Mon 29 May 2006
In response to a pair of posts by Tony Jones at Out of Ur, Tim Challies has responded with his own evaluation, “Is Emergent the New Christian Left?” Tim chastizes Jones for his “feigned” naiveté and incredulity that other Christians should be troubled by the Emergent Church movement (which is not so much a movement, or so it seems to me, as it is the chaotic, self-absorbed flight of deserters from the real spiritual battle). Tim also takes Jones to task for the latter’s abandonment of biblical, correspondent truth and his circular argument: “If you disagree, you don’t understand; if you understand, you don’t disagree.”
There are but two points that I wish to make in this post, both of which are important and need to be kept in mind. The first point is this: the Emergent Church is not Sauron. The people in the Emergent Church are not the true enemy in our spiritual warfare in the same sense that Sauron and his minions - balrogs, ringwraiths, orcs, and Uruk-hai - were the enemies of Gandalf, Aragorn, and all free people of Middle-earth. Sauron’s goal, as was the goal of Morgoth before him, was the eradication of good from Middle-earth and the elimination of the Children of Ilúvatar: Elves and Men, the Eldar and the Edain.
Sauron’s war was ultimately against God (Eru Ilúvatar) and not merely the kingdoms and realms that resisted him. From the beginning Morgoth (who corrupted Sauron and persuaded him to join in the rebellion) sought to supplant the will and purposes of Eru: Morgoth destroyed the Two Lights, the Two Trees, and was eventually cast into the void. His rebellion and war, like Sauron’s after him, was against God.
Not so with Saruman. Although he was also an incarnate angel (as was Gandalf and, earlier, Sauron), he did not seek to overthrow God but rather accomplish God’s purposes in his own way. Saruman, it is to be remembered, did not intend to rule with or under Sauron: his conversation with Gandalf in the cold chambers of Orthanc reveal as much:
The Elder Days are gone. The Middle Days are passing. The Younger Days are beginning. The time of the Elves is over, but our time is at hand: the world of Men, which We must rule. But we must have power, power to order all things as we will, for that good which only the Wise can see . . .
“A new Power is rising. Against it the old allies and policies will not avail us at all. There is no hope left in Elves or dying Númenor. This then is one choice before you, before us. We may join with that Power. It would be wise, Gandalf. There is hope that way. Its victory is at hand; and there will be rich reward for those that aided it. As the Power grows, its proved friends will also grow; and the Wise, such as you and I, may with patience come at last to direct its courses, to control it. We can bide our time, we can keep our thoughts in our hearts, deploring maybe evils done by the way, but approving the high and ultimate purpose: Knowledge, Rule, Order . . .
“The Ruling Ring? If we could command that, then the Power would pass to us. That is in truth why I brought you here.” (LOTR, pp 252-253)
Saruman’s madness is evident: he believes that he can somehow control the Evil One, i.e., Sauron, and that there are times when it is necessary to take the wrong path in order to arrive at the desired destination. His strategy, it appears, is “Let us do evil that good may come.”
But for all his treachery, this much is true of Saruman: he does not seek to serve an evil master; in fact, he does not so much seek to serve any master at all. Saruman wants to set himself up as autonomous and free from the restraints of others. He has no hope in the old, established order, believing it to be weak and antiquated; his hope is in something new, and the new is better in his eyes. All who disagree are foolish and fail to understand what it is that he seeks to achieve.
Seen in this light, is there any doubt about the Saruman-like means and ends of the Emergent Church? While its leaders do not seek to serve Satan (although they may unwittingly serve his purposes), they wish to establish a new order with themselves at the top. The old ways are passing: modernism in the church must give way to postmodernism; that which was true in the past is not necessarily true any longer - if, indeed, anything can be considered true.
Like Saruman, the leaders of the Emergent Church are eloquent and elusive speakers, carefully choosing their words to evade the suspecting and to ensnare the unsuspecting. Much is promised; little is delivered. The envisioned, utopian solution fails to accurately assess the power and threat posed by the real enemy, believing that peace can be made with evil by a smiling, engaging tolerance. As an Indian proverb says, “One sure way to appease a tiger is to allow it to eat you.” What appears to be an eirenic solution today will prove to be a disasterous dinner tomorrow.
The apostles knew such duplicity well, having encountered it in their own day. Paul, for example, wrote:
But realize this, that in the last days difficult times will come. For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, revilers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, unholy, unloving, irreconcilable, malicious gossips, without self-control, brutal, haters of good, treacherous, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, holding to a form of godliness, although they have denied its power; Avoid such men as these . . .
“Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men of depraved mind, rejected in regard to the faith . . .
“13 But evil men and impostors will proceed from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived . . .” - 2 Tim 3.1-5, 8, 13
Jude and Peter gave similar, even darker warnings:
These are the men who are hidden reefs in your love feasts when they feast with you without fear, caring for themselves; clouds without water, carried along by winds; autumn trees without fruit, doubly dead, uprooted; wild waves of the sea, casting up their own shame like foam; wandering stars, for whom the black darkness has been reserved forever.” - Jude 12, 13
“But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves.” - 2 Pe 2:1
This is not to suggest that any or all of those involved in the Emergent Church are damned: I would find it difficult to believe that all of them are.
