banner

Archives for: April 2008

04/30/08

Permalink 03:52:39 am, by dissidens Email , 1100 words, 705 views   English (US)
Categories: Old Main

In Reply To Kevin Corcoran

Mr. Corcoran is feeling somewhat out of sorts because he supposes we have not accorded his thinkings the respect he feels they deserve.

I should probably set the record straight on a few things.

First, we did accord his thinkings all the respect they deserve. He has misjudged the worth of his thoughts and now he blames us for being disrespectful.

Second, he claims that I removed a comment of his. This is false; I removed nothing. One of our four other administrators removed it (and I didn't ask who). [It was comment #5018.] On the one hand I regret that. It is in my personal interest to let stand everything these Emergents say, I think it reveals what is in their hearts, and when they blather on and on about allowing free discussion and honest conversation, I very much want people to hear what they say and how they say it. And what environment they want for this conversation. That in fact is why I post their blatherings here and it's why I link to their intellectual landfills.

That's on one hand. On the other hand what Mr. Corcoran wrote was offensive and inconsistent with the "engagement" he supposes is a virtue. It offended someone here and he or she (probably living in a red state!) chose not to play host to the rubbish. For those who may be visiting from another blog or those who may not have seen his comment, it consisted of nothing more than three sentences. The first—in reply to comment #5017—was "I see." The second was a suggestion that I go masturbate privately, and the third sentence was: "Enjoy."

Not one of those sentences advanced the conversation a single millimeter—or "mm" as we in the medical profession like to refer to it.

I say that it is in my interest to allow such crude talk to stand because it reveals the heart of the speaker. I feel that the New Testament requires me not to talk like that, but it doesn't require me to censor someone else. By the same token my interests shouldn't constrain some other administrator's sense of what is desirable on a blog he or she is a part of. Sorry, Kev.

Third, I go to the trouble of telling everyone this because one of his points was that we lack an "interest in engagement". Just let the record reveal exactly what profound contribution of his, what example of a "commitment to engagement", was removed.

Fourth, I should also clarify another misunderstanding. He resented being called a half-wit and sophomoric. Those were not intended to be derogatory at all. I was trying to be complimentary! (This could perhaps be one of those glass-half-full/glass-half-empty things.)

Halfwit of course comes from the Latin hemiintellectus.

But this fourth point introduces an issue that does deserve some time and perhaps debate. I have said this previously; perhaps it bears repetition now.

What we have in this particular instance with Corcoran, as well as in this alleged emergent "conversation", is not a conversation at all. Saying something really stupid or false, such as what Brian McLaren says about homosexuality or what Tony Jones says about truth or what Kevin Corcoran says about sexuality being aimed at the eschaton is rubbish.  I know it is rubbish, you know it is rubbish, bystanders know it is rubbish. And to accept it as though it has meaning in the real world is not conversation. It does not call for "engagement" at all. It invites laughter.

It is permissible to utter nonsense, but no one is obligated to accept it as meaningful or pretend something useful has been added to the conversation.

Conversation, for those who haven't heard, is not merely a sequence of alternating assertions. If someone says something that is false and nonsensical, the purpose of conversation is at risk until the correction is made. "Commitment to dialog" or "engagement" is not indifference to lunacy or acceptance of impromptu nonsense.

This is why emergents cannot "converse" with the MacArthurs, the Sprouls, the Mohlers, the Carsons....

This is exactly what we saw Monday with Tony Jones and Marie: "the perfect church" has become a place where you "can sit around and say whatever you want". I think it is worth our hearing them say this. The perfect church is where you sit around and say whatever you want; everyone can do theology.

What we have here are mere dabblers. Corcoran doesn't know what secare means, nor does he know what the eschaton is, nor was he able to establish a connection between the two that justifies "engagement". And now he wants to call it "semantic plasticity".

Isn't that sweet?

__________

 

Somehow I came across a nice folding leather carrying case. On the front it has a little transparent plastic pocket the size of a business card. The card gives a person's name, Medco Instruments, Inc., 4500 W. 137th Street, Crestwood, IL 60445. There is a caduceus at the top and the words: Carefully Produced by Skilled Craftsmen.

