The New Christians: A Series of Reviews and Questions

Tony Jones, the national director for Emergent recently came out with a new book called The New Christians: Dispatches from the Emergent Frontier. For the next week or so I am going to post some thoughts on the book and offer questions to interact on from the book.

But, before I do, I am offering some suggested blog etiquette for the discussion.

1) The dialog will be on the book and the questions I offer. This will not be an Emerging Church free for all.

2) Being concise is not only polite but a wonderful writing skill. Please keep your comments to a manageable size.

3) No long quotes, Biblical or otherwise. (See above rule)

4) Please offer your original thoughts and not someone else’s that you are regurgitating. If you think someone else has a good thought on the subject post a link to their stuff, we can read it ourselves.

5) Honor God above all else in your comments, please

6) If your comments seem inappropriate because of the above rules violations I will feel free to edit or delete them.

Now on to the book!

The New Christians is an attempt to map out the history, theology, church life, and criticism of the emerging church. This is no small task and no easy task, especially for a group whose history is short, theology is wide ranging, and whose churches are vastly different for each other. With all of those considerations, Tony does a wonderful job of not only cataloging, but adding needed commentary and definition to much of the past 15 years and what has become the emerging church. The only other work I have read does that does as thorough of a job is Emerging Churches by Gibbs and Bolger. This was a great book but lacked the personal insight that Tony is able to offer. I recommend this book for both those inside and outside the emerging church if for nothing else than it provides a much better platform for discussion than most of the useless debates I encounter.

Throughout the chapters are case studies, stories, parables and allegories, theology, history, definitions, and dispatches that help map out the emerging frontier. Within the first dispatch (located in a section detailing the present battles between the left and right wings of the church and the changes in our culture) is this statement.

Emergents find little importance in the discrete differences between the various flavors of Christianity. Instead, they practice a generous orthodoxy that appreciates the contributions of all Christian movements.

This seems like a really good place to begin our conversation. One of the realities of the emerging church that really unnerves and upsets its critics is this spirit of generous orthodoxy. (This term is the title of a Brian McLaren book that covers the subject well.) This generous orthodoxy is problematic for both the left and right of the church. It is a problem within fundamentalism because fundamentalists by nature are separatists. They work to separate themselves from the rest of the church by defining how they are different and holding fast to those differences. Liberalism within the church claims to be the opposite, to be open to all, but they don’t like fundamentalists or those that disagree with their theology and typically exclude themselves from those critics. (I am obviously making large generalizations for the point of discussion, not out of ignorance from exceptions and nuances. )

Emergents really are trying to build bridges on both ends and find ways to appreciate, support and live in unity with the entire church. My question is, can this be done and if so how? Emergents always talk about dialog and conversation. Is this enough? Where does our faith in the Kingdom of God enter these conversations and efforts at unity? Can I disagree with someone on the nature of atonement or homosexuality and still be in unity with them? Can I believe that despite our differences the Kingdom of God is at work through them too? I think how we answer those questions defines our ability to experience unity? What do you think? Is this generous orthodoxy a waste of time or idealistic nonsense? How does it connect to our kingdom theology?

Share your thoughts and I will post my next reflection on Friday.