(e)mergent Voyageurs

I found this amazing post at “Musings of an Emergent Postmodern Negro”. While written from the American context, largely emphasizing the history of the black/white church relationship, I believe it has universal wisdom to share. As Canadians, we need to explore this from our context. Thanks Ant! -Jamie

Resisting the “Normative Gaze” – Part 1
by postmodernegro

Will the emerging church be able to resist the historic “normative gaze” of a particular Christian culture that assumes the normativity of European culture and theology?

This is a question that has been on mind as I reflect on the idea and practice of the embracing church within the emerging church. What is the “normative gaze” and why should it be resisted?

The “normative gaze”, to borrow from Cornel West, is the idea that white culture (for the purposes of this discussion, Evangelical culture) is the norm for Christian theology and practice. Typically, this is made evident in discussions when the Protestant Reformation is talked about in a way that leaves those in the conversation thinking that the Reformation was the first and only Christian movement in church history. I don’t want to give the wrong impression here. There is much that I appreciate about the Reformation. It is a part of my Christian world. Every Christian tradition I have been a part of has been deeply influenced by the Reformation. From my early days as a Pentecostal to now. I guess I could write my own “generous orthodoxy”. Why I am Pentecostal/Charismatic/Calvinist/Evangelical/Anabaptist/Liberationist Christian.

But back to this idea of the “normative gaze” of Evangelical culture. Where does this come from? This is why I think the emerging church and prophetic liberationist theologies and praxis narration of modernity is key. The “normative gaze” in some forms of Evangelical theology, according to Cornel West, comes from the Enlightenment. Specifically the re-birth of classical greek culture and the emergence of scientism. The Enlightenment aided in the building of a culture, a presupposed universal culture, that would be the norm in philosophy, theology, economics, politics, etc..

“I will try to show that the idea of white supremacy emerges partly because of the powers within the structure of modern discourse – powers to produce and prohibit, develop and delimit, forms of rationality and scientificity and objectivity which set perimeters and draw boundaries for the intelligibility, availibility and legitimacy of certain ideas.” (West, p.49)

For the purposes of this post I want to suggest that Modernity is more than just responsible for absolutist forms of government and theologies. It is also partly responsible for the emergence of the idea of “normative” white Christian culture.

In other words.

When you look upon me do you see an inferior culture? When you see me reading James Cone or David Walker do you see me doing “weak” theology? or “compromised” theology? When you see me shouting and running around the church exercising my existential bodily freedom in the context of black worship in the shekinah glory of Yahweh do you see me engaging in frivolity, catharsis, and emotional absent mindedness? When I say “amen” to the preacha do you see me as one who has ejected “reason”? When I say, dare I say it, “I feel the truth” am I somehow engaging in a less reasonable theology and praxis? When I say God showed up in my prayer closet and spoke to me in a still small voice am I engaging in “heresy”?

More later.

It was 3am as I drove home from the theatre. I saw the midnight premiere of “Batman Begins“, by far the best movie in the series, following the Dark Knights rise as an urban warrior fight the forces of evil. As good as it was, the moment the credits started rolling, I was out the door to go home.

As I drove into my neighbourhood, Winnipeg’s inner city West End, my heart sank at what I saw. In the last two blocks before I reached home, I counted 14 girls working the streets. It had more than doubled in the last few months. They were all working pairs, suggesting that there had been some rough “tricks” out lately.

Because our van had been broken into more frequently of late (twice in two days, at one point), I parked the street across from my house instead of our back lot. The Club attached, I stepped out of the vehicle, turning to take in my block.

The neighbours kids were playing in the front yard- sadly too common even for that hour. There was little doubt their parents were not anywhere nearby. They waved hello and asked if Dino, our family Jack Russell, could come out to play. I promised them tomorrow.

Another house behind our house was glowing. Each window blinked and pulsed a different colour of light. I shook my head. A few weeks earlier, they had even put out a flashing red light to “advertise” their budding little enterprise. The police, of course, could do nothing without proof.

A few of the crack houses had shut down over the past year, which was real progress, but they had been replaced by a household of young neo-Nazi skinheads. As a white male, I am a minority in my neighbourhood, with mostly First Nations and Eritrean neighbours, so their presence was nothing short of terrifying. I had already started dialogue with the city police Hate Crime Division.

Even my own home, which doubles as our mission house, was once one of the most notorious gang houses in the city. Vestiges of its dark past still linger in its corners. The police, who we have become very familiar with, still can’t imagine a group of young Christians living in “that” building. For the first few years, many in the neighbourhood insisted it was haunted- cursed.

The large majority of our neighbours are good people, struggling against the realities and circumstances of their lives. However, it is never so simple to say that they are victims of an unjust system (which is often true) or victims of their own poor choices (which is also often true). There are no easy answers.

