A few people in the blogosphere have mentioned this article by Alan Roxburgh today. I’m off work poorly sick at the minute so I got chance to read this paper yesterday. I tend to read a fair bit on the emerging church (generally produced by the pro lobby) because in both theory and practise it makes me smile. What Roxburgh writes is really interesting. He gives a really balanced critique of the whole thing and connects the movement to church history really well… I won’t bother to summarise the entire thing, instead here’s an excerpts and if it ‘tickles your fancy’ give the whole thing (just four pages) a read…
"At their best, these younger leaders want to challenge the North American church to a conversation about faith and mission in the midst of what they deem a postmodern transition. They want to engage in conversation about the philosophical, theological, methodological, and cultural challenges we face in our fast-changing world. At their worst, they become a new form of seeker-driven churches which use art, music, the digital revolution and the aesthetic pastiche of the moment to create new experiences.
At their best they courageously and joyfully enter the worlds of Goths and tattoo parlors to form Christian life in, with, beside and for people who would never be welcome in most congregations. At their worst they become the purveyors of more experiential, artsy, aesthetic forms of religious goods and services."
The more I read about the Emerging Church the more I think it is a great cause of hope for all living in post-Christian situations, but there are things that those in authority need to keep an eye on too. In particular Roxburgh is wary of…
1. the aesthetics becoming the message rather than the medium
2. leaders simply doing emerging church as a reaction against evangelical leadership and charismatic worship
3. vulnerable people being hurt or left high and dry by the uncertainty of the movement and its lack of definition (in theory and particularly in practice)
Roxburgh’s concern’s are all note worthy, but the last two speak strongly to me. Most associated with this movement are in some way reacting against what went before, but I guess it’s important that this isn’t the driving motive. Similarly, although we might detest the certainty of the much of the evangelical church, whatever happens next must have clear guidelines or else people are just going to end up screwed and I think the church is doing enough of that already!!!
Comments