:: In.a.Mirror.Dimly ::

My review disclaimer: I received this book as part of a blog review program. And by the way, I’m doing very, very few book reviews in the future after I wrap up the five or six books I have lined up for the next few months since I’m focusing on doing more series based on books of the Bible. I’m just saying.

I’m on a book review roll of late, so why not keep up the magic with the award-winning book by Jim Belcher, Deep Church: A Third Way Beyond Emerging and Traditional. Look, I’m going to level with you right from the start: most of us know that this book won two awards, Scot McKnight gave it the thumbs up, and Tim Keller endorsed it on the front cover. The bottom line is that this book is a winner. No one can take that away from this book, and I certainly won’t.

However, a great book such as Deep Church can be read for the wrong reasons and applied in the wrong ways, and that’s where I’d like to start my review. Don’t worry, I’ll end with the gushing you probably expected.

What Makes This Book Great

I get a little uneasy when people start talking about a book becoming a blueprint for church, theology, or whatever, and I think that’s something that could happen with Deep Church. It’s all to easy to look for books that tell us how to do things or what to believe, but if we read Belcher as a guide to “how we should do church, theology, or evangelism,” we miss the real value of this book.

I’m sure some folks may pick up Deep Church because they believe Belcher has cracked some kind of code with his third way between emerging and traditional churches. However, if you read it looking for the third way so you can do the exact same thing, then I think you’ve missed the real jewel hidden in this book.

We shouldn’t read this book in order to imitate Belcher or Tim Keller. We should read this book to learn HOW Belcher figured out the third way. In fact, I often lost interest in the sections where he described his own church. I was most impressed by the way he sought out personal conversations, read one of Brian McLaren’s books THREE TIMES, and sought out the best representative thinkers for each camp in his quest to understand them.

We finally have someone presenting a critique of emerging/missional theology with a functional understanding of Leslie Newbigin. That is huge.

Where I Take Issue

As far as disagreements go, I’d probably say the most important issue had to do with the deep ecclesiology chapter, as Belcher shares how the growth of his church resulted in a terrible power struggle with some founding members. Though Belcher once again did a fantastic job in presenting the house church movement in this chapter, he failed to step back and look at how a multiplying group of house churches could have averted such a situation as his power struggle, even if he planted house churches within the PCA—though I’m not sure that would fly with the PCA.

I confess that I’m also betraying my own preference for home meetings. I understand that house churches may not be his thing, but his example struck me as prime fodder for the next house church conference as an example as why a network of small house churches have some strong advantages over larger churches.

Throughout the book I also had a sense that mission was often mentioned but rarely discussed at length. While it does tie into many of the chapters here and there, such as how we do evangelism or what we think about Christianity and culture, I wonder if there should have been a chapter on the concept of mission.

There is so much more to the emerging/missional practice that revolves around this concept of mission—where you meet, how you spend your tithe, how you interact with and serve among the poor, how the Spirit of God leads, and how the Kingdom of God advances. I caught some glimpses of what Belcher believed about mission, but I came away wondering how robust his sense of mission is. I think it may be very robust, but I felt like that was lost in talking about how to do worship, theology, and evangelism. I’m guessing he hoped to integrate it into each chapter, but that didn’t work for me.

Why I Loved This Book

Despite some of my reservations at a few points, overall, Belcher has given pastors and church planters an excellent book that asks a lot of really good questions, shows how Christians can work toward a common understanding, and even reach middle ground. I don’t believe that this book will necessarily create doctrinal unity. Rather, this book has tremendous potential to create greater respect and understanding among groups of believers who really shouldn’t be so suspicious of one another in the first place. The third way of Belcher is a great tool, but I think we have even more to learn from his methodology.

Throughout the book I had a sense that Belcher had a solid command of his material, presented it with clarity, and never took on more than he could handle. Without reviewing an unseemly number of books, he effectively picked out the best representative works for all parties involved, displayed a clear grasp of their material, and then interacted with the material in a manner that showed genuine concern to accurately represent all perspectives involved.

I usually skip past explanations of the emerging church, and I weary of the debate over postmodernism, but Belcher infused both of these topics with a sense of relevance and a greater degree of clarity than I would have thought possible. This is a book that says so much in a fairly small amount of space—no doubt a tribute to his effective research, careful study, and polished prose.

Read sample chapters and more at the IVP web site.