This blog is dedicated to class projects, and study sessions.
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Conniry #10: 2 Church Responses to the Emerging Movement
10. I said that the Western church responded in two very different ways to its emerging context. Be prepared to list these two responses and offer a brief summary of each.
The two ways that the Western church responds to the “emerging context” are schismatic: Liberalism and Conservatism. Both of these tend to talk at or past each other, rather than with each other. This was particularly evident in the Evangelical Theological Society.
The “Liberal” response can be characterized by being very accommodating to cultural trends while still trying to remain committed to Christianity’s core dogma and faith/ practice essentials. The downside of this can be over-accommodation whereby important, sine qua-non tenets of Christianity are lost. An example of this given in class was teaching that Satan was just a literary device, and not actually real. They tend to view their conservative forbears as opponents and out of touch with reality.
On the other hand, the “Conservative” response can be characterized by defending every last detail of what it understands as “traditional Christianity,” thereby moving all manner of peripheral issues into the core and then going to great lengths to defend these things and use them as a dividing line to say who is in and who is out. They tend to view “liberal” movements as opponents and heretics.
So-called “Liberal” Christians are also quick to adopt postmodern ways of thinking and to seek experiential and communal practices. This can be healthy, but it can also fall prey to early adoption without spiritual discernment or being rooted in Christ.
On the other hand, “Conservatives” are staunch supporters of traditional, rational truth claims and modern thinking in general. As such, they often fall prey to social and doctrinal modes of expression that are irrelevant.
The two ways that the Western church responds to the “emerging context” are schismatic: Liberalism and Conservatism. Both of these tend to talk at or past each other, rather than with each other. This was particularly evident in the Evangelical Theological Society.
ReplyDeleteThe “Liberal” response can be characterized by being very accommodating to cultural trends while still trying to remain committed to Christianity’s core dogma and faith/ practice essentials. The downside of this can be over-accommodation whereby important, sine qua-non tenets of Christianity are lost. An example of this given in class was teaching that Satan was just a literary device, and not actually real. They tend to view their conservative forbears as opponents and out of touch with reality.
On the other hand, the “Conservative” response can be characterized by defending every last detail of what it understands as “traditional Christianity,” thereby moving all manner of peripheral issues into the core and then going to great lengths to defend these things and use them as a dividing line to say who is in and who is out. They tend to view “liberal” movements as opponents and heretics.
Addendum:
ReplyDeleteSo-called “Liberal” Christians are also quick to adopt postmodern ways of thinking and to seek experiential and communal practices. This can be healthy, but it can also fall prey to early adoption without spiritual discernment or being rooted in Christ.
On the other hand, “Conservatives” are staunch supporters of traditional, rational truth claims and modern thinking in general. As such, they often fall prey to social and doctrinal modes of expression that are irrelevant.
-CL