Inside the case are samples of medical instruments. There is a pair of four-inch bandage scissors, a pair of six-inch scissors, something that looks like a blunt dental probe, an assortment of tweezers, and—the tool that most excites my imagination and my wife's terror—a #4 scalpel.

Now the mere fact that I have these tools makes me more of a medical professional than Kevin Corcoran is a theologian. Plus I can go to SmartDraw.com and get a free download of "easy medical anatomy software".

It is my confident belief, and I'm sure Trucker Frank will back me up on this, the only difference between me and a licensed physician is a silly piece of paper.

So if you are experiencing any internal discomfort, difficulty in breathing, poor circulation, persistent loss of memory, joint pain...please come by a let me take a look at it for you. I would work on my wife but she insists she feels just fine.

I will know more about the healing arts than Kevin Corcoran knows about the eschaton. And if worse comes to worst, I will put on your chart "semantic plasticity sufferer" and refer you to a friend who has a nifty chemistry set. He has the CHEM C2000 which promises to turn ordinary occurrences into remarkable events.

Now wouldn't you want to be part of a remarkable event?

04/28/08

Permalink 06:49:58 am, by dissidens Email , 248 words, 246 views   English (US)
Categories: Old Main

Trucker Frank, Webisode 2

...wherein we hear Marie say, "the Friday before church I got in trouble at school" and at church everyone would look at her weird and nobody would talk to her.

We hear Marie say, "They wouldn't accept me, and I haven't went ever since."

And moved with compassion, Tony Jones asks, "What did that do to your relationship with God?" to which Marie logically replies, "I didn't believe in God for a long time, and right now I'm agnostic. I know somebody's up there...I just don't agree with some of the things the Bible says and stuff."

The screen shows a caption: "Marie rejected by her church community."

Tony asks, "If you could design like what you think would be the perfect church, what would it look like, what would it feel like, what would the people talk about, what would be the vibe...?"

Marie replies, "Kind of like a Bible study...you could sit around, say whatever you want..."

Then the camera shows clips of "conversation" at Solomon's Porch.

I won't ruin this cinematic epic for you, but go watch it and remember the context: Trucker Frank is one of the best examples of a new Christian Tony has found (and all these webisodes are really advertisements for his book), and Marie is Trucker Frank's "star student".

It may shed some light on your next exposition of Ephesians.

04/25/08

Permalink 06:59:52 am, by dissidens Email , 784 words, 1418 views   English (US)
Categories: Old Main

Couch Potatoes

Doug Pagitt explained why they have those ratty sofas at Solomon's Porch: someone sitting on a sofa is more likely to converse with someone else sitting on a sofa. I'm sure there are some studies to back that up. Surely no one who regards sacred tradition as properly informing a liturgy would suppose something that silly without having some hard science to back it up. Maybe there was a Rand Study.

A traditional understanding of church is that either the Host or a text is central to what goes on there. Even when pentecostals sat in a circle it was because of the possibility of a special revelation. With emergents it is "conversation". Wherever two or three sofas are gathered together, there is conversation in the midst of them.

Journey Church in Dallas had sofas. I did not notice great conversation, really. There was the same facilitator-provoked, facilitator-directed post-lesson audience participation I had seen many times in Sunday School when everyone was sitting in proper chairs, so I'm still not a strict proponent of the sofa/conversation theory.

Perhaps we should not hold emergents too responsible for their words, sermons, lectures and books; they have simple-minded and disparaging things to say about words, sermons, linearity and rationality, and they have demonstrated that words, sermons, linearity and rationality are not things they are conversant with.

Or even competent in.

So I have been out observing their conversation. Here's an interesting bit.

Kevin is talking about Tony's new book, and Tony is writing about how emergents "live eschatologically". I like eschatology as much as the next guy so my ears perked right up.

