Ed Stetzer and David Putnam, authors
Broadman & Holman, 2006
Review by George Pasley
Over the last few years I’ve read a number of books on evangelism and reaching the unchurched. “Breaking the Missional Code” is my favorite this far. I read it last fall and marked it up with notes, underlines, highlights and questions, then skimmed it again and re-read several chapters to reinforce and revisit my earlier thoughts.
I like it primarily for two reasons: One, it does not insist that a certain theological perspective is necessary for evangelistic success. There are some books out there that do, and they seem more aimed at proving their point than helping you introduce people to Jesus. “Breaking the Missional Code” does say “we must take the Bible seriously” and does reference a theology that does not compromise faith, but it leaves room for considerable differences and it does not overwhelm the reader with its bias.
Second, “Breaking the Missional Code” repeatedly makes list of key points, making it easy to understand and easy to apply.
In particular, page 81 lists four questions we need to ask before setting out on evangelism: 1) where are the unchurched/unreached? 2) Who are the unchurched/unreached? 3) Why are they unchurched/unreached? 4) What is God already doing among the unchurched/unreached? (I found the 4th question especially significant).
These lists are found in most every chapter but others that I found helpful were on page 102, barriers to helping seekers understand and feel safe in worship; page 103, list of important assumptions to make about engaging people in a meaningful way; and page 128, patterns for spiritual formation.
Regarding barriers to worship, I like the way they recognized that even though seekers and believers are looking for different things in worship, and that tension will exist between serving both groups, we all need to worship together to experience the Christian community.
Key principals the book lifts up: 1) North America is a poly cultural context, with many cultures being micro-cultures in a local community. If we want to reach people with our message we need to find them, get to know them, and deliver our message in a way they will understand. 2) Many persons are spiritually receptive but not familiar with Christianity. 3) Discipleship now begins before conversion as people need to experience and participate in the Gospel before committing to it. 4) Evangelism is now relational instead of propositional. 5) Evangelism will require patience since much of it is more about sowing seeds rather than harvesting.
I also like the book because it is, by definition, adaptable. Every culture and context is different. Though the book seems written by persons more familiar with locales of growing populations, it could easily be adapted to other contexts, such as my won, where populations are not growing but the numbers of unchurched persons ARE growing.
While reading the book I occasionally noted questions or critiques, only to have them answered a bit later. My most serious critique is that it emanations “servant evangelism” but them passes it by as if it were insignificant or nor worth pursuing, but perhaps it is only “beside the point.”
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
NAMING INFINITY
NAMING INFINITY
By Loren Graham & Jean-Michel Kantor
Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2009
ISBN 978-0-674-03293-4
Review by George R. Pasley
Here is a fascinating book authored by two historians of science who survey the lives and thoughts of mathematicians involved in the origins Descriptive Set Theory during the first three decades of the Twentieth Century.
Why would I read such a book, and why should you? The books subtitle caught my eye, and aptly sums up the plot of the book,”A True Story of Religious Mysticism and Mathematical Creativity”.
The book purports to be written for mathematical lay persons, and perhaps it is, but I found the math almost impossible to comprehend. Well, maybe that is as it should be, for the mathematicians were all involved in studying infinity, something which is undefined except to say what it is not. None-the-less, the authors did manage to describe, both analytically and poetically, the struggles, conflicts, and insights contributed by all persons involved.
Specifically, Graham and Kantor describe how a trio of French mathematicians (Emil Borel, Henri Lebesgue, & Rene-Louise Baire), raised in a world of ultra-rationalism, made certain insights into Set Theory but then “lost their nerve” when their insights pushed them further and further away from their philosophical worldview. Their teaching, however, influenced a trio of Russian mathematicians (Dmitri Egorov, Nikolai Luzin, & Pavel Florensky) whose specific religious inclinations allowed them to make an imaginative leap where cold rationalism could not go. Florensky in fact was a priest of the Russian Orthodox Church, though the particular mystical practice (Name Worshipping) of the trio was considered heretical. Egorov and Luzin founded a school of mathematics, the Moscow School of Mathematics, whose prestige and influence world-wide is still great.
