Emerging theology doesn’t challenge me. I have long since convinced myself of virtually all of the major prophetic strands of teaching prominent among emerging church leaders and theologians.
Church of Christ theology challenged me. I continually felt a pull to read scripture more, pray more, be purer in mind, and be a better person overall. While this may have also resulted in feelings of legalism for others (and sometimes for myself), I greatly miss the collective desire for a higher ethic of life.
Why do we not have this in the emerging church? Certainly, there is a heightened sense of social responsibility and concern for justice. There is a call to authenticity, to intellectual honesty, and to honoring community and relationships.
But these things seem to come naturally to most people involved in the emerging conversation, so that they are a reflection of what we already do rather than a challenge, a call to live beyond ourselves. I miss the challenge to higher living that I always experienced growing up in the Church of Christ.
Perhaps there will always be some risk of legalism whenever there is a call to a never-quite-attainable level of righteousness. But I’m not satisfied with the current alternative - a laissez-faire, do-your-own-thing spirituality.
What do you think?
Justin, a few thoughts on your interesting observation. There certainly are people (including myself) who are highly motivated and challenged by aspects of an emerging theology. But it’s probably a different type of challenge to what we may have experienced within the framework of more conventional spiritualities - it’s a challenge to explore, confront hard questions, map out a new territory for faith, and most importantly for many people, I think, it is precisely a challenge to leave behind what we are familiar with. Having said that, I think that the emerging church, individually and corporately, should not be ashamed to draw on the spiritual resources of the spiritual traditions that many of us, to varying degrees, have recently abandoned. The emerging church is not at heart a separatist or a self-sufficient movement. It offers a new perspective that I think will be invaluable for the future of the church in the West, but it has gained that perspective at some cost - including a degree of alienation and spiritual impoverishment.
I sense that the next step will be to forge a new spirituality, no less powerful and challenging than the Church of Christ spirituality that you hanker for, that will work within the emerging church environment. It may well be less permissive, more ‘legalistic’, more disciplined, than the mood that currently prevails, but as you say, that is not necessarily a bad thing. You see it emerging here and there - a blend of the charismatic, the missional, the monastic, the sacrificial, the celebratory, the hedonistic, the humanistic… But the real challenge now is not to talk about it but to do it, to model it. The danger otherwise is that we will grow bored and jaded with the whole enterprise.
Justin, I would say that “laissez-faire, do-your-own-thing” isn’t “spiritual”. Jesus’ message was centered in self denial nad do-God’s-thing.
I find that when I surround myself with folks I agree with all the time, I stagnate spiritually I need to be challenged by other viewpoints. Sometimes, after persuing a new, somewhat radical direction (like the emrging church) for a while, traditional lines of thinking become radical and challenging.
I need to be reminded of that when I fell the desire to run from that which I’ve traditionally followed.
Wow…um…not sure how to respond to this very challenging and thought-provoking post, Justin. First, I do think that there is an apparent laissez-faire quality to some of what we see, but that may just be a baby-and-bathwater thing that will pass (see McLaren’s chemotherapy analogy). But I’m not sure I see that as the dominant motif, especially among the more mature practitioners/thinkers.
Second, I’m not sure how monolithic the “emerging theology” we might describe actually is. I think this is where local expressions are very diverse and unique to the contexts where they…well…emerge. I’m not sure “emerging theology” is experienced best through books or blogs or comment threads or …, but rather in true localized believing community, much the way we experienced Church of Christ theology growing up.
I think these written forms are vital pieces of the theological energy that helps to catalyze a new way of thinking/living/being, but the theology that emerges still has to be lived “on the ground” in specific local communities among people who can actually call us to and experience with us the things you describe (”a heightened sense of social responsibility…concern for justice….a call to authenticity, to intellectual honesty, and to honoring community and relationships.”). I say this as a person who is presently emerging on an island.
Third, to a great extent I think such “emerging theologies” are still emerging…not yet emerging, in fact. All of us involved in these theological projects are still abandoning, reevaluating, discarding, embracing, devising, creating, imagining, and so on. Way too much flux to fully evaluate at this point, I guess I’m saying.
You said: “But these things seem to come naturally to most people involved in the emerging conversation, so that they are a reflection of what we already do rather than a challenge, a call to live beyond ourselves. I miss the challenge to higher living that I always experienced growing up in the Church of Christ.”
Obviously, I can’t speak to the CofC you experienced, but my own perspective is that in my CofC upbringing I was introduced to what I might call Morality-without-Justice. I was indeed called to Know More, Do More, Study More, Pray More, but all of these were focused on ME in a individual pietism sort of way. I was never given a sense of the heart of Jesus’ teachings or the prophetic stream in which those teachings stand.
I truly believe that if we take seriously (I mean, really seriously!) just the few things you’ve listed as characteristic of an emerging theology, we’ll have way more challenge than we can stand or than we can rise to meet in an entire lifetime. Even if these are subjects to which emerging-type folks are already inclined, I think they are EXACTLY a call to “live beyond ourselves”. That’s the nature of justice and peace and forgiveness and sacrifice and mercy. And these are hard…extremely hard for fallen creatures like us. A lot harder than what I recall from my theological heritage, as wonderful and beneficial as it may have been.
[...]
salguod: Justin, I would say that “laissez-faire, do-your-own-thing”Andrew Perriman: Justi [...]
