I think my fundamental frustration with these types of thinkers and their books is not that they are challenging or questioning, but that they don't really provide any answers. Or, at least, not any answers that won't need reshaping/rethinking in another 20 years. As Lewis once wrote, "To go with the times is of course to go where all times go." (These dudes should read more Lewis.)
And so when you start with a tenuous theology, the sovereignty of self, and the primacy of cultural relevance, you obviously get the attention of a lot of a young, spoiled, rebellious kids frustrated with Boomer-centric megachurchianity.
I'm not saying everyone who reads and appreciates Miller, Burke, Bell, et.al. is young, spoiled, or rebellious. But I am saying reading them doesn't help.
If these sorts of writers really resonate with you, help is available. :-) Get ahold of some Eugene Peterson, stat
This week, the iMonk appears to echo burnout with the literary indulgence of the emergent provocateurs:
I get a lot of books sent to me and offered to me for review. I take very few. Lately, the EC books that are actually the same book in different covers have just overwhelmed me. The Traditional Church is bad x10 or 20 or ? Ok. Ok. Ok. I get the point. They all want to take off your tie and make a speech about the failure of western Christianity and especially their church and so on. I’ve contributed mightily to that whining sound. But somewhere between Why Everything Must Change and Why Everyone With Cool Glasses Needs To Be In My Backyard Pool Baptism Service, I’ve gotten somewhat sick of the sound of it.
Only tangentially related:
This is a completely shallow pot-shot sort of criticism, but there are two Boomer preachers in my area whose blogs I read, both of whom think wearing distressed denim, sporting black-framed glasses, and constantly talking about Starbucks qualifies them as hip emerging church leaders. Gentlemen, you are the pastoral equivalent of the 50 year old "cougar" in Juicy track pants. Gentlemen, grow up.