youssra
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
CHAPTER TWO CAUSES OF FRACTURING AND CHALLENGES TO ORTHODOXY IN EMERGING STREAMS
Introduction
In this chapter, we have further considered the distinctives that first united the Emerging Church (EC) movement, as well as the key voices, issues of fracturing and justifications for innovation or revision that later emerged within the three main streams of the EC: the Relevants,Reconstructionists, and Revisionists. We also wished to examine how or to what extent those EC persons and streams who came into conflict with one another considered accountability to apostolicity and consensual orthodoxy1 and, if not, what they did consider. Thus, while we have not provided a complete historical survey of the EC movement in this chapter, we have traced some of the major developments, voices, and debates that both united and later led to a divergence of EC persons and streams from each other and, in some cases, from apostolicity and orthodoxy. Additionally, we have also introduced some of the methods and justifications presented in defense of their hermeneutical, theological or doctrinal innovation, revision or defense, especially among those who sought to deconstruct orthodoxy. At the same time, we have also introduced key voices, themes, and works that have been explored further in subsequent chapters. In this chapter, as we have explored the key developments, voices, and issues that led to the fracturing in the EC and to challenges to orthodoxy, we were also often forced to rely on the popular sources used by vital EC voices who, as noted in Chapter One, have typically offered primary source material via popular facing books, videos, conferences, web articles and new media. It was especially necessary, for instance, to rely upon EC blogs that provided primary sources for much of the history of the early development of the EC. It is also vital to note that for some EC voices, such as Brian McLaren and Mark Driscoll, their blogs, interviews, and talks also appear to have revealed the core beliefs under-girding their popular facing books, which tended to be less controversial at first and aimed at a broader Evangelical audience.2 It was only in the last decade that some EC authors’ outward-facing books began to reflect the more radical tone seen in their earlier blogs, interviews, and talks, as explored further in this chapter.3 Additionally, while we have also noted some of the popular-facing academic books of not only the EC movement but also of external critics such as D.A. Carson, there is an overall lack of scholarly work on the larger EC movement following their fracturing. This lack of a greater body of scholarly work, is why we have also proceeded to conduct ethnographic research and interviews with EC voices, in Chapter Four of this study, much as was done by Eddie Gibbs and Ryan Bolger in their study of the EC in Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures. (2005) Due to the popular-facing nature of the EC movement, Gibbs and Bolger initially relied upon websites and blogs, followed by interviews with EC leaders whom they identified via initial research via the web, conferences or personal contacts.4 While Gibbs and Bolger’s work is a helpful snapshot of the movement as of 2005, we also needed to trace the more recent development of the movement to ask questions around the issues that led to division and fracturing in the EC, which began to noticeably decline after Gibbs and Bolger’s work was published. Further, we also wanted to investigate issues of fracturing in dialogue with St. Vincent’s concepts of apostolicity and consensual orthodoxy, which we have introduced in our next chapter, to see if either was considered as sources of accountability for EC reformation, innovation or revisions, or whether they were only accountable internally. However, before engaging with EC streams ethnographically, we first needed to identify causes of fracturing, as highlighted by the approaches of key EC leaders. Therefore, in this chapter, we have examined the essentials that first distinguished and united EC streams and the key voices with whom the movement was associated. We have done so to introduce important EC themes, dialogue partners, and categorizations that will allow us to also then evaluate the causes of fracturing that divided the EC, their approaches to apostolicity and orthodoxy, and theological justifications for challenges to traditional and orthodox doctrines; as well as their alternative sources of accountability. In so doing, we hoped to provide a snapshot of key issues of fracturing, approaches, and challenges to orthodoxy, and justifications for lack of consideration or revisions of consensual historical understandings of orthodoxy within the EC, so that we may also consider, in future chapters, how or to what extent, Emerging expressions might seek to reform, contextualize, innovate, or even revise Christian forms, language, practices, or doctrines, to inculturate the gospel amidst current postmodern contexts without severing continuity-and-congruity with apostolicity.
