DE PONDERINGS
The emerging church conversation is becoming more and more prevalent. It is a conversation that captivates me and continues to pique my interest in what Christianity and the church is becoming in a culturally and spiritually pluralistic world.
A common misconception about the emerging church conversation is that it is a movement in which and by which the church is caving in to relativism. The claim is that churches engaged in this conversation adhere to no absolute truth but are advocates for accepting anything proclaimed as a truth. Peter Rollins, a participant in the emerging church conversation disputes this claim in his book, How (Not) to Speak of God, when he states that “relativism is inherently self-contradictory and devours itself.” To claim that all truth is relative is an absolute statement which is self-contradictory.
Rollins contends, rather, that truth is more perception based. It's how we “filter the real world through our experiences, language, intelligence, culture, and so forth.” His philosophy is that there is an absolute truth; we are just not capable of knowing it completely. We have glimpses of it. The apostle Paul states it this way: “For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know only in part; then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known.” (I Cor. 13:12 NRSV)
The Greek philosopher Plato’s theory of forms (or ideas) sheds some light on this concept of an absolute truth of which we only have a glimpse. Plato believed that objects of perception (those things we see, touch, hear, etc) are forms of a universal abstract concept (something beyond which our finite minds can understand). Simply, there is one mold (the abstract concept) from which come many different forms (perceived objects). There is a cookie cutter (one mold) from which comes different kinds of cookies (we see various cookies but they are all cookies).
The emerging church conversation is comfortable with the abstract concept (mold) of one God with various perceptions (forms) of what that “mold” is. Our experiences of and in life help shape the forms. The one God is perceived in various ways. As a result, labels are frequently used to define the form that we understand.
Those involved in the emerging church conversation have difficulty with labels. In one section of a book by Eddie Gibbs and Ryan K. Bolger, Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures, several persons involved in the emerging church conversation share there thoughts on labels that are assigned to us depending on our set of beliefs. There are evangelicals, fundamentalists, liberals, mainliners, postevangelicals, post-protestants, etc. These labels are based on perceptions of God, our ideas of the forms God takes. Are these labels important? Yes, but not to the point of being defined by them. It is more important to let our ideas (forms) point us to the abstract—God. And, then, for those of us with labels different from another to realize that our unique forms are still representations of the true form (mold)—God. I like Simon Hall's (Revive, Leeds, U.K.) addition to the conversation: “My main aim for the community is not to be ‘post’ anything but to be ‘and’ everything. We are evangelical and charismatic and liberal and orthodox and contemplative and into social justice and into alternative worship.” The many forms meld into one, which give labels the distinction of moving us to an understanding of God. We can learn from each other rather than judging each other. If we are all of these forms, as Hall suggests, why judge each other? For in judging we judge self.
The more I read about the emerging church conversation the more I think the Church of the Brethren is to some degree emergent. Our aim is not to label but to be followers of Jesus, the closest form that we know of the one God. We don’t claim any creed but allow each other through Bible study and prayer and discernment to find our way to the one God without creedal judgments and with openness to community, the body, through which we understand the Holy Spirit speaks. I feel that the emerging church conversation is a good one in which to involve ourselves since we've sort of been involved in it anyway. We may add some real value to the conversation.
The emerging church conversation is relatively new and new things can make us a little uncomfortable. There are parts of the conversation that stretch my comfort zone. Has this brief look into the emerging church conversation caused some discomfort for you?
Do you find it interesting? I’d like to hear from you. Email me (kevink.iwdcob@sbcglobal.net). I might even use your comments in future articles (with your permission, of course). Let’s talk!
Note: If you are interested in reading more on the emerging church conversation, I recommend How (Not) to Speak of God by Peter Rollins (Paraclete Press, 2006). I’m just beginning to read Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures by Eddie Gibbs and Ryan K. Bolger (Baker Academic, 2005) and am finding it very interesting and informative. I also recommend anything written by Brian McLaren. His trilogy (A New Kind of Christian, The Story We Find Ourselves In, and The Last Word and the Word After That) is very interesting, as well as entertaining, reading.
