The way in which we make theological judgments about what social-political-cultural-moral issues are most important or most central is always quite revealing. Here I just want to pose the question: What do you think is the most pressing social issue or problem of our time? What dynamic, movement, force, or process of events in modern life do you take to be most problematic from a Christian perspective? Give at least one theological reason for why your choice seems to you to be the most important issues over-against other issues and crises in our world today.
Monthly Archives: June 2008 - Page 2
How to Read the New Testament in a Week
The New Testament consists of 260 chapters in total. Thus, if one wanted to read through the entire New Testament in one week, you would need average around 37 chapters per day (with one day having 38). So, a basic New Testament read-through in one week would look like the following:
- Monday: Matthew 1 – Mark 9
- Tuesday: Mark 10 – John 6
- Wednesday: John 7 – Acts 22
- Thursday: Acts 23 – 1 Corinthians 14
- Friday: 1 Corinthians 15 – 1 Thessalonians 5
- Saturday: 2 Thessalonians 1 – 1 Peter 2
- Sunday: 1 Peter 3 – Revelation 22
To do this you would probably have to allocate 2-3 hours per day (unless you are either a very fast or very slow reader) simply for Bible reading, so this would definitely cut into your free time. In college I follows a compropable schedule for reading the New Testament every week for almost two months before I gave out. I’m trying to take it up again. This week will be my first crack at it.
Dancing Politicians
I’m not a huge Coldplay fan generally. As my friend Christian has rightly said, they are often little more than a Radiohead clone. Nevertheless their most recent single, Violet Hill is quite good, being quite a subversive piece of songwriting, but politically and theologically. Check out the “unofficial” music video.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WqQL5WFN20]
And here are the lyrics:
Was a long and dark December
From the rooftops I remember
There was snow
White snow
Clearly I remember
From the windows they were watching
While we froze
Down below
When the future’s architectured
By a carnival of idiots on show
You’d better lie low
If you love me
Won’t you let me know?
Was a long and dark December
When the banks became cathedrals
And the fog
Became God
Priests clutched onto bibles
Hollowed out to fit their rifles
And the cross was held aloft
Bury me in honor
When I’m dead and hit the ground
A love back home unfolds
If you love me
Won’t you let me know?
I don’t want to be a soldier
Who the captain of some sinking ship
Would stow, far below
So if you love me
Why’d you let me go?
I took my love down to Violet Hill
There we sat in snow
All that time she was silent still
So if you love me
Won’t you let me know?
Anyone else have this experience?
Am I the only person who hears about awesome new books coming out, waits in anticipation for them for months, acquires them as soon as they are published…and then lets them sit on my shelf for weeks, or even months before ever really reading them? If I look around my shelves right now I can see at least three books where that is exactly the case.
My kingdom for better reading habits!
Baptism, Eucharist, and Unity
“If we believe that unity is given by God in baptism, and that any other starting point compromises the unique place of divine initiative, some other questions rearrange themselves. Baptism itself makes no sense except in the contexts of a robust trinitarian theology — it is the gift of a charismatic identity in Christ, the possibility of entering into Christ’s prayer, which is, Scripture tells us, the flowering of an eternal relation within the eternal source, and is enabled in us only be the inbreathing of God. In other words, baptism already encodes the theology elaborated by the doctrinal disputes of the early Church. And the sacrament of the eucharist as a the regular renewal of this charismatic identity is again primarily a witness to the divine invitation into the place where Christ stands, into Crist’s relation with the Father, opened to us by the paschal event, by his cross and resurrection. A very great deal can be said about the essence of the Church simply in reference to what is understood about baptism and eucharist; to grasp these human actions as necessarily and centrally witnesses to what human beings cannot do, as gifts of new identity and relation, is to see why it is possible to define the unity of the Church first in relation to this pattern of corporate activity.”
–Rowan Williams, Why Study the Past? (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2005), 83.
What is Freedom?
