Cultivating Love…

I have been talking often with my wife about farming and food. She continues to introduce me to the dangers and opportunities involved in the agro world. In the midst of this learning, she and I had the opportunity to meet and converse with the farmers with whom we receive our vegetables. They were lovely people with thoughtful eyes and patient countenances. The conversation was wonderful, but there was something that one of the lady’s mentioned that continues to stick with me. During a part of our conversation on faith and farming she said something like:

“Who would have thought I would have learned so much about parenting through farming; learning how to remove those things that would challenge the growth of a vegetable without destroying the vegetable’s roots in the process…. How does one skillfully and delicately discipline and guide a child so that the weeds are removed but the roots are not destroyed?”

This idea is incredible to me: attempting to remove weeds by the roots while being delicate to ensure you do not damage the good. If these wonderful people did not continue everyday this work those good plants—the lettuces, potatoes, carrots—would not have space to grow and thrive. They would have to compete for the soil’s nutrients with those weedy enemies. Many would lose the battle. But with skilled hands and delicate precision these farmers are able to give those vegetables an opportunity to grow. This does not guarantee that it will happen, but it certainly ups the chances.

Jesus spoke at different times about farming. He talked about seeds and weeds, cracked soils, and fertile ground. Though a carpenter, he had a keen understanding of the agricultural labor. In this Modern Age we’ve lost this agricultural sensibility. This thinking that asks: How does one clear away those things that hinder genuine growth from happening? This is precisely what is intended when certain individuals, myself included, speak about Spiritual Formation or Spiritual Disciplines. The Christian Life and Love is not natural growth, but something requiring skilled hands and delicate precision. It must be cultivated, and we must orient our lives the same way that farmers orient their trade to the seasons and patterns around them. They are always creating opportunity for growth. This is a possible meaning of inhabiting this reality Christianly: It requires cultivation, learning the “seasons,” and moving in this reality by a different rhythm.

It takes practice and persistence. It takes being willing to change our habits in order that life takes on a different, yet savory flavor. It also takes failing. We are imperfect at these things and we will make mistakes. But we can learn from these farmers. We can continue on in faith knowing that tomorrow brings with it the chance for opportunity to be created. And, who knows, maybe we will discover God right there with us in the fields.

Something tells me we will…


Peace.

This Emerging Movement: Part 3

The Emerging Movement or Conversation is a poignant philosophical critique of modernity. Individuals or groups often miss this when they discuss this topic. It seems that the movement is most often caricatured as a liberal movement that is essentially out to destroy Truth. They, it is presented, are either those desiring to do “hip church” or they are sinister individuals out to undermine historical Christianity.(1) To continue moving forward in this discussion we must first address is what this ‘modern’ thing is that is being critiqued.

Without getting into the minutia of some of the thinking that is the soil for modernity, I will give three categories that emerged from it that have direct influence for our conversation:

1. The decline of tradition for the pursuit of progress
2. Rise in science, rationality, education and professions
3. Significance of Individualism (2)

Robert Webber defines them as follows:

1. Individualism: the ultimate autonomy of each person
2. Rationalism: elevated confidence in the mental capacity to “investigate and understand reality…”
3. Factualism: the belief that our mental capacities (reason) are capable of arriving at objective truth.(3)

What the modern ethos essentially gave us was the belief in our capacity to elevate ourselves outside any biases, cultural formation, historical formation, ethnic formation etc, and achieve an objective understanding of reality. The mind, essentially, could grasp truth completely. There was no need for mystery or revelation or any sort of process outside the human capacity for reason and rationality. No longer do we need a reference point to teach us about reality. Our mental capacities are not reliant upon anything, especially a Deity, as a reference point toward understanding. Man takes center stage as the one who can fully capture and even manipulate nature.

But not to be too cynical, the modern age did bring us massive technological invention and a myriad of developments that should be applauded. The unfortunate consequence, however, is that this man-central supposition has been over-realized. The postmodern critique begins with the challenge that an individual is able to elevate him or herself beyond their biases, assumptions, culture, and whatever else that has formed and informed him or her. Postmodern thought asserts that this objective understanding is nothing more than a veil covering a persons convictions or biases. Now, this has several implications both for good and bad. But for today’s post, I would like for you to ponder on the implications of the descriptions of modernity given above.

What are good things that might come from this framework? What are negative things? How have these—in your opinion—formed our understanding of Christianity? How have they formed our socio-cultural activities and creations?

The next post will address the postmodern response. I bring this modern tendency to the service because this framework has been extremely influential in our Christian thinking. And if we really want to be able to dialogue with anything Emerging, we need to understand some of what they are critiquing.

Please share your thoughts.


(1)The second part of this is interesting in that for several American denominations their self-understanding starts at the Reformation and moves forward. Often the first 500 years or so of Church history gets lost in comparison to Luther or Calvin. It is also interesting to point out, and I will get into this later, but the historical skepticism that has challenged several of the Reformed traditions is being brought to bear on their own teaching by the Emerging Movement. Interesting irony.

(2)Beckford, James A. (2004) Religion and Postmodernity. Sociology Review.

