D. A. Carson: Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church

This is not a formal book review. I wrote this after reflecting on the book -- jotting down my notes and grouping them into categories. Many of my thoughts are simply first impressions. Many times my musings only make sense if you have the book opened to the page to which I am referring. Rather than waiting to write a formal response down the road, I thought I would put forth my ideas as a way to engage dialog.

I appreciate Dr. Carson's efforts at putting forth a book covering this moving target of a movement. I think we will all be the better for the discussions it produces. Without further ado...

D.A. Carson, Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church: Understanding a Movement and Its Implications.
Introduction
Becoming Conversant addresses a movement that is less than a decade old in the US, and almost double that for the UK. In the UK, emerging congregations exist primarily within Anglican churches, while in the US emerging churches they take the form of new church plants that may or may not retain their denominational affiliation. Carson takes on quite an intimidating task, seeking to understand such a disparate movement.

I appreciate how Carson (45) begins to list many of the strengths of the movement in regard to culture, authenticity, social location, and assessing tradition. I do believe he misses many of the strengths of the movement – such as a renewed look at the life of Jesus and the reign of God, the transformation of secular space, and renewed forms of community, and the list can go on. However, I are grateful that Carson does not find the entire movement aberrant.
Method
At the outset, I must say that the methodological approach in Becoming Conversant falls short, if the goal is to understand the Emerging Church movement in its entirety. The book does not feature interviews with Emerging Church leaders nor were Emerging Churches observed in any systematic way. Focus groups were not created nor were case-studies performed. Indeed, a few of the books written by those within Emerging Church circles were read and discussed. However, with such a small sample of books reviewed, I think it would be impossible to come to understand the Emerging Church movement.

If the goal of Becoming Conversant was simply to survey those authors who influence the Emerging Church, or those who influence the movement epistemologically, the right books were not selected. The attention on Brian McClaren plus a small number of other authors such as Spencer Burke, Steve Chalke, Dan Kimball, Dave Tomlinson distorts the discussion because these authors are not working to create an epistemology for the emerging church. My research among more than one hundred emerging church leaders indicates that other authors have had significant impact on emerging church thinking, authors such as Jack Caputo, Stanley Hauerwas, Alasdair MacIntyre, Nancey Murphy, Henry Nouwen, Miroslav Volf, Dallas Willard, N.T. Wright, and John Howard Yoder to start. Indeed, the books Becoming Conversant lists are significant, but just as with the lack of empirical research, it represents an anecdotal perspective on the emerging church.

What are the consequences of such a reading? Becoming Conversant seems to conflate Emergent with Emerging Church, and the Emerging Church is much bigger than Emergent (87)...In addition, to say that emerging church leaders come from intensely conservative or fundamentalist backgrounds is an overstatement (85). What I would say is that they have fairly solid conservative evangelical roots, representing a broad evangelical spectrum. In the UK the leaders were raised within the charismatic movements, and often they are ‘vicars kids’. In the US, emerging church leaders hail from a fairly broad spectrum, not only from the movements of the 1970s, 80s, and 90s (Calvary Chapel, Vineyard, Purpose-Driven, and Seeker movements), but mainline denominations as well. Carson did not ‘triangulate’ his research – he read a few books, but did not get at any other data to confirm deny his research. However, not all Carson writes is problematic.

On Modernity
Carson is right to critique the hype – postmodernity does not equate to utopia (83), it is simply another fallen culture and not the answer – it must be embraced and critiqued by the followers of Jesus, just as with any culture.

Becoming Conversant decries that the Emerging Church says positive things about all “isms” except modernity (73). My question is, does modernity need advocates? Its many benefits are implicit to all Westerners. It has been the powerful social force in the world for hundreds of years. A minority opinion does not need to praise the status quo; instead, the question should be, are the insights and protests from the margins valid?

Becoming Conversant suggests that Emerging Churches should honor modern Christians with their emphasis on truth, who sought to communicate the gospel in their time, that Emerging Churches should be grateful for the contributions modern Christians have made (65). Honestly, in my many conversations with emerging church leaders, I rarely hear emerging church people disrespecting modern Christians. To be sure, it is not only Emerging Churches who have difficulty controlling their tongue about others who practice their faith differently.

Carson criticizes the tone of the argument some have had against modernity (44). I would encourage that we give emerging leaders some space. They are working out a type of Christianity that is new, and this is a process of dismantling what went on before, and it might take a few years or so to make this transition. They should not be attacked for this liminal stage – it is part of an extremely vital task – mission within post-Christendom is a new process in church history, and there are not a lot of forerunners in this regard.