In my recent posts on Robert Jenson’s theology one of the recurring themes is that of freedom. One of the revolutionary elements of Jenson’s theology is his radical challenge to conventional understandings of what freedom means in Western culture. One of the recurring critiques of Jenson’s work is precisely that he compromises God’s freedom (see Molnar’s Divine Freedom and the Doctrine of the Imannent Trinity for example). However, such an accusation ignores the fundamental logic of Jenson’s work, which is to challenge the protological understanding of freedom which obtains in the inherited metaphysics of the West.
Normally, we think of freedom, both for God and for ourselves as the freedom of unconstrained and undetermined ability to carry out what we desire. Freedom, in nearly all of our contemporary idiom is understood as being autonomous, undetermined, and unaffected by anything outside ourselves. This whole understanding is, of course where the whole alleged problem of divine sovereignty and human freedom comes from. It seems pretty obvious that there can never be two completelyunconstrained and undetermined persons in existence. Eventually one will somehow impinge on the other’s freedom. And of course since, in standard theistic thinking God is understood (inadvertently or not) as a really, really big sort of top person, clearly our freedom is called into question by his far greater power. (If you really want to see this problem utterly dismantled, see Herbert McCabe, God Matters, pp. 10-24.)
Jenson’s theology is radical because it argues that freedom is not being unconstrained and undetermined, but rather that freedom is what occurs in being determined by the trinitarian logic of Christ’s death and resurrection. Freedom is not being undetermined, it is being determined by the one whose life is love. And moreover, this is freedom, not only for us but for God himself. Death and resurrection is the freedom of God and the liberation of humanity.
So, I pose the question in light of this: What do you say freedom means? What does it mean for God and what does mean for us?
What is Persecution?
There has been a ridiculously long discussion on a post from a while back on persecution, specifically on whether or not Christians in the West should be considered as a persecuted group. This opens up the question what it is that really constitutes persecution. Is persecution just any curtailment of our ability as Christians to do whatever we want in a given society? And what is the relationship between persecution and the lack of impingement upon our freedoms? Is impingement of freedom the same thing as persecution? What, other than a preoccupation with Enlightenment notions of freedom would even lead us to equate the two? And what sort of compulsion is it that leads us to equate marginalization or disestablishment with persecution? What is it that drives the evangelical desire to be able to say “I am persecuted”?
I for one am wary of equating persecution with the sort of inconveniences that Christians face in the West regarding how they are allowed to influence public policy, what sort of on-campus groups they can sponsor in public schools, and the like. I do not think that we can disentangle the discourse of persecution in the New Testament from the early Christian experience of martyrdom. It seems to me that a lot of the rhetoric of persecution that obtains in conservative evangelical circles often functions as a way to name ourselves among the persecuted without ever having to contemplate or face the realities of martyrdom that attend the daily existence of truly persecuted Christians throughout the world.
This is not to say that its no big deal when Christians in contemporary liberal societies find it hard to get things done, or find an intellectual climate that is not friendly to the Christian faith. However, lets not cheapen the language of persecution to satiate our angst about feeling disestablished in the West. Being disestablished as the church is hardly the same thing as persecution; frankly I see no reason to view it as anything other than an opportunity for the church to rediscover herself as a distinctive body within the world. Recovering a healthy sense of ecclesial homelessness within the realities of the Western empire represents the opening up of a space in which great faithfulness and authentic witness is again become possible for the church in a way that was stifled under the sort of cultural Constantinianism that has been part of the whole ethos of America specifically, and the West more generally. The sort of evangelical paranoia that attends the way in which the conservative discourse of persecution takes shape today seems to be based on little more than the a longing to live in control rather than out of control. This sort of desperation for legitimization and influence cannot be a good thing for the church. Indeed, only when the church rejects this sort of compulsiveness of purpose can she rest securely in the gospel of the resurrection which promises us that nothing in all creation can separate us from the love of God. Freedom from desperation based on fear allows us to name persecution truthfully. We are no longer driven to self-legitimation by nominating ourselves among the persecuted. Rather we are freed to find our identity as Christians and as the church outside ourselves in the crucified and resurrected Christ who de-possesses us from our frenzied desire to be validated, to have control, and to be in charge.