That the Russian trio lived and taught during the Russian Revolution, with Florensky being executed and Egorov dying as a result of imprisonment, and Luzin suffering in academic exile, and that the French trio suffered a host of mental breakdowns, makes the story tragic, compelling, and dramatic. Brief snippets are also provided to a host of the supporting players, some of whom could be the subjects of quite dramatic biographies.
The authors admit to being secularists. The book is not an attempt to solve the science-religion debates. But their final words are pragmatic, tolerant, and open to possibility. Quoting legendary secular mathematician Grothendieck, who insisted mathematicians do not need religion, Graham and Kantor reply:”Our belief, as we have shown here, is that it sometimes can help.”
August 19, 2009
Ketchikan, AK
By Loren Graham & Jean-Michel Kantor
Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2009
ISBN 978-0-674-03293-4
Review by George R. Pasley
Here is a fascinating book authored by two historians of science who survey the lives and thoughts of mathematicians involved in the origins Descriptive Set Theory during the first three decades of the Twentieth Century.
Why would I read such a book, and why should you? The books subtitle caught my eye, and aptly sums up the plot of the book,”A True Story of Religious Mysticism and Mathematical Creativity”.
The book purports to be written for mathematical lay persons, and perhaps it is, but I found the math almost impossible to comprehend. Well, maybe that is as it should be, for the mathematicians were all involved in studying infinity, something which is undefined except to say what it is not. None-the-less, the authors did manage to describe, both analytically and poetically, the struggles, conflicts, and insights contributed by all persons involved.
Specifically, Graham and Kantor describe how a trio of French mathematicians (Emil Borel, Henri Lebesgue, & Rene-Louise Baire), raised in a world of ultra-rationalism, made certain insights into Set Theory but then “lost their nerve” when their insights pushed them further and further away from their philosophical worldview. Their teaching, however, influenced a trio of Russian mathematicians (Dmitri Egorov, Nikolai Luzin, & Pavel Florensky) whose specific religious inclinations allowed them to make an imaginative leap where cold rationalism could not go. Florensky in fact was a priest of the Russian Orthodox Church, though the particular mystical practice (Name Worshipping) of the trio was considered heretical. Egorov and Luzin founded a school of mathematics, the Moscow School of Mathematics, whose prestige and influence world-wide is still great.
That the Russian trio lived and taught during the Russian Revolution, with Florensky being executed and Egorov dying as a result of imprisonment, and Luzin suffering in academic exile, and that the French trio suffered a host of mental breakdowns, makes the story tragic, compelling, and dramatic. Brief snippets are also provided to a host of the supporting players, some of whom could be the subjects of quite dramatic biographies.
The authors admit to being secularists. The book is not an attempt to solve the science-religion debates. But their final words are pragmatic, tolerant, and open to possibility. Quoting legendary secular mathematician Grothendieck, who insisted mathematicians do not need religion, Graham and Kantor reply:”Our belief, as we have shown here, is that it sometimes can help.”
August 19, 2009
Ketchikan, AK
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
PAYBACK
PAYBACK: Debt and the Shadow Side of Life
By Margaret Atwood
O.W.Toad, Ltd, Toronto, 2008
ISBN 978-0-88784-800-1
Review by George R. Pasley
This is a fascinating book, which studies the anthropological, literary, sociological, judicial and even theological history of debt, monetary and otherwise.
For instance, researchers taught captive capuchin monkeys to trade pebbles for cucumber slices. Once all the monkeys were trained, the trainers began giving one monkey grapes instead of cucumber slices. When the remaining monkeys continued to receive cucumber slices, they acted out in numerous ways, including going on a hunger strike. Fairness was the issue here, and it evidently is written into the genetic code of social primates- so quite possibly, it is written into our own.
