(Ir)religiosity

“Emergent is dead” and emergent “break-up” posts seem to be in vogue lately.  The latest round have to do with the release of Brian McLaren’s new book, A New Kind of Christianity.  In the eyes of some he’s gone way too far; for others he is finally clarifying his own positions.  I tend to fall in the latter category.  I am still a few chapters shy of finishing, but it seems to me that this book is the next logical step in the evolution of Brian’s work over time.  In other words, ten years later he is putting more substance to the wild ride he started with A New Kind of Christian.  And the result is the most cohesive and the “best ordered presentation to date of emergent theology.” That last statement has, quite frankly, pissed some people off because Brian hasn’t conformed to their expectations or notions of “orthodoxy”¹ (although I think the subtext to some of the more vitriolic reactions has to do with some built up disdain over the trajectory of the conversation for the past several years) .  Hence the eulogies and dear John letters. The problem, though, is that people had fixed expectations.  This isn’t that type of conversation.  I’m of the opinion that emergence isn’t dead, rather it is evolving and maturing.

Among the more charitable critiques are those offered by Jeremy Bouma who, along with bidding emergent goodbye, is submitting some of the thought to some much needed, though perhaps misguided, thoroughgoing theological critique.  I raised some issues on a few threads that I think are worth exploring here a bit more.

Bouma’s main issue that is that the trajectory of emergent in the past several years (he cites Doug Pagitt, Peter Rollins, and McLaren among others) has departed from “historic orthodox Christianity,” a monolith to be determined by “the rule of the faith.”  In other words, emergent fails the litmus test.  The real question, though, is what is this rule of the faith and who gets to be the arbiter of orthodoxy?  Here Bouma cites both the Nicene and Apostle’s Creed (which, for the purposes of this post, I have no qualms with) alongside his own constructive theological interpretation of them.  This is where we run into problems. Read the rest of this entry »

1. I’m not one to suggest issuing moratoriums on buzzwords, but if I were this word (along with maybe “biblical,” “scriptural” and “heretical”) would be one of them.  It has lost virtually all of its meaning and is only used as a rhetorical trump-card [↩]

I’ll be honest, I was a little disappointed with the book.  That’s not to say it is not without merit, it does several things very well and I’ll get to those in a minute.  But as an avowed Howard Zinn fan I thought the book failed to deliver.  That’s probably the fault of my own expectation combined with the way the book was marketed; however,  Diana Butler Bass points out in the introduction that she hopes to do with Christian history what Zinn did with American history.  Given the size of the book she all but sets herself up for failure.  Again, that is not to say the book itself is not noteworthy.  I just think it might be better served with the Zinn comparisons and with a different title.

But what it is about anyway?

For DBB there are basically two kinds of Christianity:  there is “Big-C Christianity,” which is the story we are all familiar with.  It’s trajectory runs thus: Christ, Constantine, Christendom, Calvin, Christian America.  If you’ve ever taken a church history class, odds are that is the way the story has run.  It’s a story of power, militant coercion and victory.  Counter to that is another type of Christianity, what DBB calls “generative Christianity” or “Great Command Christianity.”  This version of the story is one that is always guided by Jesus’s axiom of loving God and neighbor — contrary to the other story, this is the true essence of Christianity.   While the Big-C story may be dominant and pervasive in church history textbooks, DBB makes the convincing case that the story of generative Christianity has always been around carrying forward the true Christian legacy.  Her intention in the book is to tell that version of the story and eschew the Big-C story. Read the rest of this entry »

While I was away last week I received a copy of Diana Butler Bass’s new book, A People’s History of Christianity: The Other Side of the Story. I about a third of the way of the way through it now and I’m enjoying it so far. This is my first Butler Bass book and without going into a lot of detail (I’m hoping to write several posts pertaining to the content) I’ll just say that I really like that fact that this book is written for a popular audience. Unfortunately, many church history books just aren’t written at that level and probably aren’t enticing to anyone outside the academy. So I applaud that. I’m also really interested in the idea of writing a church history in the style of Howard Zinn (one of my favorite historians and activists), which is what she aims to do given the title.

About her Zinnian method Butler Bass writes:

Eschewing historical orthodoxy, [Zinn] confessed, “I had no illusions about ‘objectivity,’ if that meant avoiding a point of view. I knew that a historian was forced to choose, out of an infinite number of facts, what to present, what to omit.” This book has much the same purpose from a Christian point of view. [...] Like Zinn, I sidestep issues of orthodoxy and instead focus on moments when Christian people really acted like Christians, when they took seriously the call of Jesus to love God and love their neighbors as themselves. (page 14)

I like it. Because all history, like all reading, is always an interpretation. There is no objective, neutral, unbiased or untainted account of “the way things really were.” There just isn’t. Too many histories are written in such a way. I’m glad that Butler Bass admits that up front and I’m excited that she is attempting to tell a side of the story that jettisons the hegemony of historical “orthodoxy” and opts for the story of those on the underbelly of power.

Over the next week or so I will post more of my thoughts on the book. In the meantime, below is a video interview with Diana and Spencer Burke from TheOoze.tv.

Last time I briefly mentioned that in the book Tom Sine divides “the new conspirators” into four major streams: emerging, missional, mosaic, and monastic.¹  I’m interested to see what you think of his divisions and descriptions. I understand the need for identification, but personally I think there is more overlap with the different groups depending about locality and context.

