The Little Friar

My translation of Ephesians 4.23-24 goes like this:  " The old you -- get rid of it!  Become a new you, living in a new way, God-shaped from the inside out, holy and true".  That, I think, is the heart of becoming and being Christian.  And I don't mean in a "religious" way, a way that leaves us largely unchanged.  But in a genuinely transformed way.  A way in which we have new priorities and new passions, a new logic with a new identity.  Theologically, I want to make a couple of claims and then "flesh" them out in some of the transformed ways for this new person.   First, that Christians don't exist so that there can be a church, rather the church exists so that there can be Christians.  And second, that Christians exist not simply so that there can be Christians, rather they exist to be the prototype of a new humanity.  This is what baptism and discipleship are all about, a fundamental parting of the ways, which the NT speaks about in ...

I wrote recently that the psalms are the most significant part of my prayer life.  Which brings me to explore why Psalm 62.9 is why I still go to church (" The children of Adam are emptiness, /  the children of men are a fake; /  they are set on the scales together, /  and emptiness is their weight"). There are people who say that religion is a crutch, and I've never taken offence at that description.  There have been times when I've gone to church feeling the need for personal forgiveness or comfort or strength or whatever.  But the older I get -- I'm not very old of course, but I'm not quite as young as I used to be either -- the more I feel that my faith is not primarily a personal thing but a way of sharing the common lot with everybody else. I go to church sometimes not needing comfort for my own private griefs but seeking consolation for the slow unfolding trainwreck that is called human history.  I go to church sometimes hoping to find forgivene...

Gustaf Aulen's  Christus Victor , first published in 1931, has influenced the way generations of students think about Christ's death.  According to Aulen's typology, there are three main types of atonement theory:  (1) the "classical" ransom theory, according to which God used Jesus as bait to rescue humanity from subjugation to the devil; (2) the "objective" satisfaction theory, according to which Jesus' death satisfies the demands of God's honour or justice; and (3) the "subjective" moral influence theory, according to which Jesus' obedient death has an exemplary moral power that can be imitated by others.  I do not believe Aulen's typology is a reliable guide to the Christian tradition.  Some comments on each of his three types:  (1) His first category -- intended to represent patristic thought -- is a real muddle.  The importance it gives to the role of the devil is very misleading.  The image of Jesus as bait on a hook has ...

The rhythms of daily prayer and the church year have been a deep part of my spirituality for most of my Christian life.  The Psalms, in particular, have been the best prayers for me.  In his book, Psalms:  The Prayerbook of the Church , Bonhoeffer wisely counseled:  " If we are to pray aright, perhaps it is quite necessary that we pray contrary to our own heart.  Not what we want to pray is important, but what God wants us to pray.  If we were dependent entirely on ourselves, we would probably pray only the fourth petition of the Lord's Prayer.  But God wants it otherwise.  The richness of the Word of God ought to determine our prayer, not poverty of our heart".  I've always been skeptical in relying upon myself to pray.  I know my own heart -- its anger, greed, envy and lust.  So I know simply praying -- as so many have urged me over the years -- "to praying whatever is on your heart" isn't the best practice.  Instead, allowin...

Some weeks ago  I wrote about the relationship between self-esteem and servanthood.  The observation I made then was that we often fail to humble ourselves to take on the form of a servant (Philippians 2.6-8) because we are struggling to secure self-esteem.  Somewhat paradoxically, it takes a lot of ego-strength to be humble -- to let others go first, to take the last place, to "wash feet", and to allow others to get the praise, recognition, and accolades. We struggle with this.  Not because we are wicked but because our sense of self-worth is built upon praise, compliments, attention, respect and popularity.  Thus we engage in what psychologists have called "excessive reassurance seeking", constantly taking the temperature of our social network to verify that we are being noticed, approved of, and included.  As I wrote then, this struggle for significance is made even more difficult if you lack what this culture defines as "valuable", "worthy", ...

I was re-watching Bonhoeffer:  Agent of Grace  yesterday.  I've always been bothered by the movie's easy portrayal of Bonhoeffer as a struggling Christian pacifist who ultimately embraces a Christian realism .  According to the movie, Bonhoeffer is finally confronted by the evils of the Nazi regime and concludes, "It is worse to be evil than to do evil".  The movie concludes that Bonhoeffer entered the plot to assassinate Hitler on the grounds of his commitment to Jesus.  As I argued in my doctoral dissertation, the popular account of Bonhoeffer depicted in Agent of Grace  springs from a  misunderstanding of  why  the Nazis killed him.  Bonhoeffer was well known as a pacifist in the years leading up to his arrest, based in part on his exposition of the Sermon on the Mount in  Discipleship .  But then, the story goes, he had a change of heart given the exigencies of Nazi tyranny and joined with the conspiracy that sought to...

One of the most insidious spiritual temptations is authenticity.  In our culture, we prize "being yourself" over everything else.  Thing is, such authenticity often fails to recognize all the ways in which self-deception  actually work.  I know myself well enough to know I don't trust myself to be as authentic as I'd like to believe I can be.  In fact, the Bible warns quite often how pervasive a problem such self-deception can be:  Quite probably the clearest in 1 John 1.8 ("If  we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us").  But there's also things like Psalm 36.1-4, Jeremiah 2.34-35, 17.9-10, Luke 11.42-52.  Make no doubt about it, when it comes to sin, there are a variety of insidious ways it can take hold.  So I don't trust authenticity  language.  It's too thin and brittle.  It breaks when you give it much use.  When I hear others attempt to defend their sin with the language...

