This morning, I attended a talk by Mark DeVine, at the Blue River/Kansas City Baptist Association’s “Leader Learning Lunch.” Dr. DeVine is writing (at a furious pace) about the good, the bad and the ugly of the “emerging” and “emergent” church. I won’t attempt to re-write what he said, since his papers state his position clearly, but here are a few thoughts that stood out* (below the ‘more’):
* Doctrinal statements are a messy business, but they are efficient at establishing trust.
* A common enemy can drive relationships in the short term, but that isn’t as effective as shared conviction over the long haul.
* For the average Southern Baptist, the most helpful distinction between the various emgerg[ent/ing] churches is whether they are ‘doctrine-friendly’ or ‘doctrine-averse.’ Doctrine-averse emerg* churches try to contextualize the Gospel by good actions and welcoming communities, but they’re willing to abandon all theological anchors. Like protestant liberalism a generation or two before, the doctrine-averse emerg* lose the gospel they are trying to promote — the robust Good News has to be continually watered down, until it loses any shared meaning.
*Doctrine-friendly emerg* churches place a new emphasis on action and community, but also emphasize a Biblical, theological anchor. In fact, DeVine says he (and perhaps the average SBCer) has more in common theologically with doctrine-friendly emerg* churches than with many seeker-sensitive churches (or, in my opinion, purpose driven churches) — though seeker (and PDC) are generally accepted within the SBC and MBC. This anchor gives doctrine-friendly emerg* a better chance at lasting influence.
*DeVine said he got interested in emerg* because he is pastoring an urban church. One problem with treating all emerg* groups the same is that doctrine-friendly emerg* churches are answering questions the wider SBC is asking. Doctrinally sound emerging churches are creating orthodox communities of Bible-centered belief and action in Jesus Christ, in urban areas where secularism and liberal protestantism have had a stranglehold for decades. That’s something the SBC wants to do, but has not done well.
*George Clooney is a bad kisser and has a slight body odor (making this the most culturally relevant post on Jon the Baptist ever, bar none).
All in all, a great time. Not everyone agreed on emerg*, but everyone did agree that a KC barbecue luch is a good way to start talking through the issues… Thanks to John Mark Clifton and BRKCBA for hosting.
*Without a tape-recorder, I’ve surely put my own spin on these, without intending to do so — but note, I am not quoting the good Doctor, just stating the conclusions I drew after hearing him…
1 Comment so far
Leave a comment
Great summary big J – I think you carried the tone of Devine well, especially after having him for a few classes!
Comment by Jeff Class 07.08.09 @ 11:59 pmLeave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>