Wednesday, February 15, 2006
Lexica Nova
The other day Mark pointed out how many words I have made up. I enjoy making up words, though I have only recently begun the endeavor. I hope to make up a good deal more in the near future, culminating in the creation of a Brennaean dictionary shortly after my death. I hereby release these words with their official definitions into the ether of cyberspace, with the hope that they be taken up into the popular vernacular of Western society (or at least cause some amusement).
di-das-ca-lar-chy-1. government by teachers or a teacher, especially by a small faction of teachers in a local church setting that stifle other church practices. 2. those making up such a government. 3. A local church governed by teaching to the detriment of all other practices. (origin: Gk. didaskalos (teacher) + -arches (ruler))
Ba-ku-lize-1. to transform any person, place, or object into something akin to, resembling, or suitable for use by Scott Bakula. 2. to be "beamed" aboard a ship in the Star Trek universe by Scott Bakula, along with Scott Bakula, or the action of beaming Scott Bakula. 3. to be slaughtered by Scott Bakula. (I'd also like to suggest that any civilization organized around the worship of and ruled by Scott Bakula be named "Bakulon," and that all vampire movies be standardized to the vampire lore depicted in a government-sanctioned film starring Scott Bakula and called "Count Bakula."
I also need to credit Mark with providing the conversation necessary to generate the words didascalarchy, soughter, and sunoikos. Count on me to create more unnecessary words with scrupulous regularity as the days pass.
di-das-ca-lar-chy-1. government by teachers or a teacher, especially by a small faction of teachers in a local church setting that stifle other church practices. 2. those making up such a government. 3. A local church governed by teaching to the detriment of all other practices. (origin: Gk. didaskalos (teacher) + -arches (ruler))
Mark and I came up with this one when we were pow-wowing before we planted the church. Specifically, we meant it to refer to a church where professors or people with advanced degrees are given the seat of honor, and where teaching is given precedent over things like music, art, prayer, acts of services, etc. This can also be a church where everything seems to revolve around the sermon and the preaching pastor.E-mer-gent-si-a-1. an elite group enjoying superior intellectual and theological status in the emerging church movement. 2. a class among the emerging church population claiming intellectual dominion over particular aspects of the movement. 3. those of the emerging movement responsible for its intellectual and theological foundations.
This one I came up with a couple weeks ago at dinner. It came to me after a friend incorrectly said the Spanish word for "emergency." There's no need for anyone in the emerging movement to take offense at this definition, it's a good thing to be part of the elite, and whether any of the Emergentsia are willing to admit it, there is an Emergentsia.sought-er-(derived from seeker) 1. one who is being approached by one who is sent. 2. one who is being inquired of by a seeker. 3. a person who is being endeavored upon.
I just need this word because I want an analogous feeling to the word in comparison to "seeker." I want to be able to talk about "soughter-sensitive" churches, that is, churches that focus on sending people out to find the lost instead of enticing them in to church.sun-oikos or syn-oikos- 1. a geographical place other than a residence that fulfills cultural values of family or kinship. 2. a person who defines such a place as home because of the presence of his or her family or kinship group. 3. the phenomenon of a place taking on the cultural characteristics of a residence from the presence of a family or kinship group that defines it as such. (origin: Gk. sun (together) + -oikos (house))
I needed Mark to remind me how I defined this word. I came up with this word when we were in Ohio at a house church conference. It gets at the fact that lots of people now don't express the value of family when they are in their homes. Frequently, homes are seen as little more than a place to sleep, and not a place for gathering or celebrating. Restaurants, coffee shops, bars, movie theaters, etc. now fill the role of expressing "home" because the people who gather there define family by celebrating it with a surrogate kinship group in that location.di-Ca-pri-ate-(di-Ca-pri-at-ed) 1. an event or action which causes an ordinarily masculine man to be given the sensitive and slightly effeminate quality of Leonardo diCaprio. 2. the action of viewing the film Titanic.
Ba-ku-lize-1. to transform any person, place, or object into something akin to, resembling, or suitable for use by Scott Bakula. 2. to be "beamed" aboard a ship in the Star Trek universe by Scott Bakula, along with Scott Bakula, or the action of beaming Scott Bakula. 3. to be slaughtered by Scott Bakula. (I'd also like to suggest that any civilization organized around the worship of and ruled by Scott Bakula be named "Bakulon," and that all vampire movies be standardized to the vampire lore depicted in a government-sanctioned film starring Scott Bakula and called "Count Bakula."
I also need to credit Mark with providing the conversation necessary to generate the words didascalarchy, soughter, and sunoikos. Count on me to create more unnecessary words with scrupulous regularity as the days pass.
