Tag Archives: Book Review

N. T. Wright. Evil and the Justice of God

N. T. Wright. Evil And the Justice of God. InterVarsity Press, 2006.

N.T. Wright, the British New Testament theologian and Anglican bishop, has become a bit of an industry. We may note this simply in how this rather slight book (less than 170 pages of text with generous white space throughout) found release in hardback and remains unavailable in paperback. Wright has continued to crank out books of this size and scope in great numbers while presumably also readying the next massive volume in his Christian Origins and the Question of God series (supposedly on the writings of Paul).

In spite of (or is it because of?) his extraordinary productivity, Wright almost always has worthwhile things to say–he certainly does in Evil and the Justice of God. We may wonder how much more useful and insightful his contribution addressing the important issues he takes up in this book might be had he spent more time on it. But we can be thankful for what we have.

The core of this book, and Wright’s distinctive contribution to thought on the problem of evil, is his chapter on Jesus’ crucifixion and how that provides a framework for Christian understanding of evil and of God’s response. I greatly appreciate Wright’s summary of the core theme of the Bible (“the entire Old Testament…hangs like an enormous door on a small hinge, namely the calling of Abraham in Genesis 12,” p. 46)–that God’s is working in a long-suffering way consistent with God’s just love to bring healing in the face of human evil. Jesus’ life that led to his crucifixion and God’s vindication of this life by raising Jesus from the dead tells us what we need to know about God’s creative work in the face of evil and what God expects from people of faith as their role in this work.

I like Wright’s theology a great deal. I like that as a biblical scholar he is informed and bold concerning the big theological themes and perfectly willing to address them. And address them he does, doing so in a way that keeps the biblical message at the center. He expresses a strong commitment to the Bible’s message of shalom. If he’s not quite a full-blown pacifist and social and political radical, he’s generally close enough (despite some irritating brief seemingly pro forma digs at various expressions of “liberalism” in the early part of the book when he is setting out our current cultural setting for addressing the themes of the book).

I do have one significant concern, though. In reading much of what Wright has published and in listening to him speak several times, I am left with the impression that while working very hard (and largely successfully) at placing prophetic biblical concerns at the center of his theology, he still does remain a bit of a Constantinian.  That is, for Wright, the church retains a sort of ontological privilege in his schema of salvation history. I would think that someone as immersed in the recovery of the prophetic message of the Bible would recognize how far Christendom departed from the agenda of biblical prophets (from Moses to John of Patmos). The community gathered around Torah in the Old Testament and the messianic assembly in the New Testament both stand in judgment of the church.

Certainly, Christians have the calling to work within their communities to recover and embody the biblical message of shalom and to fulfill the calling of Abraham’s descendants to bless all the families of the earth. However, the church as an institution has long ago forfeited its standing as the steward of this message. Wright’s sanguine assumptions about the church as the center of God’s work in the world weaken his arguments about the tasks followers of the biblical God face in embodying God’s justice in our present time.

 

Book review index

Christopher D. Marshall. Crowned with Glory and Honor

Christopher D. Marshall. Crowned With Glory and Honor: Human Rights in the Biblical Tradition. Cascadia Publishing House, 2001.

This is a splendid little book. Marshall, a New Testament scholar who teaches in New Zealand, provides a concise but thorough account how the Bible and biblically-based theology may strongly affirm a commitment to human rights. In doing so, he shows conclusively that modern notions of human rights such as reflected in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are fully compatible with Christian thought.

Along the way, Marshall does critique Enlightenment-based notions of human rights, but his intent is to build bridges more than pit Christian theological language against human rights language as is lamentably done by some Christians. Marshall’s strengths include a thorough understanding of the biblical message that allows him to provide an outline for a general biblical theology (Old and New Testaments) that serves as the basis for his affirmation of human rights. He helpfully focuses on the big picture in the Bible rather than isolated proof-texts.

Marshall also does a fine job in introducing the general arena of human rights thought as it has emerged in moral philosophy and political realities. In doing so, he gives Christians an excellent primer on the intersection of their theology with the public policy world–and he gives those unfamiliar with theology a good sense of how the Bible can be seen as friendly to their human rights concerns.

