A Rigid Orthodoxy

For the curious and interested, I want to attempt to bring some clarity to my current struggle. Not that this will necessarily clear anything up really...but perhaps it will make clear to some why and how I'm walking the path that I am.

This verbal expulsion was prompted in part by Scott McKnight's comments on "Emerging and Orthodoxy 4" at his blog. But also from a conversation I had earlier today with a friend who somebody called a "withmate" on another conversation I was reading.

McKnight seems to be a proponent of orthodoxy preservation in the face of emerging attitudes about church and faith. What I gather from skimming over his last few posts on this topic indicates that he defines orthodoxy as an adherence to doctrinal faith statements. I think if you stop there...that's a component of orthodoxy which most "emerging" folk are willing to accept. In fact, with this whole concept of 'new monasticism' and 'future-ancient' types of community and worship, I think orthodoxy is perfectly acceptable to most of us (perhaps I need to define "us" but I'll refrain from doing so at this point).

However, I think what I am reacting against (dare I say rebelling against) in my present assessment of church and evangelical christianity is a type of rigid orthodoxy which goes way beyond assent to a creedal statement of faith. What I am no longer content with is an expression of christianity which errs on the side of law rather than grace. Sure it would be nice not to err on either side...but to err on the side of law and legalism reduces our spiritual experience to obligatory religous devotion and behavioral modification strategies.

In McKnight's third installement of Emerging and Orthodoxy he offers a helpful quadrilateral of points which provide in his words "four major impulses in the emerging movement." It is...
1. Postmodern: a reaction against the meta-narrative and systematic theologies. I love his final line in this paragraph... "Some have lots of questions about the gospel and find postmodernism a quiet place to rest and think about what they believe."
2. Praxis-here is the emphasis on being missional. Also wrapped up in this impulse are new forms of worship (ancient/modern).
3. Post-evangelical: This basically just implies that many of us believe ourselves to have evolved in some way spiritually...so that we're no longer what we were or what our parents are.
4. Political: Here's the impulse and issue of social justice. Hunger, poverty, aids, economic disparity, etc...these issues are huge and need to be addressed...and are so much more important than adding a new $50,000 cafe to the foyer of the church.

And so all of these ideas are part of my current journey and struggle. I don't want to react and rebel against the church of my youth just because I can. And I don't want to bail out on my "tribe." But I DO want to be a part of a community which values all the above. I no longer want to be part of a church which offers to help construct an alternate reality where the Kingdom is not necessarily released into individual lives or in any real corporate sense. I don't want to plant a church. In the words of Jason Evans, I want to "embody the Kingdom." (See McClaren's blog article entitled "Missional Planning")