Editor’s note: Much has been written recently about the Emerging church movement and its impact upon worship, church growth, and other aspects of church life. This article is the first of a two-part series addressing this movement. Part 2 will appear in the May 2010 issue.
Some say that trying to define the Emerging church is like nailing gelatin to the wall. They challenge any attempt to describe, define, or categorize the Emerging church. I agree, since work in the Emerging church is destined to be criticized for either overstatement or understatement. Yet, the Emerging church is real and should not be taken for granted as another passing trend or fad. True, there is faddishness, and the Emergent theology is more about surfing than deep diving. In spite of it all, the Emergents are serious about their work. Since they take their work seriously, we should do so as well. No attempt will be made here to hammer Emergents; rather, they will be handled gently. In spite of their many voices, the diverse communities that comprise the Emerging church do have certain attitudes, objectives, and characteristics in common that tie them together into a phenomenon that is charting its own place in history.
The purpose of this two-part series is to summarize, analyze, and assess the Emerging (or Emergent) church movement1 and its selected teachings and practices in order to draw necessary lessons on how to respond as individuals and a Bible-based Christian community to the challenges it poses. For example, a number of my students read— by their own choice—the works of Emergents. Some even attend Emergent worships. My students are not alone in experimenting with spirituality outside their respective denominations. There is a thirst for spirituality, and the Emergents are fully exploiting the situation. Based on what former students and friends tell me of what is happening in their respective religious communities, I understand that the Emergent worship practices and theology are gradually affecting the church in general and mainline Protestant churches in particular.2 As a result, some members—self-proclaimed “progressives”—push for changes toward experiential and participatory worship services and toward Christian living that is sensual rather than routine. They expect Christians to be inclusive and accepting rather than exclusive and judgmental. They may be characterized as emergent. If their needs are not met, they usually walk away.
On the other hand, there are members who do not like changes. They resist change, even small changes. This group expects their pastor to affirm and defend the already established worship practices and theology. They usually stay put and are often glad, when the other group leaves, to have rid themselves of those “radical” postmodernists and relativists. The latter see change as a necessity, the former suspect apostasy in radical changes. Both groups, however, whether they are aware of it or not, are responding to major cultural shifts taking place in society at large.3
What is the Emerging/ Emergent church?
The Emerging/Emergent church is also known as the Great Emergence, the Emergent Conversation, Vintage Christianity, the Ancient-Future Faith, and most recently as Emergent Christianity.4 You may also encounter book titles such as Organic Church, AquaChurch, Intelligent Church, Reimagining Church, The Church of the Perfect Storm, and so forth.5 If we ask Tony Jones, a leading Emergent, what the Emergent Village—yet another label—is, he will compare it to a garden full of a variety of greens and “a beautiful mess.”6 In spite of its diverse approaches to spirituality and its many voices, where some are emerging faster than others, the Emergent church has one thing in common: they are all emerging—an important theological concept to be addressed in part 2 of this series.
There are two aspects to the Emerging/Emergent church. The two are happening simultaneously. First, the Emerging church is not a new denomination, but a network of like-minded pastors who, back in the late 1990s, felt homeless and unchurched. Most of them were previously involved in the Young Leaders Network, the Theological Working Group, and the Terranova Project.7 By 2000, the founding Group of Twenty8 transformed itself into the Emergent church, with a clear objective to transcend denominational discord and eliminate doctrinal and ecclesiological barriers that separate people. Thus, from the very start, the Emerging church has been ecumenical, with an emphasis on global awareness as well as local involvement. Second, the Emergent church is also a historical grass-roots development. Since the 1960s, the population has been gradually moving away from organized religion and toward personalized spirituality. We are only now seeing the results of the influence TV celebrities, spiritual Internet sites, and postmodern academia have had on the masses. In other words, Emergent theology reflects what has been happening in family rooms across the country for several generations. Spiritual gurus on various TV shows have replaced the local priest and the pastor. While watching TV, people have been formulating their own spirituality. Unaware of the subtle changes in its thinking, the populace has become what is usually referred to as a postmodern generation—post-world wars, postcolonial, post-Western and, notably, post-Protestant, even post-Christian. This sociohistorical aspect is usually taken for granted by Christians as something they can do nothing about; therefore, why bother with it?
The spine of the Emergent paradigm of thinking, or the Emergent matrix of reality, is “both/and” rather than the traditional Western “either/or.” The Emergents refuse to separate reality. The very notion of emerging is to accept the idea that all voices need to be heard, that all narratives (stories) need to be told, and that whatever emerges out of it all is the Emergent metanarrative—if there is such a thing. No individual and no group can have a metanarrative that dominates all the others. According to this thinking, the biblical great conflict narrative between Christ and Satan, between good and evil, is pushed to the side, ignored, or downplayed. It is misinterpreted as intolerant, judgmental, divisive, repulsive, and nonapplicable to contemporary social needs. It should be of no surprise that the Emergents have a difficult time dealing with the subjects of atonement and the destruction of sinners.
