Isn’t She Beautiful - Who Left?
- Posted by scott on January 25th, 2007 filed in conversatio, isn't she beautiful, mars hill, ethnography
Previously, I discussed who came to the Isn’t She Beautiful conference. Here, I want to consider who left. That means looking at:
Thought. What were people thinking? I certainly cannot posit a worldview, theology, or attitude that would represent everyone accurately, so I’ll not bother trying.
But I will suggest that the topics discussed lent themselves to three main responses:
freedom, tension, and suppression (or outright rejection).
Bell assumed – rightly, I think – that many attending the conference had deep-seated doubts concerning the theologies, hierarchies, priorities, and practical expressions of Christianity in the churches they work for, serve, and attend. This is incredibly common among anyone “emerging.” The conference catered to this group, but I do not believe that anyone used the words “emergent” or “emerging.”
Consider, for instance, the topics of the main sessions (see the schedule at IsntSheBeautiful.org):
1) “This lovely, frustrating, intoxicating, painful, hard, compelling mystery called church and why she’s worth dying for.” Big idea: pastors have an incredibly difficult job as “eucharists” – each week, they break their bodies and pour out their blood for the benefit of others…yet they keep doing it despite tremendous pain and anguish. The message: Be encouraged. Don’t give up.
2) “A theology of creativity.” Essentially, how to be brilliant by teasing out profound meaning from obscure or unnoticed passages, teaching in a manner that is disarming, loving, and fun, developing unique illustrations, and letting ideas marinate.3) “A few thoughts on God, Jesus, salvation, judgment, heaven, hell, who’s in, who’s out, and the end of the world as we know it.” Bell declared the room a “safe space” for engaging doubts about fundamentalist perspectives on eternity and eschatology. This session was the longest, lasting nearly three hours (including breaks).
4) “The absolute necessity of endlessly reclaiming your innocence.” The message: Stick with it if you can. Quit your job in ministry and become a bartender if you have to. But no matter what, be encouraged.
These teachings were designed for pastors who love their churches and desperately want to love them more…but also for those who are having a tough time doing it. There are a variety of reasons for such discontent.
I want to highlight the tension surrounding the “who’s in / who’s out” talk in particular. This sort of discourse is central to defining a religious group– or any social movement – and it’s a touchy subject. This topic called doubt to the surface, but the atmosphere of open, honest engagement was designed to be therapeutic. For the sake of those who attended, I’m reluctant to say much more. But while at lunch, I overheard a few attendees discussing the session. One man said to another, “I agree with a lot of what he’s saying. But I’m not ready to be called a heretic.”
This tension is emblematic of what one might call “the emerging problem.” I would suggest that participants may have left the conference in a few different states of mind:
1) Freedom. Bell said, “Some have deep-seated questions that they have never voiced, and maybe just speaking them will help them to navigate this.” For those who may have suppressed these questions lurking deep in their minds, simply acknowledging them in an honest, open environment may have been liberating. I posted a question on Tuesday that someone had asked: “Is there hope?” Many long for it. But even so, the conference ended and many have returned home to find:
2) Tension, cognitive dissonance, and loneliness. When one’s closest relationships, sense of belonging, personal validation, and paycheck depend on believing and teaching what one cannot accept, tension is inevitable. Many, upon returning home to their respective churches, will have few friends with whom they can openly discuss such matters. One person asked, “What if the people you work with are working for ‘the other side’?” The phrase “chaffing against an entire system” came up shortly after.
But nobody wants a heresy trial. And nobody wants to threaten their family’s livelihood by risking their job. I cannot stress this tension enough. (For an incredibly vivid but fictional treatment of this discontent and resulting heresy trial, see Brian McLaren’s The Last Word…And the Word After That).
One person wrote, “I work in a church whose vision is the antithesis of what we’re talking about. The lead pastor says to keep my opinions quiet, play the game, and get through the system.” Under this lies a deeper question, “When is it time to stay and push reluctant Christians, and when is it time to leave?” That’s tension.
3) (Re-)suppression or rejection. “I agree with a lot of what he’s saying. But I’m not ready to be called a heretic.” Tension. I’m reminded of a scene in The Matrix. What if the consequences of taking the “Blue Pill” are too great? What does it mean to consciously choose the “Red Pill,” even if one cannot bring oneself to “swallow” it?
What do you think?
3 Responses to “Isn’t She Beautiful - Who Left?”
Leave a Comment
Isn’t She Beautiful - Who Left?
- Posted by scott on January 25th, 2007 filed in conversatio, isn't she beautiful, mars hill, ethnography
Previously, I discussed who came to the Isn’t She Beautiful conference. Here, I want to consider who left. That means looking at:
Thought. What were people thinking? I certainly cannot posit a worldview, theology, or attitude that would represent everyone accurately, so I’ll not bother trying.
But I will suggest that the topics discussed lent themselves to three main responses:
freedom, tension, and suppression (or outright rejection).
Bell assumed – rightly, I think – that many attending the conference had deep-seated doubts concerning the theologies, hierarchies, priorities, and practical expressions of Christianity in the churches they work for, serve, and attend. This is incredibly common among anyone “emerging.” The conference catered to this group, but I do not believe that anyone used the words “emergent” or “emerging.”
Consider, for instance, the topics of the main sessions (see the schedule at IsntSheBeautiful.org):
1) “This lovely, frustrating, intoxicating, painful, hard, compelling mystery called church and why she’s worth dying for.” Big idea: pastors have an incredibly difficult job as “eucharists” – each week, they break their bodies and pour out their blood for the benefit of others…yet they keep doing it despite tremendous pain and anguish. The message: Be encouraged. Don’t give up.