Yet another strength is Marshall’s economy of expression. His main text runs slightly less than 100 pages, but he is quite thorough in his discussion (beyond the main text we have 13 pages of informative endnotes and a 9-page bibliography). Certainly he could have said much more (and we could use a large tome on this subject). But what he presents is quite adequate and persuasive–Christians have every business strongly advocating human rights and human rights advocates from outside Christianity have every business welcoming biblical thought as part of their rationale for their advocacy.

 

Book review index

Michael Standaert. Skipping Towards Armageddon

Michael Standaert. Skipping Towards Armageddon: The Politics and Propaganda of the Left Behind Novels and the LaHaye Empire. Soft Skull Press, 2006.

One major contribution this book makes is to look critically and thoroughly at the political context of the Left Behind phenomena. This examination is illuminating and alarming. Tim LaHaye has a long history of right wing political activism–fueled in part by his paranoid theology. Standaert makes an important contribution both in tracing LaHaye’s career and connections and in making clear the political impact of the content of the Left Behind books.

This is a readable book that points to many resources to help buttress Standaert’s argument. He clearly is completely negative about LaHaye’s perspective and influence.  However, while his negative perspective comes through clearly throughout, he is reasoned and careful and documents most of his critiques.

It’s not a perfect book. Standaert is not a scholar. He writes well and has done significant research, but on many issues is clearly relying on others’ research–and not always the best research (for instance, he does not refer to Paul Boyer or George Marsden, probably the two most important historians who have written on American fundamentalism and premillennial dispensationalism).

Still, I would recommend this book as an important resource for anyone who wants to understand better why the Left Behind phenomenon is problematic. Beyond most of the critiques I have read, Standaert is especially helpful for his focus on the broader political and cultural issues at play.

 

Book review index

A. G. Mojtabai. Blessed Assurance: At Home with the Bomb in Amarillo, Texas

A. G. Mojtabai. Blessed Assurance: At Home With the Bomb in Amarillo, Texas. Syracuse University Press, 1997 [1986].

Though this book was written over twenty years ago, it remains a fascinating portrayal of the link between futuristic eschatology and American militarism (the paperback edition, published in 1997, remains unchanged from the original).  Mojtabai, a secular Jew and humanist from New York, decided to pay an extended visit to Amarillo, Texas, in order to understand the people who make nuclear weapons. After she arrived in Texas she began to learn how intertwined the acceptance of the validity of such work was with Christian fundamentalism.

The book is well-written and for the most part lets the people of Amarillo tell their own stories. Mojtabai seems to be a good listener, able to evoke a sense of trust from the people she talked with. She does ask some pointed questions and lets her perspective enter the discussion at times. However, the book’s power stems most of all from her care in keeping her agenda below the surface.

What results, though, is indeed a powerful and frightening portrayal of American Christianity and the American scandal of pouring such an incredible amount of treasure (human and material) into the creation of an unspeakably evil arsenal of death-dealing weaponry. The shocking element of Mojtabai’s story arises from the overt complicity of theology in such a blasphemous undertaking.

Mojtabai finds herself wondering what’s wrong with the sensibility of these Christians who so blithely support the creation of such weapons of mass destruction. In doing so, she actually presents Jesus and his message over against the words of the Christians–an act of wonderful irony where the agnostic understands the gospel better than professing Christians.

“Going from church to church in Amarillo, the impression is unavoidable: some of the most ardent born and born-again Christians are writing Christianity off as something that did not, could not work—at least, not in the First Coming.  The conviction that mankind is bent on its own destruction, that goodness cannot succeed in a world so evil, the constant recourse to the Old Testament (to the most bellicose sections), the turning for betterment to the dire remedies offered by the book of Revelation, the only light left to the Second Coming—all this strangely negates the ‘good news’ of the Gospels and the First Coming.”

