I posted a while back about my lack of knowledge about the Emergent Church. I’m still pretty unclear about the aims of the movement (though this is my own fault, I’ve not really looked into the issue), but I do get a weekly newsletter from "Christian Worldview Network" and at this moment its sole reason for existence seems to be to discredit the Emergent Church. They have a few basic claims about the Emergent Church. 1. Because it is "Post-modern" (I’d define Post-modern as an intellectual movement that has decided that the connection between things is unclear, and is okay with that fact) the Emergent Church is trying to infect Christianity with relativism. 2. Because the Emergent Church practices a "generous orthodoxy" (title of Pastor Brian McLaren’s book) it is pluralistic and universalistic, meaning it accepts every faith system as equally valid. 3. The Emergent Church not only accepts other faith systems as valid, it in fact incorporates them into their worship. 4. The Emergent Church, by incorporating other faith systems into their worship (CWN’s main boogie man is "Yoga breathing" while praying) they are creating End Times type One World Church in direct conflict with true believers 5. The Emergent Church, because of its ambivalence about Homosexuality, is ignoring God’s word.
I don’t know enough about the Emergent Movement to actually comment on any of these charges. That said, I do want to point out that the CWN may hold contradictory views about the Lutheran Church. On one hand Jan Markell in her article "The Emergent Church: A Dangerous Fad or Solid New Movement?" levels that charge against the Emergent Church that links itself too closely with "the Orthodox, Lutheran, and Catholic Church." On the other hand Ingrid Schlueter in "Emerging Apostasy" talks in very laudatory terms about the 16th century reformers, writing, "Scripture alone! was the cry of those who wrested the Gospel back from the hands of the enemy and once again let the wonderful truths of salvation by grace through faith alone ring out. This is our battle. The question of the hour is this: Will we, the spiritual heirs of these saints of old, be found faithful in our time to boldly renounce all doctrine that undermines the authority of the Bible? God help us to stand, Amen."
I guess they are taking the view that Luther and the reformers (I wonder if there is a band named that? There should be!) did a good job by breaking from the Catholic Church and emphasizing Scripture, but perhaps feel that we didn’t go far enough in our worship practices, liturgy, and our believe in having a certain amount of intellectual continuity with the church fathers.
Anyway that’s some food for thought. For the day.
Peace,
Chris
2 comments:
Personally, I'm a little tickled to think that EC is being labeled "dangerous" because it's too catholic. As someone happy to affirm, every day, that I belong to the one holy catholic and apostolic Church, I take it as a compliment.
Hello, Chris
I've just become aware of this trend myself and we should all learn more about it. I am skeptical of the emerging church because of several things I have read recently, including Wikipedia's definition.
The emergent church does not want to be a new branch of Christianity; rather, its adherents are more interested in reuniting the church by reorienting its focus back to Christ, not potentially irrelevant modern debates over cut-and-dry answers. Although some may disagree, the emergent church claims to not introduce any "unorthodox" theology; rather, it strives to refocus the church on the essentials.
The only way you have a debate over something that is "cut-and-dry" is if one side is obviously wrong.
The emergent church seems to balance Scripture with Political Correctness. In this stage it takes non-confrontationalism to the extreme. I don't think it is dangerous but we must keep an eye on it and resist the temptation to have high hopes. The emerging church could just be another posturing of Christians to conform to the world. That is not new.
Take care.
Post a Comment