It is modernists who critique particular traditions, not postmodernists, I don’t believe Carson is on solid ground here. (70)

Carson critiques McLaren’s view of the modern West, that because of its ‘absolute’ perspective on reality, the West marginalized all others and sought domination (70). Carson maintains that McLaren paints with large brushstrokes. However, both McLaren and Carson are advocating mainstream positions held within the academy, and neither are marginal positions. For those who study social theory, McLaren’s interpretation is probably more in the mainstream than is Carson's, so to paint McLaren as overstating things is well, an overstatement.

Culture in General
I find that Becoming Conversant presents a truncated view of culture – Carson asks “is there at least some danger that what is being advocated is not so much a new kind of Christian in a new emerging church, but a church that is so submerging itself in the culture that it risks hopeless compromise?” (44). This statement is inherently problematic. All of us are completely submerged in our various cultures, and we cannot stand outside of culture. Indeed, the church is always 100 % within culture. The question becomes not how much culture the church ought to adopt – but how to glorify God within that culture. By looking to create indigenous postmodern communities, Emerging Churches are not fighting the Bible, but simply other cultural expressions of the Christian faith (be it 1950s, the 1600s, or even earlier). There are many 1950s expression of church that may still make sense to those who have been raised in that environment. However, missionaries think in terms of cultures – how to advocate for a people movement within this other culture? Why should one who lives in postmodern culture have to change cultures, to find God? I teach in the School of Intercultural Studies, founded by Donald McGavran. He taught that one should not have to change cultures to find God. He was speaking most specifically about his own Indian context, where, to become a Christian, one needed to leave his or her culture, become a Western individualist, and join the mission station, to find God. Our Western churches do many of the same things to the spiritual searchers in our culture. They must become 1950s businessmen with 16th century theology to find God. McGavran decried such barriers. Emerging Churches, like McGavran, do not want to extract people from their culture, but seek to indwell the gospel within that culture.

Carson has only heard three or four Africans expound on Romans well – although they do narratives quite well. So, one needs to become modern and of European descent to understand parts of Scripture? I feel this is to impose a certain reading on Scripture that is mistaken at best and imperialistic at its worst. Again, isn’t it possible that a narrative reading of Romans might yield insights that a modernist would not receive from the text? Changing cultures in order to read scripture aright seems naive and ethnocentric. (67)

We need to accept the givenness of a culture (126) – we cannot choose the culture we are born in! Our culture shifted from text-based to image-based over a hundred years ago. To level a critique against image-based culture is futile. It is the same futility that some have sought to change oral-based cultures in order to communicate the gospel. The Incarnation teaches us to go to their culture, not demand that cultural changes occur for some to find God.

Postmodern Culture
What I mean by postmodern culture, Carson refers to these as postmodern correlatives (98). Carson’s fears of postmodern correlatives are entirely one-sided (98). I find the fear of syncretism misplaced. The modern church was highly syncretistic. Secularization was invented in modernity, and the modern church succumbed, in fact, allowed for secularization’s possibility. Indeed, the Bible as a solely print-based medium may have seen better days – but people still communicate texts, the church simply needs to be more creative in creating indigenous forms of communication for God’s Word. The popularity of New Spiritualities is due in part to the secular form the church has adopted. Indeed, the church has much to learn from the ways these new spiritualities form their way of life. Globalization means that I need to take our missional mandate seriously and the end of the practice of valorizing one culture over another.

Carson refers to a loss of objective morality with postmodernity (101) – however, we must ask, did the objective morality of modernity lead to a virtuous society? One that resembled the Sermon the Mount? In reference to evangelism (101), if our evangelism is thought to be superior – we are not evangelizing properly, and to embody the faith first is not necessarily second best – it is how many Christian communities have grown throughout history.

With Carson, I agree that hard categories, in both modernity and postmodernity are fine in argument but fuzzy in practice (121).

Carson has seen little critique on postmodernity because emerging church people see it as a culture, not necessarily an area of debate (125). It is the water we swim in – it just is. I need to work out ways to worship God within this culture – not fight it, stand against it, etc. Missionaries transform cultures from within, after long periods of listening and serving, not from without, through critique.

