2 of 2

The obvious and valid criticism of this is that it's yet another example of American consumerism run amok in the church: if you don't like what you see, then just go start another church. But I submit that the church, both in style and in substance, has always been a reflection of the culture around it. In the Middle Ages, vestments and ceremony spoke volumes about the church's celestial power to an illiterate laity. In Calvin's Geneva, academic gowns and erudite sermons reflected an educated and cosmopolitan city at the brink of the Enlightenment.

And, in a Wikipedia world, the church will increasingly reflect the highly participatory culture in which we live. You've seen it in the Reformed movement, as more and more laypersons are reading serious theology and not simply leaving that to their pastors. We see it in Emergent churches with the dismantling of the wall between clergy and laity and the sharing of the teaching duties across the congregation.

One more question for you: I've been reading some of the young, Reformed bloggers write about our conversation, and one sentiment has stood out. Several have written that my affirmation of God's sovereignty, the inspiration of Scripture, and the Atonement is not good enough. "What does he really mean?" they ask. "I don't think he really means what I mean!" So, I ask you, do you think that any affirmation of the historic, creedal beliefs of Christianity by an Emergent will be good enough for the young, restless Reformeds?

Your friend,

Tony

Copyright © 2008 Christianity Today. Click for reprint information.

Want to start at the beginning of the conversation?

The New Christians: Dispatches from the Emergent Frontier and Young, Restless, Reformed: A Journalist's Journey with the New Calvinists are available from ChristianBook.com and other retailers.

first page |  2 of 2

share this page

May (Web-only) 2008, Vol. 52