Andrew-I’ve replied in the next post. Many thanks.
Jimmy-
Third, to a great extent I think such “emerging theologies” are still emerging…not yet emerging, in fact. All of us involved in these theological projects are still abandoning, reevaluating, discarding, embracing, devising, creating, imagining, and so on. Way too much flux to fully evaluate at this point, I guess I’m saying.
I think that’s the source of my discomfort. I’ve outgrown the old to the point that it’s become unwearable, but the new is not yet woven, and I’m getting cold standing around waiting. Know what I mean?
I figure we’ll be in this limbo state for ten or so more years. In the meantime, what do we do in the way of spiritual formation? How do we challenge ourselves the way we need to be challenged?
I agree that the answer is in community, but challenging each other has become a lot less cool in the EC ethos we’ve adopted.
A friend of mine likes to talk about wilderness … desert … forsakenness … letting the land lie fallow. I think this is where we are. And I think it’s probably good for us to settle down in that “in-between” place for awhile. I keep wanting this thing to have emerged already, but birth is a long process. A new-kind-of-christian is being born and a new experience of following the ways of Jesus is coming into view, but there is no microwave-incubator to make it happen.
In the meanwhile, I believe the only-and-most-important thing to do is to live in experimental communities committed to this new way. Committed to the challenge, to the waiting, to the life of Jesus, and to the practices that help to shape disciples for a new world. That’s what you are doing at SMC. And I believe that your commitment will lead you to experiment with formation practices, discard some, retain others, reinvigoate “old” ways (like some from you CofC heritage), reject others, in an experimental-evolutionary-revolutionary process of discovery that will lead to a spiritual formation in the likeness of the Teacher.
But I think we have to choose a courageous path: one in which we are not afraid to let the land lie fallow and allow the old things to die out, while we wait for God to renew the land and ourselves in the process.
At least that’s what I’m hoping for.
Justin,
From what little I know of EC theology, it appears to be more focused on social righteousness, perhaps to the exclusion of personal righteousness. This has also been true of the more liberal sects in Modern Christianity. On the flip side, more conservative sects have stressed personal righteousness, perhaps to the exclusion of social righteousness. I don’t think that this ought to be an either/or situation.
One of the problems, as I see it, with an ever emerging theology, is that nothing ever seems to be settled. If nothing is settled, than nothing can be judged. If nothing can be judged, there is no real sense of right and wrong. If there is no real sense of right and wrong, there can be no challenge to greater personal righteousness.
I believe accountability is an essential element of Christianity. It is this accountability that challenges us to be better than we are. It need not and ought not be legalistic.
Challenge yourself. The best way to change the world is to change yourself.
I agree with Dad. Richard Foster’s premise in Renovare is that the problem with the church today is balance. Most Christians are only familiar with one or two of what Foster sees as the great traditions of the church.
This is from a paper I recently wrote on a possible training method for people interested in organizing or facilitating spiritual formation groups:
Renovaré gives the following description of itself (Smith & Graybeal, 1999):
Renovaré (Latin meaning “to renew”) was founded by Richard J. Foster and is an effort working for the renewal of the Church of Jesus Christ in all her multifaceted expressions. Christian in Commitment, international in scope, and ecumenical in breadth, we seek to combine the best from the great Christian traditions with a practical strategy that nurtures spiritual growth (p. 109).
The description goes on to list these traditions as 1) contemplative, or “the prayer-filled life,” as first demonstrated by Egyptian monasticism and flowing out of Jesus example of prayer and oneness with God; 2) holiness, or “the virtuous life,” in the tradition of John Wesley, stemming from Jesus’ example of battling temptation and maintaining purity; 3) charismatic, or “the Spirit-empowered life,” as first exemplified by George Fox and the Quakers (this group was also very evangelistic and social justice oriented) following Jesus’ example of supernatural service and his teachings on the Spirit; 4) social justice, or “the compassionate life,” as begun by the Franciscans’ service to the poor and needy, as Jesus did and taught; 5) evangelical, or “the word-centered life,” which is seen as beginning with Martin Luther and flowing from Jesus’ preaching and teaching on the kingdom of heaven; and 6) incarnational, or “the sacramental life,” exemplified by the Moravian example of integrating work and faith as Jesus did (Smith & Graybeal, 1999).
The “practical strategy” referred to above is termed spiritual formation groups, or small groups that subscribe to the Renovaré covenant, spiritual exercises and disciplines based on the six traditions, reflection questions that give insight into the knowledge of God and self derived from the practice of those tradition based exercises, and social support, or “mutual encouragement and accountability” (p.110).
Smith, J. B., & Graybeal, L. (1999). A spiritual formation workbook: Small-group resources for maturing Christian growth. San Francisco: HarperCollins.
(Sorry for the long self-quote.)
This doesn’t really address differences in theological or philosophical worldview, and it may not directly address the reasons so many people are leaving church altogether, but it does seem to leave room for a wide variety of worldviews while encouraging community. I don’t think we’re any better off trading the exclusive practice of charismatic-evangelicalism for contemplative-social justice. We need balance. Perhaps there are other traditions that Foster et al have overlooked, but this seems like a good place to start. In fact, while it’s not the ideal location, the Internet might not be a bad place for spiritual formation groups to meet.