Bulwarks of Belief (B van den Berg; Repost)

By the fifteenth century, Europe had emerged from the Age of Calamity (as referenced by one of my history books), or an age of anxiety as described by Charles Taylor (p.88).

In this new era comes two major societal transformations: the Renaissance and the Reformation. On page 75, Taylor turns his attention to the impact of one particular Protestant theology, Calvanism. It emerges* during the Reformation as a continuation of St. Augustine's thoughts on God's sovereignty and our predestination, as furthered by John (Jean) Calvin.

* Could they be the Emergents of their day? But I digress ...


According to Taylor, the Reformation - and particularly Calvanism - is central to the "abolition of the cosmos" (that is, the loss of the enchanted world) and the "eventual creation of a humanist alternative to faith". The Calvanist approach to faith leaves little room for mystery. In an attempt to create a rigid system of theology (and by rigid, I mean the need to have everything figured out), there is a "lock on the mysteries" (p.78). Anyone with experience in Calvanism recognizes this trait; there is little room for mystery or wonder. Taylor states that this "offers a model for the later humanist hostility to mystery" (p78).

Taylor discusses three levels that are emphasized with the Calvanist Reform: 1) a disciplined personal life, 2) a well ordered society, and 3) a right inner attitude. The third level creates a cycle that oscillates between salvation and depravity. We are saved, but before we become too comfortable we are reminded that we are depraved, but before we become too distraught we are reminded that we are saved ... The second level results in attempts to engineer society through social reforms, and causes the pendulum to swing between spasms of Arminianism and Calvinism.

Finally, this age also sees the "succession of elites from popular culture" (p.87). The elites begin to view moments of anti-structure (that is, the times the populace lets off steam, such as Carnival) as simply depraved acts, whereas previously they would have actively participated; there had been little difference in the activities of elites (clergy, nobility) and the common folk. It is here that Taylor argues this is the forerunner of political correctness. There is also the establishment of a "less enchanted" version of the Catholic church by the elites.

And now, for my own observations:

Recognizing that Taylor doesn't normally opine, his use of phrases like "horrifying conclusions" (p.78) and "repelling people from the faith" (p.79) make it easy to infer his views on Calvanism. Without forgetting about the log in my own eye, the phrases could be applied to his own Catholic faith too. There have been many other so-called Christian institutions fraught with corruption, playgrounds for bloodshed, politics, and power (in the manner of repelling people from the faith). I agree with him more so on the Problem of Evil - which cannot be addressed by Calvanism - and the movement towards total disenchantment (abolition of mystery). Whereas one cannot base an entire system of theology on Romans 9, one cannot dismiss it either.

I am hesitant to accept that one specific Protestant theology can be given as large a responsibility for ushering in certain aspects of the modern secular age as Taylor initially suggests, but there are over 700 pages left and I hope to find more answers there.

I gave thought to our own elites in North Atlantic societies; whereas the sixteenth century saw a succession between elites and the common folk, our own society sees an entire class of elites created by popular culture. We create icons out of movie stars, athletes, musicians, and politicians (for example, the recent Obama Mania). We adore them, gossip about them, keep track of them, and then discard them when they no longer interest us (or fail us). This is almost akin to the anti-structure described by Taylor, such as fools made king for a day, or a child in Bishop's clothes. Is our society coming full circle on some of these things?

Finally, his quick statement about the birth of political correctness could have used more fleshing out (as in, some data or studies to support his argument). What can I say? zetetic skepsis ...

Please comment here.

So Sad...

This makes me want to weep. What leap of logic could support the idea that our interaction with God could possibly automated? Has God become that depersonalized? Is it possible to think that God responds to petitions that cost us nothing but a wee bit of money - oh wait, that's that the whole notion of charities is based on. Sorry, my bad. Carry on. I'll be the one weeping in the corner over here.

So Is This

Thanks Byron.

Well Worth Watching

Paper Proposals

I fired off two paper proposals this week. Well one just got back from my director and will be packaged up and emailed out in the next day or two. It is a bit of a challenge to choose something that will help with my dissertation work, but will also not be too much my dissertation. I think I have hit on it, hopefully one or both will get accepted.

The first is for the AAR Eastern Regionals, here in Ottawa! I'm proposing to write on the the Emerging church as an evangelical effort to return from a self-imposed cultural exile. Basically I'll be comparing Carl Henry's project in The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism with what is written about Emerging church forays into social justice.

The second is for CETA at Congress 2010 (Concordia, Mtl). And I want to look at the problem of imprecision in popular evangelical terminology. In this one I'll be taking a focused look at the term missional. I have written about that term here in the past, this will be a good opportunity to spend quality time with the Gospel and Our Culture Network folks (their books anyway). The title I have so far is: Is there a Missional Bridge to Evangelical Unity? I think it is catchy.

I figure I'll just try for two this year. I did two proposals last year and ended up with both being accepted. This was great, except both conferences are in the same month, the same month as the Vineyard pastoral retreat! It made for a busy month and this year Sharon is also writing an exam in that same month.

The Bulwarks of Belief (M Samson; Repost)

Picking up where Kenneth left off, chapter 1 on Charles Taylor's book "A Secular Age" continues in sections 5-6 to develop his thoughts on the shift in the "conditions of belief" which have taken place in pre-modern to modern societies using as marker dates the years 1500 to 2000.

After looking at disenchantment and the eclipse of anti-structure, Taylor examines the shift in time-consciousness between moderns and pre-moderns, and in particular the time placing of events which to pre-moderns could be and were placed in more than one kind of time. For moderns, at least Taylor cites Walter Benjamin in saying that time is "homogeneous, empty time." (pg. 54). Or in other words, our present outlook for the most part enshrines homogeneity, coupled with a view of indifference to content. For earlier pre-moderns, there were three "kinds" of time. The 'secular' or 'ordinary,' 'higher times,' which introduce the kairotic knots and 'warps' according to Taylor, and thirdly the idea of 'The Great Time.' The 'Great Time' is the time of creation, or the beginning, which is behind us, but also above us. The Middle Ages inherits two kinds of 'Higher Time' or 'Eternity,' one from Plato and the Greeks, that of objective time of process and movement, and that of St. Augustine who wrestles with 'time' in his 11th book of his Confessions. St. Augustine sees eternity as the gathering together of past into present to project a future. Unlike the pre-moderns, we moderns tend to live their lives and conceive of them entirely within the horizontal flow of 'secular time.' Now I must confess, I have never really thought about this. Franks Comment captures this beautifully for me. This is indeed a complex thread to trace out. These shifts are not easily explained, and I too am enjoying this monster book.

Bound up closely with the change in time-consciousness is another shift in the way we understand the universe in which we live. We have moved from the idea of a 'cosmos,' an ordered whole with meaning for humanity, to a universe having its own kind of order, that of exceptionless natural laws. This insight I found tantalizing indeed! I once held to the young earth creationist viewpoint. It is no secret either as Taylor points out that many of the battles between belief and unbelief of the modern era, have been fought over this issue of 'cosmos' vs 'universe.' and the challenge of 'universe' to Biblical religion. Creation vs Evolution is fast becoming or else already is a political hot potato in the USA. For me the irony of the Ussher chronology using modern calculation methods to entrench the Bible in the 'cosmos' was startling! I never heard it put that way before. I will be following Taylor closely here, and hope he develops this further.

Lastly, Taylor looks at the issue of "Reform" and "reform." He spells out with refreshing candor for a Catholic the spiritual abuses that arise in the Middle Ages and how the stage gets set for the Reformation. Being a catholic myself, I appreciate his openness. He also seems to hint at how it may have been avoided. Latin Christendom in the late medieval period attempts to bridge the gap between the laity and the 'elites' if you will. Between those who are 'clergy' and or 'religious.' Interestingly Taylor sees this drive to reform and remake society as playing a key role in the undoing of the old enchanted cosmos idea, and further, the creation of a visible alternative in exclusive humanism, as he puts it. Again, I'm going to follow this closely.

Now, I don't really feel that I am in a position to be critical of Taylor at this point. This is the first work I have read from him, and I am in uncharted waters right now. I may need to supplement my reading of this book in order to get a better handle on him. I'm still taking it all in. This is far more complex than any of the 'subtraction stories' I have read quickly over the years. I wish I could say more at this point and make a better contribution, but this will have to do for now... still reading.....

To comment on this post go here.

Evangelicals Politically Engaged

It would be foolish to claim that evangelicals are not politically engaged in society. However, there are a number of drawbacks to the ways in which many evangelicals approach issues of social importance. Evangelicals tend towards a fairly pragmatic view of political engagement. This is because the primary concern is not the political engagement but rather the ability to witness. It is impressive how readily polarized evangelical groups can be when the issues are framed in terms of their witness and their perceived ability to witness.1 The classic example of this is the work of the Christian Right in the US. I find that Canadians tend to be less animated (more forgiving and flexible) in how they express their commitments, but these political commitments should not be underestimated (I believe that this is part of the reason the Conservatives have made it this far in our Country). This propensity for polarization reveals that what is lacking is an ability for individuals to sustain a reflection on political engagement. What suffers most is the very thing that is believed to be preserved - witness.