Philosophy
Carson writes that the majority view in the Emerging Church of the shift of modernity to postmodernity is epistemology – how we know things – representing a shift from foundationalist to non-foundationalist thinking. However, a primary focus in the emerging church is on culture and not on philosophy per se. I rarely hear the word ‘epistemology’ mentioned in Emerging Church circles – when modernity and postmodernity is discussed it is through the lens of culture, of ethics, and not epistemology. For Emerging Churches, just as it is in much of the philosophical literature, ethics and not epistemology is the first philosophy. Again, Carson reduces everything to epistemology (Chapter 3). He is reading everything through that particular lens even though that is not a stated perspective of the participants in the movement. This a modern move, one that places one’s particular cultural interpretation, or set of lenses, above all others.

Missiology
Carson asserts that McLaren and Chalke have abandoned the gospel (186). However, they are simply popularizing and reflecting on the significant conservative scholarship of N.T. Wright and mainstream missiological texts. They have not gone beyond Wright’s assertions of the gospel or the atonement – they are simply making these understandings available to the wider church. And the problem with their mission practice is that they are doing it across the street and not on the other side of the world.

Carson acknowledges that McLaren roots his work in David Bosch’s tome Transforming Mission. Clearly, Bosch’s work may well be the best-selling missiological work ever, and by rooting his work here, McLaren stands in good company. Oddly enough, Carson recalls the missionary efforts of William Carey, Hudson Taylor, and Roland Allen positively (74), and yet emerging church leaders advocate for nothing more than what missionaries have historically advocated, that of creating a “context-based theology”.

Church
Carson laments the hype that the church must change or die as alarmist – but I disagree (83). I have spent considerable time with emerging church leaders in the UK – where 1% of their peers attend church weekly whilst 60% attend dance clubs weekly. They see the situation as nothing less than dire. Most denominations in the UK have forecasted their ‘death date’, so creating indigenous forms of the gospel is not a hobby but completely necessary for it to survive. I see quite promising moves at all levels of the Church of England in response to this crisis. They do not need convincing that the situation is quite serious.

On the flip side, Carson writes that the Emerging Church sounds absolutist (85) – however, from Emerging Church leaders what I hear is ‘this is how we are doing it’, and not ‘this is how everyone ought to do it’...

Carson finds it odd that emerging church leaders do not have a tradition (140). Most US emerging church leaders who go the emerging church route are forced to leave their churches. In the UK this is not the case, emerging church leaders are accepted within the Anglican tent – and increasingly they are encouraged in these moves. In the US, it either leads to church splits, shutdown of the alternative service, new church planting, or all of the above.

Conclusion
I applaud Carson’s efforts to understand the Emerging Church, a highly complex task in itself. Indeed, the movement benefits when scholars such as Carson lend their insights to the service of churches on the ground. Unfortunately, with Becoming Conversant, I do not believe he has given the church an accurate picture of this highly vital and important missional movement.

Carson wants a critique against postmodern culture (36), and indeed, a helpful prophetic word will be issued, but not by him, and not by me. Insightful critiques are made by Christians within a culture who have formed a hermeneutical community around Scripture. They make their own necessary corrections -- where they must embrace and critique their own culture. The outsider or even the missionary’s pet sins rarely hit the target. The cultural outsider can ask the questions and create a dialog, but at the end of the day, the prophetic critique of culture will come from within an indigenous, postmodern Christ-following community.

Comments

[Georgia]

All you're doing is claiming that Carson didn't get the sources or the culture right. Because the emerging church is a moving, living mass that is never the same as it was two minutes ago. You can never write anything clear, precise, or true about it without offending half of the people in it for different reasons.

Postmodernism is retarded.

[georgia]

Once the postmodern era has become stale and stagnant, we will remember our foolishness with regret, as we move on to appease the culture we now face, our children's generation, our grandchildren's generation.

And they will mock our swayed minds and hearts.

Could we not stand strong on God's word? Did we have to give in to the culture's ridiculous theories and theologies?

Let's not look at each other and say, you are not right because my culture is doing things this way, let's decide right and wrong from the Scripture, the only lasting thing in life. Our God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, remember?

[Rich]

Georgia,
I appreciate your concerns about postmodernism, and share some of them. The problem is that you are assuming that there is one way to interpret the word of God, and history has shown that to be a false premise.
The emerging church, and all missional Christians, are trying to re-think how we faithfully interpret God's word. As I have reexamined my faith, I find that a lot of what I accepted as Biblical had a lot more to do with contemporary culture than the Bible. It is a healthy thing to ask these questions, but we're all going to need some grace from our Brothers and Sisters in Christ as we come up with new answers, and inevitably get some wrong.

