John Franke, in his new and exciting book Manifold Witness: The Plurality of Truth (Living Theology)
is mapping the plural nature of truth in the Christian faith.His concern in chp 4 is how the diversity of the past and the present impact the church today -- the local church -- your local church.
He begins by sketching the idea that God's intent is to form a community and the community of today only partially realizes that eschatological community. These communities are varied so they develop varied traditions.
One of Franke's points, then, is that tradition itself seethes with diversity and plurality instead of stultifying monotony and uniformity. The history of this ongoing conversation, then, is the tradition. It is the history of the church's varied engagements with Scripture and gospel. This tradition provides the context for contemporary engagement.
The creeds are the continuity part of our faith, yet we recognize that the creeds and confessions were themselves shaped by their context.
So what about emergent/emerging and creeds? Franke sees a rootedness in the openendedness of the historic creeds. Franke says the emerging movement is shaped by a diversity that resists the reductionism of "what do they believe?" He sees a parallel in the Reformation where plurality, not pluralism, ruled: there were differing answers to the same questions. Plurality, then, is a blessing from God in the emerging movement.
This diversity is sustained with a commitment to the truth, where there is a need for different voices to make up the fullness of the truth.
But Franke offers to warnings/challenges: there are some diversities that are not appropriate. Further, the diversity of most emerging conversations is not diverse enough. It is still too North American... and he could go on.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
"But the crucial role and purpose was that anyone uncomfortable with or unable to recite a creed was thus easily identified as someone to be shunned. Is this really a tradition we want to keep carrying with us?"
In regards to "the tradition", are you speaking of recognizing heresy, or are you speaking of the practice of shunning?
Is "emerging" really still too "north american"?
and even if it is, is that bad?
i don't think we'd critique africans for focusing their discussions about faith, etc. on the wide range of african experiences/cultures/contexts.
i've never understood why this "north american" thing constantly comes up...
i'm genuinely curious about this.
I just got the book in the mail from Amazon today! I'm excited to jump in and read it. I've got a trip next week and am saving it for the plane... don't know if I'll be able to wait that long :)
As for the point that Franke makes about the emerging conversations being too North American, I'm interested to see what he says. I, for one, agree. If the emerging movement is about being more missional and being more aware of context and culture, then we need to see all of that from lenses that go beyond our nice, white, male, western desks.
This seems like wishful thinking to me. I suppose whether or not it is depends on details like when is diversity not appropriate? The Reformation seems like an odd choice as the damage from the wars resulting from the plurality of that time is hard to miss.
i just don't see how it's a problem for a portion of emerging whose context is North America, the context they are placed in and missionally engaging, to therefore be, well, North american.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.