(e)mergent Voyageurs

This past weekend, my wife & I had some time to relax, so decided to rent a movie. As Kim is the athlete in the marraige, we choose sports films from time to time. This time Kim decided on “The Rocket”. In this excellent historical true story, the life and career of legendary Québécois hockey player Maurice “The Rocket” Richard. Those who know of The Rocket’s career will know that he was one of the most masterful players to ever play the game, but also the source of great controversy.

Richard played in an area where French Canadians were often treated as second rate citizens by other Canadians (and often as poorly by American teams and fans). Matching his talent on the ice with pointed critique of the inequity within the National Hockey League against French Canadians, reflecting the deeper prejudice that permeated the larger culture. This injustice played itself out during game play, which Richard reacted to forcefully. While his violence was perhaps excessive, if understandable, in 1955 it earned him a suspension for the remain season and the playoffs. The result was a massive riot by fans which remains infamous to this day.

Watching this film stirred something in me, perhaps even opening a deep and long forgotten wound. As many of you know, my family on my mothers side is French Canadian. The heritage of the Aprin/Trudeau family (yes, Pierre was a relative) are rich, rooted in this nation since before the Battle on the Plains of Abraham. And yet, like many of my cousins, the French heritage has been lost to me. I do not speak French (though I understand a fair bit) and have lost much of the cultural characteristics that were once a part of our families life. Several years ago I added “Arpin” to my last name as an attempt to honour that part of my history, but I have found it difficult to do more to recapture it.

Perhaps this is why the issue of my previous two posts (Redemptive Taxonomy & Why I Am…) were so personal for me. I do not want to add dividing labels or brands, nor do I want split the church into opposing camps. However, I know how misguded we can get at times, even with the best intentions, in trying to forge unity through uniformity. People keep saying this like “Can’t we just be followers of Christ?” or “We should find our identity in Christ”. Of course I agree with this, but these comments tend to be more sentimental than substantial, doing nothing to work through the real issues of our diversity.

I don’t want to beat a dead horse with this issue. However, I wanted to shed some light as to one of the reasons why this has been so important to me. I haven’t wanted to put things in boxes. I haven’t wanted to contribute to division or parochialism. I haven’t been attempting distance myself from one group/theology or another. Rather, my desire has been to try to contribute to an environment that allows for the diversity that is so essential to our identities within Christ and to our unity as His Body.

Ok, I promise to move on and mix up the topics this week. Au revoir!

Emerging Church Missional Identity Culture

Today, Brother Maynard posted an excellent overview of some of the dialogue that is continuing to go on following the announcement about Emergent Canada earlier this week. I am encouraged by the increasingly constructive exchange that is happening. I think that, despite some initial bumps, there is a lot of promise for all of us as we work together to build the Kingdom.

In his recent post at Jesus Creed, Scot McKnight describe one key aspect of this journey as conversational (or relational). He says:

Within Canada, the emergent conversation has been deeply rooted in this relational exchange- an exchange of more than just ideas, but genuine friendship, edification and love. Perhaps that is why many of us felt initial pangs of what seemed like territorialism at the Emergent Canada news. As Brother Maynard commented to them, “To us in the blogosphere though, we feel we haven’t heard from you”. However, with time, most of us have recognize the need to continue to open our hearts and minds in generousity to fellow voyageurs who want nothing more than to share the journey with us.

In his post, Brother Maynard also speculated about other national expressions of Emergent outside of the US, wondering what could be learned from their journey.

Being part of YWAM has given me great opportunity to explore and experience the diversity that different national expressions of a decentralized ministry looks like. The complexity of differences and similarities are too broad to explore here in detail, but I will say that dialoguing with other national groups is an excellent idea, if only to broaden the conversational generousity of our growing community.

