Methodists Beware!

"There is nothing more grotesque than to think of a Christ who would want to establish committees."

-Hans Urs von Balthasar

Amen and Amen!

Inspiration (2)

"In matters of faith, no [one], not even the Pope or the bishops, possesses the truth . . . This divine truth possesses us . . . Truth takes possession of us. But we must go a step further. It does not take possession of us individually, for this truth is entrusted before all to the Church. Similarly, at the level of the Church as a whole, we cannot strictly say: 'The Church is in possession of the truth, of the true faith.' Yet the true faith is unfailingly entrusted to the Church, the Body of Christ and the Bride of the Lord. It is entrusted to her as a sacred heritage which never becomes her own property. In other words, the sum total of her teaching will never exhaust all its wealth." -Piet Fransen

Agree or disagree? And with what specifically?

A Chastened Critique of Joel Osteen

This evening, megachurch pastor and best selling author Joel Osteen was interviewed on 60 Minutes. I have elsewhere been rather critical of Osteen, in matters relating to both his theology and his motives. But after seeing his interview tonight, I feel that I am developing more of, what one might call, a chastened critique. Where before I questioned his motives, after seeing his interview this evening, I am convinced that he is quite sincere. He feels that he has a calling from God to give people hope, and judging from the personal testimonies of many, it seems that he is doing this. Moreover, I respect his decision to not ask for money on his television broadcasts and agree with him that such requests would likely hinder the message he is trying to send. And where before I might have questioned whether he was even a Christian, after seeing his interview this evening, I am convinced that he is, at least in what seems to be his narrow understanding of one. At one point, he was moved to tears at the prospect of God using him in such powerful ways. He also handled serious critiques with grace, which I think are marks of a Christian.

But while it is chastened, there still remains in my assessment of him a rather strong critique, and that is this: It seems to me that Osteen is profoundly confused on a number of issues pertinent to both the Christian life and to his position as the pastor of a church.

First, his understanding of the Gospel seems extremely shallow. As far as I can tell, he preaches a message that God wants to give you the best life possible on this earth, all you have to do is think positively, be faithful and he will bless you. This is simply not the Gospel in any sense of the word. The Gospel is a message of hope of deliverance of sin and communion with God. It speaks nothing of wealth in this life. In fact, its primary model of a faithful life is a homeless man whose life was violently cut short at 30 years of age. Neither is this the Gospel as experienced by a majority of Christians through history. The early martyrs knew nothing of Osteen's gospel, yet we believe that they are among the ones who most clearly understood Christ's project and
the only ones to live it out completely.

Second, Osteen is confused as to what his calling is. Is he a pastor? Is he a motivational speaker? Is he a writer of self help books? I would imagine that Osteen would say he is all of these things. But I think that the definition of a pastor is somewhat incongruent with the other two. For a pastor is not a motivational speaker. Motivational speakers are all about making people feel good. Pastors are called to preach the Gospel whether that brings hope or conviction. Sometimes people don't need to feel good. They need to feel bad so that they might be driven to God. And a pastor is not a self help author. For a self help author believes that a person only needs to implement a few reasonable habits or principles into their life and they can have the life they want. A pastor knows that there is no formula to this Christian life. Sometimes you can be praying consistently and have all the faith in the world, and your loved one still dies of cancer. A pastor knows that living the Gospel is not about implementing principles. It is rather about communion with the living God.

Therefore, it seems to me that Osteen is much more of a motivational speaker and self help author then he is a pastor. His new book has seven principles for "Becoming a better you" yet none of them mention God or Christ. How can a Christian pastor speak about personal development apart from Christ? Also, Osteen told the 60 Minutes interviewer that (paraphrase) "there are others much more qualified to understand and expound Scripture. I don't feel that's what I'm called to do." He was making the point that he wants to keep the message simple. But this is where he is wrong. It is precisely the job of a pastor to expound the Scripture. And the fact is that Scripture is hard in many places and it is the pastor's job to make that understandable, not just to keep it simple. If this is not what Osteen is called to do, then he is not a pastor. And given his understanding of the Gospel, I question whether the hope he is giving is the Christian hope in any meaningful sense of the word.

An Open and Likely Unwanted Letter

To my dear and faithful readers (if there are any of you left):

My sincerest apologies for my absence of late from these pages. Much has been happening (or "has gone down" as the kids are now saying) these past few weeks and I am only now beginning to feel as if I'm getting my feet back under me. Of course, that will only last for a few days and then the flood will take them away from me once again, and I'll be left to wonder where the heck my Arky Arky is. In times like these, it is unfortunate but true that blogging is one of the first things in my life to go, second only to personal hygiene. But as this push is nearing its end, I anticipate to return to these pages shortly.

