Scott Responds to Scot

I stopped reading Christianity Today several years ago because I grew weary of all the seminary ads. Perhaps more people would be trained for ministry if the seminaries reduced both the ad budgets and the costs per credit hour. But today a friend gave me a copy of this month's issue and asked for my thoughts on Scot McKnight's recent article on the emerging church.

Scot McKnight positions himself as a middle of the road evangelical who has chosen to be a part of the emerging church movement. I think he's sliding off the left side of the road.

After yet another reminder of the important difference between "emerging" and Emergent in this conversation, McKnight highlights five traits of the emerging church. Those five traits are are: Prophetic, Postmodern, Praxis Oriented, Post-Evangelical and Political. (I haven't seen alliteration that good since my last Adrian Rogers sermon.)

1. Prophetic. McKnight gently chides his emerging friends for their provocative posture, but he doesn't go far enough. "Death and life are in the power of the tongue, and those who love it will eat its fruits." (Proverbs 18:21 ESV)
2. Postmodern. I wish McKnight had mentioned the Biblical storyline here. There is an inherited metanarrative that provides an overarching explanation of life. It's called redemptive history. As Schaeffer said, God is the God who is there, and He is not silent. Christians are called to help bring this postmodern world under the Lordship of Christ.
   
3. Praxis-oriented. I've got two issues here. First, McKnight raises an important question but doesn't answer it. "Is the sermon the most important thing on Sunday morning?" Yes, it is. And preaching the gospel of God is the most important thing ever other day of the week too. "So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ." (Romans 10:17 ESV) God works primarily through the verbal, not the visual. In his providence, what has he left with us today? The Bible, not Solomon's Temple. Secondly, about this new ecclesiology that the emerging movement is attempting to fashion, is it a biblical ecclessiology? Listen again to J.L. Dagg:

   "Our obedience to Christ should be universal. The tithing of mint, anise, and cummin, is of less moment than the weightier matters of the law, judgement, mercy and faith; but it is not therefore to be disregarded. Christ taught that both were to be observed. 'These ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.' (Matt 23:23) Church order and the ceremonials of religion, are less important than a new heart; and in the view of some, any laborious investigation of questions respecting them may appear to be needless and unprofitable. But we know, from the Holy Scriptures, that Christ gave commands on these subjects, and we cannot refuse to obey. Love prompts our obedience; and love prompts also the search which may be necessary to ascertain his will. Let us, therefore, prosecute the investigations which are before us, with a fervent prayer, that the Holy Spirit, who guides into all truth, may assist us to learn the will of him whom we supremely love and adore." (J.L. Dagg, Manual of Church Order, Harrisonburg, VA, Gano Books, 1858/1990, p.12)

   Like our postmodern culture, the emerging church movement tends to marginalize biblical theology. Movements without a biblical ecclesiology have a history of hurting people.
   
4. Post-Evangelical. This is where it gets ugly. Three points here. 1) To quote McKnight: "The emerging movement tends to be suspicious of systematic theology. Why? Not because we don't read systematics, but because..." Hold on a minute, Scot. You mean to tell me that all those young adults that are float in and out of my church and the "emerging" service at the church down the street know what a systematic theology is? Give me a break. They may know the artists who write the latest songs that both churches sing and they probably think that ancient forms of worship are cool, but their lives betray their lack of a comprehensive all-of-life theology. My pastoral context is one where Christians are not engaged in the worshipful discipline of either systematic or biblical theology. Have you read Grudem's Systematic Theology? If you don't finish each chapter in worship before God, something is wrong with you. 2) In this culture, if your church doesn't have a statement of faith, you are in for a world of hurt. Your people will pick and choose what they believe from the spiritual smorgasbord that is postmodern America. Contra McKnight, the emerging movement is in no sense "radically Reformed" when it is not willing to articulate the gospel in written form. The emergent movement is running off the left side of the evangelical road when it tries to build churches without statements of faith. Tell us, emerging movement, what is the gospel? Can you affirm this restatement of it? 3) McKnight is right to critique the emerging church's ambivilence about who is in and who is out of the body of Christ. The biblical principle of regenerate church membership is ignored by far too many emerging churches and their corporate witness to the power of the gospel and the kind of love it produces is sadly lacking.
5. Political. Scot McKnight confesses to voting for Democrats for years. Scott Kelly confesses to voting for Republicans for years. McKnight asks his "fellow emerging Christians to maintain their missional and ecclesial focus, just as [he urges his] fellow evangelicals to engage in the social as well." Frankly, Mr. McKnight, many of your fellow evangelicals do engage in the social components of our faith. You just don't like the way they do it with different degrees of moral conviction than you. Is supporting and staffing pregnancy resources centers and providing housing for single mothers any less significant social ministry than providing shelter for the homeless? Has centralizing government for social justice actually worked in this country? Your Republican brothers in Christ do not think so. Rather than chide us for inaction, engage in more constructive political debate.

I agree with McKnight that the emerging movement may not disappear anytime soon. But I disagree that it posesses a chastened epistemology. It is unwilling to declare the supremacy of scripture in all matters of belief and living. There is a postmodern epistemology driving much of this movement that wants to reform evangelicalism into its own image. If a movement is unwilling to join with other Christians who celebrate the gospel and live it out together in biblical churches, it's not evangelical.