Wes' Blog Cabin

Thanks for the update, Mr. Wes.

As always, I enjoy your writing. "Beauty, Pagitt." I *just* got that! Very clever.

And for the whole postmodernism thing? In the words of *my* friend Gloria, "The rhythm is gonna getchya."

watch out for doug. he swears. also, sorry we missed you this weekend. makes me want to swear.

excellent thoughts, wes. allow me to ramble...

having witnessed a couple round-table discussions, heard a few leaders speak, and read several dozen blogs and articles about the whole thing, i consider myself a somewhat informed outsider (though certainly no expert).

one of my problems with the emerging church is the amount of energy they spend on insisting that the "movement" isn't really a "movement" and "can't be defined" while a the same time there is a publshing brand ("emergent"), a series of conferences, a bunch of web sites and books, etc.

it's one case where, in very postmodernish fashion, people at the forefront of the thing are trying to have it both ways. the effort it takes to constantly resist any kind of definition for the small return of not being "boxed in" is, in my opinion, wasted. and it makes it hard for me to trust some of the great things that are happening. it seems to me that some of these folks might be putting too much value on being slippery.

doug's intro to his new book is a good example - he does a few philosphical backflips to justify (with appropriately postmodern reservations) something as simple and self evident as writing and selling a book. something doesn't sit quite right with me about that. there seems to be some false humility wrapped up in there somewhere.

how's this for a postmodern sentence: if the developing leaders would just come clean about the fact that the face of postmodernism is coalescing into a recognizable entity, and that the accompanying line of books and conferences, if handled with Kingdom stewardship, can be good things needing no self-conscious spin that simultaneously rationalizes and disparages, well, then, i'd feel like they were being straightforward, and i'd have more respect for the message they are trying to share.

i don't feel like this is nitpickng - a lot of other conclusions can flow from this. that resisitance to definitions can manifest in profound ways. the most significant to me is an openness among some emergent types (certainly not all) to welcome groups that aren't biblical, but whose methods and opinions on postmodernity line up.

the area that comes to mind is scriptural inerrancy. a plain manifestation of this is the moral acceptablity of lifestyle choices such as homosexuality (which of course flow from the interpretation of scripture). these theological and moral differences are sometimes characterized among the emergent leadership as unimportant. i disagree.

leonard sweet (author, professor, champion of postmodern christianity)loves to play with words, which as a writer i can appreciate. he calls his conferences "advances" as opposed to "retreats." he equates his take on the daily walk of faith to being on a swing - leaning back into the rich heritage of the faith and kicking forward into the future with a willingness to approach things in a new way. all great stuff. but he has stated often that he's skeptical of the concept of "balance." the radical faith, he says, is an occurence of all or nothing, not necessarily balance.

he has a point, but... swinging is a study in balance. when leaning back, if we do not do so with balance, we meet the ground in a hurry. and if we lean forward too far at the top of the arc, we hit the ground harder, from a greater height.

there is a good, healthy emphasis on grace that is prevalent among many emrgent groups, one that is as accepting of people right where they are as Jesus said to be. i love that. it's about freaking time. But it definitely puts these groups on a tightrope, where balance becomes more important than it is on "safe" ground. i wholeheartedly believe God would have us trembling there on the wire, desparately dependent on him each step of the way. my fear is that in the rush to get there, some emergent groups place too much emphasis on things that have too long been neglected, but in so doing are in danger of falling off the other side.

babies, bathwater, swings, tighropes, dead horses ... fill in the relevant analogous metaphores. or something.

those are my thoughts.

i love you wes.

As my pastor said this morning,"I'm not going to call it a reformation, because people who do that end up hiding out in towers afterwards."

As was already stated, I think the basic core of postmodernism is becoming clouded in all the people, groups and supporters who are trying very hard to define, categorize or defy definitions and categorizations. The basic message of post-modernism is not in it's definition or lack thereof. (I like that word).

Post-modernism is the natural course that theism is taking. Some embrace, some oppose but regardless, it's a re-establishing of the roots of faith. Not "the next big thing". It's about getting back to spirit led worship, Christ centered relationships, and missional living.

This ended up longer then I planned.

Jeremy, you just gave your definition of post-modernism ("spirit led worship, Christ centered relationships, and missional living") while denying that it's a definition. that's part of what i find frustarating. why avoid calling it a definition when clearly that is what the term means to you?

Also, I think you can find spirit led worship, Christ centered relationships, and missional living at many mega churches and the tiny church down the street. right in the suburbs, amid talk of lawn care products and SUV's, all of these things are occurring. there are dedicated disciples and churches that get it. but honestly, the postmodern movement seems to think that isn't the case. i find that a bit arrogant at times, couched in false humility.

of course there are problems, perhaps chief among them a successful marketing of easy, cultural christianity. but not all the consumers of the stuff and attendees of the community-center-styled churches are missing the mark. an encouraging number of them are real disciples.

i personally don't feel comfortable in a modernistic megachurch environment, but that is probably more about taste than substance. people like john piper and dave johnson are calling people to authentic faith and have been for decades.

jeremy, one more thing. i came across as a dink in that last post. usually i reserve such dink-ness for wes alone. i apologize.

Blaine, you're not a dink. At least, not as far as I've ever been able to tell.

You're right though, I don't believe the post-modernist movement has cornered the market on authentic spirituality. That wasn't what I was trying to say.

What I was trying to define was not the movement but the pieces of New Testament Christianity that seem to me to be coming to the front and center of the new generations. Not that these things are singular to post-mondernism. Post-modernists are just grabbing them and placing their flags on top claiming they "brought them back". In many respects I don't think that these core values of faith ever left.

I think an important thing that is resurfacing (which may or may not be in correlation to the new movement) is that faith is becoming less about church (as established bodies) and more about the individual relationships. I think it is bodies of faith that have made this distinction and preach it/teach it that are becoming "successful".

Blog is fun.

hbf6cva8mer1h1pc