I've recently run across some discussion of "the Emergent Church" and that this is related to the post-modern movement within Christianity. I've read a very little bit about this post-modern movement, and I have to admit, I don't get it. I've read some articles at the on-line magazine Next Wave and participated in some forum discussions there (though I could no longer find forums there on a more recent visit) and I have not been able to get a clear understanding of what they are talking about.
A lot of what I'm hearing there sounds to my ears much like other Evangelicals. So what distinguishes them? I have read that this is a reaction against the Modern movement (which, I guess, is what I subscribe to, since I'm a "Modern Liberal" Christian), but I haven't found a clear example of what they are rejecting that goes beyond modernity. Most of what I've read sounds more like going back to the Fundamentalist point of view.
I was told in a chat environment that the Emergent movement, I'm sorry, "conversation" has grown as a split from Fundamentalist churches as a rejection of their too strict insistence on biblical literalism, but as I understand it, the Modern movement was exactly this rejection of biblical literalism. So do the Emergent/Post-Modern churches view the Modern point of view as having gone too far? Wouldn't that make them "semi-Modern" instead of Post-Modern? Wouldn't something that is post-whatever go beyond that "whatever" instead of saying "no, that went to far, we're going to back off from that position"?
I like Meg Jenista's term "Fundagelical" which seems to me to fit what I'm getting from these Emergent/Post-Modern writings:
1. Fundagelical. def. n. a person who claims to be an evangelical but whose eschatology and reticence to engage with the real world belies their claim and places them solidly in the fundamentalist camp. Used in context: "The Fundagelical said she wasn't a dispensationalist but a progressive dispensationalist." adj. churches/institutions that remove denominational affiliation from their name in favor of friendlier, more obtuse words like "community" without making the necessary re-evaluation of the theology which continues to inform their beliefs and instruction. Used in context: "My church used to be a 'Baptist' church but now we are just a Left-Behind-toting, Republican, independent, homophobic, conservative, tee-totaling 'Community' church."
Surely I'm just misunderstanding this complex movement which seems to have a lot of people talking, both for it and less impressed by it.
Since I'm specifically interested in hearing a coherent explanation or getting pointers to a good resource (preferably on the net), I am enabling comments for this post. I notice my counter going up faster than is explained by the times I check my site to see if my counter has advanced, so I suspect someone, somewhere is reading this. I hope it is someone who might know something about this and not just comment spammers. Let me know your thoughts. Please.
Posted by JoKeR at August 11, 2005 12:03 AM | TrackBack