The ECM Series Part 1

The Epistemology of the Emergent Church Movement

You don’t have to read very much Emergent Church literature to realize that it is based on a Postmodern epistemology. This philosophical system pervades everything that is Emergent Church. To be fair, I will first state an often quoted and popular definition (though it is extremely broad) made by those in the movement: “Emerging churches are communities that practice the way of Jesus within postmodern cultures.”[1] If you are like me, then that doesn’t really settle the issue of definition.

Trying to define the Emergent Church Movement (ECM) is difficult when you are on the outside and a critic, not to mention that it is a system that is essentially a form of Postmodern Christianity (which makes anything objective, constant, and propositional ironic). But I would propose this definition half jokingly but half seriously: the ECM is a philosophically driven movement based on the tenets of Postmodernity which extends to a Postmodern orthopraxy and leads to a Postmodern hermeneutic which inevitably leads to a Postmodern orthodoxy. In case you weren’t paying attention, the ECM is all about Postmodernity.

Now there are varying levels of Postmodernity just as there are varying levels of those in the broader emerging church that accept some form of Postmodernity. But if the acceptance on any level that truth is either relative, pluralistic (which means contradictory but accepted), not absolute, or cannot be known in absolutes; then the result is a danger of moving away from Biblical orthodoxy rather than fixing or reinventing it.

To understand the epistemology of the ECM, it helps to understand the reason for its acceptance. The ECM like many other radical movements is reactionary. Just as Postmodernity was reactionary to the failure of Modernity, the ECM is reactionary specifically to Conservative Evangelicalism (but generally to most forms of Protestant churches as well as Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox denominations), which has a somewhat Modern or even Pre-Modern mindset.[2] What one usually sees in a reactionary movement is that it identifies the problems of a current system, but it goes to the other far extreme to fix them. In the case of the ECM, they honestly and truthfully point out many errors that are taking place in most Evangelical churches (some of which I was guilty of). But their response could be characterized as an “ends justify the means” type of reaction. Case in point is the acceptance on differing levels of a Postmodern epistemology.

Coming from a Fundamentalist, Conservative viewpoint of truth, orthodox theology, and Biblically based orthopraxy, I see a major flaw in the ECM that is directly related to their epistemological practice of Postmodernity. John MacArthur says it better than I could:

"The one essential, non-negotiable demand that postmodernism makes of everyone is this: No one is supposed to think he or she knows any objective truth. Because postmodernists often suggest that every opinion should be shown equal respect, it seems (on the surface) to be driven by a broad-minded concern for harmony and tolerance, which sounds very charitable and altruistic. But what really underlies the postmodernist belief system is an utter intolerance for every worldview that makes any universal truth-claims—particularly biblical [sic] Christianity."[3]

And thus, there is a great danger of an acceptance of Postmodern ideals, especially dealing with Biblical Christianity.

Timothy L. Decker
-----------------------
[1] Gibbs & Bolger, Emerging Churches, 44.
[2] The extreme negative critiques against Conservative Evangelicalism are primarily due to the fact that most ECM proponents came from that background.
[3] MacArthur, “Perspicuity of Scripture: The Emergent Approach” The Master’s Seminary Journal (Fall 2006), 149.