A Generous Orthodoxy: Why I Am a Missional, Evangelical, Post/Protestant,… (2004)

I knew going into this that McLaren has been pegged with a lot of red flags. The bad publicity alone piqued my curiosity and therefore I wanted to see for myself what the issues were. From my perspective there wasn't any glaring unorthodox views that has caused me to toss the book aside or label McLaren a heretic as so many have done. I have agreed in most part with McLaren's views about salvation. I also like how McLaren draws on the strengths and weaknesses of all the different traditions of the Christian faith and encourages us to come together on our strengths rather than part ways on our weaknesses. I was struck by his assessment regarding the hermeneutics of Scripture. We have an inerrant and infallible Scripture, but we have errant and fallible men who interpret them. Therefore, nobody can lay claim on the proper interpretation of Scripture. I also liked how McLaren expanded upon Calvin's acronym of TULIP. He didn't replace it or redefine it, but interpreted it in such a way that becomes more generous rather than exclusive. A few things I disagreed with McLaren on was some of his church history. It seemed his history of the Anabaptists and Reformed traditions were a bit off on some points. I was taken a bit back about his incessant apologies for the masculine use of God throughout the book. Why the apology when Scripture alone utilizes the masculine pronouns? Furthermore, McLaren devoted an entire chapter to being "green" which I take issue with. Sure, let's be good stewards of the earth, but let's not allow our stewardship of earth and nature take precedence over our care for people. Chopping down a few trees so people without homes can now have a place to live doesn't make me any less generous or compassionate than someone who nurtures our earth's resources. McLaren lost me when I got to the "Why I Am Emergent" chapter. A lot of new jargon I did not understand, but some of which I did. Even though he was trying not to sound pluralistic, he really is. Personally, I find nothing wrong with being pluralistic in our theological beliefs. It is my hope that most Christians are pluralistic, primarily in their distinctives and secondary issues. Although I thoroughly enjoyed the book, I was somewhat disappointed with the fact that McLaren spent most of the time describing what a generous orthodoxy is not, but little time on what it is. It seems only the last and final chapter was dedicated to defining this generous orthodoxy. And perhaps the best definition I found is this:

"To be a Christian in a generously orthodox way is not to claim to have truth captured, stuffed, and mounted on the wall. It is rather to be in a loving community of people who are seeking the truth on the road of mission and who have been launched on the quest by Jesus, who, with us, guides us still." (page 333). ( )

McLaren really made his course clear here: headed down the lane of pluralism and an abandonment of Biblical authority. So why two stars? Because his opening picture of the different Jesuses he sees in the different streams of Christianity was very good. ( )

I won't deny that I am a fan, so to speak, of Brian McLaren, that I constantly find him refreshing, offering fresh perspectives that I thoroughly enjoy time after time, especially since I, myself, tend to not believe in the more literal, doctrinal, typical representations of Christianity. So I really do enjoy the way he explains concepts and terms in a way that I find much more relate-able for those of us who do understand the message of Jesus differently.

The approach of this book, as we are told on page 22, "seeks to find a way to embrace the good in many traditions and historic streams of Christian faith, and to integrate them, yielding a new, generous, emergent approach that is greater than the sum of its parts." Starting with a chapter focused on an overview of the seven main examples of Jesus the author has encountered, the Conservative Protestant, Pentecostal/Charismatic, Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Liberal Protestant, Anabaptist, and Jesus of the Oppressed representations, the book then goes on to look at different ideas when it comes to concepts such as "Son of God," what we mean when we call Jesus "Lord/Master," and what we mean when we speak of the idea of salvation or being saved, before going on in Part Two to the different kinds of Christianity (Missional, evangelical, Post/Protestant, Liberal/Conservative, Mystical/Poetic, Biblical, Charismatic/Contemplative, Fundamentalist/Calvinist, (Ana)baptist/Angelican, Methodist, catholic, Green, Incarnational, Depressed-Yet-Hopeful, Emergent, and Unfinished), explaining in each chapter what aspects of each strain of Christianity resonates with him and which parts perhaps could be improved upon, looking into the different histories and doctrinal distinctives of each, continuing to offer throughout his refreshing perspective and understanding.

I do understand that the intended audience, as we are told, are those in the fray, so to speak, those "who are about to leave (or have just left) the whole business because of the kinds of issues I raise in this book" as well as those who may be "spiritual seekers who are attracted to Jesus, but they don't feel there is room for them in what is commonly called Christianity unless they swallow a lot of additional stuff" (page 44), but I do think that this is a book (as are so many of his others) that offers ideas and perceptions that would benefit any Christian open enough to discussion and new ideas, and any non-Christian open to seeing Christianity through a different kind of lens, regardless of what one ultimately concludes upon completing the book. I really did enjoy the glimpses into the various traditions of faith, and I love his explanations of what a generous orthodoxy is/entails:

"To be a Christian in a generously orthodox way is not to claim to have the truth captured, stuffed, and mounted on the wall. It is rather to be in a loving (ethical) community of people who are seeking the truth (doctrine) on the road of missions (witness, as McClendon said), who have been launched on the quest by Jesus, who, with us, guides us still. Do we have it? Have we taken hold of it? Not fully, not yet, of course not. But we keep seeking. We're finding enough to keep us going. But we're not finished. That, to me, is orthodoxy - a way of seeing and seeking, a way of living, a way of thinking and loving and learning that helps what we believe become more true over time, more resonant with the infinite glory that is God."
(pages 333-334)

And:

"So perhaps orthodoxy will mean not merely correct conclusions but right processes to keep on reaching new and better conclusions, not just correct ends but right means and attitudes to keep on discovering them, not just straight answers but a straight path to the next question that will keep on leading to better answers. This kind of orthodoxy will welcome others into the passionate pursuit of truth, not exclude them for failing to posses it already."
(page 335)

I must say that though I have always strongly considered myself to be unorthodox, I could gladly find myself embracing this kind of orthodoxy. :) ( )

This is a very helpful book, he seems to be reacting to many of the difficulties we feel with Christian belief at the beginning of the 21st century. He starts by describing how he has benefited from various different brands of Christianity he has been involved with, but more usefully he then reports on the way the contrasting views show up each others deficiencies.
One underlying and contentious idea is that the faith is not static but does change as history goes on. The priorities of TULIP give way to the five principles of the fundamentalists. The "unchanging gospel" is not as stable as we thought.
He warns us about the dangers and misunderstandings that can results from the way we use some words, judge, father, king, about God.
He reckons our main enemy is the reductionist ideology of modernism, no doubt that's why he is so accepting of post-modernism! By the end of the book he has almost abandoned cross cultural evangelism, or at least he would repudiate any pushy, forceful version of the gospel.
I think his version of the gospel appears a bit feeble - Gods love to us and to all of creation- but there is an awful lot to be learned for the modern church in this book. ( )

An eloquent plea for Christians to move beyond what divides them and take the best from each tradition while discarding the past misdeeds of each tradition.

The author's fondness for the prefix 'post-' can be a bit trying after a while.