Welcome back

Hello All,

I’ve really missed offering my musings here. So I’m back.

Blogging is an odd thing, you know. It’s stereotypically comprised of a lot of criticism, and offers the writer the opportunity to instant worldwide publishing that he may soon regret. I haven’t really ever regretted anything I’ve ever posted in and of itself, but ramifications can be many, good and bad. I’ve only ever written anything with the best of intentions, but I know that I too can often write things that are misunderstood for the worse. Many of you know the circumstances of mine that have changed over the past few months, and I have shared personally with some of you why I felt compelled to stop blogging. In short, I was feeling hurt, and sincerely did not want my prone-to-fight nature to volley a passive-aggressive speil online that I may regret later. But since then, I’ve learned a lot. Here are a few things I’ve learned:

1) I say a lot of things that are misunderstood. Deconstruction and constructive critique are good things, necessary things in every area of life. But criticism is negative and not so helpful. The problem is that deconstruction and critique often look just like criticism. So while you’ve got my word that I’ll always speak as constructively and honestly as possible, I also know that…

2) My language will always be misunderstood …especially misunderstood the more different I am from the reader. I just don’t think you can speak your perspective without offending. I’m passionate about the way of the Christ, but I see myself as post-Protestant, post-Evangelical, post-Conservative. Not better, just “post.” So just as a Roman Catholic would disagree with many of my claims, so will the Protestant church misunderstand the Church in emergence. I’m also not trying to box myself into a label, but there is a certain linguistic usefulness to saying such.

3) You will see my honest opinion and feelings about the things I see. I think constructive provocation is a lost art; not simple, reductionistic provocation, but provocation to think beyond your paradigm, above of left or right, beyond “yes” or “no” answers. I also think mankind at large, and religion in particular, would do well to dump our obsession with ingrouping and outgrouping, counting the saved and damned as so many items on a spreadsheet. My schtik is writing about faith in the Great Emergence, not because its some fad, but because it’s the only faith I know anymore. It is my faith, my perspective, but we are shaped in our respective niches and informed by our subcultures. As such, most of what I write is tuned into the epistemology, theology, philosophy, and implicated politics of the greater Emergence in culture, politics, and religions. I don’t want to get into a faulty pattern of saying “Most people think X, but Y is what the Bible actually says.” What I share is a feeling, an opinion, a perspective. To say my beliefs are unquestionable fact is to commit merely a different form of fundamentalism. I’ll speak with conviction, but please rebut me when I am too sure of things I cannot know. I want dialogue.

Very important note that many commenters don’t seem to get>> I actually don’t agree with a decent amount of the material I link to, and I post many thoughts-in-progress that I will soon move beyond. So when you see me write something you disagree with, there’s a good chance we may agree more than you know. Then again, maybe we don’t. Then yet again, what does it matter?

So let’s not take ourselves too seriously. Comment frequently. Be in dialogue. If something provokes you in a good way, discuss it with somebody. If it is not helpful, let the chaff blow away. But I’m glad to be back writing.

And by the way, I’ve had some pretty provocative ruminations since I last blogged. So stay tuned.