And this leads to another feature of emergents, what Tony refers to as "a hope-filled orientation" (p.72). Emergents live eschatologically, i.e., in light of God's future, a glorious future that has come and is coming still. They're convinced that Jesus came with good news and that God has a program of all-inclusive love, wholeness and restoration for the world and they're eager to get on board with God's agenda. Their view of heaven, therefore, like my own, is not that of a disembodied place in the great by-and-by, but an embodied future where things--earthly things like relationships, drinking water, economic systems, eco-systems, all things--are the way God ultimately intends them to be. That future, they believe, is something to get excited about and to start actively anticipating.

I don't need to elaborate at length that this eschatology of drinking water, economic systems and eco-systems is pretty boring and probably not biblical. The conversation was flagging a bit, so Kevin took a much-appreciated detour.

The English word sex comes from the Latin secare which literally...

Yes, I know it seems you've jumped a few screens ahead, but bear with me:

The English word sex comes from the Latin secare which literally means to cut-off or to sever. To be "sexed" is, in a very meaningful sense, to be cut-off, disconnected from a whole or severed from it. And that, I think, is part of the human condition, to find yourself self-aware, aware of a kind of loneliness, incompleteness or un-wholeness. Sexuality is nothing more and nothing less than that drive or energy in all of us for communion, relationship, connection, affection and wholeness. "It is not good for man to be alone." That is sexuality. And what is the eschaton if not community, connection and wholeness? Communion with God and each other. If sexuality is the question, the eschaton is its answer. So, sexuality and eschatology are actually deeply connected. In fact the one (sexuality) is aimed at the other (the eschaton).

Well, isn't that precious?

Very fanciful and a wonderful conversation-starter, but strictly speaking it is not at all true. At least not according to the OED which has shown some interest and expertise in words.

The Latin word secare was not intended to convey this cornpone, sophomoric notion of being cut off from the whole as in some sort of psycho-sexual alienation; it has to do with a sectioning, division or distinction that exists between male and female in the animal kingdom.

I'm tempted to suggest that some people sell a bean bag and buy a book. The OED wouldn't be a bad start. If they refuse to do that, I'd recommend a helpful mouseclick.

And this goes right to the problem of "conversation". You put a bunch of half-wits in couches and this is what happens. You have a comical pooling of ignorance in desperate need of a book and a definition.

The difference between these people and a hot air balloon is just the balloon.

04/23/08

Permalink 05:54:15 am, by dissidens Email , 340 words, 226 views   English (US)
Categories: Old Main

The Ethos Of Emergence

Tony Jones told Krys Boyd that Emergence was not so much a doctrinal position as it was a vibe or an ethos, and that no doubt left some people wondering about the disposition, character, or fundamental values peculiar to the people or culture of the Emergent movement.

In the past we would have had ethoi explained to us through language, and the more articulate the speaker the more descriptive and helpful would be his explanation. With any luck at all we would come to knowledge.

Tony Jones is not particularly skilled at language in spite of the fact that he is the National Coordinator of this thing called the emergent "conversation". One might have expected that fluency, if not eloquence, would have qualified him as a national coordinator of a conversation, but I have learned the hard way that life is full of jarring disappointments.

Tony does the next best thing, he shows us a picture. I know it's not a good picture; once again it is a rip-off, this time a rip-off of those boring Sunday morning local interest stories on TV. Channel 8 sends a cameraman and a hairdo down a local road to chat with a plucky genius who makes funny statues out of rusty car parts.

This is the enchanting tale of a dysfunctional trucker who divorces, attempts suicide and has an epiphany. Grab you some popcorn and watch this.

This guy who can "hold forth and talk about God" failed to off himself successfully and he deduces from this that God didn't want him dead, that he "had something for him".

And before any foul-mouthed emergents write in to accuse me of pulling some smelly eccentric off the highway in order to smear Emergence, I implore you to rush off and watch this little "film", and listen for the place where Tony says that Trucker Frank is "one of the best examples of a new Christian that I have found."

This is the ethos of Emergence.