Or, why do some people use “trespasses” in the Lord’s Prayer and others use “debts”? Atwood reports that Aramaic, the language Jesus spoke, has only one word for both English translations (though she does not delve into either Greek or Hebrew).
In a bit of literary and cultural research, Atwood reports on the custom of sin-eating. Quoting Mary Webb (Precious Bane, 1924): “Now it was still the custom at that time, in our part of the country, to give a fee to some poor man after a death, and then he would take bread and wine handed to him across a coffin, and eat and drink, saying, ‘I give easement and rest to thee now dear man, that ye not walk over the fields and down the by-ways. And for thy peace I pawn my own soul.’” (p. 61)
Atwood’s book follows a fascinating rabbit trail dodging a dozen directions, but I found myself deeply engrossed in every wondering thought. My trouble came at the end, when after exposing the shadow side of debt- the things that happen when we don’t pay our debt, or the things that happen when debt cannot be repaid with money (as in, when revenge doesn’t work), Atwood comes to conclusion: pay it forward. She actually does a stellar job of explaining the limitations of justice, the symbiotic nature of lenders and borrowers, and the value of forgiveness. But in the end she offers environmental activism as a solution (though perhaps only as an example) and I found it insufficient- though perhaps it was only too narrow. Still, thought provoking and worthwhile. Good discussion for religion, philosophy, literature, and economic learners.
July 15, 2009
Ketchikan, AK
By Margaret Atwood
O.W.Toad, Ltd, Toronto, 2008
ISBN 978-0-88784-800-1
Review by George R. Pasley
This is a fascinating book, which studies the anthropological, literary, sociological, judicial and even theological history of debt, monetary and otherwise.
For instance, researchers taught captive capuchin monkeys to trade pebbles for cucumber slices. Once all the monkeys were trained, the trainers began giving one monkey grapes instead of cucumber slices. When the remaining monkeys continued to receive cucumber slices, they acted out in numerous ways, including going on a hunger strike. Fairness was the issue here, and it evidently is written into the genetic code of social primates- so quite possibly, it is written into our own.
Or, why do some people use “trespasses” in the Lord’s Prayer and others use “debts”? Atwood reports that Aramaic, the language Jesus spoke, has only one word for both English translations (though she does not delve into either Greek or Hebrew).
In a bit of literary and cultural research, Atwood reports on the custom of sin-eating. Quoting Mary Webb (Precious Bane, 1924): “Now it was still the custom at that time, in our part of the country, to give a fee to some poor man after a death, and then he would take bread and wine handed to him across a coffin, and eat and drink, saying, ‘I give easement and rest to thee now dear man, that ye not walk over the fields and down the by-ways. And for thy peace I pawn my own soul.’” (p. 61)
Atwood’s book follows a fascinating rabbit trail dodging a dozen directions, but I found myself deeply engrossed in every wondering thought. My trouble came at the end, when after exposing the shadow side of debt- the things that happen when we don’t pay our debt, or the things that happen when debt cannot be repaid with money (as in, when revenge doesn’t work), Atwood comes to conclusion: pay it forward. She actually does a stellar job of explaining the limitations of justice, the symbiotic nature of lenders and borrowers, and the value of forgiveness. But in the end she offers environmental activism as a solution (though perhaps only as an example) and I found it insufficient- though perhaps it was only too narrow. Still, thought provoking and worthwhile. Good discussion for religion, philosophy, literature, and economic learners.
July 15, 2009
Ketchikan, AK
NOT THE RELIGIOUS TYPE
NOT THE RELIGIOUS TYPE
By Dave Schmelzer
Tyndale, 2008
ISBN 978-1-4143-1583-6
Review by George Pasley
Author Dave Schmelzer is the pastor of a new and rapidly growing church in the Harvard neighborhood of Cambridge, Massachusetts. This little book offers, part by way of personal testimony and part by way of apologetics, an introduction to Christian faith to modern Americans who might consider themselves educated skeptics.
