Tag Archive - story fields

The Power of Story

It must be quote day. This one from an author who seems to speak for me almost as often as not:

“As human beings, we cannot check the power of a story to determine the lives of those who participate in a particular, defining narrative. What we can do, however, is return repeatedly to our story. We can rehearse it in the words spoken in our communities. We can illustrate it in the giving of the bread which is Christ’s self-given body and the wine which is his self-given blood. We can symbolize it in the cross. And we can beckon one another into it by creating communities defined by self-giving acts of love.” – J. R. Daniel Kirk, Jesus Have I Loved, But Paul…? (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, forthcoming [2011, Lord willin' and the creek don't rise])

Story Fields and the Death of Emergent

Ever since Andrew Jones (a.k.a. Tall Skinny Kiwi) prophesied that 2010 would be the year in which the Emergent Church was declared dead, the internets have been swirling with hearty “Amen”s, “Thanks be to God”s, “What on earth are you talking about?!”s, and “God, I hope not”s.

It seems to me that one of the most sane lines of response has been given by the likes of Danielle Shroyer, and others, who have argued that Emergent isn’t dying, but taking on a new, positive posture in which it’s redefining itself in some manner other than reaction against the status quo.

I recently stumbled upon a website that talks about “Story Fields“: stories that frame our experience and shape our decisions. Much of what these folks are doing for non-Christian policy making is what I’m advocating for in theology: the telling of compelling alternative narratives that create new ways of perceiving the world and our actions within it.

At this site, Tom Atlee talks about how alternative stories get generated and then mature. Talking through the process of change, he charts sources of power and what it takes to give a new story staying power:

  1. “I believe that every emerging culture or movement for social transformation gains its power, above all, through a compelling story field of its own. However, as mentioned above, insofar as the alternative story field is created against the dominant story field, it tends to lend power to the field it is resisting.”
  2. “I believe that compelling, viable alternatives must grow naturally from an inner logic of their own. They can’t be sustained by oppositional energy alone… If… they arise from a truly positive vision, they stand in contrast to but not primarily in opposition to the status quo. Thus they do little to empower that status quo, while at the same time inviting those who are ready for change, into the new story field.”
  3. “The question that remains for any movement is how to translate its positive visions into positive story fields capable of shaping a new culture.”

It seems to me that one likely scenario for Emergent/Emerging/Emergence is that it is reconfiguring its story from opposition to developing its own inner logic.  I don’t necessarily expect Emergent to be around forever. But I do anticipate that the story of reaction will develop, in some quarters, into a positively articulated vision of the kingdom of God. Because of its less antagonistic and oppositional character and its genuine newness, as a story framing the lives of various communities, many will no longer recognize this as Emergent, and maybe that’s for the best.

Even if it’s wrong.