finitum non capax infiniti

Unless you have had your head in the sand for the past decade, you have probably at least heard of the emerging church movement. Figures like Doug Pagitt, Ryan Bolger, and Tall Skinny Kiwi might come to mind. For most people, the first name to come to mind is Brian McLaren. McLaren was one of the first to pump out a bunch of books in the emerging/post-evangelical/postmodern stream. Because of this, his name is almost always part of the conversation surrounding the emerging church.

Because of his massive influence within the emerging movement, many have gone after him and his ideas as normative for those within the emerging movement. People like Don Carson have shown his errors in his theological thinking (and, in many cases, his ignorance of the facts of church history, history of theology, Biblical languages, etc.). To be fair, McLaren is not a theologian. He is an English-professor-turned-pastor. His theological issues (as well as his issues surrounding the question of homosexuality) have been addressed by many people and are not really my point.

The emerging movement is a variegated movement. There are Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians, Anglicans, and the denomination known as “non denominational”-ists within the movement. Because of this, it has been hard to nail down their theology. As Dr. Scot McKnight points out in a number of places, this is because the emerging movement is not a theological movement, but a movement focused on ecclesiology. When some within the emerging movement are approached with theological issues or errors, the response has been, “That’s not me.” This has driven it’s critics crazy. But, to be fair, it is the truth. Just because I consider myself within the world of evangelicalism does not believe that I believe in Open Theism, even though there are some within the evangelical world that hold to this view of a pansy God who doesn’t know which way is up and is desperately waiting for us to help him out.

There are some things within the emerging movement that I think are excellent points that should be embraced by the church catholic. Being missional, I think, is the first and foremost. There are other things which I think are dangerous. Again, these things have been documented and explained by people much more qualified than I.

One thing, though, drives me completely crazy about the emerging movement. It is this: their almost completely negative view of the evangelical/fundamentalist church. It seems that they are unable, or unwilling, to admit that anything, anything at all, the evangelical/fundamentalist church has done is positive.

This seems to be a staple within the emerging movement. They have gotten the label of being nothing more than disgruntled ex-fundamentalists with an axe to grind…and, in many, many cases, they live up to this label.

McLaren, for instance, grinds his axe on almost every page of his many publications. For instance:

I should add briefly that fundamentalists and Calvinists share two traits that I hope will be dropped by any who wish to participate in a generous orthodoxy. The first is a fondness for reductionism, epitomized by their love for the Latin word sola (only), seen in what are often called the Reformation mottoes: sola Scriptura, sola fide, sola TULIP, sola the fist fundamentals, etc….Finally, harsh rhetoric has too often characterized Calvinists in particular and fundamentalists in general…The generous or ungenerous way they critique this chapter (which no doubt deserves critique) will illustrate to what degree they will uphold this trait or relax it (Generous Orthodoxy, 198).

The first point McLaren makes is characteristic of the problem I see with many of the emerging church’s critiques of evangelicalism/fundamentalism. First of all, the Five Solas of the Reformation were mottoes. The Reformers weren’t attempting to distill Scripture into solas, they were using the solas as a reminder of what the Reformation was all about. Luther and Calvin (and those who followed them in the Reformations of the 16th and 17th century) were anything but reductionistic. Go to Amazon and type in their names. Look at their massive corpus of writings. They not only wrote systematic theologies and catechisms, but many more sermons and commentaries. Reductionistic?

The second point McLaren makes is ironic (read: hypocritical) considering what he has, to that point, already written in his book. He has caricatured and ripped apart evangelicalism/fundamentalism in an entirely “ungenerous” way. He openly admits that he gives positive readings to people from other traditions (both theological, like liberation theologians, and ecclesiastical, like Anglicans) but is much harder on evangelicals/fundamentalists.

I say all this to make this point: the emerging movement needs to give evangelicalism/fundamentalism a fair and generous reading. On the flip side, those outside of the emerging movement also need to give those within the emerging movement a fair reading. The finger pointing and caricaturing needs to stop.

Evangelicalism/fundamentalism is not what McLaren is saying it is. What he is describing is, perhaps, the negative experience he has had with a pocket of evangelicalism/fundamentalism. Some of the things he says are true and the church should take it to heart, but many of the other things he says are mistaken at best and deceptive at worst.

On the flip side, the emerging movement is not what Carson, MacArthur, et. al. are saying it is. What they are describing is a negative theological issue that they have seen in a pocket of the emerging movement. Some of the things they say about the emerging movement are true and the emerging movement should take those to heart, but many of the other things they are saying are mistaken at best and deceptive at worst.

If we are going to get our collective panties in a bunch about being misread and being misunderstood, we should be willing to read others fairly and charitably. Both sides need to stop this “emerging hypocrisy” of complaining that the other side is not representing us correctly and then turning around and returning the favor by not representing them correctly. The way to get through the seemingly growing impasse between the emerging movement and fundamentalism/evangelicalism is to treat one another and one another’s work with honesty and integrity. This does not mean always agreeing, but there are ways to disagree that are fair and honest.

I believe that if this is done, the church will be strengthened and God will be glorified.