I found it very readable, very persuasive, and invitational. It was neither dogmatic nor polemic. In fact, I finished the book thinking that Schmelzer might be as liberal, theological speaking, than me (though that was only a suspicion- he doesn’t offer any proof of that) but that he is definitely more pious.
Schmelzer’s testimony is the story of how he came to faith, moving from proclaimed atheist to follower of Jesus, while he was a college student. The transformation came as a result of his prayers in search of a God who was concerned about his (David’s) well-being, followed by serious study of the major religions. Thus Schmelzer’s proclaimed faith is one that is all about personal relationship with Jesus, made vibrant by prayer.
But Schmelzer hangs his personal testimony on M. Scott Peck’s four-stage theory of human spiritual and emotional development (which can be found in Peck’s Further Along the Road Less Traveled). Schmelzer neatly summarizes Peck’s theory, and points out that most churches are filled with stage two people, which Schmelzer calls “rules based” (p. 20). “These are the good people who get things done and raise strong families.” (p. 21)
Schmelzer describes stage 3 as the “rebellious stage,” a stage where people ask questions, and says that universities- and even whole societies- are filled with these types. Stage twos and stage threes mistrust each other, for obvious reasons.
But Peck says that stage 3 is in fact a spiritual progression from stage 2, primarily because of the courage to ask questions. Schmelzer grabs this notion and runs with it, but not before admitting that the notion has limitations and can be misunderstood. Then, Schmelzer gets to the great theme of his book: “What stage 3 people usually don’t realize is that there is a stage 4, that there actually are answers to the questions they’ve been answering. You might call this the mystical stage. Here, one suddenly realizes that most of the things we were taught in stage 2 are, in fact, true, but in a richer and more mysterious sense than we would have, or could have, imagined.” (p. 23)
Around this theme of journey from questions to answers rich with mystery, Schmelzer tells stories of his faith and his congregation. Regarding the stories, I personally appreciate the humility with which Schmelzer tells them. He recognizes both the uniqueness of his journey and the inconsistencies of it.
This would be a great book for group discussion, or a good introduction to faith for seekers and inquirers. It might also move some stage two persons as well.
Ketchikan, AK
July 15, 2009
By Dave Schmelzer
Tyndale, 2008
ISBN 978-1-4143-1583-6
Review by George Pasley
Author Dave Schmelzer is the pastor of a new and rapidly growing church in the Harvard neighborhood of Cambridge, Massachusetts. This little book offers, part by way of personal testimony and part by way of apologetics, an introduction to Christian faith to modern Americans who might consider themselves educated skeptics.
I found it very readable, very persuasive, and invitational. It was neither dogmatic nor polemic. In fact, I finished the book thinking that Schmelzer might be as liberal, theological speaking, than me (though that was only a suspicion- he doesn’t offer any proof of that) but that he is definitely more pious.
Schmelzer’s testimony is the story of how he came to faith, moving from proclaimed atheist to follower of Jesus, while he was a college student. The transformation came as a result of his prayers in search of a God who was concerned about his (David’s) well-being, followed by serious study of the major religions. Thus Schmelzer’s proclaimed faith is one that is all about personal relationship with Jesus, made vibrant by prayer.
But Schmelzer hangs his personal testimony on M. Scott Peck’s four-stage theory of human spiritual and emotional development (which can be found in Peck’s Further Along the Road Less Traveled). Schmelzer neatly summarizes Peck’s theory, and points out that most churches are filled with stage two people, which Schmelzer calls “rules based” (p. 20). “These are the good people who get things done and raise strong families.” (p. 21)
Schmelzer describes stage 3 as the “rebellious stage,” a stage where people ask questions, and says that universities- and even whole societies- are filled with these types. Stage twos and stage threes mistrust each other, for obvious reasons.
