I have been watching with interest and sometimes disgust, at the new Christian movement today called Progressive, Emergent, a dozen different names. I've been standing outside the circle for the entire summer, interacting with some of the Outlaw Preachers and people associated with it and I have some observations.
I was interested in this "movement" because after decades of Wicca, I wanted to see if I could find my place back in Christianity after being beaten to death with guilt and fear from the Southern Baptist church as a child and teen. I heard "grace" and "inclusiveness" and was fascinated...could this be?
Let me say I am quite knowledgeable of the Bible and quite accustomed to spiritual jargon. So, i am no stranger to the issues and arguments of religion, both spiritually and politically. I am a liberal, feminist and an artist so i am quite open to other min-sets.
This is what I have observed. This group is certainly not friendly to opposing views. I have posted on the "OP" (Outlaw Preachers) facebook and quite quickly drew sarcasm, after being totally ignored. In fairness, there were a FEW that were cordial, but for the most part I was treated like an ignorant child and not in the "click". So I have hovered outside the perimeters on Twitter and gleaned information from time to time from participants who looked friendly. I have asked specific, foundational, boiler-plate questions about how to be saved, did the church still do altar calls, questions about specific scripture and have been told a myriad of things. mainly that the group as a whole has no one view. Each person has their own idea and perspectives on all of these things and much more. There has been ONE person who has been kind enough to address my earnest questions (you know who you are) and others that have thrown out remarks such as "Does the church still do altar calls? That's so 90's!". Having come from an abusive religious background, these remarks and others, and the total absence of comment make me withdraw. And I am a strong, belligerent personality. I can imagine what it would do to a more timid character.
I have listened to pod-casts til my ears bleed, read blogs and articles, andcontributed both opinion and money to this group and frankly I feel fucked. After spending hours of my time trying to see what this group believes in, I have come away with the information of "Love everyone as yourself" and accept everyone on their own terms. which is fine but it does nothing to answer questions of people actively seeking and needing answers.
Look, I have no horse in this race; I'm just an observer who wants to know things. And I will give a bit of advice, unsolicited as it may be, to this group that is relevant and needs to be considered. As a group with differing beliefs, I can relate to that. The pagan church I belonged to had the same theory, to have an open theology to invite everyone who walked different paths. No basic boiler-plate except there is Deity, love, acceptance and learning. sound familiar?
This did not work. I'm talking about the principle, not the religion. When people ask questions, they got ten opposing answers. This is great for debate but not for leadership. In my opinion, especially when trying to achieve new objectives, there has to be some sort of consensus for how to answer questions by people who want to be involved. This is especially true for people who know little or nothing about Christianity or what the new "labels" mean.
Granted, Twitter and Facebook are not the best method for relating such sensitive ideas, but being that the OP's have selected these sites, and pod-casts, etc., for relaying their ideas, there has to be some basic idea of structure for a jumping off point. It doesn't make sense without it to someone who is a lay-person. Most people will just turn away and shake their heads. Being the persistant hard-head I am, I didn't. Hence this blog.
When a person gets ignored or belittled, that person will no longer seek help from that group who has treated them that way. I have seen argument, squabbles, name-calling, screaming in text, and general confusion in this group that would make the main-stream churches sit back and smile. Inclusive? No. Grace to everyone? As long as you have elephant hide as skin. The OP's had their yearly gathering this week, and while the individual' sermons were good, some out-standing, it all comes back to the same thing. there is no basic premise to spring from. Example. jay Bakker said on his T.V. interview there were several ways to be saved. He said Jesus spoke of various ways for the person involved with the conversation. ???? Anyone having even basic church training would want an explanation, not to stir trouble but to be able to grasp the new idea. I have YET to get even a one-sentence explanation for this. Universalism definition I receieved (at least I received an answer) is that either you're already saved because of the resurrection, or you'll be saved in a timely manner or what???? WHAT?? Then the kicker was that it didn't really matter. Well, it matters to me. And I would imagine it matters to alot of other people.
If all of this has MY head spinning, as one with years of biblical force-feeding under my belt, how do you think other people feel? The haggling after the cuum-by-yah conference has commenced. As I thought it would. If your not willing to sift thru all the bull-shit, youre not going to find what you need.
I admire the pure idea of this group. I would not have spent as much time trying to learn about it as I have if I didn't. But you people nedd to step back and take some deep breaths. Seriously. Get your shit together. It's lost it's purity. You want the world to see you as love and grace. Then act like it. You are being watched by people who want to know, people who WANT and LONG to be in the grace of God, all coming from their different experiences. you need to get some basic answers. I KNOW the beauty is the diversity, and I admire that. But I think you get my drift. Don't ignore serious questions. You have become what looks comparatively a high-school click. I don't think that was the intent.
