This post is a continuation of a series on Phyllis Tickle's book, The Great Emergence. If you are new to the series, you can read the introduction here. I've linked to a lot of wikipedia articles in this post. This is not because I think you've never heard about Luther or Copernicus or because I'm trying to suddenly cite observations. I spent some time reading up on this time period while I was writing this post and I kept finding more and more interesting events and connections. You should really check out some of the articles and see what jumps out and where those wandering mouse clicks lead you. You never know where you'll end up on wikipedia!
If asked what started the Great Reformation, probably a lot of us would point to Martin Luther and his 95 Theses on October 31, 1517. This event is certainly a turning point, but Luther was only responding to pressures that had been building for almost a century and a half. This next section will focus on some of the key contributing factors of the Reformation, the most recent "rummage sale", and also examine some of the results. It obviously isn't a full list, but will hopefully give you a better understanding of just how significant the impact of the Reformation was.
Phyllis Tickle points back to 1378, when two Popes were simultaneously elected- one from France and the other from Italy. Europe was just coming out of the Dark Ages and into the Renaissance. Nations as we think of them didn't exist- the land was split into little city-states ruled by merchants or feudal lords. The Black Plague had just killed close to one-third of Europe's population. At this time, the single unifying voice throughout all of Europe was the Pope. In fact, the Church, through the voice of the Pope, was considered the ultimate authority on all matters of Christianity. So who is the authority if there are two popes?
Another significant blow to the Christian status quo was dealt by a clergyman (and after hours astronomer) named Copernicus. To us it is absurd to think of a flat earth topped by layers of crystal domes (to hold the sky, clouds, moon, sun, and stars, of course), at the very center of the universe. But in the 16th century, this construct was commonplace, and more importantly, fully backed by the Church and (supposedly) the Bible. It was considered heresy to believe that the earth wasn't the center of all things, with heaven right above and hell just beneath. Copernicus seemed to understand the conflict his discoveries would cause, and he hesitated in publishing his writings until just before his death. But once his findings reached the public, it wasn't too long before people were left questioning the accuracy of the teachings of the Church and the Holy Scripture. If they are wrong about the structure of the universe, what else are they wrong about?
I'm sure we've all heard about the many abuses that lead the Reformers to challenge the Roman Catholic Church, so I won't spend time on that. The important thing is to understand just how devastating the Papal civil war was to the general worldview of western Europeans. For centuries Europe had trusted that the voice of the Pope was the voice of God, and suddenly that faith was cracked. How can God have two conflicting voices? How can the church fathers and leaders have been wrong about fundamental structure of nature? Where now is the authority? The question of authority is precisely what the Reformers set out to solve, and their answer should surprise none of us: Scripture, and Scripture alone. Luther believed that the Bible should have the final say, not the Church, and that the only way to prevent corruption in the future would be if everyone could read the Bible for themselves. He translated the Bible into the vernacular and placed great emphasis on the priesthood of all believers. Previously literacy was considered a luxury for the wealthy or clergy- now it was a necessity for all.
Of course, it would have been impossible to even dream of each person reading the Bible on their own without the Gutenberg Press, which made mass production of books possible for the first time in world history. This phenomenal breakthrough (which Time-Life magazine named the greatest invention of the millennium) occurred in 1450, only 33 years before Luther's birth. Tickle also points out that without the printing press, Luther's 95 Theses could never have circulated throughout Germany and on to the rest of Europe within two months. For the first time, ideas were able to be shared quickly throughout the western world. The growth in literacy, the ability to share ideas, and the understanding that individuals have intrinsic value eventually led to the birth of modern science, the Industrial Revolution, and the Enlightenment. We'll spend more time looking at those events later, but for now just recognize that they are intimately connected to the changes caused during the time of the Reformation.
As a side note, I thought I should mention that this time in history featured a resurgence in Christian-Muslim tension throughout Europe- almost 300 years after the Crusades. The Moors were pushed out of Spain just before Luther's birth, the Ottomans occupied the southern rim of the Mediterranean Sea, and Muslims conquered Hungary by 1524. They would eventually strike as far as Vienna before being pushed back. It appears that the most common Christian response was once again aggression, war, and hatred. I don't have any more thoughts about this now, but I can't help but notice the trend and think of it as significant for today.
