Deconstructing: “The New Christians”

“What is the “emergent church movement” all about and why does it matter to the future of Christianity? Following on the questions raised by Brian McLaren and others about faith in a post-modern age, Tony Jones has written an engaging exploration of the emergent church movement that points the way toward a new kind of Christianity.” - From the dust jacket
********************************

The first word that came to mind as I read the first chapter was “caricature”. In fact, I have written that word in the margins on many pages in the first chapter and the introduction. Other words and phrases I wrote?

• condescending
• definition?
• presupposition?
• false dichotomy
• true?
• normative?
• nonsense
• “this is dumb”

That is how I read every book. With pen and highlighter in hand, looking at the arguments presented and asking questions as I go. And some of the questions have me a bit puzzled. For starters, it is difficult to determine who the author’s intended audience is from the contents of the first chapter. If it is supposed to be Christians, and he is making an attempt to sell them on the merits of the Emergent Church, I find the method he has chosen to be rather insulting.

Fundamentalists are described as being “backwoods”, “snake handling”, “poison drinking”, and “Bible-thumping”. (How DO you thump a Bible anyway?) Conservative Evangelicals are alleged to have elected Presidents and apparently have the power to appoint Supreme Court justices. (I wish someone had told me…) (Pg 12)

Apparently, and I did not know this, but the Evangelicalism is responsible for the decline of American as a “Christian Nation” because they have been too busy getting millions to “invite Jesus into their hearts” and playing politics to stem the assault on Christian values “in the form of video games, Coors Light ads, and gun violence”. (Pg 13) Apparently, seeing the lost come to Christ is a bad thing.

The “left” does not go untouched either, as mainline denominations are described as hostile bureaucracies, where “mainline preachers” are forced to pick a “flavor of Christianity early on in their careers”, (I didn’t know there were “flavors”), and are threatened with exile to a kind of spiritual Siberia if they disobey their party bosses’ orders. (Pg 7) And you thought Communism was bad.

Definitions:  (and the men who love them…)

While the author does a good job of defining terms like “emergent Christianity”, “the emergent church”, “the emergents”, and “Emergents”, other terms remain undefined. A definition of Christianity would have been a good place to start. Unfortunately, that is left to the reader. In a book like this, which purports to present a new way of doing Christianity, the reader must assume that the author’s view either matches their own, or piece together the definition from the narrative.

The later approach yields a view of Christianity that is somewhat troubling. There seems to be no differentiation between those who make false professions of faith, and true Christians. I wondered as I read if the author was familiar with the concept of “tares” in the church, a theological construct that is absent from many of the “flavors” of Christianity that the author decries.

The term “church” also remains undefined at this point. I think, and correct me if this seems absurd, but if one is going to write about the problems inherent in the church, and propose solutions to solve those problems, defining just exactly what the “church” is might be a good idea. Maybe that’s just me. Instead, it is left for the reader to assume that the church is any group that wants to call itself a church, and that the concept of false churches or illegitimate expressions of the church does not appear to be valid because it is never addressed.

I wonder if these terms are left undefined for a reason, and I doubt seriously that obscurity on definition of terms will lead to helpful discussions. I suspect instead, that the unintended consequence of such obscurity will lead to more confusion, more ill will, and more division in the very church that the author seems to want to help.

Two other code words that remain undefined at this point are “pastor” and “gospel”. No indication is given as to what the author views as the gospel, other than to say what it isn’t. That is accomplished through narrative, as anecdotes of abuse are used to portray the blight of a church that is pronounced “dead” by the author. In fact, the word “gospel” really doesn’t come into view until page nine of the first chapter, when it is introduced only in the negative.

Also, the reader is left to assume that a “Pastor” (he or she) is either a low level bureaucrat hopelessly stuck in the machine of the mainline denominations, or a political zealot who is unconcerned with life in the real world and who spends his (but definitely NOT her) time engaged in hate speech. No mention of the pastor as shepherd, no mention of servant leadership, and no mention of the valuable ministry that countless, unappreciated pastors labor in every day across the world for the people of God. I felt sorry for the author, as it seems that his experience, and those of his “cohort”, with the pastorate has been so abusive.

Attitudes:

I find the author’s attitude toward the church, and Christianity in general, to be rather condescending. For instance, he makes the statement that “A new church is emerging from the compost of Christendom.” (Pg 7) Comparing Christendom to compost is neither kind nor helpful. And this kind of statement has more in common with those who who have rejected Christianity altogether than it does with brothers and sisters in Christ, seekers, or just plain ol’ snake handling fundamentalists like me.

When the author rails against evangelicals for not caring about “animal rights or national health-care or the minimum wage or immigration rights”, and assails Evangelical leaders for narrowing the “theological or ethical agenda” to the twin issues of “abortion and gay marriage”, (Pg 17) the attitude he displays leads this reader to conclude that he may never been a part of a genuine church on any level. And I think that most readers, excluding dedicated adherents to the movement, will see the descriptive hyperbole that the author employs simply as an outward expression of his inner anger with the church, and quite possible God Himself.

Conclusion:

It is clear that the author is trying to sell us on the idea that the church is broken by constructing straw men of the “Right” and “Left”, pitting them against one another, and declaring that only his philosophy, and that of his cohort, is able to provide a viable solution. The proposed way out of “this mess” that Christianity has made of itself is a belief system that is not really grounded in Truth, a church that is not really the Body of Christ, and a gospel that is not really The Gospel. And in spite of the fact that Christendom is compost in the author’s eyes, the emergent church seems to be content to dig through the pile of dung and borrow heavily from it. One has to ask; If the church is so diseased, why borrow anything from it at all?

The anecdotes that are interwoven throughout this chapter, and especially the one presented at the end, left this reviewer sad. Not for the church per se, but for the people who have endured the anguish that the author highlights as their normative experience. It reveals a complete misunderstanding of Biblical Christianity, doctrine, faith, ecclesiology, the authority of Scripture, and the freedom that comes from the simplicity that is Christ. I felt like I was reading “The Chronicles of The Lost Sheep”, rather than any word on a “New kind of Christianity”.

I hope that the book will improve, but so far it has been disappointing. Nothing I have read thus far makes me want to join this movement. In fact, I have recognised experiences in my own life and “journey of faith” that were “emergent” before the word was cool. The difference between those experiences and what I have read in TNC is that my brothers and sisters in Christ did not abandon the authority of the Word of God as it appears this movement has done. (Pg 19)

And that, has made all the difference on the road I have traveled.

Until next time, I bid you peace.