04/21/08

Permalink 05:23:52 am, by dissidens Email , 263 words, 323 views   English (US)
Categories: Old Main

Ben Stein Talks With Monsters

I don't know how much any of you have followed the ID squabble, but you might want to find a way to watch Expelled.

It opened last Friday and I was there for the first showing. (Along with what looked like a small posse of local evangelical retirees who laughed during the sarcasm and clapped during the credits.) For those of you sensitive about entering a theater, I'm not sure what to tell you until a DVD comes out—assuming there will be a DVD, and I don't know about these things. I'm sure your guess is better than mine.

I say you might want to see it because a) if you've followed the ID debate you probably won't learn anything new from this documentary, and I wouldn't want to suggest you take more from this than it was intended to convey, and b) nor would I want to encourage anyone to do what conscience or prudent judgment has precluded. But several things struck me and they might provoke useful reflection in you.

First is the heroism of true men. It is rare to see and exhilarating when you do.

Second is the revulsion for academic sellouts and arrogant camp-followers. God had three great ideas: a Messiah, music and Hell. There are probably others, but those three constantly leap to mind. When God judges this country I shall dance a jig. Or maybe a reel.

I haven't decided yet.

Finally there is the result of a failure to permit self-criticism.  Nothing good ever comes from that except perhaps some documentation of the consequences.

04/18/08

Permalink 05:11:47 am, by dissidens Email , 176 words, 170 views   English (US)
Categories: Old Main

Rich And Layered

Our little cartoon critic hasn't been back in a while and this is a disappointment to some of us. Nothing like a few theology-laden cartoons to mix in with your Greek vocabulary and Church history readings.

So I have traveled to and fro in the earth to find something appropriate. Over at TonyJ's place there is this YouTube version of Dr. Seuss. So basically it's another emergent rip-off—carrying forward the salient tradition of that culture.

Definition is discrimination.

Down in the comments you'll notice that jonathanbrink is not the A-student in this class. He's just been told that labeling is wrong, and the first thing he does right out of the chute is define everyone as "human".

Kathy also seems a bit too eager to identify and demonize the poor guy with the machine who is merely providing a service worth ten dollars to everyone who uses it.

Then there's blake:

yes!!! i love the sneetches. seuss is so rich and layered. i'd really like to see more done with him in theology.

04/16/08

Permalink 05:53:38 am, by dissidens Email , 651 words, 308 views   English (US)
Categories: Cafe Perplexa

The Heart Of Darkness

 

Jack: Mind if I sit down? I wanted to ask you something.

Nat: Sit and ask.

Jack: I visited a funny church last Sunday and I was curious what you would make of it. I'm not sure what it all was intended to mean.

Nat: What did you observe?

Jack: Well, it was weird, gritty and disconnected.

Nat: Ah! The Emergent church. It's like going to church in a gutter of the French Quarter before the Sunday morning hose-down. That's their idea of "keeping it real".

Jack: Emergent?

Nat: It's a new kind of novelty religion.

Jack: They seemed to speak highly of tradition.

Nat: Did the church look traditional?

Jack: No, that's one thing I thought was weird.

Nat: Did they sing traditional hymns?

Jack: One kinda hokey text, but even that was from the mid-20th Century and it was set to a silly tune no one knew. The rest was knock-off indie music played by people who clearly could not get gigs anywhere else.

Nat: Was there a traditional sermon in which a biblical text briefly appeared?

Jack: Not as such. I don't remember seeing too many Bibles.

Nat: Yes, they pay lip service to tradition, but the only tradition you find is in trinket form. It's a kind of charm bracelet faith: bits and pieces with sentimental connections...but nothing that binds them to a doctrine or a church practice and nothing that suggests coherence. Nothing a traditional Christian would recognize.

Did you find a doctrinal statement on your visit?

Jack: No, I've never asked for a doctrinal statement from any church I visited.

Nat chuckled.

Nat: You ought to make it a rule to ask. You plan to go back?