This upheaval and unrest in political, social, and religious spheres lead to a restructuring of all areas of life. Driven by fear of invaders and the beginnings of industry, the scattered populace began to gather in cities. Nations rose to bring order to the new structure. Gone were the days of knights with swords fighting for a lord. In there place rose armies with guns, fighting for their king. Industry began to take power away from hereditary bloodlines, placing it instead in the hands of those who could make enough money to buy it. A new middle class rose to fill take advantage of this new opportunity, since a man could control his own destiny with good ideas and hard work. Capitalism was born. And to go along with all this, a new social religion, one which gave value to individuals and their ability to read God's authority on their own, flourished.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Friday, December 12, 2008
rise
I made this piece today at work for one of our employee's blogs. He likes to use the phrase "disturbed, yet hopeful" as a way of describing his perspective on the orphan crisis that World Orphans is involved in changing. The first thing that came to my mind was a sunrise: light chasing away darkness. I also had the idea of a black and white city that is lit up and colored with love- that has been bouncing around in my head for a while, so this was a chance to try that out as well. And there is a little influence from Robbie Seay Band... I really like how it turned out, so I thought I'd share it on here.
You can see the whole image by clicking on the sample below.
You can see the whole image by clicking on the sample below.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
The Great Emergence 1
This is the third post in a series on the Great Emergence by Phyllis Tickle.
One of the first things to note is that it isn't a book that deals much with theology, but functions more like a history lesson with a glimpse forward at what the future might hold. I found as I read that lights were coming on in my head all over the place. I began seeing how key events were connected and had much larger, far-reaching effects than I previously understood. I also was impressed with her ideas of what the future might entail, as it aligned quite well with some of the things I've seen happening on a micro level. I think as you read this, you will find yourself going "Wow, I've been thinking about that a lot lately, but I thought I was the only one, and I had no idea it had anything to do with that other thing over there." It seems to accurately reflect many of the things I've heard from a lot of my friends and family: those who have theology degrees and the ones who have never been to college, those who might be considered more liberal and others who are very conservative (whatever those terms mean), and a wide range of age from my parents and some of their friends to high school kids.
One of the biggest ideas in the books is that there have been huge shake-ups in Christianity every 500 years. The most recent was the Great Reformation, where Protestantism was born and split from the Roman Catholic church. It was in 1517 that Luther pounded his famous 95 Theses into the door of the church in Wittenberg, which is almost 500 years ago. Obviously the Reformation was not born over night, and in fact the events leading to its explosion were hundreds of years in the making. To make it more interesting, Tickle explains that the Reformation was not the first cataclysmic shift in the Church. About 500 years before then, the Great Schism split the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Western, or Roman Catholic Church.
Looking even further back, we find the collapse of the mighty Roman empire (and more or less the rest of civilization). A lot of research has been done into the factors causing the fall of Rome and the chaos that resulted from it. Less noticed is that this collapse birthed great changes in Christianity. The Church had become wedded to the empire and was in danger of shattering with Rome. Gregory the Great, a pope so popular and influential that he was given his nickname immediately after his death, held the Church together and worked to clean up the mess that had come of mixing Christianity with the most powerful Empire the world had ever seen. And while much of the western world's knowledge was lost to looting and burning, monks studiously copied the Bible, the teachings of the early church fathers, and classic literature. Without them humanity may have been set back many hundreds of years.
It was also during this time that Patrick brought the Gospel to the Irish. While much of Europe struggled through the Dark Ages, Christianity and scholarship flourished in Ireland. The Irish embrace of mysticism, nature, simplicity, and charity greatly painted their understanding of Christianity, and many today are once again finding much value from what the Irish can teach us. They would eventually re-take the teachings of Jesus back to the rest of devastated Europe, acting as missionaries to the people who had once taught them.
Of course, 500 years before this was the time of Jesus and the birth of Christianity, first as a sect within Judaism but quickly as something new on its own. It is worth noting that the 1st century was in many ways an ending to the priestly Judaism of the Old Testament. The Temple in Jerusalem was completely destroyed in 70AD, and the Jews were banned even from even entering Jerusalem a short time later and were then scattered around the world. Looking back in approximately 500 year increments you will also find core changes in the lives of the Jews, starting with the destruction of Solomon's Temple and the exile, then back to the shift from the rule of judges to Kings (including of course David and the beginning of messianic expectations), then further back to Moses and the Exodus, and finally back to Abraham and God's calling of a people through whom he could bring about his plans for the world.
