I know some who throw in with the opponents of the Emergent conversation. They are “good and godly” people, as I heard one of them say about Christians who disagreed with each other. They truly, honestly, sincerely seek to honor the Word of God and protect the tenets of the faith from misguided teaching.
For them, that sort of teaching currently comes in the form of the emerging church—the relatively recent phenomenon within evangelicalism where questions are being asked about traditionally held beliefs within the system.
Those bloggers who are ardent supporters of Emergent have embraced a blog-badge which says, “Friend of Emergent.” It’s got a clever little “e” logo, made to look like a leaf, conveying some of the environmentally friendly values common among emerging church leaders. It also communicates the types of individuals who embrace Emergent: generally artsy or literary, cultured and urban. 
Balancing out the spectrum are those who have badged themselves as “Friends of Discernment.” They, too, have come up with a clever knock-off of the emergent logo. The logo is benign to the Emergent illiterate. But this Discernment badge seems to suggest a few things:
(1) It’s likeness to the Emergent logo is clear and unequivocal. It is obviously meant to remind us of that logo. And in so doing, it is meant to point out everything they believe Emergent is not.
(2) The “Friend of Discernment” badge, not so subtly, suggests that you’re either emerging or discerning, that you can’t be both. To be a friend of Emergent is to be an enemy of Discernment. That is the clear statement of this mocking badge (like JOakleys were to Oakleys, "BELIEVE" was to "LIVESTRONG," VH1 is to MTV, THE MESSAGE is to the King James Version.)
(3) Those who are “Friends of Discernment” clearly pray in a better temple to a greater god. They know their Bibles and are careful in their exegesis. They believe the right things and are certain in all their knowledge.
(4) Those who are “Friends of Emergent” have turned from the true faith by asking questions and are indeed heretical in their conclusions. They are unthinking (“carried along by every wind of teaching”), unlearned in Scripture, and unwilling to live by its teachings.
It is unfortunate that the often good exegesis and often clear-thinking of those who call themselves “discerning” have failed to discern the meaning of their own logo. Those who have sought it out and put it on their blogs, do so with the express purpose of mocking and likely an attitude of spite and ridicule.
This failure in discernment is quite the failure. It betrays the fact that while they may easily conquer the textual analysis of a biblical passage, they are not applying it to their lives as they should. They are not examining their hearts to find that they “have not love.” They are not hearing the words of our Savior: “Woe to you hypocrites for hating those who honestly search for the kingdom of God and indeed prevent them from doing so. Woe to you who laugh now, for you shall weep. To everyone, you appear righteous, but inside you are full of hypocrisy.”
To those who are being mocked: “Blessed are you who hunger now: you will be satisfied. Love your enemies; do good to those who hate you. Bless those who curse you; pray for those who are mistreating you.”
If I have offended you, I hope that your anger will reveal you to yourself. If I have offended you, I hope it is an offense that will rebreak the bone that it might heal right. I do not think you hypocrites are wrong in your theology; you “know all the mysteries and all the knowledge” but you “do not have love.”
You know how it ends.
I can love people with whom I do not agree. It is difficult to have a friendship of depth when there is continual disagreement. 2e I think you are trying to offend by quoting Scripture. Is the leaf logo related to a fish or a Greek Cross or a Russian Cross or a Celtic Cross. What is the purpose of the leaf, if not to bring attention to your differences?
ReplyDeleteVery good set of ideas; none of us is as consistent as we'd like to be, but if we see together to hold ourselves accountable, we will learn that friends and discernment can sit at the same table.
ReplyDeleteWow. You need to lighten up.
ReplyDeleteFRQSTR - It is hard to be friends with people you disagree with. But we're still told to love them right? Does mocking emergent qualify as loving, even if some think they're wrong?
ReplyDeleteScot - Thanks. Consistency is hard. Accountability is good. We need others to reflect back to us our own hearts sometimes.
Hmmmm. I think the "discernment" camp has anything but. I disagree with you that they have a good handle on the Bible. They don't. Even worse is their command of logic. I quit reading their sites long ago, because their arguments relied mostly on poisoning the well and guilt by association tactics that are fueled mostly by anger--an emotion that does not make for clear thinking.