Robert Jenson: A Reader’s Guide
Lately I’ve been re-reading the works of Robert Jenson, as you all may have guessed from the overabundance of Jenson quotes that have appeared on this site lately. Jenson remains, in my opinion the most important American theologian alive today, and perhaps the most important American theologian of the last century. However, he is woefully under-read. So, here is my advice on reading Jenson for those who are inclined to do so.
First, the place to begin is with a small, older book of Jenson’s entitled Story and Promise: A Brief Theology of the Gospel About Jesus. This book is less than 200 small pages, but every sentence is packed with dynamic theological insight. All of the themes that will emerge in Jenson’s later work are here in nascent form (the temporal infinite of the Triune God, the centrality of the resurrection, the body of the ascended Jesus as embodied in the Eucharistic church, etc.). The book is a bit hard to get these days, but if you can get it, do so. And hopefully I’ll be able to get us at Wipf & Stock the chance to reprint it soon!
The next place to go is to Jenson’s superb book on the Trinity, The Triune Identity: God According to the Gospel. This book pulls together Jenson’s key thoughts on the doctrine of God, including his revisionary metaphysics which he roots in the gospel of Christ’s resurrection from the dead. This book is incredibly energetic and provocative. There are few books on the Trinity that have totally shaken up my views on God as much as this one.
After reading these two books, anyone can probably read anything else in Jenson’s corpus they want and not feel too lost. However, it would probably be good to tackle the first volume of Jenson’s Systematic Theology next. This book fully articulates all of the themes of Jenson’s doctrine of God explicitly and masterfully. I have never read another volume of systematic theology that I found so energizing, except perhaps from some sections of Barth and Balthasar’s works. After volume one, you are more than ready to head into the second volume of Jenson’s systematic theology. Here you will receive a thorough exposure to other aspects of Jesons’s thought, including his radical ecclesiology.
For more study on Jenson’s ecclesiology and sacramentology, his earlier book Visible Words: The Interpretation and Practice of Christian Sacraments is very helpful and thorough. Finally, after having read all of the above, I would advise that then and only then one move on to Jenson’s small book, On Thinking the Human. This little volume is anything but light reading. In it Jenson tackles some of the essential philosophical questions about human personhood from a theological perspective. The results are fascinating and extremely provocative.
If at his point you still haven’t had enough, you can always start accumulating the dozens of books that Jenson has edited with Carl Braaten, or read his delightful book, coauthored with his young granddaughter, Conversations with Poppi About God. And if you just haven’t had enough of Jenson’s systematic theology you can also read his extensive chapters in Christian Dogmatics, a collaborative work which Jenson and Braaten edited. One of the notable parts of this collection is Jenson’s extensive treatment of the Holy Spirit, which is not equaled in his own systematics.
All in all, I think anyone interested in Christian theology will find reading Jenson a very rewarding experience. I have been energized, provoked, and stimulated by him more than by any other living theologian. Jenson ignites a fire in the theological imagination that is rapturous, deep, and ultimately fun. Perhaps what I find most compelling about his work is the way in which it constantly seeks to be radically attuned to the gospel of the resurrection, allowing that gospel to shape the whole of theological inquiry. Jenson has much to teach all of us who seek to do theology in the service of the gospel.
The Eternal Embrace of Time
In The Triune Identity, Robert Jenson opens his book with the following claim: “Human life is possible — or in recent jargon ‘meaningful’ — only if past and future are somehow bracketed, only if their disconnection is somehow transcended, only if our lives somehow cohere to make a story. Life in time is possible only, that is, if there is ‘eternity,’ if no-more, still, and not-yet do not exhaust the structure of reality. Thus, in all we do we seek eternity.”