Tickle refers to these gigantic shifts as "rummage sales", a term which she borrowed from Anglican bishop Mark Dyer. She writes "about every five hundred years the empowered structures of institutionalized Christianity, whatever they may be at that time, become an intolerable carapace that must be shattered in order that renewal and new growth may occur (pg 16)." To use the rummage sale analogy, the Church eventually decides that it is time for a new look and feel, and decides that the best way to do that is to clean out the closet and start fresh.
History has shown that there are 3 major results of these rummage sales. The first result is that a new expression of Christianity is born as a criticism of the dominant form. It is a recognition of the ways that the institutionalized Church has lost some of the message of Jesus and more importantly it is also a desire to return to more obedient beliefs and actions (orthodoxy and orthopraxy). The goal isn't to help Christianity "catch up" to the rest of culture or to change the message so it's more acceptable to people. The driving force behind these shifts is an awareness that something fundamental is broken, and therefore something needs to change.
The second result is that the existing form of Christianity continues on, albeit in a diminished role, and eventually adopts some of the changes brought on by the new form. We all know that the Protestant Reformation did not kill the Roman Catholic Church, and the Catholic Church did eventually recognize that many of the points raised during the Reformation were valid and necessary. The third result is that Christianity has been spread dramatically as a result of this split, reaching new people in new areas. The new expression of Christianity is able to effectively communicate the gospel to a significant number of people the old form couldn't, or wouldn't.
So with these points in mind, I'd love to hear some thoughts from you. Phyllis Tickle seem to view this split as inevitable, but ultimately good. Can this be done without hatred, anger, and unnecessary division? I think much of what God wants to do will be lost if western Christianity slips into a civil war. The last 500 years is full of Protestant vs Catholic wars. That can hardly be thought of as an answer to Jesus' prayer that his followers would be one, just as he and God are one.
Second, what new group of people do you think will be particularly influenced by a new practice of Christianity? What would you say is a bigger driving force for you: "a new practice of following Jesus" or "relationships with a new group of people"? I realize that these both drive each other and truly you need both, but I'm curious as to what brought you to this place of being open to questions and new answers. Maybe thats a good exercise for yourself, if nothing else.
One of the first things to note is that it isn't a book that deals much with theology, but functions more like a history lesson with a glimpse forward at what the future might hold. I found as I read that lights were coming on in my head all over the place. I began seeing how key events were connected and had much larger, far-reaching effects than I previously understood. I also was impressed with her ideas of what the future might entail, as it aligned quite well with some of the things I've seen happening on a micro level. I think as you read this, you will find yourself going "Wow, I've been thinking about that a lot lately, but I thought I was the only one, and I had no idea it had anything to do with that other thing over there." It seems to accurately reflect many of the things I've heard from a lot of my friends and family: those who have theology degrees and the ones who have never been to college, those who might be considered more liberal and others who are very conservative (whatever those terms mean), and a wide range of age from my parents and some of their friends to high school kids.
One of the biggest ideas in the books is that there have been huge shake-ups in Christianity every 500 years. The most recent was the Great Reformation, where Protestantism was born and split from the Roman Catholic church. It was in 1517 that Luther pounded his famous 95 Theses into the door of the church in Wittenberg, which is almost 500 years ago. Obviously the Reformation was not born over night, and in fact the events leading to its explosion were hundreds of years in the making. To make it more interesting, Tickle explains that the Reformation was not the first cataclysmic shift in the Church. About 500 years before then, the Great Schism split the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Western, or Roman Catholic Church.
Looking even further back, we find the collapse of the mighty Roman empire (and more or less the rest of civilization). A lot of research has been done into the factors causing the fall of Rome and the chaos that resulted from it. Less noticed is that this collapse birthed great changes in Christianity. The Church had become wedded to the empire and was in danger of shattering with Rome. Gregory the Great, a pope so popular and influential that he was given his nickname immediately after his death, held the Church together and worked to clean up the mess that had come of mixing Christianity with the most powerful Empire the world had ever seen. And while much of the western world's knowledge was lost to looting and burning, monks studiously copied the Bible, the teachings of the early church fathers, and classic literature. Without them humanity may have been set back many hundreds of years.
