The Reformed and Emergents
Monday, April 10, 2006 at 4:22PM I am fairly Reformed in my theology, and some of my closest friends are Reformed. I have many Reformed friends who give me hope (hello, Ken Davis; hello Bryan), and scholars like Michael Horton and Stan Fowler (theology professor at Heritage) represent what is best in Reformed life and theology. But I have to admit that it is sometimes tough to be Reformed, because we are known as a prickly bunch who don't engage well with those who believe differently than us.
For some years, I have been on a search for exceptions. I don't see why you can't be Reformed in theology, yet also gracious and fair in how you interact with others.
I've especially been looking for this type of engagement between the Reformed movement and Emergents. For one thing, I think the two have much in common. Both are concerned with how the Gospel has been compromised, and both have an impulse to think at the theological, not pragmatic, level. Both are similar in their diagnosis, and I had hoped to see some constructive dialogue about the prescription. But that discussion on the prescription is often derailed by misunderstanding and a lack of agreement on assumptions (example: the role of Scripture).
And it's not all the Reformed people's fault either. Some Emergents have learned to duck or raise fists when they see a Reformed guy coming. Maybe they're just coming to shake our hands and we should extend a hand of greeting instead of raising our fists. (Until they throw the first punch, of course!)
I actually think the two groups have a lot to learn from each other. People keep telling me I'm blowing smoke, but I keep hoping. A few encouraging signs:
- Tim Challies has a strongly worded post today on his experience with McLaren on Saturday night. Tim has put some good issues on the table, and he's also clarified a statement that (in my opinion) went too far. I like Tim and I think he's surfaced some important issues. People like him could be a fair and reasonable voice on the Reformed side.
- Paul Martin presented a good paper on the Emerging Church today, and he's going to start blogging it here. Paul went out of his way to be fair and wants to avoid painting a caricature. (I even got my name mentioned in the paper. Wow, I'm famous!) As Paul blogs sections of the paper, I think we could have a productive discussion.
- Nathan, one of the organizers of the Evolving Church conference, attended the meeting with Paul Martin today, and he is willing to engage and listen and learn.
- There are a few of us who appreciate Carla at EmergentNo even though we often disagree on the issues. I've seen her work to be fair. You have to respect that, even if you disagree with her. I love that people like Andrew Jones treat her like a sister and listen to her, believing she will say things we need to hear.
- There are people like Tim Keller at Redeemer around who are Reformed and able to speak into the Emerging conversation very well.
I don't know why we have to choose to be Emergent or Reformed at all. In fact, I don't understand why we're being called to make any number of choices: proposition or narrative, Gospel or social justice, red letters or black letters. Why must I choose one and not the other? Can't you, for instance, believe that the Bible is narrative but it still contains ideas that look a lot like propositions?
At the end of today's meeting, the host reminded us to not lose sight of Christ. Maybe that is simplistic, but at the end of the day, that's much more important than labels or movements.
You never know. I keep hoping the Reformed and Emergents will stop talking past one another. It could happen. I pray so.
Reader Comments (11)
Do you mean as in: Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels... or Blessed are the peacemakers... Blessed are the meek, blessed are the poor in spirit... or The Lord answered Job from the whirlwind...Where were you when I laid the foundations of the world? You mean listening?:^)
We all come from a long line of protestors (ie protestants). I think it's engrained in our cultures both reformed and EC. As someone firmly entrenched in the Emergent mindset I know that the Reformed folks drive me crazy. But no more then I drive them crazy. I think we need new churches and a lot of grace. Rob
When I grow up (assuming that ever happens) I wanna be just like Double D! (OK, maybe not the Reformed part... Could I just be a 3.5 Solas guy, puhleeze?) Darryl, thanks for this post. And for the continued teaching on graciousness - via example, rather than words.
Thanks for your post, Darryl... and more importantly, for coming to the paper today and having such good things to say. I don't know about you, but I would have been happy to carry on that discussion for a few more hours (as long as Ken would have run out and got us lunch). I had the thought during the morning that perhaps we Canadians might progress this conversation a little. We are peacemakers (in the best sense of that word) by nature. That can be bad... but it can also be good. Maybe we will be able to cut through some of the smoke and get to some real issues? I would still love to see from you a longer "list" of those things you think we can learn from emergent. And now that I have blogged that and not just told you so in a parking lot, you pretty much have to come through with it! That might be a good place to continue the conversation... Thanks again for coming today and for your good clarifications and comments.