Jack: Not sure yet. Probably will try to find some context for what I saw; they seemed somewhat sensitive about it when I asked if they were liberal. All of the literature I saw was Leftist political activism.

Nat: You should go back. My guess is they will have more condoms than documents, but ask for a doctrinal statement and ask them what creeds they accept as binding the conscience. Emergents are short on thought and long on atmospherics. Candles, dim lighting, a coffeehouse ambience, slop-art that evokes something in their memories and a bit of mumbo-jumbo to suggest they read a book once and thought they might like to try it again sometime.

People accuse them of being liberal for good reason. And it annoys them...which I find amusing. Look for Obama stickers on the bumpers. Their National Coordinator shouts "death to homeschooling" like some weenie ayatollah, which gives some clue as to their political disposition. And which of us needs to be reminded that homeschoolers are a grave threat to our liberties?

Jack: So you think there's no future for this group?

Nat: Oh, I wouldn't say that; really bad ideas sometimes gain a following. I would guess in the long run it can't survive any scrutiny; it's why they don't put stuff out to be scrutinized. But I suspect if it lasts it will have to morph.

I read one statement describing a children's program: "We create our curriculum with the awareness that children are wise in ways that we have forgotten." Sounds like a portent of a shocking news story. I suspect that that sort of sentimental loopiness will not survive in a world where childcare is taken seriously.

But do go back and ask a few questions. If I tell you what I think, I guarantee some emergent will complain that he's being "labeled" and that I can only raise questions representative of my prejudices. Apparently they are the only people who can transcend their culture and the historical moment. And they do this in spite of the pop culture encrustations they call their art.

Ask them how they can do that.

04/14/08

Permalink 06:26:55 am, by dissidens Email , 261 words, 565 views   English (US)
Categories: Old Main

In Reply To Billybob And His Many Friends

What can we learn from the Christian fundamentalists? (in exactly 250 words)

The first thing we can learn is the importance of permanent things and the cost of ignoring them. Fundamentalism at the first was not about those things most often associated with it. The world had emerged from the 19th Century with a profoundly different view of God, man, nature and society. With Modernism, Freudianism, Darwinism and Marxism, our plate was quite full. Christian orthodoxy needed a J. Gresham Machen and it got a William Jennings Bryan. By and large the movement's leaders acted short-sightedly and out of self-interest.

The second thing we can learn is the seductions of power. God was in perfect control, is in perfect control, and always will be in perfect control. There are real and long-term consequences when men act like they are. Cast your mind back to Abraham and Ishmael.

Thirdly, the cost of bad leadership is too high and there is a punitive surtax added when power rests in arrogant, ambitious individuals.

Fourthly, conscience is central to obedience. No real piety of the sort necessary to face this world was nurtured in fundamentalism. Discipline without conscience is not mature Christianity and it will not produce a mature church. From Bible college handbooks to standards of personal conduct within the leadership, conscience was distrusted and violated too regularly to have produced a desirable culture.

Fifthly, no movement will ever flourish if it loses track of what is true, good and beautiful. No substitutes, no matter how momentarily attractive, will meet the need of a crisis.

04/11/08

Permalink 06:01:14 am, by dissidens Email , 544 words, 573 views   English (US)
Categories: Old Main

Lighting up Frank

There is an incorrigible mind behind this recent pose we've observed. There is neither point nor benefit in burning J. Frank Norris's bones, and throwing all the fundamentalists' skeletons on the pyre will not help us get over what some believe needs to be gotten over.

Behind this glib and tardy proposal there is a profound ignorance of history and culture. A few in these evangelical movements are coming to the position similar to that held by Machen in the 20s. Others persist in fantasy.

Let us consider what might be gained or lost by burning J. S. Bach's bones. Would that deprive us of his works? Shall we imagine something better in his place? Would I forget the Chaconne? Would Christians no longer be moved by the B Minor Mass? Would desecrating his grave obscure the profound influence he has exerted now for over 260 years? Will you amend the works of Beethoven, Mendelssohn, Busoni and d'Albert to reflect your change of heart?

