This 11 minute video will give you a first hand feel for what the Emerging Church is all about. It was made by someone at Solomon’s Porch, a noted Emerging Church. It is particularly helpful because it was made by someone inside the movement to advocate the postmodern approach to church. Whenever someone tries to critique or explain the movement from the outside, they are inevitably accused on not understanding them. That cannot be said here.
It is interesting to how two particular themes run through the whole video. The first, and most obvious, is an obsession with personal autonomy and repulsion of authority of any kind. The second is outright disdain for the political right and embrace to the left.
There is a high value placed on community, but notice how it is community for community’s sake. There appears to be no substance that they are joined around. This is a far cry from the unity in the Spirit that Christ calls us to (1 Cor. 1:10, Phil. 2:2, and elsewhere).
As you watch, notice the themes of postmodernism and the implicit denial of objective truth (truth as something outside of myself that I must conform to) that Hugh has been writing about this week.
HT: Melinda
Interesting. I love community too! I love passion for God too! With that being said, it seems that the ideas that are being expressed are still in the conceptual realm seeking to live in rebellion toward any type of formal definition. When do you know you have achieved community? What are the limits in a person’s expression of passion for God? Can I punch you in the mouth and chalk it up to my passion for God? Can I swear or take God’s name in vain and attribute it to my zealousness for Christ-centeredness? It was very apparent how those being interviewed worked hard to define themselves by using many words, loose comments and vague terms. Solomon’s Porch seems to find its definition in not seeking to be some specific thing for Christ’s glory as much as trying not to be like other churches they have grown to distain. It seems that the drive to be different or counterculture is a huge motivational passion for this group. When being different is the drive of a church (and there is no clear doctrinal position rooted in Scripture) it will eventually implode or become cult-like by following the strongest personality in the group.
I would suggest that there are two driving factors that cannot be ignored in these types of movements; first, the need for community is formed in the wake of family breakdown. I would bet that if I surveyed Solomon’s Porch I would find a substantial portion that had come from broken and/or abusive family situations. The established church is now in the first stages of sowing and reaping when it comes to the breakdown of the family. The lazy approach of the “church” toward those who claimed to love Christ yet fall out of love with a spouse is now being expressed in groups such as Solomon’s Porch. The children of those who believed God would honor there divorce are now filling the landscape of people who have taken this redefining of God to another level.
Two, the exponential growth in knowledge in general is contributing to the lack of dogmatic stance on propositional truth. The rationale goes something like this; since there is so much to know how much can I really know for sure? Due to the increase of knowledge and the options in living that are produced, it is easy to see why having thoughful, dogmatic answers looks more arrogant than informed. It’s as if the more sincere, thoughtful or passionate for God the less sure you will be that you actually know anything about God for sure.
One last thought: The age of those in the video I thought was telling. Are there any older people among them who are lending balance to these views by applying the lens of maturity to the dialogue? It would seem that this church would do well to consider looking toward spiritual oak trees vs. spiritual shrubbery when it comes to forming a Christocentric worldview.
Eric, thanks for posting this, it is indeed very revealing. What I saw as I watched this was the flesh pushing to assert itself. From the concepts expressed to the words chosen even down to the appearance of those in the clip this was evident. I’ll do my thing my way, call it Christain and dare you to say otherwise.
Of course our flesh struggles to rise to the top, even as believers, however, I think the issue with the emergent church is that they see this desire of the flesh to assert itself as a good thing, a thing to be embraced, even ‘celebrated’, whereas scripture teaches that it is a thing to be resisted and fought against.
I really think that’s the root cause of the so-called emergent movement, people want a venue that legitimizes their desire to glorify and cater to themselves rather than one that requires that we glorify and cater to God.
Great post. I highly recommend David Well’s No Place for Truth. One of the best books out there on understanding postmodernism. It is a difficult subject because it tends to lack precise definition (like those who adhere to it, i.e., Emerging church). Wells does an excellent job.