It was also during this time that Patrick brought the Gospel to the Irish. While much of Europe struggled through the Dark Ages, Christianity and scholarship flourished in Ireland. The Irish embrace of mysticism, nature, simplicity, and charity greatly painted their understanding of Christianity, and many today are once again finding much value from what the Irish can teach us. They would eventually re-take the teachings of Jesus back to the rest of devastated Europe, acting as missionaries to the people who had once taught them.
Of course, 500 years before this was the time of Jesus and the birth of Christianity, first as a sect within Judaism but quickly as something new on its own. It is worth noting that the 1st century was in many ways an ending to the priestly Judaism of the Old Testament. The Temple in Jerusalem was completely destroyed in 70AD, and the Jews were banned even from even entering Jerusalem a short time later and were then scattered around the world. Looking back in approximately 500 year increments you will also find core changes in the lives of the Jews, starting with the destruction of Solomon's Temple and the exile, then back to the shift from the rule of judges to Kings (including of course David and the beginning of messianic expectations), then further back to Moses and the Exodus, and finally back to Abraham and God's calling of a people through whom he could bring about his plans for the world.
Tickle refers to these gigantic shifts as "rummage sales", a term which she borrowed from Anglican bishop Mark Dyer. She writes "about every five hundred years the empowered structures of institutionalized Christianity, whatever they may be at that time, become an intolerable carapace that must be shattered in order that renewal and new growth may occur (pg 16)." To use the rummage sale analogy, the Church eventually decides that it is time for a new look and feel, and decides that the best way to do that is to clean out the closet and start fresh.
History has shown that there are 3 major results of these rummage sales. The first result is that a new expression of Christianity is born as a criticism of the dominant form. It is a recognition of the ways that the institutionalized Church has lost some of the message of Jesus and more importantly it is also a desire to return to more obedient beliefs and actions (orthodoxy and orthopraxy). The goal isn't to help Christianity "catch up" to the rest of culture or to change the message so it's more acceptable to people. The driving force behind these shifts is an awareness that something fundamental is broken, and therefore something needs to change.
The second result is that the existing form of Christianity continues on, albeit in a diminished role, and eventually adopts some of the changes brought on by the new form. We all know that the Protestant Reformation did not kill the Roman Catholic Church, and the Catholic Church did eventually recognize that many of the points raised during the Reformation were valid and necessary. The third result is that Christianity has been spread dramatically as a result of this split, reaching new people in new areas. The new expression of Christianity is able to effectively communicate the gospel to a significant number of people the old form couldn't, or wouldn't.
So with these points in mind, I'd love to hear some thoughts from you. Phyllis Tickle seem to view this split as inevitable, but ultimately good. Can this be done without hatred, anger, and unnecessary division? I think much of what God wants to do will be lost if western Christianity slips into a civil war. The last 500 years is full of Protestant vs Catholic wars. That can hardly be thought of as an answer to Jesus' prayer that his followers would be one, just as he and God are one.
Second, what new group of people do you think will be particularly influenced by a new practice of Christianity? What would you say is a bigger driving force for you: "a new practice of following Jesus" or "relationships with a new group of people"? I realize that these both drive each other and truly you need both, but I'm curious as to what brought you to this place of being open to questions and new answers. Maybe thats a good exercise for yourself, if nothing else.
Sunday, December 7, 2008
The Great Emergence 0.1
View the first post in this series here.
To give you an idea of where I'm going over the next few weeks, I'll give you a quick outline of the book. Phyllis Tickle starts with a look back at previous religious and social shifts that seem to be occurring about every 500 years, with the most recent example being the Protestant Reformation. She digs into the causes and effects of these turbulent times, and pulls out some common themes then we can then try to apply to the last 200 years of our history. A lot of time is spent on the dramatic changes caused by the Reformation which have lead to the way we all view the world today. She then looks at more recent shifts that are causing the conflict we are all becoming aware of. A good three-quarters of the book is dedicated to building the backdrop for our modern world, and only the final chapters look at where we might be headed. I particularly enjoyed how she examines the movements in American Christianity over the last century, including looking at some of the "proto-emergence" church movements. She then concludes with some guesses at where the western church is headed, which is extremely interesting and exciting.
