Why I Don't Believe in "Worldviews"
Abstract:
Quote #1, from Worship Leader
magazine:
In the last decade of the twentieth century, a small group of Christian leaders were drawn together by their mutual conviction that evangelicalism had produced a subculture that was no longer the best possible representation of Christianity. The world that had given birth to North American evangelical institutions (established basically through the 1940s to the 1960s) had disappeared by 1990. These believers realized that pushing the same methodologies (perhaps even the idea of methodology) and striving to salvage the old worldview would increasingly alienate popular culture and future generations of Christian youth.
Quote #2, from the Ooze:
In 2001, co-authors George Barna and Mark Hatch made the following written prediction in their book, Boiling Point: Monitoring Cultural Shifts in 21st Century Chrsitianity: “Around mid-decade we expect to see a nascent grassroots movement from within the Christian community to reintroduce people to the idea of living in accordance with a biblical worldview and discovering how to get there,” including values and lifestyles that reflect the same.
In the last decade of the twentieth century, a small group of Christian leaders were drawn together by their mutual conviction that evangelicalism had produced a subculture that was no longer the best possible representation of Christianity. The world that had given birth to North American evangelical institutions (established basically through the 1940s to the 1960s) had disappeared by 1990. These believers realized that pushing the same methodologies (perhaps even the idea of methodology) and striving to salvage the old worldview would increasingly alienate popular culture and future generations of Christian youth.
Quote #2, from the Ooze:
In 2001, co-authors George Barna and Mark Hatch made the following written prediction in their book, Boiling Point: Monitoring Cultural Shifts in 21st Century Chrsitianity: “Around mid-decade we expect to see a nascent grassroots movement from within the Christian community to reintroduce people to the idea of living in accordance with a biblical worldview and discovering how to get there,” including values and lifestyles that reflect the same.
Body:
Sometimes I get excited by what I see happening
in church culture. I see people looking more at the church from the bottom-up
than the top-down. I see people rejecting the idea that religious truth is
something you can just "transmit" from one brain into another. I see
experimental worship.
Other times it feels like more of the same. The way we are already telling triumphal histories of change, when the outcome is far from certain, reminds me of modern Western arrogance. The first quote makes it sound as if the emergent church movement is the product of brilliant minds - a sort of New Great Awakening Great Man theory. "A small group of Christian leaders..." like a small band of rebel forces resisting Darth Vader and the Empire.
I have this deep suspicion that conservative evangelical modernists are already co-opting anything "ermergent" as a way of bringing postmodernism back to a more modernist orthodoxy. What is a "biblical worldview?" The one that says women should submit to their husbands, not speak in church, and learn in silence? The one that says sexual activity not ratified by a wedding with a white dress is punishable by death? The one that says you must believe in "literal" historical water-walking miracles and that you must reject notions of an evolution that isn't guided by an invisible hand? No, seriously, what is a Biblical worldview? Because I suspect that "a Biblical worldview" is a myth. I haven't yet met anybody who has one - least of all those who claim to have one.
I'm afraid that too many people already buy into the idea of "a Biblical worldview." When I opened Relevant Magazine recently I found several subtle and not-so-subtle indicators that being Pro-Life is part of being Pro-Jesus. That saving yourself for marriage is "cool." That Jesus is hip. I don't really have a problem with any of those positions, but I have to wonder: is this just a more nuanced and crafty version of Devo magazine? It almost seems like someone finally got the message that the world doesn't break down into "Christian" and "secular" labels, but that's as far as the revelation went. They need to go farther. Let me point out that I really like Relevant. I like their positive message. But there's a critical element missing somewhere.
"Relevant" is what happens when someone is able to "pull off" being part of an in-group, or can speak the code of a culture. You can try and fail, at which point you will be labeled a "poser" or a less-than-genuine person. I'm afraid that the church is increasingly in the position of being less than genuine in its attempts to be genuine. There is a tragic aspect the the constant struggle to be authentic. You get so focused on yourself and your image - or so focused on the church and its image - that you wind up being a very good, very clever phony. Rather than trying to see how Jesus is already at work among people of different "worldviews," I'm afraid that the church is simply trying to infiltrate "progressive culture" - targeting my demographic and the one immediately behind me - in order to make them over according to white middle-class values. Frankly, I see little of Jesus and more of corporate America in their strategies. Oh, it's an enlightened, progressive, edgy corporate America. But it ain't Jesus. It's somebody's worldview.
