A reasonably brief primer on Postmodernity
Some people have written me and let me know that they were lurking on my blog and wanted some more information on Postmodernity. The following is the first chapter from my last paper. I think it is a reasonably brief primer on postmodernity.
Gender roles have shifted. Women, once expected to remain in the home, have become an active part of the work force. As Tomlinson puts it, “Marriage is now seen much more as a partnership with decisions being shared…. [We] assume sexual equality and take for granted the right of a woman to follow a career.1” In contrast to 1955, women are expected to have similar opportunities for career choice, advancement and pay as their male counterparts. Household roles have changed as well. Men are more often expected to take a larger role in raising their children. Traditional divisions of household chores are more likely to be negotiable.
Divorce has become a more acceptable behavior. People once inhibited by shame see it as a suitable alternative to an unhappy marriage. Family structures have changed. Single parent homes are more common. Grandparents are more likely to raise their grandchildren. Expectations and the reality of the family unit have changed. Family has changed from uniformly nuclear units to multiple and varied constellations.
Since the Vietnam war protests, trust in authority has diminished in its various manifestations. The impact of the slogan “Question Authority” was not limited to the government. Trust has diminished in regards to many forms of authority from teachers in schools to police officers on the streets and pastors in the churches.
We are more globally connected and interdependent. “Globalization and expanded immigration have brought increased ethnic and cultural diversity to both the United States and to Canada.”2 Advances in information technology from the satellite to the computer to the internet have created a much smaller world. In the last fifty years, news agencies have gained the ability to instantaneously bring a picture and a voice to stories from around the globe. We have also become more economically interdependent. We are dependent on a manufacturer in Korea, an international shipping industry and a global telecommunications network to supply the auto part at our corner auto store. American car companies build cars with parts made all over the world ordered shortly before they are needed, shipped and supplied to workers just before they are used. We are economically interdependent with people from various nations, cultures and languages.
The internet has revolutionized communication. We see the initial manifestations of this revolution. Personal and business communication has grown in speed, volume and shape. The internet has fostered a democratization of knowledge. A mother can now research at great length her child’s new illness. Her doctor is no longer her sole source of or authority for her information. In addition, it is changing the way we relate to one another. Dating sites, eBay auctions and blogs illustrate the internet bringing people together across previously inhibiting physical boundaries.
In addition, America has become a more pluralistic culture. Madonna says, “I go to synagogue, I study Hinduism… all paths lead to God,” 3 and actress Halle Barry states, “I believe in God. I just don’t know if that God is Jehovah, Buddha or Allah.” 4 Where there was one dominant religious choice, there are now many.
The United States is the most religiously diverse nation in the world…. The Immigration Act of 1965 eliminated the quotas linking immigration to national origins. Since the Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, Jams, Zoroastrians, and new varieties of Jews and Catholics have arrived from every part of the globe, radically altering the religious landscape of the United States5.
The Christian faith has shifted from a normative source of spirituality to one among many acceptable sources of spirituality. A comparison of Bing Crosby – a beloved respected pastor – in The Bells of St. Mary in 1945 to Reverend Lovejoy – a meandering meaningless pastor – in The Simpsons of 2005 paints a picture of this change. As Eddie Gibbs writes in Church Next, “[T]he Church finds itself pushed out to the wings of the social stage.”6 Once perceived to be at the center of society and culture both in prominence and significance, the Church has moved to the sidelines.
Before we go further, it would be valuable to note the distinction between postmodernity and postmodernism. The first is the time or condition in which we find ourselves. The second is a title for the various schools and movements that it has produced. 10 Postmodernism describes schools of philosophy, architecture and art that while connected to postmodernity are not synonymous with it. Postmodernity is the culture that has produced these schools. It can not be defined by nor contained within these manifestations. One might be tempted to look for the root causes and founding principles of postmodernity in postmodern philosophers such as Derida, Foucault and Rorty. This would lead one astray, for while they are a product of postmodernity and have had an impact, particularly in the academic realm, their influence in the larger society is more limited. Their reaction to and deconstruction of modernity is significantly more extreme than that found in larger postmodernity. Though they are a manifestation of postmodernity, and have contributed to it, they do not define the underlying rationale for it.
