While perusing through cyber-space in search of thoughts on emerging Christianity, I am struck by how often critics of the Emerging movement assume that the Emergent aim is to wholly embrace postmodernism- and wholly reject modernism. This is a misunderstanding on a couple of different levels.

First of all, it's helpful to remember that the terms modern and post-modern refer not only to two separate philosophical paradigms, but also to two corresponding points in time. And there is no clean, clear shift from one to the other. The two exist along a continuum. The truth is that even the most ardent modernist is still almost surely to hold some postmodern views. It's virtually impossible to live in the 21 century and this not be the case.

Likewise, modernism is still alive and well in many segments of society, and in certain aspects of our personhood and our ecclesiology; no matter how "cutting edge" we assume our particular churches and/or understandings of the Faith to be. Many expressions of our Faith are tied to underlying presuppositions about reality- and these just do not change overnight- even if we think they should. There are some aspects of our selves that are hidden from ourselves.

So this addresses one misconception regarding the aims of the Emerging Church. Once and for all, let's put to rest the idea that the Emerging Church is pro-postmodern and anti-modern. It is neither. In part, the postmodernizing of the Christian message comes from an acknowledgement that this is the new dominant societal milieu- for good or for bad; these are the times that we have been born into. And as the saying goes: "when in Rome, do as the Romans do".

Secondly, the postmodern shift is largely an unconscious and unintentional one. It's not as if a group of Christians woke up one day and said- "Hey, why don't we shift philosophical paradigms- that would be fun!" No, what happened is that for the Gen X generation down, this is the lens we were raised with. It is no more intentional on our part than the color of our eyes.

So now that we've clarified that the Emerging movement is neither pro nor anti modern or postmodern (are all these prefixes confusing you yet?), let me address what I see as another fallacy. Many people who fear the postmodern shift, do so because they assume that in postmodernizing the Church, we risk loosing the Church as it is has been given to us.

This may be the case, but it's very important to remember that the Church was not originally given to us with all these modern trimmings. The Church was born in a pre-modern context. And pre-modernism is different from both its successors. And if anyone might be banging a drum here, I would think it would be the pre-moderns.

So where exactly (you ask) are the pre-moderns in the debate? Aren't they the silent past? No- I don't think so. There still exist today a variety of Christian groups/schools of thought that adopt a more pre-modern understanding of the Faith. The one group that stands out to me, and the one I have the most experience with- are the Eastern Orthodox.

When we talk about historical events like the Enlightenment and the Reformation, we sometimes forget that this was not a worldwide phenomenon. There existed, and still exists, an entire segment of the Church that was never really modernized; they are the Eastern Orthodox.

For those who aren't terribly familiar with the Orthodox tradition historically, the Orthodox Church was originally joined with the Catholic Church. In the end it was largely language and cultural differences that led the Orthodox and Catholics (or perhaps it is better to say, the western Catholics (based in Rome), and the Eastern Catholics (based in Constantinople), to different philosophical and practical understandings of what Christianity and the Church was. And thus the first of all Church splits occurred.

The Orthodox tradition is a rich and diverse one. And I cannot do its history justice in this particular article. What I will say is that at a time when my Evangelical/Protestant conceptions served to categorize and neatly box my conceptions of the Faith (sometimes to the point of suffocation), I found the Eastern Orthodox tradition a mysterious breath of fresh air. During a very tumultuous time in my life, when neatly packaged arguments and "proof-texted answers" were not working, this journey into mystery was exactly what I needed.

What I found most perplexing, but ultimately enlightening about my "Eastern journey", was not the answers I found along the way, as much as it was the unraveling of my questions. Whereas Westerners are often quick to offer neatly systematized answers to any and every question, my Eastern Orthodox friends would often look me straight in the face and say to me "that's the wrong question". Questions, even more so than answers reveal our underlying presuppositions. As time went on, I began to see how my entire worldview was modernized. And I soon realized that this box could not capture all that there was to life and God.

Many in postmodern circles strive not just for a creed that seems right, but also for an experience that feels right. Interestingly, this thrust is not new to postmodernism. The Eastern Orthodox have always stressed the importance of Orthopraxy (right practice) over merely abstract cognitive categories. When I would talk with a priest or an Orthodox friend about what the Orthodox believed about such and such a subject, they would often kindly gaze at me and then say "Why don't you come and experience the life of the Church for a while and perhaps you will find your answer."

Again, my aim here is not to defend Eastern Orthodoxy over other expressions/traditions of the Church. My point is merely that the question of faith and culture is broader than many of us realize. Personally, I am not particularly interested solely in the modern/post-modern debate. What I am interested in is a journey into mystery; where we seek to humbly be enlightened by a Gospel that is not "owned by" or subject to, any particular societal paradigm.

The truth is that there is no such thing as the Christian worldview. There are several- if not many, in operation today. While none of these paradigms is the final authority, each one can provide clues to the mystery as we seek to know "He who dwells in unapproachable light". And not only is this sharing process productive in illuminating the mysteries of the Gospel, but it also helps to bring greater unity to the fabric of the worldwide Church of Jesus Christ. And maybe that was part of the divine blueprint to begin with.