But Peck says that stage 3 is in fact a spiritual progression from stage 2, primarily because of the courage to ask questions. Schmelzer grabs this notion and runs with it, but not before admitting that the notion has limitations and can be misunderstood. Then, Schmelzer gets to the great theme of his book: “What stage 3 people usually don’t realize is that there is a stage 4, that there actually are answers to the questions they’ve been answering. You might call this the mystical stage. Here, one suddenly realizes that most of the things we were taught in stage 2 are, in fact, true, but in a richer and more mysterious sense than we would have, or could have, imagined.” (p. 23)
Around this theme of journey from questions to answers rich with mystery, Schmelzer tells stories of his faith and his congregation. Regarding the stories, I personally appreciate the humility with which Schmelzer tells them. He recognizes both the uniqueness of his journey and the inconsistencies of it.
This would be a great book for group discussion, or a good introduction to faith for seekers and inquirers. It might also move some stage two persons as well.
Ketchikan, AK
July 15, 2009
Friday, July 10, 2009
PEARL S BUCK
PEARL S. BUCK: A Cultural Biography
By Peter Conn
Review by George R. Pasley
Cambridge University Press, 1966
ISBN 0-521-56080-2
It has literally been decades since I read any of Pearl’s books, but they obviously made quite an influence on me as I have never forgotten them. When I accidentally came upon Pearl’s West Virginia birthplace, I braked my truck and pulled in for a look. Likewise, when I came upon this volume in our library I immediately checked it out.
The title aptly describes the book. While it is indeed a biography of the first American woman to win a Nobel Prize for literature, the author places all the events of her life, all of her massive volume of work, and all of her achievements within their cultural and historical contexts. This made the biography a worthy (if somewhat wordy) study for students of literature, Asian-American studies, Presbyterian Church history, and feminism.
The biography informs us that Pearl Buck was the daughter of Presbyterian missionaries to China. Conn identifies as major conflicts in Buck’s life: her mother’s submission to her father, her father’s misogyny, the common missionary fundamentalism of the time that failed to see anything of value in Chinese culture, the bias of cultures (both Western and Chinese) that had no understanding of the other culture, and a male-dominated literary world.
Conn goes to great lengths to describe a long-running controversy that Pearl Buck held with the denominational structures of the Presbyterian Church, and as a Presbyterian pastor I found that quite informative. But Conn failed to set the debate in context of the fundamentalist controversies. Though they didn’t actually happen at the same time nonetheless impacted the debates over the purpose of mission that occurred in the prewar era. Likewise, though Conn repeatedly made reference to Buck leaving the church, the book offers no information on her church life or personal faith. She may have indeed given up on God, but Conn seems to equate her severing her missionary ties with losing faith. Perhaps no other information is available, but Conn uncovered a treasure trove of information about every other aspect of Buck’s personal life. It may be the Conn simply doesn’t think in those terms. Even so, the information that Conn did provide was helpful.
I found most enlightening Conn’s careful tracing of Buck’s feminism which surely was foundational though long ignored. Few may know that the publisher of Betty Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique consulted Buck prior to it’s publication, that Buck was a outspoken advocate of women’s issues (including birth control), or that the second American woman to women the Nobel Prize for literature, Toni Morrison, looked back at her early reading of Buck’s work and said, “She misled me…and made me feel that all writers wrote sympathetically, empathetically, honestly and forthrightly about other cultures.”
Many have likewise forgotten that for more than a decade Pearl Buck was virtually America’s only source of information on what ordinary Chinese people were like, and that she used her authority of knowledge and voice to combat racism and to promote positive relations between the West and all of Asia.
The thing I remember most vividly about Buck’s writing was the dignity she gave to the peasants in her stories, and Conn lifted that out as major achievement of Buck’s writing. Perhaps that explains why in later life I came to enjoy other writers (Wendell Berry comes to mind) who managed to endow their ordinary characters with the same dignity.
