Posted by Helen on: 07.31.2006 /
The New York Times published the following quote from Brian McLaren a couple of days ago:
“There is a lot of discontent brewing,” said Brian D. McLaren, the founding pastor at Cedar Ridge Community Church in Gaithersburg, Md., and a leader in the evangelical movement known as the “emerging church,” which is at the forefront of challenging the more politicized evangelical establishment.
“More and more people are saying this has gone too far — the dominance of the evangelical identity by the religious right,” Mr. McLaren said. “You cannot say the word ‘Jesus’ in 2006 without having an awful lot of baggage going along with it. You can’t say the word ‘Christian,’ and you certainly can’t say the word ‘evangelical’ without it now raising connotations and a certain cringe factor in people.
“Because people think, ‘Oh no, what is going to come next is homosexual bashing, or pro-war rhetoric, or complaining about ‘activist judges.’ “
Brian McLaren will be speaking at You Say You Want a Revolution?, Off The Map’s November Conference.
Comment by: Rachel
1I completely agree with McLaren’s assessment and I think that it is a very welcome development. Without this challenge, and hopefully revolution, I and many of my friends would probably leave evangelical Christianity for good.
Comment by: Julie marie
2me too.
Comment by: Eliza
3How does this show up? How do you know about it? As someone observing from outside Christianity, I haven’t heard about this before…
Comment by: Julie Marie
4I didn’t realize there was a movement of malcontents afoot until recently - it certainly isn’t evident down here in the land of the megachurch. I thought I was alone in my feelings of frustration.
I started seeing glimpses of it when I started perusing the Christian blogosphere. Of course, the blogs I went to were FE blogs, but every now and then they’d post an article about McLaren and/or the emerging church and discuss it. Mostly trash it, but every now and then, they’d allow as these emergents have a point or two worth consideration.
They are really upset about George Barna’s book Revolution. But they can’t dismiss him, because his research over the years has been solid and respectable.
Comment by: Helen M.
5Julie Marie wrote:
Nor did I.
A few years ago I saw an evangelical Christian express ‘concerns’ about Brian McLaren - that was when I first heard of him.
But I didn’t know there was an ‘emerging church’ movement until I started reading Off The Map’s blogs.
For what it’s worth, I find the reviews that trash people most helpful in quickly finding out the point of what the trashed person is saying.
LOL - yes, I can understand. I expect they feel he’s ‘betrayed’ them by seeming to be one of them - and then he writes that book.
I heard him on the radio a while ago and I’m not surprised about the book because his discontent was evident in that interview.
To me the link is clear: his research consistently shows Christians failing to live up to the way they are taught to live. What else could one conclude except that a ‘revolution’ is needed?
Comment by: Jule Marie
6one of the interesting things to me is the FE churches still think of the emergent movement as 20somethings who will perhaps grow up, who are unchurched probably baby christians. By that definition I still don’t fit in—as a 40 something who thinks she has grown out of FE teachings!
Oh well. I soldier on.
Comment by: Helen M.
7Julie Marie,
In my experience, evangelical Christians have a really hard time with the idea that there can be a stage beyond where they’re at - since they consider themselves to have reached the mountaintop of truth.
Nevertheless, it seems to me that there are a significant number of people around who used to be evangelical Christians, who aren’t anymore, who see themselves as having ‘progressed’ from being an evangelical Christian to something better. To these people the concept of something beyond evangelical Christianity is very real.
Comment by: NCxian
8My sense is that there are two somewhat different movements. The most succint explanation I could find on line was Wikipedia. If you look up “Evangelical Left” and “Emerging Church” you will see descriptions of the two, with a little history, and some links to representative people.
I first became aware of the Evangelical left when I joined my Baptist congregation in the early 1990s (evangelicals were not really on my radar before that time). These guys were long established at that point. They are MTWABP kinds of folks (formerly known as “social justice” Christians :) ), and align themselves often with Catholics of the same persuasion. At the same time, they are thoroughly evangelical in the “personal relationship with JC” kind of way. Unlike some other evangelicals, I find them to be more ecumenical–willing to work with folks who are different from them theologically–and thus are sometimes accused by their more conservative brethern as being “universalists”. The two people who come first to my mind in this camp are Tony Campolo and Jim Wallis. They strike me as being very pragmatic–MTWABP.
