Tuesday, October 23, 2007

Um...Now I'm Afraid

If Quebec separates and I am living in Quebec, will I be able to vote? Will my citizenship be "controlled"? I suppose I am a little concerned that I have to (and we do have to) ask these questions. Here's the article that should give all people who enjoy freedom in Canada some concern. Wow.

Of course, this fellow is now back-tracking. But, really, if these words come out of your mouth and you are conscious that they are daring, then what good is a backtracking? We already know what you think.

I do take comfort in one thing, however. I am from Shawville and that town won't be bullied with a (literal) fight.

Monday, October 22, 2007

Book Review: A Community Called Atonement


Scot McKnight (www.jesuscreed.org) is a significant participant in the conversation of the Emergent Church. A Community Called Atonement, a title conspicuously lacking no meandering academic subtitle, is McKnight’s in-print addition to the emergent conversation, and the initial publication of the new Living Theology series edited by Emergent Village’s Tony Jones, and published by Abingdon Press. As such, McKnight’s work seeks to fulfill the desire of Tony Jones for the Living Theology series that it “talk about the best theology around…in ways that are approachable for many people” (ix).

McKnight begins his work with a metaphor: just as golf is a game requiring numerous clubs for different kinds of shots, so does the “atonement game” require us to “understand the value of each club” (xiii), by which McKnight means the numerous biblical images of atonement which “play out the fulsomeness of the redemptive work of God” (xiii). Whether or not there is a single bag to hold all the atonement images is one of the questions McKnight seeks to answer. As the title suggests, McKnight is concerned about atonement being lived out, and specifically in community. This means that atonement must “work.” It must not only be lived out, but it must facilitate its own being lived out.

McKnight grounds this belief in a Lukan reading of the Kingdom of God. “If [covenanted community where the covenant God’s will is lived out for each and every person] is Jesus’ vision, and atonement is one way of speaking of what God’s redemptive work in this world is designed to accomplish, then the creation of a community where God’s will is done is inherent to the meaning of atonement…. Atonement creates the kingdom of God” (13). This discussion is focused on the Trinity, anthropology, and sin. McKnight desires to develop his theology of atonement first on God, moving quickly to restoration of humans in three other directions so that humans, or “eikons,” are properly “God-oriented, self-oriented, other-oriented, and cosmos-oriented” (21). This combines both objective and subjective elements: “Atonement spools from the (objective) act of what God for us into (the subjective) fresh and ongoing acts by God’s people” (28). Atonement both reconciles and commissions people to be reconcilers.

McKnight follows this by defending the appropriateness of metaphors. He says, “The effect of seeing metaphor as possibility is that metaphors are not in need of decoding or unpacking by of indwelling” (37, emphasis in the original). But while metaphors form ways of life, they also encourage humility. They are always limited. This humility should enlarge our understanding of two things: the multiplicity of sin and the expanse of atonement. “Our grasp of atonement is partial; the God we are grasping for is complete and whole. In God there is absolute truth; in our articulations there is always something lacking, something partial, and something still yearning for yet more. A proper confidence in the God who atones reminds us of this and keeps us humble—and in conversation as we work this atonement thing out in each generation” (49). This means that each and every image of atonement is useful, to be considered, and to be used in the appropriate manner and at the appropriate time. It also means that the whole life of Jesus—incarnation, crucifixion (in part considered as penal substitution), resurrection, and Pentecost must be kept in play. This leads to McKnight’s unpacking of Passover, justification, and recapitulation as atonement stories.

Having developed each of these atonement images/stories, McKnight asks whether there is a bag in which one can carry the whole bunch. He offers the phrase “identification for incorporation” to carry the full set of atonement clubs: Jesus identifies with humans; Jesus incorporates humans in his death for liberation from sin. This means that “Jesus died for them, with them, and instead of them” (107). Jesus takes on our death so that his life might be given to us. This full-orbed statement of Jesus’ death leads McKnight to consider how recapitulation, Christus Victor/ransom, satisfaction, and penal substitution can all fit into this description.
Finally, McKnight unpacks living atonement as fellowship, justice, and mission, being shaped by the Word and in the church’s practices of baptism, eucharist, and prayer.

McKnight’s book has two immediate qualities. First, it is structured and reads conversationally. This is not to say it is unconsidered or naïve, but that it is meant to foster conversation and community. It seeks to encourage more voices rather than to offer a final word. Second, it is gracious and non-polemic. Even for those who will disagree with McKnight will find him amiable. I believe McKnight’s idea of atonement being participatory would have benefited from interaction with Radical Orthodoxy, specifically John Milbank’s unpacking of Colossians 1:24 and Paul’s suffering what was lacking in Christ’s afflictions. However, this interaction would have been difficult to handle in the popular style of McKnight’s work, which may have contributed to Radical Orthodoxy’s absence. Also, I would have enjoyed a consideration of the Ascension as an atoning moment, especially since this event is often ignored and unconsidered by many church-going believers.

As the initial installment of the Living Theology series, A Community Called Atonement has succeeded in bringing good theology to a context accessible to many people. This book is appropriate in a number of contexts: as a supplementary text in an introduction to atonement theology course for undergraduates; as a primer for preachers reconsidering their preaching of the atonement; and, most importantly, as a text for small communities to discuss, consider, and by which to be spurred to actions of atonement.

Saturday, October 20, 2007

A gift from postmodernism

Harry Potter author, J.K. Rowling, recently announced that Albus Dumbledore is gay. Fortunately, aspects of postmodernism makes clear that Rowling's control of the story is not totally hers anymore. She has written a text and now may no longer control it. I have the same text she does and see no reason to believe, after reading the text, that Albus Dumbledore is gay.

Thursday, October 18, 2007

Deconstruction, the Cross, and Listening

Roy Harrisville's recent book, "Fracture," contends that that the Cross is incompatible with the worldviews present to the New Testament authors. Placed against other thought forms, it (possibly) deconstructs them.

For a while, I have seen listening as an act that resembles the Cross. I have relied on the definition of Carl Jung for listening--"becoming thoroughly at home in another person's thought world" (or something like that). The Cross is God living in the world he has created, that others live in, as well. The Cross is God listening to a suffering world.

Listening has the potential to deconstruct, as well. In illness narratives, listening provides a form of power for the sufferer over their illness, deconstructing that which threatens to deconstruct them. Listening can also unsettle the narrative of a speaker, opening new interpretations.

I believe this potential is akin to the Cross' potential for deconstruction: The Cross, if followed, shatters the worldview of those who approach it; it turns worlds upside-down. However, this leaves a vacuum: The deconstructed worlds, or narratives, of individuals need to be re-narrated; I believe this is the place for speech and resurrection to build new worlds, new narratives.

Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Prayer and Confession

Prayer is a form of confession because what you pray reveals who you are.

Christian confession is form of prayer because the other to whom you are confessing is a representative of your High Priest, Jesus, who is also your elder brother whose Spirit dwells in the person to whom you are confessing.

Monday, October 15, 2007

Resurrection as Narrative Bound; or, one cannot have one's philosophical cake and eat it, too

I have been listening to some lectures on postmodernism for a church context. Very interesting. The two main guys, John Caputo (Syracuse University) and Patrick Kearney (Boston College), have some great thoughts to share. I love how they can make philosophers sound like preachers (e.g., Jacques Derrida; at one point, Kearney says something like, "If you're listening to or reading [Caputo], then you'll be disappointed in reading Derrida. Caputo really makes Derrida sound redemptive."). (The podcasts are available here.)

However, the last podcast ended rather disappointingly with the theology Caputo and Kearney both spouted, which was pluralism: the different religions, inasmuch as they point to love being the center of reality, point to God and will all end up with God. The problem, of course, is that if God is love, then inasmuch as anything points to God as love, it is true, and applying this statement to religions is no different. It simply becomes a truism. But more importantly, the saving event(s) of the Christian narrative, life, crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension, are radically tied to a single man, Jesus of Nazareth, who is radically tied to the narrative of Israel. It is not just unique, it is particular. If all religions point to God and all religions are tied to their own narratives, then we don't have a plurality of good news. In fact, we have lost Christianity as a route to God. Let me flesh this out.

At one point, Kearney says that Jesus and Buddha would sit and listen to each other. When
pressed by Tony Jones, the moderator, whether or not Jesus would call the Buddha to follow him, Kearney says he would, but that Jesus would also accept the Buddha's invitation to follow him. This is obviously a far cry from Jesus of Nazareth being installed as King, and the Buddha being among the many who bow before Jesus of Nazareth. This notion that Jesus and Buddha are on par with each other radically undermines the gospel of Jesus Christ because its meaning is longer supported by its narrative. If Jesus of Nazareth is raised from the dead and ascends to heaven, then the Father of Jesus Christ is God. The narrative of Jesus Christ bears no good news if it is one of many because of its particularity and meaning when fit in the context of Israel.

One cannot both hope for the resurrection and undercut the unique and particular narrative which gives rise to it and its meanings.

Saturday, October 13, 2007

Is Kinsella right or wrong?

Warren Kinsella is a smart guy. After the Ontario Libs won a massive majority this past week, he wrote this on his blog:

"October 10, 2007 - What does Tory's defeat mean? What does the Tories massive defeat mean?

It means a certain guy at 24 Sussex has to be re-evaluating an election for Fall 2007.

My guess? He won't do it."

There are four ways to think about Kinsella's prediction:
1. Kinsella is right (no federal election) for the right reason (Harper has taken notice of Ont. Lib. favour).
2. Kinsella is right (no federal election) for the wrong reason (Harper realizes other parties won't bring him down and can continue governing).
3. Kinsella is wrong (there is a federal election) for the right reason.
4. Kinsella is wrong (there is a federal election) for the wrong reason.

The first two are straight forward. The second two require a little more unpacking. I don't think Kinsella really thinks the Ontario election will play any part. He knows Harper plays his own drum and is hoping that in his small way, Kinsella himself can delay a federal election. This would be option #3: Kinsella is wrong in his prediction, but has correctly read Harper. This, of course, is a switch in reasoning from option 1. Kinsella could also be wrong and there is a federal election, but has just underestimated the political fortitude of Harper. I highly doubt this is the case. Kinsella is too smart. Honestly, does he think Stephen Harper is at all afraid of going head to head with Stephane Dion in a debate? Does he not realize the swing votes that the Liberals got will be very comfortable voting for a conservative politician with such genuine appeal and leadership ability as Harper?

My guess is that Kinsella sees that such a devastating win for the Liberals in Ontario only bolsters the appeal of a federal Conservative Party under strong leadership.

Thursday, October 11, 2007

Inconsistent Postmodernism

Critique from John Caputo for postmodernism: Postmodernism deconstructs all the tenets of modernism except the distinction between faith and reason. Once people start talking about religion, the alarm is raised that that is out of bounds. Instead, we must remember that reason is a way of believing and faith is a way of reasoning.

Excellent critique.

Tuesday, October 09, 2007

Deconstruction in Canadian Politics

Yesterday I mentioned how the preacher can deconstruct his/herself by leaving the word with the people. Leaders who deconstruct themselves are leaders who are constantly changing so as not to develop a significant following. I am not sure my worldview, which has a strong notion of authority, will allow such a neat deconstruction, though. After all, even the most staunch post-modernists still develop followings. Brian McLaren still gets a crowd.

I think one form deconstruction took in Canadian politics was the flip-flop of Peter Mackay after winning the leadership of the Progressive Conservative party a few years ago. Mackay promised not to merge the party with the Canadian Alliance and thereby won the support of Joe Clark. He quickly reneged this promise, however, and entered into talks with Stephen Harper. The parties were merged and a new Conservative Party of Canada was born. This is now the governing party of Canada. What Mackay did not do, however, was run for the leadership of the new Conservative Party. He stepped aside and allowed others to lead and vie for its direction and public face. It was in precisely this act of stepping aside that Mackay deconstructed himself. Of course, this situation is also tainted with the realism of politics, but I don't think postmodernism should mind this realism, especially in its rejection of idealism and utopias.

Monday, October 08, 2007

Postmodern Preaching

John Caputo draws a distinction between nihilistic and prophetic postmodernism. The latter is concerned for the individual and is positive in its approach to her. It is not necessarily optimistic, but it presents a positive mandate. (I think this is can become a form of the moral argument for God's existence and is the reason religion has made an appearance in some forms of postmodern thought...and is why people like Caputo, Jamie Smith, and John Milbank are read with gratitude by Christians.) Anyway, I have been thinking about deconstruction in preaching, or postmodern preaching.

Postmodern preaching is concerned with presenting the truth of the gospel in a way that gives the majority of responsive space over to the Spirit. The preacher does not describe correct/dogmatic responses to the sermon (except, perhaps, generalities like repentance). S/he leaves the sermon, the word, with the listener, which is an act of entrusting the word to the Spirit. (And, of course, it is the Spirit of the Lord who brings change to be like the Lord.) The preacher leaves the sermon with the people, self-conscious of her/his own bondage to this spoken word, as well. In this way, the preacher has deconstructed his/herself: S/he is not the one to follow, though s/he was the one anointed of God to speak.

I think the error of nihilistic postmodernism is to say there is either no truth to speak or no speaker to speak it.

Saturday, October 06, 2007

Coming full theo-philosophical circle?

Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard, the great existentialist philosopher, reacted against the philosophy of G.W.F. Hegel, in part, because Hegel's philosophy brought God down too far and abstracted him too much. Hegel did this by saying that history is the autobiography of God (which in turn was a reaction to the unknowable God of Kant...anyways...). Kierkegaard affirmed, instead, that God was transcendent and personal.

Postmodern theology, done after the projects of modernity (think Star Trek and how earth is devoid of poverty, illness, etc.) have had devastations like the Holocaust, emphasizes the immanence of God, the suffering God (Moltmann). Both Kierkegaard and (good) PoMo theology react against abstract theology, but based on their location in the story must emphasize different elements of who God is.

Friday, October 05, 2007

Beyond Carrie Underwood Christianity

Carrie Underwood's first single from her latest album was "Jesus Take the Wheel." It was followed (whether or not immediately) by "Before he Cheats." "Jesus Take the Wheel" is about a single mother who has lost her life and desires to give it to Jesus, because she's messed it up. "Before he Cheats" is about the revenge a former lover takes on her ex-boyfriend, celebrating her revenge and sense of justice.

This story describes the Christianity of too many people, which is to say, the lack of Christian faith of too many professing Christians. How so? We come to a situation in life (perhaps a physical, emotional, financial, real, false, perceived crisis) and give life to God. Jesus, take the wheel. However, we continue living once the crisis is past and go back (or stay in) our old ways of living; we live life without regard for the one who's just assumed control. We live as though we never gave up control in the first place. Unfortunately, there is no faith without transformation. (Actually, that's quite fortunate, but that's another post.) Why? Because the one we've asked to take the wheel is the Lord who breathes the Spirit into our lives (John 20) and it is the Spirit who changes us to be like the Lord. In fact, in 2 Cor. 3, Paul draws Jesus and the Spirit so closely together (in connection with Yahweh, reminiscent of Ex. 34) that he refers to them both as the Lord, but they remain distinct. Jesus without the Spirit is no Jesus.

If you're in Johnson City, NY on Sunday, go to another church, or else you'll hear that same sermon.

Wednesday, October 03, 2007

Embodying Forgiveness

Embodying Forgiveness, by Greg Jones, is an excellent study in (what he calls) the craft of forgiveness. I won't break this book down as I have others, but only give a one-post overview.

Jones contends that forgiveness is costly and that some therapeutic versions of forgiveness do a disservice to taking it seriously. Costly forgiveness takes seriously the violent nature of the world; it does not sugarcoat the evils that forgiving people might face. Forgiveness must meet the horrific evils the world presents us with if forgiveness is to be part of the life that unlearns the violence of which we grow accustomed and even accepting.

Forgiveness must be learned from the Triune God in both his actions of Incarnation, judgment, and sacraments. God's judgment is not one that limits and only limits the one judged, but is a judgment of grace that establishes the possibilities for new relationship and new formation.

With this in mind, Jones presents forgiveness as a craft to be learned. Forgiveness is a way of life that flows from one's forgiven-ness in Jesus Christ. This may mean living with those who refuse to be reconciled to us, however it does not overturn the role of (secular) political power. Christians must maintain a voice for those suffering the punishment of the state, but need not reject it altogether and can indeed forgive those the state punishes.

Jones ends by asking whether the story of the world, in all its horror, is a story to pass on. He gives three possible answers to the question: First, the story of the world is not worth passing on because it is horrifying (at times). Second, the story of the world, because of its horror, simply breaks and disintegrates and is not a story. It lacks resolution and coherence. Third, the story of the world is not a story to pass on, or forsake. It is not one to ignore. The craft of forgiveness calls Christians to take seriously and treat with care the stories of those they find in the world because they feed a larger story that does find its coherence.

One line has resonated with me time and again from this work, taken, I believe, from Rowan Williams: Christ crucified and resurrected is not the same as Christ un-crucified.

Monday, October 01, 2007

Organic Community: Language and Resources

In chapter 9, Myers suggests that we must move from noun-centric to verb-centric in our use of language. Words that previously haven't been verbs (e.g., Google) become verbs to bring a connotation of action. Myers suggests that we must consider small groups in a verb-like way. By this he means that we must see small groups as people becoming. There is no easy way to summarize this chapter because what Myers is urging is to reconsider language so as to shape the way we think. However, in order to do this, he must use language in a way that he is not totally advocating doing. He still has nouns; he still uses subjects. He admits the difficulties of this chapter at the outset. This was a good chapter, with an interesting approach. It is rather abstract and suffers from that abstraction, but I don't think Myers would mind. Part of changing the way you use language is reading unfamiliar uses of language. In a way, this whole book is an exercise in changing your language about small groups so that you will speak in a new way and thereby change your worldview.

Myers' final chapter is on abundance and believing that resources will present themselves when the time is right. This is a good chapter for me to read, because I tend toward conserving and designating resources. I rarely think in terms of finding available resources or that resources will be available as the project moves forward. I think this chapter needs to be balanced with aspects of the chapter on growth, however, a good reminder overall.

The goal of Myers' book is to help people move from being a programmer to being an enviromentalist. I like this approach. This book, pointing to the point of chapter 9, has helped give me some new language for community. It has encouraged me to continue being an environmentalist in my church in ways that I have been doing, and to become more diverse, divesting more responsibility to people for the community they have and want.