Daily we see people try to make sense of lives confronted with poverty, racism, untreated mental illness, substance abuse, gang warfare, etc. ad nauseum. Family & friends applaud us for the “selflessness” that would lead us to work, live and raise a family in such conditions. But the truth is not so simple.

In reality, my wife & I have discovered our own need- our desperate need- to live here. By choosing to make this our home, we are forced into authenticity. No longer can we get away with t-shirt theology and 4 point evangelism. “Asking Jesus into your heart”, no matter how well intentioned, comes off and naive and glib. More than being the “Bible Answer Man”, I have become the “Frantic Question Guy”. In the end, as difficult as it is, I am thankful to have any pseudo-faith dismantled.

This is why I need the emerging conversation. It is one thing to be forced into authenticity, but something real needs to fill the void. I need to know there are others asking the same questions, needing answers for more than theological abstraction, responding to more than simply being disgruntled with evangelicalism. I need to know because so do the people in my neighbourhood. Without this conversation- without this journey towards Truth- hopelessness is the only recourse.

As I locked the van and turned toward my house, something caught my eye. Above the buildings and trees, waves of light and colour swept the sky. The Aurora Borealis- the Northern Lights- lit up the heavens in a stunning display of beauty. I stood intranced, the heaviness of my spirit lifting. The answers may not be clear or easy, but this mysterious phenomonon reminded me that their is more than answers- there is hope.

by Jamie Arpin-Ricci

As a “missionary”, I find myself visiting a broad variety of ministries, largely (though not exclusively) evangelical congregations and so called “parachurch” organizations. In a large number of them, I hear some of the same concerns and challenges. This is especially true of the sentiment that the Church needs to “get back to the Bible”. In and of itself, few would argue with the importance for us to pursue God through His written word. However, when you get down to details, you realize that what this actually means- what it looks like- can be as different as the individuals, churches and even nationalities reading it.

One of the most common approach to Scripture is the use of the inductive method. Inductive Bible study is “interpreting scripture with no pre-judgment, by the text itself, through analyzing the evidence and drawing out of it logical conclusions.*“. This method seeks to allow the studier to approach the Bible with an openness of mind and spirit, a dependance on the Holy Spirit, an understanding of history and context, and much more. It has proven to be an incredibly valuable tool within our mission, and will continue to be so.

Therefore, when Christians affirm our need to “get back to the Bible”, it is often this inductive method that is implied or assumed. And while I affirm this method as a helpful and effective tool of study, I am concerned by the lack of balance I have seen in its promotion and application. Additionally, I have seen that this emphasis on inductive study often results in perspectives that are imbalanced and even damaging the Church.

Though the inductive method is a significantly helpful approach, it must also be seen as a human construct that is as prone to flaws as any other. Understanding the historical development of the method helps shed light on this reality.

The inductive method was developed as a result of flaws seen in Aristotle’s deductive reasoning. Aristotle’s approach was very effective in mathematics, but fell short in the study of nature, philosophy, etc. Mathematics provided the foundational axioms or facts on which to make accurate deductions. Because nature/truth/etc. could not provide those axioms, the method was backwards. Discovering the axioms became the goal- not the starting place- of their study. This method, called the inductive method, revolutionized the world, with Descartes in philosophy and Newton in science as example of its prime champions.

While the inductive method has provided humanity with a great deal of good, much of its so called “progress” is questionable at best. Granted, some of the problems are as a result of the abuse of the method and not the method itself. However, in recent history, significant discoveries in the field of quantum physics have shed new light on the older models and the methods through which they were articulated (namely, the inductive method).

This article could not contain the details of these discovers, but for those interested in more detail, please contact me for a reading list. Suffice it to say that scientists have realized that while helpful in some aspects of discovery, the very nature of the inductive method has, at times, altered the quality of the results. One major factor is that, while the inductive method attempts to enter the study in a “vacuum”, without preconceived ideas or conclusions, it fails to recognize that the very method, and belief in it, reveals that it embraces the very presuppositions it seeks to avoid. Even the act of observation has an impact in the results it achieves (see uncertainty principle).

When defending the inductive method, many people respond with the inevitable, “Well, it is far better than deductive reasoning!” This is true, especially where spiritual truth is in question. Deductive reasoning, while incredibly valuable in its own way (right, Mr. Holmes?), requires that its evidence be already proved to arrive at an accurate conclusion. So, while there are aspects of truth we can stand in confidence (if not by proof, then carefully in faith), deductive method is not the best course of action.

The problem with this argument, however, is that “inductive vs. deductive” simply does not even remotely represent the only (or even best) of the options, especially where Scriptural study is concerned. Ironically, these dueling methods are actually “brothers”. Both are born from the concept of reductionism. This brings us back to Descartes and the Cartesian influence on every aspect of our Euro-Western worldview.