I will caution, however, about making any hasty comparisons in this regards. For example, while it might be assumed that Canada & Australia will have more in common than the US, I am not sure this is accurate. Being married to an Aussie, in many ways I have learned that there are some significant commonalities between the US, Australia and the UK (interestingly, Canada shares a far closer cultural paradigm and history to New Zealand). Conversely, there are several differences between these three nations that make them very different.

All that to say, that while we can learn from one another, comparisons are ill suited to draw meaningful conclusions in this context. As Canadians, we know that one unfortunate cultural characterstic we have is defining ourselves by what we are not-namely, American. Therefore, we need to be careful not to try to find better suited nations to model after, but rather search for an indigenously authentic identity. (Additionally, I believe that Canada and the US desperately need each other in this journey, and that closer ties, while maintaining cultural autonomy, is a crucial step we need to take).

As to regional difference across Canada, this could be said for communities within a Province or neighbourhoods within a city. I agree that there are great distinctions between the regions within Canada, but I believe we need to begin the journey on that which we have in common. More to the point, however, is the nature of regional relationships based on our difficult history. Again, having lived and ministered throughout Canada, there is a distinct set of conflicts that divide our nation.

Because this, there is still negative attitudes between the regions, making a national movement difficult (which is why Emergent Canada being in the far West has probably raised some concerns). Even within YWAM, there are those who believe that our focus should remain only regional. Regional/local expressions will always be most important, as that is where relationship happen the truest, but this should be no excuse not to work to overcome these barriers. Can think of no better heritage to the emergent journey in Canada then to further work of reconciliation within out country.

In the end, if we are to become a Canadian expression of missional, relational, catholic/universal, global, emerging Christianity, then we need these challenges. It is in these difficulties that we begin to question our identities, visions, commitment, motivations, etc. As important as this topic is to discuss, Emergent Canada is not the real issue. The issue is that something is stirring in the Canadian church. And while challenges and conflicts are inevitable along the way, this is something for us all be excited about.

Canada has a unique vocation within the Body of Christ (as does every nations and culture). I believe that we have gifts to offer the global Church, such as what it means to be a “Mosaic People”, for example. As Canadians, we need to rekindlethis pioneering spirit that is at the roots our culture and heritage. So, let put our paddles in together and see where this journey will take us.

[emerging church]

Today I received word that Emergent Canada is in the process of finalizing their formal creation. At the site, they mentioned that “we are in the process on incorporating an organization with charitable status; we have been connecting people; we have developed links with the admin of the US and UK groups.” This has sent ripples around the web, with speculation, excitement and concern bubbly moderately in the midst. Since this blog is dedicated to the Canadian emerging journey, I thought I should weigh in.

Before I go on, though, I should be clear: Though I will express concerns and critiques about this news, please do not think that I am against it. In fact, I have invited the folks at Emergent Canada to respond to any comments or concerns expressed here. Emergent Canada, should it develop further, will have my prayer and support as fellow voyageurs on this faith journey.

Let me start with a little background. Like many of us, I received an email around a year ago, gathering info about my interest in the emergent conversation and how it pertained to Canada. I was delighted to receive the contact, though after that I heard little to nothing, depsite my attempts to find out what was going on. A couple of months ago I emailed them again, trying to find others in Winnipeg to connect with, which they kindly helped with.

From there, I began exploring several Canadian (and other international) websites & blogs, as well as writing a few emails. I then started Emergent Voyageurs in order to better engage the conversation. It took off far quicker than I had anticipated. I soon was connecting online and in person with many people across Canada and the globe.

However, it was with RESONATE.ca that I found not only a vibrant and thoroughly welcoming “emergent” community, but one that was authentically, organically, indigenously Canadian. RESONATE has been more welcoming and affirming than any other e-community I have encountered thus far.

When I received todays announcement, my first reaction was moderate concern. What jumped out the most was the name- Emergent Canada- and its intentional affiliation with Emergent US and Emergent UK. Don’t get me wrong, I think both entities are excellent. However, I have found that they are not entirely fitting models to our Canadian context. I was also concerned that taking the name will further “franchise” the emerging journey more than it should be (in my opinion).