God's Peace, Rich

[Drew Addington]

Interesting critique, however, in understanding the part of Carson's book that critiques post modernity, it seems given that some parts of every culture will be challenged by Christianity—Carson was trying to identify some of these. Also, as one who has studied philosophy your critique of his emphasis epistemology is misguided. In philosophy, a position held in one area such as epistemology will necessarily affects all other areas such as ethics or methodology. Hence a discussion on the most primary issue is most beneficial. I appreciate the time you have spent vocalizing your reaction to Carson's book.

[tad DeLay]

my opinion on this work here:
http://taddelay.wordpress.com/2008/01/07/on-becoming-conversant-with-the-emerging-church/

I liked his critique of postmodernism, but it would have been nice if he had shown any indication that he had talked to people in or tried to understand the emergent before he wrote a book called "becoming conversant..."

[Steve]

I am just now trying to wrap my brain around what Emergent or Emerging, or the Emergent Church, or what the Emergent Village actually is, mostly because it does affect me. I have a sister who is a pastor of a church that claims to be "emergent." We were both raised by loving parents in "the ministry." My family is a Spirit-Filled family with conservative Weslyan Evangelical roots. So I see myself and my sister, moving from those roots into Spirit-filled things and engaging in our cultures to be obvious "target candidates" for the movement (meaning, likely to be somewhat more comfortable with the movement.)

Here is a quick "critique" of this critique: The Emergent notion of a "conversation" is a new way of simply describing what is fundamentally not a conversation but a Greco-Roman style of "public speaking" to people who have moved from pews to couches. I am only half joking, but there is a lot of truth in it. Said another way, to join the "Emergent Conversation" you have to either sit in the couch / pew, or be writing pseudo-theological books (I say pseudo-theological because everytime the books / blogs/ articles are critiqued, the authors claim "foul! We aren't theologians!" - hence pseudo-theological.) The fact is that it really isn't a conversation any more than two people playing chess from two different countries via email. So, it is my opinion, that while we continue to imagine that the Emergent Conversation is really two people sitting across from each other having a coffee and baking the grey matter, the fact is that most Emergent churches are falling into one of two categories: (1) not knowing what the Emergent Village really thinks "theologically" but like the sound and ideas conveyed by the term "emergent" or "emerging" and so unintelligently identify with the movement, or (2) are reading the popular authors that Carson reviewed. They may be the "wrong" authors, but they are the ones that are being read. So, for as much as those books are "conversant" I believe Carson is adding to their notion of the "conversation." It isn't about "talking"... it is about adding to the body of what is said on a topic. This blog is more "conversant" that the body of opinion shared by emergent leaders within the scope of actual two-or-more-people-talking-conversations.

Having said that, I am not saying that all of the "talking points" coming out in the "emergent conversation" are wrong or that we cannot get something from them. But equally so, there is plenty of wacky stuff coming out of the movement (and yes, while we might start debating if "emergent" is a movement, I think the fact of the existance of the Emergent Village and that it employes people professionally takes that debate off of the table) and we need to examine it thoroughly. I imagine since we are critiquing a book, then we are comfortable with critiquing the movement it addresses.

I would agree with a number of you that appreciate the fact that the Emergent movement seems to universally value the idea of people identifying with the "way of Jesus." This often plays out as various "journey" statements that seem to commonly value living a life like Jesus. But it is people like D.A. Carson who are simply addressing the fact that it is a dichotomy of belief to think that we can live life like Jesus, but have a hard time defining that since multiple Emergent authors in the "conversation" are rejecting "propositional theological statements" (basically saying that we can't know what is really meant, so even though Jesus said multiple times in the New Testament "Go and sin no more", propositionally we can't say "Jesus doesn't want people to engage in sin"... a bold propositional statement.)

Does every believer or author who calls himself emergent think this way about propositional theology? From what I can see, no. But that is the problem with emergent then. It is so nebulous to really not mean much of anything, but popular enough to sell books and want to print church logos with the word in the title.