In all sincerity,

J. Lashier (long "a" soft "s")

We are One Another

An appropriate quote, I think, for this blog:

"I bear in my life of faith today the drama of Israel, the fruit of the costly discussions of Nicaea and Chalcedon, what Francis of Assisi mined in the mysteries of evangelical poverty, what thousands of obscure believers have affirmed of the power of hope in their responses to persecutors. And our successors will, in their time, be enriched by what African and Latin American Christianities in their contexts are working out before our eyes. The communion of saints is not relegated to the register of merits or of prayer. It already involves the fundamental plan of faith."

-Jean-Marie Roger Tillard

Inspiration (1)

It seems to me that the church and her theologians spend an inordinate amount of time these days on the doctrine of inspiration. The idea that Scripture is inspired has, in fact, taken first place in the confessional statements of many churches (and seminaries for that matter), particularly those churches of the non-denominational/evangelical/megachurch variety. I find this odd, given that a doctrine of inspiration is not even present in the historic creeds; they, rather, all address the nature of the God who was revealed in Christ. To be sure, the Fathers believed that the Scriptures were inspired, they just did not feel the need to logically define how that mysterious process took place. In general, pre-moderns are much more comfortable with mystery than moderns are.

I suspect that the doctrine of inspiration has been so elevated in recent times because it has come under so much fire from more liberal (in the original sense of the word) sects of the church and those outside the church who hold a priori (or without even arguing for it) that such a doctrine is impossible. Thus, the great dividing line - what makes one a Christian or not - is shifted from what one believes in Christ (the historic definition) to what one believes about the inspiration of the Scriptures.

In one sense, this shift may be appropriate because unless one believes that the Scriptures indeed come from God, then one will not believe in the truth of the things which are said in them, and thus the entire faith crumbles. But in another sense, this shift is entirely inappropriate for it entails the addition of a creedal component that was not agreed upon by the Fathers when the church was still one entity; and, therefore, a creedal component which all parts of the church cannot agree upon. (Again, the church has always believed in the inspiration of her Scriptures, but not in the manner that it is defined by certain sects.) Moreover, this shift gives the disastrous impression of elevating belief in the inspiration of Scripture as the most important aspect of our faith.

Friends, this is simply not the case, and if this is how you have been taught, then you have been taught a faith that, at least in this respect, is in no way consistent with Christianity as passed on from the apostles. The truth is that the most important aspect of our faith, the aspect which Jesus came to earth to witness to is who God is. And all the creeds agree that God is Trinity - Father, Son, Holy Spirit - and, as such, a relational God who desires relation with his creation and will one day restore that creation to himself. All other creedal points - including the inspiration and authority of Scripture - flow out of this point. And as far as I know, you and I can agree on who God is without being completely in agreement on the nature of the word which tells us this. If the Fathers felt no need to define the great mystery of inspiration, I see no reason why we should.

The Communion of Saints - One Year Later

I am happy to announce to all of my readers that the Communion of Saints blogspot (hereafter CoS) has officially been in existence for a year today. I am carefully to add "blogspot" to the previous statement for I in no way want to imply that the Communion of Saints has been around for just a year. As I hope this blog has witnessed to, the Communion of Saints is a living communion that has existed since that original Pentecost nearly 2000 years ago. And according to Hebrews, our Fathers and Saints (that great cloud of witnesses) extends back into Israel's story, the communion of saints in potentia perhaps.

We have seen and, hopefully, experienced a bit of that communion here as I have tried to bring to the table pertinent topics for discussion and debate. I have also tried to represent significant voices from our past who we might not have been aware of, voices of the great Fathers like Irenaeus and Augustine. And we have heard from the living saints - you my readers, if there are any of you left. :) Of course, communion in cyber space is less than perfect for it is disembodied and the church, if anything is an embodied entity. Yet reading one another's thoughts and dialoging here can be a form of communion and can encourage us to seek out our local communities and foster embodied relationships there.

In honor of the passing of the year, I would like to offer you a few of my favorite posts from this past year. Enjoy! And as Babu Bhatt (of Seinfeld fame) said: "Tell your fliends!"

