« April 2006 | Main | June 2006 »
May 29, 2006
Emergent- A few thoughts
Here is a recent article by a fellow emergent-esque guy named Tony Jones. Tony really inspired me several years back to start thinking about the practice of global Christianity. He is well known in many academic and practioner circles.
Is Emergent the New Christian Left? Tony Jones responds to the critics
In December, Brian McLaren was arrested along with 115 other activists while peacefully protesting the federal budget that he believes unfairly treats the poor. As one of the most visible participants in Emergent Village, McLaren’s increasingly outspoken political views has some wondering—is Emergent a new camp for Christian liberalism? In this post Tony Jones, the national coordinator for Emergent, responds to critics by championing Emergent’s conversational purpose and celebrating the group’s diversity.
I read a lot of blogs, my wife and friends say too many. And some of those blogs are deeply critical of Emergent Village, a decade-old friendship that has, after my family, become home to my most important relationships. My Emergent friends, old and new, love Jesus and are robustly grappling their way into God's future. It seems to me that the two most important commitments that we in Emergent share are 1) we are ultimately hopeful about God's future, and 2) we are committed to moving forward together, as friends.
What continues to surprise me is how dangerous some people consider this friendship I'm in to be. If you take some of these blogs (and books) seriously, those of us who make up the Emergent Village are a great threat to the Christian church—we have undermined doctrine, truth, and church life. The fact that we're discussing theological items that have been previously deemed "undiscussable" is considered grounds for labels like "heretic" and "apostate."
Honestly, I care little about these critiques. They come from those who either have no idea what Emergent is all about and/or could not possibly be persuaded from their position anyway.
On the other hand, I'm currently hearing and reading that Emergent is part of the "New Christian Left." Mark Driscoll, for instance, has recently drawn a line in the sand between "emerging evangelicals" and "emergent liberals." He places himself in the former camp, and I assume he'd assign me to the latter. Others, like Ed Stetzer, have similarly attempted to divvy up the emerging church. Stetzer gives three labels: relevants, reconstructionists, and revisionists. Again, I can assume that I'm among the lattermost, whose "prescriptions fail to take into account the full teaching of the Word of God," according to Stetzer. Yet another Christian leader has recently accused us of becoming one with Jim Wallis, Sojourners, and the Christian Left.
The problem with all of these critiques is that they fundamentally misunderstand the nature of Emergent Village. We are a group of friends—about 20 in 1997, and now in the thousands—who are committed to doing God's Kingdom work together, regardless of our theological, ideological, and political differences. Are we friends with Jim Wallis? Yes! And are there Bush-loving neocons among us? Yes! Emergent is a loose collection of folks who feel that true, robust conversation about issues that matter has been chilled out of modern Christian institutions (seminaries, mega-churches, denominations, and para-church groups, to name a few). We're trying to make a place to bring conversation back.
Thus, we have friends among us who think that small government, free market economies are the solution to poverty, and others who favor federal programs and higher taxes—honestly, this is an ongoing conversation within the Emergent friendship. But we all agree that something must be done about extreme poverty, especially in Africa.
Within Emergent are Texas Baptists who don't allow women to preach and New England lesbian Episcopal priests. We have Southern California YWAMers and Midwest Lutherans. We have those who hold to biblical inerrancy, and others trying to demythologize the scripture. We have environmental, peacenik lefties, "crunchy cons," and right wing hawks.
I suppose it's easy for those who stand outside of Emergent Village looking in to credit the politics or theology of a few to the whole group, but that's inaccurate. And I can understand the frustration of those who want to criticize us and box us in when we say that we don't play by the old rules, that we can't be categorized as "left" or "right," "evangelical" or "mainline."
But, I think those same critics will only be more frustrated as the tide of those rebelling against a commodified and domesticated Jesus gain momentum. If the mainstream media is a harbinger, then I'd say that recent columns by Gary Wills and Andrew Sullivan show that a tipping point is just around the corner. Jesus really wasn't a Democrat or a Republican, and he won't be domesticated by political agendas. I do, however, believe that he will inhabit the robust and respectful dialogue about ideas that matter.
Posted by joshuacase at 08:29 AM
Back from Turkey
So i am now back from from Turkey and what an experience it has been. The first several days were spent in the east of Turkey in Tarsus and Antakya (Antioch).The last few in Istanbul. I'll post some photos shortly.
Couple of things that I'll reflect on shortly as an intro:
1. Cave church of St. Peter in Antioch- I am not sure what i was epecting, but it wasn't what i found. As we ascended this mountain from the old town of antioch, we arrived at this place where the face of the opening looked very normally like a church. Big wall with a sotne door entrance. When you passed through, it was literally, a cave with a few bits of mosaic on the floor. The interesting thing for me was, you could see the evolution of the Christianity represented in the evolution of the cave. From secret cave (with rear escape route from Roman soldiers) to cave with a better floor, to cave with big columned stone face (thus making it look like a "real" institution. There was an steady dripping of water in the corner thought to be the place where the early christians would have performed baptisms (note steady drip of water). All in all, it was an interesting experience. More to come later I'm sure.
