By Tabitha Ong
Growing up slightly more postmodern than my parents or church would've preferred, the subject of emerging churches catches my attention..
The freedom in which to be able to live and function as a community of believers that isn't bound by traditions, red tape, fears of "what-ifs".. The promise of an atmosphere of acceptance instead of judgment that pervades is what draws an influx of Christians disillusioned or bored by the confines and rigidity of conventional and traditional churches..
The current trend of young people that are postmodern, seeking more than just religion or a "doctrine" of a relationship they could have with a higher being.. To be a part of something larger than themselves, that would actually make a difference in the world.. To find connection that accepts them for who they are, pushes them to be better in whatever they do..
The article in Christianity Today "Five Streams of the Emerging Church" gave a brief on emerging churches, the 9 practices that define them:
1. Identify with the life of Jesus
2. Transform the secular realm
3. Live highly communal lives
4. Welcome the stranger
5. Serve with generosity
6. Participate as producers
7. Create as created
8. Lead as a body
9. Take part in spiritual activities
The church's purpose according to Rick Warren's "Purpose Driven Church" is firstly to Worship (Loving God with all our hearts), secondly to Ministry "Loving ur neighbour), thirdly to Evangelism (Go ye into all the world), fourthly to Fellowship (baptising them into the family), and lastly to Discipleship (teaching them to obey)..
Why does the traditional or conventional church seem so unattractive to this current generation, and I'm thinking that we do need to evaluate what needs to be done to be able to offer or present Jesus that makes it relevant..
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Its interesting to see the church in the light of the Postmodern era. But as people with foresight and vision from above, I believe the church needs to not only address the Postmodern perception of the church, but also the Post-postmodern era.
ReplyDeleteWe need to anticipate the next wave of anthropological evolution in terms of its social identity.
The Postmodern era is famous for its antithesis of the Truth and its lack of confidence in absolute Truth. Thus the birth of the individuality issue in each Christian as well as others.
Even the advent of social media has fueled the Individuality and propagation of the me, myself and I concept.
Yet there is hope for both this generation and the next. Jesus says the church with prevail and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. It is when we conform (Schema) the church to the ways of the world that we are in danger of losing our identity. The form of the church changes to suit the individual needs of social transformation. That would be dangerous if we continue to let it slide down a slippery slope.
I believe the key to tackling the Postmodern issue, is found in Romans 12:1,2. Not to conform but to be transformed by the renewing of the mind. Not change the church but metamorphoo the individual by the power of the Holy Spirit.
Well said Iggy. As biblically faithful Christians we should be very wary of the postmodern generation. The predominance of individualism, relativism and lack of confidence in absolute truth in this generation are very much contrary to Biblical truth handed down to us by the biblical Christian heritage. I think the reason why new generation is uninterested in traditional churches is because they think they know or can do better (being individualistic) but forget that every generation should stand in the shoulder of others . Many people think that flexibility or relevancy is the most valuable virtues because they think that God is primary love but forgot that He is equally holy and righteous. But what does the Scripture says? Did God being flexible with the Israelites? Is the gospel culturally relevant to the 1st century Gentiles that Paul preached to? Why are they do many injunctions in the NT against the prevalent culture of the day? Why is Paul condemning the false teachers that messed up his message? Isn't that very intolerance? After all, these teachers also taught people to be "spiritual" don't they?
ReplyDeleteRm 12:1-2 will be normative in every era. Every Christian generation should be challenged to be renewed by the Word and to let their worldview shaped by the Word over against their respective cultural influences. Sadly many people think this is outdated, irrelevant, rigid, fanatics, etc. To me it just proved that humanity is so depraved that we think we are the centre of the universe instead of God as the centre of the universe we lived in.
I agree. 'The word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.' (Heb. 4:12) The power of God's Word and the gospel transforms lives and cultures, renews the mind and shapes the worldview. I so agree with Rom 12:1-2 being the key to counter postmodernism. The church is to counter the depraved culture of the era and to raise the standard of the generation. Not lowering God's standards to win the world. Lest, the church allowing the power of depraved culture becoming greater and higher than God's truth. The church is God's transforming agent, not tolerating agent.
DeleteTab,
ReplyDeleteA wise man once said: "there is nothing new under the sun". Whatever we are talking about was addresses by the church fathers of old. I see what the emerging church is doing - it is the same thing St. Francis of Assisi did in his time, the same that Martin Luther and Anna Baptist leaders were doing in their time. And it was the same time the church in the previous generation was trying to do for their time. Making the church relevant to the culture of that time.
Yet in all this we see good in those movements but not the emerging church... Why? all movement or counter movements will meet with resistance. Yet they have to prove their worth for the stand that they are taking, but also be willing to tweak their movement to get it growing in the right path. No movement became grounded perfectly overnight, they had to iron out the problems. And the emerging church may have good points, but they have many things to iron out and to prove.
I think the nailing of the key is like what you said. They want a relationship, they want to know that there is something more that the LAW. The current church stresses conformity... and frankly that is very much the modernist aspect that shines there... to which the generations before that had problems with that too... The emerging church deals very very strongly with the individual's relationship with God (brownie point to emerging church). But they oppose the law, and leave the expressions of worship to the individual... and they also do not deal with how the body of believers correct each other because everyone has their own way of dealing with things. Where then is the accountability of the body of believers who are supposed to check each other?
This movement of anti-thesis is young... it need to reach a point of synthesis and resynthesis-ing till a properly grounded yet appealing movement can b achieved.
I agree that the current way of presenting the gospel seems to not work for young people, but don't you think that we're on the verge of an idea? I'm saying that these people need to be transformed to what you guys are saying (i.e. the romans argument) but that is when they are in the foal already don't you think? This is where the emerging church has weakness... they tend to teach the life of Christ with out the hard truths and solid biblical truths... but with proper biblical teaching and the right balance of everything else... I think this new move may be exciting to see how they win a generation over to Christ:)
Lionel, that was exactly what I wanted to say. That every generation saw their own 'rebel'. Now looking back we look at it in a different light - they brought a revolution and marked history for good. Even Jesus was considered too radical in his time. And imagine what the churches THEN would have felt and thought and acted on? I really just wonder if history is simply repeating itself?
DeleteI would prefer, thus, to take it more openly to see what might come out of this. The emergent church may have its strong points and its weaknesses. They may reach the generation but compromise. Then someone else will come out with something to improve that. And so on so forth.
However, I concur with Iggy that we do need to have some foresight and anticipate the future generations. Especially since the generation changes so much faster these days.
From what I see, the strong point of the emergent church is its ability to contextualize the Gospel. Not surprising considering they started as a response to that very need to contextualize to the post-moderns. I agree with Lionel that the current church stresses conformity. We must be aware that in Christianity, unity is not uniformity. Allowance for expressions of our Faith in different forms is another 'brownie point'.
DeleteI may heading of in a total different direction here, but what crosses my mind is which church model would be more effective if we were to reach out to the cousins in our land? Can our current church models accommodate this so-called 'final frontier' of the Malaysian church. Or will it like one pastor jokingly put it "cause them to backslide" the moment they see our expressions of faith through our 'night-club' style worship and our individualistic approach to doing life.
As I look at the mentioned strengths of the emergent church, which includes its emphasis on communal living, I would not rule out this movement to contain some vital keys in advancing the Church in Malaysia.