Thanks, Paul. I look forward to interacting with your paper at the new blog. Thanks for your encouragement and all of your hard work.
"But I have to admit that it is sometimes tough to be Reformed, because we are known as a prickly bunch who don't engage well with those who believe differently than us." Ah Darryl - the reason we are known as a prickly bunch is because most of us are. And the ones who aren't we treat with suspicion. Too much starch in the underwear. Seriously though, it does seem that most of the reformed types I know are a little on the edgy side and I could hardly exempt myself from the description. It's hard to know why except to say that in an age when doctrinal precision is largely dismissed as impractical nonsense, those who know it is not will vigorously defend it. Why they cannot do so and be less prickly is a bit of a mystery but I think you would agree that things are changing for the better. And to be fair, it is not just reformed people who are like this. Fundamentalists of the dispensational variety are famous for their frothiness. Some of the KJV only boys act like their stand for the KJV and civility are mutually exclusive. Emergent types tend to put anyone who disagrees with them all into a box labelled "right wing, fundamentalist, arrogant, most likely Calvinist - open with caution." I agree with you that the polarities need to be diminished. It is not an either/or situation. There are aspects of the emergent "thing" that are very commendable (I wish they would get a label that worked - Ahhhh! Labels!!). But one of the frustrating things for me, and it was evident Saturday night, is the strong tendency to equate what is understood to be the good things that are happening in the current conversation with a lot of aberrant theology. Some things are just plain bad and need to be labelled as such. True, it should get the label without all the vileness that often accompanies the critique, but labelled as bad nevertheless. (I give, as an example the comment Saturday night that Romans 11 can be used to support a view that God cannot be known and that ignorance is a good thing. McLaren should have jumped all over that - unless he believes it is true. His lack of criticism indicates that he agrees with the man and that makes me concerned about what he represents.) Pastors are commanded in Scripture to refute those who oppose sound doctrine and Jesus warned that false teachers would appear. Opposing what is false will often get you the reputation that you are prickly. Consider the opponents of Spurgeon in his day. One of the major problems in this whole thing is how people lose the content in the style. Already several people responding to Challies have mentiooned that McLaren is a nice guy. Shoot, being nicer than me is a very low bar to jump over - but that isn't the issue. But people lose the validity of an argument in the optics and more reformed people need to understand that. My mother's advice comes ringing in my ears "It's not what you say it's how you say it." Funny she should have said that to me, don't you think? One of the most popular responses to those trumpeting their cause with vigor is the one posted above - quoting from I Cor.13 or the beatitudes, implying that being loving or peacemaking means not being doctrinally accurate. That is the kind of polarity we all need to jettison. We nee to exude both I Cor.13 and Titus 1:9. Had enough? I'll stop for now. Good topic. Thanks for the post.
Thanks Ken for your apt remarks for the truth. I could hardly tell you were Reformed you were so silky smooth :)
Ken is my favorite kind of Reformed guy. He tries to come across all crusty but we all know what's inside. ;)
A Dr. Haykin from Toronto Baptist Seminary is also passionately Reformed and very biblical.
Trish - Check with Darryl to see if I am silky smooth. Darryl - check with my wife to see if I am not crusty inside. May I live long enough to resemble your kind remarks.
I'm Reformed, very Reformed, but have learned quite a bit from reading some Emergent material and interacting with a few Emergent people on a quazi-regular basis. I think the most important thing I've learnt is now to not loose my cool over certian things, and that disagreements are almost inevitable. I'm just about as hot-headed as they come at times and through this interaction I think I've learned to present my thoughts and frustrations in a more constructive light. Perhaps more Reformed folks can learn this. Personally my only substantial "beef" with the EC is the lack of certianty it's theology promotes. As opposed to talking about the undoubted catholic faith which can actually be believed because it's grounded in the work of Christ, it has tended to be lost in a post-modern interpretation and mysticism, at least this is the case IMHO. I think that this is the fundamental issue that a Reformed person would have at the end of the day.