I wanted to know. I wanted to learn. i wanted to be answered. And I'm not the only one. what happened?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
I agree. For a supposedly "inclusive" organization my suggestions and input were both ridiculed and marginalized. And this was from one of the "most respected" members of the group! I LOVE several select members to death, or some of those that traipse about on the periphery..... but being brutal in your criticism from a far left perspective is as off-putting as brutal criticism from the "right," which most OPs do not identify themselves with (liberal, emergent, etc.).
The cliquishness of the group is VERY palpable, and it is plainly obvious and stunningly disheartening to see your opinion ridiculed or merely ignored, when the same opinion is given by one of the "inner sanctum," and it is lauded and celebrated as "inspiring, refreshing!"
Again, the parts that make up the whole may very well be worth getting to know, but the whole, on the whole, is lacking in cohesive direction, a sense of communal responsibility for self-policing of "trolls" (as a blind eye is turned to behavior that is criticized when "fundies" do it,) and a clearly stated ethical compass for guidance during internal questioning and dispute.
A shame, really. It has such potential, but strikes me as a self-serving mutual admiration society with a few really awesome people stuck being washed along for the ride.....
I think the core idea of the group is a good one, but the wheels have come off. It's time for a shakeup in leadership, a retooling of vision, and a sloughing off of bs.
Will it happen? I hope so. I used to be honored to be called an Outlaw Preacher. Now? Not so much. Perhaps someday it can again become a badge of honor.
Very interesting. Relevant questions for the times. It happens often that when something gets a little fame, ideals get watered down.
Good post. I am finally starting to figure this out. The Emergent conversation essentially began about ten years ago with a group of evangelical student ministers and though it (for a while, anyway) was moving towards including "hyphenateds" (Presby-mergent, Angli-mergent) it has been dominated by the post-evangelicals(thus the huge percent of white maleness). What you see at the evangelical mega churches - the stage, the microphone held by a young, hip, cool white male, predictably adorned and accented, the cool music - seems to have pretty much carried over the the emergent crowd. While they will invite some others on stage to help their message, they still maintain control of the microphone (read: power). Does this sound familiar?
There were MANY of us who called out this movement for continuing to exclude the marginalized voices from leading and having center stage to educate others, but to no avail. To me, it was totally absurd to have a straight, white male speak at OP11 on loving the oppressor. This was CLEARLY a response to the fallout from OP10 when they lost most of their LGBTQ "outlaws" over the issue of bullying and "safe space". The talk seemed to be nothing more than a "corporate response" to reinforce the leaders position and nothing more. And I'm not getting down on Gabe, but it would have helped IMMENSLY had he at LEAST offered that this was HIS personal abuse experience and that he could not speak for those dealing with societal/systemic abuse and bullying (like the LGBTQ). But again, a more marginalized minority voice would have been FAR more informative on the issue of abuse and oppression than a straight, white dude.
What I am finding is that the REAL progressive Christians are the UCC, DOC, and the Episcopalians (I will include the Presbyterians once they are free of the evangelical "Fellowship"). I also am finding much connection in the progressive Muslim community in issues I care deeply about (LGBTQ, social justice, human rights). And I am finding good groups to connect with in these issues with NO religious attachments, which I find refreshing!
So while there are still people I dearly love and will continue to learn from with the "emergent" and the "OP" label (and that's a whole 'nother issue - the went from a movement to a brand name vehicle), I am now post-mergent, post-OP, post-Christian. I just no longer find those labels life-giving.
PS - this article just posted today on HuffPo: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christian-piatt/christians-should-be-more-than-gay-okay_b_977785.html
I don't speak for OP as a whole because I don't think ANY of us can speak for OP as a whole. OP is not a church so some of the questions you say you asked (and I'm not questioning that you did only saying that I personally don't spend enought time on twitter to have seen those interactions) aren't really answerable as asked. Churches offer altar calls, have a cohesive dogma, and so on.
OP as I understand it and have experienced it is a conversation (in its online formats) and a community (in its couple of small regional groups and at its annual family reunion) to understand OP in church terms is to set both the questioner and the OP conversation up for failure.
As to what happened at OP11 as far as structure and what sessions were live streamed and what sessions were not, there is validity in that criticsm. Many of us who were there are currently composing our thoughts to offer to the planning team as we process the event.
I will say that at the same time as Gabe's talk was being broadcast I was in another session that was not being broadcast which was being lead by a lesbian woman that was awesome and having since seen the recording of Gabe's talk I wish that the two of them had been coordinated in a combined format because I think that it would have given a more complete picture of the issue and enriched both those who attended and those who watched online.
