meditatio at the water's edge

McLaren, Wittmer, Dobson...

So, Brian began the conference with these words, "My whole life is committed to Jesus as Lord." For those of us who still really question Brian's motives, what word within that phrase don't we understand enough to be disalarmed or disarmed?

While I much appreciated all three of the presenters, the audience frustrated me a bit. McLaren, Wittmer, and Dobson were all thoughtful, passionate about the gospel and the people of God, and respectful of one another. They could have been more adversarial, and yet they chose to show a mutual respect for one another. Above everything said on Monday, their examples of humility was refreshing and an example for all of us who were present.

On the other hand, as someone sitting in the middle of the second row, I could easily hear the 'ooohs' and 'aahs' of the audience. It was as if people felt the need to pick sides. I sensed: Either you are for or against this emerging church thing. Either you are for our way of approaching the biblical text or you are against us.

Really? Is this what God has called pastoral brothers and sisters to be? We are either for or against one another based on the writings of McLaren, Dobson, and Wittmer? The frustrating irony was that these guys were not the people who were trying to drum up the ranks to choose sides. It seemed more like acid reflux. Some of those within the audience couldn't help themselves.

This past week has given me enough theological reflection for a month; so I'll be writing more over the next couple of weeks, but two thoughts stand out for me.

Professor Wittmer suggested that "sometimes the emerging church goes too far to make its point. I just don't think we need to go so far to make the point."

Steve Argue, in his refections on the Monday's conversation, suggests that people 'fear.'

While I can and should hear what Wittmer is saying regarding 'go[ing] too far to make a point,' here is what I fear:

I fear a church that doesn't want to go far enough with its parctical (lived-out) theology. It wants to be safe. It wants to embrace an orthodoxy that is true as it attempts to be faithful. Yet, as it exists in the center of society as a tax-exempt 501(c)3 organization, it increasinly fails to speak and live at the margins of society.

While we once (1900's) embraced female missionaries traversing the African nations and connecting with the leper colonies, we have largely failed to traverse the AIDS communities, the homosexual communities, and the racial barriers within our own neighborhoods. Right here in West Michigan.

For me to hear brothers with different skin color tell me that Grand Rapids is a racist place... that breaks my heart. I can not pray the words, "Your kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven" enough. I can not allow my life to be a shell that allows those things to continue as I have expereinced them.

My children must know that the priorities of Jesus are different than what we have previously promoted. While my children will undoubtedly know brokenness and pain, they must also see that reconciliation is possible between people of different skin colors. They must also see that there is room in the West Michigan churches for the 'lepers' among (whoever they may be).

If we are not willing to live the kingdom life along the margins, we may as well simply hope for a God that gets our butts into heaven and expects nothing more of us. While our theology must remain biblical, we must be willing to face our fears and address our own brokenness.

The brokenness of my own attitude toward people with AIDS, people with different sexual orientations, and people of different skin colors have moved to the top of my priority list. While these are different issues, my heart breaks for my own attitudes that need serious adjustment. Am I afraid? A bit. But not too much either. If I REALLY believe in a sovereign God, then what is to fear? Either we are going to increasingly believe in the stuff we are smoking (aka gospel) or we are not.

God go with us!