Reading Donald Miller’s Blue Like Jazz, though I had not yet heard of the emerging church movement, was my introduction to that movement. Donald Carson’s Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church: Understanding a Movement and Its Implications was the first serious treatment of the movement I encountered. That was almost two years ago. Since that time I have found myself frequently frustrated by the conviction that Carson had “got it wrong,” and so had wrongly poisoned the pot of evangelical reception of the emerging movement. Carson’s reputation as one of the most respected evangelical scholars writing today is well established and well deserved. His influence is significant and with good reason.
Over the last two years I have engaged in constant research of the emerging church movement, have published a couple of short pieces on the movement and have warned audiences that Carson’s work should not be viewed as the final, comprehensive, evangelical assessment of emerging church. I stand by that view. No treatment of the movement that makes no mention of the names Mark Driscoll, Tim Keller, Erwin Rafael McManus, Ed Stetzer and John Burke can hope to achieve anything like a comprehensive overview of emerging.
But! Having just re-read Carson’s book, I am much more impressed with it than I once thought possible. In a forthcoming book I will argue that folks like Mark Driscoll and Erwin McManus do merit (whether they like it or not) the emerging tattoo and thus, Carson’s book involves an analysis of only a couple of sub-sections of the movement. But very important sub-sections they are and Carson’s analysis of them is, I believe, right on.
Far from the mean, reductionistic treatment of McLaren some have charged him with, Carson is very thorough, fair, and even seems to look for every opportunity to praise McLaren where he can. For example Carson notes McLaren’s care in avoiding the simplistic notion modernism bad/postmodernism good-trap that so many others fall into. Nevertheless, Carson, through careful and footnoted examination of McLaren’s writings, exposes unbiblical conclusions, questionable analysis of culture, and contradictory assertions that characterize McLaren’s thinking. I read Carson before McLaren and when I got around to McLaren I took a bias against Carson with me. But, now having tried to read McLaren sympathetically with little success, I find Carson, upon second reading, very impressive indeed.
I highly recommend Carson’s Becoming Conversant as an indispensable evangelical assessment of what I call the doctrine/wary and doctrine/averse streams within the emerging church movement.
11 responses so far ↓
Jimmy Snowden // Oct 6, 2007 at 7:04 pm
I have not studied the emerging church movement all that much (just a few books here and there), however I have read Carson’s book. I did a book review of “Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church.” The first time I read the book I was fearful that Carson had neglected a great part of the emerging church until I read this statement on page 187, “I would feel much less worried about the directions being taken by other emerging church leaders if these leaders would rise up and call McLaren and Chalke to account where they have clearly abandonded what the Bible says.”
This really is the heart of the book. It is clear from this quote that Carson is not condemning anything associated with the emerging church He is not saying that if you are emerging, no matter what, you have been overtaken by the excesses and abuses of Mclaren and Chalke. I think the real point of Carson’s book is to do an analysis of those he considers to be the most influential in the movement (McLaren and Chalk). He then seeks challenge the Driscoll’s in the Emerging church to call the McLaren’s to the carpet.
It is interesting that Driscoll (and other conservative emerging types) have done just this.
Just some thoughts.
Ariel // Oct 7, 2007 at 11:32 am
Having just finished Gibbs & Bolger’s “Emerging Churches,” I’m all the more convinced that guys like Driscoll and Burke need to be included within the ec milieu.
Reading between the lines, I think many ec practitioners (Gibbs & Bolger being a case in point) are biased against churches that grow very big, have visible, authoritative leaders, and don’t shrink from “confronting” (a four-letter word these days) postmoderns with the gospel.
However, the various emphases that Gibbs & Bolger single out as “ec traits” are visible at Mars Hill as well…and arguably in their best, most biblical manifestations.
Apparently ec relevance is in the eye of the beholder.
brad brisco // Oct 8, 2007 at 8:53 am
Dr. DeVine
I hate to keep bringing up the different categories/streams of EC but I do think it is helpful in regards to Carson’s Becoming Conversant and the issue of who is included in this or that EC discussion. Regardless if we use Stetzer’s three categories, Scot McKnight’s five streams or even Doug Pagitt’s (now don’t associate me with Pagitt just because I am going to quote him, but I do think this is helpful) “some minister ‘to’ postmoderns, other ‘with’ postmoderns, and still others ‘as’ postmoderns.”
For me the point is that Carson focuses his attention on Stetzer’s “revisionists” or Pagitt’s “as postmoderns” which clearly includes the likes of McLaren and Pagitt. Now I agree with your statement that “Carson’s Becoming Conversant as an indispensable evangelical assessment of what I call the doctrine/wary and doctrine/averse streams within the emerging church movement” but the book does not, in my opinion, bring “understanding of a movement” as the subtitle suggests because of its extremely narrow focus, which is for the most part Brain McLaren and postmodern epistemology.
