fundamentalism to liberalism

Michael Pattern seems to have concluded his series of excellent post on Would the Real Emerger Please Stand Up. The latest, FROM FUNDAMENTALISM TO LIBERAL: SPECTRUM OF THOUGHT IN THE WESTERN CHURCH, has a wonderful series of diagrams that I think accurately depict the landscape. They are well worth a look.

In part 4 of Would the Real Emerger Please Stand Up, Patton states:

To be emerging does not necessarily have to do with where you land on certain issues. It has to do with your willingness to fly, seriously entertaining anew important and fundamental issues. Not only do you entertain questions (e.g. Why does God allow bad things? Is inerrancy the center of evangelical faith? Do the various traditions—Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant—all have valid contributions to make?) but you have the same questions yourself. In some sense it captures the Protestant reformation principle of reformata et semper reformanda (”reformed and always reforming”) better than other traditions who have reformed and then hardened in their categories of thought and practice.

In the end, as an emerger, you may land your plane in the field of traditional Protestantism on a particular issue, but it is your willingness to take off that is key. Are you willing to discuss issues from a fresh perspective? This is a key emerging question.

I like the series of concentric circles representing essential for salvation, essential for orthodoxy, important but not essential, not important, and pure speculation. In these he uses dots to show the number and distribution of issues depicted in each category for Fundamentalists v. Evangelicals v. Emerging v. Emergent. On one extreme the Fundamentalist has nearly all issues in the "essential for salvation" category with only a small number in the next two circles and nothing in the outer circles. On the other extreme, the Emergent has nearly everything in the "pure speculation" category and only one dot in the "essential for salvation" circle.

In part 3 of the series I like how Patton delineates each group's relation to culture:

1. Fundamentalists: Separate from culture.
2. Evangelicals: Change the culture.
3. Emergers: We are the culture.

In answering the question, "so what does emerging mean?", Patton posits:

In short, the emerging ethos represents a growing mindset which is, consciously or sub-consciously, willing to legitimize and take seriously anew the type of questions being asked, doubts being expressed, and the distrust and dissatisfaction that the a postmodern (emerging) culture has with the traditional church (and Christianity) because they identify with them.

Those that seem to identify with the postmodern mindset too closely, believing that traditional Christianity may not have the answers, are more on the Emergent side. Emergents call for radical change in doctrine and practice. Those that identify with the postmodern mindset yet feel traditional Christianity, while imperfect, does offer the answers to the most important issues may be part of the more orthodox emerging movement. These call for a more mild change.

Part 2 of this series is an attempt to outline the essential elements believed by various "orthodox" positions - interesting.

Part 1 is just ok ... it simply sets up the rest which I found informative.

Technorati Tags: Emerging Church