The Emerging Church
(Part 2)
By Rick Shrader
The primary tenet of the Emerging Church has been that we
must a) recognize that our culture has become postmodern and b) we must immerse
our churches much more into this postmodernism if we are to reach this
generation with the gospel. It has been my contention that “a” is true but “b”
is false. Increasingly Christian apologists are sounding warnings that this
movement has gone over-board in their love affair with the postmodern culture
with little or no warning of its inherent dangers. I have already suggested
reading D.A. Carson’s stinging rebuke of the Emerging Church1 for
their unbridled adoption of postmodernism. I might also suggest Douglas
Groothuis’ chapter on Postmodernism2 from this month’s book review.
Also Millard Erickson’s Truth or Consequences,
part 3.3 All of these strongly warn churches of the dangers in using
postmodern methodologies to such a degree.
1. EPIC of the Emerging Church
In his 2000 book Post-Modern Pilgrims4
Leonard Sweet outlined his vision for the new Emerging Churches with the
four-fold epigram EPIC, which he gives in a catchy postmodern way, “E(xperiential),”
“E-P(articipatory),” “E-P-I (mage-Driven),” “E-P-I-C (onnected).” By these four
adjectives Sweet presents the case for churches adopting a much more serious
postmodern mindset.
Experiential.
It takes little proof to show that the current culture puts much more stock in
experience and feeling than in rational thinking. Sweet writes, “Postmoderns
don’t want their information straight. They want it laced with experience
(hence edutainment). And the more extreme the better” (p. 33).
Two of the most common expressions of this in churches are
the replacement of “testimonials” with the sharing of “experiences,” and the
replacing of music that relies heavily on the message while the music brings the
participants into an experience. For support he enlists a Barna study which
“found that 32 percent of all stripes of regular churchgoers have never
experienced God’s presence in worship. Forty-four percent have not experienced
God’s presence in the past year” (p. 45). Sweet advocates, “Total Experience is
the new watchword in postmodern worship. New World preachers don’t ‘write
sermons.’ They create total experiences” (p. 43).
In 1985 Neil Postman wrote Amusing Ourselves to
Death in which he described a “Sesame Street” generation that has been
entertained in school and church since infancy and is now holding us all hostage
with the demand, “Entertain me and I’ll learn.” Sweet’s assessment of the
postmodern generation merely describes this phenomenon as inevitable. He makes
no attempt to offer suggestions for combating it but rather only offers ways to
“go with the postmodern flow.” (These are the ones who have always criticized
Conservatives for their failure to confront the culture!) This appears to be
a capitulation to postmodern feeling over fact, or rather, feeling that creates
the fact!
Participatory.
It is not hard to show that the postmodern culture is one of participation, of
two-way communication not one-way. Sweet calls this the Karaoke Culture because
people don’t want to merely listen, they want to participate in the music.
Television is mostly a one-way communication whereas the computer forces one to
interact. Older Radio broadcasts were one-way communication whereas talk-radio
allows the listener to participate. Sweet criticizes the old “representative”
culture in a severe caricature (needing to be controlled, have decisions made
for them, etc.) but praises the Participatory Culture for broad-mindedness and
fairness.
In his 1994 book, Postmodern Times, Gene
Veith pointed out that postmodernism was replacing the “representational” art of
premodernism, and the “self-centered” art of modernism with a “participatory
art” of postmodernism that is socially constructed. Again, it may be astute to
recognize what is happening, but it is a lack of biblical stewardship to fall
head-over-heels for the culture’s immaturity and baseness. We have always
recognized that the younger the child, the more he needs sensory participation.
But we also realize that growing up and maturing means to “put away childish
things.”
Image-Driven.
It is not a secret that today’s culture believes that “image is everything.”
Sweet writes, “The lesson for the church is simple: images generate emotions,
and people will respond to their feelings . . . . Images come as close as human
beings will get to a universal language” (p. 86). Sweet makes much of the word
“metaphor” as opposed to the old word “proposition.” A proposition has
connotations of dictionaries, linguistics, logical deductions and the like. But
metaphor has the connotation of symbols, stories, feelings and other
image-driven communication. Sweet says, “Postmodern culture is image-driven.
The modern world was word-based. Its theologians tried to create an
intellectual faith, placing reason and order at the heart of religion” (p. 86).
Metaphors, similes, parables and other language tools all have a legitimate
place in Scripture and other literature. But there is a definite demarcation
between using these language tools to illuminate propositional truth and using
them to create propositions! Carson writes, “Yes, postmoderns are more open to
nonlinear thinking than moderns, and they probably appreciate imagery and
metaphor more than the preceding generation. . . . But there are plenty of
dangers with ‘image-driven’ witness. While it can fire the imagination, it may
prove so subjective that it leads people astray from what the text actually
says.”5
Connected.
I doubt that anyone denies the obvious fact that the world is a smaller place
because of modern communication tools. But the point here is not merely
communication but connectivity. Sweet writes, “the web is less an information
source than a social medium. Both [Amazon.com and eBay] are becoming the new
town squares for the global village” (p. 109). The contention is that people
are hungry for personal connections and are not getting them in the traditional
places. “The paradox is this: the pursuit of individualism has led us to this
place of hunger for connectedness, for communities not of blood or nation but
communities of choice” (p. 109-110). Sweet goes even further when he writes,
“Jesus is the Truth. Truth resides in relationships, not documents or
principles . . . . Not until the fourteenth century (at the earliest) did truth
become embedded in propositions and positions” (p. 131).
