The New Christians -- (Tony Jones) A Review


Tony Jones, The New Christians: Dispatches from the Emergent Frontier, San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 2008. xxii + 264 pp.



What does it mean to be an Emergent Christian? That is a question that many of us have been asking, and it’s a question that has garnered several answers, both positive and negative. By and large, more liberal Mainline Protestants know little about it, but among conservative Christians, the movement is seen as a watering down of the Christian message – a capitulation to relativism. Tony Jones, national coordinator of the Emergent Village (the centerpiece of this network of Christians that takes the name of Emergent) has sought to address that question in his new book, The New Christians.


The Emergent movement is for the most part an expression of evangelical Protestantism. Its leadership, with few exceptions, is young (under 40), and committed to a postmodern reading of the Christian faith and the world itself. They are, if Tony Jones is correct, a group of Christians who are committed to the essential gospel but are fed up with the institutional wrappings it has normally come in. They are into deconstruction – hoping that from the ashes will emerge a purer and more responsive Christian faith. God may not be dead – as Time and Nietzsche have announced, but Christendom, and the church as we’ve known it, is dying as well. As this happens, something new is emerging. Tony uses at one point the analogy of new growth emerging from a forest floor, something that suggests health

"The modern church – at least as it is characterized by imposing physical buildings, professional clergy, denominational bureaucracies, residential seminary training, and other trappings – was an endeavor by faithful men and women in their time and place, attempting to live into the biblical gospel. But the church was never the end, only the means. The desire of the emergents is to live Christianly, to build something wonderful for the future on the legacy of the past." (pp. 4-5).


In the course of what is in part a defense – apologia – of Emergent from conservative attacks and a challenge to what appears to him to be a theologically deficient Mainline Protestantism (as a Mainliner myself I may be a bit sensitive to his critique), we learn about a new world and the church’s place in it. Denominationalism is dead, of course, along with other aspects of institutionalism – robes, Roberts Rules, and things – but it’s not just the institutions that are passing away. What galls conservatives is the Emergent rejection of foundationalism, or that is Jones’ interpretation (he may be right on this). Foundationalism is the idea that truth rests on absolutes, but by taking a postmodern view of things, Emergents understand that truth isn’t relative but it’s not always scientifically verifiable. They understand the reality of interpretation – whether it’s the Bible or the modern context.

In Jones’ defense of Emergent, he seeks to place this movement above the fray, about the left-right fight that is rooted in modernist understandings, understandings that are, in his mind, overly politicized. 

With reactionaries on one side and revolutionaries on the other, emergents are attempting to reclaim Jesus’ role in society: revolutionary (p. 21).


He claims not to take sides, but it’s clear that while not comfortable with many aspects of conservative evangelicalism (especially regarding women and in some ways regarding homosexuals), theologically at least he’s most comfortable on the conservative side of things. As I read the book, and pondered his critiques of left and right, I felt that he might protest too much about the conservative critique and showed a lack of understanding of more progressive or liberal perspectives. I say this as one who is sympathetic to his movement. I too am interested in a contextualized gospel, one that speaks to those in the here and now, but something is disconcerting about the critique.


As a whole, this is an important guide to the movement written from an insider’s perspective. Although Jones denies that this movement is about younger versus older Christians, the fact is that most if not all Emergent leaders are young(er). Brian McLaren would seem to be the oldest of this group and he’s in his mid-50s. There is, however, a strong generational voice here. He represents a movement among the young and at times shows little understanding of the needs and concerns of older generations. Robes and hymns may mean little to him, but to many who are of older generations these "trappings" are important elements of their faith experience. They find the new stuff to be loud and chaotic. They want stability in seemingly unstable times. It isn’t that their faith or their theology is deficient, it is simply different.

Though there’s an impatience with the church and its elders, the voice present in this work and that of others like Doug Paigitt and Tim Keeler is an important one. It reminds us that we must be contextualized – it’s not just a matter of being relevant, for to be relevant could be faddish. Rather, it is a matter of understanding the world in which we live so we might share the message that is ours. It is also a recognition that the world no longer is willing to accept at face value the truth claims of the church. To say simply that the "bible says it" and that this proves it, no longer works – unless of course you are first brought into the community.

It is community that forms the basis of the movement, as described in the book. The movement began as a conversation among like-minded and frustrated evangelicals. Many of these conversation partners were youth ministers who found it increasingly difficult to connect with young people through traditional means. Many had been involved in mega-churches and found that the church growth and corporate mentality they discerned to be present didn’t fit with their reading of the gospel. Thus, there is an attempt here not to create an institution, but instead build a loose-knit network, one that gives considerable freedom to create churches that are responsive to the context. This is a community that Jones describes as being an "envelope of friendship." The focus is on reconciliation rather than on orthodoxy (though Jones isn’t interested in jettisoning orthodoxy, he simply wants to espouse one that is generous). As a community that is rooted in relationships, that is more network than institution, it’s not surprising that the Web and the blogosphere have been key to its development. Thus, it is also a movement that is most conducive to the young, those who are internet savvy.

