Next-Wave Ezine > church & culture

Cries in the Wilderness: On what it means to be 'Emerging'
By Jeremy Del Rio

"Be alert, be present. I'm about to do something brand-new. It's bursting out! Don't you see it? There it is! I'm making a road through the desert, rivers in the badlands." - Isaiah 43:19, The Message

A generation of prophets cries out. They are, in appearance, humble; in sustenance, meager; in approach, gruff. Do you hear them?

Americanized evangelicals – those for whom Christianity has as much to do with attaining the "blessed life" (more commonly known as the "American Dream") as it does following Christ – don't know what to make of them. Clearly they have something to offer. But we approach with caution, skepticism, and, at times, outright fear or resentment.

Some call them "emerging" or "next" or "future." Others say "Emergent" or "new" or "Spirit-led." Critics describe them as know-nothing idealists or do-nothing demagogues. Often they are relegated to subculture ghettoes (an unfortunate redundancy) of ministry "departments" or labeled paternalistically as "urban" or "Gen X" or "millennial" or "postmodern" or "youth" and/or "young adult."

Like The Baptist of old, their cry resonates and convicts: "Repent, for the Kingdom of God is near." Do you hear them?

The kingdom they proclaim defies evangelical niceties. They trade tailored suits for weather-worn camel skins, upscale cuisine for locusts and honey, gated communities for wilderness cave dwellings, and luxury rides for calloused and blistered feet. Their cause is justice for the vulnerable, love for the lonely, healing for the weak, mercy for the powerful, grace for the lowly, holiness without judgment, and righteousness in both pulpit and pew. The keys to this Kingdom unlock the gates of Hell itself.

The sin they expose resides as much within the "white washed tombs" of our houses of worship and "broods of vipers" with ecclesiastical titles as it does the heart of everyman.

They do not, in themselves, offer salvation. But they herald the One who does. They wrestle with complexity and embrace uncertainty and yet trust completely He whose shoes they are unfit to untie. Do you hear them?

They speak on behalf of those who cannot speak for themselves. If Christians are those who've been "born again," they are prenatal caregivers who nurture the pre-born and minimize high-risk birth conditions. When complications arise, they do neo-natal intensive care real well.

Their message meets a mixed reception because their eternal Kingdom disrupts and threatens that which is temporary. "If you have two coats," they say, "give one away. Don't collect more taxes than are required. Don't extort money or accuse people falsely. Be content with your pay, and respect what doesn't belong to you." (Luke 3:10-14, 19-20 paraphrased.)

Some hear and repent. Many remain indifferent, and others, infuriated. But the One who matters most meets them in the water. "Baptize me," He requests as fulfillment of that which was foretold. Do you hear what He hears?

The resistance at times causes the prophets to doubt. Rejection, persecution, and imprisonment demoralize and frustrate. Still, the King of kings reassures them. They glimpse the fulfillment of the truth they proclaim as the Kingdom invades their space and invites transcendence.

Those who pay the supreme price do so at the hands of disgruntled listeners who fail to hear the message. But their sacrifice represents the highest honor in this Kingdom. Though the King of kings meets us on our terms, they live life on His.

Let him who has ears, hear. (Matthew 11:15, paraphrased.)

Jeremy Del Rio, Esq. directs Generation Xcel and was named one of "30 Emerging Voices under 40" by Charisma magazine in 2005. He's still trying to decipher what that means. Decipher with him at his web log: www.GenXcel.blogspot.com .

RECENT COMMENTS

Well, this is what I get for hurrying to get a post up (it was 1:30 in the morning). You are quite right, Concerned, I had no business dismissing all emergent voices as "non-prophet," especially since that's not even what I believe. Also, my list of descriptors was overkill for the one main point I was trying to make. Although I did have a very strong reaction to the article (and still do), my main objection was to its presumption (that the leading emergent voices are all God's prophets to whom we should be listening; that they're being called "Spirit-led," as if that's some new thing that no one outside the emergent camp is; that nothing they say is wrong (because they're the prophets of God), therefore all objectors are just "disgruntled listeners who fail to hear"; all of this echoed in your own presumption that the emerging church unquestionably is "the new thing God invites us to be part of," etc.). This, coupled with the radical disconnect between the sacrificial Word-proclamation ministries of the Biblical prophets and the ones the author is trying to equate them with. (For example, how many emergent prophets have actually "paid the supreme price"? And are they really wearing camel skins, living in caves, walking shoelessly from city to city, and eating locusts and honey? That sort of thing.) In fact, Jim's objection, and your response to it, is exactly what I'm talking about: The Prophets of Old cried "Repent!" and the article leads with "Repent," but many of the Prophets of New do not cry "Repent!" even though the article tries to equate them all directly with the Prophets of Old, who did.

In any case, it is obvious (as Charlie has already intimated) that the very act of trying to cover all bases in a "take-no-prisoners" blog post is fertile ground for miscommunication (my fault) and misunderstanding. In order to do better justice to the article and not go overboard in my own response to it, I will have to go into it in more detail in my own blog, which I will do shortly, Lord willing. Regardless of what I believe still needs to be said, I will be more careful in the process.