Origins of the EC Movement
In their seminal 2005 study of the EC movement, Eddie Gibbs and Ryan Bolger framed the movement as a collection of “communities that practice the way of Jesus within postmodern cultures,” by following nine common practices: to “(1) identify with the life of Jesus, (2) transform the secular realm…(3) live highly communal lives…(4) welcome strangers, (5) serve with generosity, (6) participate as producers, (7) create as created beings, (8) lead as a body, and (9) take part in spiritual activities.” (Gibbs and Bolger 2005, 44-45) Streams of the EC have also often been unified by their critique of traditional western church models and practices that they thought need to be deconstructed and reformed in order to better bring the ‘essentials’ of the Christian faith into postmodern culture, a culture that far too often could not relate to modern and ‘attractional’ forms of Christianity typically practiced in traditional churches. (Ibid, 29) EC streams were also likely to eject from their original church communities and to instead participate in new communities intentionally located within the hubs of postmodern culture, living out the gospel incarnationally instead of attempting to ‘attract’ persons back into more traditional churches and programs. In addition, some Emerging communities were also primarily virtual communities facilitated via blogs with periodic gatherings in person, while others gathered in pubs, coffee shops or community centers to avoid the typical Sunday-morning forms and patterns of traditional western churches.5 Still others required members to join an intentional community and commit to shared rhythms.6 Whatever form these new emerging communities took, they were often organized as alternative life, worship or discipleship communities where persons could ask questions and experiment with new styles, language, forms or methods.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ABSTRACT
CHAPTER ONE OVERVIEW AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
1.1 Introduction
1.2 The Research Problem
1.3 Objectives of Research
1.4 Justification for Research
1.5 Literature Review
1.5.1 Reliability of Sources
1.5.2 Originality of Sources
1.5.3 A Typography of the Emerging Church
1.5.4 Primary Literature from within the Emerging Church
1.5.4.1 Early Primary Literature on The Emerging Church
1.5.4.2 Professional Publications of the Emerging Church
1.5.4.3 Sources on the Decline and Evolution of the Emerging Church
1.5.4.4 Sources who Continue EC Themes, Work, or Debates
1.5.4.5 Additional Primary Sources
1.5.5 Secondary Sources
1.5.6 Summary of Literature Review
1.6 Methodology
1.7 Methodological Training
1.8 Scope
1.9 Outline of Subsequent Chapters
1.10 Delimitations
1.11 Research Ethics and Risk Assessment
1.12 Summary
CHAPTER TWO CAUSES OF FRACTURING AND CHALLENGES TO ORTHODOXY IN EMERGING STREAMS
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Origins of the EC Movement
2.3 The Second Wave of the EC Movement
2.3.1 Three Key EC Streams and Reasons for Division
2.3.2 An Emergent-Revisionist Justification for Revisions of Orthodoxy
2.3.3 Emergent-Revisionists and Postmodern Deconstructionism
2.3.4 To Whom or What are EC Streams Accountable?
2.3.5 The Decline of the EC Movement
2.4 Conclusion
2.5 Summary
CHAPTER THREE THE IMPORTANCE OF ST. VINCENT’S METHOD OF CONSENSUAL ORTHODOXY FOR EMERGING EXPRESSIONS
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Overview of St. Vincent’s Life and Discovery of The Consensual Method
3.3 St. Vincent’s Impact
3.4 Challenges to Vincent’s Method
3.4.1 Is Consensual Orthodoxy a Guise for Systematizing Innovation?
3.4.2 Is Consensual Orthodoxy Truly Consensus?
3.4.3 Does Consensual Orthodoxy Contradict Sola Scriptura?
3.4.4 Why Would God Allow Heresy or Need Christians to Refute it?
3.5 Conclusion
3.6 Summary
CHAPTER FOUR ETHNOGRAPHIC DIALOGUE WITH EMERGING EXPRESSIONS: A MATTER OF ACCOUNTABILITY
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Purpose of the Questionnaire
4.3 Methodology
4.3.1 How Participants Were Identified
4.3.2 How Participants Were Contacted
4.3.3 How Our Questions Were Formed
4.3.4 Categorization of Data
4.4 Questionnaire Responses
4.4.1 Backgrounds and Affiliations of Respondents
4.4.1.1 Relevant Backgrounds and Affiliations
4.4.1.2 Reconstructionist Backgrounds and Affiliations
4.4.1.3 Revisionist Backgrounds and Affiliations
4.4.2 Views on Reformation and Renewal
4.4.2.1 Relevant Views on Reformation and Renewal
4.4.2.2 Reconstructionist Views on Reformation and Renewal
4.4.2.3 Revisionist Views on Reformation and Renewal
4.4.3 Views on the Church, Epistemology, and Scripture
4.4.3.1 Relevant Views on the Church, Epistemology, and Scripture
4.4.3.2 Reconstructionist Views on the Church, Epistemology, and Scripture
4.4.3.3 Revisionist Views on the Church, Epistemology, and Scripture
4.4.4 Views on Innovation, Apostolicity, Orthodoxy, and Heresy
4.4.4.1 Relevant Views on Innovation, Apostolicity, Orthodoxy, and Heresy
4.4.4.2 Reconstructionist Views on Innovation, Apostolicity, Orthodoxy, and Heresy
4.4.4.3 Revisionist Views on Innovation, Apostolicity, Orthodoxy, and Heresy
4.5 Conclusion
4.6 Summary
CHAPTER FIVE A CRITIQUE OF PETER ROLLINS’ MISUSE OF DIETRICH BONHOEFFER TO SUPPORT DECONSTRUCTIONS OF ORTHODOXY
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Rollins’ Influence on the Revisionist Stream of the EC
5.3 Rollins’ Revisionist use of Bonhoeffer
5.4 Bonhoeffer’s Possible Support for Revisionists
5.5 Bonhoeffer’s Critiques of Rollins’ Revisionist Movement
5.5.1 Bonhoeffer on Confession of Sin as a key Evidence of Revelation
5.5.2 Bonhoeffer’s Further Evidence of Accountability
5.5.3 Bonhoeffer is not a ‘Death of God’ Theologian
5.6 Žižek’s Influence on Rollins’ Revisionist Movement
5.7 Conclusion
5.8 Summary
CHAPTER SIX ORTHODOXY AS UNIFIED FAITH, OBEDIENCE, WORSHIP, AND WITNESS IN THE BODY OF CHRIST
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Orthodoxy as Unified Faith, Obedience, and Worship
6.3 EC Orthodox Congruence with Bonhoeffer and Vincent
6.4 Orthodoxy as Faith, Obedience, Worship, and also Witness
6.5 Conclusion
6.6 Summary
DISSERTATION CONCLUSION
7.1 Introduction
7.2 Final Conclusions
7.3 Challenges
7.4 Recommendations
7.5 Final Comments
BIBLIOGRAPHY
APPENDIX