Chris B., 11:27 PM
17 Comments:
My soft-spoken father, Chet Welle, was once Bakulized, but he debakulated eventually.
peter, at 7:00 AM
sunoikos came about when we were talking the differences between how people experienced deep, familial, fellowship in the early church and how we do today. Oikos means household. SUNoikos is when we "household together" in our favorite places like coffeeshops and bars. Often, it is more meaningful to invite a person to my favorite coffeeshop than it is to invite them into my home.
as one at whom you are clearly pointing the finger, I'd love for you to show me places where anyone is claiming dominance or intellectual superiority.
Thanks.
tony jones
Thanks.
tony jones
Peter--I remember the Bakulization of your father.
Mark--thanks, I'll modify the definition today.
Tony--notice the first definition of Emergentsia is fairly benign and can be taken as a compliment if thought of in a certain way. Feel free to put yourself in that category.
Mark--thanks, I'll modify the definition today.
Tony--notice the first definition of Emergentsia is fairly benign and can be taken as a compliment if thought of in a certain way. Feel free to put yourself in that category.
Chris, I'd have to twist pretty hard to feel good about being called "elite" in a movement that is pretty clearly anti-hierarchical and anti-clerical.
But I'll take your word for it.
But I'll take your word for it.
spoken like a true member of the Emergentsia.
Chris,
Two things:
1) What sort of evidence is there that the emergentsia exists? I'm not asking because I disagree with you.
2) What are some "marks" of the emergentsia. How does one, such as myself, know if I am among their number?
Two things:
1) What sort of evidence is there that the emergentsia exists? I'm not asking because I disagree with you.
2) What are some "marks" of the emergentsia. How does one, such as myself, know if I am among their number?
here's what I would say about the Emergentsia. There are a relatively small number of people leading the movement, which itself is still small. But the effect the leaders have in their mostly small communities is quite high, and the effect the movement has in shaping popular culture's view of the American church is also magnified. In other words, the tail is wagging the dog when it comes to the emerging movement (tail) and the Church (dog). I can't tell you how many articles I've seen on the emerging movement that have consulted someone as an expert on it who probably only leads a few dozen people. That's not a bad thing at all, it just is what it is.
The Emergentsia, just like intelligentsia, are just an elite group of people who hold sway over society because of their knowledge. They are elite because they have knowledge that allows them proportionately higher amounts of influence than should be commensurate. The ability to dominate the intellectual arena in this country on any level is quite powerful, and though emergents cringe at the idea of having dominion or power over someone, they ought to acknowledge the power they do have over Christian American politics. I'm not going to give you criteria to see whether you fall into a category or not, I think it's up to you what you think.
The Emergentsia, just like intelligentsia, are just an elite group of people who hold sway over society because of their knowledge. They are elite because they have knowledge that allows them proportionately higher amounts of influence than should be commensurate. The ability to dominate the intellectual arena in this country on any level is quite powerful, and though emergents cringe at the idea of having dominion or power over someone, they ought to acknowledge the power they do have over Christian American politics. I'm not going to give you criteria to see whether you fall into a category or not, I think it's up to you what you think.
Well articulated. I think one of the things that many within the emerging movement is the idea that is has an elite. In many folks' minds, there is no elite, since they don't formally recognize an elite. Whether or not folks are trying to form an elite is basically irrelevant. Those that read the paper or read emergentish books will generally see the same handful of folks shaping the debate. These are the emergentsia--the ones who shape the intellectual debate. They are the ones who narrate the movement.
Given this sort of definition of emergentsia--I am not among their number.
Given this sort of definition of emergentsia--I am not among their number.
This will be hard to communicate in a comment (without verbal and facial cues), but the so-called "elite" may be in a position of influence because they've (we've) been working our asses off at this thing for ten years. Maybe we've just been at it longer, so we've got more experience, read more books, done more media interviews, etc.
But (and I can't say this strongly enough), any of us who might fall in this category desperately want the leadership of the movement to be diffuse and egalitarian. We're constantly trying to move many others into a position of leadership.
But (and I can't say this strongly enough), any of us who might fall in this category desperately want the leadership of the movement to be diffuse and egalitarian. We're constantly trying to move many others into a position of leadership.
Tony,
I think you're right. I think you're reading more finger-pointing into Chris' post than he intended. Chris doesn't really identify himself with the emerging church all that much and so his thoughts are more along the line of "witty observation" than "frustrated response."
The only real frustration I have with a "so-called" emergentsia isn't that it exists--it is that folks try to act as though it doesn't. It isn't good when a group of leaders don't realize the extent of their influence.
You may not see yourself as "emergentsia" but many inside and outside the movement really only look to a handful of people to tell them what the movement is. You may not like that phenomenon. I may not like the phenomenon. But it is real. If we don't like it, we need to name it and respond.