Posted by (Still) Not Sold | Posted at 02/11/2006 3:15 PM

Jim:

Evidently you're "not hearing." Your specific lament is "that many of the Emerging church ... never bring up sin or repentance." Yet this columnist leads with "Repent." Essential to the cause he defines are: "holiness without judgment, and righteousness in both pulpit and pew." The sin he speaks against "resides as much within the 'white washed tombs' of our houses of worship and 'broods of vipers' with ecclesiastical titles as it does the heart of everyman." He celebrates those who "hear and repent" even while mourning those who "remain indifferent, [or] infuriated." As far as Jesus meeting us on our terms, it was Jesus, was it not, who "became flesh and dwelt among us" to the extent that "while we were yet sinners, He died for us."

Not Sold:

Wow. Where you hear an author being "self-congratulatory; self-important; self-aggrandizing; self-glorifying; puffed-up; overconfident; egotistical; proud; 'wise in their own eyes'; absurdly, laughably presumptuous," I hear one being introspect and impassioned and desperate for the new thing God invites us to be part of. Speaking of laughable presumptions: your dismissal of anyone within the emerging church movement as functioning with a legitimate prophetic gift (Ephesians 4 applies to emerging as well as established church movements). Also, your insistence on painting everyone who might be "'emerging' or 'next' or 'future'" or "'Emergent' or 'new' or 'Spirit-led'" with the same brush betrays a "made-to-order" bogeyman that you seem all too eager to attack.

Posted by Concerned | Posted at 02/07/2006 10:01 PM

Again: The syncretistic "gospel of the Kingdom" preached by many emergent prophets, where "the rest of the world is our partner too," etc., is NOT the gospel of the Kingdom that Jesus preached, or that Jesus rules over now. Just citing "the Kingdom of God" does not in itself prove that our definition of it is actually true. But when we refuse to govern our concept of the gospel or the Kingdom by the Scriptures, and insist on redefining them according to our own philosophy, or our own made-to-order epistemology, this is what happens - ludicrous articles about "prophets" who simply aren't.

Posted by Not Sold | Posted at 02/07/2006 1:25 AM

Thanks Jim for your continued input. One of the problems with this kind of dialogue is we can't hear the tone of voice or see the body language of the other person. Thank you for being more specific. "Everyone" is a lot of people. And I will have to admit that I had never picked up on the idea that McLaren, et. al. were promoting a gospel of "good works." What I have heard most of all is the "gospel of the kingdom." I guess you would have to say that Jesus never spent much time on the "sin" business, did he? Anyway, thanks for your continued input. Blessings, Charlie Wear

Posted by Charlie Wear | Posted at 02/06/2006 4:50 AM

What's unspecific and uncivil about what I said? You want specifics? Brian McLaren says those things. Bono says those things. Doug Pagitt says those things. There is nothing wrong with living like Jesus or doing good works. The problem is that many of the Emerging church (do I need to get specific again?)never bring up sin or repentance. They preach works as salvation. That's what is wrong. I may as well bring up the last line of the article as well: We do not, ever meet God on our terms. God never, ever changes His attributes and meets us on our terms. We either meet His terms, or we perish. Period.

Posted by Jim | Posted at 02/06/2006 4:44 AM

The critique of an evangelicalism that often equates the "American Dream" with the blessed life is certainly on point. But here's the overwhelming "feel" this article communicated to me: self-congratulatory; self-important; self-aggrandizing; self-glorifying; puffed-up; overconfident; egotistical; proud; “wise in their own eyes”; absurdly, laughably presumptuous. I know humility has never been the strong suit of many an emergent writer, but this one simply left me speechless. Really, it was embarrassing to read. In any case, I now have the perfect example (in an ever-increasing repertoire) to show all who may inquire just how highly this movement thinks of itself (Romans 12:3, anyone?).

Charlie, of course there is nothing wrong with doing good works and living like Jesus. That is what we are supposed to do. But there is something wrong with prophets who preach "do good works and live like Jesus" but who do not preach repentance (or salvation through Christ alone, or any number of other things the emerging "prophets" often skip over). That was the previous poster's point.

Posted by Not Sold | Posted at 02/05/2006 6:33 PM

I am probably going to be required to post some protocols for commenting on the articles. Something like: If you are leveling a criticism, be specific; and try to be civil in the debate. In the meantime, maybe the poster of the previous comment, could tell us what is wrong with doing good works and living like Jesus?

Posted by Charlie Wear | Posted at 02/05/2006 11:35 AM

"Repent, for the Kingdom of God is near." Do you hear them?" Which one of your Emerging "prophets" says this? Every one that I have have heard proclaim a much different message. More along the lines of "do good works" and "live like Jesus" and many plainly state that many "good" people will be in the Kingdom of God, no matter what they believe. Are you trying to convince yourself with that first line or your readers?

Posted by | Posted at 02/05/2006 10:43 AM