Ecclesiological Movements

i have been thinking about the nature of the emergent church and here is what i've concluded: it is mainly an intellectual movement for Evangelicals and an Evangelical movement for mainliners. (i think it is also a movement for some disgruntled people, but they'll move along soon enough, i expect.) here's why:

Re: Intellectual movement
1. the movement's leaders operate with a relatively high theological and philosophical affluency. it is very much a rejection of modern epistemology and western liberalism's emphasis on the individual. most church people aren't aware that there is such a discussion and don't care to know.

2. its affinity with radical orthodoxy. radical-orthodoxy takes seriously that there should be a theology for everything. rather, everything should find its existence in relation to theology. theology is an implicational study--it demands change and transformation, but only by implication. those who find a home in it from Evangelical churches are glad to be in vibrant churches, and are glad for conversation partners to push theological dialogue.

in essence, those people who have been the church in meaningful ways got sick of there being no value for academic achievement.

Re: Church movement
1. the attraction of some Radical Orthodoxy people. these people tend to be Anglo-Catholic--two bodies that house some Evangelical thinkers and value scholarship. i think that some of these folk are growing tired of the Spirit having left large numbers of their own churches and are glad to find the ecclesiological relationship with Spiritual believers.

2. existentialism is rampant in our society. it's why so many people blog--and think their deepest feelings are worthy to be read by many. (how many blogs have you seen that talk about how deep they are going to be?) needless to say, it's present in academic circles, too. emergent relationships give ecclesiological space for academic existentialists to admit the gravity of sin and still live against the abyss it creates.

this is all evident in your local Christian bookstore: take a look at how many books are geared toward church people written by phd people. karl barth has succeeded in making scholarship for the church--the only problem is that no one in the church reads the books written for them. there's no fault to be given. that's just the nature of the beast--that i can even speak dichotically of the church and the academy shows it. of course, one of the beautiful things about the emergent church is that it is a renewal and not a denomination. people can find affinities in the emergent church and stay with their own denominations. that loyalty may bode well for the future.