First Post: A Communion of Bloggers

Post which generated the most comments: Authentic Community

Most meaningless post: A Bit of Levity

Post with the biggest rant: Let's Leave THEM Behind

Imago Trinitatis

"The trace of the Trinity appears in creatures." -St. Augustine

The Experiment

In a previous blog, I related the classes that I will be taking this semester. The astute reader, and I know that you are all astute readers, will surely realize that the majority of my blogs this semester will have something to do with either Romans, Thomas Aquinas, or the church, as we tend to think about (and some of us) blog about the things that we are learning. There is one other area from which I will probably be crafting a lot, perhaps the majority, of my blogs. For this past Sunday a great experiment began.

Julie and I began teaching the senior high Sunday School class at our church, Trinity Pilgrim United Methodist Church. Some may call it an adventure (you never know what those kids are going to say), some may call it foolish (nothing short of three people approached me on Sunday to tell me that they had tried teaching the high schoolers and they had quit), but I prefer to call it an experiment. It is an experiment to see if the wonderful theological training I have received over the last five or six years actually "works" in church and, moreover, in the youth culture.

I am here reminded of a story that one of my seminary professors told me. Several years ago, there was an African tribe who had come to Christ through the ministry of a missionary from North America. After several years, there grew a desire that the tribe begin to lead themselves, and so they sent one of their promising young men to an American seminary in order to learn from the great minds about the bible so that he could then teach these truths to the tribe. After an absence of over four years, the tribe anxiously awaited the young man's return. When he did, they put him right into the pulpit to preach. But he was speechless. After standing there for a long time, the missionary pulled him aside and asked what the problem was. The young man said that he was not sure how to preach what he had learned to his tribe. How does "expiation" or "transubstantiation" translate? This man had to go through another course to relearn the Christian faith in his own language.

It strikes me that Julie and I are in a similar position here. We've spent the last few years learning a language and learning how to meaningfully discuss things in terms of that language. Specifically, I have spent the last few days in a quite interesting debate over the first few chapters of Romans. But this all means nothing in the context of senior highers. We, like the missionary, might be speechless in front of these kids. Unless we find a way to translate it into their language and their culture. And this is why I call it an experiment. I believe that our learning can be translated; it has to be, otherwise the academy has lost all touch with the church and has therefore become a useless entity. We have evidence that it has been translated through the years - this is why the Apostle Paul wrote in Greek (the language of the people) instead of Hebrew (the language of the faith). The question is, and the experiment will be, whether we can find the effective means to make that translation happen. If we can, then we have a chance of reaching these kids and impacting their lives with the truth of God's story. If we can't, then we might as well not waste their time - and I might as well start thinking of another profession.

We need your prayers in this experiment.

God's Definition of 'Reward'

"Now this is our highest reward, that we should fully enjoy him, and that all who enjoy him should enjoy one another in him." -St. Augustine

An unorganized discourse on classes and Labor Day

I have one week under my belt and it looks to be a good, and quite busy, semester. I am taking three classes this semester, as opposed to two classes (which I took each of my first two semesters) and which is the standard thoroughfare for doctoral students. My reason for increasing my class load is twofold: 1) I received a scholarship for 18 credits this year, and any credit unused would simply go to waste; as I might not be awarded the same scholarship next year, it behooves me to use all of the credits; hence, 9 credits, or 3 classes, each semester; and 2) my lovely wife has assured me that she will in fact kill me if I do not hurry up and finish. Taking three classes each semester will mean that I will finish my coursework this year - and everyone involved will be happy. So, though it will be busy and, perhaps, a little insane at times, I am committed to it. Let's just hope they don't commit me when I am done.

My classes this year are as follows: 1) Romans, a biblical studies course taught by a first year professor. I took the course primarily because of this professor. He studied under Richard Hays, a Wesleyan biblical scholar at Duke, of whom I greatly admire his exegetical practice. As I have lamented in previous posts, modern biblical scholars, in my humble opinion, tend to spend their time carving up the text until it resembles a large pile of meaningless scraps and in no shape to be edifying to the church. My hope (and experience thus far) is that this class will not be like that or that if it is, I would have the strength and intelligence to stand for a different approach;