Conn is an admirer of Buck (though he only came to realize that late in life), and he found himself in agreement with many of her opinions, beliefs and causes. But his biography tells Buck’s story honestly, with all her flaws. Buck herself may not have appreciated much of what Conn writes, but those who appreciate the honesty with which Buck depicted life in her novels surely will.
George R. Pasley
July 10, 2009
Ketchikan, AK
By Peter Conn
Review by George R. Pasley
Cambridge University Press, 1966
ISBN 0-521-56080-2
It has literally been decades since I read any of Pearl’s books, but they obviously made quite an influence on me as I have never forgotten them. When I accidentally came upon Pearl’s West Virginia birthplace, I braked my truck and pulled in for a look. Likewise, when I came upon this volume in our library I immediately checked it out.
The title aptly describes the book. While it is indeed a biography of the first American woman to win a Nobel Prize for literature, the author places all the events of her life, all of her massive volume of work, and all of her achievements within their cultural and historical contexts. This made the biography a worthy (if somewhat wordy) study for students of literature, Asian-American studies, Presbyterian Church history, and feminism.
The biography informs us that Pearl Buck was the daughter of Presbyterian missionaries to China. Conn identifies as major conflicts in Buck’s life: her mother’s submission to her father, her father’s misogyny, the common missionary fundamentalism of the time that failed to see anything of value in Chinese culture, the bias of cultures (both Western and Chinese) that had no understanding of the other culture, and a male-dominated literary world.
Conn goes to great lengths to describe a long-running controversy that Pearl Buck held with the denominational structures of the Presbyterian Church, and as a Presbyterian pastor I found that quite informative. But Conn failed to set the debate in context of the fundamentalist controversies. Though they didn’t actually happen at the same time nonetheless impacted the debates over the purpose of mission that occurred in the prewar era. Likewise, though Conn repeatedly made reference to Buck leaving the church, the book offers no information on her church life or personal faith. She may have indeed given up on God, but Conn seems to equate her severing her missionary ties with losing faith. Perhaps no other information is available, but Conn uncovered a treasure trove of information about every other aspect of Buck’s personal life. It may be the Conn simply doesn’t think in those terms. Even so, the information that Conn did provide was helpful.
I found most enlightening Conn’s careful tracing of Buck’s feminism which surely was foundational though long ignored. Few may know that the publisher of Betty Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique consulted Buck prior to it’s publication, that Buck was a outspoken advocate of women’s issues (including birth control), or that the second American woman to women the Nobel Prize for literature, Toni Morrison, looked back at her early reading of Buck’s work and said, “She misled me…and made me feel that all writers wrote sympathetically, empathetically, honestly and forthrightly about other cultures.”
Many have likewise forgotten that for more than a decade Pearl Buck was virtually America’s only source of information on what ordinary Chinese people were like, and that she used her authority of knowledge and voice to combat racism and to promote positive relations between the West and all of Asia.
The thing I remember most vividly about Buck’s writing was the dignity she gave to the peasants in her stories, and Conn lifted that out as major achievement of Buck’s writing. Perhaps that explains why in later life I came to enjoy other writers (Wendell Berry comes to mind) who managed to endow their ordinary characters with the same dignity.
Conn is an admirer of Buck (though he only came to realize that late in life), and he found himself in agreement with many of her opinions, beliefs and causes. But his biography tells Buck’s story honestly, with all her flaws. Buck herself may not have appreciated much of what Conn writes, but those who appreciate the honesty with which Buck depicted life in her novels surely will.
George R. Pasley
July 10, 2009
Ketchikan, AK
Friday, May 22, 2009
HOW DOES JESUS SAVE?
HOW DOES JESUS SAVE US
Review of an essay by William C. Placher
By George Pasley
The late William Placher was long my favorite Presbyterian theologian, though he rarely published and labored in the obscure ranks of undergraduate educators at Wabash College in Indiana. Nonetheless, his work on the “Brief Statement of Faith,” and his book, “Narratives of a Vulnerable God” were well thought, clearly written, compelling, insightful, and both modern and traditional.