2. Excessive religion- I've had thoughts for while about the excessivity of religion in the world. Yet this trip some how brought them again to the surface. Not that excess is bad, but that the excess needs to be set in the proper context with the proper culture. One of the things i think can be said about both Islam and Christianity is that at certain times, the excessivity of the faith has felt much more like intimidation than imitation. Christianity, that is the practice of those that follow in the way of Christ, needs to be practiced as the kind of excessive balance between adoration for the way Christ lived and care and recultivation of the creation and relationships we have in our lives. Christianity calls people to be a confessional people and to take up the sign of the cross in such a way that we reaffirm our commitment to the unrelenting imitation of Christ. That we would ever be a people who: love the Lord with all our hearts, minds, souls, and strengths; that we would love our neighbors as we love ourselves; that we would love mercy, walk humbly, act justly; that we would love our enemies abundantly more than they would deserve; that we would protect those who can not protect themselves and feed those who can not feed themselves. If faith is to have a place in the age to come, we must re-imagine what it means to have/be excessive with it in the post-colonial age.
Posted by joshuacase at 07:59 AM | Comments (151)
May 23, 2006
For you readers...
Laura and I are off to Turkey for a small trip (nack on dimanche). Stay tuned for many photos and journals upon return. Who knows what Tarsus or Antioch might hold!!
walk on....jc
Posted by joshuacase at 11:06 AM
May 20, 2006
A link that links to Bono
Mike Todd likes U2 and Bono about as much as I do. And, he is usually a little more political on his blog than I am. Check him out!
Posted by joshuacase at 09:12 PM | Comments (4)
Da Vinci Code Part 2
So i did it. I broke down and went and saw the movie. Per my last comment, I can honestly say with full clarity i am not sure who the critics were laughing at. There were three things I took away from the movie:
1. Academic debate, even when fictional, is fun for me to watch. There is this one scene where Tom Hanks character and Gandalf (can't remember his real name) are debating each other over who came up with the divinity of Christ. Its a fun exchange to watch and I think the guy next to me was quite worried when i couldn't stop giggling through this whole section of the movie. If you are history buff, I am sure you too found this part a bit interesting.
2. Creativity of the depth displayed in this movie should be applauded. While the acting in the movie i feel lacked real "wow that was good" appeal, the creativity to connect so many of these pieces must be applauded. Whether or not Dan Brown made it up, stole it, or truly discovered it (wink wink), it deserves an applause. And again, well done to Ron Howard for making it become real. That is of course except for the self mutalation of Silas the monk. OUCH!
3. One of my favorite lines from the film was: "you are what you protect". Think on that one. If one protects the poor and oppressed, what does that make them? If one protects the righteous and the saintly, what does that make them? Just a few thoughts.
I'll just close by saying that i read an article in the Economist this week about the code. One of the points made in the article is that while many Christians world-wide are boycotting the film, evangelical Christians in America are not as much. In fact, the article says, "For them the movie provides an golden opportunity to get people talking about Christian subjects. Some churches are giving away tickets along with Starbucks vouchers to encourage post-film discussion. Campus Crusade has printed 1 million copies of its guide to the movie." It goes on to read, "The churches are obsessed with "seekers"- people who are vaguely interested in Christianity without knowing much about it. The calculation is that the film will boost the number of "seekers"- and that the churches will then knock Mr. Brown's nonsense out of their heads....Whether Mr. Brown's work brings people to God is impossible to say. But it is bringing a lot of money to a lot of people."
So what do we think about that?....If you go to one of those churches that are giving away tickets, and you have invited some of your "seeker" friends to go to Starbucks with you afterwards, and they just happen to read the Economist.....shhhh...they're on to you.
Enjoy the film! Enjoy the coffee. And by the way...i rooting for Tom Hanks character at the end to steal a kiss from Jesus' great great great great great....well you get the point!
Posted by joshuacase at 08:51 PM
Now I remember..
I was reminded this morning just why i love U2 so much. As i was doing some work around the house, i slipped in the Vertigo Chicago dvd. When the band gets to their intro to the song Miracle drug, bono does one of his normal intros and woos the crowd a little bit closer in. One of the things he says in the monoglue is this: "We don't mind bringing the songs from our past with us, songs like: Pride, One, Where the streets have no name. We don't mind bringing our past with us where we are headed, because we are excited about the future! Yes, we are excited about the future!".
As the prophet that he is, i hope and pray that more people would hear that message. Not the message of escapism or we can't wait to get out this place called earth, but the message that he gives, set in the context of the intro to song where he repeatedly says, "i've had enough of romantic love/I'd give it up for a miracle drug". Bono you see is excited about our future, the one here, the one now, the one we can effect for people and creation. That's the kind of future i too am excited about. As Bill Clinton said, "if we can do something, we must do something".
For those of you who didn't know, Bono is doing quite a bit of speaking around the USA these days trying to raise money to fight poverty, aids, and malaria. He deeply devoted to the One campaign. If you haven't already, get involved!