I'm not sure what I'm advocating for. Perhaps I just long for real discussion instead of just posturing worldviews. Cultural incarnation rather than culture wars. Witnessing for Jesus instead of witnessing for modernism, or postmodernism, or post-postmodernism. I'd like to see the emerging church become a transforming church, a repentant church, a broken and resurrected church.
Other times it feels like more of the same. The way we are already telling triumphal histories of change, when the outcome is far from certain, reminds me of modern Western arrogance. The first quote makes it sound as if the emergent church movement is the product of brilliant minds - a sort of New Great Awakening Great Man theory. "A small group of Christian leaders..." like a small band of rebel forces resisting Darth Vader and the Empire.
I have this deep suspicion that conservative evangelical modernists are already co-opting anything "ermergent" as a way of bringing postmodernism back to a more modernist orthodoxy. What is a "biblical worldview?" The one that says women should submit to their husbands, not speak in church, and learn in silence? The one that says sexual activity not ratified by a wedding with a white dress is punishable by death? The one that says you must believe in "literal" historical water-walking miracles and that you must reject notions of an evolution that isn't guided by an invisible hand? No, seriously, what is a Biblical worldview? Because I suspect that "a Biblical worldview" is a myth. I haven't yet met anybody who has one - least of all those who claim to have one.
I'm afraid that too many people already buy into the idea of "a Biblical worldview." When I opened Relevant Magazine recently I found several subtle and not-so-subtle indicators that being Pro-Life is part of being Pro-Jesus. That saving yourself for marriage is "cool." That Jesus is hip. I don't really have a problem with any of those positions, but I have to wonder: is this just a more nuanced and crafty version of Devo magazine? It almost seems like someone finally got the message that the world doesn't break down into "Christian" and "secular" labels, but that's as far as the revelation went. They need to go farther. Let me point out that I really like Relevant. I like their positive message. But there's a critical element missing somewhere.
"Relevant" is what happens when someone is able to "pull off" being part of an in-group, or can speak the code of a culture. You can try and fail, at which point you will be labeled a "poser" or a less-than-genuine person. I'm afraid that the church is increasingly in the position of being less than genuine in its attempts to be genuine. There is a tragic aspect the the constant struggle to be authentic. You get so focused on yourself and your image - or so focused on the church and its image - that you wind up being a very good, very clever phony. Rather than trying to see how Jesus is already at work among people of different "worldviews," I'm afraid that the church is simply trying to infiltrate "progressive culture" - targeting my demographic and the one immediately behind me - in order to make them over according to white middle-class values. Frankly, I see little of Jesus and more of corporate America in their strategies. Oh, it's an enlightened, progressive, edgy corporate America. But it ain't Jesus. It's somebody's worldview.
I'm not sure what I'm advocating for. Perhaps I just long for real discussion instead of just posturing worldviews. Cultural incarnation rather than culture wars. Witnessing for Jesus instead of witnessing for modernism, or postmodernism, or post-postmodernism. I'd like to see the emerging church become a transforming church, a repentant church, a broken and resurrected church.
Posted: Sat - April 16, 2005 at 04:55 PM |
Quick Links
About
Dave Barnhart
Why Vulgar Homiletics?
Personae:
All Consuming | Del.icio.us | Last.fm | MySpace | Zaadz
contact: dave at davebarnhart dot net
Why Vulgar Homiletics?
Personae:
All Consuming | Del.icio.us | Last.fm | MySpace | Zaadz
contact: dave at davebarnhart dot net
Categories
Archives
XML/RSS Feed
Calendar
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
Looking and Listening
Recently played:
Weekly Top Artists:
Blogroll
Blog Stuff
Statistics
Total entries in this blog:
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Aug 15, 2006 01:49 PM
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Aug 15, 2006 01:49 PM