Next-Wave Ezine > church & culture

Hi. My name is Kester, and I am “emergent”...
By Kester Smith

Hi. My name is Kester Smith, and I am “emergent”.

There’s been a lot of talk lately about what that means, about defining a theology and a doctrine, about whether this is a movement or a conversation, about what it is that defines the emergent church.

Of course, developing an emergent doctrine and theology is impossible. This is because what makes a church "emergent" is only one characteristic in many. It's like asking what a sad person's views on the environment are or trying to discern what Democrats like on their pancakes. It isn't the summation of something. The term itself means different things to different people.

I am most comfortable with the term "emerging" referring to a conversation rather than a movement. The defining characteristic of the emerging churches, it seems to me, is a willingness to admit that we don't have all the answers. A bit of humility, a bit of mystery, a bit of the "I don't know."

In fact, the major complaint against the emerging conversation (of which I would consider myself a part) is that those of us taking part in it don't know anything, don’t believe anything, that we're impossible to nail down, that we won't just come out and say what we mean.

And sometimes...sometimes...that complaint seems valid.

The strength of the emergent conversation is like that of postmodernism -as a corrective (to fundamentalism or modernism) they're great, on their own, they're much weaker. The problem with fundamentalism and modernism is that they both claimed to have all the answers. The way that the emergents and postmodernists act as a corrective is by admitting they don't even know all the questions.

However, both emergents and postmodernists can get so keen on humility and mystery that they become cagey and overly ironic. Everything could be true, no one really knows anything for sure. This is the complaint of the fundamentalist and the modernist against the emergent and the postmodernist.

The problem with the fundamentalist and modernist is that they think they know everything and they're sure they can prove it. The emergents and postmodernists were a welcome and necessary response to such an arrogant and outlandish stance.

However, the emergent and the postmodernist too often avoid any talk of anything true. We can get quiet and even shifty when asked about what we know. This is the mistake the emergents can make. We've overcorrected as correctives almost always do. We make the mistake of acting like we don't know anything simply because we don't know everything.

I love my wife.

Now, imagine the integrity I would lack if I took the approach that stated that I not only have never doubted that love, but can prove, on paper, that I love her. It would be absurd.

Now, imagine the hope I would lack if I took the approach that stated "well, I think I love my wife...I'm pretty sure she loves me...although how can you ever really know?"

What we need is another alternative, one that acknowledges the moments of doubt and has the faithfulness to push through them. One that has enough history to say with confidence "I love my wife" and know that it is true.

I know that God is real. I know that Jesus died and then rose up from the dead. I believe that forgiveness of sins and a new way of living are available to all who follow Christ. I can't prove it and I have moments when I question it, but I believe that it is reasonable, based on evidence and experience. It's faith, which means it has mystery, but it isn't blind faith. I'm not just as sure I'm wrong as that I'm right. And I don't have to pretend that I don't believe what I do believe and call it humility. It wouldn't be humility if I were talking about anything else, why is it humility when we're talking about God?

The fact is, I'm not interested in a modern doctrine or a postmodern doctrine, a fundamentalist theology or an emergent one. I'm interested in being a Christian. As naive as it may sound and as trite as it may seem, I'm interested in continuing to discover who Christ is and what it means to follow him. I'm interested in a faith and a hope that can speak into every context but isn't defined by any of them. I'm interested in the "I don't know" and the "this I know", because they both play a part in what it means to be a Christian. And that's all I want to be.

Kester Smith currently serves, with his wife, Rachel, as lead pastor and co-church planter for the Immanuel Austin Community in Austin, TX. Raised in Chicago, Kester holds a degree from Abilene Christian University. His blog (www.pastorkes.blogspot.com) is filled with bits of sermons, top 10 lists, and random thoughts on life, the truth, and the Way. He has begun work on a collection called "Tentmaking Saved My Ministry or What Jesus People Could Learn From BookPeople". He also works part time for Texas' largest independent bookstore, BookPeople.

RECENT COMMENTS

I'd say "liberal in some things and conservative in others". I'd say that I don't try to force the obedience that comes with Jesus following on those who aren't Jesus followers. But I think we'd be saying something similar. There's nothing wrong with claiming to know the Way anymore than I'd claim to know my wife, Rachel. But that doesn't mean that those who don't know the Way are always wrong about everything or that I am always right. I can hold up Jesus as the source and definition of all truth without denying others as having some knowledge of truth or asserting that I have a complete understanding of truth. To do a sort of backwards paraphrase on myself, our critique of the fundamentalists is that their knowing something makes them think they know everything." Now, that something (or Someone) is, in a very real sense, all there is worth knowing and is, in another sense, not Someone I could claim to fully know. What we need to do is make introductions to Jesus as the Way, the Truth, and the Life while also acknowledging that we don't know all there is to know about who Jesus is or what that means.

Posted by Kester | Posted at 10/06/2007 2:14 PM

Kester, Thanks loads for the article! I feel that I have an "emergent" view...but the definition has always been rather vague. You have cleared up some of the dross for me. I think I understand it as being "conservative with myself and liberal with others". Not meaning to be morally relative, because we both know there is absolute Truth...but to feel we have the market cornered on it is something different altogether. I have left the denomination of my childhood (I am 42 now) because of the pride and arrogance about "we're right and everyone else is wrong" attitude. Thanks again for the article; please keep 'em coming! Peace.

Posted by Mike | Posted at 10/06/2007 6:37 AM

Myself specifically and those of us at Immanuel Austin believe those truths laid out in the Nicene Creed and speak them together on a regular basis in our worship. I don't think this is unusual for emergent churches to do. There is a great conversation about this topic in the book Listening To The Beliefs of Emerging Churches, which I highly recommend picking up.

Posted by Kester Smith | Posted at 09/27/2007 12:04 PM

i notice theres no claim of doctrine, my concerns about the "emergent church" deal with what the beliefs in the creed are. Do you believe that jesus christ was fully man and fully god and died as the sacrifice for our sins that if we confess him as lord and turn from our sins, turning to god, we will have everlasting life?

Posted by grant | Posted at 09/26/2007 1:28 PM

Shannon-

I'm glad you liked the article. I do want to make sure that you understand that I don't see emergents as having a "lack of truth" or I wouldn't call myself one. I think that we can sometimes overcompensate for the truth shouters by having nothing to say at all, but I don't believe that emergent=weak on truth.

-Kester

Posted by Kester Smith | Posted at 09/21/2007 6:12 PM

Kester-

Finally...an emergent that makes sense!

Perhaps this is the first step to take the emerging conversation away from a lack of truth and start grasping the real and knowable truth of God's Word?

I love this comment: "We make the mistake of acting like we don't know anything simply because we don't know everything."

We must understand that just because we have the truth and can know the truth, it doesn't mean that it should puff us up...actually it's just the opposite, it humbles us to obedience to our Lord and Savior.

There's a somewhat new blog that speaks of a "humble orthodoxy"....you may want to check it out www.newattitude.org/blog/

Posted by Shannon | Posted at 09/19/2007 9:54 AM