2) Ecclesiology (which is just a fancy way of saying "study of the church"), a systematics course on, you guessed it, the study of what the church is, how it functions, etc. This course is taught by a Catholic nun whose primary focus, in her work, is what is called ecumenism. This means the work of finding what is similar in different denominations and working toward greater unity in the entire church. She is on several national "church dialogues" including one between the Catholics and Lutherans and another between the Catholics and Orthodox. She is also on the editorial board of an ecumenical periodical which I love called Pro Ecclesia ('for the church'). I am probably most excited for this class, as I hope that the main thrust of my own work, once I attain my PhD, will be the working toward greater unity in the church;

and 3) The Theology of Thomas Aquinas, a historical course studying the life and work of Thomas Aquinas, a medieval Catholic monk and theologian whose theological thought has had, arguably, the most influence of any Catholic thinker in the life of the church. I have been told that if you are a history major than you will have to deal with Thomas Aquinas at some point. It is taught by a middle ages scholar who has already shown in subtle ways that she is brilliant (she spoke to a student in both Swedish and Norwegian on the first day). This class will be more of what I am used to, as it is a historical course; however, I am fairly weak in knowledge on the middle ages so it is going to be a challenge. It should improve my Latin skills, however, as she expects us to read his work in Latin. We'll see.

On an unrelated note, does anyone else feel that Labor Day comes at the worst possible time? Last Sunday, I went through the entire grieving process of acknowledging that summer was over (Julie said to me: "See you at Christmas.") and that going back to class and getting back into the swing of things was in fact a good thing. This was very difficult, yet somehow I managed to do it, and by the end of the week and all of my classes, was starting to feel excited once again. And then all of the sudden, you are hit with this three day weekend, this mirage in the desert, summer's last, dying gasp. And you enjoy it! You love it! It makes you feel once again like you have no worries. But lo and behold Monday evening roles around and you are right back to where you started a week ago, trying to convince yourself that it is a good thing to be back. It is a little unfair - might have liked a three day weekend more at the beginning of October. But since when have students had any say?

Slave of Christ

"Being a slave of Christ is more distinguished than any freedom."

-Origen

First Day of School

Today is the beginning of a new school year for me. I have always loved these new beginnings - when I was a kid, it was so exciting to go back to school, to play at recess with your friends again, to meet your new teacher, to use your new school supplies and to wear your new outfits. In beginning what, hopefully, will be the final year of all my years in education, I find that these little joys are no longer present. I'm currently wearing some pants that I got as a gift two Christmases ago, a shirt I bought last year, and a pair of shoes that I've had since my third year in seminary. In fact, as I think of it, this might be the exact outfit I had on the first day of school last year. My school supplies are the same, simply remove the old notes from the binder and insert some new paper. Of course everything is done on computer now and I can't remember the last time I needed a glue stick or some crayons. I have new professors this year but, quite honestly, that prospect scares me more than anything. Its rather nice to already know what your professor expects. And unfortunately we have no recess here, though it is nice to study with some familiar faces.

And though the joys are not the same, I find that there are indeed still joys. I haven't seen many of my classmates since the spring - one of my friends has been in Australia all summer, another one in Boston. It will be good to see them. I'm excited about my classes. Though there is no anticipation of learning and memorizing more of the multiplication tables or spelling words with three syllables, there is an anticipation of new subject matters, and new horizons to integrate. And as with every beginning, the Lord has new mercies all over the place. We just need to be aware of them, and to appreciate the stage of life in which the Lord has it. Because we will never be here again.

I love being a student.

Musings from a Beach

"Yet, as everyone knows, meditation and water are wedded forever." -Herman Melville, Moby Dick

(Note to the reader: Since last Friday, my wife and I have been on vacation at Panama City Beach, Florida. When a person sits hour after hour looking out at such a powerful part of God's creation, namely the ocean, he has much time to ponder the deep and the shallow things of life. The following have been some of mine:)

1. There is, perhaps, no place where litter is more visible, and more disturbing, than on a beach.

2. In one of my morning walks, I happened upon a school of minnows swimming in the shallow waters of the ocean. They were constantly being moved by its powerful waves, drug into the shore and then pushed out again. But they kept swimming and together they kept moving. I thought it an apt picture of the church's existence in the world. Pity the poor minnow who finds himself swimming alone.

3. Given that reading is an aesthetic experience entailing not only the words on the page but the surroundings in which they are read, Moby Dick, if it is to be read at all, should be read on an ocean beach.

4. There is a military base nearby. Every so often, a fighter jet or a helicopter flies by piercing the clear, blue air with its stream and the peaceful sounds of the tides with its thrust. It reminds me that even this most serene and peaceful of environments cannot be likened to paradise. For the specter of war is never far off here. Why must this be?

5. George Costanza may have said it best: "The sea was angry that day my friends, like an old man trying to return soup in a deli."

6. Take heart freckled ones. I have found that if you stay outside long enough, all of your freckles eventually come together into one and thereby giving you the appearance of actually being tan.