The June 2, 2009 issue of The Christian Century contains an essay by Placher on soteriology, “How Does Jesus Save?” which I find to be of great value.
For students of theology it provides excellent summaries of most of the classical and modern theories of how Jesus saves. He lifts up the strong point of each theory, and summarizes the critique of each theory. Particularly helpful is his summary and critique of Renee Girard’s mimetic theory.
But most helpful is his encouragement of a different (though not necessarily new) way of thinking, which follows two principles.
The first principle, borrowed from Hans W. Frei, is this: “in theology, doctrines should illuminate and clarify stories rather than stories illustrating doctrines.” Placher defines the stories as “God’s covenant work with Israel and then the birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.” Then says, “We figure out and affirm the doctrines necessary to make sense of those stories (holding them tight if they really are necessary), but the stories come first.”
The second principle is Calvin’s, “Christ saves us by the whole course of his obedience,” a principle that Placher points out was often ignored by Calvin and most of the historical creeds (including- especially- the Apostle’s Creed).
The theory that Placher then espouses is best described by the early theologian Irenaeus, “(Christ) became what we are in order to enable us to become what he is.”
Placher says we need to stretch the idea of “becoming what we are”, as that would imply that the incarnation alone was sufficient for our salvation, and it clearly wasn’t: “At that point…the boundaries of the work remained far from clear. Were gentiles also saved? What about the despised and condemned? The list of such questions could be long extended. Only when God incarnate has welcomed sinners into his table fellowship, cured those who suffered, died the death assigned the blaspheming and seditious, even gone into the realm of those who rejected God and exist in a hell of utter isolation…only when this God incarnate has been raised can we glimpse the expansiveness of God’s work of salvation. Only the crucified One can save us.”
Some object that Irenaeus description amounts to deification (making gods of human beings) and Placher argues (effectively, I think) against that worry. But just in case, he offers another way of looking at it (a way I often emphasize when preaching about the New Testament Joseph): Jesus became one of us in order that we might be adopted by God.
I think Placher’s ideas “will preach” for a long time to come.
George R. Pasley
May 22, 2009
Ketchikan, AK
Review of an essay by William C. Placher
By George Pasley
The late William Placher was long my favorite Presbyterian theologian, though he rarely published and labored in the obscure ranks of undergraduate educators at Wabash College in Indiana. Nonetheless, his work on the “Brief Statement of Faith,” and his book, “Narratives of a Vulnerable God” were well thought, clearly written, compelling, insightful, and both modern and traditional.
The June 2, 2009 issue of The Christian Century contains an essay by Placher on soteriology, “How Does Jesus Save?” which I find to be of great value.
For students of theology it provides excellent summaries of most of the classical and modern theories of how Jesus saves. He lifts up the strong point of each theory, and summarizes the critique of each theory. Particularly helpful is his summary and critique of Renee Girard’s mimetic theory.
But most helpful is his encouragement of a different (though not necessarily new) way of thinking, which follows two principles.
The first principle, borrowed from Hans W. Frei, is this: “in theology, doctrines should illuminate and clarify stories rather than stories illustrating doctrines.” Placher defines the stories as “God’s covenant work with Israel and then the birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.” Then says, “We figure out and affirm the doctrines necessary to make sense of those stories (holding them tight if they really are necessary), but the stories come first.”
The second principle is Calvin’s, “Christ saves us by the whole course of his obedience,” a principle that Placher points out was often ignored by Calvin and most of the historical creeds (including- especially- the Apostle’s Creed).
The theory that Placher then espouses is best described by the early theologian Irenaeus, “(Christ) became what we are in order to enable us to become what he is.”
