Picture This
A few weeks ago I followed a link to one of those survey sights. This one was desgined to tell me what I am in terms of my faith. For those of you waiting on the edge of their seats, it turns out I am not actually a Muslim, nor a Buddhist nor an atheist. In fact, after ranking my responses on over 100 questions in turns out that I am an "Emergent Christian." They even put a little picture on there. Apparently I am going to look just like Brian McLaren before this is all over. Perhaps I should have kept a copy of the results in case I ever need them to get into a missional club, but I didn't. I tossed them. Maybe it was a knee-jerk reaction to being labeled.
There is something interesting about being identified as something rather than identifying yourself as something. I thought back over my responses to the questions trying to remember what I had said and how it may have been interpreted. Reading some of the description of someone who is "emergent" I thought that indeed it sounded like me even though I was a bit resistant in light of the impressions I had gotten from other people who identify themselves accordingly. Perhaps I should explain.
Something about the church of my youth that bothered me was the notion of exclusions and absolutes. I have always been very aware of my ignorance. And while I may have been given a double portion of ignorance, I doubt that I have completely cornered the market. In light of this, I really do not think that any person has completely firgured out the mind of God and has a full understanding of His ways and His plan. Therefore, the idea that any one understanding of scripture is absolutely correct is folly. I guess that is why I was less than enamored with the legalistic teachings of my faith heritage, but it may also be why I am skeptical of being identified as emergent.
I might be stating the obvious, but it seems like those who are now enlightened and disappointed in the ways of conservative legalism are just as openly critical toward those on the other side as the other side is toward them. Is it possible that either side has a stranglehold on ultimate truth? Neither is unique in acting like they do. And sadly, it often seems like both sides spend more effort and time talking about their opinion than they do acting on it.
I guess it's easier to condemn than to be introspective. I guess it's easier to talk about being missional as a church or a group than it is to actually form close relationships with people from the other side of the tracks. Oh well, even if the disenfranchised are further alienated by the intellectual conversations we have on their behalf I am sure they are impressed. And that's gotta be worth something, right?
I do not intend for anything I have said here to sound critical of Brian McLaren. Quite the opposite. In fact, I have been very impressed and moved by much of his material. Still, I wonder whose picture would have been on my page if I had answered a few questions differently? Maybe I need to find that website again and keep trying until I find a picture of Jesus. I'll get right on that.
There is something interesting about being identified as something rather than identifying yourself as something. I thought back over my responses to the questions trying to remember what I had said and how it may have been interpreted. Reading some of the description of someone who is "emergent" I thought that indeed it sounded like me even though I was a bit resistant in light of the impressions I had gotten from other people who identify themselves accordingly. Perhaps I should explain.
Something about the church of my youth that bothered me was the notion of exclusions and absolutes. I have always been very aware of my ignorance. And while I may have been given a double portion of ignorance, I doubt that I have completely cornered the market. In light of this, I really do not think that any person has completely firgured out the mind of God and has a full understanding of His ways and His plan. Therefore, the idea that any one understanding of scripture is absolutely correct is folly. I guess that is why I was less than enamored with the legalistic teachings of my faith heritage, but it may also be why I am skeptical of being identified as emergent.
I might be stating the obvious, but it seems like those who are now enlightened and disappointed in the ways of conservative legalism are just as openly critical toward those on the other side as the other side is toward them. Is it possible that either side has a stranglehold on ultimate truth? Neither is unique in acting like they do. And sadly, it often seems like both sides spend more effort and time talking about their opinion than they do acting on it.
I guess it's easier to condemn than to be introspective. I guess it's easier to talk about being missional as a church or a group than it is to actually form close relationships with people from the other side of the tracks. Oh well, even if the disenfranchised are further alienated by the intellectual conversations we have on their behalf I am sure they are impressed. And that's gotta be worth something, right?
I do not intend for anything I have said here to sound critical of Brian McLaren. Quite the opposite. In fact, I have been very impressed and moved by much of his material. Still, I wonder whose picture would have been on my page if I had answered a few questions differently? Maybe I need to find that website again and keep trying until I find a picture of Jesus. I'll get right on that.
3 Comments:
Thanks, Val for your questioning thoughts. And don't be so condescending towards your own intellect, but rather be bold in the ways God is leading you through this.
All this 'emergent'and 'missional' stuff, to be quite honest, has not quite hit the UK in as large a wave yet as in the US. (It's more like a very tiny ripple.) Christians here are wary and a bit suspect of new spiritual trends that start in America, for some reason. The word ‘missional’ still does not appear in the English dictionary … man, the EmergentUK guys are going to go around the block on that one for a good time!
Seems to me a dialogue very similar to this one took up some energy back in the late '70's and early '80's (when I was a sweet young thang), with regards to those in the Church who were suddenly discovering the 'spirit-filled' dimensions of their spiritual life. There was a lot of finger pointing, introspection, snubbing, and posturing going on between those charismatic and those not so. Although it had a positive impact in providing a basis for the Church to become more grace-orientated and tolerant (a dirty word for conservatives then as now), in retrospect, much hurt resulted and reconciliation has been painful. It was a watershed time for Churches in both the US and UK, and it affected at least one generation. People are still repairing and getting over the pain.
I think introspection is an important process within the context of drawing closer to God through the spiritual discipline of meditation. This is one practice that I think Jesus was absolutely brilliant at, because of the energy He gave to it and strength He received from it. How it enabled Him to meet with so many people afterwards -- whether they were strangers or intimates -- was so amazing, and serves as a viable model for us. We may think, 'But He is perfect and doesn't need enabling methodology!' If that's the case, then why did He seem to have such a passion for introspection and meditation, make it a priority, and maintain such discipline in His practice? And He seems to have rarely postured to others about it, or announce, 'Oh, I'm going up to meditate now.' His was such a private, silent model.
After His aloneness with God, just look at the ways He took time to reach out physically, touching and getting to know the 'disenfranchised'. If we want them to be impressed, I agree with you that talk and spiritual hubris, if you will, is not the way to reach them.
I don't know about 'emergent' or 'missional'. They are not topics for hot discussion over here. In fact, the few EmergentUK guys cannot even agree on the term 'emergent' and have been debating about changing the name and some of the phraseology. In the meantime, those who need the touch of Jesus are getting left behind in the dust.
I'm still just grappling with the ways in which to get to know my immediate neighbours better. Just to get them to come over for a cup of tea takes great effort. I know I have to be the one to make the first move.
Anyway, thanks for your genuine thoughts. They prod the spirit! I guess we just have to remember that 'Labels -- the Concept' is one of the very things that our Lord Himself tried so diligently to ignore.
Blessings!
Your thought about going back and trying to get the picture of Jesus made me laugh... because I did try. I took that quiz many times before I got all the labels- and not one of them had a picture of Christ. It is interesting.
I have had the same issues with all of these questions. While I don't agree with some things that have happened in our heritage, it still is our history and we wouldn't be here without that history. It is a question that churches all over grapple with when I really wish we would just try to live it instead of figure out how and what to call it.
"Hostile to the church, friendly to Jesus Christ. These words describe large numbers of people, especially young people, today."
- John Stott (1958)
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
BTW, I took that survey too and it came back with a picture of Brandon Scott Thomas! I'm going to try again. LOL BST.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home