The emerging church folks are newer to me. I think they are newer altogether, although I am sure that they have antecedents in other movements of Christianity. They seem to be somewhat more about reforming how Christians behave vis-a-vis one another–ecclesiology (churchiness). My impression is that they are, as a movement, somewhat less interested in politics, and I would say that the folks I know or have read identifying themselves with this movement seem to have a wider range of political views–left, right, and apolitical. Brian McLaren is, of course, the most visible spokesperson here. It seems to me they talk a lot more about “being” then the older guys, who are mostly interested in “doing”. They don’t refer to themselves as a “movement”, but a “dialogue”. That may be just the newness of the whole thing, though–they are maybe just trying to think it through really hard at this point.
And even though I’ve tried to say how I find them to be different from each other, I find them to both be attractive to me personally, and I think there is a great deal of overlap. Brian McLaren hangs out with the relgious left folks, for example.
Comment by: Julie Marie
9OK, true story here. A few weeks before I started reading eBay atheist, I had a dream. I was on the top of a mountain. It was cold, but not cold enough to ski down - the snow had melted and the runoff had accumulated into a slushy ice filled river below. I REALLY wanted to get off that mountain and up the other one. And I did not want to wait for the thaw to dry out and new growth to form. All of my baggage was in a grocery cart. I considered making my way down with it - and consulted the ski patrol about conditions. (even in my dreams, I am so me ;)) They warned few were making it without breaking bones. So I decided to leave my grocery cart behind, and slide down on my butt. I calculated that the cold slushy river wasn’t greater than thigh deep, so I could wade across.
I shared this dream with my counselor, thinking it had to do with personal baggage. He looked at me and said he thought that dream was pretty heavy with theological undertones. (he is not a christian counselor, btw).
So it seems I have left the pinnacle of truth ;) I would say I’m in the river right now.
Comment by: NCxian
10I realize that in my previous post, by trying to tell you why I thought there were sort of two different things going on, I didn’t say why I thought they were both relevant here. I think it is the evangelical left–Campolo/Wallis and all–who are leading the charge against the marriage of the political Right and American Christianity. They have been doing it all along. I think the emerging church is folks bubbling up from the rank-and-file, mostly disaffected evangelicals, who are now adding their voices to say, there is something seriously wrong with the church being bound to any political party.
Comment by: Julie Marie
11that sounds right to me, NC.
Comment by: Helen M.
12Wow - fascinating dream, Julie Marie!
NCxian - I’m very fuzzy on who is who but I’ve also noticed that there seem to be a number of Christian groups these days who disagree with the Christian Right and I’m happy to see that.
Comment by: Rachel
13I agree with the above assessments of the Evangelical Left and the Emerging Church and add some observations of my own.
The evangelical left includes people like Jim Wallis of Sojourners (www.sojo.net), Tony Campolo of the progressive evangelical college Eastern University and Ron Sider, founder of Evangelicals for Social Action (ESA). They are concerned with faith-based political issues like peace-making, economic justice and creation care.
ESA puts out an excellent magazine called “Prism” that I subscribe to - they bill it as “America’s Alternative Evangelical Voice.” I also receive their “Creation Care” quarterly from ESA’s spin-off organization Evangelical Environmental Network. And I subscribe to Sojourners magazine and their free weekly e-newsletter SojoMail. Anyone from a progressive Christian viewpoint would probably really enjoy these publications.
The evangelical left has been around for a long time but has been drowned out in the public square by the more strident voices of the Religious Right. Guys like Wallis and Sider have been speaking out on these issues since the 60s and 70s. However more people are finally listening as more and more evangelicals become disillusioned with the RR. For example, subscribers to SojoMail have tripled since the 2004 elections.