Postmodernity is diverse, and some say centerless. Yet it is unified by its rejection of the assumptions of the enlightenment project which underpinned the modern era. If we wish to describe postmodernity, we must examine the assumptions it reacts against.
As Grenz describes, Francis Bacon set the stage for the Enlightenment with his vision of human kind mastering nature by discovering her secrets. Rene Descartes laid the philosophical foundation with his focus on doubt and his affirmation of Augustine’s dictum, “cogito ergo sum.” He thereby defined human nature as a thinking substance, and the person as an autonomous rational subject. Isaac Newton provided a scientific framework, picturing the world as a machine regulated by laws that could be discovered and understood by the human mind. 11
Within this framework a number of assumptions were made. It was assumed that knowledge is certain, objective, good, and accessible to human beings. All of reality was subject to the scrutiny of reason. Emotion and intuition were set aside as pathways to truth. It was assumed that it was possible and desirable to be an objective observer thereby gaining access to this universal knowledge. The ideal observer evolved into a neutral specialist in a narrow field of study. Because knowledge was understood to be inherently good, progress was inevitable. It was assumed that every challenge would be solved through scientific discovery, and that this discovery, combined with education, would solve all social ills as well. With the elevation of reason and human freedom, all beliefs that limited this freedom or seemed to come from external authority were suspect.12 According to Anderson and Harvey,
Metanarratives have fallen from favor. As Tomlinson describes,
People of the pre-modern world did not have to encounter pluralism in their daily lives. People of the modern era had the hope of universality guaranteed them by the inevitable progress of dispassionate rationality, but instead they encountered pluralism. People of the postmodern era have put universality itself into question. As Anderson explains, “Postmodernity, then, is the age of over-exposure to otherness.”16 Western culture has witnessed the narratives of Marxism, Capitalism, Freudianism, Christianity, Islam and a great number of others competing to become the dominant narrative. Through international travel, increased immigration, and expanded communication and interaction, Western society has experienced the competing narratives of multiple cultures. It has become difficult to stand within any one paradigm and claim the exclusive authority to interpret reality. Anderson states, “We are living in a new world, a world that does not know how to define itself by what it is, but only by what it has just-now ceased to be.”17
Second and more radically, relativity extends beyond one’s perceptions of the truth to the essence of truth. Truth itself is relative to one’s community. This is perhaps the most unpalatable facet of postmodernity for the Church. At the least, postmodernity affirms the possibility that there are multiple contradictory truths. At the most, it fully rejects the possibility that there is absolute truth or anything that is true for every time and community. As Tomlinson describes it, “It is perfectly valid for you to have your story, your version of truth, just so long as you do not try to force it on anyone else. The unforgivable sin is to behave as though you have cornered the market on truth.”23
The postmodern world is a world which understands itself through biological rather than mechanistic models; a world where people see themselves as belonging to the environment rather than over it or apart from it. A world distrustful of institutions, hierarchies, centralized bureaucracies and male dominated organizations.26
Postmodernity expects the world to be chaotic, interconnected and incomprehensibly complex. In contrast to the rationally structured, hierarchical institution, it seeks structures that are formed organically.
1Dave Tomlinson, The Post-Evangelical (London: Triangle, 1995), 37.
2Darrell L. Guder and Lois Barrett, Missional Church: A Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America, The Gospel and Our Culture Series (Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans Pub., 1998), 45.
3Dan Kimball, The Emerging Church: Vintage Christianity for New Generations (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 2003), 67.
4Ibid., 72.
5Diana L. Eck, A New Religious America: How a "Christian Country" Has Now Become the World's Most Religiously Diverse Nation, 1st ed. ([San Francisco]: HarperSanFrancisco, 2001).