7. The dolphins have been thick here. I have heard it said that dolphins are intelligent enough that if they ever came together, they could take us over. And this, I am told, is something we should fear. Why, I'm not sure. The seem playful enough. Anyway, I don't think they can do much worse than today's average world ruler.

8. Though it might not be the case that the world is my oyster, I can now most assuredly say that the ocean is my toilet.

9. There is little that can be added to the experience of a sunset over the ocean, save a good wife and a good cigar.

The Sacrament of Marriage

Three years ago today, I stood before the church with my fiance Julie Graff and repeated the sacred marriage vows. Largely due to the influence of J.D. Walt, my pastor from Asbury and the man who was leading us through the vows, I had already begun to think of marriage in terms of a sacrament. The sacraments are "perceptible signs (words and actions) accessible to our human nature. By the action of Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit they make present efficaciously the grace that they signify" (Catechism of the Catholic Church 1084). In other words, they are an outward sign of an inward grace, those acts or "means of grace" by which we experience the grace of God in a special, tangible manner. Generally speaking, Protestant traditions have limited the sacraments to two, namely Baptism and the Eucharist, as these are the two signifying acts, which were instituted by Christ. The Catholic and Orthodox Churches, following practices of the early church and a strong cohesive tradition, recognize several more, of which marriage is one.

My belief in the sacramentality of marriage was being formed by the manner in which I was reading Scripture. I was coming to see, more fully than I ever had before, that the covenant that God formed with humanity, first with Israel through Abraham (Gen. 12.1-3) - more fully explained in the Sinai Covenant (Exod. 20ff) - and with all humanity in Jesus Christ, was portrayed by the writers of Scripture as a marriage covenant. God pledges to his people his enduring faithfulness, not on the basis of any work or merit that his people provide him, but on the simple fact that he loves them and chooses to covenant with them. Thus, the Old Testament speaks in the most intimate of terms of God's love. When Israel goes astray, he is jealous for them. Their apostasy is most often characterized as adultery - Israel plays the whore to other gods. The most stunning depiction of this love is the book of Hosea, where Hosea relentlessly pursues his wife Gomer despite the fact that she is prostituting herself to other men. He finally is forced to buy her back, though she is already rightfully his. And despite her cruel unfaithfulness, Hosea never ceases from his pursuit of her.

The New Testament continues the metaphor referring to the People of God often as the Bride of Christ. Christ is pictured as the Bridegroom who is betrothed to his people in his life, death, and resurrection. The Apostle Paul never speaks of marriage without immediately moving to the relationship of Christ and the Church. The time between Christ's first advent and second advent has been interpreted by many theologians as a time of preparation for the bride. The Church is being sanctified to be fully joined with Christ in the Eschaton. Thus, the preferred image of heaven in the New Testament is a wedding feast.

In marriage, a man and a woman vow to love one another not on the basis of anything that the other can offer but on the basis of unconditional love. This is why the vows say, "for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health". The point is that it is not about what one can do for the other - it is rather the enduring, faithful love for the other that ratifies the covenant. As imperfect humans, we are truly incapable of this kind of love, and this is why marriage often fails, even with the best of intentions. Yet, husbands and wives that stay together, that truly enact the vows they proclaim to one another, witness to a love that is nothing short of divine, for it mirrors the love that our Heavenly Father, our Bridegroom, shows to us. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church so elegantly puts it: "The entire Christian life bears the mark of the spousal love of Christ and the Church. Already Baptism, the entry into the People of God, is a nuptial mystery; it is so to speak the nuptial bath which precedes the wedding feast, the Eucharist. Christian marriage in its turn becomes an efficacious sign, the sacrament of the covenant of Christ and the Church. Since it signifies and communicates grace, marriage between baptized persons is a true sacrament of the New Covenant" (1617).

Of course, this is all good in theory, and on the day of my wedding I could only think in theory because I had never been married. The fact that I have learned over three years is that marriage is hard! It is hard to love for worse, for poorer (ask my wife who has supported us for three years!), and in sickness. The romantic love characterized in the movies is not the prevalent experience of marriage partners - how can it be when one sees all the faults of the other in their rawest sense? The worst things that we do and think cannot be hidden from the other in a true marriage.

And yet I have found that this raw reality of marriage is actually a better sign of the love of God than anything portrayed for us in the movies. For movie love is based on a feeling, and feelings that are strong one day can be just as equally missing the next. Marriage love is based on a covenant, a covenant that does not falter when the other does nothing to deserve love. And in my marriage, I find myself loved and pursued by my wife in times when I am a miserable wretch, when there is absolutely nothing lovable about me. And I'm sure she would say the same. It is the covenant that endures and it is the covenant that makes the feelings of love meaningful.

