Just got through the first section of part one of Phyllis Tickle book "The Great Emergence". I've been dabbling in things called "emergent" for the last 7 or 8 years. Leonard Sweet is, by number of his books I have, my favorite author and his musing's are what tipped my interests toward "emergent" authors and events. Lately I've been a little more cautious about the so called "emergent movement", mainly because it stretch's the field in places of theology that I think are at times ridiculous and at other times just not sound, but that is another 100 blogs or so.
I first heard Phyllis Tickle speak at an Emergent Conference in Nashville, TN. She made an impression on me then with her command of the stage, insight into subject and passion for the faith. So I was interested in what she has to say, but still a bit cautious. . .and quite honestly I still have my hand on the "wary button". However in just the opening pages she has set the ground work of support for much of my personal observances and laments about the institutional church. It has evoked responses like "that is what I've been saying all along" or "I knew there was something to my maniacal ranting".
Quoting "Bishop Mark Dyer", Tickle says this: ". . .about every 500 years the empowered structures of institutionalized Christianity, whatever they may be at the time, become an intolerable carapace that must be shattered in order that renewal and new growth may occur." Now this has gotten my attention, because for the last couple of years the only answer that I can see to the future of the church is an almost total do over. Course I have to read on now, but this certainly satiates my interest.
2 comments:
John, sounds interesting - keep me posted on the book and your observations.
~Jeff
John, I was reading the Nov/Dec "Modern Reformation" and I encountered an article by David Wells that tackles the same problems raised by the Emergents from the Evangelical side of the house.
-----
"The Evangelical Manifesto issued in May of this yea and signed by many evangelical leaders, gives a diagnosis of the movement which is true, clear, pungent, and with which I wholeheartedly agree.
It speaks of evangelicalism's internal 'confusions' and of evangelicals as being 'in dire need of reformation and renewal.' Why is this? It is because biblical truth has been replaced by 'therapeutic techniques, worship by entertainment, discipleship with growth in human potential, church growth with business entrepreneurialism.' The result is a kind of culturally perverted Christianity in which 'we ourselves are often atheists unawares, secularists in practice who live in a world without windows to the supernatural, and often carry on our Christian lives in a manner that has little operational need for God.' As if that were not enough, evangelicals, who loudly proclaim the doctrine of sin, are nevertheless turning a blind eye to their own sins and failings.
[...] (and this is what stuck out to me)
Unfortunately, though much of what the Manifesto sees as wrong is now so thoroughly institutionalized, so much of it is a part of the warp and woof of evangelical believing, so much of it unashamedly practiced by the leaders, both pastoral and institutional, who should be about addressing what is wrong that no 'business as usual' kinds of repentance are going to work."
~"Time to Clean House, Time to Dream Dreams" by David Wells
Post a Comment