rix rantz ravz & revelashunz

Ranting Against the Ranters

It's been a while since I've heard much in the emerging conversation beyond bashing the moderns and saying, "we've got to do better." Apart from the home church movement and various other "out there" groups, most of what I see is "same thing only different."

Historically this country began with fairly staid institutions through the first Great Awakening to more vibrant institutions. The wesward movement of the frontier during the second Great Awakening saw the rise of all sorts of transformations. There was the rise of a multitude of denominations and groups. Just look at the explosion of sects during the 1800's - SDAs, Stone/Campbell Restorationmovement, Mormons, JWs, expansion of Methodism and Baptists, rise of the Pentecostal movement, just to name a few. All of them were revolutionary in their way, yet all of them were a reflection of American culture. The rise of Prohibition, anti-slavery and women's suffrage all reflect the American culture that had a deeply embedded religiosity.

Following the turn of the century, America went into a long transition to secularism in both religious and social life. Scientific principles were applied to theology and religion moved from meditative and contemplative in more liturgical circles and from enthusiasm in the newer denominations to more inquiry-based religion. Even the most revolutionary of denominations took hold of the "science" of hermeneutics and an approach to the Bible and religion that has shaped the conversation of the entire past century.

I know this is painting with a broad brush but hey, this is an e-mail post, not a treatise. Let's flow with the generalities here.

Today we are seeing the potential for transformation butI've seen little real evidence of it. Church has had some cosmetic changes, many of which we've seen in our lifetimes with the rise of the mega-churches, and will continue to do so. But I believe it will continue to reflect the culture, as it always has, until it either resonates with the experience of the people as it once did in our country and as we are seeing in some of the Third World countries of our day or else it will become a footnote to culture as we see in Europe.

For my part, I see much of the Emergent Church movement as re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic. The efforts to "save the church" are, IMO, misguided and ultimately doomed to failure. God did not send us into the world to save the church. He called us to transform the world. If we see the church as a consequence of our activity and not an institution to save or organization to perpetuate, I think we would then begin to think radically and realistically about our mission. Jesus came to seek and to save that which was lost. Too manyof us are here to seek and to save that which is found. Whatwould happen if we would abandon our allegiance to institutions and instead sought to simply embrace the hurting, feed the hungry, comfort the grieving and shared the love of Jesus through genuine relationships? Churchwould then happen on its own. But as long as we seek to criticize the church, fix the church, transform the church,whatever.... we miss the Mission.

I think we have become a nation of spectators. We watch athletics on TV. We listen to sports talk radio and even call in to the programs. We talk about sports at the office. We join in the betting pools and have all sorts of fun.

But we don't actually play sports.

And church is no different. We watch church, we talk church,we argue church, we even bet our offerings to support our favorite church and try to convince other church fans to join our club and support our team.

But we don't actually DO church.

And until we do, the Emergent conversation will be just that- a conversation.