In regards to Ariel’s comment about Gibbs/Bolger they do not discuss/include churches lead by guys like Driscoll (and McManus) because Gibbs/Bolger focused their attention (rightly or wrongly) on the “with postmoderns” and “as postmodern” crowd and not the “to postmodern” group, or what Stetzer calls “relevants.” Now I recognize that Gibbs/Bolger do not frame their discussion in this way, instead they refer to Driscoll/McManus as “generational churches” which I thought was off base, but for me seeing guys like Driscoll/McManus as ministers “to” postmoderns as opposed to “as” postmoderns is helpful.
Dr. Mark DeVine // Oct 8, 2007 at 9:15 am
Brad
I agree with all of your observations. I think that over the next year, much more clarity concerning EC will be gained. Increasingly, I think we are beginning to understand the phenomenon more accurately, both its continuities and complexities.
Matt Christenot // Oct 8, 2007 at 5:31 pm
Dr. DeVine,
I attended a missional network this weekend at Denver Seminary with Alan Hirsch and Michael Frost (authors of The Shaping of Things to Come and The Forgotten Ways), Their approach to missional-incarnational was quite a different animal than the Emergent crowd. There was actually quite a bit of indirect critique of emerging being just as consumeristic as the seeker models. Many of the “missional” guys are really asking missiological questions, like how does theology “in-flesh” or incarnate culture. Both those guys admit to being conservative doctrinally even though their methods would make a lot of Acts 29 guys nervous. I would say that any fully orbed critique of emerging/missional will have to grapple with Hirsch and Frost. Thanks again for being willing to engage these issues.
Matthew // Oct 16, 2007 at 12:02 pm
I loved Miller’s book, not everything, but most.
www.matthewsblog.waynesborochurchofchrist.org
Rev. Zdenek Sykora M.Div. // Feb 25, 2008 at 11:14 am
The more complicated the Starbucks order, the more annoying the drinker. If you walk into a Starbucks in Prague and order a “decaf grande half-soy, half-low fat, iced vanilla, double-shot, gingerbread cappuccino, extra dry, light ice, with one /Leonard/ Sweet-n’-Low, and one /Leonard/ NutraSweet,” boy are you messed up. So I have decided to drink flavored water. /Deconstructionism – Derrida/ But it is interesting that there’s no such thing as flavored water. /Caputo drinks his postmodern cappuccino and has different point of view of course/ there’s a whole aisle of this stuff at the Czech modernism supermarket, water, but without that watery taste. Sorry, but flavored water is called a soft drink John Wesley says. You want flavored water? /Happy club instead of Church? We should not change authentic Christianity to make ourselves more comfortable or more acceptable to the world. But do not ask Velvet Elvis picture in the garage of Rob Bell because Rob does not like noise of church Bell. Ask Brian McLaren he was in kitsch church so he knows, he has all answers but it is very difficult to define what he says in his post-kitsch thoughts. / Drink some of that salinized water at the beach that comes out of your faucet there! It is example how look postmodernity in Czech. Many like cheeseburger with name “ontolgy of relativism”. We do not know because we could not know what we actually do not know. “Is it true?” but rather “Whose truth is it?” What has replaced genuine truth is “a world of lies, hype and spin. Truth is dead and knowledge is power.” Os from the power-land of Guinness beer says. Personal and social ethics have been removed from the realms of truth and of structures of thought, they have not only been relativized, but they have been democratized and trivialized in my postmodern country. Praise the Lord that we know that Truth is LORD JESUS CHRIST.
Mike Morrell // Mar 3, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Thank you for your thoughts. Please also read:
Emerging Churches by Gibbs and Bolger
Rising from the Ashes by Becky Garrison
The New Christians by Tony Jones, and
The New Conspirators by Tom Sine
I think this is way bigger and more diverse than Carson realizes, and these books (three out only in the last six weeks!) shed much-needed journalistic-y light on the emerging church phenomenon.
Dr. Mark DeVine // Mar 4, 2008 at 8:38 am
Thanks Mike
My chapter in an upcoming book “Evangelicals Engaging Emergent” will contend that the scope of what is considered “emerging” must be expanded far beyond Carson’s focus in his book.
I believe that Carson’s treatment is valuable according to an if-the-shoe-fits application. And I believe it does fit EmergentVillage.com far more than some admit.
Jacob Bice // Mar 31, 2008 at 2:56 pm
Dr. DeVine…when/where can I get the book?
Dr. Mark DeVine // Apr 2, 2008 at 12:39 pm
Jacob
The Carson book? It is available at Amazon.com or any bookstore could order it if it is not currently in stock.
Good to hear from you.
Leave a Comment