I try to make it a point not to write about some of the more outrageous views and statements from pundits of all sorts. Nearly any mention is a good mention and I’d rather not direct more attention to people who generate more heat than light on a given topic. But Sacred Frenzy, a good friend of mine, tipped me off to an opinion Frank Pastore wrote for Townhall.com and its title alone, “Why Al Qaeda Supports the Emergent Church,”comes across as one of the more ridiculous statements of the year. I had a longer post dealing with Pastore’s specific arguments, but the piece is jumbled and it was difficult to address his post in a systematic fashion. Basically it appears that Pastore has taken two things he doesn’t like, the “Emergent church” and Al Qaeda and tries to criticize them in the same post. I agree with Pastore that the battle with radical Islam is a war of ideas, but the majority of his claims are specious at best and certainly uncharitable towards other members of the Body of Christ. I’m fine with strong disagreement and strong debate within the Church, but as earlier Christians said during the Thirty Years’ War (another war of ideology), “In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity.” Of course different people have different ideas of what is essential, but that is another post altogether.
Theology and Church, Politics and SocietyJuly 26, 2007 7:37 am
3 Comments »
The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://spacebetween.blogsome.com/2007/07/26/how-not-to-make-an-argument/trackback/
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>


I’m not sure about Frank Pastore’s context and motivation, but Alan Hirsch’s new book “The Forgotten Ways: reactivating the missional church” does link the emergent church with Al Quaeda (sp?) in that both are flexible, fast acting, non-hierachical organizations. They function like organic cells more than mechanical institutions. It’s more of an organizational resemblance than diatribe. Check it out
Comment by don — July 26, 2007 @ 1:41 pm
Pastore’s main problem with the “Emergent church” as he calls that tradition is that they have adopted a relativistic stance toward truth. Such a flimsy stance only waters down the resolve and message of the West and Christianity. (He does conflate Christianity and Western culture. They are certainly linked in their development, but I wouldn’t say that they go hand in hand.) Radical Islam, on the other hand, does have a strong stance on truth and the reason groups like Al Qaeda like relativists—again, according to Pastore—is that relativism makes their job that much easier in winning the war of ideas. So while the Emergent church may not be flying planes into buildings, for Pastore, they are weakening the West’s ability to defeat its foes.
My gut reaction to Hirsch’s statement is that I don’t care for it much—I haven’t read the book, so I won’t comment a ton. I wish he would have found a more positive analog to describe the emerging church, even if they do share some characteristics as Al Qaeda. Maybe something like forums of computer code writers or artistic communities. It’s difficult for me to think positively about Al Qaeda.
Comment by Tyler Watson — July 26, 2007 @ 4:04 pm
I wonder if one of the major intellectual and moral problems with the current American conservative movement is a fascination with pseudo-analogies.
Saddam is sort of like Hitler. Bush is sort of like Churchill. Iraq is sort of like Nazi Germany and sort of like fascist Japan. Al Queda is sort of like the Soviet Union. Iran is sort of like Nazi Germany and sort of like fascist Japan and sort of like the Soviet Union. Bush is sort of like Reagan. Blah, blah, sort of like blah.
Readers of the Weekly Standard and the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal over the past 5 years will recognize that line of thought.
Pastore just takes that same fairly recently politically successful American conservative logic one step further down the road. When a movement depends primarily on enemies most people become suspect eventually. Even well meaning conservative emerging church types.
Conservatism has so much good to offer. I’m not a part of that movement or ideology but I’d love to see conservatism make a more positive contribution.
Comment by Tom Pratt — July 27, 2007 @ 9:59 pm