However, my view is that we have often been cast in the light of a negative voice because we are pretty confident on what does not chime with us any longer but a lot less certain (and that can be a v good thing in and of it self) in what we are for.

I’m not sure that makes us particularly prophetic, particularly where we are chosing the opposite end of the same spectrum or merely using the same attitudes/reasoning but just updated for current cultural reference.

But here you have an institution that is so messed up and so far away from any original vision of the Church. And they have something to say about those who have sold it all and are trying to start something fresh?

Feels kind of like the guy who dropped the ketchup bottle on aisle 7 standing around and complaining about the way the high school kid is mopping up the mess.

As to the inside/outside criticism discussion, I don’t think it can necessarily be an either/or. Of course self-reflection and self-criticism is needed in order for a healthy perspective to be gained. But I can’t go as far as to say that self criticism is the only valid sort of criticism. There are times when one could very well be speaking from experience, but if those who are even more inside the group don’t like what one has to say all they have to do it say “you’re not one of us so therefore your criticism is invalid” to shut down the conversation. And I can also think of a number of groups/situation that I have no personal experience with (just knowledge about) that I have no problem whatsoever in critiquing. Does that invalidate the critique or alter the truth in any way? To limit the prophetic voice to merely that which it is intimately involved with runs the same risk as not allowing that voice to exist at all.

Maybe if the conversation is always focussed on the negative (and there is no constructive conversation), we’re talking to the wrong people? Or at least, we need to recognise when ‘enough is enough’ and move on.

But whether emergents are also evangelicals is really beside the point, I think. The need to be self critical also applies to individuals, and to “movements within a movement” such as emergent (or the church growth movement, or any other). If we aren’t frequently asking ourselves what good points are being made by those with whom we disagree (and finding some), and if we aren’t asking ourselves what good they are trying to protect, preserve, or rescue (and finding some), and what dangers we risk falling into as we react against those with whom we disagree (and finding some) then we are in a dangerous place, and risk pharisaism and losing the right to speak prophetically.

Tim Keller gained some credibility in my eyes with his recent criticisms of evangelicalism, even if there is room for disagreement with other parts of what he said. Mark Van Steenwyk’s “7 Loving Challenges for Emergent” was refreshing to read and the sort of thing I wish I saw more of from folks in the emerging church. Such self-criticism is there to some degree I know, and is a healthy sign where it exists.

I have only in the last few months found my voice for constructive conversation. I’ve been writing about my concerns and observations for years, but speaking about it is a whole other creature. What has held me back the most, is that anything that the Lord shows me is convicting me as much as anyone else. I guess I’ve learned that I don’t have to wait until I’m fully conformed to speak out, I just have to be honest about my own failings.