As NCxian said, the emerging church is more concerned with how to have faith communities that are vibrant, relevant and connected to 2000 years of Christian tradition. They embrace rather than resist the postmodern shift and are nearly always nondenominational. They emphasize living ones’ faith through service to the poor and being a voice for justice. Representatives would be people like Brian McLaren, Rob Bell of Mars Hill Church in Michigan or Dan Kimball, author of “The Emerging Church.” For some emergent websites, check out http://www.emergentvillage.com or http://www.ginkworld.net
The older evangelical left movement and the younger, newer emerging church movement have become natural allies because of their shared beliefs and concerns and together are providing an alternative to the Religious Right. (Brian McLaren, for example, is a board member of Sojourners.) Some leading figures from both groups are calling themselves “Red Letter Christians” http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=about_us.redletterchristians
Eliza, you mentioned that you had not heard of this movement among evangelicals. I attribute a lot of this to the laziness of the media who continue to portray evangelicals as a monolithic group and who seek sound bites from the same old tired mouthpieces like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. Both of these men actually have small followings but they are perceived as representatives of evangelicals. Even many very conservative evangelicals that I know find these men embarrassing. I think that the media seeks them out because they can be counted on to say something ridiculous and offensive and that makes news.
Comment by: JG
14This is only a personal view and others may well disagree with me, I don’t know but in the UK, I would guess more people would associate the church with the left rather than the right.
Try running a google search for
Archbishop of Canterbury left wing
and view some of the results. The Baptist Union of GB has been outspoken in its opposition to the war.
Things are not black and white for example. Yes there is a left wing in the USA as well. See for example:
http://www.urc.org.uk/iraq_2003/American_Church_leaders.htm
And it is interesting to note that it is the Amerciacn Episcopal Church that is under threat of excommunication from the Anglican communion for its position on homosexuality.
I think what is known as “Emerging church” has much to offer and the questions, issues and challenges it raises should be taken seriously.
But what concerns me (again this is a personal view, others will disagree) is that in the 1980’s we had “Signs and Wonders”, in the 1990’s we had “the Toronto blessing” and now in the 2000’s we have “Emerging church” - what will it be in the 2010’s? When I was at University, students tended to flock to the “in church” or “in churches” and what was viewed as the “in church” would change from time to time. Human nature craves “the latest thing”, “the trendy” etc etc. People will flock to whoever offers to satisfy this craving.
I don’t believe Jesus was trendy. He wasn’t politically correct. Indeed, the crowds ended up screaming for him to be crucified.
John the Baptist was described as a voice in the wilderness. For me a Christian does not join a lynch mob baying for blood, rather he or she stands alongside and speaks up for the target of the lynch mob’s hate.
If being Christian is simply about changing the world, why did Jesus fail to do so? Were the centuries after his death a story of love and peace in the world? Were people in the world generally better people after Christ than before Christ? Why do we think we can achieve something that Jesus failed to do?
Comment by: Helen M.
15JG wrote:
Yes - I’ve noticed that difference between the UK and US church.
I really like your final questions - I’m posting them as a new blog entry:
Is being Christian simply about Changing the World?
Comment by: Rachel
16Definitely - but the “mainline” churches usually have been recognized as “left-wing” or “liberal” while the “evangelical” churches have been recognized as “right-wing” or “conservative.” So the general sense has been that one must choose between being evangelical in their core beliefs OR being progressive in their politics but one cannot be both. In my experience and observation, this is the message sent both in the large majority of evangelical churches and in the larger media/culture understanding of evangelicalism.
As many evangelicals (especially younger ones) have grown more and more disillusioned with right-wing politics/religion, they have found themselves facing an agonizing dilemna. They must either walk away from their evangelical faith or continue to align themselves with a political and religious agenda that they no longer believe is consistent with the Way of Jesus. The growth of the emerging church & evangelical progressive movements have literally, for many of us, saved our faith.
Comment by: Eliza
17Well, I am learning quite a bit here - thanks! Including, why OTM’s upcoming conference is titled as it is (referencing Barna’s book & ideas). Silly me, I thought “So you say you want a revolution” was just referencing the Beatles!
Comment by: JG
18What I think about emerging church is as stated:
What I observe is the human tendency to go for the latest thing, run with it for a while and then drop it when the next thing comes out.
As NCxian points out, Jesus experienced this himself when he entered Jerusalem. In this sense there is nothing new under the sun.
The reference to the lynch mob is simply a development of the theme of “the crowd” - that I see Christians primarily standing up to the crowd no matter what the personal cost. If in the USA, most Christians are pro war etc and only a few like Campolo are speaking against it then that is an example of what I mean.
If Emerging church does make a lasting expression then I believe it will be through:
1 its willingness to stand up to “the crowd” rather than simply go with the crowd and
2 the positive attributes and fruit of its work - what it is rather than what it is not.