On the topic of postModern versus Modern: Nothing is new under the sun. Most emergent authors know they are nearly quoting first and eleventh and fourteenth century authors. Analytical definitely predates "Modern" thought, was popular culturally since the days of Plato, and it is promoted in the writings of emergent authors (McLaren has written about the Christian love affair with "truth" and "clarrity" rejecting in one breath and saying "let me be clear" about some propositional truth he wants to communicate in the next.) It seems that people believe they can figure stuff out. People believe that they can find something that is more true than something else (if they think that they KNOW that universal truth doesn't exist, they are just simply believing that statement to be more true than a belief in universal truth.) This all naturally makes the point: Theology happens. Whether you decide to call it that, or claim that your theological statements do not have to be subjected to theological analysis, because you are not a theologan OR because you are post-modern makes no difference. It is symantical. These are a few mind-bending topics that come out of these popular books and I think I am concerned that people are absorbing this theology whole, but are being indoctrinated into thinking that "hey, we aren't theological, or hung up on clarriy or truth more than relationship" when the fact is that this IS some new theology that is just simply attempting to dodge reasonable introspection and real "conversation."

So far, in my "journey" I have met a hand full of post-modern emergent types, and they seem to (1) love people, and (2) talk about Jesus and (3) many of them simply reject a lot of Biblical stuff (meaning don't like the existance of certain bible verses or won't research what the Bible might have to say about a topic, but instead just rage against what they were taught about the Bible because suddenly "theology" is wrong or too limiting) because it doesn't fit into their world view (i.e. a lot of people are living together sexually and not getting married, so we should re-define love and commitment in this new post-modern context... not examining what the Bible has to say about it, in the context where it was said.)

I've also known a handfull of missionaries that have done pioneering works in South America. In some cases they were translating the Bible into a language that never had it before. They fought to find the right words that matched the context of that culture. What I tend to hear coming out of the emergent movement isn't an effort to contextualize the core message WITHIN the communication-tools of the culture, but to change the message itself (in some cases) to accomodate the norms of the culture. it is situations like this that have a reasonable person questioning if Emergent is really Christian, or just another religious perspective that is associating itself with some of the "characters" of the Hebrew and Christian texts.

[Beatrice]

Hi, you have a nice site, good Luck!.
I am from Uruguay and also now teach English, give true I wrote the following sentence: "Iris's route, ron, is local and often, but skate misinterprets him to be fuzion more than a local indicative open-wheel."

Thanks :P. Beatrice.

[Buy Online Rx]

One of the reasons I admire Thatcher is because she was clever, curious and well-informed. I think you need to get over your class analysis of this situation. I also think the idea of a conservative who has no time for the concept of the 'better' is a contradiction of terms.

[christian louboutin]

haha...It is so useful imformation for us to read...gogo..

[christian louboutin]

haha...It is so useful imformation for us to read...gogo..

[elickyUsesy]

Newest Advertising Tool

Located In Custom Flash Drives

USB drives are utilized in every day life by persons of

virtually any age. School-age children who're necessary to have them as portion of classroom supplies to corporate

executives, find they're invaluable as an external supply of

pc memory. Today, there's yet another use for them as small business owners brand their

firms with custom flash drives.
These devices have been around for some time, however the believed of

utilizing them with promotional marketing and

advertising is reasonably new. The original

items had limited capacity and style that created them much

less than desirable for this objective. With all the

options out there today, nonetheless, it creates an opportunity to make a

organization a brand name at the same time as

acquiring a message out.

This form of advertising has turn into

quite well known,

particularly for all those who own Online corporations. With written communication

practically eliminated in favor of virtual solutions, the

use of these devices is now frequent practice. An further

asset is that messages is often saved

even though not taking up quite a bit of hard

-drive space.
Modern http://www.zlxusb.com>usb pen drives

are readily available in

beautiful styles and colors and may be imprinted with

messages or logos. Once they are especially constructed to

reflect a company, this really is an

great advantage. An example could be

having one shaped like a auto which would instantly identify the

automobile sector as the source.

For those taking into consideration working with these http://www.zlxusb.com/usb-flash-drives/usb-people-84.html>USB people devices for promotional purposes, it's

significant to order from a trustworthy

provider. The promotional materials

utilised by any company

should be representative of their excellent and trustworthiness. The last thing an entrepreneur wants is always

to send out merchandise that don't perform.

[Jarnekorey]

to buy http://www.wearol.com/special-occasion-dresses-homecoming-dresses-c-9_5.html>Cheap Homecoming Dresses and check coupon code available http://www.wearol.com/special-occasion-dresses-cocktail-dresses-c-9_3.html>Cheap Cocktail Dresses online shopping

[expawjaquelyn]

view http://www.wearol.com/special-occasion-dresses-debs-dresses-c-9_4.html>Cheap Debs Dresses with low price http://www.wearol.com/special-occasion-dresses-debs-dresses-c-9_4.html>Debs Dresses for gift