The witness of any religion is always tied to the ability of that religion to foster political engagement. The kind of political engagement that prophetically stands up in the face of injustice. While Christianity is not alone in its capacity to evoke the prophetic spirit, it is surely a rich part of Christianity's own formation. But what has been traded for the political prophetic voice is an apocalyptic and ecstatic spirit that deems overt political involvement as participation in a world which has no lasting hope. Pat Robertson's recent racist remarks about Haiti prove this point. What is unfortunate is that this is what passes as prophetic in much of evangelical culture. That is the prophetic is an ability for enforcing a deep apathy towards critical political issues. The church has become the state church preserving the state's status quo at all costs. What cost you might ask? The cost is the witness.

In Power Evangelism John Wimber claims that a faulty gospel message can at best create weak Christians. His claim comes in the midst of a discussion of the Kingdom message as the kerygma of Jesus' own gospel proclamation. I think he hits something important. The gospel that many North American evangelicals have bought into often has no reference to such political notions as the Kingdom of God. In fact Kingdom is only mentioned as an afterward as if saying the sinners prayer somehow transports one into the Kingdom. This could not be further from the message of Jesus. The Kingdom isn't something we can usher people into, a veritable holding place where we can plug up our eyes and ears and await the great yanking away. No. The Kingdom was central and its direction was always incarnational not escape. Sometimes I'm convinced that our gospel messages have more to do with our own personal comfort than with anything we read in the four gospels.

This weakness is already hurting evangelical witness. There is a growing awareness that the issues of our day demand a profound and prophetic response. And with none coming from our churches and ministries it should not surprise us that our numbers are dwindling. The plea of this argument is not to water down our gospel - I think we've done that enough. But to reflect on how our gospel actually might have the prophetic capacity to be, once again, a force for good in our world. This won't happen while we happily clap in our pews. It happens when we follow Jesus into the highways and byways and become like a certain famous Baptist who prepared the way for the Kingdom to come in the person of Jesus Christ.


1. By witness, I am referring to the active sharing of ones own faith in hopes of leading other individuals into a similar religious orientation.

Role Players Unite... and take over!

All I Need To Know About Life I learned From Dungeons and Dragons. An IgniteOKC Talk. from Chad Henderson on Vimeo.

The Bulwarks of Belief (K Sheppard; repost)

Charles Taylor's A Secular Age is a sustained criticism of negative secularization theories. As we saw in the introduction that Frank's post provided, Taylor is primarily concerned to narrate the transformation of the "conditions of belief" from premodern to modern societies. He does so in order to reveal how the background to lived experiences (and the aspiration to flourishing, fullness) proves crucial to understanding the shift from naive belief to an awareness of many belief options.

Chapter 1, "The Bulwarks of Belief", begins with differences between what Taylor calls an "enchanted" and "disenchanted" world, borrowing from Max Weber and Marcel Gauchet. But this shift is only one part of the story, which Taylor discusses under the headings "obstacle", "equilibrium" and "a common understanding done away with".

(I) The enchanted world is a world filled with what Taylor calls "porous" selves. A porous, premodern self places the locus of meaning and action in the world "outside" him or herself, "exogenously". The enchanted word was spiritual, where things themselves had meaning, where meaning could be extra-human and intra-cosmic. This contrasts with the modern, disenchanted world where meaning is fundamentally construed as "within" ("endogenously"), and specifically within the human mind. This buffered self sets up a series of boundaries not present in premodern selves: between agents and forces, mind and world, physical and moral. Where the natural world, the existence of society and the enchanted cosmos affirmed the existence of God, it was very hard to embrace unbelief. If someone denied God they did not thereby leave the "field of forces" that remained, many of which were malevolent, making unbelief difficult to entertain.

(II) Porous selves were thus vulnerable selves. They were also part of communities that felt themselves to be part of a spiritual and force-filled world. That is why, Taylor argues, there was such enormous pressure to conform, such intolerance for heretics, and so little unbelief.

(III) Porous selves were also part of a society that held two goals in tension: that of self-transcendence associated with the ideals of Christianity, and that of normal human flourishing. Taylor uses Turner's concept of play between structure and anti-structure, as embodied in medieval Carnival, for example, to demonstrate how this equilibrium was held in balance. It was both functional, in "letting off steam", and affirmational, in confirming the normal order of society.

Subtraction stories do not pay enough attention to these changing conditions of belief and are therefore unable to explain the transition from naive belief to an awareness of belief options. Taylor supplements this criticism with a narration of such changes, from the enchanted to the disenchanted world, from the porous to the buffered self, and from the world of play between structure and anti-structure to its restriction in contemporary life.

One may perhaps suggest a few avenues of criticism: first, on a methodological level, with Taylor's argument that the conditions of belief and background need to be front and centre in any account of secularization; second, even if one accepted Taylor's methodology, one might then criticize his use of existing scholarly material to posit the transitions he does. While it would be foolish to think consensus was ever likely to emerge on either point, evaluating Taylor's contribution must begin here.

Comment on this post here.

The Vineyard and Post-Christian Reality

Jason Coker has been posting some excellent articles on the Vineyard in the aftermath of Tony Jones' comments. His recent description of a missional think tank (which included David Ruis!) is very helpful. Two things that encouraged me were the fact that they were resisting trashing the attractional models and that they are also wrestling with how to incorporate whole families into some sort of post-Christiandom church life. I've struggled with this a lot in my own church planting/pastoring work. I have to agree that we are in for a hard road. And I see two reasons for this: 1) Churches are stubbornly hanging on to Christendom models. We shouldn't always have to arrive late to the party. And 2) the culture that rejects organized religion on religion's terms does not have clear models for developing an ecclesiology. The resistance that is part of the cultural makeup actually works against efforts to define what a post-Christiandom church might look like.

I think the question is: Is it worth it? And for that the only answer I can give is yes. The reason for that is because of what I've seen the encounter of God do in the lives of people. Heck, my own life is completely revolutionized because of the God who met me in my brokenness. For that reason alone it is worth the wrestling to build a church that can carry this message of hope to the world. Do you think it is worth it?

Heaven Misplaced (Review)

This is the second of Douglas Wilson's books that I have reviewed. And I'm happy to say this is a much better book. However, he makes some methodological choices that hurt his argument and toward the end of the book he has lost his flow of coherency. But his project of historical optimism is a good one, I just wish he'd spend more time unpacking it.

The book is a very reformed reading of Kingdom theology. That is he is developing a theology about the concept of God's reign, its implications for Christian life and thought, from a reformed position. In fact he imagines a more dispensational view of history as an opposing view. Several times I truly agreed with his conclusions but would never have tackled the issue in the way that he does. In many cases his evaluation of theological problems is simply not sustained enough to get the reader where he wants them to go. This is important because of his methodological choices.

Early on Wilson asks us to read this book as if it were a story, that is suspending out judgment until it is done. That would be great if he were telling a story, but his style is polemics - he is arguing. So this tactic is not helpful, it sets up the reader to expect a piece of exploratory theology only to serve up a completely different dish. As a reader this was disappointing, a missed opportunity on Wilson's part.

The other methodological problem I have is one of target audience. This book is definitely written to a popular audience. It comes complete with bible studyish questions on each chapter. It also has some nice break out definitions (and while he does some nice defining, every now and then he drops something in without really explaining it) that are aimed to help the reader who might not have a theological or historical background. The reason this is disappointing to me is that I think he has some good insights and I'd like to see more of his underlying thoughts. For example, he tries to expand our notions of atonement, but his clear bias towards penal substitution are resoundingly clear. What is worse, he introduces alternate views and never pursues them - perhaps he doesn't know how/where they fit?

Despite these weaknesses, I did enjoy the book. He does a good job re-interpreting the classic "end times" texts. And he also does a good job making the Kingdom of God a central theme in his theology. I give this book 2.5 stars out of 5.

[EDIT] One of the things I forgot to mention about this book is that Wilson is entirely too triumphalistic. His project of historic optimism should be more invitational than it is. A good example of this is how he deals with ecological issues, in short he doesn't. And the very critique he levels against eco-theology also applies to his own theology that has a distinct and privileged view of our species (although I think this is not a true assessment of much eco-theology). Here he resorts to substitutionary atonement as the paradigm of choice and basically says our only task, as the Church, is to make disciples of the nations. A fine claim, but he fails to unpack it adequately. And he also fails to note what implications disciple making has on self-identity. It is almost like he wants to push the envelope, but only so far. I think the whole envelope needs to be remade from scratch (there is my bias). It also struck me as odd that in this whole project he doesn't once tackle the chief objection - theodicy. What we end up with is a repackaged (Christianized) version of human progress when it seems to me that is the last thing he really wants to do.