Of course not. This is the sort of thought that could flit through only a philistine's mind. It has no meaning in the world. It is a stunt; street theater.

We all live in a world made by Bach, Mozart, Mendelssohn, Schubert, Watts, Wesley, Zinzendorf, Faber, Rossetti, Tersteegen, Gerhardt, Tertullian, Luther, Edwards, Knox, Kierkegaard, Norris, Machen, Sunday, Graham.... You want to throw all their bones in the open pit mine in Hibbing, set it alight and start with a fresh sheet of paper?

This is what we have come to.

"This is why we can't have nice things," as my mother would tell me when my dog and I broke something delicate. We cannot have nice things because we don't exercise care for what we have. Fundamentalists can burn all the bones they wish, evangelicals can abandon every shiny trend that's lost its luster, and emergents can reject every creed they find. If you want to see what they have to offer us, look out the window.

Serious men do not hold casual views of history.

The gravity of our situation is demonstrated by men like Mark Minnick who said, "...I'm writing of the Fundamentalism with which I'm familiar, not everything calling itself such". Please don't drag the church into a fantasy world. Take a vacation to Disney World if you must. Rent a pirate video.

For a culture to work one cannot proceed by disavowing the shameful bits of the movement, defending the bits he's familiar with (or the bits he's chosen to become familiar with), or commending only those bits he decides are worthy of the name. Wouldn't it be grand if we could all do this? The neo-evangelical could disavow the goofier statements of Harold Ockenga, the seeker-sensitive could disavow the premature confessions of Bill Hybels, the fundamentalist could disavow the scandalous behavior of Richard Hand, the emergent could disavow the happyface piffle of Tony Jones....

Serious men are not indifferent to any of the facts of history. They know that our present circumstance is the sum of both heroism and self-interest, the result of the generosity and short-sighted ambition of our forebears. God is sovereign in all of history, not just the smooth, colorful bits you like to carry around in your pocket.

04/09/08

Permalink 05:41:14 am, by dissidens Email , 207 words, 726 views   English (US)
Categories: Old Main

The Remonstrans Billboard

The story has been told that George Bernard Shaw sent Winston Churchill tickets to the opening of his play Pygmalion:

"I have included two tickets so that you may bring a friend, if you have any."

To which Churchill replied:

"I regret to say that I am unable to attend that night; I would like tickets to the second performance, if there is one."

__________

 

I'm hoping to crank up the ol' Gulfstream and take in a bit of quality fundamentalist theater this season. I mentioned my plans to the head stewardess of DissidensAir and she said—and rather sharply, I thought—"Huper ptoma mou". I'm not sure what she meant by that; I suppose it is just some aviation lingo.

But I list below some of the thespian delights insofar as I could determine them and the states I shall be flying to:

[Spring Drama] Apr. 25, 26; Faith Baptist Bible College, IA
A Murder Is Announced, Apr. 3-5; Northland Baptist Bible College, WI
Cheaper By the Dozen, Apr. 17-19; Pillsbury Baptist Bible College, MN
Henry V, Shakespeare, Apr. 30-May 2; Bob Jones University, SC
Love's Labours Lost, Shakespeare, Apr. 16-19; Clearwater Christian College, FL
Pygmalion, G.B. Shaw, Apr. 10-12; Maranatha Baptist Bible College, WI
She Loves Me - Feb. 22; International Baptist College, AZ

 

04/07/08

Permalink 06:44:56 am, by dissidens Email , 831 words, 778 views   English (US)
Categories: Old Main

My Journey

We seek to follow the way of God revealed to us in Jesus Christ, study the grand narrative of the Bible, and learn from the fullness of Christian tradition. We recognize our human condition of brokenness and seek the wholeness that Christ continually offers. We believe intentional communication with God through sacred acts of prayer, communion, worship, art, music, silence and meditation on Scripture is imperative to life with God. We desire to be holistic, integrated people, believing that following God encompasses obedience in every part of our lives, and that both big and small decisions are matters of faith.