I guess my main comment to you is this, OP is young only a couple of years old, and we are made up by and large of folks who have in some way or other been hurt by the church. I find it fascinating that the OPs attract so much attention and bitching about "power" because I seriously see us as a minor player at best in the Christian world and I wonder where this perceived power resides. As I see and experience it we're just people who are trying to carry on a conversation and figure out where we fit in after having been rejected in some way by our experience of church. We're going to be messy because people are messy. I'm not sure I understand what is expected of us but it sure feels like being damned if we do and damned if we don't.
Thank you for sharing your frustrations.
I suppose, for me, it is the opposite reaction. I can see how if you're wanting something concrete and certain, OPs would be frustrating. For me, though, I'm need a place to bring my shit and not have to have all the answers in order to nurture relationships, love and serve. I'm ok living in the process - b/c I was brought into the Church like I was studying for the GRE - learn the answers, quickly and correctly.
For me, OP has been a place to rest and to be real. I know that is not the case for everyone. And at other points in my life that may not have been the case for me. I don't know the answer for that. I can only speak to my own experience.
I can definately say that I was much more involved in social networking w/ OPs after the first reunion - after I had faces and flesh and hearts to put with the avatars and screen names. I have seen the hurt & also much love in between OP10 & OP11. I have seen it in every community I've ever invested my energy in. They all involved humans. And it sucks. But its reality. I'm not defending anyone, because quite honestly I've not gotten myself in the middle of the frustrations.
I can also say that my interactions at OP11 were more rich than OP10, and I can only think that my online interactions will be all the better because of it. Community is a slow process, and it teaches me so much about myself.
Community is a cornerstone of my theology. I think it is extremely important. I also think it is important to seek out community that fits for you. I never would've thought 2 years ago OP would be one of those places for me. I've tried on others that definately were not. My congregations locally (yes, two - I'm a churchwhore)are a fit, even in all their messiness, that I never would've expected. It has taken a lot of getting to know myself to recognize where I best thrive, and it has been a long, difficult process.
Sorry, kinda rambling now. I do appreciate you sharing your heart and frustrations, and I'm sorry that OP was a negative experience for you. I do hope that you will continue seeking out community and find those places where your desires and the shape of the group intertwine. Blessings.
T-bear, I wasn't commenting on format or individuals. i was commenting on the attitude that comes across when addressing people outside the group. Of course no one's perfect, I was never expecting the OP's to be, that's the main reason I was attracted. But the way the group interacts with people who differ in opinion and the lack of patience and testiness is completely within each one's control. You ARE a small part of Christianity as a whole, but that's the whole point of your group, yes? to encourage others with similar experiences to join? To be safe and included? THAT'S what i am addressing. Everyone, including myself, is responsible for how they treat people, and it seems a lot of the time the OP's won't be bothered with anyone outside the main, core group. I stand by what I wrote. I thought about it for quite some time. But I appreciate your comments.
Kimberly, thanks for the response. Let me explain that I was not looking for certainy or solid answers when i came across this group. I admit readily to having been raised with the stock-standard of Christianity and after seeing i could/would not live with that, wanted to see what this "new" movement was about. But when things are said that are so opposite of what I have learned in the past, such as the ways to being saved,(just one example),then I feel I am ok with questioning how this opinion was birthed. Where the scripture is to draw this idea from. There HAVE been some pretty concrete ideas thrown out there, with no foundational information to back them up. I am simply saying I wanted more information.
I too wanted a place to rest and serve. But I have to know the basic premise of the place I choose to do that. Can you see this? I happily wanted to get involved, learn, but at the same time be taken seriously. i know myself quite well, being a introspective person; I know what I need. i don't need a strict structure or written dogma to operate. Hence what I said about Wicca. but if I am going to try and follow the very religion that I bear scars from, the least i need is to be answered. Basic answers is all i wanted. Not the Bible re-written. Thanks again for the comments.
I am so sorry for your hurt. If I was one of the people who either made you feel less than you were or deliberately ignored you, I am sorry and hope you forgive me.
I understand your frustrations and feel for some of them. There are some points where I feel you may be putting too much on any one group or persons and I do not think those things are even part of the OP's, nor should they be. But common respect and deceny should be.
Some of the twitter and facebook stuff in the last few months have been atrocious. Many good people, even fellow OP's, have stopped being online in those spaces due to those arguments. Hell, I was likened to an abusive and negligent father by someone there. That cut deeply and I honestly do not see myself engaging with that person ever again.
There is some change towards the online behavior, but I do not expect the recalibration to happen overnight. It will be a process and at times it may be a painful one. I hope that what emerges from the mess more of the beauty that is already in the midst of the mess.