Again, space does not allow for a thorough treatment of this topic here. Let me summarize by saying that Cartesian thought is largely responsible for the way analyze information- by breaking it into its smallest components. If we can understand the finest details, it will unlock the secrets of the larger truth. This has given birth to countless fields of study that focus on this micro- emphasis.

In the last 50 to 70 years, scientists have realize that this is simply an ill-equipped model to provide us with an accurate result. Scientist, philosophers and theologians alike are beginning to see that there are different, broader ways to seek truth. In fact, many have come to faith, leaving the scientific atheism of their past.

In the same way, then, we must consider, as the Body of Christ, that as we approach this sacred mystery that is the written word of God, we must not limit ourselves to models that can provide only limited and sometimes flawed understandings. By committing ourselves too fully to one method, we face the potential (almost inevitably) of producing a very singular and narrow perspective.

In Part 2 of this posting, I will offer other alternatives that could broaden our approach to Scripture, as well as lay out cautions of the dangers of accepting shallow or false “alternatives”.

I want to tell you a story. It isn’t a pleasant story, so I will present it to you as simply and straight forwardly as I can.

Several years ago, my wife & I were traveling. As missionaries, we spend a good deal of time meeting with people, from dear friends to perfect strangers. On one such occasion, we had scheduled to meet with a friend of ours. However, when we got there, we were surprised to find that he was not alone, but with a young man we did not know. We thought nothing of it at first.

It soon became clear to us that this new individual was a Muslim man. Moments later, I found myself face down, with both men standing over me, their hands on my shoulders. While I could not see her, I knew my wife was near by. The men laughed as one man sliced my back with a blade, while the other stabbed me with another.

To this day, I have the scars to remind me of this incident.

With the political and social state of the world as it is, such a story is likely to stir great emotion. What did you feel as you read this story? Anger? Shock? Sympathy? Undoubtedly, each of you reading this has a clear mental image of these events, almost as though you had watched them yourself.

I have a confession to make…

The fact is, the friend I was meeting was my family doctor in my old home town. The young Muslim man was a medical student, shadowing the doctor as part of his education. Truthfully, moments after meeting them, they had me laying on a gurney, where they proceeded to removed two moles from my back. One was uncommonly deep, requiring my doc to stab under it more than was typical. The men were laughing (as were we) over a joke the student had made.

Before you collective plan my demise for misleading you, there is a point. While I gave you the facts of the story, I did not tell you the truth. While the rich history of modernism in Christianity leaves us a great deal to be grateful for, its tendency to reduce the Gospel to the bare doctrines, dogmas and facts- through systematic theologies and however many spiritual laws- has often torn the soul from the incarnational message of hope. Can the Gospel be represented on the basis of “just the facts” and still be the Gospel? Or have we ended up with a misleading alternative that could lead to theological and political colonialism?

As our understanding of the Gospel- of Truth- expands to encompass the fullness of the message of Jesus, we will inevitably come to a demanding reality. The declaration of the Gospel, through the spoken and write word, only finds its authority to the degree that the Truth of the Gospel in embodied in the lives of the Church- not merely in the context of individual “righteousness” and morality, but in the transformational fullness of the Kingdom of God.

-Jamie Arpin-Ricci

---

(See “The Gospel in a Pluralist Society” by Lesslie Newbigin, Chapter 11, ‘Mission: Word, Deed and New Being’)

[emerging church]

Welcome to the journey.

This site is dedicated to exploring the uncharted waters of faith in our postmodern world. Our hope is that this be an open forum to explore, to question and to learn. Though open to all aspects of the dialogue, we are also hoping to engage the concepts from a Canadian perspective.

In the history of Canada, few people better represented the adventurous, pioneering spirit than the voyaguers, the courier des bois. These brave explorers and fur traders traveled deep into the unknown wilderness, characterized by their insatiable curiousity and resilience. With uncommonly good relations with the First Nations (native peoples) and their familiarity with the regions thus far unmapped, they were indispensable as guides, translators and advisers.

In the same way, exploring faith in the postmodern world will require of us the same standard- we must be brave, curious, willing to face the dangers and risks inherent in this exploration. We must be characterized as people who can act as guides, translators and advisers to those coming after us. We must be known for our ability to relate to the “natives” of the land, not as theological colonizers, but as servants and friends.

The patron saint of Canada, St. Jean de Brébeuf was martyred, along with many other early missionaries in Canada’s history. In training the priests under his care, he once said:

This journey is worth making. We need to be real about the risks and dangers, but also confident about the richness of what we are certain to discover. I look forward to where this will lead us.

Jamie Arpin-Ricci
author of “Looking Forward”