I drove down to the Journey church in Dallas.

It meets in an office park just off I-635. On Sunday evening at 5:10 p.m. there is only a janitorial crew and milling church attenders. The parking lot has a very modest collection of middle-class cars, and inside the very corporate-looking digs is an accidental collection of bad religious wall hangings: some small, cheap reproductions of Orthodox saints and color photographs of lawn ornament angels. Along the back wall is a table and bulletin board pushing the One Campaign and some ineffectual, feel-good activism on behalf of the people in Darfur.

The conspicuously disheveled room had four monitors and a big screen with a meaningless visual and the word "Journey" at the top. The blinds were closed and the recessed florescent lights were off. All that lit the room was accent lighting. The only task lighting was a pair of weak spots to light the face of the speaker/speakerette. All the background music, both for the pre-service and the public singing, is being played from a laptop through amplifiers and huge speakers which dominate the room. There is a mismatched set of church pews and some shabby, not entirely healthy-looking sofas. Most of the people were middle-class, young and white, but there were a few middle-aged white couples adding a touch of diversity to the group.

The pastorette walked up and introduced herself by telling me she recognized me from my earlier visits. I was surprised to learn this. I thought I would have remembered. But before I could argue with her I lost interest in the conversation. The worship monitors began showing a digital count-down clock reminding us how much later than the posted time this meeting would begin.

Three people picked up some guitars and a girl began telling the group about a recent activity and about how wonderful it was. The guitarists started strumming their instruments and moving about with those unnatural gestures that substitute for the invocation of the Muse. The congregation began singing alternative settings to When I Survey and Here I Am to Worship. (Between numbers everyone waits reverently while a guitarist/worship leader puts the next selection up on the screen.) They sang the original Stephen Foster song Hard Times and a really sticky him-and-her version of In the Garden.

And when I say the congregation sang, what I mean is that while the guitars and amplified canned music was drowning out all other noises, I saw the people's lips move in that reverent way crazy people recite memories to themselves.

The preacherette stood up, dismissed the children to the nursery, and told us that at their Wednesday leaders' planning meeting they'd read in Luke's Gospel the account of the road to Emmaus. I gather from her description that they were all pretty confused as to what to do with the narrative and apparently rejected it as a workable sermon text. During the week, however, the preacherette experienced some random thoughts—her words—and she decided to share them with us. She warned us that they might seem a little wacky, but she held out the promise that we could discuss her wacky ideas later.

It seems that after reading some unidentified writing of N.T. Wright she came to the conclusion that Easter was something of a pre-resurrection resurrection, "the beginning of the beginning" and "the in-breaking of a new reality".

Then the preacherette opened the meeting up for discussion. The chatter matched the décor perfectly: slovenly eclectic: clutter significant of nothing at all. Prefacing his remarks one of the guitarists admitted that they did not have it all together. Another person offered an observation that there was a certain tension between resurrection and resurrection.

All in all the experience seemed to bear out the quotations found on their website:

"Roaming through the night to find our place in this world."

and

"We'll see you after the rapture!"

Following the discussion was communion. All those who wanted to could go to the middle of the room and casually get a piece of store-bought challah to dip in a nearby glass of wine. As people filed through the room a solitary girl knelt to pray before a tiny collection of votive candles and a framed statement about praying before votive candles.

I left.

04/04/08

Permalink 06:17:01 am, by dissidens Email , 585 words, 304 views   English (US)
Categories: Old Main

Take Me Out Of The Ballgame

I don't know if you've ever visited an Emergent Village. I never have. I suspect the Emergent Village is a lot like Chelm but with swine. Someday I want to go to an Emergent Village, and when I do I want to do a couple of things. First I want to conduct some tests on the drinking water.

Then I think I will want to hit the concert hall/wrestling arena/fairgrounds/saloon and take in a "show". Nothing says more about a person than what sort of entertainment he pays for. I'm going to go way out on a limb here and suppose they don't have many string quartets, so this experienced traveler won't be packing his Lea Pocket Scores.