It is good to try to bring others into leadership. That is wise and neccesary. But I think leaders can do more to help decentralize the movement. The movement has been commodified and branded. I think we need to think of ways of "debranding" the movement in order to unfetter it. And the movement, from my perspective, is fettered. I don't think it was intentional; it is just the way our consumer culture works. We need to resist the consumer impulse.
I think you're right. I think you're reading more finger-pointing into Chris' post than he intended. Chris doesn't really identify himself with the emerging church all that much and so his thoughts are more along the line of "witty observation" than "frustrated response."
The only real frustration I have with a "so-called" emergentsia isn't that it exists--it is that folks try to act as though it doesn't. It isn't good when a group of leaders don't realize the extent of their influence.
You may not see yourself as "emergentsia" but many inside and outside the movement really only look to a handful of people to tell them what the movement is. You may not like that phenomenon. I may not like the phenomenon. But it is real. If we don't like it, we need to name it and respond.
It is good to try to bring others into leadership. That is wise and neccesary. But I think leaders can do more to help decentralize the movement. The movement has been commodified and branded. I think we need to think of ways of "debranding" the movement in order to unfetter it. And the movement, from my perspective, is fettered. I don't think it was intentional; it is just the way our consumer culture works. We need to resist the consumer impulse.
That was all well put, Van S, very good thoughts. And yes, I think you are right, I wasn't pointing fingers and trying to accuse people. I don't identify myself formally as an emerging movement member, but I wish the movement all the best. I think maybe, Tony, you might be caught up on the word "elite." I don't consider that word to necessarily have a bad connotation, and you seem to think it is indicting. Elite people in any society have sometimes gotten to that position because of a power structure that gives them undue power. But lots of elite groups in many societies are elite because they are the best and brightest. If you consider yourself in the "working hard" elite category, then I'm willing to accept that. But I find it hard to believe that there isn't an elite.
Whatever "emergentsia" is, I want to be a part!
I wonder if "elite" isn't quite the right word though. "Elite" denotes a certain sort of social-economic preferred status and I don't know if we can truly say that about anyone in Emergent. Yes, there are certainly those who have more influence and are the fathers and mothers of the movement, but so what? Every movement needs spokespeople.
On another note, my wife has coined the word "delimmanate" - to ponder as if having a delimma. It has become a common word in our household.
I wonder if "elite" isn't quite the right word though. "Elite" denotes a certain sort of social-economic preferred status and I don't know if we can truly say that about anyone in Emergent. Yes, there are certainly those who have more influence and are the fathers and mothers of the movement, but so what? Every movement needs spokespeople.
On another note, my wife has coined the word "delimmanate" - to ponder as if having a delimma. It has become a common word in our household.
Jeff,
Though elite does imply a social phenomenon, it need not imply any economic status. Elite is absolutely the correct word. There is a group of people in the emerging movement that enjoy superior intellectual status over others, it's that simple. It's part of the ethos of the sub-culture to shun positions of power or authority, but the prestige and latent influence of the Emergentsia is simply undeniable. Again, it doesn't have to be a bad thing if you don't want it to be.
Though elite does imply a social phenomenon, it need not imply any economic status. Elite is absolutely the correct word. There is a group of people in the emerging movement that enjoy superior intellectual status over others, it's that simple. It's part of the ethos of the sub-culture to shun positions of power or authority, but the prestige and latent influence of the Emergentsia is simply undeniable. Again, it doesn't have to be a bad thing if you don't want it to be.
Interesting discussion - I appreciate the candor and back and forth.
One thing in my travels around the country I continually get asked is, what is an emerging church, and what is emergent?
I do my best (as I understand it) to explain that it is a both/and kind of deal. I understand the church to be always emerging and never 'there yet.'
I understand emergent as a movement that is trying to articulate some vision for the emerging church from a variety of viewpoints.
As far as the term "emergentsia" that did make me chuckle a bit. Whether it exists or not... that is a good question. I don't have the answer.
JVD
One thing in my travels around the country I continually get asked is, what is an emerging church, and what is emergent?
I do my best (as I understand it) to explain that it is a both/and kind of deal. I understand the church to be always emerging and never 'there yet.'
I understand emergent as a movement that is trying to articulate some vision for the emerging church from a variety of viewpoints.
As far as the term "emergentsia" that did make me chuckle a bit. Whether it exists or not... that is a good question. I don't have the answer.
JVD
Good thoughts Broseph, thanks.
When Jesus arrived here in the first century He aroused great anxiety from the religious elite of His day. In fact He inspired complete hatred from both the religious liberals and conservatives of His day, they even conspired to execute Him!