I just want to also emphasize that the book and this discussion is not about the emergent or emerging church. It's about a global shift that is happening, and the emerging church conversation is one community that is developing as a result of this. But the idea is not that the Emergent Church is the final expression of what God is doing or where Christianity is headed. Listen to Doug Pagitt's thoughts on that here.
I think this is why there has been so much confusion about the emerging church. Everyone wants to finalize it and decide what's right and wrong about it, but it is only one small expression of a much larger phenomenon. And even this small network or people is still figuring out where it is going and why- nothing is set in stone. It's like a young child still years away from adulthood. Nobody knows how this will turn out, which is why the emerging church leaders always refer to their network as a conversation. They want everyone to be involved in what is happening, not a few powerful leaders.
This is a beautiful example of the "priesthood of all believers". We all have an opportunity to seek God about what he wants to do and where he wants to go with his Church. If there are dreams in your heart about what the Church can be, share them so that we all can dream together. If there are ideas that look dangerous to you, speak up, but do so in gentleness and love. If you don't love your brothers and sisters, which is the most fundamental part of being a Christian, how can you offer worthwhile thoughts on more advanced and nuanced doctrine?
Above all, we need to put aside our desire to be right and make sure everyone else knows how right we are. You can't have a very good conversation with people if you only talk to the people who agree with you, or if you will only talk and never listen. You can't love your enemy if you won't associate with the people you have conflict with. How can we say we love the world, like Jesus did, if we can't even love other believers? So please offer your ideas on here, but I ask that you do so with gentleness and respect. I want to talk this out with my friends because I value all of you and know God is speaking to you in ways that are sometimes similar and sometimes different from what he is saying to me.
Finally, I'm going to label all of the posts in this series under “The Great Emergence”, so if you get behind and want to view them all, just click the link of “The Great Emergence” from the list of labels on the right.
To give you an idea of where I'm going over the next few weeks, I'll give you a quick outline of the book. Phyllis Tickle starts with a look back at previous religious and social shifts that seem to be occurring about every 500 years, with the most recent example being the Protestant Reformation. She digs into the causes and effects of these turbulent times, and pulls out some common themes then we can then try to apply to the last 200 years of our history. A lot of time is spent on the dramatic changes caused by the Reformation which have lead to the way we all view the world today. She then looks at more recent shifts that are causing the conflict we are all becoming aware of. A good three-quarters of the book is dedicated to building the backdrop for our modern world, and only the final chapters look at where we might be headed. I particularly enjoyed how she examines the movements in American Christianity over the last century, including looking at some of the "proto-emergence" church movements. She then concludes with some guesses at where the western church is headed, which is extremely interesting and exciting.
I just want to also emphasize that the book and this discussion is not about the emergent or emerging church. It's about a global shift that is happening, and the emerging church conversation is one community that is developing as a result of this. But the idea is not that the Emergent Church is the final expression of what God is doing or where Christianity is headed. Listen to Doug Pagitt's thoughts on that here.
I think this is why there has been so much confusion about the emerging church. Everyone wants to finalize it and decide what's right and wrong about it, but it is only one small expression of a much larger phenomenon. And even this small network or people is still figuring out where it is going and why- nothing is set in stone. It's like a young child still years away from adulthood. Nobody knows how this will turn out, which is why the emerging church leaders always refer to their network as a conversation. They want everyone to be involved in what is happening, not a few powerful leaders.
This is a beautiful example of the "priesthood of all believers". We all have an opportunity to seek God about what he wants to do and where he wants to go with his Church. If there are dreams in your heart about what the Church can be, share them so that we all can dream together. If there are ideas that look dangerous to you, speak up, but do so in gentleness and love. If you don't love your brothers and sisters, which is the most fundamental part of being a Christian, how can you offer worthwhile thoughts on more advanced and nuanced doctrine?
Above all, we need to put aside our desire to be right and make sure everyone else knows how right we are. You can't have a very good conversation with people if you only talk to the people who agree with you, or if you will only talk and never listen. You can't love your enemy if you won't associate with the people you have conflict with. How can we say we love the world, like Jesus did, if we can't even love other believers? So please offer your ideas on here, but I ask that you do so with gentleness and respect. I want to talk this out with my friends because I value all of you and know God is speaking to you in ways that are sometimes similar and sometimes different from what he is saying to me.
Finally, I'm going to label all of the posts in this series under “The Great Emergence”, so if you get behind and want to view them all, just click the link of “The Great Emergence” from the list of labels on the right.
