I\u2019ve heard it, I\u2019ve read it, and I\u2019ve seen it happen: it is a characteristic of many in the emerging movement. But it\u2019s got to be understood for what it is: I call it \u201cinclusion reaction.\u201d This inelegant expression tells a story. I\u2019ve heard it, I\u2019ve read it, and I\u2019ve seen it happen: it is a characteristic of many in the emerging movement. But it\u2019s got to be understood for what it is: I call it \u201cinclusion reaction.\u201d This inelegant expression tells a story.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":197,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1736,425],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2022","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-emerging-movement","category-missional"],"yoast_head":"\n
\nI can\u2019t tell you the number of times I\u2019ve heard emerging Christians come to the defense of Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Protestant Liberalism. This \u201cinclusion,\u201d however, is not often granted so instinctively to traditional evangelicals. Why? Because the latter group is the one the emerging movement is reacting to. Hence, my suggestion \u2014 and I wonder what you think \u2014 of what I\u2019m calling \u201cinclusion reaction.\u201d
\n[Just in case you are wondering, this post was in my mind for sometime, and has very little to do with the Up\/rooted post below it; though there were subtle indications of this theme at work Monday night \u2014 even on my part.]
\nRead Brian McLaren\u2019s Generous Orthodoxy<\/em>; it\u2019s a splendid example of what I am saying. He even admits he\u2019s not going to be completely fair with traditional evangelicalism.
\nHere\u2019s my definition of a characteristic: There is an instinct among emerging Christians to defend those who were \u201cothered\u201d by evangelicals and an instinct to \u201cother\u201d evangelicals, even though many emerging Christians truly are moderate or progressive evangelicals (and nervous about that term).
\nThe irony of it all sometimes amuses me: most of us in the emerging movement are more than committed to including women in traditional \u201cministerial roles\u201d though we may also not even like such categories any more. But, here we are at times standing up for the ecclesiology of Roman Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox, when (if you haven\u2019t observed) they have not made any genuine progress toward untying traditional knots that have excluded women from traditional ministerial roles.
\nYet another one: most of us are dead serious about democratizing power and authority and decentralizing and empowering the excluded or empowering the \u201claity,\u201d but (again) we find ourselves defending those high, traditional, and clearly hierarchical authority structures at times.
\nWhy do we do this? The answer is simple and two-fold: we want to include those whom we have \u201cothered\u201d so we are especially sensitive to critique of Roman Catholics and the Orthodox. And, we want to develop an ecclesiology that gets \u201cbeyond\u201d the old divisions and that means we have to work hard at inclusion \u2014 especially making room at the table for those whom we have othered.
\nI will post in the near future (not sure when) about the mainline denominations, and I will probably sort through Diana Butler Bass\u2019s book to do that.
\nBut, for now, what do you think? Is it fair to characterize this trend in emerging as \u201cinclusion reaction\u201d?<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"