Over the last year, I’ve been greatly encouraged by the teaching and thoughts of a local pastor, T. Scott Daniels. He is the lead pastor at Pasadena Nazarene (PazNaz). He got his PhD from Fuller Seminary (my present goal), and is a trustee. He’s also a very committed Nazarene coming from a long line of Nazarenes.
So, what does this pastor have to say about the emerging church? Very good thoughts indeed.
The big question so far, I suppose, is why I feel like I can contribute to such a dialogue.
One way of suggesting an answer is to link to my other, and earlier, contributions on my own personal blog. I’ve been blogging since 2004, and what has increasingly formed itself in my mind as an emerging theology has made regular appearances on my blog(s). These are pretty wide ranging, but the easiest way to point some of these out is to link to much of what I’ve labeled as being ‘emerging church‘.
It would be both arrogant and absurd, as well as shockingly ignorant, to suggest that this present effort is somehow a beginning of some overall emerging theology conversation. Indeed, there’s been significant contributions in significant ways from many, many different streams of thought for well over a decade.
In this present project, my hope is not to suggest this is a new task, but to see how it might develop further, maybe more thoroughly. It’s also a task of exploration for myself, and others who might join me hereabouts.
That being said, I hope to make note of and honor those others who have contributed a great deal to the deepening and broadening of a developing, emerging theology. This is a continued task, and one I hope will be aided by suggestions and directions.
A few key ones come to mind now as a sort of beginning of this task of compilation. Tony Jones, formerly a key leader in Emergent Village, has a great blog he is updating regularly. Also, of note is the great group blog Open Source Theology, who have kept up a significant conversation for a number of years. Third, there is the very popular blog of New Testament scholar Scot McKnight. These each have immensely helpful blogrolls, as well, which can point to other interesting sources of thought and discussion.
I openly admit the significant conversations that have happened all over the world, in various mediums, that lead to a working emerging theological tradition. I freely acknowledge the fact this present project is dependent on these conversations. It remains to be seen if I, and any who join me, are able to contribute anything unique, so I venture forth with an attitude of humility. This means I want to know what others are saying, as well as acknowledge them, hopefully learning from them.
There’s a lot of suggestions out there what counts as a theology for the emerging church. One one end of the spectrum there are those who suggest there is no theology of the emerging church, that it is anti-theology, trapped in some pit of postmodern relativism in which everything is so accepted as true that nothing becomes really truth.
On the other side are the various pre-packaged theologies. The emerging church is among the spicier movements of the last decade, so those who want to get a bit of street cred for their own movement, their own work, their own less than popular tradition, adapt a few words, show up at a few conferences, and otherwise co-opt the emerging church movement for their own goals. This happens even as many of them have little to no prior participation in the actual contributions of emerging churches.
I don’t believe either of these accurately reflects what is the working theology of churches following emerging or missional priorities. In their book Emerging Churches, Eddie Gibbs and Ryan Bolger present their discovery that there are about nine characteristics of emerging churches. Within these nine, there is indeed a very distinct theology that asserts positions on key theological categories. However, because these categories are not always the traditional topics of debate among other church traditions, it can seem like the emerging tendency to bypass the old debates means an absence of theology altogether.
But there is a theology, and it’s not a repackaged theology of prior generations nor is it simply an attempt to grasp on to whatever is trendy, joining forces with the spirit of this age. Rather, I am increasingly convinced that this is a movement who participates with the Spirit of God, the Lord of all ages.
My saying this, even strongly asserting it, is not enough. That’s why I’m interested in working out this theology more thoroughly, hopefully alongside others who are pursuing the same type of goals.
This blog is one beginning of that. Another is taking place at the Society of Pentecostal Studies conference in Minneapolis in early March. Other beginnings will, hopefully, develop after that.
So, what is this emerging theology? I think that remains to be seen, at least in a fully developed form. However, at this point I think I would suggest it is a theology that is very interested in both thought and experience, no longer dualistic in separating reason from action. I would suggest that it takes strong guidance from key missionary leaders such as Lesslie Newbigin. It also orients itself, loosely, around the academic theology of Jurgen Moltmann, Wolfhart Pannenberg, among others. It is a lay theology in that it is extremely aware of the contributions of those outside of particular vocational ministry or academic study. It is a deep theology because it seeks to explore these contributions in a broad field of study that invites reflection and participation by those who study various topics deeply, topics such as history, systematic theology, philosophy, among many others.
It is a theology that works itself out in the real lives of participants but can be debated in the halls of academia as reflecting core values of theological insight and depth. It is an integrative theology that brings together various traditions, and various approaches. It is a constructive theology that builds on the insights of others, and responds to the issues, questions, and needs of our era. It is a contextual theology that insists on the fact that theology must be itself incarnated, reflecting in its priorities and conversations the uniqueness of various cultures and locations. Because of this, it is both a global theology and a local theology–aware of its own location and contribution while always aware of and listening to those in other settings who share the same general theological goals.
There’s a lot more. But that’s why I think it’s useful to start a blog about it, rather than try to sum it up in a few, or a few dozen, pages of essay. It’s still developing after all. It’s still emerging.
Patrick Oden