6Eddie Gibbs, Churchnext: Quantum Changes in How We Do Ministry (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 26.
7Walt Anderson, The Truth About the Truth: De-Confusing and Re-Constructing the Postmodern World, A New Consciousness Reader (New York: Putnam, 1995), 2.
8Stanley J. Grenz, A Primer on Postmodernism (Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1996), 2.
9Anderson, The Truth About the Truth: De-Confusing and Re-Constructing the Postmodern World, 4.
10Ibid., 6.
11Grenz, A Primer on Postmodernism, 3.
12Ibid., 4.
13Anderson, The Truth About the Truth: De-Confusing and Re-Constructing the Postmodern World, 4.
14Tomlinson, The Post-Evangelical, 77.>
15Jean Franðcois Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, Theory and History of Literature; V. 10 (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1984), xxiv.
16Anderson, The Truth About the Truth: De-Confusing and Re-Constructing the Postmodern World, 6.
17Ibid.
18Grenz, A Primer on Postmodernism, 8.
19Tomlinson, The Post-Evangelical, 78.
20Grenz, A Primer on Postmodernism, 14.
21Ibid., 7.
22Ibid., 8.
23Tomlinson, The Post-Evangelical, 78.
24 Leonard Sweet, Lecture Before Grace Presbytery at Austin College. Sherman Texas. November 18, 2003
25 Ibid.
26Kimball, The Emerging Church: Vintage Christianity for New Generations, 54.
1. An Emerging Culture
With a little reflection, a casual observer can deduce that American society has changed dramatically in the last fifty years. Values, taboos and mores have shifted substantially. Clothing, entertainment and profanity that would have been shameful in 1955 are now acceptable. Since the onset of the birth control pill which contributed to the sexual revolution, sexual activity outside of marriage has grown in practice and acceptance.Gender roles have shifted. Women, once expected to remain in the home, have become an active part of the work force. As Tomlinson puts it, “Marriage is now seen much more as a partnership with decisions being shared…. [We] assume sexual equality and take for granted the right of a woman to follow a career.1” In contrast to 1955, women are expected to have similar opportunities for career choice, advancement and pay as their male counterparts. Household roles have changed as well. Men are more often expected to take a larger role in raising their children. Traditional divisions of household chores are more likely to be negotiable.
Divorce has become a more acceptable behavior. People once inhibited by shame see it as a suitable alternative to an unhappy marriage. Family structures have changed. Single parent homes are more common. Grandparents are more likely to raise their grandchildren. Expectations and the reality of the family unit have changed. Family has changed from uniformly nuclear units to multiple and varied constellations.
Since the Vietnam war protests, trust in authority has diminished in its various manifestations. The impact of the slogan “Question Authority” was not limited to the government. Trust has diminished in regards to many forms of authority from teachers in schools to police officers on the streets and pastors in the churches.
We are more globally connected and interdependent. “Globalization and expanded immigration have brought increased ethnic and cultural diversity to both the United States and to Canada.”2 Advances in information technology from the satellite to the computer to the internet have created a much smaller world. In the last fifty years, news agencies have gained the ability to instantaneously bring a picture and a voice to stories from around the globe. We have also become more economically interdependent. We are dependent on a manufacturer in Korea, an international shipping industry and a global telecommunications network to supply the auto part at our corner auto store. American car companies build cars with parts made all over the world ordered shortly before they are needed, shipped and supplied to workers just before they are used. We are economically interdependent with people from various nations, cultures and languages.
The internet has revolutionized communication. We see the initial manifestations of this revolution. Personal and business communication has grown in speed, volume and shape. The internet has fostered a democratization of knowledge. A mother can now research at great length her child’s new illness. Her doctor is no longer her sole source of or authority for her information. In addition, it is changing the way we relate to one another. Dating sites, eBay auctions and blogs illustrate the internet bringing people together across previously inhibiting physical boundaries.