 

Book review index

Garry Wills. What Paul Meant

Garry Wills. What Paul Meant. Viking, 2006

Garry Wills is an American treasure–a great historian, especially of American presidents, a political and religious progressive, a powerful critic of many of the failings of hierarchical Catholicism, a perceptive commentator on current events, and a prolific writer of always useful books.  As a kind of sidelight late in life, he has written a series of books on the New Testament–one on Jesus, one on Paul, and one of the gospels.

The second of the series, What Paul Meant, provides a clear, concise, and informative look at the great Apostle. One strength of the book is its accessibility combined with its reliability. Wills is not a New Testament scholar, but he is attentive to some of the best of Pauline scholarship and does a fine job summarizing some of its key insights. Another strength of the book is Wills’ clear and forceful placing of Paul firmly in first century Jewish debates. He rightly, and importantly, asserts that Paul was not a “Christian” because such a thing did not exist until after Paul’s death. Paul was a Jew arguing with other Jews about the best understanding of their tradition–from within that tradition.

Somewhat of a weakness, in my opinion, is that Wills does write as a historian–even if one seeking (successfully) to speak to a general audience.  That is, he is more descriptive than prescriptive, focusing more on what Paul “meant” then, than on what Paul means for us now.  One somewhat distracting element of this historical focus is the energy Wills spends on debunking Luke’s Acts of the Apostles as a useful source of information about the historical Paul. In such a short book (again, its brevity is a strength for Wills’ intentions with this book), it seems too bad that he would focus on this negative tangent. I don’t necessarily disagree with his judgment of Acts as history (though I think he presents the evidence as more clear and certain than it probably is) so much as think that if one wants to focus on Paul’s own writings as the basis for reconstructing the central elements of his life and thought one should simply do so and not spend much time justifying the exclusion of Acts from consideration (it would be different should this book be aimed at a more scholarly audience).

Nonetheless, while I was disappointed that Wills did not reflect more on Paul’s meaning for today (which would have seemed natural for one who pays such perceptive attention to the American political scene), I would recommend this book as a great introduction to the historical Paul.  And, in the end, Wills gets it exactly right, in my opinion, when he links Paul with Jesus, summarizing the message of both: “Both were at odds with those who impose the burdens of ‘religion’ and punish those who try to escape them. They were radical egalitarians, though in ways that delved below and soared above conventional politics. They were on the side of the poor, and saw through the rich. They saw only two basic moral duties, love of God and love of neighbor. Both were liberators, not imprisoners–so they were imprisoned. So they were killed. Paul meant what Jesus meant, that love is the only law” (175).

 

Book review index

Jacob Taubes. The Political Theology of Paul

Jacob Taubes. The Political Theology of Paul. Stanford University Press, 2004.

This is an interesting book, though perhaps not for everybody. Taubes was a Jewish political philosopher in Germany and the United States who died in 1987. Shortly before his death he presented a set of lectures on the Apostle Paul’s Letter to the Romans (kind of). These lectures were gathered, edited, and translated, finally being published in North America in 2004 in a Stanford University Press series on postmodernism that includes other books from European philosophers on Paul.

Mark Lilla’s New York Review of Books article, “A New, Political Saint Paul?” in the October 23, 2008 issue (unfortunately only available online through a paid subscription), very helpfully puts Taubes’ thought in context. Unlike thinkers such as Zizak and, especially, Badiou, Taubes presents us with a Paul who is thoroughly Jewish. This is a major issue, and we can be grateful for Taubes’ counter-witness to what seems surely to be the kind of attention to Paul that does little to advance Christian theology and ethics or the much needed rapprochements of Christianity and Judaism on the one hand and of post-Christian Western thought and the authentic gospel on the other.

Taubes also stands over against the great Jewish thinker, Martin Buber, in his understanding of Paul.  Buber’s great book, Two Kinds of Faith, displayed a remarkably sympathetic Jewish reading of Jesus–but unfortunately drives a deep wedge between Jesus and Paul. Taubes rejects this wedge (though he does not pay much attention to Jesus, per se) and makes the assertion that Paul remains thoroughly Jewish in the prophetic line. This assertion would have still been unusual in the 1980s, but happily is now much more central for scholarly readings of Paul. Taubes was a good friend of the pioneering Pauline scholar Krister Stendahl and his affinity with Stendahl on this issue of Paul and Judaism is apparent.