Posted by joshuacase at 03:52 PM | Comments (1)
May 19, 2006
Laughing at the Da Vinci movie...or Christians?
The people who have seen the Da Vinci code movie are laughing. Whether they are laughing at the movie, in its overly talkative, simple story, lack of action elements, or laughing at those in the movement of Christianity who stood so strongly against it is up for grabs.
This fiction has caused more of a media frenzy than anything, and for me, it is almost laughable in the way its has provoked the response it has spawned! Director Ron Howard, when asked about the movie said in an interveiw with a French journalist, and I paraphrase, "What we are trying to do is create some conversation about the issues the book, a fiction, brings out. As people involved in the making of the movie, we had to meet with the historians and the theologians and the people who are much more knowledgeable than us to find out about the topics surrounding Christianity, and I think, we're all better for it. I hope, people get out there and talk to these kind of people and have good dialogue with each other".
To me, this sounds less like someone trying to harm people following in the way of the one true God and more like someone wanting to see authentic and informed dialogue happen. Well done Ron!
Posted by joshuacase at 11:21 AM | Comments (0)
Not Speaking of God
I wanted to highly recommend for everyone wanting to push themselves even in the slightest about How (Not) to Speak of Godto keep your eyes on this guy. He has become a good friend and Peter Rollins will blow your socks off! If you are up for it, take on this philosophical man from Northern Ireland!!
Posted by joshuacase at 08:13 AM | Comments (0)
Post-Emergent debate rolls on
Well, this is my first post after the long awaited Geneva Emergent conversation. While the conversation was great, from my perspective, it has brought forth a great amount of various discussions.
A few of the panelists, namely Jamie Smith have been hosting some follow up discussions. You can also find what these people have said as well: Jason Clark,Lammert Vrieling,Andrew Jones, and Matt Glock.
It was a treat to have all these people around. I also really enjoyed getting to spend some time talking and thinking out loud with Brian Mclaren and Andrew Perriman. Hopefully more to come soon on these conversations! Also, be sure to check out this website for the podcasts of the event in the next couple weeks!
Posted by joshuacase at 07:55 AM
May 08, 2006
Aimless wandering
Yesterday, at a local Anglican service I heard it said, "The aimless wandering of some of us, effects all of us." On a recent tv special on AIDS, former president Bill Clinton said, "Because we can do something we must do something." I am growing increasingly aware that our call and our role in life is not be the stars or the heros that make it to the news or to people magazine, but to be responsible with what we can and must do for our local context. The places where we are as people are the key to the great puzzle of life.
Something odd has happening to the human spirit with the rise and fall of capitalism in the 2oth century. Something odd has and is happening to us all as we are ever one click away from being somewhere else. Something odd and very real is happening when we long to be in place other than where we are because that "pasture" looks more attractive than this one. Only now, we're not really talking about pastures within walking distance, we are talking about those we might never arrive at or even get to. After all, ifJonny Baker is right, "The journey is the destination."
For me, the question becomes not should people dream, but what does it mean that we have internalized a dream for things that are too far out of reach and out of sight for us to even to do real life? What does it mean that people have gotten lost in the maze of do-it-yourself-isms and refuse to get out there and participate in community? What does it mean that we're trying to support and love people in different parts of the world when we can't even really love those next door? This for me, is more of the hard work of Christianity in the world. That it brings us humus, or near to the earth, and that it calls us to participation at home, in the lives of those closest to us, in the best way we can love with the whole of our lives. If we are doing this, the good news of the kingdom of God will transform, and the goodness plotted by Christ and all those who seek to follow him will change our world through the vehicle of our personal expression in our local communities. Press on dear reader, and love your neighbor, be they friend or foe.
Posted by joshuacase at 08:03 AM
May 05, 2006
Doctrinal statements
Alas, I've been waiting to read something on doctrinal statements that i can find of use or of insight for me and, in brief, it has been released. So often in life, these statements have felt like this rubber stamp that gave people (or myself) approval, or an "ok" for being "right" Christian in the world. I have felt quite often though that they are part of the "almost redeemed but not yet" catagory; ie that eventually we'd lose all need for them when we truly experience the body and fullness of life in Christ together. As different from creedal statments, or what i'd like to call doctribal statements, (those things which we say together as community which not only form us but give shape to our worship) doctrinal statements seem to just give us a vehicle for further compartmentalization and separation within the body of Christ!
As a "theolopractinker" (that is one who is about the study of God through practice and thinking) i have found this article deeply helpful. Read on and good luck!
jc
PS. Just to make sure people know, i am a person who is under the leadership of statments of faith, therefore I do understand their place in organizations that want to make sure their employees and staff "line up" with what they believe. The point of this is to say, whether or not these same organizations or churches need them in the future is completely up for grabs. If you want to follow more of the conversation, you can also track what one of our panelist for this week's Emergent conversation, Jamie Smith is saying here
Posted by joshuacase at 08:33 AM