In addition, America has become a more pluralistic culture. Madonna says, “I go to synagogue, I study Hinduism… all paths lead to God,” 3 and actress Halle Barry states, “I believe in God. I just don’t know if that God is Jehovah, Buddha or Allah.” 4 Where there was one dominant religious choice, there are now many.
The United States is the most religiously diverse nation in the world…. The Immigration Act of 1965 eliminated the quotas linking immigration to national origins. Since the Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, Jams, Zoroastrians, and new varieties of Jews and Catholics have arrived from every part of the globe, radically altering the religious landscape of the United States5.
The Christian faith has shifted from a normative source of spirituality to one among many acceptable sources of spirituality. A comparison of Bing Crosby – a beloved respected pastor – in The Bells of St. Mary in 1945 to Reverend Lovejoy – a meandering meaningless pastor – in The Simpsons of 2005 paints a picture of this change. As Eddie Gibbs writes in Church Next, “[T]he Church finds itself pushed out to the wings of the social stage.”6 Once perceived to be at the center of society and culture both in prominence and significance, the Church has moved to the sidelines.
A Paradigm Shift
There is an even greater transformation underlying these particular changes. Walter Anderson writes in The Truth about the Truth that a much larger change, even a paradigm shift lies beneath these changes7. According to Stanly Grenz,Many social observers agree that the Western world is in the midst of change. In fact, we are apparently experiencing a cultural shift that rivals the innovations that marked the birth of modernity out of the decay of the Middle Ages: We are in the midst of a transition from the modern to the postmodern era 1. 8 1See, e.g., Diogenes Alln, Christian Belief in a Postmondern World: The Full Wealth of Conviction (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1989), p2The postmodern era is emerging, but it is nebulous and ill-defined. In fact, it is easier to identify what it is reacting against than to encapsulate it in a set of principles. Harvey and Anderson describe it as the situation in which the world finds itself after the breakdown of the enlightenment project, which underpinned the modern era9.
Before we go further, it would be valuable to note the distinction between postmodernity and postmodernism. The first is the time or condition in which we find ourselves. The second is a title for the various schools and movements that it has produced. 10 Postmodernism describes schools of philosophy, architecture and art that while connected to postmodernity are not synonymous with it. Postmodernity is the culture that has produced these schools. It can not be defined by nor contained within these manifestations. One might be tempted to look for the root causes and founding principles of postmodernity in postmodern philosophers such as Derida, Foucault and Rorty. This would lead one astray, for while they are a product of postmodernity and have had an impact, particularly in the academic realm, their influence in the larger society is more limited. Their reaction to and deconstruction of modernity is significantly more extreme than that found in larger postmodernity. Though they are a manifestation of postmodernity, and have contributed to it, they do not define the underlying rationale for it.
Modernity
Postmodernity is diverse, and some say centerless. Yet it is unified by its rejection of the assumptions of the enlightenment project which underpinned the modern era. If we wish to describe postmodernity, we must examine the assumptions it reacts against.