According to social psychologists, it's becoming easier to see our individual discipline and effort to be immune from the shortcomings we find in others.  That this self-inflating moral bias is even stronger when it comes to moral judgments we make about others' behaviors.    Culture, religious belief and experience all help shape a person's sense of moral standing in relation to others, psychologists say.  According to this theory of the holier-than-thou effect , more moral behavior is related to situation than to character.  So the problem with the effect is that we blame character flaws -- and then highlight  those flaws -- over against our own kindnesses to self in the same situation.  According to psychologists, that's the only way to diminish the holier-than-thou effect:  Share similar experiences.  I write often here about humility.  My go-to definition for what humility is, is taken from Paul's principle:  "Don't push your w...

Yesterday, a few friends posted on Facebook a link to the story that a Christian group has cancelled a speaking engagement for some of the members of the cultural phenomenon known as Duck Dynasty.  I commented that I had developed, over the past weeks, some concerns about the show.  Apparently, I'm alone in this amongst my friends.  So let me lay out here those concerns in order to open up the conversation.  First, let me confess:  I came to the show only this year.  Kendra had started watching, so I started watching.  And, though it probably seems odd for an intellectual to claim:  I love it.  It's funny and well-produced.  It's even largely a family-friendly show for cable tv fame.  That said, I've developed some critiques of it.  The largest -- and most serious to my mind -- involves the scandal of particularity.  What's that?  Let me illustrate.  Like I said, I've watched nearly every episode.   True, th...

I don't celebrate Veteran's Day.  And each year I'm asked why.  So, in advance of the day, let me lay out my thinking here.  Veteran's Day in the US has its roots in Armistace Day.  Armistace Day was remembered on the 11th day of the 11th month each year, as a reminder of those who died in the violent Great War (World War I).  The idea in Armistace Day wasn't to glorify the dead, but to mourn them.  The idea of Armistace Day was to reject that "old lie; Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori" (to quote Wildred Owen's poem that quotes Horace:  "It is sweet and right to die for your country").   It is  a lie, of course, for Christians.  Because Veteran's Day is predicated not on mourning dead and praying for peace.  It is the lie that the dead we mourn sacrificed themselves for peace.  For Christians, there is only one sacrifice that brings peace, through the forgiveness of sins like violence -- that's the sacrifice of Jesus. ...

I make a lot out of  Jesus' radical welcome and embrace of "tax collectors and sinners".  So inevitably someone will  try to throw some cold water by bringing up John 8.1-11.  This is the famous story of the woman caught in the act of adultery.  After challenging the men accusing the woman -- "Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her" -- causing them to drop their stones and walk off, Jesus turns to the woman: "Woman, where are they?  Has no one condemned you?" "No one, sir," she said. "Then neither do I condemn you ..." So far, so good. Jesus doesn't condemn the women like the men have.  But that's not Jesus's final word.  His parting word is this: "Go and sin no more." The way John 8.1-11 rhetorically functions in many conversations is as evidence that Jesus had moral standards.  Jesus's embrace wasn't unconditional, it had strings attached.  That is, Jesus' welco...

I'm a Christian who struggles with lots of doubts.  So I'm very sympathetic to those who struggle with doubts.  Whether it's other Christians or those outside the faith who wrestle with their own doubts about becoming Christian.  But there's also something I've begun noticing in myself that gives me pause.  Judgementalism.  I've detected this not because I have a window into another's soul.  It's my own darkness.  I'm guilty.   I've detected this because it's a sin I've succumbed to.  You look at people who don't struggle with doubts -- don't struggle with the reality of horrific suffering or problems with the biblical text -- and wonder if there isn't something wrong with them.  Maybe they are just too fearful.  Maybe they just aren't smart enough.  Me?  Well, I'm smart and  courageous. So I doubt.  I'm tempted here to go off into another riff about how we tend to build our self-esteem over against others. ...

Today, I'm thinking about temptation.  Specifically, the mechanics of temptation.  I often hear folks speak of temptation as if the Satan were inside their mind/heart, urging them in this or that direction.  When I think about "temptation" and how an agent like Satan might be involved with it, I have a lot of questions.  So, this post has more to do with my questions than working through any opinion I might want to share with you.  After posing my questions, if you have any thoughts on the matter, I'd be happy to hear them.  First, let me turn to that text that most informs my questions about temptation:  Romans 7.15-23:  "I do not understand what I do.  For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do.  And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good.  As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me.  I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. ...

*WARNING:  There's lots of blue and offensive language in this post.  It fits with what truthful language Stan himself uses.  Don't read on if you may be offended.  Stanley Hauerwas is transitioning out of the classroom and into a research-filled "retirement".  He'll still supervise PhD students, write and contribute, but his teaching in the classroom days are behind him.  Since "Stan the Man" -- as some of us have called him over the years -- is "retiring" (what the hell* it means for a theologian to retire is beyond me), I thought it appropriate to write my own retrospective on Stan.  So, here goes.  I didn't go to Duke because of Stanley.  I went to Duke to study with Fred Herzog. Fred unfortunately died, though, my first semester at Duke.  So I had to scramble for a new adviser.  Not knowing whom to choose, I was placed with Stan.  That simple turn became one of the greatest gifts God gave me.  I still remember reading...