed to completely miss your point and am quite embarrassed.
In that light, I think my comment stands as an affirmation of exactly what you're saying. We've got to stop being "pissed off" and live the revolution that Jesus proclaimed.
As McLaren wrote in "The Last Word...," the purpose of deconstruction is to take something apart with the hope of building something new. You're absolutely right - if we do nothing more than tear stuff down, we've missed the point entirely.
Let's keep building! :-)
grace --> peace,
- Scott
Posted by Scott Andreas | Posted at 12/01/2006 11:17 AMThanks for the article. Well thought through and quite articulate. I have been labeled a "rebel" within my own ranks due to my incessant questioning during staff meetings or pastors meetings. "Why are we doing this?" "What's the purpose?" "How will this reach people for Christ?" - you get the picture.
I think my questions are valid and for the most part I'm not looking for everyone to see it my way. Rather I'm interested in having an intelligent, engaging conversation about whatever is being discussed. Let me attempt to persuade you to see it my way and vice-versa. And while decisions must eventually be made by an individual or a small group of people, I believe there needs to be much more dialogue amongst church staff.
With that said, I have concluded that the church is a rather beautiful organism because of it's "target group," that being all human beings. I'm thankful the church I attend does a rather succesful job of reaching people in their 80's while also reaching people in their teens. It's a balancing act that at times I wish we could do away with and just focus on my age group - play the music I like, discuss the things that I'm dealing with, reach out to people in my stage of life. But there will come a day when I will be much older than the senior leadership and I will have to rely on them to not just focus on the "up and coming generations," but also remember little old me.
In the end I think we need to continually challenge methods, philosophies, mission statements, etc, all the while realizing the church has been and needs to continue to be open to my son, myself, my father, and my grandfather.
Posted by Bert | Posted at 12/05/2006 6:44 AMI really loved this article. Brian was able to communicate his point in a way that I wish I could. Thank-you for bring this subject up.
I am not someone who fits into the evangelical christian subculture. While I have sympathies with the emerging church, I do not fit into their culture either. But that doesn't matter. I am a member of the Body of Christ.
Christianity has an all too familiar pattern in history. God gives revelation in one spot, and He moves on to do something new. He doesn't change, but He keeps moving. His standards don't change, but He moves on to make all things new. Christians, on the other hand, have this tendency to stay in the one spot where God was and put up a flag and pitch a tent. That is where a lot christians stay for a long time. My concern about the emerging church movement is that it is becoming "another spot." People plant the flag and pitch the tent. There is a condescension toward those who don't live in the emergent camp. I have heard some say, "Well, emergence is fluid. We don't have labels and cliques." I have to disagree. While there is a lot of good things from emergent thought, some have a tendency to idealize their visions and views contrasting them to all those bad modern christians who are supposedly out of date and incapable of producing good fruit.
The Body of Christ needs one another, and we need to learn how to function together. We don't need another subculture with new status quos. The Body is the real movement that God wants to unleash into the world to share the gospel, make disciples, feed the poor, heal the sick, etc. Everyone in the Body is invited -- emergent, modern, or otherwise. Perhaps I am idealizing here. But the "Body of Christ" is in the Bible. If we believe in the Bible, how can we ignore God's design for the Church?
