Articulating the tension

The Emergent Village Blog has been hosting a blogologue (dialogue over a blog – yes it’s a pretentious word), between Tony Jones and Bill Easum.

I really don’t try or need to get around “the medium is the message.” We have misunderstood the message, we have Hellenized it to the point it is mostly meaningless to most church members. I think we can both agree on that. The very concept of ecclesia is so far off base it is ludicrous. So I don’t have a problem shaking up our lack of theology. What has concerned is whether or not Emergents have gone too far in innovating the Gospel. I don’t think the issue is innovating the Gospel; I think it is rediscovering the Gospel. I’m not willing to even come close to saying the Gospel has to change in order to reach postmoderns. The Good News can’t change because it is rooted in actual history first and our language second. Our language cannot change history, only our perception of it. Perhaps this is where we stake different claims. I’m not willing to say that theology has to be as innovative as methodology.”

Weblog » Emergent Village » Blogologue Part 3: Bill Easum Response to Tony Jones.

I think that Bill hits at the things that both interest me the most, and scare me the most about the Emergent guys. Because I’m deeply passionate about experimenting with methodology – trying stuff out and recognizing the influence of Hellenistic thinking on the modern church. And I do think that part of that needs to be recognising where our theology has bought into culture, and enveloped cultural assumptions into the Gospel – assumptions that have nothing to do with the Gospel, or run completely counter to it.

But I do get a little bit scared (at times) that we don’t take that beyond what we can find in Scripture. That’s where reading Dan Kimball, and Scot McKnight and this response from Bill Easum has been an important part of working this stuff through for me. Because unless this stuff finds it’s roots in the Gospel, you might as well find yourself in the same place as Shelby Spong and this guy – and make up your own religion on what you think it marketable.

So, Tony, here is my primary question for you: If you are calling us back to rediscover first-century Christianity and contextualize the methods to fit into this weird world, I applaud your efforts and pray for your success. If, however, you are seeking to rewrite the Gospel or innovate it so far as to change it substantively, then I pray for Emergents quick demise. I look forward to your response, especially to these last two sentences.”

There’s a fair chance that some of this language will grate with the Emergent crowd, because they’d contend that in lots of ways the mainstream church has done exactly that – rewriting the gospel (in places) to fit its own image. But fundamentally, I’m whole-heartedly behind what Easum is saying here (although only in the quotes – he says some other things in the post I’m not 100% sure about). Have a read of the blogologue here.