2) “A theology of creativity.” Essentially, how to be brilliant by teasing out profound meaning from obscure or unnoticed passages, teaching in a manner that is disarming, loving, and fun, developing unique illustrations, and letting ideas marinate.3) “A few thoughts on God, Jesus, salvation, judgment, heaven, hell, who’s in, who’s out, and the end of the world as we know it.” Bell declared the room a “safe space” for engaging doubts about fundamentalist perspectives on eternity and eschatology. This session was the longest, lasting nearly three hours (including breaks).
4) “The absolute necessity of endlessly reclaiming your innocence.” The message: Stick with it if you can. Quit your job in ministry and become a bartender if you have to. But no matter what, be encouraged.
These teachings were designed for pastors who love their churches and desperately want to love them more…but also for those who are having a tough time doing it. There are a variety of reasons for such discontent.
I want to highlight the tension surrounding the “who’s in / who’s out” talk in particular. This sort of discourse is central to defining a religious group– or any social movement – and it’s a touchy subject. This topic called doubt to the surface, but the atmosphere of open, honest engagement was designed to be therapeutic. For the sake of those who attended, I’m reluctant to say much more. But while at lunch, I overheard a few attendees discussing the session. One man said to another, “I agree with a lot of what he’s saying. But I’m not ready to be called a heretic.”
This tension is emblematic of what one might call “the emerging problem.” I would suggest that participants may have left the conference in a few different states of mind:
1) Freedom. Bell said, “Some have deep-seated questions that they have never voiced, and maybe just speaking them will help them to navigate this.” For those who may have suppressed these questions lurking deep in their minds, simply acknowledging them in an honest, open environment may have been liberating. I posted a question on Tuesday that someone had asked: “Is there hope?” Many long for it. But even so, the conference ended and many have returned home to find:
2) Tension, cognitive dissonance, and loneliness. When one’s closest relationships, sense of belonging, personal validation, and paycheck depend on believing and teaching what one cannot accept, tension is inevitable. Many, upon returning home to their respective churches, will have few friends with whom they can openly discuss such matters. One person asked, “What if the people you work with are working for ‘the other side’?” The phrase “chaffing against an entire system” came up shortly after.
But nobody wants a heresy trial. And nobody wants to threaten their family’s livelihood by risking their job. I cannot stress this tension enough. (For an incredibly vivid but fictional treatment of this discontent and resulting heresy trial, see Brian McLaren’s The Last Word…And the Word After That).
One person wrote, “I work in a church whose vision is the antithesis of what we’re talking about. The lead pastor says to keep my opinions quiet, play the game, and get through the system.” Under this lies a deeper question, “When is it time to stay and push reluctant Christians, and when is it time to leave?” That’s tension.
3) (Re-)suppression or rejection. “I agree with a lot of what he’s saying. But I’m not ready to be called a heretic.” Tension. I’m reminded of a scene in The Matrix. What if the consequences of taking the “Blue Pill” are too great? What does it mean to consciously choose the “Red Pill,” even if one cannot bring oneself to “swallow” it?
What do you think?
3 Responses to “Isn’t She Beautiful - Who Left?”
-
Douglas McHugh Says:
January 25th, 2007 at 3:52 pmI defintely want to get together and talk to you more about this stuff. Explore where our thoughts/opinions overlap and where we diverge… and in a Bloomington context as well.
-
Jamie Says:
January 30th, 2007 at 4:37 pmI would agree that those were the 3 responses after his heaven/hell in/out talk. I particularly loved that he addressed the whole paycheck issue. It’s a concerning thing. My husband and I left a staff position a year and a half ago due to our increasing frustration. We still haven’t recovered financially, but WOW…our excitement about God ….fabulous. I think Rob was right when he said, “If you have to leave the church to find your faith, then do it.”
-
Rob D. Says:
February 11th, 2007 at 10:40 pm“I agree with a lot of what he’s saying. But I’m not ready to be called a heretic.”
I find it very saddening that the spiritual climate of this man’s church was such that he felt he could not openly and honestly express his thoughts and feelings about his faith without receiving condemnation from his “family”. I wonder, is this an abstraction or the norm? If I had to guess….I would say the latter.
If my assumption is true….the question is why?
Why are Christian communities so fearful of people’s thoughts?
Why is orthodoxy more important than authenticity?
January 25th, 2007 at 3:52 pm
I defintely want to get together and talk to you more about this stuff. Explore where our thoughts/opinions overlap and where we diverge… and in a Bloomington context as well.
January 30th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
I would agree that those were the 3 responses after his heaven/hell in/out talk. I particularly loved that he addressed the whole paycheck issue. It’s a concerning thing. My husband and I left a staff position a year and a half ago due to our increasing frustration. We still haven’t recovered financially, but WOW…our excitement about God ….fabulous. I think Rob was right when he said, “If you have to leave the church to find your faith, then do it.”
February 11th, 2007 at 10:40 pm
“I agree with a lot of what he’s saying. But I’m not ready to be called a heretic.”
I find it very saddening that the spiritual climate of this man’s church was such that he felt he could not openly and honestly express his thoughts and feelings about his faith without receiving condemnation from his “family”. I wonder, is this an abstraction or the norm? If I had to guess….I would say the latter.
If my assumption is true….the question is why?
Why are Christian communities so fearful of people’s thoughts?
Why is orthodoxy more important than authenticity?