I am also concerned that this has birth out of very localized initiative. As the site said of Brian McLaren’s (who I have deep, deep respect for) visit with them, “In the months after this, [Brian] handed us the ball to start something ‘distinctly Canadian’”. While I appreciate Brian’s leadership in the conversation, I am not sure that his handing the ball off qualifies for national representation.

Rather, I would hope that, should Canadians believe that we need a formal expression of the emerging journey, not to mention a organizational link (formal or otherwise) to Emergent US (& UK), it would grow from a natural community of relationships, which I believe RESONATE represents.

Again, please do not misunderstand. I neither think that Emergent Canada is usurping RESONATE or that RESONATE should (or wants to) have this role. I am simply concerned at the nature of the development of this new endeavour, that, perhaps, the cart is being put before the horse.

In the end, I believe there is great potential for good in Emergent Canada, which means there is also great potential for problems. This is inevitable. For one, I want to say I am committed to serve them, moving through these challenges, as they have expressed great openness and willingness to be shaped from without, by all who want to invest.

As long as we recognize that each group, network and even individual, represents a piece in the larger mosaic, we will growing to become a vibrant and beautiful picture. Emergent.ca will play a complimentary role in it, I have little doubt.

While this does not represent all the concerns I have about Emergent Canada, it is a starting point. I look forward to adding their voice to this dialogue here, as well as that of all of you.

Peace,
Jamie Arpin-Ricci

Recently, while hosting a couple of youth groups on their urban outreach here in Winnipeg, I had the opportunity to lead them through a day of cultural awareness & orientation in missions. My first activity with the group was to make a list with two categories: Canada and the United States of America. I started by asking them their impression of Canada. Along with the expected “maple syrup” and “beer” (a proud moment), there were also things such as “terrorist haven” and “military chickens”. Following this, I had them list their impressions of their own country, proffering such responses as: George W. Bush, democracy, One Nation Under God, and prosperity.

I then had them go through the list, cheering for characteristics they thought were positive and ignoring the ones they disliked (which usually meant booing). The results were fascinating. I realized instantly how the contrast of American & Canadian culture, even in the churches of both countries, reflected many of the difference that the emergent/postmodern Christian conversation is trying engage, such as surpassing conserative/liberal dichotomies, embracing new paradigms for intentional diversity and defining our identity beyond deconstructionist extremes.

As many of you already know, having been born in Minnesota to a Canadian family…

…I have the rare privilege of being a dual citizen. This has always allowed me to walk a path between these two nationalities, embracing them both with great respect, while maintaining a moderate amount of distance from each that allows for a different perspective. From this vantage point, I truly believe that, should we be able to move past (or through) the conflicts that separate our nations, the resulting relationship offers powerfully mutual benefits in this emergent journey.


One of the key ways we can work towards this reconciliation is to learn to understand and honour that which the other nation models well. I am not a sociologist and can only speak from my limited perspective, experience and education, however I would like to offer here a few characteristics from both countries that I believe demonstrate how this relationship is crucial and promising. I will start with observations about Canada:

• A Mosaic People The multiculturalism of Canada is often referred to as being a cultural mosaic. The idea was developed in direct opposition to previous concepts of assimilation, such as the American concept of the melting pot. While the US concept has slowly broadened their understanding to be more multicultural, this concept is a key difference between these two nations. Cultural mosaic has a stronger emphasis on immigrant citizens maintain strong cultural and historical ties to their countries and cultures of origin. It is far more common, therefore, to here Canadian refer to their cultural identities of their origin before they refer to being Canadian. This does not reflect a lack of patriotism to Canada, but rather is one of the truest expressions of Canadian patriotism. I believe that Canadian concepts of multiculturalism offer promising models for the emergent conversation in the United States. (NOTE: We should not assume by this that Canada has been free from the colonialization and subjugation of assimilation practices and values. Canadians retains a tainted history with the First Nations people, French Canadians, Chinese immigrant, and many more)
• Political Diversity of Christian Population While amoung Canadian Evangelicals, there is still largely a trend of adherence to Conservative politics, the partisanship within the church (generally speaking) is not as distinct or assumed within Canadian Christians. For example, though I consider my morally conservative, my political stances tend to lean far more “left”, thus leading to a more Liberal voting pattern in my recent years. I believe this relative openness within the Canadian church to allow for differing political positions (something that I believe very strongly differentiates us from American Evangelicalism) in part owes its roots to socialist democratic ideas. Because of this, I believe many Canadian Christians are well positioned to engage the emergent movement with a certain level of freedom/flexibility that many American Christians do not, another reason to be more intentional about dialoguing across the border.
• Church in a Pluralist Society While the Canadian church has been referred to as one of the fastest declining churches in the Western world, having lost its United Nations status as a Christian nations year ago, there has been some greatly beneficial results from this process. In the past few years, due to the decline of denominationally stringent Christian churches, new congregations have been emerging that seem to be better equipped to respond and function in the pluralistic society that is emerging. Responding and adapting to some of the very factors that led to the demise of Canadian churches, many of these faith communities are thriving through a greater appreciation of the diversity within Christian traditions, more intentional embrace of multiculturalism, etc. Unlike the US, Canada as a Christian nation/subculture no longer exists, giving us a moderate “heads up” on the future of Christianity in the post-Evangelical, post-Christian world.

At the same time, Canada faces significant challenges and weakness that need to be addressed, such as establishing our national identity by what we are not (namely NOT American); cynical and subversive attitudes to leadership and great vision; general apathy- to name a few.

Conversely, the United States of America has a great deal that Canadian Christians desperately need to embrace, such as:

• Social Justice Leaders Though it would be easy for any of us (American or Canadian) to point out where to US has failed in the areas of human rights and freedom, justice and civil liberties, we need to balance this with a fair understanding and appreciation of the how much the US has done (historically and today) in the fight for human equality and freedom. Even when its government did not get involved in such issues, American citizens often led the front in bringing awareness and change, not only in their own countries, but also throughout the world. America speaks with a loud “voice”, playing an important role in addressing injustice throughout the world. Canadian Christians need to learn to acknowledge that, despite legitimate concerns and criticism, we have a great deal to learn from our American sisters & brothers in this regard.
• Unbeatable Spirit One of the core characteristics that has distinguished the people and the nation of the United States of America is their unquenchable drive to achieve the vision and goals they set before themselves. Circumstances, rather than hindrances to discourage, seem to further inspire these people to strive all the harder. Through this perseverance, they have accomplished some of the greatest achievements in many field, including being the most generous missions force in the world (perhaps, in history). Canadians, too frequently prone to dismiss what they perceive as “over zealous American emotionalism”, could learn to look beyond their critical (often cynical) evaluations and step out with vision bigger than their apparent means.
• Freedom Though I was going to entitle this point “Freedom of Speech”, I felt it was more appropriate to feature the larger theme. While obviously an ideal not perfectly pursued, one cannot deny the contribution that the US has made to freedoms of all varieties. Though recently challenged in some circles, the freedom to dissent is a value that the church (in both countries) needs to learn from. The freedom to experiment and explore, to try new things. This theme of freedom is central to the Gospel, and while there may be a gap between this concept and American freedom, the difference is not (I believe) as big as we might think. While Canadians embrace and celebrate our freedom, we have not held it as universally for all people.

Conversely, as far as the US has come in its fight for equality, there is a great deal of deep healing and reconciliation that remains unfinished, especially with the African American and Native American communities. Their fierce determination, when fixed upon a goal, can become dangerously single-minded, even when committed to “bringing freedom” to others.

