Review: The Great Emergence
Phyllis Tickle is founding editor of the religious department of Publisher's Weekly. She describes having to become fluent in the conversation of religion quite quickly when the job came knocking. It seems that out of this building fluency, she has developed a narrative to describe and predict the emergent church, a movement she calls The Great Emergence.
Tickle's thesis is that every five hundred years or so, Christianity has a major shift. Gregory the Great solidified the church by preserving its leadership and educated in monasteries. The Great Schism provided the context in which the Western church could bloom. The Great Reformation allowed the principle of sola scriptura to change church structure and theology. And now the Great Emergence promises to do as all other other changes have done, which is to rework the question of who has authority.
What led to this question is the advancements of science and technology. Psychology and biology have destroyed the concept of the soul and the little man inside us all who runs us. Technology has allowed us to become much more fluid and less attached to our familial heritage. Moreover, everything has become relative--even time and space. Just living colours our perceptions. Or, to put it in Heisenbergian language, just observing a particle changes its course. Throw in changing family structure because of World War II and you've got a recipe for religious change. Who has authority when the spiritual leaders don't have a corner on the market of truth and experience?
Tickle says that those asking this question come from four quadrants: Liturgists (Roman Catholics, Anglicans, etc.), Renewalists (Pentecostal, Charismatic), Conservatives (Evangelicals), and Social Justice Christians (Mainliners). They remain in tension because the Lits and the Renewalists follow something beyond sola Scriptura and believe that things that are beautiful are true, whereas the SJCs and the Cons like sola Scriptura and believe God is the source of all truth. Meanwhile, the SJCs and the Lits are concerned with right practice whereas the Cons and the Renewalists like orthodoxy. Out of these tensions, a center forms which values all of these--and the conversations such tensions bring--and this is the Great Emergence. Where this will take us is more wholistic than any one of these quadrants can exhibit on its own. Questions of what is a human being? what is Atonement? what is truth? why is there suffering? In this gathering center, they value Scripture and the community and hesitate to place one over the other. Tension.
Ticke's book is a fun read. It's quick. It's always hard to understand. She talks like those she's wanting to describe which is helpful, but also forces one to be critical of her large beliefs about the promise of the emergent church. Her language is helpful because it forces me to wrestle with a paradigm that is not my own. But I got the feeling that Tickle wasn't just describing a phenomenon, but pushing it forward. Not only is this book about "How Christianity is Changing and Why" (the book's subtitle), but it wants to help it get there; it's really, "How Christianity is Changing and Why and my Part in Seeing it Happen." This comes out in two ways: First, the book's structure moves its story from description (What is it?) to explanation (Why is it?) to prediction (Where is it going?). The prediction, it seems to me, was a little intense--a redescription of all major religious feelings visavis authority in North America and possibly beyond. Second, at times the book is a little harsh or edgy or cutting. Its ability to move along at a quick pace is enabled by its sweeping statements and lack of appreciation for debate and dialog around issues like inerrancy, women in leadership, slavery, philosophy.
The book's impact will not be among those who don't know the emergent church. Frankly, it's too hard to understand at points what the heck she's talking about. As a person trained in theology and philosophy, I just had to admit, "This language is strange and I don't understand." It will help those who like the emergent church and want to see it progress because it reinforces their views over and again. Plus, it's speaking their language.
Tickle's thesis is that every five hundred years or so, Christianity has a major shift. Gregory the Great solidified the church by preserving its leadership and educated in monasteries. The Great Schism provided the context in which the Western church could bloom. The Great Reformation allowed the principle of sola scriptura to change church structure and theology. And now the Great Emergence promises to do as all other other changes have done, which is to rework the question of who has authority.
What led to this question is the advancements of science and technology. Psychology and biology have destroyed the concept of the soul and the little man inside us all who runs us. Technology has allowed us to become much more fluid and less attached to our familial heritage. Moreover, everything has become relative--even time and space. Just living colours our perceptions. Or, to put it in Heisenbergian language, just observing a particle changes its course. Throw in changing family structure because of World War II and you've got a recipe for religious change. Who has authority when the spiritual leaders don't have a corner on the market of truth and experience?
