Scot McNight has an interesting post called An Emerging Character: Inclusion Reaction. In short, he discusses the tendency of emerging church folk to react negatively to their evangelical church roots while being much more generous towards those traditions which have been typically denounced by evangelicalism. It's definitely worth a read.
Scot's post has me thinking about reactionary actions in general and wondering how much in the world is truly new and how much more is mere reaction. For instance, if I climb on top of my car because there is a copperhead snake in the driveway, I've done something new in that i've never climbed on my car before. But, I didn't climb up there because I wanted to do something new; I did it out of instinctive reaction to danger. (This hasn't happened, but I did enoucnter a young copperhead by my car a couple of years ago.)
I know that the following are not new thoughts, but I need to work through them. It's clear that a lot of what the emerging church is, is less new in the sense that someone felt an inclination from God to go to go in a new way, but more of a reaction to negative experiences in the evangelical church. We feel compelled to climb out of the situation like I hypothetically climbed onto my car.
This doesn't mean that the climbing is wrong or not within God's will. If I had to climb on my car for safety, then I would thank God for providing for my safety, as I thank Him now for the emerging church. But, as Scot's post suggest, it's a fully worthwhile (and needful) endeavor to try to understand what part of our changing methods and/or theology is reactionary rather than new; why we're reacting; and to be certain we don't react negatively to things we aren't really against. I might climb on my car if I saw a lizard in the driveway, but that would be needless since lizards aren't poisonous-- and possibly even damaging to the car. Then I'd have to spend unnecessary time and energy climbing back down and feeling quite embarrassed, not to mention angry with myself if I happened to scratch the paint in the process of going up or down.
Just some early thoughts on a foggy morning.
About Me
- Cindy
- Married 26 years to Keith. We're parents to a fantastic 12 year old whom I homeschool. We live in the country about 25 miles south of Montgomery, Alabama. We have a horse named Wrangler and a dog named Mickey. Keith and I currently lead worship music at our church.
Subscribe via email
email me
4 comments:
Cindy,
One thing that bothers me is having some of my current beliefs invalidated because they were borne out of a reaction.
I agree with what you are saying, that it is mixed. Yes, some new ideas that were reactions are part of God's plan and direction for us, other reactions will have to be adjusted or even dropped as simply being reactionary.
We are still sorting through our current situation trying to discern what is reactionary and what is God's direction for us. I wish that it were more clear cut.
Grace- I hope you didn't feel that I was invalidating those beliefs born of reaction!
I think reacting can lead us directly into the path God desires for us, if we react appropriately. God certainly created us to react instictively to many things- for our own good (like running from a snake). The reaction of the emerging church is a good thing overall, I think; but I also see some things that I expect we will corporately re-accept in time.
It seems to me, in my very newbie way of thinking, that the tendency to dismiss worship for the sake of mission is perhaps going too far. Somebody posted on this just today. I'll try to put up a link to it tomorrow- after I remember who it was. (!)
The many twenty somethings who are quite comfortable with chaos in worship as a planned thing, will in twenty years be middle aged. You know what I'm saying. I don't mean to offend anyone, but our preferences do tend to change a bit as we age. At least as far as appreciation for chaos and messiness is concerned. There is a difference betweened planned messiness, and an openness to unintentional messiness. Our worship service is often a bit messy- but it isn't by design. It's just that nobody gets in a huff when it happens. I honestly think that's pretty close to what is best.
I also wish it were more clear cut.
No Cindy, I didn't get that from you at all. Sometimes I just wish that no one knew our church history (in real life or on the blog) so they wouldn't automatically assume our beliefs and choices are reactionary.
Grace, I'm glad I didn't hurt your feelings, but I'm sorry you feel invalidated in that way.
Sometimes the only reasonable thing to do is to climb up on the car, and then sit there a while evaluating the situation. From that better vantage point we might see that the snake is not poisonous- or not even a snake at all. But we might see that there are 3 more poisonous snakes on the other side which we were unable to see until getting on higher ground.
Post a Comment