It is to say, however, that they are false prophets to the extent that they depart from the truth that has been given in Scripture.
It is to say that they inject into the Body of Christ “destructive heresies,” even if - if - they stop short of denying the Savior.
It is to say that they are trees without fruit - true, spiritual fruit - and clouds without rain - rain which would water the ground and facilitate genuine growth in others.
It is to say that, though they may not be evil men - for Paul does make a distinction - they are imposters on a path from bad to worse.
And, finally, it is to say that they are form without substance: they manifest an appearance of godliness but the power is absent because the Holy Spirit is quenched, grieved, or resisted.
The Emergent Church, its leaders, and its adherents, it seems, are little different than Saruman: they seek to establish their own kingdom in their own way, eschewing that which has been made clear and instead pursuing a path enlightened only by the darkness of their own minds.
Related Tags: Tony Jones, emergent, Lord of the Rings, Saruman, Ecclesiology
Namárië.
May 29th, 2006 at 1:07 pm
I was initially impressed by this website (being a fan of Tolkien), but frankly this article misrepresents and insults both Tolkien and the Emergents. I am greatly disappointed.
May 29th, 2006 at 4:10 pm
Doug:
Serious charges, if true.
In what way or ways do you believe I have misrepresented and insulted Tolkien and/or the Emergents? The Emergents I can perhaps understand (if a compelling argument can be adduced) but I have no idea how I may have misrepresented Tolkien or insulted him.
If you have time, I would be interested in knowing more.
- Mike
May 30th, 2006 at 7:24 am
Mike -
I’m not sure whether Doug mis-spoke, but I imagine he meant that you might have mis-used the Tolkien analogy with comparing Saruman to the Emergent Church. I have issues with some in the emerging church more than others, although the grassroots nature of the ‘emerging church movement’ leaves it somewhat amorphous. i guess it means that - like with Saruman and the Order - there was really only one Istari who fulfilled the stewardship he was given (Gandalf), while the others lost heart (is that what happened with Radagast?) or got lost in rabbit trails and neglected the larger purpose (Alatar and Pallando). I think some in this emerging church thing are like Saruman, some are like Alatar and Pallando who seek their own by chasing down rabbit trails, some help a little while losing heart, like Radagast, and some are true servants of the secret fire, like Gandalf. anyway, just my thoughts…i still like your blog a lot.
May 30th, 2006 at 10:23 am
Thanks, Steve.
The main point I was trying to make is that the people in the Emergent Church, while perhaps misguided in some cases, nevertheless are not the Enemy. They may, as I wrote, unwittingly accomplish the Enemy’s purposes at times - but who hasn’t? Some in the EC are, without doubt, One-Eyed Jacks, but so too are many involved in other movements or denominations.
At the same time, the EC seems to have attained the status of the Emperor in the story we first heard as children (I do not regard it as a “children’s story”): no one dares to state the obvious due to the threat of impending condemnation. The conversation seems too one-sided to me: communication is the meeting of meanings, but many in the EC deny the ability of those outside to achieve such understanding.
Radagast, I believe, got caught - literally - chasing rabbit trails: I think Tolkien said something to that effect in one of his Letters - but I need to check. Tolkien thought that the other three wizards went East and began some of the mystic religions. He never seemed to be definite or dogmatic about that.
Thanks again for the comment and thoughts. And, of course, for reading.
June 28th, 2006 at 5:37 pm
Hi Mike,
I’m no expert on the emergent church, though I myself share in some (though not all) common emergent sensibilities. My chief complaint about your post is that it seems gernerally derisive without really giving concrete criticisms. I mean, being identified with Saruman is no consolation simply because you didn’t identify the person with Sauron.
As far as forging a new order, the emergents would say that they are rediscovering old truths. There is nothing wrong with that - every great movement of God in Church history did as much. The question is if this is in fact the case, but reacting to corruption isn’t always bad, even if reactors are prone to overreact.
One thing I do share with many emergent types is a fondness for N. T. Wright (if not Brian McLaren). One of the points he makes is that the criticisms that postmodernity makes of modernity are valid, and we must take the critique on board. However, we must not take what is simply a critique as something good and substantial in itself - it is good only as a corrective. Postmodernism as a comprehensive philosophy is vacuous. What we need to do is to go through the critique and out the other side. I think he strikes the right balence with this, over and against those who want to embrace postmodernism in and of itself.
I do think the cry that “you don’t understand us” has some validity, even if it can also be a cop out. We all have ready made schema that we fit arguments in, and they are normally quite polarized. Think of the double take the Western world had to do to figure out that our next Global Conflict is with Islamic terrorism and Western Culture, instead of Capitolism and Communism. We’re still trying to figure out how we fit in to the great battle of OUR time. The “liberal/conservative” battle lines in theology are well known, and it seems to me that the liberals have largely lost. The emergents object to being simply put into the “liberal” box and treated as such. There are new conflicts and new assesments need be made.