The Great Emergence 0
Everybody seems to be talking about the emerging church lately. I think I've only heard the term in the last couple years, and right from the beginning it seemed pretty confusing to me. My friend Ben introduced me and a few of my friends to Velvet Elvis by Rob Bell in fall of 2005, and I remember how much we all loved it. It wasn't a completely revolutionary approach to Christianity for any of us, it just seemed like it was a clearer picture of what we already were about and where we deep-down wanted to go (and I think that is true, but not the way we thought). I guess we thought of it as a new paint job on the same car, or maybe a tune-up or new tires as well.
Since then I've read it several times and I've realized just how much there is underneath the surface that I didn't get the first time. I think we'd all agree that to follow Jesus, you can't just stick his teaching onto your previous life like an extra arm or new set of clothes. You have to be willing to let everything else go and sometimes start over completely. I think one of the underlying themes of Velvet Elvis is that sometimes Christianity itself has to start over and clear out a lot of the extra baggage it's picked up over the many years. That, of course, is a terrifying idea, because we tend to think of Christianity as the way of following Jesus. But what if the religion that carries Jesus' name becomes one of the biggest hindrances to following Jesus?
I first heard about the emerging (or emergent, but that's kind of different- more later) church through reading and listening to Rob Bell. He always has lots of notes about other books to read and often had guest speakers at his church. And lots of people on the internet had interesting things to say about him and those other authors and speakers. A lot of them were angry about this thing called the emerging church, and said Rob and some of the other people who he was influenced by or was friends with presenting heretical ideas. I think that is a pretty serious accusation to make, so I decided to research this myself. I began studying the Bible more and church history and theology- things that never really interested me much before. This eventually is what lead me to Fuller to study theology.
But one thing I noticed right away is how nobody could agree on what the emerging church was. Some people said it was a Christian reaction to post-modernism, or nothing more than a more relevant wrapping on evangelicalism, or an emphasis on simple living and serving the poor. Some said emergents didn't believe in absolute truth, or the Bible, or Jesus, and had very "liberal" views on homosexuality and abortion. Others said that it was a desire to return just to taking seriously the teachings of Jesus on loving your neighbor and being peacemakers. Is it a new denomination? Is it a movement? Is it a new religion? Is it some kind of new age spirituality that takes some of Jesus and some of Buddha and some of whatever else and mixes it together? Is there a difference between emergent and emerging? And nobody could even agree on who was part of the emerging church. Lots of people called Rob Bell emergent, but he always said he wasn't and that he didn't want anything to do with new labels that further divide Christians into smaller and smaller pieces. Some people said that was enough proof that he was emergent...
This last summer I have been reading a lot of books on the subject. What the so-called emergents say and believe and hope for, and what critics say about them. I've taken little online quizzes that that ask theology questions, and then tell you what percentage Charismatic, Wesleyan, Reformed, Liturgical, Evangelical, Catholic, Orthodox, or emergent you are. I've read lots and lots of blogs! And I've continually been struck by how consistently the things I've read from many emerging leaders have resonated with my heart. They seem to put words to the things I've believed deep down, the things that I had questions about or often blurry dreams that God has given me. That's been really exciting, but also very unsettling? I've been frustrated with many things about modern American Christianity for a while, and much of what I have learned has given words and form and even theology to this frustration. Is that me wanting to rebel and do things my way, or is it God leading me to trust him more and religion less?
The pieces of this puzzle finally began coming together, and one of the biggest pieces was a book by Phyllis Tickle called The Great Emergence. She is a grandmother, Anglican lay minister, and has worked as a teacher and head of Publisher Weekly's religion department. In this book, she looks at the current events of our world through a much wider view than most usually do and gains a lot of insight into what's really going on. She discusses the earth-shaking changes we've seen over the last 150 years in science, transportation, communication, war, society, medicine, government, and religion. It becomes pretty clear that we are in the middle of something huge. I've heard others say that the current shifts we are experiencing are comparable to the changes of the Great Reformation, but I thought it was a pretty big exaggeration. After reading this book, I wonder if it might be an understatement.