The Emerging Stream

According to Sine — who cites several other notables including Gibbs & Bolger, Jonny Baker, Brian McLaren, and Andrew Jones just to name a few — the emerging stream is especially attuned to postmodern culture and is “actively seeking searching for the sacred in the profane.”²  Thus, emergents are more relational, experiential and are likely to be especially involved in or show a great appreciation to the arts and various forms of new media which are consequently integrated into their worship. Read the rest of this entry »

1. Tom Sine, The New Conspirators: Creating the Future One Mustard Seed at a Time (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 2008), 31-55. [↩]
2. Sine, 34. [↩]

I finished reading Tom Sine’s The New Conspirators a few weeks ago and I’ve meant to throw up a review for a while now.  Because this is such a great and important book I’ve decided to devote a post for each section and hopefully open up some conversation.   If you haven’t read this book yet, I highly recommend it, especially if you’re one of those emergent-y types.  It’s a shame this book hasn’t received more publicity in emergent circles.

Sine begins the book acknowledging that we are indeed living in turbulent times as far as the church as a worldwide institution is concerned.  But instead of focusing solely on the negative he writes, “For followers of Jesus, times of challenge are always times of opportunity to give new expression to God’s love for a people and a world.”¹ Read the rest of this entry »

1. Cf. Tom Sine, The New Conspirators (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 2008), 18. [↩]

This was a great book to read. Especially now.

I’ve always considered myself independent in my politics. I’m a registered independent and I’m constantly finding myself wore out by our two party (or one party,however you view it) system. So this was good for me.

Marcia is an aggressive researcher. And I say that being an aggressive researcher myself. She knows her stuff and the book is chalk full of great, enriching information. The best part is she presents the information in an accessible way. Her writing style is engaging, witty, and, at times, downright funny. I once heard someone say that the trick to teaching and presenting information is to communicate in such a way that the learner doesn’t realize (s)he has been taught. This book is a perfect example. Read it and you will learn without knowing you have learned, it will be a fun and engaging experience.

I confess that before reading this book I was a poorly misinformed independent — at least when it comes to the indie political scene (I had to get that phrase in somewhere!). I’ve always known that our system is inherently biased toward Read the rest of this entry »

This was a really fun book to read. It’s been a while since I’ve read a book that is in a narrative format much less a spiritual memoir. It was a breath of fresh air.

Many of the reviews I’ve read suggest that Gall is a sort of St. Augustine-Don Miller hybrid. I echo their sentiments. Pete’s story is a confessional, sometime brutally so, but it is also engaging, funny, and deeply emotional. It is a story we can all connect with because on a certain level Pete’s story is our story. It simultaneously portrays some of the darkest and most endearing aspects of human nature. And it is real. Pete is real. He doesn’t gloss over his story and bares all so to speak makes himself very vulnerable. In our world that is encouraging and inspiring.

Further, Pete’s story is call to remember. To remember our distinctive mark as followers of the Way to deny self, take up our cross live for others. It is a beautiful reminder to reject our idols and anything else that stands in the way of realizing God’s alternative reality and our synergetic, interactive participation in the life of the divine, the process of creativity, and the ongoing narrative of cosmic restoration and renewal.

If you like a good story of personal journey and spiritual discovery in the style of Don Miller, Anne Lamott, and yes even Augustine then you will thoroughly enjoy this book. It is an easy read, an engaging read and an inspiring read. If you’re looking for some good summer reading I’d recommend picking this one up.

As I mentioned last week I am, along with some others, reading and eventually reviewing Pete Gall’s memior, “My Beautiful Idol.” It is absolutely amazing. Pete’s story is beautiful. Further, his story is our story. It is everyone’s story. I’ll save the rest for my review, which unfortunately may be a little later than I’d originally planned. But it’ coming!

Until then, here are some excerpts:

“There’s an inherent immorality in advertising that shows itself in phrases like “create a need.”…Likewise, there is something inherently immoral about using a gift for ability for the good of something you don’t believe in. It’s a prostitution….”

“I don’t know how the word is used in the Bible, but to my marketing mind and idol is a god you can put in your pocket. It’s something you can control, pull out when you need a does of insurance or magic, and then put away while things click along well. Oh, and an idol will always choose your death over its own. This is true of careers, relationships, doctrines, fears, hiding places, and even the choices we make to “believe in ourselves.” Even the idol of me will choose my death over its own. It happens with suicide, but it also happens in a million ways too. We die in favor of the idols of ourselves anytime we can’t admit the truth to ourselves. And we’re all addicts to that on, I’m afraid.”

“I think the church has become a toothless lion. And the teeth have been pulled out by church people who don’t really believe what they say they believe. They don’t serve the people they say they’ve been called to serve; they don’t trust the truths that say they trust; they don’t love the people they say they love; they don’t keep the promises they say they’ll keep; and they don’t point to the sort of God they say they point to. People from within the church have made errors in judgment…and those errors have diminished the church’s credibility; and the more credibility has been diminished, the more people within the church have capitulated with society’s efforts to relegate the church to some quaint, outmoded superstition; and the more that has happened, the more the church has been left with little to show for itself but the arcane bromides of its small, dark existence.”

I have to admit, I’m quite impressed. I got an email on Monday telling me that I had been selected to be an “Ooze Select Blogger,” which basically means about 3-5 times a year, Zondervan and The Ooze will send me new books to review. Pretty cool.

I was told I’d be getting a copy of Pete Gall’s memoir “My Beautiful Idol.” I have books mailed to me all time, so I figure it would be a good two weeks before it came in the mail. Then today, two days after I got the email, I come home from my morning class and what do I find? A package from Zondervan with my name on it. Apparently they don’t mess around. And apparently books come much quicker when sent directly from the publisher. I’ll have to remember that.

So, anyway, hopefully I can get it read over the next week or so and I after I finish my series on “Jesus for President” I can throw up a review.