ReplyDeleteBut I am not convinced that the Emergent crowd is really searching for truth either. Some of them are and some of them aren't, but as always in these kinds of discussions, the issue is over who truly is a believer and who isn't. False teaching can come from both ends, from those that draw the circle to large and those that draw it to small.
Thought you might be interested to trace the foundation of the "discernment" logo to here
ReplyDeleteWhenever a labeling debate comes up I can't help but think of the pro-choice vs. pro-life movement. Both of those titles are attempting to highlight their positions best aspect. Would you be willing to be called anti-choice, anti-life, or anything anti-_____ for that matter?
Finally, I question why the "emergent" logo was created. The only reason I can think of would be to draw lines in the sand which automatically causes distinct sides because it calls people anywhere on the fence to lean one way or the other. If you were not a "friend of emergent", must you take the title "enemy of emergent", or do you have to be a "friend to [something else]"? Just what was the purpose of the "emergent" logo?
-- bry
While I'm somewhat familiar with the Emergent camp, I haven't heard about the Discerners. I'll have to do some research.
ReplyDeleteI think it's ironic how this one group with such a name thinks they are the only discerners, as if none exist in the Emergent movement. It's a pretty bold move to give yourself such a name.
Ochuk - Like Erin pointed out, and I agree with you, the Friends of Discernment don't have a corner on the market. Anger does seem to be an operative emotion in the whole thing--not so productive in the pursuit of truth. It is amazing how quickly many Christian debates devolve into making circles. How far can infallible logic go in arguing for the tenets of the faith?
ReplyDeleteBry - Thanks for the link; I had that hidden somewhere in my post's links. Some good points on labeling. Also a good question regarding the birth of the emergent logo. However, I wouldn't immediately infer that they meant to create an us/them dichotomy with it. As with many things genuinely creative, I see it as proactive, whereas the Discernment logo is reactive and mocking (ergo, my main issue with it). For example, a nation's flag is primarily intended to represent the nation, but a knock-off flag (inversed colors, interposed symbols, etc)is meant to mock that nation (to be anti-) to a greater degree than to positively represent something.
2e, informative article. I didn't know about the "discernment" group. People often mock what they don't understand, or can't defend against. To be fair Emergent/Emerging is now becoming a hodge podge of great variety. There are many of us out there who would call ourselves part of the Emerging church, but see "Emergent" as more of the Brian Mc. house-church, anti-ecclesiology, postmodern embracing group. Emergent at times seems to have left much of Orthodoxy. Emerging holds many of the Emergent qualities in it's missional contextualization, and cultural embracing while holding to a very conservative and creedal doctrine and theology. I thought your article on heresy was right on as well.
ReplyDeleteI keep in touch with the Emergent camp by reading Relevant magazine and surfing their website. What I perceive is that these believers are at the come-and-see level of dedication to Christ. They are like the 5,000 whom Jesus fed. They know there is something special about this man and they want to find out what it is. They have questions and needs. Many of the core camp have been burned by churches and Christianity. They are reactionary in their response to legalism. They are engaged in the culture around them. They are fishers of men.
ReplyDeleteThe next level within Jesus' ministry consisted of 70 -120 "disciples" commissioned to participate in His ministry. This is the church as we traditionally think of it. As we approach this camp the sacrements become more important to us, the emotion less important, and we are ready to receive doctrine. We are also ready to accept the more rigorous ethic demanded by this camp.
Jesus had a select 12 whom he was preparing to carry the ministry after His ascension. These are our church leaders, and those preparing to become leaders.
Jesus also had a close special relationship with Peter, James, and John. He was especially close to John. Interestingly, I believe all believers can enter into this special relationship, while even at the come-and-see level.
As believers we ought not to disdain anyone, nor presume to teach others "The true path," rather we ought to be ready to engage in conversation so as to learn from and through each other. The attitude of many within the leadership of emergent is like this. It challenges
All this postmodern dialecticizing, identification, and camp-forming sort of makes my head spin. Nice thread though.
ReplyDeleteBrent, Juris - Thanks for your thoughts. It's amazing how many views are out there. Even within the emerging church there's the "liberal" and the "conservative" voices, which are becoming apparent (I was tempted to say "emerging").
ReplyDeleteBrian - It's all about categorizing our lives.