A common misconception about the emerging church conversation is that it is a movement in which and by which the church is caving in to relativism. The claim is that churches engaged in this conversation adhere to no absolute truth but are advocates for accepting anything proclaimed as a truth. Peter Rollins, a participant in the emerging church conversation disputes this claim in his book, How (Not) to Speak of God, when he states that “relativism is inherently self-contradictory and devours itself.” To claim that all truth is relative is an absolute statement which is self-contradictory.
Rollins contends, rather, that truth is more perception based. It's how we “filter the real world through our experiences, language, intelligence, culture, and so forth.” His philosophy is that there is an absolute truth; we are just not capable of knowing it completely. We have glimpses of it. The apostle Paul states it this way: “For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know only in part; then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known.” (I Cor. 13:12 NRSV)
The Greek philosopher Plato’s theory of forms (or ideas) sheds some light on this concept of an absolute truth of which we only have a glimpse. Plato believed that objects of perception (those things we see, touch, hear, etc) are forms of a universal abstract concept (something beyond which our finite minds can understand). Simply, there is one mold (the abstract concept) from which come many different forms (perceived objects). There is a cookie cutter (one mold) from which comes different kinds of cookies (we see various cookies but they are all cookies).
The emerging church conversation is comfortable with the abstract concept (mold) of one God with various perceptions (forms) of what that “mold” is. Our experiences of and in life help shape the forms. The one God is perceived in various ways. As a result, labels are frequently used to define the form that we understand.
Those involved in the emerging church conversation have difficulty with labels. In one section of a book by Eddie Gibbs and Ryan K. Bolger, Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures, several persons involved in the emerging church conversation share there thoughts on labels that are assigned to us depending on our set of beliefs. There are evangelicals, fundamentalists, liberals, mainliners, postevangelicals, post-protestants, etc. These labels are based on perceptions of God, our ideas of the forms God takes. Are these labels important? Yes, but not to the point of being defined by them. It is more important to let our ideas (forms) point us to the abstract—God. And, then, for those of us with labels different from another to realize that our unique forms are still representations of the true form (mold)—God. I like Simon Hall's (Revive, Leeds, U.K.) addition to the conversation: “My main aim for the community is not to be ‘post’ anything but to be ‘and’ everything. We are evangelical and charismatic and liberal and orthodox and contemplative and into social justice and into alternative worship.” The many forms meld into one, which give labels the distinction of moving us to an understanding of God. We can learn from each other rather than judging each other. If we are all of these forms, as Hall suggests, why judge each other? For in judging we judge self.
The more I read about the emerging church conversation the more I think the Church of the Brethren is to some degree emergent. Our aim is not to label but to be followers of Jesus, the closest form that we know of the one God. We don’t claim any creed but allow each other through Bible study and prayer and discernment to find our way to the one God without creedal judgments and with openness to community, the body, through which we understand the Holy Spirit speaks. I feel that the emerging church conversation is a good one in which to involve ourselves since we've sort of been involved in it anyway. We may add some real value to the conversation.
The emerging church conversation is relatively new and new things can make us a little uncomfortable. There are parts of the conversation that stretch my comfort zone. Has this brief look into the emerging church conversation caused some discomfort for you?
Do you find it interesting? I’d like to hear from you. Email me (kevink.iwdcob@sbcglobal.net). I might even use your comments in future articles (with your permission, of course). Let’s talk!
Note: If you are interested in reading more on the emerging church conversation, I recommend How (Not) to Speak of God by Peter Rollins (Paraclete Press, 2006). I’m just beginning to read Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures by Eddie Gibbs and Ryan K. Bolger (Baker Academic, 2005) and am finding it very interesting and informative. I also recommend anything written by Brian McLaren. His trilogy (A New Kind of Christian, The Story We Find Ourselves In, and The Last Word and the Word After That) is very interesting, as well as entertaining, reading.
<< Home