Posted by Holly | Posted at 12/13/2006 11:21 AMI appreciate your openess, I too am open and struggling. I to have realized that there can be a danger in throwing out the baby with the bath water. We should reap the best of all steps. Steps that I have stood on. Some have shaped me for good and others for bad. Yet each one was a step, a sense of progression. Maybe integration is the out working of the verse that says, "Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ." Many times I believe it comes down to balance. To many times we get caught up in extremes(either left or right). Just tonight at a coffee and dessert time after a Christmas program I was talking to another man of my age. Both of us are willing to think outside the traditional fundamentalist, conservative box said we should call ourselves NeoDinosaurs. We want to move forward, with what is culturally relevant yet hold on to the old truths that work. Good or bad each step affects how we take the next one. Keep on climbing those stairs. John You can read more of my desire and story in the comment section of On the Road Again II Posted by John Zdon | Posted at 12/17/2006 8:03 PM
Hey brian, That was a wonderful article and i think it really stepped on some toes (in a good way) We must alway be a part of the solution. I just love even reading the other reviews b/c most of us have a tendency to try to defend how we are or are not like the "emerging guy"... very nice man.. you're a great writer. Posted by steven watkins | Posted at 12/19/2006 6:05 AM
I was worried for about the first two-thirds of your article that you were a self-righteous, pomo bigot, but was relieved with the climax which put the former in perspective.
Nice employment of satire. Although it did come across as a bit condescending. However, thank you for your main point, complete with the explanation of the steps of maturation. I especially applaud the observation of the danger of the university system. I'm persuaded that all professors need to engage this reality and proceed with care in their classrooms.
There is a way to teach deconstructive theories and philosophies without destroying the student (as so many currently do), which involves at least a humility in the classroom and ideally, personal mentorship outside of class. The latter obviously is utterly unrealistic at large universities (which is why I favor smaller ones), which places even more responsibility of big school profs to tread carefully in their deconstructionist endeavors.
Thanks for stirring good conversation.
Posted by Matt Stephens | Posted at 12/19/2006 10:01 AMBrian,
I'm personally grateful for your critique, as it begs a question so many of us wrestle with, as has every follower of Jesus since the time of his work in the world.
Am I following Jesus, or simply reacting to what I left in each new found spiritual adolescence I go through? Would my faith live in post-Postmodernism, and in post-postmodernism-modernism?
One reacts against the evangelical world by throwing out all things "character and conservative," and another reacts against political Christianity by building a personality around deconstructing and critically approaching anything that tastes like the "old way."
To live beyond reaction, and to move in appropriate response, enables us to embrace the gifts of our past and enliven them with fresh understanding, and at the same time dispense with faulty understandings while never shutting the door on their merits completely.
To respond, and to follow, will keep us true.
Posted by Dan Wilt | Posted at 12/19/2006 11:31 AMBrian,
I find your article very intriguing. First, I have only been to church meeting once or twice since moving to Virginia in May of 2005. It was unusual in the sense that I sat and was entertained. The worship band played a rousing version of REM's "Losing my religion" and the pastor sought to de-bug the DaVinci code for me through both a message and a dramatical interpretation.
I somehow feel that there is more to Christ than what I have seen in my life and walk. Your treatment of this issue has helped me to see that there are others who feel as I do. Thanks for your words.
Posted by Benjamin Crawford | Posted at 12/19/2006 2:25 PMBrian,
Wonderful article! I can identify with a lot of what you have said here. I think that this is very true, at least in that many "emerging persons" really do more damage than good in the great realm of things. Myself included, and quite recently in fact.
While I wouldn't quite call myself "emergent," I do see many things I don't agree with that go on around me in the church of believers, and there is quite a bit of what I have learned from speaking to "emerging people" and reading books by people like McLaren, Miller, and Bell that I find to be very true. At times, to family members in arguments and occasionally other Christians, I have been the guy who "pisses people off." I think that the key here is that if "emerging persons" do nothing but pick apart people and such, they are no different from that which they are trying to separate themselves from.
Thank you for reminding me of this, I truly hope I will remember this the next time I just really want to "lay into" someone, and also for a new book to look into (Wilber's).
