Emergent in Boston: John Franke at The Gathering and Gordon-Conwell

Theologian, Professor at Biblical Seminary, and Author John Franke came to The Gathering Tuesday night April 6th.  This was the first of three days of Emergent activity in the Boston area.

The event was organized by Jesse Browning, Matt Miller and "The Church which Meets in Beverly."  I did not count the people who came, but it was a little over 15 people I think.  Some of us from The Gathering, others from The Church which Meets in Beverly.  Adonis Vidu, a professor at Gordon-Conwell joined us as well.  Adonis teaches a class on the Emergent Movement, and John lectured there as well.

Before the evening began, we stood around talking about topics such as the people who think that John is a heretic and deserves to be taken outside and stoned (with rocks that is).

Then we gathered on the couches in our little library corner, and John taught for about 45 minutes.  He wandered around a few points, and then followed up with a discussion time.  He discussed the following things (my words not his, because I did not take notes, and my brain is little):  1)  Christians should be learning to serve together in God's mission with people from other Christian traditions - there should be a plurality of witness,  2)  The Mission of God is what we are to be about (and this is "Mission" as a singular word - not "missions." God is about one mission and what we do should be a part of that one mission), and 3) Our enlightenment informed perception of truth and the Gospel is problematic in contemporary society.

At one point during the teaching, John compared enlightenment thinking, and modernity to "The One Ring to rule them all and in the darkness bind them."  This was one of the last points before the discussion time began.  I could not help but laugh - I loved the illustration, but also shared my uncomfortableness with the fact that the illustration was similar to saying that enlightenment/modernity thinking was Satanic.  Hmmmmmmmmmm... not comfortable with that myself.  John admitted he may rethink the use of that illustration.  But, his point was well made that an individual who believes they hold uncorrectable, absolute truth stands in a position attempting to intellectually rule over others - great point.

Once the discussion opened up Megan DeFranza presented a challenging point.  She suggested that perhaps modernity versus post-modernity were not as critical delineations as more important categories as humility and pride.  Jesse jumped in and questioned what the bottom line actions, and motivations of our missional engagement ought to be.

Caroline topped off the evening with a wonderful little testimony/sharing moment.  She talked about not fully understanding the whole conversation, but identifying with the direction of it, and feeling as though it offered her a solid footing for her transition out of the days of a Fundamental Baptist background in which she "could not wear pants."  That might have been my favorite part of the session.

There was about 45 minutes of discussion, and following the event, most of us hung out at Gulu-Gulu Cafe for a couple more hours.  Once again as the last meeting at Gulu-Gulu I was joined by Jesse and The Unidentified Baptist dude.  As well Matt the Pirate, Michael Giobbe, and Caroline.

This afternoon, I also went to see John speak at Adonis Vidu's class at Gordon-Conwell on the Emergent discussion.  This is a photo of Dr. Vidu giving the introduction.

During this discussion John shared his holiest moment in the Boston area:  Going to a game at Fenway Park.  Then he wandered into a discussion, which I am assuming comes from his book Manifold Witness: the plurality of truth.

He discussed his view of plurality as something God is leading us toward, and part of the plan of redemption.  He framed his understanding of truth in Barthian terms, and discussed the difference between Truth and truth.  Some of the gang from Tuesday night were there as again:  Megan, Jesse, and Ben the Tattooed Mystic (as The Prof. Carlos Z. calls him).

There was some good Q and A afterward including a question about Scott McKnight distancing himself from Brian McLaren recently.  John described his position on the issue:  He does not agree with some of the premises of Brian's most recent book, but even more so does not agree with Scott's choice to disengage from mission with Brian.  For some reading on the McLaren/McKnight debate check out John Armstrong' Blog.

After the class at Gordon-Conwell students lined up to talk with john and get his autograph.  Students at Gordon-Conwell getting his autograph - now that's interesting. :-)

Noblesse Oblige Award - and my passing on the Torch of Nobility

Beth Patterson from The Virtual Teahouse has honored me with this blog award for "nobility of spirit." Her words are some of the nicest things which have said about me either on paper, or by word. Beth - you humble me with your grace - thank you.

From Wikipedia comes this extended definition of the French term "noblesse oblige," which means literally "nobility obligates."

""Noblesse oblige" is generally used to imply that with wealth, power and prestige come responsibilities. The phrase is sometimes used derisively, in the sense of condescending or hypocritical social responsibility. In American English especially, the term has also been applied more broadly to those who are capable of simple acts to help another, usually one who is less fortunate.

In ethical discussion, it is sometimes used to summarize a moral economy wherein privilege must be balanced by duty towards those who lack such privilege or who cannot perform such duty. Finally, it has been used recently primarily to refer to public responsibilities of the rich, famous and powerful, notably to provide good examples of behaviour or to exceed minimal standards of decency."

Beth identified well the heart of this blog experiment, which is all it was in its infancy three years ago, and probably all it remains today. Having the same birthday as Martin Luther I identify in far too many ways with the reformer, turned heretic, turned renegade. Square No More was birthed out of the fires of false accusation against myself, and our wonderful little church. The early goals of the blog were to define my faith in the terms of the marginalized, fringe, and alternative elements of our culture - to make it a living faith in a sometimes dead church world, and so I took my Jesus outside the four walls of institution. Okay, that's not accurate. I actually was forced outside the four walls of religious institution, and was hoping that Jesus was coming with me on this adventure into a strange new world. It has been a wonderful mission, a dangerous mission, a sometimes lonely mission, but each time I turn around, I discover that friends are really still there, and they are cheering me on. Those who have traveled with me have sacrificed much as well, and to them I owe my life: My wife Bev, Jeff and Diane Menasco, Jeff the G-man, Steve Pate, and all The Gathering gang who have been with me through the whole story - Mike and Stef, Rennie, Joanne especially, and all our new found friends from those in the church (like Prof CZ), and those outside (John Armstrong - thanks). This award belongs to you as well!