I never post but I read from time to time. I want to recommend Mark Driscoll to all of you. In his book “Confessions of a Reformission Rev” he draws a difference between the Emerging Church and Emergent. The latter is liberal in its theology with the first consists of sound doctrine (Reformed in Driscoll’s case) and culturally engaging methodology
http://www.marshillchurch.org
http://theresurgence.com/md_blog
All For His Glory
Kevin
I recently read something by John MacArthur regarding Driscoll. He says that Driscoll does indeed have correct theology, at least soteriologically, but he has this to say in addition:
“Driscoll ministers in Seattle, birthplace of “grunge” music and heart of the ever-changing subculture associated with that movement. Driscoll’s unique style and idiom might aptly be labeled “post-grunge.” His language—even in his sermons—is deliberately crude. He is so well known for using profane language that in Blue Like Jazz (p. 133), Donald Miller (popular author and icon of the “Emerging Church” movement, who speaks of Driscoll with the utmost admiration) nicknamed him “Mark the Cussing Pastor.”
In fairness, I’ve not heard one of Driscoll’s sermons but if what is referenced here is accurate, I’m not sure we need to be that culturally engaging. There are some parts of our culture that should be outright rejected by the church rather than engaged.
It is important to distinguish between Emergent and emerging. Emergent is a particular organization with a particular group of leaders.
Emergent is is simply a leading voice within the broader ’emerging’ movement. As Kevin points out, Emergent is theologically liberal. The ’emerging church’ is such a broad movement that we find everything from theologically sound to no theology.
Labeling ’emerging’ theologically is a little like labeling the ‘charismatic movement’ theologically (Are you talking about Wayne Grudem or Benny Hinn?).
However, that video is characteristic of the dominant themes in the emerging church in general.
Driscoll does seem to be one of the more theologically sound voices withing the movement. I appreciate the desire to remove cultural barriers to reaching the lost, while maintaining the integrity of God’s truth. However, I’m with Larry in that I have difficulty seeing how being know as “the Cussing Pastor” brings glory to our Savior.
In his book, “Confessions of a Reformission Rev” Driscoll adresses being tagged “Mark the Cussing Pastor” as an unfortunate thing. I have never heard him swear on any of his recent sermons and I am in no way an advocate of foul language. What I was pointing out was Driscoll’s emphasis on spreading the Gospel to the postmodern culture without compromise. I also don’t want the word “engage” to be confused for “embrace”. The body of Christ has to be careful not to put up a wall between the church and culture.
To comment on the actual video:
That’s not a church
It’s a Hippie House
I recommend you listen to at least one Mark Driscoll Sermon or lecture before condemning what he has to say. From all the times I’ve listened to him, I have never heard any language worse than anything you would hear in any PG movie. Also, he does address his “cussing” in his book mentioned above.
I think it is a little overly simplistic to dismiss his whole ministry, all his work, and the methods he uses to teach the bible as not glorifying to the savior from having a bad nickname whether he earned it or not. Paul deliberately crude when appropriate see Ga 5:12, php 3:8.
For the record, did not intend to condemn Mark Driscoll. I was merely commenting on the an aspect of his ministry that has gained considerable attention.
Just as we shouldn’t erect unnecessary cultural barriers that detract from reaching the lost, I don’t think we want to have personal affections that detract from the message either, even if they are cheap ways to grab people’s attention.
Recently, Mark was at the Desiring God conference and actually said he had “repented” of his involvement in the emergent movement (liberal end). He went on to say that His theology has become more reformed and he was simply ignorant during those intial days touring with the leaders in the emergent church. I would like to assume that Mark’s attitude toward foul language is now in a similiar category.
As long as this topic is veering off into this direction, here is a good example of a proper response to one’s own use of course language in public. The language he used would barely cause a movie to be rated PG
Wow! I just watched this video. (I had resisted investing the 11 minutes) The ‘Hippy House’ comment is an entirely appropriate description. I particularly like the guy who says we SHOULD be labeled as hyphenated Christians and then holds disdain for liberal-christians or conservative-christians. This is just the type of double-speak you get when you don’t stand for anything.
Finally, it is abundantly clear that they haven’t a clue who Jesus is. When they get tired of all the other personalities in their ‘community’ of anarchists, they will move on in search of another such community.