It is a conversation that seeks to bring theology to the forefront – key theologians and philosophers that have influenced this movement include Jack Caputo, Nancey Murphy, James McClendon, and Miroslav Volf. Interestingly enough, one theologian who receives a mixed reaction is Stanley Hauerwas – who is seen by some at least as being too insular. The theology that attracts them is "local, conversational, and temporary" (p. 111). Again, it is a theology that includes context and understands that while the central truths of the gospel don’t change, the way they’re understood, described, and lived changes, and thus any answers must be held humbly.

The book is an important contribution to our conversation about the future of the church. I can’t speak to the criticism from the right. My sense is that Tony is too concerned about it and that he needs to let it go. Fundamentalists won’t give him the time of day when it comes to issues like women in ministry or even gays and lesbians. Minds have been made up. Many younger evangelicals will, however, be attracted to a gospel that takes context seriously and recognizes that times have changed. The role of women is different than a generation ago. Women have become leaders of countries, companies, and even churches. Gays and Lesbians, while still held at arm's length by many in society, are being increasingly accepted by the young.

What is troubling to me, as one who has been an evangelical and is still in part evangelical is his acceptance of caricatures of the Mainline. For instance, he makes a critique of the lectionary, a resource that many of us in the Mainline use. We are accused of using a limited gospel, one full of ellipses and that is politically correct. Indeed, some of the more horrendous portions of the text of scripture aren’t found in the lectionary. But even the most devoted of lectionary preachers aren’t required to omit the text found in the ellipses. Rather, the reason for this "selectivity" is the recognition that our call as preachers is to preach the good news. There is a time and place for dealing with difficult texts, and the pulpit isn’t likely the place.

So, what do we make of this movement that is described by one of its leaders? It is by Jones’s own admission, informal (no robes), not overly concerned about growth (some of its churches are large, but not all), it is theologically committed, it can be irreverent and unconventional. It is a movement that has a social concern but isn’t necessarily committed to social change as a focus. It is also largely young, white, and affluent.


There is a tone present in the book that is disconcerting. It’s a tone that is present in many of our works, no matter our perspective, but considering Tony’s desire to offer an alternative to the current options – the religious two-party system – it is unfortunate that he takes a tone that betrays a sense of superiority. Conservative evangelicals and Mainline Protestants simply aren’t up to his standards. We are, it would seem "static" while they are "dynamic." Although the call to conversation requires humility, at points in his critique of his "opponents" there is a lack of humility. I chalk that up to youth. Being a decade older than Tony – he was an M.Div. student at Fuller not long after I finished my Ph.D. there – I can see my own impatience that was present in my critiques of the church. But a decade of serving congregations that include mostly older people, I have gained an understanding and an appreciation for their experiences and their concerns. And so maybe the choice isn’t either/or but both/and. It’s not a matter of t-shirts and jeans versus robes and stoles, it’s a matter of perspective. And if I’m not mistaken, a post-modern view of things is about perspective.

And so we have it, an important insight into a growing and influential new movement in the churches. It is evangelical and yet it could possibly have its greatest influence (in my mind) among sympathetic Mainliners. Its willingness to suspend judgment, to treat gays and lesbians with respect, and to accept the leadership of women (though most of the leading Emergents are men) is in line with what is happening among Mainline churches. Many in the Mainline understand that institutionalism isn’t the answer and that we must restructure and reconfigure. While the "missional" concept has made more headway in Mainline circles, its related movement has begun to make inroads. Indeed, the question isn’t so much whether an emergent movement will "emerge," but which one. 

Marcus Borg, a biblical scholar and theologian who is critiqued here as an expression of old-time liberal theology also speaks of an emergent Christianity, although their understandings are different. I would enjoy seeing Tony more closely engage with Borg and others who are also trying to address the questions of the contemporary seeker. The fact that Brian McLaren and Borg often appear together, suggests that these two understand that they are on similar paths, even if they’re starting points are different.

In the end, what we have is a book that is at points frustrating, confusing, and overly sensitive, but also one that offers a way forward. If one understands that this isn’t a perfect book, one can get much out of it. As a Mainliner, I would recommend reading it in conjunction with Diana Butler Bass's A Christianity for the Rest of Us. I will add that Tony and Diana have had some interesting "conversations" about the future of the church, especially the Mainline version.

Comments

tony said…
Thanks for your thoughtful review, Bob. Here's to more conversation in the future!

Popular Posts