And isn't that a perfect picture of the love of God? How can God continue to love us and pursue us when we are such miserable people, when we are such a miserable Church? He does because the covenant is based on his love and faithfulness, not on our own. I am immensely thankful, on this 14th of August, that I have a God who loves me so deeply. And I am immensely thankful that I have a wife, a partner in covenant, whose love for me witnesses to the Father's love in a manner that I never could have understood - and probably never fully will. I can only hope that she has the same experience of me.

"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church-- for we are members of his body. 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.' This is a profound mystery-- but I am talking about Christ and the church." -Ephesians 5:25-32

On Walking to Work and the Faithfulness of God

My wife Julie has a job for next year! Starting on September 10th, she will be a chaplain at St. Mary's Hospital. St. Mary's is a strong hospital with two locations in the Milwaukee area. She will be working at the one on Lake Avenue (pictured left), which is, incidentally, only five minutes from our apartment! She will be walking to work! This is quite a change from the 35-40 minute drive she now has everyday. Though she is only part time right now, it has been indicated to her that there is a strong possibility of it going full time soon.

This is just one more blessing in a string of blessings that we have experienced since coming to Milwaukee. Yes it is true that it is cold here (except when it is unbearably hot) and yes it is true that we got an inordinate amount of parking tickets in the first months and yes it is true that we have been living on an intern's salary for a year, but these are all incidental to the truth that we have consistently felt God's hand on us here. I do not think it is a matter of God rewarding us for our faithfulness. Rather, I believe that God called us to Himself and we have followed, which led us on paths to one another and then to Milwaukee and now for Julie to St. Mary's hospital.

I leave you with a few of my favorite lines from hymns that celebrate God's faithfulness.

"Great is thy faithfulness." -Thomas O. Chisholm

"Ponder anew what the Almighty can do." -Joachim Neander

"Here I raise mine Ebenezer, hither by Thy help I'm come." -Robert Robinson

The Power of True Stories

The importance of story in the forming of Christian disciples has been a theme of late on this blog. Narrative theology is the theological discipline that most clearly articulates and expounds on these truths. Its proponents treat the bible as one continuous narrative, with a beginning, middle, and ending, and believe that the theological statements, propositions, ethical teachings, etc. cannot be removed from the narrative in which they are situated. It is this overarching narrative that gives them their meaning. And it is the narrative itself, as told in and performed by the church, that has the power to form Christians in the image of Christ.

One of the constant criticisms that narrative theology and its practitioners face is the assumption by some that a story cannot be real. In other words, if we treat Scripture as a narrative or a story, than we are effectively removing the historical referent (e.g. that Jesus of Nazareth was truly born, truly lived and truly was crucified under Pontius Pilate) from Scripture. Such a move, it is argued, relegates Scripture to the level of any other story, such as Les Miserables, which, while being a story that positively affects people, never actually happened (Jean Val Jean is not an historic figure).

While there may be some narrative theologians that presume such ideas, the best ones retain the historical referent, while insisting that we respect Scripture's primary genre of narrative. There must, after all, be a reason that the Gospel writers (and the writer/writers of the Pentateuch) decided to relate the historical information in the form of a story. And that reason, I think, is because story has more power than a list of facts or sayings. And in the end, Scripture was not written (or later called such by the church) simply to relay facts; it was written to form people after the image of God revealed in Jesus Christ.

In any event, it is simply untrue that stories by definition have no historical referent. Think of how great figures throughout history have been remembered in print. They are not remembered through a list of facts about their lives, but through the relating of the story of their life by biography and autobiography. The stories of the saints, when related in this manner, also have the power to change people, to point them to Christ. Yet, it would be preposterous to assume that because these lives are written as stories they must be historically false.

To make my point, I offer you, in my opinion, the ten greatest spiritual biographies/autobiographies ever written. All are written as narratives, and yet all relate the historical truths of historical figures. I recommend anyone of these works to my readers. Each of them, for different reasons, will inspire, encourage you, and point you to God.