According to Jenson, our temporal lives are only livable, only meaningful in that the goneness of the past and the not-hereness of the future are somehow embraced or given coherence within a story that transcends the disconnection between the three arrows of time without eviscerating their difference. In light of the fact that the possibility of a meaningful life is predicated on some sort of eternity, it becomes of primary importance to emphasize what sort of eternity is offered by the God of the gospel. An eternity is always some sort of a reconciliation of the past and the future. As such, it is vital for us to articulate the Christian hope for eternity in a way that makes specific just what sort of hope we have within us.
As Jenson puts is, “In that an eternity is always some union of past and future, every possible eternity will be one of two broad kinds: a Persistence of the Beginning, or an Anticipation of the End.” So, the question for Christian theology is which of these two eternities best articulates the logic of the gospel. Jenson rightly proposes that it is the latter rather than the former that comports with the gospel of Christ: “It is because we face a future that we experience ourselves as temporal beings; if there were only the past, which remains forever as it is, we would be timeless. The eternity in which all persists as it was is therefore the cancellation of time; the eternity in which all is open to transformation is the success of time itself.”
Thus, as Jenson points out, Christian theology must go one of two ways when considering eternity and the Christian hope. It will either be a “refuge from time or confidence in it. God may be God because in him all that will be is already realized, so that the novelties of the future are only apparent and its threats therefore not overwhelming. Or God may be God because in him all that has been is opened to transformation, so that the guilts of the past and immobilities of the present are rightly to be interpreted as opportunities of creation. God may be our defence against time’s uncertainties, or he may be himself the ‘Insecurity of the future.’”
Here is the fundamental divide between Christianity and all other world religions according to Jenson. The gospel’s God does not give us the hope of the persisting past being eternalized in the present, but rather of a future open to inexhaustible transformation through death and resurrection. As Jenson argues, “Brahman-Atman, by any of his names may be God, in which case all time is an illusion, circling around a blissful utter Sameness. Or Yahweh may be God, in which case all sameness will be overcome by the God who makes all things new, whose very righteousness is his love of sinners, of those who are lost if the past determines.”
Christ or Nothing
“If infinity is not the infinity of God, it must be the infinity of the world, that is, of nothingness. The one who hears the call of infinity must believe either in Christ or in nothing. Insofar as the call of infinity has been an actual historical phenomenon in the West, and insofar as we have various heard it, radical faith and nihilism have repeatedly and with increasing urgency posited themselves as our only choices; we need affirm the systems of neither Søren Kierkegaard nor Jean-Paul Sartre to see that each of us must in a deep sense be the one or the other.”
–Robert W. Jenson, The Triune Identity: God According to the Gospel (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2002), 169.
Princeton Theological Review Call for Papers: Fall 2008 Issue on T.F. Torrance
In the interest of spreading the word arround further, here is the call for papers for the next issue of Princeton Theological Reivew. If you have an interst in the theology of T.F. Torrance you might think about submitting something.
You are invited to submit an article, reflection, or book review for publication in the Fall 2008 issue of the Princeton Theological Review! This issue’s theme will be on the life and work of T.F. Torrance.
T.F. Torrance was born to missionary parents in 1913 and grew up in West China and in Lanarkshire, Scotland. Profoundly influenced by his teacher, Karl Barth, he would later supervise the translation of Barth’s thirteen-volume Church Dogmatics and become a leading exponent of his mentor’s work. Torrance served for ten years as a parish minister and taught church history and dogmatic theology at New College, University of Edinburgh from 1950 to 1979. In the last decades of his life he produced an extensive scholarly output on topics ranging from theology and science to Trinitarian theology and the person and work of Jesus Christ. He died in December 2007, leaving a legacy for Reformed theologians and the church at large.
If you would like to submit an article, reflection, or book review that is pertinent to the PTR’s Fall 2008 theme, please click on the Submission link for more information. All submissions are due by September 15, 2008. Please send them by email attachment to ptr@ptsem.edu.
