Yesterday I wrote that the Emergent Church seems heavily populated by Meyers Briggs intuitive types. I differentiated them this way:
“Sensing types are highly observant of the factual details around them. Intuitive types are introspective as they scan the environment for patterns of organization.”
Sensing types tend to value words like sensible, practical, realistic, and down-to-earth. Perspiration is what leads to success. Intuitive types tend to value imagination, ingenuity, the possible, and the speculative. Inspiration is what leads to success.
All of this is good until you combine these two types. The sensing types are inclined to view the intuitive types negatively. They will likely see the intuitive types as flighty, impractical, head-in-the-clouds, unrealistic, and irresponsible. Similarly, the intuitive types are inclined to view the sensing types as plodding, exasperatingly slow to see possibilities, and blind to complexity.
It isn’t just that these types tend to view their counterparts negatively. They often view their counterparts as possessing some mental or character flaw. In many organizations, a particular conflict is less about specific decisions and more about exhibited temperamental traits. I suspect the intuitive types are more sensitive to this struggle as they often find themselves outnumbered. Sensing types comprise 75% of the population, and intuitive types comprise about 25%.
Yesterday I noted that I am an INTJ (Introverted, Intuitive, Thinking, Judging). INTJs make up about 1% of the population. This means that in most of my classes of 25-30 students, K-12, there was not another INTJ in the room. As teachers are disproportionately sensing types, we intuitive types often grow up feeling that we are somehow odd. If we make it into higher education, we often are surprised to find a much higher percentage of people who are similar to us. Many intuitive people are drawn toward advanced education.
For me, there were also family and religious issues. My parents are sensing types. I was raised in a Wesleyan-Arminian Evangelical tradition that tended toward a formulaic legalistic way of relating to God and the world. I wasn’t even an adult before I knew I was a fish on dry land.
As a young adult in graduate school in the early 1980s, I wandered into an on-campus study of the Presbyterian Book of Confessions, led by a Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) minister. Through this experience, I found a community where difficult questions were welcomed. I also was involved with an ad hoc group that worked with international students and created opportunities to discuss difficult theological and cultural issues. That group eventually became known as Wellspring, near Manhattan, Kansas, and continues to exist today. It mostly involved people who were intellectually and artistically starved. (It was also in 1984, that I spent part of a summer at the Southboro, MA, L’Abri.)
In the late 1980s, I earned an M.B.A. at Eastern University in Economic Development. Most of the students were not from the U.S.A., and most were planning to work for economic development in nations around the world. I sensed that most of these students were intuitive types. It was one of the more rewarding experiences of my life. Since then, I have been involved in various organizations that directly reflect the concerns and values prevalent in the Emergent Church.
I tell my story because it was one of intellectual dryness searching for living water. The Evangelical milieu lacked the intellectual rigor to feed my rationalist-intuitive-thinker N.T. passion and gifting. I know many others have had this experience, and our congregations were not where we would want to bring fellow N.T.s. All that said, we N.T.s were not the only “dry stream.”
The other major stream I have been consciously aware of along my journey is the idealist-intuitive-feeler N.F.s. I suspect they may be the greater portion of the Emergent developments. The idealist N.F.s are disproportionately artists and ministers. As other N.T.s and I have sought an intellectual coherence to life, I think the N.F.s have sought a coherence of relationships and community. Psychologists will tell you that N.F.s are very distinct from other temperaments. The SPs, S.J.s, and N.T.s all have some sense of what it means to achieve self-actualization. But the N.F. is ever becoming and never arriving. The quest itself is the purpose of the quest. This seems to make perfect sense to N.F.s and is unintelligible to the rest of us. Whatever the case, when you find a highly empathetic person who seems able to get in touch with deep archetypical human traits, you are likely relating to an N.F. The formulaic, overly scripted, platitude-laced world that too often dominates Evangelical circles was just as confining for the N.F.s as my brother and sister N.T.s.
I believe that the Emergent Church had its birth in N.F.s and N.T.s who intuitively sensed radical culture changes and could no longer abide by the stifling confines of Evangelical institutions. My solution in the early 1980s was to move to a mainline Presbyterian milieu where my “NTness” was welcomed, even though I have found much that makes me sometimes question my decision. Others took similar paths of exodus from Evangelical structures. I see the Emergent Church as a continuation of that exodus.
From what I can tell, what we call the Emergent Church came from an organization called Young Leaders in 1996. It went on to become the Terra Nova Theological Project. Several young leaders passionate about being the Church in a postmodern age became convinced that conventional structures and organizations were not getting it done. They got together and envisioned a new way of being the Church that neither Evangelical nor mainline congregations could or would embrace. They saw both groups as hopelessly trapped in Modernist paradigms that would not do in the present age. So in one sense, the Emergent Church is post-Evangelical, but it is also consciously post-Mainline Christianity. While the movement began among Evangelicals, it has moved steadily beyond those borders in recent years.
My first exposure to the Emergent Church came when Steve Hall, a friend of mine and fellow graduate of Eastern University, told me he was part of a core group that wanted to begin a church in my neighborhood to reach postmodern young adults. I told him that the third floor of our building wasn’t being used and suggested they consider renting it. They did, and the core group of Jacob’s Well began meeting on our third floor.
Jacob’s Well grew steadily and soon began to rent the sanctuary for their expanding services. Our 100-year-old Presbyterian congregation was energized by seeing Jacob’s Well’s work and began exploring new possibilities for the future ministry in 2000-2001. Unfortunately, due to several factors, including a protracted illness by the pastor, the congregation of Roanoke Presbyterian Church decided to dissolve and sell the facilities to Jacob’s Well. Jacob’s Well now has a vibrant ministry to hundreds of (mostly) young adults. While not directly involved with Jacob’s Well, I have had a front-row seat to its formation. The presence of Jacob’s Well has kept the Emergent Church on my radar.
I greatly respect the efforts of those involved with the Emergent Church. But can the Church truly be the Church if it only consists of Idealists and Rationalists, excluding Guardians and Artisans? I find Emergent congregations deeply attractive, but I fear it may be for the same reasons I find White middle-class congregations comfortable. They are a lot like me.
More Tomorrow.
Leave a Reply