----

10. An Arrow Pointing to Heaven, Biography of Rich Mullins, written by James Bryan Smith

9. The Genesee Diary, Henri Nouwen, about his time in a Trappist Monastery

8. Life of Antony, Biography of Father Antony of the Desert Monks, written by St. Athanasius

7. Life of Macrina, Biography of St. Macrina, written by her younger brother St. Gregory of Nyssa

6. Shadow of the Almighy, Biography of Jim Elliot, written by Elisabeth Elliot

5. The Hiding Place, Autobiography of Corrie Ten Boom focusing on her time in a concentration camp. (This I have not yet read but I am assured by my wife that it belongs high on this list - #5 is not high enough for her, but not yet having read it, I didn't think I could justify any higher. Incidentally, it is my next read.)

4. The Life of Saint Francis, Biography of St. Francis of Assisi, written by St. Bonaventure

3. The Story of a Soul, Autobiography of St. Therese of Liseaux

2. The Seven Storey Mountain, Autobiography of Thomas Merton

1. The Confessions, Autobiography of St. Augustine

---

There are so many more deserving of mention. What spiritual biographies/autobiographies have you read that have influenced you?

Top Ten First Lines (or The Beauty of a First Line)

As an avid reader of fiction, I find that I put a lot of stock in the first line (or lines) of a work. I realize that, in the same way that one cannot (or should not) judge the contents of a book by its cover, the first line does not always make or break a story. However, it has been my experience that works with incredibly intriguing first lines have not normally disappointed me. What makes a great first line is difficult to define and, in any case, I would be woefully inadequate and rather presumptuous to offer such a definition. I will say that it does not necessarily have to be shocking. There simply needs to be some tacit experience in the first line that cries out to the reader: "Read on!" Thus, it may be that different people connect with different lines, and any list given would certainly be subjective.

With these qualifications (and with a further one that my reading experiences are likely too limited to even attempt such a list), I offer you, in my opinion, the ten greatest first lines in works of literature. (A note to the reader: I have excluded from the list Scriptural quotations because Scripture, while a narrative, is certainly not literature in the same sense as the following works of fiction. But be it known that there shall never be a better first line than: "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.")

----

10. "It was a feature peculiar to the colonial wars of North America, that the toils and dangers of the wilderness were to be encountered before the adverse hosts could meet." -James Fenimore Cooper, The Last of the Mohicans

9. "When in April the sweet showers fall / And pierce the drought of March to the root, and all / The veins are bathed in liquor of such power / As brings about the engendering of a flower." -Chaucer, The Canterbury Tales, trans. (from Middle English) Nevill Coghill

8. "If you really want to hear about it, the first thing you'll probably want to know is where I was born, and what my lousy childhood was like, and how my parents were occupied and all before they had me, and all that David Copperfield kind of crap, but I don't feel like going into it, if you want to know the truth." -J.D. Salinger, The Catcher in the Rye

7. "When I had journeyed half of our life's way, / I found myself within a shadowed forest, / for I had lost the path that does not stray." Dante, Inferno, trans. Allen Mandelbaum

6. "I am doomed to remember a boy with a wrecked voice - not because of his voice, or because he was the smallest person I ever knew, or even because he was the instrument of my mother's death, but because he is the reason I believe in God; I am a Christian because of Owen Meany." -John Irving, A Prayer for Owen Meany

5. "In our family, there was no clear line between religion and fly fishing." -Norman Maclean, A River Runs Through It

4. "Two households, both alike in dignity, / In fair Verona, where we lay our scene, / From ancient grudge break to new mutiny, / Where civil blood makes civil hands unclean. /From forth the fatal loins of these two foes / A pair of star-cross'd lovers take their life; / Whole misadventured piteous overthrows / Do with their death bury their parents' strife. / The fearful passage of their death-mark'd love, / And the continuance of their parents' rage, / Which, but their children's end, nought could remove, / Is now the two hours' traffic of our stage; / The which if you with patient ears attend, / What here shall miss, our toil shall strive to mend." -William Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet

3. "When Gregor Samsa woke up one morning from unsettling dreams, he found himself changed in his bed into a monstrous vermin." -Frank Kafka, The Metamorphosis

2. “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way–in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only.” -Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities

1. "It was a pleasure to burn." -Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451

----

Please feel free to balk, criticize, (perhaps) agree, and add your own favorites to the list.

The Story in Dogmatic Outline

As a narrative theologian, I am normally not a fan of propositional theology. However, in keeping with the theme of capturing the entire story of Scripture discussed of late on this blog, I found the following synopsis of that story quite fascinating. If you have a chance, let me know what you think.

Why have we lost the Story?