Sometime I'd like to go by their market and see how they sell their foodstuffs. I am prepared to be somewhat nauseated by that experience, but I've eaten in Louisiana, so I think I can handle it.

It wouldn't make much sense for there to be a library in the Emergent Village.

Eventually I want to make it to their ball park.

Tony Jones is the National Coordinator here on emergentvillage.org, and he claims to have been an umpire. He told a bunch of people over at Wheaton College what a strike was [Whence Hermeneutic Authority? available here], and while I haven't collected all the details, I gather there weren't a lot of people cheering him around third. And that comes as a bit of a surprise to me because I thought they could believe anything over at Wheaton.

Here are some of Tony's "thoughts". They are really bad thoughts and I'm not surprised Wheaton decided not to publish them. Even Wheaton has some standards. And apparently sometime later he was mocked in class, and Tony doesn't like that.

(Gotta love emergents. Soon maybe fundamentalists can be as serious as emergents.)

Of course, it's not lost on me that since the earliest days of the postmodern conversation, there's been story floating around about three umpires,

  • The pre-modern umpire says, "I call 'em as they are!"
  • The modern umpire says, "I call 'em as I see 'em!"
  • The postmodern umpire says, "They ain't nothin' 'till I call 'em!"

This all stems, it seems, from the irrepressible literary critic, Stanley Fish, who years ago told this story about the legendary umpire, Bill Klem,

"Klem's behind the plate," Fish said. "The pitcher winds up, throws the ball. The pitch comes. The batter doesn't swing. Klem for an instant says nothing. The batter turns around and says, ‘O.K., so what was it, a ball or a strike?' And Klem says, ‘Sonny, it ain't nothing 'till I call it.'

"What the batter is assuming is that balls and strikes are facts in the world and that the umpire's job is to accurately say which one each pitch is. But in fact balls and strikes come into being only on the call of an umpire."

So the ball that goes in the dirt is a strike if the ump calls it a strike. The ball that beans the hotdog vendor is a strike if the ump calls it a strike. The ball still in the pitcher's glove is a strike if the ump calls it a strike. There is no strike zone, really ; there is only the call of the umpire.

Baseball Rulebook, Rule 2.00 at Emergent Stadium.

Now let's do some theology, Tony!

04/02/08

Permalink 09:08:59 am, by dissidens Email , 345 words, 418 views   English (US)
Categories: Old Main

Beaks And Talons

There are certain men in this world who are a law unto themselves.

They rise up publicly and smite God's chosen "hip and thigh, bone and marrow, heart and lungs", they hire and fire on personal whim and are not amenable to the entreaties of their colleagues, their egos destroy institutions, they sign and break covenants for their own advantage, they turn acts of private compassion into public slanders for political gain and they discredit the church before the world, they intimidate the flock by being "dominating and domineering", they take other men's wives and molest children, they rule by expulsion and threat of expulsion, even in fields where they are manifestly incompetent they create a ludicrous and ineffective culture to impose on the sensibilities of others, they insinuate indecencies about young women for expressing their beliefs, they are men without discretion or tenderness, they publish scandal sheets out of a "love for the brethren"....

It is of a piece. It is the nature of this unclean bird. These are not just the deeds of the 1920s which can now be gotten over. These are the humiliations of today's public life. These are the "nutty professors", the Barney Fifes and the Keystone Cops. These are the teachers, leaders and pastors. But mostly, this is the church of your children.

"But, really, dissidens! Aren't there better things we could be doing?"

In a sense I agree with that. There are many pleasant things we would prefer. There is a book here at my left elbow, there is a CD in the tray with a "legendary performance" by the Wiener Oktett. Either of these is preferable. But we forget what is at issue here. This is the church of Jesus Christ which was explicitly told to see to these matters. You tell me where judgment begins. As it stands we do no such thing and we are disgraced in a world amply supplied with Hillary Clintons and Eliot Spitzers.

Will this movement ever examine itself?

Remonstrans

April 2008
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
 << < Current> >>
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30      

Archives