As Grenz describes, Francis Bacon set the stage for the Enlightenment with his vision of human kind mastering nature by discovering her secrets. Rene Descartes laid the philosophical foundation with his focus on doubt and his affirmation of Augustine’s dictum, “cogito ergo sum.” He thereby defined human nature as a thinking substance, and the person as an autonomous rational subject. Isaac Newton provided a scientific framework, picturing the world as a machine regulated by laws that could be discovered and understood by the human mind. 11
Within this framework a number of assumptions were made. It was assumed that knowledge is certain, objective, good, and accessible to human beings. All of reality was subject to the scrutiny of reason. Emotion and intuition were set aside as pathways to truth. It was assumed that it was possible and desirable to be an objective observer thereby gaining access to this universal knowledge. The ideal observer evolved into a neutral specialist in a narrow field of study. Because knowledge was understood to be inherently good, progress was inevitable. It was assumed that every challenge would be solved through scientific discovery, and that this discovery, combined with education, would solve all social ills as well. With the elevation of reason and human freedom, all beliefs that limited this freedom or seemed to come from external authority were suspect.12 According to Anderson and Harvey,
[The thinkers of the enlightenment project] took it as axiomatic that there was only one possible answer to any question. From this it followed that the world could be controlled and rationally ordered if we could only picture and present it rightly. But this presumed that there existed a single correct mode of representation which, if we could uncover it (and this is what scientific and mathematical endeavors were all about), would provide the means to Enlightenments ends.13
Transition to Postmodernity
Lyotard, a French philosopher commissioned by the Council of Universities of Quebec in the late 1970s wrote in The Postmodern Condition that all modern systems of knowledge, including science, were dependent upon metanarratives, or grand discourses about the main direction of history. Metanarratives are stories of mythic proportions. They are large enough to unify and direct art, science, philosophy and politics. Lyotard cites examples of the Christian story of God’s will being worked out in history, Marxism’s clash of the social classes, and the Enlightenment’s story of rational progress. He describes postmodernism as a time of incredulity toward metanarratives.Metanarratives have fallen from favor. As Tomlinson describes,
There is a consensus that this disillusionment with the great ‘epics’ of modernity can be traced back as far as World War I, which, with its unspeakable horrors, shattered the dream that scientific man could grasp his own destiny and create a utopia. Add to this the Holocaust and the bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and all the terrors which have followed and it is quite clear that the big epics have run out of credible storylines. 5 14Metanarratives also fell from favor in part because we were exposed to so many of them. When people lived in relatively isolated communities, they experienced and operated within a single metanarative. As exposure to multiple cultures, traditions and beliefs grew we became more and more uncomfortable with the claim of any one metanarative to authoritatively and exclusively describe reality. Lyotard said there are lots of centers, and none of them holds up. We encounter diverse and contradictory fragments of stories and the arts and the sciences go their various ways15.
5 Zygmunt Bauman, Postmodern Ethics (Oxford: Blackwell, 1993), p32
People of the pre-modern world did not have to encounter pluralism in their daily lives. People of the modern era had the hope of universality guaranteed them by the inevitable progress of dispassionate rationality, but instead they encountered pluralism. People of the postmodern era have put universality itself into question. As Anderson explains, “Postmodernity, then, is the age of over-exposure to otherness.”16 Western culture has witnessed the narratives of Marxism, Capitalism, Freudianism, Christianity, Islam and a great number of others competing to become the dominant narrative. Through international travel, increased immigration, and expanded communication and interaction, Western society has experienced the competing narratives of multiple cultures. It has become difficult to stand within any one paradigm and claim the exclusive authority to interpret reality. Anderson states, “We are living in a new world, a world that does not know how to define itself by what it is, but only by what it has just-now ceased to be.”17
Postmodern Assumptions
Rejection of Objectivity