Milbank on Scientism, Sex, and Personhood
The latest issue of The Other Journal has a fascinating interview with John Milbank on contemporary atheism. In the process a whole mess of things get talked about, including the sexualization of contemporary culture in contrast with the sort of inverted totalitarianism that obtains in regard to all other forms of freedom. Here’s just one snippet:
“Science is the freedom to know and is Faustian. Beyond this is the right to choose one’s lifestyle. But of course one can’t interfere with the freedom or happiness of others nor the power of the State. The really crucial thing here which the left has missed is that sexual freedoms have increased exponentially while all other freedoms have declined.
Today in Great Britain you scarcely have the right to demonstrate and a higher proportion of the population is in prison than are in China. The boy at the shop counter with no customers is not allowed to read a book to improve himself all day, but who cares what he gets up to with sex and drink after the shop closes? Of course there’s also a double think about sex—its all OK, male sexuality is nearly always exploitative, etc… But in general it would seem that, as Adorno and Horkheimer predicted, sexualization is intended to keep us all quiet: neurotic, hysterical, frustrated and unhappy but still ‘looking’. With sex divided from procreation, science and sexual freedom come together.
So by supporting the total disjuncture of sex and procreation, the left is really supporting a new mode of fascism. ‘Women’ are lined up with science and choice in order to produce a new kind of ideal human subjectivity—male and autonomous and yet pliant in ‘female’ manner. The newly envisaged female body is the final site of the coming together of scientific objectivity and absolute freedom of choice. Perhaps one could even speak here of a new racism of the human race as such—it’s to be made the object of an endless ‘objective’ improvement and expression of a will to freedom/will to power. Of course this also means that the specific phenomenology of the female body is destroyed. It’s denied that this body is inherently linked both to the male body (as also vice-versa) and to another body that is itself and yet becomes not itself—the baby. Having denied the link of babies to men and also to women save as objects of their (‘male’) choice, babies thereby become pure consumer objects and all human personhood is abandoned.”
–Ben Suriano, “Three Questions on Modern Atheism: An Interview with John Milbank“, The Other Journal June 4 (2008)
The Biggest Threat?
So, I’ve posted a few critical articles on Mark Driscoll lately, and as I’ve said before, I believe that his theology and practice is sub-Christian and a major threat to the gospel and its embodiment in the world. However, this leads me to wonder, who do we consider the greatest threats to the gospel within the broad scope of the Christian community today? What teachers, pastors, or theolgians do we find to most unhealthily problematize the gospel? I’m curious to see who people might identify. So, I pose the question, who, among today’s Christian teachers and preachers do you consider to be the most dangerous to the mission of the Christian gospel in the world today? And why?
Why is Mark Driscoll Interesting?
My post excoriating Mark Driscoll’s idolatrous concept of Jesus has skyrocketted to my most-viewed post ever written in a mere two weeks. It has also garnered some responses around the blogosphere, some of which I may respond to at some point. However, what I find intriguing is how, in two weeks a post on Mark Driscoll’s lunacy could become the most popular post on my blog. What is it that makes nutty figures like him major topics for discussion? I suppose people intent on polarizing things will always bring discussion out of the woodwork, but I find that unfortunate. As long as the most interesting theological discussions are ones that are radically polarized, I fear we won’t have that many good discussions. They may be fun (and important), of course, but ultimately I doubt they are the conversations that really, really matter.
However, in light of all the discussion that was had over that post, and the amount of stuff by Driscoll that I’ve read in light of that discussion, I am more convinced than ever that the Jesus he preaches and the ministry he oversees is a blight on the gospel which is tragically leading people into lives of bondage and death rather than the liberation of the gospel. In light of this, stay tuned for more posts about his books which I’m painfully continuing to digest so as to speak more clearly to the issues that are raised by his sub-Christian theology and ministry.
This year’s
Recent Comments