Stephen Clark
Posted by Stephen Clark | Posted at 12/19/2006 10:20 PMBrian, Thanks for the informative if somewhat tongue-in-cheek article. I have to say that I find myself on all those levels also. Unfortunately, I seem to find myself changing from day to day! One thought about Wilber's progression. I find that outlining steps in a linear fashion does create exactly the situation you described. If we are progressing along a line, the automatic thought is that first, we are better than the steps behind, and two, we never encounter personally those steps again. The Okinawan martial arts found a solution that seems to really help me, that of interlocking circles. In formal martial arts, you begin with the basics, the core techniques. Your circle of knowledge and experience is small. As you continue to study and practice, more techniques, knowledge, and the experience of using them are added. Larger circles are overlaid the original one, however all circles join in one area. So as we learn and experience new things in this circle, we are brought back to all the previous circles and must continue to practice what is now applicable. The only limit to additional circles is your choice to stop growing or death. (and death is probably debatable) This path of interlocking circles is why some advanced martial arts practitioners continue to grow even though they are not studying with a "master."
To completely abandon all the "steps," or circles that we grow through is to abandon an important part of what and who we are. I was raised evangelical, left the fold many years ago, now full time in the PCUSA as a Music Minister. Some days I would like to think that I have left completely behind my evangelical roots, especially on days Jerry Falwell says something outrageous. But when I am truthful with myself, I admit that I can never leave it behind, and must constantly integrate the good I learned as an evangelical. Others may have the exact opposite path!
Any way, my two cents.
Posted by Brian | Posted at 12/20/2006 8:21 AMBrian,
Thanks for saying what has been running around in my heart and head for a while. I have often been one who has sacrificed truth in the name of truth, thus living out a confused view of the Body, my place and the Lord. Thanks for reminding us all that truth ought to bring freedom and truth is coming at us from outlets we may have rejected in the past or new ones yet to be stmbled upon. In the end it ought to be about knowing and following Jesus even more fully and more passionately and with compassion for all those we encounter.
Posted by virgil | Posted at 12/20/2006 12:49 PMI think that the message of this article is spot on. While I haven't read Ken Wilber's book, the synopsis reminded me of some other stage theories from the psychological world, i.e., Lawrence Kohlberg's theory of moral development and Erik Erikson's theory of psychosocial development. plus several others that come to mind but can't be applied as directly. Maybe Wilber had some of these stage theories in mind in his own work?
I was also thinking as I read the article that this emergent stuff going on arises from a yearning to reach that 1% level of maturation... even though I think few realize such yearning enough to name it directly. I figure that's because most of us usually dwell very comfortably someplace in the middle stages and it's hard not to settle in where you dwell. So we have self-righteous moralists, and "if you're not for me then you're against me" narcisists, "whatever" pragmatists, and self-satisfied postmoderns. The interesting thing is that, mentioning the link between Wilber and psychology at large, there must be something innately human in such development... that such stages aren't just applied to Christians. So the whole Church in every age with all it's movements, and factions, and denominations, and spiritualities has been made up of people in every stage. That's an amazing thing to me. That makes me want to grow and develop all the more. It also makes me want to look back as well as forward, both at the Church and it's development, as well as my own life and faith. If I take a honest appraisal of my own faith, then I see where I've come from and where I want to get to... and realize a whole lot of fludity between stages in the here and now. Still I want to get to that 1% place... I yearn for it. Not like I'm heading to a finish line, but because I long to see myself as a mature Christian in authentic relationship with God. In some spiritual traditions that 1% level would be considered "union" or "perfection". or "sanctity"... which is always a paradox because those at such stages of maturity are always painfully aware of their frail humanity and so empathy, integration, wisdom seems to flow easily from them. They're also gloriously aware of grace and mercy and love that flows infinitly from God, through Christ and the Spirit. That's what I yearn for... and I think that's what God yearns for me...
Posted by RF | Posted at 12/20/2006 9:09 PMIt's weird being 18 and having gone through all these phases already. I'm not saying that to be conceited.. but for me everything happened in 3 years.
I am currently in between Postmodern and intergrated. I call it "Silence" I have officially stopped expressing my ideas, views, or advice.
:)
Posted by Vance | Posted at 04/21/2007 10:24 AM