The emergent/postmodern journey is one that seeks a more authentic manifestation of the Church- thus requires voices from all peoples, cultures and nations. However, here in North America, the proximity and interconnection our these two nations requires specific attention. Americans would be wrong to dismiss Canada as a “small” voice, disconnected from their context, just as Canadians would be wrong to ignore or reject the US out of spite, frustration or even misplaced (though often denied) inferiority issues.

I would like to invite you, the readers- both American & Canadian- to add you voices here. Have anything add? Anything you disagree with? Let’s talk it out! All I ask is that we discuss, dialogue and even debate with grace and openness all around.

While I was raised by Canadian parents in Canada, I was born in the US, making me a dual citizen of both nations. For some, this would simply be a matter of paperwork, but for me it represents something important within my identity. The United States government extends to me all the rights and priveleges of a citizen, something I take very seriously.

Growing up in Canada, however, anti-American sentiment was all too common. Canadians often choose to define their identity by what they are not- namely American. With current world events, this has increased significantly. Regardless of ones position on the US, its government, culture, foreign policy, etc. (issues that do need to be addressed), the dismissive attitude of judgment is not something Canadians should be proud of, especially within the church.

No one with any objectivity can deny the incredible force for good that the American people have been, both throughout their history and today. Their unbeatable spirit, determined ingenuity and remarkable determination have made it possible for our world to be changed for the better in so many arenas. Acknowledging the inevitable human failures that all nations are prone to, the tasks of human rights, world missions, civil liberties, etc. would not be nearly where they are today without the United States.

Additionally…

Additionally, the unmatched generousity and drive of the American people demonstrates an admirable willingness to “put their money where their mouths is”. Seemingly impossible circumstances never seem to diminish the monumental vision and tireless perseverance of this great nation.

So on this day of celebration, July 4th, I would like to honour the United States of America, the land of my birth. I honour them for the rich tradition of Christian service and values. I honour them for their unquenchable spirit. I honour them for championing the cause of freedom that seeks to empower even its own detractors. Thank you for your service to the world and to our God.


(NOTE: This post is dedicated to honour the United States on their Independence Day. Therefore, while I believe in open dialogue and the need to critical examination of American culture and government, this thread is NOT the place. Judgment, criticism, attacks, etc. will not be tolerated. Thank you.)

This is the second part in a great set of postings from “Musings of an Emergent Postmodern Negro”. Click here to read Part 1. Jamie.

Resisting the “Normative Gaze” – Part 2
by postmodernegro

Alright. Some great comments from my last post on this topic. Which has led to some interesting discussion in other places. The lead off question:

Notice. I haven’t said that the emerging church has not resisted normative gaze. For me, that remains to be seen. We’ll see. But where were we?

I take my cue from the apostle Paul again:

Paul teaches us that there are philosophies, warped philosophies, and barriers erected against the truth of God. I would venture to say that there are practices along with these barriers that do indeed stand in the way of Truth. One of the practices that we are engaged in here is the practice of the normative gaze. Although referred to as an ideal by Cornel West I consider it a practice as well. For gazing requires movement and intentionality. To quote Cornel West again:

Basically the classical aesthetic becomes the “norm” for beauty and truth. For a richer genealogy of modern racism check out West’s Reader. I am sure there are other places where this can be found. But what comes out of this is this: the tyranny of a perceived universal over a particular. Thus particularity becomes a scandal. One attempting to speak authentically from their particularity becomes a scandal. This could be do to perceived power. But as a Christian I can only see this as some kind of idolatry. In effect raising one’s ethnicity above others and holding it as the norm for others to follow suit I believe to be a form of idolatry. Jesus once told us that it was a sin to love one’s own family more than Him. Which is startling thing for Jesus to say in our culture charged with jingoism and nationalistic pride.

I wanted to write more but this is where my main thoughts have left me thus far. I have been thinking about some things Stanley Hauerwas has said on the attachments of the old age or aeon and how that is connected to violence and idolatry. For it seems that race-ism is deeply connected to an over-love for family and ethnic heritage than it is of pure hatred of another family or race. We’ll see as this journey unfolds.

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.