|
Friday November 30, 2007 ~ 8 Comments
Al Mohler and Tadd Grandstaff were on NBC Nightly News Friday night. See the teaser here: You can see the video of the actual report here. Three things stood out to me. First, Tadd's church is far from an "emerging church." They are a contemporary church... and an edgy one at that. But, the piece was described as a look at the Emerging Church and its impact on politics. It was not. Second, NBC tried to make the piece about homosexuality and the apparent disagreement between Al Mohler and Grandstaff's church. However, there is no disagreement as best I can tell. I could tell you a lot of areas where they would disagree (trust me), but that is not one of them. On the homosexuality issue, Grandstaff has indicated that quotes were used out of context. Tadd wrote on his blog: [T]he response to Jennifer's Snipes question was taken completely out of context. Her original question was, "How do you see politics and the church effecting the 2008 election?" In which her resonse was, "I think that is a personal issue...set aside from any church issues." Her question was never anything about homosexuality. Third and finally, the better and more detailed interview between Brokhaw and Grandstaff is here. The information here is much more clear. There is a story out there on the Emerging Church and the move away from conservative politics, but it does not involve Tadd, it involves people with names like Brian, Tony, and Doug. The boys at GetReligion.org have not yet broken open their usual can of stomp at religous media misreporting, but I am sure they will soon. 8 CommentsComment PolicyComments are welcome on discussion posts. Comments are not moderated but do require a keyword to avoid spam. If this is your first time commenting, please review the comment policy. Leave a comment |
  
  |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
Brother Ed,
You write; "Tadd's church is far from an "emerging church." They are a contemporary church... and an edgy one at that. But, the piece was described as a look at the Emerging Church and its impact on politics."
Can you point-counter-point briefly explain the difference in your terminology? "emerging church" and "contemporary church...and an edgy one at that"?
I just do not understand a difference and it seems that lines are blurred even more when these types of statements are made.
Blessings,
Tim
Tim,
That is probably a long answer, so let me refer you to an article I wrote here that might here.
Ed
Ed, thanks for your reflections on the piece. It certainly illustrates how difficult it is to present issues clearly in a Nightly News format, that is in three minutes.
I agree that they totally missed the story by focusing on a church that is only (I think the story said) 12 weeks old. There are more established an influential Emerging Churches out there.
By my categorization the church featured does look like an Emerging Church but not an Emergent (Village) one. By your classifications, Ed, wouldn't they fall into the "Relevant" category?
Michael,
A good question.
As best I can tell, I would think that they are intentionally focused on contextualization to a more modern cultural situation. I would think that an emerging "relevant" would be more focused on a postmodern context or mission.
But, admittedly, it is an imperfect distinction.
So, the fact that Tadd does not consider his church "emerging" may be more important.
Ed
Ed,
Rob Bell/Mars Hill don't consider themselves Emerging either but they clearly are. My point is that by nature these churches despise labels and so they are probably not the best judges of their own classification.
Andrew Jones put a post up recently asking whether the term had meaning anymore. http://tallskinnykiwi.typepad.com/tallskinnykiwi/2007/11/emerging-chur-1.html
The responders mostly said it does not and that it is already as badly damaged as "Evangelical".
To me "Emerging" is an umbrella term used to describe churches that are attempting to relate to postmodern culture. Taken literally it simply describes new forms of church that are emerging from currently established forms.
"Emergent" is a specific stream within the movement and is generally used to describe those churches and individuals endorsing or supportive of Emergent Village.
I feel a new series of posts coming on. ;-)
I agree that NBC totally misrepresented Tadd's church. You could definitely see there was an agenda. However, Tadd and other young leaders such as himself should use a little more discernment when engaging the media and not let themselves be used as a pawn. He ultimately only has himself to blame. I am hopeful this will serve as a warning to young leaders everywhere. There is no such thing as free advertisement.
Chris,
I disagree.
No one can avoid the danger of the reporter switching the questions from the answers on the tape. It is just bad journalism...