Modernity assumed that knowledge was objectively accessible by dispassionate rational observation. In contrast, postmodernity rejects the notion that any individual is capable of such objectivity.18 Rather, it assumes that all are conditioned and therefore limited by their culture. The paradigms in which we operate are blinders. They direct us to particular questions and affect our discovery by the limitations of their assumptions. Further, we are not able to discern our bias, for we are not able to look from outside of ourselves. In contrast to modernity’s faith in access to certain knowledge, postmodernity assumes that all discovery of knowledge is affected, limited and directed by time, place and culture. Even if truth is certain, we can not be certain of our access to it. As Tomlinson describes, “People are suspicious of certainty and distrust claims of objectivity.”19 This compels us to humility regarding truth claims. It obliges an admission that we are limited in our understanding by the unconscious paradigms in which we operate. It obliges us to openness toward new paradigms, for even if they are contradictory with our own and with each other, they avail us of windows to discovery that were not available through a single paradigm.Holism
Modernity exalted rationality as the pathway to the discovery of truth to the exclusion of emotion and intuition. In contrast, postmodernity embraces a holism which integrates all dimensions of personal life, including our affective, intuitive and cognitive selves. Where the modern person sought to be a rational autonomous individual, the postmodern person seeks to be a “whole” person. This holism acknowledges a broader connection to that which lies beyond our selves, including nature and community. 20 Postmodern epistemology not only rejects the dispassionate rational observer as a possible discerner of truth, but considers it an inappropriately limiting means to discovering truth. The postmodern truth seeker embraces the value of aesthetics and beauty, of emotion and spiritual encounter, and of dialogue and relationship.Pessimism Regarding Discovery
Where modernity assumed all knowledge was good, postmodernity assumes knowledge is neutral at best. Discovery and the application of technological advances are not wholly positive. With the invention of the steam shovel humanity discovered the ability to make spectacular changes to the world, both constructively providing for human need and destructively altering the earth beyond repair. The discovery of atomic energy led to both the constructive source for energy and the destructive effects of nuclear contamination and a weapon that threatens to undo humanity. As Grenz describes, “Postmoderns have not sustained the optimism that characterized previous generations. To the contrary, they evidence a gnawing pessimism. ”21 Where modernity trusted in the inevitability of progress, postmodernity is weary of the unforeseen affects of knowledge.Community vs. Universal
In contrast to modernity’s search for universal truths that transcend time and culture, postmodernity operates within a community based understanding of truth. What one believes and even the way in which one believes is assumed to be determined by one’s community. 22 Restated, truth is relative to one’s community. There are two consequences of this. First, the community is the primary locus for the discovery and discernment of truth. In modernity, the dispassionate rational observer with mastery of a very narrow field of study was perceived to be in an ideal position for the discovery of truth. In postmodernity, the holistic person connected to a community interacting, interrelating and working out that truth within her community is in a better position to discern truth. Truth or knowledge that does not work within one’s particular community is of little value. The postmodern person values “relevance” in a way the modern person did not.Second and more radically, relativity extends beyond one’s perceptions of the truth to the essence of truth. Truth itself is relative to one’s community. This is perhaps the most unpalatable facet of postmodernity for the Church. At the least, postmodernity affirms the possibility that there are multiple contradictory truths. At the most, it fully rejects the possibility that there is absolute truth or anything that is true for every time and community. As Tomlinson describes it, “It is perfectly valid for you to have your story, your version of truth, just so long as you do not try to force it on anyone else. The unforgivable sin is to behave as though you have cornered the market on truth.”23
Postmodern Values
It is still early in the process of discerning and discovering what is valued in postmodernity. As it is still a moving target, we look to forecasters to give their best understanding at the moment of the postmodern condition. Leonard Sweet, who is such a culture forecaster and prominent Christian writer on postmodernity, lectured to Grace Presbytery in 2003. He presented the four adjectives “experiential, participatory, image-rich and connective” forming the acronym EPIC. 24 While he described this list as a new epistemology, they might be better described as four significant postmodern values. Rather than a philosophy of the acquisition or the nature of knowledge these describe what postmodernity values. Let us look at each of these values as they are expressed in postmodernity.Experience
The rise of Starbucks illustrates the value of experience in postmodernity. Starbucks stores provide more than carefully made beverages; they offer a carefully crafted experience. They provide an aesthetically tailored space. Every element that makes up each store fits into a style that provides a unique, aesthetically desirable experience. Though an espresso drink cost as much as four dollars, their product is appreciated as a value significant enough to drive the demand that has spread Starbucks across the country and around the world.Participation
