Confused about the "Emergent Church"?
Well, then THIS is the post for you. Be prepared to laugh.
posted by Brannon Hancock | 11:51 AM
Nazarene Roundtable
A forum for discussion, reflection, and calls to action. Everyone is welcome.
Contributors
Links
- Sacramental Nazarenes
- Emergent Nazarenes
- Emerging Nazarenes
- Church of the Nazarene
- Jesus Creed
- Captain Sacrament
Recent Posts
- Infant Baptism: A work in progress
- Just Hit the Highlights
- Bigger, Better, Faster, More:
- Flags?
- I have a right!
- The Corporatization of Ecclesial Language (and Fas...
- Freakin' Deacons...
- So what's the consensus?
- Teaching the Articles of Faith
- Sanctifying Worship...
Friday, August 25, 2006
Copyright © 2006-2008 Rights reserved by each author.
3 Comments:
Funny... thanks for the laugh...
Actually, I would draw a clear line of distinction between the two, Levi. Radical Orthodoxy (at least the Milbank/Pickstock variety - G. Ward is somewhat unique, I think) is a high Anglo-Catholic theological movement rooted in medieval scholasticism tweaked in light of postmodernity; for all their talk of "participation" and liturgy and the rest, I think its shortcoming is that it is primarily a theoretical, intellectual exercise and, despite certain appearances, an extremely conservative one at that. Not that conservatism is necessary a bad thing - I just don't understand how something so conservative or even regressive, insofar as they seem to wish to restore an idealized version of medieval Christendom, can call itself "radical." That said, I get a LOT out of Radical Orthodoxy and am quite sympathetic to their agenda - I have just realized that "Radical Orthodoxy" is just the fancy name of a clever publishing house for "Traditional High Episcopal/Anglo-Catholic theology."
On the other hand, it seems to me that "Emergent" is genuinely about particpation, far more than it is about theory and intellectual abstraction. Emergents really do care about liturgy and worship and community, not as theoretical constructs or hueristic devices, but as the actual, life-forming essential elements of authentic discipleship. Also, Emergent, unlike Radical Orthodoxy, seems to be genuinely interested in engaging postmodernism - Emergents tend to regard the postmodern as a given, even embracing it or seeking to reappropriate or redeem the various motifs of postmodernism (plural truth, relationality, dialogue) for Christian rather than secular or humanistic or relativistic ends; whereas RO is interested in understanding the postmodern only insofar as is necessary to deconstruct or outstrip it (often, ironcially, with the very tools provided by postmodernism) for the priority of the "Christian metanarrative."
I don't mean to suggest that there is NO similarity - there certainly is some overlap, and by and large I would say that the thinkers of Emergent Church have found Radical Orthodoxy a valuable resource, expecially if you read folks like James K.A. Smith (Who's Afraid of Postmodernism?, from the Baker "Church and Postmodern Culture" series). But if Emergent draws inspiration from RO, the same cannot be said in the inverse: RO would probably not be as embracing of Emergent. In sum, I think it is important to see them as very independent movements, one primarily practical and missional (Emergent) and the other as almost purely academic and intellectual (RO).
Feel free to disagree, though...I love debating about both Emergent and RO, as I have a sort of love-hate relationship with both and have yet to be convinced one way or the other about either one! (But man, I've got a lot of opinions for someone who claims to be ambivalent...)
No, I think you're right - RO certainly provides intellectual and theological inspiration for many in the EC "movement" (such as it is - i know they hate to be labelled a movement), but I think it's just one amongst many: Yoder, Hauerwas, McIntyre, Bruggemann, N.T. Wright, Dallas Willard, even deconstructionist thinkers like Carl Raschke and John Caputo (who are more properly embracing of postmodernism than anyone in RO) - these are not "RO" thinkers in any formal sense, although they do share affinities, and provide equal inspriation and theoretical support for what EC folks are trying to do. Your characterization is right, though - RO is academic, and EC is practical - the locus of the former is the university, and the latter is the parish. Definitely.
Post a Comment
<< Home