The Emergents are intolerant only toward those who are “intolerable.” This negative attitude toward groups who hold to metanarratives and certitude of Truth often intimidates the latter from standing up to the Emergents.
The emerging worship and theology
The Emergent church does raise serious issues as to what Christian worship should be. There are several reasons why Christians should pay attention to worship style—mainline Protestants in particular.9 First, since worship is usually the first impression a newcomer to a religious community experiences, it follows that Christians should create a worship environment that would inspire the new worshiper to come back. That would constitute a missional dimension to worship. Second, the same applies for the current members—a nurturing dimension. Third, in this age of fast-paced living, where people believe they can easily get a satisfactory summary on a doctrine or biblical text over the Internet at the click of a button, they are not particularly interested in hearing long sermons. Today, an increasing number of people go to church to experience God. They want to be emotionally excited, even disturbed, by the Divine Presence—therefore, an experiential dimension. Fourth, the worship experience connects people with God—thus the sought-after spiritual dimension.
One of the main reasons people skip church worship today is precisely because of the routine and nonparticipatory atmosphere. It is for these reasons that Emergents follow Rick Warren’s advice to “never attach your church to a single style; you’ll soon be passé and outdated.”10 When people speak of worship, they mean an experience they had or expect to have in the designated place of worship: through singing, praying, meditating, testifying, participating in a liturgy, reading the sacred text, listening to a homily, breaking bread and drinking the wine, smelling the incense and candle flame, etc.
In spite of the apparent variances in the style of worship among Emergents, they all resonate that “spirituality must be experienced.” Emergents believe that all five senses (sight, smell, touch, hearing, and taste) should be, in one way or another, involved in worship. As a result, they are introducing new and alternative approaches to worship, such as casual dress, physical rearrangement of seats and the pulpit in order to create a more casual and relaxed atmosphere, candlelight, visual arts, icons, all types of music, the eucharist, medieval centering or contemplating prayers, moments of silence, various forms of meditation (including Eastern forms of meditation) and mystical practices, prayer labyrinths, designated places for personal meditation, silence and prayer, and so forth—all of which have the purpose of making worship EPIC—experiential, participatory, image-driven, and connected.11
Some of these innovations are biblically acceptable, while others are not. Some youth leaders and pastors are adopting some of these without much discrimination. Of particular concern is the introduction of practices like the presence of icons, mystic notions of silence and meditation, contemplation and medieval centering prayers, the eucharist with its transubstantiation notions, prayer labyrinths, and so forth. These practices are designed to lead the worshiper toward self-centeredness, self-reliant methods of salvation, self-worship, nature worship, and pantheistic, gnostic, or monistic states of mind.12 In other words, their purpose is to take the focus away from Jesus Christ and place it on someone or something else.
Christians who uncritically adopt some of these practices should pay attention to what the Emergent leaders themselves have to say about Emerging worship. The Emergents are very cognizant of the fact that worship is inseparable from theology, that one shapes the other, that one is the other. It should be noted that there is only so much one can innovate and say about alternative ways of worship before one begins to tamper with theology. According to Dan Kimball, one of the most recognized Emerging leaders on worship, people miss the point of “foundational issues” when they focus on merely experimenting with different models of worship. What model of worship we adopt amounts to no more than what kind of wrapping paper we use to wrap what matters most, that is, what we believe and what we worship.13 In other words, our worship speaks our theology. Our worship reflects what kind of God we worship. It tells us about our God. Again, our worship is our theology. Every single Emergent work on new models of worship I have analyzed starts with worship and ends discussing spirituality and theology.
Worship should be participatory and experiential; there is a definite need to address this issue. While I am not advocating incense and icons, worship should be more liturgical in style.14 I would, however, suggest that we never introduce into worship any practice which detracts from the person of Jesus Christ, the Living God, the Creator God, and takes worshipers toward self, nature, and god or spirit that is not clearly identified with God the Creator, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,15 and the God of Moses, Daniel, and the apostles; i.e., with the biblical Jesus Christ. In this age of multicultural emphasis where all religions—that is, all gods—are given the stage, it is of utmost importance that we clearly indicate whom we worship.
A biblical worship requires a great deal of preparation. We need to update our worship, while keeping it biblical. Worship needs to focus on what God has done, is doing, and will do for His people.
The challenge and contribution the Emerging/Emergent church provides
My research shows that the Emerging/Emergent church (1) has become a serious challenge to Christians who, over the years, have become complacent, lethargic, and insensitive to social ills.16 The Emergent call to authentic Christianity is both difficult and unreasonable to dispute. (2) It is able to reach a segment of society that many traditional Christians would not, a segment of society that would hardly ever step into the church or listen to traditional evangelistic presentations. There are thousands of “wounded” children of Christian parents, thousands of alienated young and old who are completely disappointed with Christianity and Christians.17
(3) It provides a forum for a conversation between various opinions and religious groups. They raise serious questions, and to most of those questions, they have no answers. We Christians who take the gospel mission seriously and claim the Scriptures to be the sole repository of spiritual authority should welcome this opportunity to step in and make a contribution. It goes without saying that those who venture into this debate better make sure they are well prepared to do legitimate exegesis and exposition of the gospel and biblical text. And (4) it points to a major worldview shift taking place, and few Christians are paying attention. Christianity is drifting away from its biblical theistic worldview. Like Gnosticism of the second century, the Emergent theology is a threat to Christianity today “precisely because it [is] not an organized counterforce but rather a way of thinking within the faith.”18
It is the Emergent theology and this worldview shift that we will discuss in part 2 of this series.