Coming Revival Amongst the Gays???

Some of you have caught wind that Tony Jones has stirred up a bit of conversation about the possible demise of Vineyard and Calvary Chapel. Now Iggy has weighed in with a very interesting comment:

It seems there are many Vineyards that may be as you described, yet there are also many that are not. Presently I attend a great one. I know also that Jason Clark in the UK is Vineyard… so I wonder… is your analysis quite as right on as it could be? Remember we entered the Anita Baker era in the 80’s so homophobia was rampant… so it would follow suit that many CC and Vineyards would turn against those they found to be gay. Yet, I see a openness that is returning… Vineyard is actually turning to N.T. Wright as far as theology… and many of us are looking at the gay community as the next wave of God’s grace. To put it in the old terms… some are seeing a revival coming out of the gay communities.

A couple of things struck me as I read Iggy's comment.

1) Finally someone said it. Really I think we need to recognize the context in which Lonnie carried out his ministry. This is not an excuse for homophobia, or even a watering down of the gravity of the injustice of homophobia, but a simple recognition that this is what was being done at the time. We need to look back and say in that context we probably wouldn't have done any better - but that should provoke us to make sure we don't perpetuate the ignorance that was the homophobia of the 80s. What I took from David's film is that John didn't respond until it was thrown out in the open by someone else. My gut tells me we just don't know enough about what happened and neither man is around to probe into this any further.

2) About time. I have been feeling for a while that there is a work of grace that God wants to do in the homosexual community. I say this as someone who hasn't completely worked out what I believe about homosexuality. So far I'm convinced that orientation is not sin and that the scriptures are far from clear on the topic (despite what some have asserted). I'm also confident that God loves homosexuals, and that God has put a huge love in my heart for homosexuals that are in my life, some of whom I know also love God in profound ways. Maybe I should have taken a clue from my friend James, way back in my early Christian days he befriended me and let me in on his struggles with self-worth. All of them centered on a lack of acceptance for him as he knew he was - didn't James deserve unconditional love too? He asked me what I thought of him being gay (this was the first thing he ever said to me) and I told him I didn't think God approved but that I was ok with that. I don't think he expected that from the fundie Pentecostal he worked with. As I got to know James I began to see the ways in which God was reaching into his broken life and trying to heal the rejection he'd faced. I also noted that God's agenda was bigger than Jame's sexual orientation - James was a person Jesus loved and longed to be with. I'm not sure where it would go from there, I leave that to God. I moved away and left James with another very capable Christian to be friend and counselor. What saddens me most though is that finding Christians who were capable of seeing someone like James through the eyes of God's love are still few and far between.

3) But haven't we also heard... Even though I felt that news of a grace revival amongst the gay communities was hopeful I can't help remembering all the other sources that us charismatics have been claiming revival would come. I am tired of it. Revival is coming from the North. Revival is coming to the Middle East. I can't help wondering how much of that is individuals crafting false hopes because they simply don't have the psychic energy needed to deal with the spiritual needs around them. Or worse because they can't cope with the fallen world we live in and want to escape. I'm not sure this is the same thing, but I feel caution is the word. Revival is not a word I like that much anyway. Revival never comes by our initiative, although I do believe that true revival is proceeded by prayer - not all prayer efforts resulted in revival (nor should they). Rather I think these things must be processed as invitations. I think that if you feel God wants to move in a particular community - then do something about it. That might be the very call to prayer that I was talking about earlier. But it is also a call to act. I am not confident in revivals (they don't usually end well), but I am confident in God's desire to reach into all communities and bring Good News that changes lives. Sadly, I'm also convinced that Jesus' assessment is still good today - the workers are few.

PhD Seminar - Winter 2010. My Last One!

On April 9th I'm scheduled to present my Project Proposal, at which time the University sends me off to write my thesis. What a long haul this has been! But good, I think ultimately the process has been a good one. The key at this point is to identify what do I have the passion to sustain study on long enough to produce a new contribution to my field in? I have been thinking a lot about public and private spheres and the construction of self-identity. I think that is going to be pivotal for my research. But it could also simply reflect my ramping up for some good Taylor discussion. Focus, focus, focus.

I just received the official seminar schedule, we start off with preparing for the comprehensive exams - I've already written these so I'm tempted to come late for that one. But the bulk of the sessions look like they are concerned with this whole idea of process. I think that will help, in order to structure my time I will definitely need to develop a process specific to my research. Along those lines I've been thinking a lot about methodology.

I want to us a dialectic methodology. That is I want to put one school of thought in conversation with another. Specifically I want to put political theology (via Moltmann and possibly Pannenberg) in conversation with conservative evangelical Kingdom of God theology. I think Russell Moore's The Kingdom of Christ lays out what I'm talking about in terms of Kingdom theology, that will be my starting point. What I think I need are a small set of questions to animate the conversation. That means I'll spend a bit of time outlining my intentions and the players, and then I will be posing those questions to each body of theological inquiry. From there I will attempt to see how each of these conversation partners will respond to the approaches of the other partner. Hence, creating a conversation. A good example of this is Moltmann's dialectic style of theology. He is really good at letting the partners have a fair say even before he brings in the next voice. Hopefully I can limit the voices so that the project does not get out of hand. But my intuition is that such a conversation will at least identify some key insights that can be used in the creation of a Conservative Evangelical Political Theology.

A Secular Age - Reading Schedule

For those of you wanting to follow along with our reading and blogging adventure here is the reading schedule we are attempting to follow. Link this post as I'll be updating it with links to the posts as they are created. Also we will try to keep our main comments on the latest post, but feel free to comment on specific ones as well. If you post a comment on an older reading you might not get a response right away. Also note that the names represent the five official commentators of this project.

Introduction - Frank
Bulwarks of Belief 1-4 - Kenny (Jan. 14th)
Bulwarks of Belief 5-6 - Mike (Jan. 21st)
Bulwarks of Belief 7-9 - Ben (Feb. 4th)
Rise of Disciplinary Society 1-2 - Frank (Mar. 25th)
Rise of Disciplinary Society 3-4 - Kenny (Apr. 1st)
Rise of Disciplinary Society 5-6 - Frank (Apr. 15th)
The Great Disembedding 1 - Mike (Apr. 22th)
The Great Disembedding 2-3 - Ben (Apr. 29nd)
The Great Disembedding 4-6 - Frank (Apr. 29th)
The Spectre of Idealism - TBD (May. 6th)
Providential Deism 1-2 - Kenny (May. 13th)
Providential Deism 3-4 - Kenny (May. 20th)
The Impersonal Order - Mike (May. 27th)
The Malaises of Modernity - Frank (June 3rd (my birthday!))
The Dark Abyss of Time - Ben (June. 10th)
Expanding Universe of Unbelief - TBD (June 17th)
19thC Trajectories 1 - Kenny (June 24th)
19thC Trajectories 2-5 - Mike
Age of Mobilization 1-2 - Frank
Age of Mobilization 3-4 - Ben
Age of Authenticity 5 - TBD
Age of Authenticity 6- Religion Today 7 - Kenny
Religion Today 8-10 - Mike
The Immanent Frame 1-4 - Frank
The Immanent Frame 5-6 - Ben
The Immanent Frame 7-10 - TBD
Cross Pressures - Kenny
Dilemmas I 1-3 - Mike
Dilemmas I 4-6 - Frank
Dilemmas I 7-8 - Ben
Dilemmas II 9-11 - TBD
Dilemmas II 12 - Unquiet Frontiers 16 - Kenny
Conversions 1-2 Mike
Conversions 3 - Epilogue

Edited Mar. 25/10

4th Edition as a Player

After DMing 4th Edition Dungeons and Dragons for many months, today I had my first chance to experience it as a player. I must say that I'm liking this version more and more. It promotes cooperation and makes every player's contribution (role) valuable. I still dislike some of the more video game like aspects (squares, simplified movement, allies not giving cover for ranged attacks, etc.) but I cannot complain with how the system works. It is not hard to teach. It makes game play similar for all classes (which I did not like at first) which means you all always have something to do and you all basically go about doing it the same way. It is overall a big improvement on previous editions of the game. I spent much of one epic battle (we were 1st level characters) in the belly of a giant frog! That's me in the far frog. One of the things I like about this version is that it is not hard to drop a character, but it is rather hard to kill them. I'm slowly being digested by this frog, I've stopped making saves to get out (I couldn't roll over ten four times in a row! And I'm rolling to make sure I don't die, but still taking damage. I was 2 HP away from the magic -11 dead mark when Glen made a miraculous hit on my frog, freeing me! I managed to hang out long enough for a healing to get me back up. But I had missed most of that fight. That's the last time I volunteer to open the door for the party while they hold back at the entrance! Sheesh. It was much fun though, the fact that it came so close made it exciting. I was already envisioning my brother Jimm the Shady taking over (my character was the eladerin artful dodger rogue Slimm the shady) so I could keep playing. Fun day!

Identity Crisis and the Evangelical

I'm always concerned with the amount of energy many evangelicals put into defining what they are not. It is really quite sad. It reminds me a a certain pericope where Jesus describes two men praying - you know the one. The evangelical says, "I thank you God that I'm not like this Catholic, damned to hell and really not getting what you are all about Lord." Seriously, isn't it about time we focused on what we are? Better still, isn't it time we learned to see what is good and best about others instead of trying to stake a claim that alienates us from everyone else including others who call on the name of Jesus (really the only scandal I think we can claim with authority). Maybe I'm just realizing how my training to seek out Christ in any and every circumstance I find myself in has jaded my view of exclusivist stances. It certainly hasn't made me a naive inclusivist, but I'm certainly more inclusivist than exclusivist. Jesus got really upset at his disciples for wanting to rebuke certain Jewish exorcists for using Jesus' name. If that doesn't at least warrant a look before your leap attitude towards other people of faith - then what does? Just some food for thought.

A Secular Age - Introduction

"This is typical of the modern condition, and an analogous story could be told by many an unbeliever. We live in a condition where we cannot help but be aware that there are a number of different construals, views which intelligent, reasonably undeluded people, of good will, can and do disagree on. We cannot help looking over our shoulder from time to time, looking sideways, living our faith also in a condition of doubt and uncertainty." C. Taylor, A Secular Age, p11.

Taylor opens up this monster of a book with his effort to describe a current trend of secularity. Taylor presents three understandings of a secular moment in history: the removal of references to ultimate reality in public spaces; a decline in participation in religious practices; and the loss of support for religious practices because such activities are no longer considered culturally normative and may even be spurned by large segments of society. This last definition is what Taylor feels describes today's Western society, faith is no longer assumed rather it is questioned when it is exhibited. I think Taylor is right and I'm looking forward to his tracing of this secular condition.

A couple of comments though, and I'll let everybody weigh in.

1) I think Taylor is careful to trace out the dimension of care for cultural diversity (especially in regards to religious experience/expression) that ultimately leads to this secular age. This is the big question for political philosophers - how do we deal with diversity in a liberal democracy. As is the case in other Taylor works, his Hegelian search for historical displacements, moments when society opted to resolve the tension between two or more views on issues such as human freedom, and to trace out what is lost in those transformations will come in handy to define how we got to this secular age.

2) In this introduction Taylor hints that he will trace the influence of academia on public thought. I am hoping. As a theologian I've seen a lot of disconnection between my discipline and the lived experience of religious communities. I suspect that a robust theological imagination would help these religious communities navigate this secular age. I am referring to something more intellectually honest than the current anti-postmodern apologetics that I too often see being read by religious practitioners. I'll be watching this aspect of Taylor's discussion keenly.

3) Taylor has a bigger goal than merely tracing the loss of a religious core to society. He sees this secular age as a moment of "purely self-sufficient humanism" which Taylor sees as a transitional form spelling the end of naive religiousity and beckoning a new era (axial perhaps) of religion that relates to society in intellectualy and spiritually engaged ways. This is similar to the idea of postmodernity as a provisional name for a shift that we are in the midst of, and a moment that might hint at where we are going but really is throwing open possibilities the modernist mind is not willing to entertain. Unfortunately this moment also is a time of retrenching and trying to recapture the lost naivity; the rise of religious fundamentalism throughout the world is evidence of this trend.

A Time to Recharge...

Sorry if it has been quiet around here. This has been a great time of recharging. I'm trying to get caught up on my Early Reviewer's book reviews! Three books are in the queue and one from Thomas Nelson, which is a study bible that I'm frankly bored with. Oh well, work needs to be done. I am also mulling over the intro to Taylor's Secular Age which I need to blog about soon. Soon...

Sharon got a really awesome camera for Christmas, so I've been playing with that a lot. A Canon Rebel XSi. We have been talking about buying a DSLR for about three years and last year we were going to spend all the Christmas money from family on one - but life intervened. This year we made good, it was really the one big gift we got and it is something for both of us. Sharon does a lot of scrapbooking so she takes lots of photos, and well I like shooting them! Although the 16G SD card was definitely overkill - I almost fell over when I saw how many photos it can hold. After playing with it for a few days now I can see why my buddy Richard loves his Rebel so much, it is a fantastic camera, with tonnes of shortcut controls all over the body. I'm working through the for Dummies book for this model, Richard recommended that one to me, it is really thorough.

I've also been back at my stamps. I cleaned up my office and as soon as my desk was clear I was able to pull out an album and start working. I've cleaned up a few stock pages of Chilean stamps that came from Andrew's dad's collection and two pages of state stamps from India (I love the older and odder material). Now I'm working on India (national) and my oldest has been helping me. I had a bunch of stamps like the one in the picture to sort, I asked her what the difference was - so she stared at them for a while correctly identified that some said postage and some had & revenue on them. Once we sorted those into two piles I told her the one with just postage has two possible watermarks, or thinnings on the paper in a specific design that shows up when the stamp is wet. So we laid them out to see if they had one star or many stars. I think that's the first time she's used watermark fluid - so exciting to share my hobby with her. Once they were sorted we mounted the one I was missing and put the rest into my trader stock. Then we went off to play picto-chat together on our Nintendo DSs (I'm not sure why they like that especially when they like to sit next to each other and chat??? But it was a chance to hang out with her which I appreciated.)

Today we have a bit of a party. I have to get back at my school work soon too - I have a deadline of the 6th for an outline of my project proposal. I think it will take me a few months to put together - will I ever get used to feeling inadequate to the task? I feel like there is so much work at the front of the PhD that I'm not able to adequately devote myself to research until I've locking in on what I'm doing? I would like to take a few months just to do exploratory research and then draft my proposal. But that is not the programme.

Avatar was all kinds of Awesome!

After hearing my buddy Richard reluctantly telling me how good this film was I knew I had to see it. I highly recommend this film, in 3D if possible. The 3D isn't kitschy here, it only adds to the immersive experience. The visuals are stunning. I'm not a big fan of excessive CGI and this movie has a lot of CGI. But it is convincing, you are in an alien environment. I saw Cameron's IMAX The Deep and so I was not expecting Cameron to do CGI well - I was wrong. It was amazing!

The story is simple, but that works. The environment is an amazing rich character in this film - so having a huge complex story would just be overwhelming. Just because the story is straight forward do not assume there is no depth here. I should say that story is classic and allows Cameron to explore deep themes in this film. The obvious theme is one of cultural domination that is rooted in the ignorance of the dominating species. But there is so much more in this theme. The ecological themes actually take a similar track - and turn back on the humans as a indictment against our own despoiling of our planet.

Remotely Saddened

Is it right to have so little faith in your government? I have really not been paying more than peripheral attention to Copenhagen because I felt Canada would be more obstructionist than helpful. I really dislike this government - I voted, just not for them. So why am I so sad about it? Part of the problem is that what this administration is doing will continue to be an obstruction to the next government. But really, my kids are the ones who will pay the price. And seriously, the price will not be near what it will be for those in the have-not countries. What will it take for our species to pull our collective heads out of our asses and do something? Probably more than our species will be able to survive.

That Time of Year Again!

From Dread Oom to Bedroom!

So we have a house guest for the next month or so. BJ has been in Yellowknife for the last couple of years and it is good to have her back. She has some great stories! Next week I'm back to work, I have to outline my thesis proposal and spend some time researching a few areas I identified through my comp prep. I am still riding the high from finishing my comps so well. I have two big jobs I want to accomplish before Christmas - shopping and cleaning out my office. It sure felt good to clean up the studio. If I can get my office in shape then I'll be all set for next semester.

Just a heads up. I'm starting to read Charles Taylor's Secular Age with some friends (historians actually). We are going to be posting as we go, I have the intro so it should be up in a week or so. If you are interested in joining in on the fun you will have lots of posts to comment on and I'll post the reading schedule so you can follow along. I'm also open to guest posts for those so inclined - just let me know and we'll trade emails.

The Dread Oom

Years ago we partitioned off almost half the basement as a practice studio. I built a rack into the wall (I have enough gear to provide sound for a small concert) and a custom mixing desk and one wall has many, many coat pegs for all my cables. It's really quite crazy considering we've only used it as a studio a handful of times since the kids were born. We used to use it all the time too, and I suspect we'll use it again. But right now we need the space for a friend who is coming to Ottawa and needs a place to stay for a few weeks.

Right now the room holds tonnes of miniatures and terrain for gaming, boxes of unsorted stamps on paper, CDs, more CDs, liturgical supplies, defunct computers (I counted four!) and music gear (including a full drum kit!). Oh did I mention dust bunnies? I've been sucking those beasts up all afternoon. I also have a few old computers in the garage so I'm going to make a trip to the recyclers soon. I'll probably scam the hard drives from the computers just in case - I used to do sensitive IT work.

I found a whole whack of cassette tapes, working tapes from when the studio did more than collect dust. I fired them up and was delighted to hear sessions with some old friends, and a tape an old dear friend made me a few years before he took his life. I carefully organized all these tapes and tossed a few others in the trash - mixed tapes? I also discovered that my CD player isn't working? It isn't the cable, my iPod worked fine. I'll have to see if I can fix it. Also I don't have a working set of headphones anymore, my really nice pair were trashed by one of the kids.

Once I have everything either thrown out or compressed into one side of the room, I have great plans to set the room up with a futon (we have) for our guest. I think we'll have a nice little room setup down there.

Recovery Mode

Now that exams are done I'm under orders to take a week off. I'm having trouble. I had a bit of legitimate work to do for the Vineyard, but thankfully I got most of that done last night. One of our kinships is cancelled so that the host can practice for his CD release concert - go Kurt go! And it is Sharon's week to go to the other kinship. So that means I have the week off for real. Now if only I could get to sleep at a normal time.

I find that the last few months have taken a toll on the old body. I've done very little yoga and I can really feel it. I'm going to fix that today while Sharon is off to the quilting store. Tomorrow I will try to hit a yoga class around noon time. My neck is super sore all of the time, which is frustrating. I'm not sure if it is bacause I'm doing too much work on it or not enough, shoulder checking in the car is excruciatingly painful. I think it was like that before I did yoga and better when I was doing yoga all the time. The thing is I had a lot of back pain too which the yoga seems to have cleared up. If getting back into an exercise routine doesn't help I'll dig out the referral my doctor gave me for physio.

This weekend I'm flying down to Nova Scotia to meet with the rest of the Thoughtworks reps. I'm pretty excited too. We'll be hanging with Cathy and Rik Berry, Cathy is the Atlantic Thoughtworks rep, and dreaming of a Canadian family of Vineyards that are theologically equipped. I am continually amazed at the depth we have in this movement, and I'm looking forward to tapping into more of that this coming weekend.

We also have an old friend of ours moving back to Ottawa. She's been in Yellowknife for the last few years. We have decided to put her up for the four weeks she needs to get situated here. If you have a room to spare, she'd probably be better off than the futon we are giving her in our semi-finished music studio. Which is one thing I am going to do this week - clean that studio. She comes in on the 11th, and I'm looking forward to it. I'm just not sure she's ready for the chaos that is the Emanuel family.

Intimacy in Worship

Scott has been posting on what troubles him in terms of modern worship music. I've been hesitant to wade into this lest I tip my hat. His latest rant is about lyrics that he feels cross the line between eros and agape. In terms of that particular song I find that it isn't really that well thought through lyrically and I really don't find songs about God that intimate. But I actually don't have the same problem with the wet sloppy kiss, because as a metaphor for the intersection of heaven and earth well I've heard worse (whatever the heck is meant by heaven and earth and some sort of intersection there). Poor theology aside, I do relish an intimate song in worship. But those songs that let my heart sing of my love for God are actually sung to God. They are songs through which I acknowledge my feelings as a legitimate response to God's love and/or presence.

I really feel that there is needed better theological reflection in the creative process of songwriting for worship. I am really glad that folks like Dan Wilt have made this a priority. What we sing actually reflects accurately what we believe (if we don't start out believing it we will eventually believe the words we sing). So the theology of our worship music definitely matters. Personally I love to worship, but I also love to reflect on how the community I lead worships - including the songs we sing. I'm not above pointing out my trouble with a particular phrase or song being used. I'm glad though that for the most part there is a lot of room for well thought out and intimate worship music. It can be done. It needs to be done a lot more.

I Passed the Written Exam

Just got the news today. The culmination of a full summer of study, I landed in the room we affectionately call the dungeon and there I sat for four hours typing out my answer. My friend Lauren was waiting for me when I emerged, a gift in hand and took me for lunch. My brain was mush.

I actually had two questions, I had to pick one. The first was hard: Discuss some of the similarities and differences between Kingdom Theologies and Hope Theologies drawing specifically from Moltmann and Pannenberg. I had to include how each dealt with eschatology (which I wove into all of it, how could I not?) and conclude with some of the important concerns, in my judgment, that arose from this comparison. The second question was a lot more open, it had to do with North American Evangelical theologies put into conversation with Hope Theologies. There was more to it, but it seemed like an easier question - so I chose to go hard??? Why do I do that? Anyway, it worked out well, I think I nailed it. After when I was describing my answer Lauren though I was speaking clearly and in a structured manner, trying to encourage me that I probably did awesome. Still, I did feel a great sense of relief when the official notice hit my inbox.

Now I'm given a new question which I will prepare a 45 minute presentation on. Basically I will write a paper to be presented to my committee. Afterward they can grill me on anything from the readings or presentation for an hour. I happen to think my oral presentation skills are better than my written skills (I have a lot more experience putting together and delivering presentations). So I am less anxious about this part. But it is still quite a piece of work. I am throwing a few other books into my box to tackle it - they aren't on my comps list but will prove invaluable.

Unfortunately today my brain was still mush. I actually had one of my daughters home sick today, so I ended up napping all morning and vegging all afternoon. Tonight I have to prepare a status report for the doctoral seminar, I'm not wanting to do it actually. I had all these ideas worked out for it, but had to work on my comps - so it feels like I need to start from scratch. Actually it is not that bad, but I'd just like a bit of a break. No rest for the wicked I suppose.

OK, Book Idea to Throw Out There

I woke up with an idea for a book that I want to put together. But it occurs to me there might be something like this already. Soooo, if you know of anything like this let me know. I think I can do a good take on it so it might not deter me, but I would want to make sure I've read anything that purports to do the same task.

The book would be called An Evangelical's Guide to Surviving University. I'm convinced that we need more evangelicals in our universities, but I've seen the confusion and even devastation that can result in evangelicals entering into mainstream academia. I have some of the chapters mapped out in my mind already. I think this would be a great resource for potential and current students, helping them to get the most out of their university experience. I also think it would be a great aid to pastor's trying to help direct folks to appropriate educational experiences. I am thinking specifically of evangelicals in the soft sciences, hard sciences are a lot easier to navigate - but that is part of the discussion I'd have in the book.

What do you think? Would something like that be helpful in your communities?

Moments of Crisis

One more week until I start my comps! It has been a long and stressful run. It is not so much the material, although there is a lot of it, but it is all the life that constantly gets in the way. I'm sure I'm not the only one who experiences this. It seems that there is always some sort of crisis in my life, either with me or someone I love. But life is like that, if it was smooth sailing then it wouldn't be that interesting. And actually I'm wired for crisis anyway. I tend to excel when faced with considerable challenges and when those challenges are not around I have motivational problems. I'm working on that. In the meantime I'm trying to make it through my notes one more time before I write. If you are the praying type, I'd appreciate prayers for grace with my family - I'm not the easiest of people to live with at the best of times.

Vineyard Days!

I just returned from the Ontario Vineyard Days conference. Daniel Schuster (Calgary) was our keynote speaker - well if you can call it that, cause what happened was way more awesome than some speaker sharing something they found important. Daniel helped lead us through some significant heart work as a region. It was amazing. I came away with renewed hope for our churches, I know a lot of them have been struggling for a long time. But what really got me was I was completely unaware of how much my own heart had been tied up in all that went down in the 90s (that's when the Airport Vineyard was asked to leave). I have done a lot of reflecting on that time, trying to understand what happened. But it really wasn't about understanding, it was about what that did to our hearts. I think what God was doing this past weekend makes it possible for us to find a new center in our identity and I'm extremely hopeful that we'll follow God in this unfolding work of absolute grace. My friend Ahren (Ottawa Valley Vineyard) put it well in our last session - it isn't about having a response at the end of our service - indeed no response is adequate to this - but it is about letting it bug us cause burying it (what we've been doing) hasn't worked.

During the gathering I got to present a Thoughtworks workshop on the theology of grace. Actually I was doing two things: 1) demonstrating how important theology is to us as God's people - you do it anyway, wouldn't it be better to do it well? and 2) showing how working within a methodological framework opens up meaning we might not otherwise see. I used Ventor's proposed threefold approach: Bible, Tradition (and history), and Holy Spirit. I looked at grace three ways drawing us to a richer understanding than the truncated Reformed position that is primarily about personal salvation. Not that the truncated understanding is wrong - it just is not the whole story.

My big concern was if anyone would come to a workshop on theology like that - especially so many other cool options (I really wanted to go to the worship workshops). But I had a pretty big group and they were engaged. Maybe we are asking the right questions after all. I was encouraged. I know that despite Wimber's commitment to lifelong learning, continuing education is not always the easiest sell in our churches. Not the kind of learning that I think is needed - there is always a market for pop psychology and simple teachings. But those things are not adequate to the challenges of our time. One of my biggest passions is that we've created a form of Christianity that can't bear academic inquiry because it is based on weak methods and a lack of trust in the experience of God. In fact lots of Christians have an experience with rhetoric and not an experience with God - so their trust can't bear any kind of challenge to their truth claims. We really need to reclaim an academic excellence that comes out of our quest to understand the faith that our experience of God evokes.

I skipped the AAR. I wanted to go tonight to a session on the origins of Pentecostal identity in Canada. Would have been great. But I needed a day to rest. Tomorrow I'm back at studies, my big exam is on the 18th. If you are the praying type, I can use all the encouragement I can get.

Chirp Chirp

So what do Christians banned for being idiots on Twitter do? Yup they start their own separate twitter wannabe. Thanks for the heads up Jim. Why do such antics make me so sad inside? Curse of being an optimist and always expecting more from my fellow Christians.

Gervais the Exegete

Not for the kids, but a very entertaining read of the two creation stories.

Review: A Climate for Change

I actually have a bit of a backlog on books I'm supposed to be reviewing. But when A Climate for Change: Global Warming Facts for Faith Based Decisions (Katharine HayHoe, Andrew Farley, Faith Words, 2009) arrived, I had to take a gander. In fact I had to read the whole thing. The first 3/4s, or more, of the book is an apologetic for climate change, specifically that climate change is happening and that humans are the source. This part is ok, except that the quotes that start off a chapter usually have much more depth than the chapters themselves. I chalked this up to how volatile this debate has become South of the border (in the United States), and how careful the authors wanted to be. Unfortunately, nowhere in the book does it state that we need the Earth and not the other way around. I suppose such a fact would not sit well with the intended audience of this book. But knowing that is my bias, it is not surprising that the last few chapters made me want to throw the book at the wall. If you spend that much time outlining a real problem then you would think you could at least propose a stewardship approach (even though I am convinced stewardship is not near an adequate response to the ecological crisis we are facing.) Actually, the response section begins with an affirmation of the pessimistic claim that God will yank us out of here anyway, or at least destroy the Earth and create something new. They even quote Revelation, but not the parts about the new coming down to the old or that God will return to destroy those who destroy the earth. So after discounting the possibility that anything we could ever do to respond to the ecological crisis is useless, they propose another reason. It makes a good witness??? Actually, I think if you motivation is to look good to maybe win people - is that not hypocritical? Seriously, if I got excited about Jesus through someone doing something they didn't believe in I think I'd probably not be too excited about that person's religion when I figured it out. This is what I would call a bad witness. Color me frustrated at this point.

They actually end on a good point. It is true that none of us can do it all. And the best place to start is with small steps having the goal of changing our lifestyle (especially our dependence on non-renewable sources of energy). And for all I complained about lack of depth, the chapters do cover off the majority of falsehoods I've heard from folks who deny the ecological crisis. Not sure how convincing their arguments are, I was convinced from the beginning. And the quotes, many of them are really good.

I'm not sure I could recommend this book. I really want to. This is an area that evangelicals really need to think deeply about. But I would want a response that includes faithfulness to God, particularly God's love for this whole world. I want something that challenges anthropocentrism, the arrogance of our species. And if this is part of our witness, and I believe it should be, then I want something that engages the issue on the issues terms, not as a smokescreen for evangelistic motives with no real desire to make a real difference for our planet. Bottom line is, we screwed this planet up, we can't fix it (despite a few hints in this book that there is still time to fix the problems, they waffled on this point though) but we have to do something, if for no other reason, the ones who suffer the most are the ones least able to do anything about climate change. But, I'd add, that as Christian we also need to have hope that through God we can do more than is humanly possible and maybe through God's grace give our kids a planet that will be livable.

Today it Arrived!

I have been waiting a long time for fresh + re:fresh to come. I was really excited when Len emailed me to say they had finally landed with him, and still it took over a week to arrive. Canada Post battered the spine up a bit, but not to let that squash the extreme joy of seeing my article actually in print! Wahoo! I instantly added it to LibraryThing and I'm wondering if a single chapter qualifies me for a LibraryThing author badge. Ah, but I'm gushing. I read my article sitting in the parking lot of my regular grocery store, and it is pretty good. I've spent a bit of time with the book, taking breaks from my work, and I think it is a great addition to the growing body of literature on emerging/missional church. Some of the best stuff coming out is descriptive, it is an important place to start. As Noll says, evangelicalism at its best is a blending of innovation and tradition and this book certainly represents that (Noll, American Evangelical Christianity, 15). Thanks Len for letting me contribute to this project, I hope it brings out the best in evangelicals all across this wonderful country of ours.

Back but still busy!

The Theology Intensive at Dominion Hill was excellent. It was great to get to meet theologians and pastors that I didn't know and hang out with a few that I did (and really like!) I was really encouraged that the Vineyard, in Canada, is wrestling with the important issues of our time. I think about four years back I got the impression that we were in a holding pattern, which I found a bit frustrating. But that is definitely not my impression after this past week. I was also really encouraged with an insight of David's about the mode of deconstruction that many people are engaging in these days - at the end of ourselves what we really need is an encounter with God. In fact the whole mystic thrust is that we stand before the unknown and are undone. The Vineyard is good at that, we have a long tradition of experiencing God. This is something we need to celebrate and look for as a way forward into the future. To that I say "Come, Holy Spirit!" David wasn't suggesting we somehow disconnect our brains. While we engage with the issues to the fullest of our capacities - there is always something more than what we can do on our own. The wonderful insight of Kingdom Theology is that the Kingdom is God's, not ours. And while we love to partner with God in the stuff of the Kingdom, it is God who leads and reigns.

I wish I had time to properly capture the rich discussions of this past week, but alas it is back to the grind for me.

Hermeneutics with Derek Morphew

I'm heading off to Dominion Hill (New Brunswick) to participate in a workshop with South African Vineyard theologian Derek Morphew. I've met Morphew in the past, he is quite an interested guy. Apparently they are video taping this workshop for Vineyard Bible Institute. I hope I don't get myself in trouble. :-) The main text is Kevin Vanhoozer's Is There Meaning In This Text? which I'm quite enjoying. Unfortunately, I have too little time to adequately prepare for this (We are supposed to read this book, a 69 page course book and watch a presentation Morphew recently did as a webinar). But on the other hand I have read the majority of the suggested other reading - some of which is really, really good material. I am hoping this will be a really in depth exploration of hermeneutics, I'll definitely blog a bit if I have internet access.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch... I am working on my OGS application, prepping an undergrad class on Early Christian Spirituality for Thursday (filling in for my director who is away) and frantically trying to work through my themes on the Kingdom of God tradition. And that is just the academic front - we also moved our oldest from French immersion to English school, survived my wife being away all weekend, took care of a few semi-surprise pastoral issues and entertained my kids. Life is pretty darn full right now.

How to Get at the Sources an Author Does Not Acknowledge

One of the tasks I'm wrestling with tonight is how to get at the sources for several biblical scholars: C H Dodds, J Jeremias and G E Ladd. Ladd I have some good leads to follow. But this is not my world. I don't know Schweitzer enough to know exactly how Dodds is interpreting him. What I have are bibliographies and a computer. So dig, dig, dig. It could be worse, my director did Thomas Berry and he didn't even use footnotes! So to figure out his sources was a huge piece of work that took several scholars. She told me it was a risky (academically) venture and I can believe it. The things I'm appreciative is that not all theologians are that evasive of who their sources and dialogue partners are. If you have any nice leads on the three I chase down tonight please pass them along (even if it is not tonight anymore).

I Write Like Jazz???

While I was doing some final edits on an article for Word in the World (Concordia) I had an insight into my writing. I realized that I write jazz. While that is kinda cool, it is not a good style academically. But at least now I know what I am doing so I can address it. Here is what I mean, let's say the next paragraph is a sample of a typical paragraph in one of my essays.

All the balloons in the world are blue. Fourteen years ago the shuttle Survivor ran into a strange space gas. It was quite upsetting for the pilots, all of whom found it hard to deal with the colour blue. The gas they ran into was blue and piercing the cloud brought it raining down on the planet. Most things were affected, even temporarily, blue became the new black. Now all that is left is the inflation effect, remnants of that strange space gas cause inflated objects to turn blue. The effect is still a puzzle to the scientific community. The blueness of balloons has led to many a sad birthday party, it is these parties that I will turn next.

There are a couple of things - I typed that quickly so it probably has many unintentional problems as well - I want to point out. Multiple ideas in one sentence, I'm working on that one. Connecting sentences at the end that are disconcerting leaps. But there is a strategy that I noticed. I call it the jazz paragraph.

Jazz introduces tension into music, then the listener follows longing for that tension to be resolved. Good jazz resolves this, but not always in the way we expect. This tension and resolution is what makes the music so interesting. (I could be completely off here in my understanding of jazz, so if I am just call it Frank's erroneous understanding of jazz and follow me to the next part.)

My paragraphs often begin right away with a clear claim. That I do well actually. So my strategy should be how I establish the validity of that claim - and there are several ways of doing that. What I tend to do is make my claim and then immediately jump several steps down the rabbit trail. Then I scramble back up to make my connection, but if you missed that this disconnect was the tension you probably are stuck trying to figure out what the first two sentences had to do with each other and completely miss my point. That is the problem with my jazz approach. I need to close the gap between sentence one and sentence two, easing myself (and hopefully my reader) into the rabbit hole.

It is actually encouraging to recognize this. One of the hardest things for me has been to become self-aware when I am writing. When you write you have a whole world of thought in your head and some of it makes its way to the page. If you leave out too much you can't be followed, or at least your arguments cannot be followed. That has been a comment I've gotten a lot from my director - that she can't follow the thinking between sentences. Now that I discovered the jazz aspect I realize why it makes sense to me (plus I'm an abstract thinker, not linear). She knows I know the material, as she once said I can always explain what I am trying to do, but it is not translating to the page.

I'll probably read this post later and laugh. I hope you find it amusing too.

Honesty is a Beautiful Thing

It warmed my heart to read an honest statement about personal ideological claims from a Creationist! Thank you Todd. That is the sort of disclosure that actually gives me hope that there can be conversations, worthwhile conversations between people with different ideological stances towards the science and religion debates.

Let me be equally as honest. I believe that evolution is compelling. I also believe that the Bible is compelling. But I don't feel obligated to believe the Bible weighs in on the science of creation any more than it tells us how a light bulb works. My ideological stance is that the Bible tells us more about the way life should be and in Christ can be than it does about why it is the way it is. The Bible isn't a textbook on socio-cultural analysis any more than it is a physics textbook. That doesn't mean it doesn't have insights that are valuable in that area - but that isn't it's primary thrust. I believe that through the Bible I meet the God who gives me a future and a hope. I also believe that this same God is the creator of all that is. And I also believe that the marvels of evolution, creation and the universe all tell of God's glory. Convoluted as that all sounds, it is where I start in the discussion.

Challenge of Evangelical Theology

The more self-designated evangelical theology I read the more issues I realize I need to contend with in constructing an evangelical political theology. Issues like a theology of scripture, that is very murky water to have to wade into. The issues of competing theologies from the Calvinist versus the Methodist traditions, the reality is that I will never solve that debate for folks and I'd be a fool to try (but I can definitely land somewhere). That debate hints at one of the issues that is most problemmatic - the evangelical obsession for boundaries. Grenz deals with this quite well in chapter 5 of Renewing the Center. The reason for boundaries is specifically to say who is in and who is out - a good example is this critique of the emerging church. The obsessive how far in or how far out of that article struck me as rather odd. The big question is who sets the boundaries. This chart really sets up a false schema, in fact I'd argue if you had to do a boundary diagramme a Venn diagramme is better suited - in my estimation Patton fails to allow for any cross over between fundamentalism and emerging church - why? What presuppositions allow him to make that claim? What allows him to define who is where, or wears what label? Such efforts really only serve one goal - a desperate attempt to define boundaries. Indeed, this might actually be one of the truest defining characteristics of evangelical theology. If that is true then I think my project is, at the very least, in for a very uphill battle!

But NO! I don't believe we should allow anyone else to define who we are for us. If evangelicalism has it's roots in coalitions (as Grenz point out) then the boundaries are not for exclusion, but for helping people choose inclusion. There are two reasons I believe this should be the case: 1) it is the most evangelistic position to take and 2) it is hopeful in a way narrowing can never be.

The real roots of evangelicalism in North America are really found in a convertive piety. This is still recognized in that one of the chief definitions of evangelicals is a strong commitment to individuals being converted to Christianity. Now certainly there are a number of ways this plays out. But if the thrust is outward in an effort to draw women and men to Jesus how can we twist that into a social club disconnected from the world God so loves? In terms of evangelical identity, are we not doing the same thing? Are we not saying who is and isn't welcome to the discussion that is evangelical theology? Would we not better serve our apologetic tendencies to have more people in the conversation than just those who agree with us? You can't save the lost if you aren't willing to go to them (and even invite them to the table like Jesus modeled!) Boundary setting is counter-productive to the gospel. It says we are seeking our comfort (not being challenged) rather than God's glory. It says we are more concerned with our club not being infiltrated than with God's Spirit leading us to shape the discussions that lead the willing into a deeper understanding of their faith and the identity of evangelical.

This narrowing shuts down possibilities for evangelicals to have a positive impact on the world. It closes doors for us to participate in ecumenical and societal events. And so it prevents us from bringing the hope that is in us to those situations. But it also corrupts our vision of what that hope looks like. In my estimation many evangelical theologies have a very weak understanding of grace. We see this most evidently in how we use decline readings of scripture to justify building theological enclaves, fortresses really, that focus on the call to be separate ignoring the equally valid call to be in the world. So we imagine God will whisk us away and hurl vengeance at the world God so loved that Jesus laid down his life for? The disconnect is painful. It is not hope that this evokes, but utter and complete fatalistic despair. And why? Again it is the itching ears that want to feel like they have it right. They have the corner on truth and everyone else has to measure up to their standards. This completely misses any historical reality of our religion (or even Judaism for that matter). The Church was birthed in plurality. Evangelicalism was birthed in plurality. Unfortunately it quickly took on the cause that has tripped up the church so often in the past - plurality is seen as the evil that threatens to destroy us. This might just be one of the best lies ever launched against the Church. Plurality is our strength. Plurality means those who need to be strengthened, encouraged, challenged - even saved, that they are in on the conversations where that will happen. I, for one, would rather be an evangelical in that fashion, opening my arms, than one who has become so blinded that they are no longer able to fulfill the command of Christ in this world. I wish we could all have a mount of transfiguration moment, the boundaries are not the point - Jesus is. God, open our eyes to see Jesus alone.

Reading...

Just an observation about reading. Way back when I was doing my masters I rejoiced in having a super high reading speed. It is still true that if I need to I can plow through books and articles at break neck speed. It is also true that doing this is actually helpful, provided I have some immediate means of massaging the data into meaning - such as a quick read before a class discussion. If I waited too long it was less useful to do this. Just as the masters was reteaching me to write, I think the doctoral work is reteaching me how to read. Reading with comprehension is hard. Reading with attention to detail is hard. Reading is not as simple a process as I would like.

Reading with comprehension, for me, requires lots of processing space. I need to step back from the text a lot, talk it through in my head (or better with people), which just adds to the time it takes to finish the reading. This does not mean I don't strategically read certain texts - it is a good skill to be able to dissect a book into which parts are most important to your purposes, read those thoroughly and skim the rest so that you don't miss something potentially important. But, at least in terms of the comps, my texts are carefully chosen to not have a lot of fat that needs trimming. So I read.

I think part of the problem is that I am quite ADHD, so it is easy for me to start in on a page and halfway through, "is that a cow over there?" Yup, I'm gone. This used to get quite frustrating for me, but really there is not much I can do about it. And the reality is that I do manage to stay on task quite effectively - I've had years to learn how to deal with my attention issues. That explains why I like working in crisis so much, give me an impending deadline and I'm all fired up. If the deadline is only sort of pending - well there is always facebook! Oh look there is a whole season of Trailer Park Boys' I've never seen before! You know the story. The problem with that is it is usually my family that suffers. So I've tried my best to not fall into those old patterns. In fact I've tried to spend time with my family as a way of making the deadlines loom larger for me. This tactic sometimes backfires when I end up pulling a late night and spending the next day with the grumpies.

Well, I've procrastinated long enough this morning, got to get back to reading.

Deep Church

The idea of "deep church" has been getting a lot of traffic lately. However, is this term really any more helpful than emerging/ent or missional? The meaning of these terms are far from self-evident. In fact these terms have insider meaning (usually positive) and outsider meaning (usually negative). I don't think the answer is ditching the effort to name things - but rather recognizing that there are two legitimate components of all these names. First there is a core common phenomenon that folks are trying to name and second these terms are artificial creations with artificial meaning(s) attached by everyone who uses them.

The common phenomenon is the attempt to deal with cultural relevance. Guder's Missonal Church is a great touchstone on this one. The reality is that the models and modes of being church are not as functional in the West as they used to be. There are complex reasons for this. And the reality is that different practitioners have different answers and see different issues as primary concerns. It is important to recognize that even entrenchment into tradition is a response to this phenomenon. Adaptation is a feature of the church that has enabled it to survive and even thrive for 2000 years now. And to be sure most of this adaptation has had faithfulness to the gospel front and centre (at least that aspect of the gospel that was dominant in that moment of history).

This tendency for adaptation means that the practitioners are having an involved and inside conversation involving their specific context(s), ecclesial background and hopes for the church. Because this often occurs with little critical reflection (it is a practical and incipient activity) the language that arises is insider language. The big problem with insider language is the ease at which it is misinterpreted by outsiders - especially outsiders who read the conversation partners in different ways. Take the knee jerk reaction of most anti-emergent books, articles and websites as a prime example. What is needed really is not polemics, but concentrated study. Especially in terms of differentiating the aspects of this phenomenon. Personally I see this an opportunity for academics to step into the conversation, not to give their opinions on how it should be, but to help define what is going on in ways that are helpful, accurate and harder to misunderstand as an outsider.

What this means is that the attempts to adapt in our generation(s) should be submitted to a high degree of examination. What this does not mean is that we should simply assume the worst. I would dare say we should expect the best - and I dare say that in the multitude of options we are bound to find it. It doesn't mean these terms will work for you, but perhaps we can get past the tendencies to simply conflate emerging, deep, missional with some fictitious attack on the church.

Moltmann and Me

In retrospect my contextless thank you to Moltmann probably conveyed more to me than to him. But it was awesome to meet my theological hero in the flesh.

Moltmann Conversation

The tweets from the conversation contain many great quotes and links. If you are looking for audio snippits, that's in there too.

Back now, I'm still tired but really glad I went. The conversation was amazing. Kudos Doug and Tony. I ran into an old friend this morning and realized that he has been studying a lot of the same stuff - Bloch, Moltmann, Pannenberg, etc. It was a great connection and a great excuse to rekindle an old friendship.

Tomorrow I'm leading worship at Greenbelt Baptist. I've never been before, but the pastor is a friend of mine. He's one of those guys who gets that unity is about diversity. I know this because we have quite different political ideas. But at the same time we know each other has a heart for God. Unity is like that. It says there is something more important that politics and even denominational distinctives. It says there is something about belonging that doesn't put any prerequisites in the way. I find that folks who listen for the heart in others are way more willing to see God leading you in different directions, and accept that it is because God is more concerned with seeking us out than God ever is with the trappings of our religious affiliations. I appreciate that in people like Steve.

Conference and Rest

Yesterday was really tiring, so I decided to leave the laptop off. So as a result no blog posts of the conversation yesterday. However, some great live blogging will fill in the blanks. My new friend Joe has links and thoughts - go check his blog out. Today is a bit of a roller coaster too, so I'm thinking that I'll not get to blog until I'm back home in Ottawa.

Eastern Depiction of the Trinity

First Day - Moltmann Conversation

I'm tweeting as pomorev if you want to see some snippets, but the first day was pretty good. John Franke spoke, trying to prime the pumps for our conversation. I felt it was more a plug for his book - Manifold Witness. He began by expressing his non-negotiables regarding biblical reliability, confidence in the promises and Spirit of God. I appreciate them, but I think to really embrace plurality in the idea of truth you need to risk your foundations. Not that you don't bring them into the conversation, but it is like only bringing yourself half to a conversation. But this is based on a short talk, I think he is probably worth reading.

Wicker Park led us in a Eucharist after, it was quite nice. I love the live artist working with chalk as we listened and worshiped. The service was quite accessible and a representation of the incipient worship of their emerging community. The vibe reminded me of EcclesiaX in Ottawa.

Things should be starting up soon.

13 Hours to the Moltmann Trip

In 13 hours I will be stirring myself awake so that I can get to the airport, wait for and board a plane first to Philadelphia and then Chicago. Yup, it will be a lot of time in the air. At my destination, O'Hare, I'll meet up with the gracious Rob Morpeth to catch a ride to the hotel. All they had left were smoking rooms, bummer, so I bought some travel incense. If I'm going to stick like a smokey room it will the smoke of my choosing! I stuffed Sharon's yoga mat in my travel bag, just in case, but I will probably do no more than some standing practices at the hotel and between sessions. And I had to decide just what Moltmann texts to bring. Theology of Hope, of course. It is well loved. Then my favourites, which just happen to be the other texts they recommend you read before coming: Trinity and the Kingdom of God and The Crucified God. When I picked up my passport this morning I had a really strong sense of relief - I really don't like deal breaking loose ends. If it hadn't gone through I would be out a lot of money. But it is nice how this trip is coming together. Now the deal is to get to bed early and simply enjoy myself as my academic interests collide in Chicago. I'll probably send the odd tweet from the conversation, my twitter handle is pomorev.

Undersea Adventure

Today I'm gonna try and find some small plastic sharks. Yeah, sharks! Other than short stints through water I've not run a real undersea adventure - until now. The next leg of my Rathbone campaign takes them to the dread pirates cove with its undersea treasure repository. They are looking for something specific, but much danger awaits. The location is the Sea of Persistence, known for its teeming shark population - of course that is because sharks are not the top of the food chain down there! I'm also thinking of procuring a second aboleth mini, the dread salt-water aboleth might make its presence known. Minis aren't the challenge, what I need to figure out are the niggly things like movement and 3 dimensional combat. Also I'm wondering about the effect of brine on equipment? Thoughts, suggestions, favourite web resources on the subject? Bring it on.

BTW this campaign is D&D 3.5E with some house rules. The party is from 12-14th level so I'm apt to throw lots of big stuff at them. And pirates, there definitely has to be pirates with ship-to-ship combat! The more epic the better. Love to hear your thoughts.

How Committed to the Text ?

I'm reading George Eldon Ladd's the Presence of the Future, it is very good, but it is definitely the work of a Biblical theologian. That is someone whose primary commitment is to the text. He is convinced of his understanding of Kingdom of God theology based on what he sees in the scriptures. His concerns are about the correct interpretation of those scriptures. And I suspect that if he found the scriptures to paint a different picture of the Kingdom of God then he'd not be willing to challenge those scriptures. What I'm wrestling with is how committed I am to the text.

I think this is why I am not a Biblical theologian. If I found an unhelpful understanding of the Kingdom in scripture I would definitely challenge that. But it is not so simple. The reason I don't find such a reading has to do with the bias I bring to the scripture. I know that Ladd, like all Biblical theologians, also brings a bias to the scriptures. Actually I'm impressed when Ladd lays out his assumptions and his thesis, I wish more general evangelical writers would take this lead. But one of the biases I bring to my reading of scripture is that our interpretation changes over time. So my commitment is primarily to a specific reading of the text, but always to a particular understanding that I find supported by the text but also by tradition and experience.

So I am not uncommitted to the text. In fact I have a high value for the text. It disturbs me greatly when scriptural texts seem to counter my values, such as Wednesday's lectional reading about Simon's mother-in-law being healed and then serving. But my response is not to say the scripture is to be rejected or chastised, rather I love to wrestle with it. And in this case I had to conclude that it is equally plausible that Simon's mother-in-law found serving fulfilling (indeed it is a value of the Kingdom) and so was enabled to do something that was deeply rewarding and meaningful even if it could be construed as supporting a patriarchal view of society. The reason I would wrestle at all is that Jesus, in most cases, treats women in ways that are quite radical for his social context. And when this isn't the case usually there is something quite profound going on. Maybe it is best to say that I don't give up on the text - but is this real commitment to the text?

I think it is good for me to reflect on this, the text is important but I'm not animated primarily by the text. Although it is undeniable that 20+ years of reading the bible has influenced my theology, it is how these ideas work themselves out in the context of community, life and politics that really drives my faith to seek understanding. This is a big reason why I don't even pretend to be a Biblical theologian. It also is the reason that I avoid backing up my ideas with proof texts (a practice I abhor). So I end up at a place of both-and. I have a commitment to the text, but it is not primary. My commitment is to well thought out theology that understands and exposes its presuppositions (as much as possible) and seeks to work for a better world for everyone.

Moltmann, Emerging Church, Passport!

OK so I'm heading to Chicago to take in the Moltmann Conversation. I know, no brainer, I write extensively on the emerging church and my favourite theologian of all time is coming to address them. This month is super busy, but first my wife and then my director convinced me that I can't miss this. So I spent the last 48hours setting it all up. Unfortunately I'm staying in a smoking room at the hotel, all they had left, so hopefully that will get changed. But I think it is worth it. I wish I could take my family, but that isn't practical even if it was affordable. So away I go.

I think Moltmann has something profound to say to evangelicals in general. I just hope that what he says is actually reflected on. I also know that the hope theology movement is very concerned with the slip into apocalyptic language that is so popular in evangelical circles. I wonder if Moltmann will clearly address that issue. I think that this will be important for those engaged in re-imagining church, especially the evangelical church.

I'll probably tweet the conference, it will give me something to reflect on later. I'll definitely take lots of notes.