Tuesday, September 13, 2005

Brian McLaren and the Emergent Conversation…


Brian McLaren was at GRTS yesterday participating in a conversation with Mike Wittmer, professor of Systematic Theology at GRTS, and Ed Dobson, pastor of Calvary Church in Grand Rapids. The conversation, in my estimation, was really a conversation rather than a debate. What I experienced were three people, passionate about the gospel of Jesus and the church sharing their dreams, concerns, and critiques. Something was communicated beyond the “presentations” … a message that Christians of all types can truly dialogue with one another. I hope that spills over into all corners of Jesus following communities.

In the last session, I had a chance to moderate a panel discussion between the three. Here are some of the questions I asked:

• While the emergent/established distinction isn’t necessarily divided neatly by generation (it’s more about value tribes), there is no doubt that the greatest tension is felt in established churches filled with modern Sr. pastors and emergent youth pastors. What input might you give to Sr. Pastors and to youth pastors who are sensing that they need to have their own conversation?

• In many areas of the church, we see a primarily male dominated institution. What are each of you doing/considering in your own context to encourage female voices to be heard in the church?

• Critics and advocates of emergent have warned that Emergent is primarily a white, male dominated movement, saying that this is no different from the established, “modern” church. How does one move toward a multicultural expression of the gospel and what priorities must we embrace to get there?

• One common strand in Protestantism… is one’s bent toward protest. While, church planting is an essential expression in the church, what advice would you give to church planters who desire to do church in a fresh way, yet stay connected with the broader church? How do we cheer on church planting and not perpetuate protest?

• Is “Apologetics” a necessary approach for the church to engage the world anymore? If yes, why? If not, what is the “apologetic” for the church today?

• Some critics have commented that emergent has thrown it’s net too wide. That to be generous with one’s orthodoxy leads to universalism. What does it look like to “belong” in a Christian community?

• Each of you are influential in your own areas of context (emergent, seminary/academic, mega church/GR), therefore you have followers. Speak to each of your own. What would you encourage your followers to continue to do? What caution would you give your own followers?

For their responses, and for the whole dialogue, you can download the mp3’s at
  • GRTS Talking Points

  • Finally, I found an interesting word popping up among many participants throughout the day… “fear.” I wonder if the conversation/dialogue turns to debate when people become fearful of change, fearful of looking at the world and their faith in different ways. New perspectives can feel like “attacks” and look like “heresy” and many are quick to dismiss the thinking or move beyond the issue and attack the person (just go to Amazon and read the comments from Rob Bell’s book “Velvet Elvis” and you’ll see what I mean).

    Fear is a real emotion. We can’t tell people to not “feel” something. But I wonder what we can do to create safe space where ideas, fear, hope, and change have room to percolate beyond knee-jerk reactions into something more edifying.

    This is what the will make the church beautiful and the gospel more clear for everyone.

    2 Comments:

    At Fri Sep 16, 08:59:00 PM GMT-5, Blogger White Rabbit said...

    Fear is a big part of it. Nobody likes change, and all change, even for the good, brings anxiety. Another part though is fear of the unknown. Emergent is just taking shape theologically. Not everything is clear, and not everyone agrees. Brian reminded us at the seminar that not all of his thoughts and theological positions represent the thoughts of emergent thinkers as a whole. Of course, when people are turning to his books to critique and understand emergent theology, they don't have much else to go on, and therefore attribute it to the whole. Suddenly personal opinions become a trademark of a movement, though they were never intended to be taken that way. i hope emergent thinkers don't come up with a distinctive theology on issues such as trinity, hell, election, etc. That would simply lead to another denomination. i think what we're looking for is an authentic way of being. Doctrine isn't the main issue here. Our doctrine is sound, and hopefully does not splinter us as it did the protestants. Something that ought to make emergent thinkers sick is the idea of tearing apart the church over gray issues. i say we ought to continue to live together with our own distinctive, and mostly orthodox theologies, and celebrate the diversity of our theological differences, and focus on practice. We may not agree on hell eternal or annihilation, openness theology or meticulous sovereignty, or various other issues, but most of us recognize what it means to "live Christ" and know we need one another to even begin to be able to attempt to do this.

     
    At Fri Sep 23, 09:27:00 PM GMT-5, Blogger tonymyles said...

    Some great Q&A here... thanks for sharing the stuff!

     

    Post a Comment

    << Home