Notes:
1. In most situations, emerging refers to the movement itself and its related activities, whereas emergent refers to theology and its related processes of concepts and ideas. Throughout this article, I will use the two interchangeably, often one term denoting the meaning of the other as well.
2. Mainline Protestant is a rather loose category, and would include all those congregations that somehow fail to meet expectations of the postmodern generation: to be inclusive, tolerant, experiential, participatory, nontraditional, etc. Therefore, traditional Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, Baptists, Evangelicals, Fundamentalists, even Seventh-day Adventists, would fall into this category.
3. That a cultural shift away from modernity to postmodernity is taking place is not in dispute. Emergents, however, are fond of (over) emphasizing this cultural shift. The cultural shift in question here is predicated on scientific and technological advances, which, by their very nature, influence the human view of reality, human habits, and how humans handle daily affairs. Hence the argument, since we live in a totally different world than our ancestors, we need a new moral guide on how to handle abortion, homosexuality, the role of women in the church, etc. There is some merit in this argument; however, the Emergents fail to notice that the gospel is not addressing technological and cultural changes but human nature—and human nature has remained the same ever since Adam and Eve. For example, see Leonard Sweet, Soul Tsunami: Sink or Swim in New Millennium Culture (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1999).
4. To learn more about the Emergent church, start with Doug Pagitt and Tony Jones, eds., An Emergent Manifesto of Hope (Grand Rapids, MI: BakerBooks, 2007); Phyllis Tickle, The Great Emergence: How Christianity Is Changing and Why (Grand Rapids, MI: BakerBooks, 2008). Also, visit the official Web site of the Emergent movement, www.emergentvillage.com. For Emergent Christianity, see www.cacradicalgrace.org; look for the upcoming conference under the same label to be held in April 2010.
5. Neil Cole, Organic Church: Growing Faith Where Life Happens (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2005); Leonard Sweet, AquaChurch: Essential Leadership Arts for Piloting Your Church in Today’s Fluid Culture (Loveland, CO: Group Publishing, 1999); Steve Chalke, Intelligent Church: A Journey Towards Christ-Centered Community (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2006); Frank Viola, Reimagining Church: Pursuing the Dream of Organic Christianity (Colorado Springs, CO: David C. Cook, 2008); and Leonard Sweet, ed., The Church of the Perfect Storm (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2008).
6. Tony Jones in An Emergent Manifesto of Hope, 15.
7. Tony Jones, The New Christians: Dispatches From the Emergent Frontier (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2008), xvii.
8. Actually, the Group of Twenty consisted of approximately two dozen plus or minus individuals. It was more of a
gravitational center of the early Emergents. See Jones, The New Christians, 49.
9. Protestants have stripped the church walls of images, threw out the incense and candles, introduced a sermon—a necessity to instruct the believers into what is the correct biblical doctrine—and thus transformed the worship experience from being highly liturgical (experiential and participatory) to instructive and analytical.
10. Rick Warren, foreword to The Emerging Church: Vintage Christianity for New Generations, by Dan Kimball (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2003), 7.
11. Of course, not all Emergents adopt all of these. For EPIC, see Leonard Sweet, Post-Modern Pilgrims: First Century Passion for the 21st Century World (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000). Books and articles on how to do worship and how to church are abundant. See Kimball, The Emerging Church; Eddie Gibbs and Ryan K. Bolger, Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2005). For the use of Eastern monistic mysticism, see Nanette Sawyer, “What Would Huckleberry Do? A Relational Ethic as the Jesus Way,” in An Emergent Manifesto of Hope, 41–50; Samir Selmanovic, It’s Really All About God: Reflections of a Muslim Atheist Jewish Christian (San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass, 2009), 130–141.
12. More on the theology behind these practices will follow in part 2 of this series.
13. Kimball, The Emerging Church, 14, 15.
14. For example, a worshiper who had attended the Catholic or Eastern Orthodox liturgy takes home a more memorable experience than a worshiper in a common Protestant service where the “instructional” sermon dominates. Granted, a sermon can also be engaging but often ends up poorly executed. Likewise, a Pentecostal worship also involves the entire person. Notice that it is virtually impossible to fall asleep during Catholic or Orthodox liturgy or during a Pentecostal worship hour, an occurrence common in Protestant worship services.
15. Exodus 3:15.
16. Read the message to the church of Laodicea in Revelation 3:14–19.
17. See Dan Kimball, They Like Jesus But Not the Church: Insights From Emerging Generations (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2007); Jones, The New Christians.
18. Ronald A. Wells, History Through the Eyes of Faith, Christian College Coalition Series (San Francisco: HarperCollins Publishers, 1989), 39.