(3)Webber, Robert (1999) Ancient-future Faith. (pp 18) Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books

This Emerging Movement: Part II

I wanted to try and jump into some of the history of this movement today, but there is a bit of prefacing that needs to happen before we can move forward. I am doing this primarily because there are many presupposition and assumptions we bring to this kind of discussion. It is important, then, that I present a couple important framework pieces.

1. The Church has and is always emerging. There has never been a static moment in the history of Judeo-Christianity. When we read scripture all the way through we should quickly recognize that there was growth process taking place. (I submit that we should think of this process not so much like evolutionary progress, but more like a seed that is constantly growing and emerging.) When we look at Church history we also find constant changes and metamorphoses happening. Our last major turning point could be considered the Reformation, which oddly at times becomes the starting point of Church history for some. I mention this point because it is important that we recognize that change is going to happen, and that this emerging movement is completely in line with what is presented in scripture and in Church history.

2. Know the differences between Modernism and Postmodernism. Postmodernism has been completely summed up with one term--relativism. This is bothersome because it is a straw man argument that does not deal with the substantive issues that the philosophy actually brings to our attention. There is also little understanding and critique of our own modern philosophy with its assertion in the objective knower. (I will get into this in a later post.) What I am pointing out here is that people need to be aware of their presuppositions. The modern ethos, which has influenced most of us in varying degrees, taught certain ways of viewing reality, ourselves, and even the Scripture. If we want to even be reasonable in our assessment of Postmodernity or the Emerging Movement we need to understand the assumptions or suppositions we bring to the critique. Postmodernity or the Emerging Movement should not be summed up with the term Relativism any more so than Modernism should be summed up as Individualism. Both terms are present in each, but do not define the whole.

3. Read the materials and become familiar with Emerging Leaders. The disagreements and controversy surrounding folks Brian McLaren and Rob Bell no more represent the entirety of the Emerging Movement than Joel Osteen or Ted Haggard represent the rest of Christianity. If you think some of these guys are teaching heretical ideas then challenge them. But challenge them with sound reasoning, wisdom, and understanding. If you want to take pot shots at these guys, then be prepared to have pot shots taken at you. We have got to learn to disagree strongly but with civility and good character. Pithy jabs and passive-aggressive statements are ridiculous. I do not agree with everything the ladies and gentleman of this movement present, and I am going to strongly challenge and critique them. But I will do this on the basis of the thoughts and content that has been presented for all of us to read. Here is a personal bibliography to help with this:

Webber, Robert. (1999) Ancient-future faith. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing

Kimball, Dan. (2003) The Emerging Church: Vintage Christianity for new generations. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan

*Webber, Robert (ed.) (2007) Listening to the Beliefs of the Emerging Churches. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan

McKnight, Scot. (2007, February) The Five Streams of the Emerging Christianity. Christianity Today, 51(2) 35-39

Bolger, Ryan and Eddie Gibbs. (2005) Emerging Churches: creating Christian community in postmodern cultures. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing

Jones, Tony. (2008) The new Christians: dispatches from the emerging frontier. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

*Sweet, Leonard (ed.) (2003) The Church in Emerging Culture: five perspectives. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan

Podcast:

Dallas Theological Seminary: DTS Dialogue—Issues of God and Culture: The Emerging Church. (Host is Dr. Mark Bailey)


* These versions consist of essays written by various leaders on the Emerging Movement continuum. Doug Pagitt and Tony Jones also edited a book of essays: The Emergent Manifesto of Hope. I did not add it in the list because I have not read it.

This Emerging Movement: Part 1

In the process of researching for my thesis, I have come to realize there are many misnomers and incomplete assumptions put upon the Emerging Movement (or conversation). It is often assumed that people associated with anything Emerging are just hip Christians who love candles, rock-star worship, and a host of other constructions used to de-legitimize the entirety of the movement. There is some accuracy that the churches that fall on the emerging continuum may have great aesthetic appeal and tend toward a more trendy form of worship and style. But such discontentment (ridicule?) cannot be used to describe the movement in its entirety. There are attributes pastors, leaders, and thinkers within this movement are proposing that are extremely important for us to consider.

I would like to present some of this material here. There are certainly points of criticism that need to be addressed and discussed. But these criticisms need not overshadow possible substantive thought and material needing consideration. Some might declare that this “conversation” is dead and gone. I do not necessarily think that is a fair assumption. There may be parts of the movement that have become less influential, but there are some core tendencies that need to continue to be discussed and analyzed.

I want to close with the most thoughtful and concise explanation of the Emerging Movement. It comes after several years of research by Fuller seminary professors Ryan Bolger and Eddie Gibbs. Here is their definition:

“Emerging churches are communities that practice the way of Jesus within postmodern cultures. This definition encompasses nine practices. Emerging churches (1) identify with the life of Jesus, (2) transform the secular realm, and (3) live highly communal lives. Because of these three activities, they (4) welcome the stranger, (5) serve with generosity, (6) participate as producers, (7) create as created beings, (8) lead as a body, and (9) take part in spiritual activities.” (Bolger and Gibbs, 2005, p. 45)


Bolger, Ryan and Eddie Gibbs. (2005) Emerging Church: creating Christian communities in postmodern cultures. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing