At our last meeting several mentioned that we hoped to finish some books we'd started throughout the past year - which led to the suggestion that we each post a short review or reaction to our reading here on the blog.
So finish that book and share your thoughts with us by adding a comment to this post.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Sunday, December 14, 2008
The Powers That Be
Well, book two of four is complete. This time I read Naming the Powers by Walter Wink. It is the first of a trilogy he began publishing in 1984 and that is quickly becoming a classic.
Here, Wink's goal is to counteract centuries of biblical interpretation that has failed to realize that the language in Scripture referring to powers and authorities does not refer solely to spiritual forces. In fact, he asserts, while the language refers to both spiritual and earthly powers, it mainly refers to earthly powers.
This was brought to my mind today in Sunday School when the question was asked, "Why is the gift of Christ the greatest gift of all?," and was followed by the question, "How do you give the Christmas gift of Christ to others?" I explained when I think of Mary's Magnificat and that the angels appeared to shepherds and foreigners instead of those Jesus seemed to have came to deliver, I am reminded that God identifies with those who are exploited by the powers that be.
I said this makes the gift great, that Christ's birth proclaimed to the powers, powers created by God and inherently good, that they are not reflecting the goodness of their creator and shall be called to task for the many injustices they have trangressed.
As Wink puts it, these powers have falsely established themselves as the ultimate. Christ proclaims a different spirituality: he is the ultimate and his way is love rather than domination. This, Wink says, is where both conservative and liberal Christians have missed the boat. They have sought to overcome these corrupt powers by gaining that corrupt power for themselves not realizing that these powers are fed by a false spirituality.
So we proclaim the gift of the true spirituality of Christ as the ultimate whose Lordship revolutionizes what the worldly powers have made lordship to be in their image. We give this gift by speaking truth to the powers, including those that fuel the system in which we live and benefit, and by providing what refuge we can to those who are exploited by the powers.
The result will be twofold: 1) the very existence of the powers will be threatened by the proclamation of a true spirituality, and 2) people will find deliverance in an authentic way of life instead of that destructive value system they were duped to participate in.
With that, I began book three and wish you an excellent Advent and a Merry Christmas. Remember, in this season we celebrate the arrival of God's Kingdom on earth.
Here, Wink's goal is to counteract centuries of biblical interpretation that has failed to realize that the language in Scripture referring to powers and authorities does not refer solely to spiritual forces. In fact, he asserts, while the language refers to both spiritual and earthly powers, it mainly refers to earthly powers.
This was brought to my mind today in Sunday School when the question was asked, "Why is the gift of Christ the greatest gift of all?," and was followed by the question, "How do you give the Christmas gift of Christ to others?" I explained when I think of Mary's Magnificat and that the angels appeared to shepherds and foreigners instead of those Jesus seemed to have came to deliver, I am reminded that God identifies with those who are exploited by the powers that be.
I said this makes the gift great, that Christ's birth proclaimed to the powers, powers created by God and inherently good, that they are not reflecting the goodness of their creator and shall be called to task for the many injustices they have trangressed.
As Wink puts it, these powers have falsely established themselves as the ultimate. Christ proclaims a different spirituality: he is the ultimate and his way is love rather than domination. This, Wink says, is where both conservative and liberal Christians have missed the boat. They have sought to overcome these corrupt powers by gaining that corrupt power for themselves not realizing that these powers are fed by a false spirituality.
So we proclaim the gift of the true spirituality of Christ as the ultimate whose Lordship revolutionizes what the worldly powers have made lordship to be in their image. We give this gift by speaking truth to the powers, including those that fuel the system in which we live and benefit, and by providing what refuge we can to those who are exploited by the powers.
The result will be twofold: 1) the very existence of the powers will be threatened by the proclamation of a true spirituality, and 2) people will find deliverance in an authentic way of life instead of that destructive value system they were duped to participate in.
With that, I began book three and wish you an excellent Advent and a Merry Christmas. Remember, in this season we celebrate the arrival of God's Kingdom on earth.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Anselm's God-Man
Well, I'm blogging. Sorry it took awhile. It's been a busy couple of weeks. After all, I still have 2.5 books to read by year's end.
I just finished Joerg Rieger's Christ and Empire. The premise of the book is that the doctrine of Christ has been understood to have developed in a vacuum. By assuming this, we have missed how the doctrine was shaped by the political contexts in which it was found and that it ended up supporting empire as it was formed by those in positions of power. However, the idea of Christ itself is so dynamic and unable to be boxed in by empire that even these traditional doctrinal statements leave openings to be reintepreted to resist empire.
The chapter that caught my eye the most was on Anselm's doctrine of the God-Man. This doctrine is that which affirms that Christ was fully God and fully man and sets forth the satisfaction theory of atonement: Christ came and took our place to restore the violated honor God.
There's two major points here. First, the idea of satisfaction needs to be placed in its historical context. This doctrine came together in the days of the feudal system. Within the Norman conquest of England, there were many fiefdoms. The lords of these fiefdoms were responsible for their territory and demanded absolute obedience of their subjects who had to answer to them and the king. Obedience meant order and honor. Disobedience meant chaos and dishonoring the lord and the king. So when someone was disobedient, they came down hard. The lord and the king's honor had to be restored. Honor was important because recognizing one's place in society is what maintained order.
There were two ways to restore order: punishment and satisfaction, instituting interpersonal relationships that overcome the distortion of the relationship.
So here are a few observations:
1) Satisfaction is not about God getting violent revenge, but restoring order.
2) The satisfaction theory of atonement was formulated with the existing power structures in the background and fails to redefine lordship.
3) Despite that failure, notice that Anselm chooses the nonviolent option for restoring order. This will become important in considering the second point.
The second point is this, Anselm wrote of this doctrine in Cur Dues Homo in which he speaks to a student of the need to convince "unbelievers" of the reasons why God becoming man makes sense. This is important in this time in which the church felt the need to reconcile God's omnipotence, impassibility, and immutability with the idea of God becoming man and dying. Now, today we assume "nonbelievers" refers to people without any kind of faith. Yet, that was not the concern then like today when battles against secular humanism and other such things tend to be the focus of many Christians.
Instead, other religions were the main issue. Yet, the issue goes even deeper than the level of religious ideas and is a response to two developments: economic developments that led to a migration of Jewish peoples into urban areas of the Norman Empire and the Crusades. The result is the repression of the Jewish peoples and military action in Jerusalem.
The significance here is that what the empire tried to achieve by the sword, Anselm tried to achieve by reason. Anselm again seems to think in terms of peace while not questioning whether or not God really backs the empire and assuming superiority to his counterparts.
Rieger's insights challenge us to evaluate all out traditional doctrines and see where they lead us to support abusive power structures. My mind goes straight to dispensationalism and the end times. I see a great deal of this in Left Behind thinking and back in our history with Manifest Destiny. What do you think of any of this?
I just finished Joerg Rieger's Christ and Empire. The premise of the book is that the doctrine of Christ has been understood to have developed in a vacuum. By assuming this, we have missed how the doctrine was shaped by the political contexts in which it was found and that it ended up supporting empire as it was formed by those in positions of power. However, the idea of Christ itself is so dynamic and unable to be boxed in by empire that even these traditional doctrinal statements leave openings to be reintepreted to resist empire.
The chapter that caught my eye the most was on Anselm's doctrine of the God-Man. This doctrine is that which affirms that Christ was fully God and fully man and sets forth the satisfaction theory of atonement: Christ came and took our place to restore the violated honor God.
There's two major points here. First, the idea of satisfaction needs to be placed in its historical context. This doctrine came together in the days of the feudal system. Within the Norman conquest of England, there were many fiefdoms. The lords of these fiefdoms were responsible for their territory and demanded absolute obedience of their subjects who had to answer to them and the king. Obedience meant order and honor. Disobedience meant chaos and dishonoring the lord and the king. So when someone was disobedient, they came down hard. The lord and the king's honor had to be restored. Honor was important because recognizing one's place in society is what maintained order.
There were two ways to restore order: punishment and satisfaction, instituting interpersonal relationships that overcome the distortion of the relationship.
So here are a few observations:
1) Satisfaction is not about God getting violent revenge, but restoring order.
2) The satisfaction theory of atonement was formulated with the existing power structures in the background and fails to redefine lordship.
3) Despite that failure, notice that Anselm chooses the nonviolent option for restoring order. This will become important in considering the second point.
The second point is this, Anselm wrote of this doctrine in Cur Dues Homo in which he speaks to a student of the need to convince "unbelievers" of the reasons why God becoming man makes sense. This is important in this time in which the church felt the need to reconcile God's omnipotence, impassibility, and immutability with the idea of God becoming man and dying. Now, today we assume "nonbelievers" refers to people without any kind of faith. Yet, that was not the concern then like today when battles against secular humanism and other such things tend to be the focus of many Christians.
Instead, other religions were the main issue. Yet, the issue goes even deeper than the level of religious ideas and is a response to two developments: economic developments that led to a migration of Jewish peoples into urban areas of the Norman Empire and the Crusades. The result is the repression of the Jewish peoples and military action in Jerusalem.
The significance here is that what the empire tried to achieve by the sword, Anselm tried to achieve by reason. Anselm again seems to think in terms of peace while not questioning whether or not God really backs the empire and assuming superiority to his counterparts.
Rieger's insights challenge us to evaluate all out traditional doctrines and see where they lead us to support abusive power structures. My mind goes straight to dispensationalism and the end times. I see a great deal of this in Left Behind thinking and back in our history with Manifest Destiny. What do you think of any of this?
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Recap kingdom versus empire
Six intrepid souls braved the cold wind to join our discussion about "when should the kingdom resist the empire?" Opinions varied from "always" (due to the natural tension between kingdom and empire) to "whenever we see the empire acting unjustly." An interesting thread centered on what to do when the church starts acting more like the empire than the kingdom...
This was Beth's first time to visit. Welcome, Beth!
Joseph took 14 minutes to discuss some of his latest thinking on theology and Larry shared the news from Casey that he and Kasey are moving to Abilene, so Casey can take a new position with Abilene Christian University. Casey and Kasey, we'll miss you. Vaya con Dios!
J.D. stepped up and volunteered to help maintain this blog. You should see his input as soon as I get him authoring rights.
We'll meet again on January 29. The group suggested we spend some time reading and blogging about what we read between now and then, then we'll talk about our holiday reading at our next meeting.
To inspire you, J.D. says he is going to finish the 3 or 4 books he started this year but never finished. Sounds like a great place to start! (That means I should finish the Shack and The Blue Parakeet...)
So leave a comment and tell us what you're reading.
Maranatha!
This was Beth's first time to visit. Welcome, Beth!
Joseph took 14 minutes to discuss some of his latest thinking on theology and Larry shared the news from Casey that he and Kasey are moving to Abilene, so Casey can take a new position with Abilene Christian University. Casey and Kasey, we'll miss you. Vaya con Dios!
J.D. stepped up and volunteered to help maintain this blog. You should see his input as soon as I get him authoring rights.
We'll meet again on January 29. The group suggested we spend some time reading and blogging about what we read between now and then, then we'll talk about our holiday reading at our next meeting.
To inspire you, J.D. says he is going to finish the 3 or 4 books he started this year but never finished. Sounds like a great place to start! (That means I should finish the Shack and The Blue Parakeet...)
So leave a comment and tell us what you're reading.
Maranatha!
Friday, November 14, 2008
Kingdom versus Empire
Our next meeting will be on Thursday, November 20 - due to the Thanksgiving holiday. We will discuss the question "when is it appropriate for the Kingdom to resist the Empire?"
Hope to see you at 7:00 PM at It's a Grind, 4152 W. Spring Creek Pkwy in Plano.
Hope to see you at 7:00 PM at It's a Grind, 4152 W. Spring Creek Pkwy in Plano.
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Jesus for President Part II Recap
The October 30th North Dallas Cohort (NDC) meeting was thought provoking and enjoyable highlighted by a great crowd and stimulating discussion. Jimmy Cramer, a friend of the Brummet's, joined us for the first time. As always, there was no shortage of interesting discussion and unique perspectives!
Due to the upcoming holidays, we decided that we would meet one more time this year - Thursday, November 20th. The first meeting in 2009 will be Thursday, January 29th. Both meetings will be at our usual gathering place.
We began by discussing and contrasting two of the leading emergent writers and thinkers - Brian McLaren and Shane Claiborne. Their books and contributions have had a major impact on the development of emergent thought and for many of the North Dallas Cohort. Their messages are very similar and kingdom focused. Brian was seen as a more eloquent, persuasive, almost academic contributor with a very moving and inspirational approach. Shane's writings and message are equally motivating, stimulating and thought provoking, however; his style was viewed as more of a social activist.
The NDC also discussed the challenges facing today's the traditional church. We agreed that the reference to 'church' carried with it a certain amount of negative baggage. To some this implies an institution, a specific dogma or doctrine, uniformity, a building, and the primary place of worship. Unfortunately, a location, where we spend only 1-2 hours each week (at best). We also discussed how the traditional church at times appears to be incorporating Christian and American democratic principles as a unified theology that lures people into a political correct view of church. In some cases, placing more emphasis on politics and national interests than Christ's teachings. Consumerism was also cited as a key contributing factor to this co-mingling of religion and politics. Racism was also noted as a subliminal, almost unconscious factor also shaping our church views and practices. We agreed that we needed new language, new rituals, inclusion, and emergent practices to realize Christ's kingdom message.
As we adjourned, we agreed that the key topic for the November 20th meeting would be ..."when it is appropriate to resist the Empire".
Peace,
Due to the upcoming holidays, we decided that we would meet one more time this year - Thursday, November 20th. The first meeting in 2009 will be Thursday, January 29th. Both meetings will be at our usual gathering place.
We began by discussing and contrasting two of the leading emergent writers and thinkers - Brian McLaren and Shane Claiborne. Their books and contributions have had a major impact on the development of emergent thought and for many of the North Dallas Cohort. Their messages are very similar and kingdom focused. Brian was seen as a more eloquent, persuasive, almost academic contributor with a very moving and inspirational approach. Shane's writings and message are equally motivating, stimulating and thought provoking, however; his style was viewed as more of a social activist.
The NDC also discussed the challenges facing today's the traditional church. We agreed that the reference to 'church' carried with it a certain amount of negative baggage. To some this implies an institution, a specific dogma or doctrine, uniformity, a building, and the primary place of worship. Unfortunately, a location, where we spend only 1-2 hours each week (at best). We also discussed how the traditional church at times appears to be incorporating Christian and American democratic principles as a unified theology that lures people into a political correct view of church. In some cases, placing more emphasis on politics and national interests than Christ's teachings. Consumerism was also cited as a key contributing factor to this co-mingling of religion and politics. Racism was also noted as a subliminal, almost unconscious factor also shaping our church views and practices. We agreed that we needed new language, new rituals, inclusion, and emergent practices to realize Christ's kingdom message.
As we adjourned, we agreed that the key topic for the November 20th meeting would be ..."when it is appropriate to resist the Empire".
Peace,
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Jesus for President Part 2 - October 30
Join us Thursday, October 30 when Al will help us explore whether it is too late to redeem Sunday mornings in institutional churches, and J.D. will lead us into a discussion about the question: "when is it appropriate to resist the Empire?" This promises to be a great conversation, and so timely just before the election. Reading some or all of Claiborne's book is NOT a prerequisite for this discussion - so come on and enjoy the dialogue
Hope to see you at 7:00 PM at It's a Grind, 4152 W. Spring Creek Pkwy in Plano.
Hope to see you at 7:00 PM at It's a Grind, 4152 W. Spring Creek Pkwy in Plano.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)