In the previous post, I lamented the fact that church has, generally speaking, in some way lost the understanding of the biblical narrative, the redemption story of God and the people he has called to himself in Israel and in the church. This loss has been deceptive because in many parts of the church, it would appear that bible reading is on the rise. Individual study of the Scriptures is now everywhere encouraged, including the Catholic Church which, for a time, kept the Scriptures away from lay people in an ancient language. Additionally, it would appear that Scripture memorization is on the rise. I've been to many churches where pastors encourage this discipline from the pulpit.

But the deception comes just in this. It is easy to deceive ourselves into thinking that we are biblically literate people because we have memorized a few verses or because we know a few bible stories. It is easy to deceive ourselves into thinking that we understand the story because we know who Balaam is. And so despite what can pass for biblical sermons and such, I hold to my original claim. But why have we lost this story? Particularly when the love of the bible is so high in many denominations. How did we get to where we are? This is a complex question with many possible answers. In this post, I would like to suggest only one possible factor with the knowledge that it alone cannot shoulder the blame.

Maxie Dunham, long time United Methodist pastor and former president of Asbury Theological Seminary, was fond of saying: "As the seminary goes, so goes the preacher, as the preacher goes, so goes the church." There is much wisdom in this statement and I think that he gets at a fundamental truth of the loss of the story. Much of the onus must be placed on the academy that trains these ministers. Allow me a bit of background to make this point.

In the modern era, there developed in biblical scholarship a series of methods for studying the text, which are collectively known as the "historical-critical method." The historical-critical method, in all of its varieties, seeks to find the meaning of the text by placing the text in its original sitz im leben ("life setting"). It seeks to discover the original author, the original audience, the original setting, any circumstances that occasioned the work, and the like. It was thought that the original context would provide the appropriate interpretive context. The historical-critical method developed in response to erroneous interpretations which read the text purely from one's own context, often employing it in manners that are unwarranted by the text itself.

This is all well and good and you might think that the historical-critical method was a positive development. After all, there are innumerable examples of how the text has been twisted to meet someone's personal agenda and the historical-critical method does provide some means of objectivity to act as a check against this sort of exegesis.

Having said this, there are, in my estimation, many negatives to the historical-critical method. The first, and perhaps the only one that needs to be mentioned here, is the shifting of the context of interpretation. For the historical-critical method, the context of interpretation moves behind the text. That is, the real interesting and crucial knowledge about an epistle such as Ephesians is not the content of the letter itself, but rather the situation in which it was written. Scholars who employ this method think that they will ascertain the meaning of the text if they can recreate the original context. But that means that the meaning is not located in anything Paul says in the text (if indeed Paul wrote Ephesians) but what was happening in his mind to cause him to write this. As a result, the text shifts to the background and these "behind-the-text" issues become the only important thing.

The greatest example of the loss of the text is in Gospel studies. Historical-critics are in general agreement that Mark was the first Gospel written and that Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source. But to understand the numerous similar passages found in Matthew and Luke that are absent from Mark, they have constructed a hypothetical "Q" document which is, supposedly, an early list of Jesus' sayings. They contend that Matthew and Luke also used "Q" to write their accounts. There is no manuscript evidence for this document. It is never quoted as such in the early Fathers or canonical lists of books. Yet, for most biblical scholars Q more important than any of the Gospels because it represents the earliest source, a list that is closest in time to the Christ event. NEVER MIND THE FACT THAT IT DOESN'T EXIST! The canonical Gospels, in the work of these scholars, very clearly take second place.

This phenomenon can also be witnessed in any scholarly commentary that one picks up today. On the average, 3/4s of a given commentary is devoted to the recreation of the original setting, whereas only 1/4 is given to actual exposition of the text. And these are the commentaries that our preachers are using.

And here is where I think the academy has led to the loss of the story. The majority of ministers currently in the pulpit cut their teeth on this historical-critical method. As a result, they have been trained to think of the text as secondary in importance. This leaves them with quite a problem on Sunday mornings. Are they to write a sermon about the real author of Ephesians? Chances are no because that does not preach very well. What is left then but some topical sermon? For they were not trained to understand the entire narrative and that its retelling is the only thing that will form Christian disciples.

There are, to be sure, positive things to be mined from the historical-critical method. But to buy into it hook, line, and sinker is to relegate the text to second place and to lose the overall understanding of the story of God from creation to redemption. It is to lose the idea that the one author, the Holy Spirit, is behind all of the individual authors and settings and gives the story its coherence. It is to lose the idea that this story still speaks to us today, that we as the church today are the intended audience of these letters. In short, the beginning of the recovery of the biblical story is the restoration of the text to its rightful place as the center of both exegetical study and homiletical exposition.