Placher says we need to stretch the idea of “becoming what we are”, as that would imply that the incarnation alone was sufficient for our salvation, and it clearly wasn’t: “At that point…the boundaries of the work remained far from clear. Were gentiles also saved? What about the despised and condemned? The list of such questions could be long extended. Only when God incarnate has welcomed sinners into his table fellowship, cured those who suffered, died the death assigned the blaspheming and seditious, even gone into the realm of those who rejected God and exist in a hell of utter isolation…only when this God incarnate has been raised can we glimpse the expansiveness of God’s work of salvation. Only the crucified One can save us.”
Some object that Irenaeus description amounts to deification (making gods of human beings) and Placher argues (effectively, I think) against that worry. But just in case, he offers another way of looking at it (a way I often emphasize when preaching about the New Testament Joseph): Jesus became one of us in order that we might be adopted by God.
I think Placher’s ideas “will preach” for a long time to come.
George R. Pasley
May 22, 2009
Ketchikan, AK
Friday, February 27, 2009
THE HERETIC'S DAUGHTER
THE HERETIC'S DAUGHTER
By Kathleen Kent
Little, Brown and Company, 2008
ISBN 0-316-02448-8
Book Review by George R. Pasley
My ancestors were among the group that settled Salem, so even though they left by the time of the Witch Trials, this was a book I had to read. Also, my interest in the history of theology in America made the tile of this book somewhat enticing to me.
The Heretic’s Daughter is a historical novel written by a direct descendant of one of the women executed for witchcraft, one Martha Carrier. The author has painstakingly researched all the recorded history of the trials, as well the lifestyles and culture of their times, making Heretic’s Daughter not merely interesting reading, but educational as well.
Of course, much of the novel is conjecture, but it is conjecture based on historical evidence. It does much to explain what happened, without excusing any of it. The novel portrays the corruption of the theocracy that was early colonial New England, while at the same time portraying the faith of those few who had a more benevolent view of God and a more compassionate leaning towards humanity.
Of particular interest is how the author was able to weave into the narrative the extreme pressure for land that was placed on the region by a rapidly growing population, the threats imposed by increased resistance by Native Americans, and how those two variables played into the fires of fear that were fanned by accusations of witchcraft.
The novel is a narrated by a nine year old daughter of Martha Carrier, Sarah Carrier, who was herself jailed on charges of witchcraft and forced to testify against her mother. The novel captures the normal tension between mother and daughter, and in a wonderful way offers a picture of two women who managed to bind themselves back together despite suffering together an ordeal that defied every notion of goodness residing within our human nature.
George R. Pasley
February 27, 2009
By Kathleen Kent
Little, Brown and Company, 2008
ISBN 0-316-02448-8
Book Review by George R. Pasley
My ancestors were among the group that settled Salem, so even though they left by the time of the Witch Trials, this was a book I had to read. Also, my interest in the history of theology in America made the tile of this book somewhat enticing to me.
The Heretic’s Daughter is a historical novel written by a direct descendant of one of the women executed for witchcraft, one Martha Carrier. The author has painstakingly researched all the recorded history of the trials, as well the lifestyles and culture of their times, making Heretic’s Daughter not merely interesting reading, but educational as well.
Of course, much of the novel is conjecture, but it is conjecture based on historical evidence. It does much to explain what happened, without excusing any of it. The novel portrays the corruption of the theocracy that was early colonial New England, while at the same time portraying the faith of those few who had a more benevolent view of God and a more compassionate leaning towards humanity.
Of particular interest is how the author was able to weave into the narrative the extreme pressure for land that was placed on the region by a rapidly growing population, the threats imposed by increased resistance by Native Americans, and how those two variables played into the fires of fear that were fanned by accusations of witchcraft.
The novel is a narrated by a nine year old daughter of Martha Carrier, Sarah Carrier, who was herself jailed on charges of witchcraft and forced to testify against her mother. The novel captures the normal tension between mother and daughter, and in a wonderful way offers a picture of two women who managed to bind themselves back together despite suffering together an ordeal that defied every notion of goodness residing within our human nature.
George R. Pasley
February 27, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)