The value of participation is illustrated in the rise of blogging (or web logging). As a tool, the internet could be used in any number of ways, and yet people choose to use it in a participatory fashion. Rather than limiting their activity to gathering information from corporate sites, people are publishing their own opinions and interacting in communities of bloggers as they comment on one another’s blogs and link to each other. This rise of participatory blogging has become a force that threatens media figures and influences political campaigns.Image-Richness
The value of image-richness is illustrated in the advertising industry. Where persuasive words in the form of a slogan, song or argument were effectively used in the 1950s to sell products, they have been replaced today by images. Advertisers use images of celebrities and of the experiences they wish to associate with their product. Product names are becoming less prominent than logos. A Nike commercial ends with the Nike swoosh rather than the brand name. Where the printed word was valued in modernity, images, icons and symbols are becoming a prominent medium for communication in postmodernity.Connectedness
Sweet illustrates postmodernity’s value of connectedness with the rise of reality shows and online dating sites.25 This value fits with the previous descriptions of the emphasis on community and the connected individual in opposition to modernity’s value of the rational autonomous individual.An Organic Paradigm
Modernity embraced a reductionist, Newtonian, mechanical model for understanding the world. It assumed that psychology and sociology would one day be explained by biology, which would be explained by chemistry, which would be explained by physics, reducing all of reality to a set of simple universal principles. In contrast, postmodernity embraces an organic paradigm. Dan Kimball affirms Dave Tomlinson, when he writes,The postmodern world is a world which understands itself through biological rather than mechanistic models; a world where people see themselves as belonging to the environment rather than over it or apart from it. A world distrustful of institutions, hierarchies, centralized bureaucracies and male dominated organizations.26
Postmodernity expects the world to be chaotic, interconnected and incomprehensibly complex. In contrast to the rationally structured, hierarchical institution, it seeks structures that are formed organically.
An Emerging Culture
Western society has changed dramatically over the last fifty years. In the wake of the failure of the Enlightenment project and an increasing exposure to otherness, we have entered the era of postmodernity. Postmodernity is marked by new assumptions. It embraces an epistemology that values community, holism, connectedness to nature, aesthetics, emotion and intuition. Truth is assumed to be relative to one’s community in access, if not in essence. In contrast to modernity, postmodernity values aesthetic experience, participation, image-richness and connectivity. Through the lens of an organic rather than mechanical model, postmodernity understands the world to be complex, interconnected and chaotic. This is the emerging culture in which the American Church finds itself.1Dave Tomlinson, The Post-Evangelical (London: Triangle, 1995), 37.
2Darrell L. Guder and Lois Barrett, Missional Church: A Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America, The Gospel and Our Culture Series (Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans Pub., 1998), 45.
3Dan Kimball, The Emerging Church: Vintage Christianity for New Generations (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 2003), 67.
4Ibid., 72.
5Diana L. Eck, A New Religious America: How a "Christian Country" Has Now Become the World's Most Religiously Diverse Nation, 1st ed. ([San Francisco]: HarperSanFrancisco, 2001).
6Eddie Gibbs, Churchnext: Quantum Changes in How We Do Ministry (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 26.
7Walt Anderson, The Truth About the Truth: De-Confusing and Re-Constructing the Postmodern World, A New Consciousness Reader (New York: Putnam, 1995), 2.
8Stanley J. Grenz, A Primer on Postmodernism (Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1996), 2.
9Anderson, The Truth About the Truth: De-Confusing and Re-Constructing the Postmodern World, 4.
10Ibid., 6.
11Grenz, A Primer on Postmodernism, 3.
12Ibid., 4.
13Anderson, The Truth About the Truth: De-Confusing and Re-Constructing the Postmodern World, 4.
14Tomlinson, The Post-Evangelical, 77.>
15Jean Franðcois Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, Theory and History of Literature; V. 10 (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1984), xxiv.
16Anderson, The Truth About the Truth: De-Confusing and Re-Constructing the Postmodern World, 6.
17Ibid.
18Grenz, A Primer on Postmodernism, 8.
19Tomlinson, The Post-Evangelical, 78.
20Grenz, A Primer on Postmodernism, 14.
21Ibid., 7.
22Ibid., 8.
23Tomlinson, The Post-Evangelical, 78.
24 Leonard Sweet, Lecture Before Grace Presbytery at Austin College. Sherman Texas. November 18, 2003
25 Ibid.
26Kimball, The Emerging Church: Vintage Christianity for New Generations, 54.