Regardless of the fairness of the expectations, it does not diminish the hurt and for that, I apologize and ask your forgiveness.
I'm one of the folks who attended OP11, and I was (at this point) only somewhat-surprised at the voices that were centered, and the voices that were less-centered, or even semi-marginalized. I wondered at the whitehetmaleness of most of the centered voices, having believed this might not be quite the same as it is everywhere else. Well, no, clearly not.
I don't come from a background that discusses "being saved" and has "altar calls," which is why I never answered you. If you ask me about the use of "sacramentals" and "acts of piety" and I can help. ;-)
And, as far as I know, this talk of "leadership" seems premature. There are clearly facilitators, but no leaders.
For contrast on what an organic, non-hierarchical gathering looks like, check out unco (un-confernce)which seems to be primarily comprised of the "traditional progressives". Note the lack of widely-known, published speakers, and I love how "The leaders, topics, and workshops will be harvested from the participants." UnCo12
Pat Green, i forgave the comments you made the day you said them to me. I will not be talked to like a child. So the forgiveness is not the issue. I do accept your apology.
I don't think it's unfair to expect some sort of bounderies within a group when they decide to present themselves on-line as just that - a cohesive group. This group is not that new and it is not just me that has felt it's ex-clusiveness. You can see it here, in the comments, as well as other places.It's not as much the on-line bickering among yourselves as it is that y'all say "Come! Be a Part!" then you DON'T FOLLOW THRU. I think that's the thing you're missing. NO one has addressed that. You are not welcoming. You are not ...."nice". You (and when I say "you" I mean in general" remember just plain "Be Nice"? God how hard is that to understand. I guess if youre going to put yourself out there as an organized group, be organized. Don't invite unless you mean it. Thanks for the comment.
Wow...so many things I was going to say but Lisa said them for me! (Great minds...)
Again, I agree totally with EVERYTHING you've said in your blog. I think that when people create a group and not follow through and you're portraying yourselves to be there for the outcast, the forgotten, the outlaws...then you NEED to BE there.
Period.
It was said there is no structure of leadership, because there isn't any, we all know that isn't the truth. When someone asks about who is in charge or head of this "group" everyone knows whose names come to mind, not to mention who has the "power" and "authority" to delete comments on facebook or "approve" a request to "join." I'm sorry, but to ME (and I would think anyone else) that right there is showing an established idea of who's who in the OP.
This is why the Bible and God are big fans of ORDER.
without it, there is nothing but chaos.
If there is no direct HEAD to the body then nobody has accountability for misrepresenting the group. Therefore no one is to blame or in the wrong because they represent themselves not OP.
That doesn't even make sense! And if it's open, new, ect Then why is the FB not OPEN to anyone to just comment? No...there MUST be an APPROVAL to join. Do you see my point?
And I am truly sorry but to say because of all the diversity there are no direct questions or whatever...that doesn't make sense either man. Simply because when you are reaching out to people who have been rejected for one reason or another the first thing you ask is "WHY?" and to re-learn all over again...you are going to have questions. That is human nature. That is how people learn...asking. that's also biblical...ask...ask away. But to have a bunch of people, some of which are PASTOR'S and then not have answers or a "designated" person for certain area's to question's is a BIG foul. I understand you all have lies but OP is mainly communicated as an ONLINE COMMUNITY so that isn't fair to say WE should understand. YOU ALL put yourselves out there, YOU not the hurt, the wounded, the lost...When a lost hurting person finds a shred of what seems to be hope your unconditional, non accountable non group but yet...GROUP says "Please...come...but no questions. And by all means feel free to agree with the OBVIOUS leaders we don't have in our group that isn't a group.
Goodness...and Pat...I'm glad you've apologized to Lisa, but you were so rude that day to other people and just some advice first impressions are REALLY hard to "amend" when coming across as a jerk. I'm seriously not trying to be a bitch. I just wanted to let you know that. Also, someone said questions may have been missed or not answered because of knowledge or whatever but really...? If someone said something that the MAJORITY of this "non group" of people didn't agree with or believe all the "non-leaders" would be ON IT. Or if one of these "non leaders" said something completely disrespectful that would make them seem like a straight up asshole, one of the ...ahem..."non leaders" of this "non group" would delete THAT ONE comment.
I was so excited about the OP when I first started but now...I'm just bothered and annoyed by the lack of respect shown to people who aren't as...ummm..."inclusive" to this "non" exclusive group, I mean..."non" group. Or...whatever.
By the way: When I said "I know you all have lies" I totally meant to say LIVES ;) MY BAD!!!
Post a Comment