As with much post-modernist conversations, one hardly knows how to begin 'reporting' on the two-hour plus chat between EMO and NECF members on Saturday. So the below are really 'sound-bytes', nothing comprehensive.
It was inevitable that concerns with postmodern thinking arose early. The first half-hour after the personal introductions featured mostly Sivin and Kia Meng 'defending' or justifying Emergent's inclination (for lack of a better word) towards postmodern concerns about 'one-size-fits-all' solutions to local church issues, the oppression nurtured (perhaps subtly) by various truth-claims, the coldness of "non-embodied" spirituality, etc. and how these provide the counter-balance to problems related to relativism, pluralism, non-foundationalism, a lack of affirmations and so on.
I think whilst nobody doubts the value of stories and how some aspect of narratives may help in the kingdom in ways that propositions do not, Dr. Ng cautioned that even stories can be oppressive (e.g. the Gnostic circulated fascinating stories, too). Hence the need for creeds (in no-holds-barred propositional form). This came on the heels of the warning, issued (and understood, I'm sure) all round that in a relativistic age, affirmations and convictions are needed. Emergent - so I heard the NECF implying at the start -may have trouble being of help to this generation if it doesn't postulate firm anchors. I can't recall Sivin's, Kia Meng's or Yew Khuen's exact responses (except that Kia Meng made references to the work of Rene Girard and that in general they were well-accepted). I'm only glad that they were around to restrain my loose-cannon comments, the most radical being the counter-warning issued to the NECF that there is a dark side to absolute truth which we ignore to our chagrin, and that maybe we should prize utility over and above truth in our theological construction.
Somebody mentioned (towards the end) that the "sum of all propositions does not equate to truth" but I can't remember if everyone in the NECF concurred. I just thought that was a pretty 'Emergent' thing to say (smile). Minnie Ang also suggested that Emergent youth may represent an anamoly among the general youth in Malaysia, as this latter group seems, to her, more keen on 'shallow' church music. I think a tentative conclusion (in the context of this issue) is that youths are not a homogenous group. If nothing else, Emergent caters to a certain segment of youths i.e. the more reflective, less church-satisfied ones, maybe?
Emergent distinctives were also brought up (and questioned). This provided the opportunity to talk a little about the motifs Emergent promotes more than most other groups: Missional. Generative friendship. Stories. Conversations. Space.
Personally, I feel that the distinctives are better felt than explained. And whilst I'd have liked to say that Emergent employs global methods of thinking and discussion to address local church issues with the aim of perhaps producing 'glocal' solutions or ideas, perhaps the following is more helpful:
Emergent isn't primarily about contending for a 'one true' Christian theology or perspective. Also, it is not chiefly aimed at resolving issues of theology, apologetics, history and so on. Emergent respects the multiplicity of views and arguments by Christians, and fears that frequent theological exclusivity demonstrated by many such intellectual forums are of limited value, missionally speaking. This distinguishes Emergent Malaysia at least from groups like AGORA, NECF and maybe even Kairos.
Emergent, however, does highly value 'talk' as a necessary prelude to 'action'. Conversation among the key players on the local scene is essential to getting effective work done for the kingdom. This precludes any idea of Emergent being *merely* for church leaders or theologians or pastors. Anyone who has a role to play for Jesus and who's interested in sharing very specific concerns and learning from others is welcome. This factor, I suppose, distinguishes the network from more socially oriented ministries like Malaysian Care and World Vision. Furthermore, the love of theology and the willingness to grapple with the latest issues in not just theology but also philosophy among its members would set Emergent apart from, say, Lausanne (which focuses more on evangelism and world missions).
I think Ng Kam Weng's closing comments were very generous and whilst he won't pretend to be very sympathetic to the theology of Emergent, he counselled his more conservative members to listen to EMO, thanking us younger ones for raising necessary questions. He also humbly noted that just because 'older' Christians may have been around for many decades, that doesn't entail correctness and the best insights in all things.
It was smilingly and respectfully concluded that the Christian community must not be satisfied with abstract no-impact teaching, even whilst it should not waver in its firm foundation in Jesus.
Finally, Dr. Ng also asked why the elders seemed to be 'led by' the younger ones. Has the earlier generation failed as role models? I wouldn't exactly put it that way. But perhaps this could be the next emerging conversational topic -let's hope there's "space" for it (smile).