Tickle says that those asking this question come from four quadrants: Liturgists (Roman Catholics, Anglicans, etc.), Renewalists (Pentecostal, Charismatic), Conservatives (Evangelicals), and Social Justice Christians (Mainliners). They remain in tension because the Lits and the Renewalists follow something beyond sola Scriptura and believe that things that are beautiful are true, whereas the SJCs and the Cons like sola Scriptura and believe God is the source of all truth. Meanwhile, the SJCs and the Lits are concerned with right practice whereas the Cons and the Renewalists like orthodoxy. Out of these tensions, a center forms which values all of these--and the conversations such tensions bring--and this is the Great Emergence. Where this will take us is more wholistic than any one of these quadrants can exhibit on its own. Questions of what is a human being? what is Atonement? what is truth? why is there suffering? In this gathering center, they value Scripture and the community and hesitate to place one over the other. Tension.
Ticke's book is a fun read. It's quick. It's always hard to understand. She talks like those she's wanting to describe which is helpful, but also forces one to be critical of her large beliefs about the promise of the emergent church. Her language is helpful because it forces me to wrestle with a paradigm that is not my own. But I got the feeling that Tickle wasn't just describing a phenomenon, but pushing it forward. Not only is this book about "How Christianity is Changing and Why" (the book's subtitle), but it wants to help it get there; it's really, "How Christianity is Changing and Why and my Part in Seeing it Happen." This comes out in two ways: First, the book's structure moves its story from description (What is it?) to explanation (Why is it?) to prediction (Where is it going?). The prediction, it seems to me, was a little intense--a redescription of all major religious feelings visavis authority in North America and possibly beyond. Second, at times the book is a little harsh or edgy or cutting. Its ability to move along at a quick pace is enabled by its sweeping statements and lack of appreciation for debate and dialog around issues like inerrancy, women in leadership, slavery, philosophy.
The book's impact will not be among those who don't know the emergent church. Frankly, it's too hard to understand at points what the heck she's talking about. As a person trained in theology and philosophy, I just had to admit, "This language is strange and I don't understand." It will help those who like the emergent church and want to see it progress because it reinforces their views over and again. Plus, it's speaking their language.
Labels: Review, The Great Emergence
posted by Aaron Perry at
4:52 PM
4 Comments:
I've heard of this book. I'm not sure the major shift every 500 years is original to her. I do think associating this movement with the "solidifying of the church" and the Reformation is a diluted vision of grandeur. I think there are many "emergent thinkers" who would agree with me.
Most of what I read from the emergent village is a desire to advance the mission of God in one's cultural context. While this does entail some practical and perceptional change, it does not require a casting off of our traditional heritage or an alienation of the small "t" traditional church.
I've found that those within the emergent movement who do reject their Traditional heritage and the look upon the rest of the Church with pious disdain are a significant minority. Unfortunately, they are the ones that get the attention.
No, the 500-hundred-year shift is not original to her. She gives credit to other thinkers who have mentioned it. Her judgment, of course, remains to be seen as to whether this is one of those shifts.
Tickle would also agree with your middle paragraph. There are differing "levels" to those who are emerging. Some wish to remain in their traditions to "re-tradition" them. Some want to merge traditions. Both of these can be done in local church contexts. That being said, she would agree it's a cultural phenomenon. Her narrative is focused to North America, which I should have mentioned.
I agree that many emerging Christians are quite blessed people and a blessing. They are fun to engage with and not just critical. I expect Tickle is one of those people, even though a few of her phrases got under my skin.
There are app. 2 billion Christians in the world. 1 billion are Catholics. 1 billion are everybody else. Of these, the majority are Pentecostal/charismatic. Everybody else is shrinking.
Emergent is not a 500 year shift (and neither was the Reformation).
Azusa--there's your 500 year shift.
Emergent is a fad. Perry 3:16
I disagree that Reformation wasn't a shift; it brought changes to global Christianity in both Protestant and Catholic forms. Without the Reformation, there would be no counter-reformation and Catholicism would look much different than it does today. There would have been no Vatican I, let alone Vatican II.
Tim, you and Tickle agree on Azusa: For Tickle, Azusa is the proto-emerging event. It couldn't have started without Wimber and then Wagner.
But we should be clear: "Emergent" (and here my own language in the final paragraph of the review is sloppy) is best reserved for Emergent Village or what used to be Emerging Leaders--the organized (and it is) "conversation" of McLaren, Pagitt, Jones, McKnight, etc. "Emerging" is a broader phenomenon that Tickle would argue encompasses Catholics, Charismatics, Mainliners, and Conservatives.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home