Since this book has been so useful for giving me a bigger and fuller idea of our times, I wanted to walk through it on here so a lot of you who don't have time to read can still get some of the benefit. All the time I talk to friends who feel unsettled and frustrated. The dreams God has given them seem incompatible with the current life they see every day, and they don't know where to go next or why this is happening. I'm realizing it is not an isolated few that are going through this. I hope this series will help explain why they are feeling this way, and where we might be headed, so they can begin to see their circumstances through eyes opened up a little wider.
Since then I've read it several times and I've realized just how much there is underneath the surface that I didn't get the first time. I think we'd all agree that to follow Jesus, you can't just stick his teaching onto your previous life like an extra arm or new set of clothes. You have to be willing to let everything else go and sometimes start over completely. I think one of the underlying themes of Velvet Elvis is that sometimes Christianity itself has to start over and clear out a lot of the extra baggage it's picked up over the many years. That, of course, is a terrifying idea, because we tend to think of Christianity as the way of following Jesus. But what if the religion that carries Jesus' name becomes one of the biggest hindrances to following Jesus?
I first heard about the emerging (or emergent, but that's kind of different- more later) church through reading and listening to Rob Bell. He always has lots of notes about other books to read and often had guest speakers at his church. And lots of people on the internet had interesting things to say about him and those other authors and speakers. A lot of them were angry about this thing called the emerging church, and said Rob and some of the other people who he was influenced by or was friends with presenting heretical ideas. I think that is a pretty serious accusation to make, so I decided to research this myself. I began studying the Bible more and church history and theology- things that never really interested me much before. This eventually is what lead me to Fuller to study theology.
But one thing I noticed right away is how nobody could agree on what the emerging church was. Some people said it was a Christian reaction to post-modernism, or nothing more than a more relevant wrapping on evangelicalism, or an emphasis on simple living and serving the poor. Some said emergents didn't believe in absolute truth, or the Bible, or Jesus, and had very "liberal" views on homosexuality and abortion. Others said that it was a desire to return just to taking seriously the teachings of Jesus on loving your neighbor and being peacemakers. Is it a new denomination? Is it a movement? Is it a new religion? Is it some kind of new age spirituality that takes some of Jesus and some of Buddha and some of whatever else and mixes it together? Is there a difference between emergent and emerging? And nobody could even agree on who was part of the emerging church. Lots of people called Rob Bell emergent, but he always said he wasn't and that he didn't want anything to do with new labels that further divide Christians into smaller and smaller pieces. Some people said that was enough proof that he was emergent...
This last summer I have been reading a lot of books on the subject. What the so-called emergents say and believe and hope for, and what critics say about them. I've taken little online quizzes that that ask theology questions, and then tell you what percentage Charismatic, Wesleyan, Reformed, Liturgical, Evangelical, Catholic, Orthodox, or emergent you are. I've read lots and lots of blogs! And I've continually been struck by how consistently the things I've read from many emerging leaders have resonated with my heart. They seem to put words to the things I've believed deep down, the things that I had questions about or often blurry dreams that God has given me. That's been really exciting, but also very unsettling? I've been frustrated with many things about modern American Christianity for a while, and much of what I have learned has given words and form and even theology to this frustration. Is that me wanting to rebel and do things my way, or is it God leading me to trust him more and religion less?
The pieces of this puzzle finally began coming together, and one of the biggest pieces was a book by Phyllis Tickle called The Great Emergence. She is a grandmother, Anglican lay minister, and has worked as a teacher and head of Publisher Weekly's religion department. In this book, she looks at the current events of our world through a much wider view than most usually do and gains a lot of insight into what's really going on. She discusses the earth-shaking changes we've seen over the last 150 years in science, transportation, communication, war, society, medicine, government, and religion. It becomes pretty clear that we are in the middle of something huge. I've heard others say that the current shifts we are experiencing are comparable to the changes of the Great Reformation, but I thought it was a pretty big exaggeration. After reading this book, I wonder if it might be an understatement.
Since this book has been so useful for giving me a bigger and fuller idea of our times, I wanted to walk through it on here so a lot of you who don't have time to read can still get some of the benefit. All the time I talk to friends who feel unsettled and frustrated. The dreams God has given them seem incompatible with the current life they see every day, and they don't know where to go next or why this is happening. I'm realizing it is not an isolated few that are going through this. I hope this series will help explain why they are feeling this way, and where we might be headed, so they can begin to see their circumstances through eyes opened up a little wider.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)