Beth, you have no way of knowing how much I am honored that the word "Noble" in it's highest meaning as you have attached to it touches me. This is the character trait I respect most deeply.

Now I am called to pass the torch onto to three others, and I call the following people my clan of noblemen (and women.)

John Smulo - he has been silent lately. Maybe this will call him back out. John you are the most gracious blogger I know, and in person you are even more gracious. To you I give the title Noble Blogger, and give you the Noblesse Oblige award. See JJ the Smu at Smulo Space - always thought provoking, occasionally gently provoking, and oh so gently too.

Noblesse Oblige number two goes to the prolific, and definitely provoking Jason Pitzl-Waters from Wild Hunt Blog. Now here I go again. A Christian pastor honoring a Pagan. I will probably get in trouble for it - again. I simply have to give this award to a blogger, who despite his significant differences with me on matters of theology, and religion has been gracious in the times he has mentioned me, and always beneficially critical of we Christians. (Yes, Christians it is true. People can be critical of us for our good, and they can be non-Christians who do so.) Thanks Jason. You are cool. I'd love to have you come hang out with us in Salem sometime.

The first award goes to someone who does not blog - my wife, Bev. She is the noblest person I know. She admits her mistakes quick as lightening. She works as hard as anyone living. She puts up with a dreamer like me, and helps to support a terrible churchplanting-missional habit. I wish she had a blog to put this award on.

Reading the Scriptures Through the Eyes of Experience

Just under two months ago I had a conversation with John Armstrong. We discussed our similar experiences of being accused falsely, and how that has caused us to read the Bible differently. Now that is not to say that I have changed my theology, but I certainly have added something to it. It is as though I have seen Jesus responding to hypocrites a little more clearly than I had seen it before. I began to see His defense of humble God searchers, against the forces of legalistic religion, and it has enlightened my path, and encouraged my heart.

Oh, and by the way, read John's blog on Bobby Cox record for getting ejected from games. It's a great post.

I'm talking with John about having him come to Salem for a conference in November. I'll let you know more about the details should this come together.

The Truth War - The General of Generalization?

Response to The Truth War Part 1
Response to The Truth War Part 2

Generalization is a nasty, hasty habit for many of us. We all become captured in the over-simplification of making hasty generalizations at times. This is a classic fallacy in argumentation. For example: During my time as a Christian I have discovered that Christian leaders who believe reformed theology are overly dogmatic and judgmental toward those who do not hold their positions, because the ones I have met. or read have been that way. Of course, this is not true. It is not even true that all reformed theologians I have met are overly dogmatic. But even if it were true, it is an over-generalization to say that all reformed thinkers are overly dogmatic, and judgmental. That is a hasty generalization, and jumping to conclusions.

Hasty generalization is the formation of an opinion from an insufficiently small test sample group of a larger body. Insufficient evidence used as a basis for conclusions leads to hasty generalization, and logical fallacy.

Enter stage right The Truth War.

From a mere handful of leaders, from a narrow range of denominations, and miniscule number of writings, a series of accusations about the apostate nature of the Emergent Church is presented.

Rob & Kirsten Bell, Brian McLaren, Tony Campolo, and reformed theologian John Armstrong are among those listed and quoted in the book. A small smattering of their quotes are given.

John Armstrong most particularly is of interest. On three counts information provided about him is illogical. Armstrong's friend P. Andrew Sandlin has provided a solid defense against the accusations here in an excellent article. The accusations against Armstrong are provided as an example of the Emergent Church's slide into empty relativism. They are false on these counts: 1) John Armstong is a reformed theologian. He once taught side by side with John MacArthur, and still holds to the reformed traditions and theology with minor variations on his previously held beliefs. He does not typically fit the Emergent Church category. 2) As shown by P. Andrew Sandlin's article, MacArthur chooses statements from Armstrong from only two sources among his many writings - one blog, and one article. 3) His responses to citations from John Armstrong are inaccurate.

Two of three points illustrate hasty generalization perfectly. First, John Armstrong is quoted from a miniscule sampling of his greater works, and his beliefs are inaccurately assessed. Assumptions about John Armstrong are made with insufficient evidence. Secondly, these quotes from this single source become an example of postmodern relativism infiltrating the church at large. MacArthur also lists quotes from such authors as Brian McLaren, and Rob & Kirsten Bell, Donald Miller, and Stanley Grenz. The small sampling of quotes frm each are presented as authoritative comments from what is a complex and diverse movement. They are generalizations about the larger group from a small sampling of ill read quotes. Generalizations are made about John Armstrong, which in turn are used as a sampling of generalizations about the larger group called Emergent.

The premise of the book is based off hasty generalization. John MacArthur shows no complete understanding about the nature of the Emergent Conversation, and similarly no clear comprehension about the basic critiques which postmodernism holds toward its predecessor modernism.

Whether as a tool for creating the larger scope of the book, or in details of the book MacArthur shows himself to be a master generalizer. After quoting Donald Miller's Blue Like Jazz with story about "Mark the cussing pastor," MacArthur goes on to say, "Obscenity is one of the major trademarks of the Emerging style. Most authors in the movement make extravagant use of filthy language, sexual innuendo, and uncritical references to the most lowbrow elements of postmodern culture...."

I don't know which books he's been reading, but my guess is that either they weren't Emergent books, or that he's become the General of Generalization. Logical fallacies are presented as sound doctrine in this book.