Again, no one doubts the fact that this is a connected world and few doubt that
people are hungry for relationships. But where does the local church, made up
of born-again believers and responsible for the precepts of God’s Word, open its
doors indiscriminately to whomever wants to “feel connected?” The Emergent
Church puts “belonging” before “becoming” (i.e. sharing in the family’s benefits
before committing to its membership) even in matters of salvation and church
membership. Unbelievers must never be “disconnected.” In addition, the “global
community” emphasis widens the door for ecumenical and social gospel
participation that conservative local churches have until now cautiously
avoided. To avoid these things is seen as sectarian and narrow-minded to
today’s “connected” generation.
2. Some Further Thoughts
It has been a generally accepted conclusion by conservative writers that
postmodernism has many more negatives than positives. For a new movement to
advocate using more of it, not less, should sound a strong note of warning to
Biblically conservative churches. In addition to my comments above I would add
two thoughts that keep coming back to me as I read more and more of this
literature.
The Return to an Old
Testament Form of Faith and Practice
The appeal for support of contemporary worship is almost always from the Old
Testament because the New Testament says very little about it. New Testament
worship is centered on our High Priest in heaven who continually intercedes for
us. It is by necessity more cognitive than emotional. The writer of Hebrews
often contrasts the temple worship on earth with its “participatory” and
“symbolic” services with that of faith, which understands what is happening
before God’s throne in heaven. Chapter 12 reminds us that we are not come to
Mt. Sinai that was full of sights and sounds, but to Mt. Zion and the things of
a heavenly worship.
Even in the matter of salvation, the Emerging Church places “belonging” before
“becoming” i.e. practicing the things of Christianity before actually accepting
them. Paul’s formula for “the righteousness which is of the law” (Rom 10:5) is
“that the man which doeth those things shall live by them” (taken from Lev 18:5)
rather than the New Testament order of faith before works. Liberal Christianity
has always down-played personal conversion and focused on teaching a person to
try to live the Christian life. The seeker-sensitive model is to bring the lost
person into the church first with a lot of “Christian” activity, and then hope
that conversion will follow.
The simple Christian life with its walk of faith, not of sight, has no appeal to
this carnal world (nor should it). But a religious life of good works with a
lot of activity to keep the contemplation at a minimum appeals a great deal.
Baptists, of all believers, have been champions of a simple, direct New
Testament form of worship. Even D.A. Carson says “The emerging folk have
reversed the order. Invite people to belong, welcome them aboard, take them
into your story, and the ‘becoming’ may follow” (p. 146). Then, sadly, he adds,
“Over against this ‘Believers Church Tradition’ to which they are normally
thought to belong, some Baptists are now openly advocating belonging before
becoming” (p. 147). That’s because a desire for popularity will always
gravitate to the base desires of the lost which will always be a works-based
salvation, what Paul calls “the righteousness which is of the law.” Ironically,
this becomes the real “legalism.”
The Reversal of the
Fundamentals from a Century Ago
Having read the entire set of The Fundamentals
last year, I’m convinced that many who think they are still in that mold are
not, whether they still choose to use the title or not. As I have written
before, the most obvious reversal in thinking is the misconception that these
volumes present an irreducible minimum of doctrines that make one a
“fundamentalist.” The opposite is true. They propose that all of the Bible
must be defended against the modernists who were minimizing almost all parts of
it for rationalistic reasons. To minimize parts of it today for pragmatic
reasons is no less (and perhaps more) dangerous.
I made a list of references from The
Fundamentals that speak to almost all of the concepts in the EPIC outline
above. Space keeps me from being detailed. My intention was to illustrate how
far we’ve moved away from what our forefathers in the faith defended. One
example would be from Howard Crosby on “Preach the Word.” He writes, “Churches
are filled by appealing to carnal desires and aesthetic tastes. Brilliant
oratory, scientific music, sensational topics and fashionable pewholders, are
the baits to lure people into the churches, and a church is called prosperous as
these wretched devices succeed” (Vol. III, p. 169-170).
I’ve also read (and reviewed) the volumes on
The Fundamental Baptist Congresses fifty years after that. They are not
as detailed nor doctrinal as The Fundamentals
but still show the same true fundamentalism. Now, at another fifty year
interval, we need another world-wide voice for the fundamentals of our faith.
As one said of those early days, “There were giants in the land in those days.”
They were truly men who stood against the world and cared not for its praises.
God help us to have some today.
Notes:
1. D.A. Carson,
Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
2005).
2. Douglas Groothuis, “Facing the Challenge of
Postmodernism,” in To Everyone An Answer,
edited by J.P. Moreland and others (Downer’s Grove, IVP, 2004).
3. Millard Erickson,
Truth or Consequences: the promise and perils
of postmodernism (Downer’s Grove: IVP, 2001).
4. Leonard Sweet,
Post-Modern Pilgrims (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2000).
5. Carson, 126.
| 