However, the “kind of” in my parenthesis above must be explained. If you are looking for a close reading of Romans you will need to look elsewhere.  Taubes rambled a lot in these lectures. What is reproduced in this book is mainly a series of reflections on an appreciative Jewish reading of Paul, on various currents of 20th-century European political philosophy, and on Taubes’ own very rich and fascinating life. This makes a fun read–but useful more for its suggestiveness than for any sustained argumentation.

Peace Theology Book Review Index

James Logan. Good Punishment?

James Logan. Good Punishment?: Christian Moral Practice and U.S. Imprisonment. Eerdmans, 2008.

This is an important and timely book.  Logan, a Mennonite who teaches at a Quaker school (Earlham College in Indiana) has provided a clear and devastating critique of the American criminal (in)justice system.  In careful, even understated prose, he details layer upon layer of social devastation–to the convicts who are treated like pieces of trash, to the victims of crime who are shunted aside by the system, and to the broader society that finds more and more resources being poured into a more and more ineffective (even counter-productive) prison-industrial complex.  A strong sense of humanity, grounded in his Christian faith, underlies Logan’s analysis.

By far the strongest part of the book is the first half, where Logan lays out the problems. He is quite persuasive in helping us see the social consequences of our society’s linking the violence of retributive philosophies and practices that takes already damaged people (convicted criminals) and damages them even further through dehumanizing punitive practices together with a powerful trend toward privatizing prisons and making them serve corporations’ lust for profits.

Logan writes this book as a theologian. He seeks to develop a case for what he calls “good punishment” where violations are taken seriously but become an occasion for seeking to heal the damage done rather than an occasion to unleash the forces of vengeance and (now) capitalist extraction of profits from human misery. He draws especially on the work of the pacifist Methodist theological ethicist Stanley Hauerwas in this constructive effort.

I greatly appreciate Logan’s attempt to respond to this terrible crisis theologically. Indeed, the churches and the larger society are in dire need of such responses. The Dutch law professor, Herman Bianchi, makes the evocative statement that since the western theological tradition has so much responsibility for the crises we find ourselves in, one important step in a positive direction would be to apply some “homeopathic” therapy where we draw on this same tradition for resources that might heal the damage it has done. Logan’s work is an important effort at such homeopathic therapy.

Nonetheless, I found myself somewhat disappointed with the constructive theological proposals Logan makes. One problem arises from his use of Hauerwas as his main interlocutor. Hauerwas has a disconcerting tendency to take concrete ethical issues and mush them up with opaque theological jargon and abstract and vague thought experiments. So, Logan inevitably moves in the same problematic direction by relying on Hauerwas. He makes some perceptive criticisms of Hauerwas’s tendencies in this direction, but they pale in relation to how he nonetheless lets Hauerwas frame a theological response.

Logan’s main constructive proposal is to develop the notion of what he calls a politics of “ontological intimacy”–an unfortunate term that does not really help very much in providing clear directives for a theological, ethical approach to transforming the retributive and corporatist system we suffering under today.

When I picked up this book, knowing that Logan is a Mennonite and with the title “Good Punishment?”, I expected more engagement with the work of John Howard Yoder.  Yoder wrote a set of essays under the rubric of “good punishment” that have never been published (they were written in 1995 and are available online here [this page has many of Yoder’s unpublished writings, scroll down a ways to find the set of lectures calls “The Case for Punishment”]). I thought Logan might be taking Yoder’s creative work as his jumping off point. He does refer briefly to Yoder; however, by letting Hauerwas set the agenda instead of Yoder, he misses an opportunity to make a more significant theological contribution to these important issues.

It is probably true, as Cornel West says in a blurb for the book, that “Logan’s book is the most sophisticated theological treatment of the prison-industrial complex we have.” And Logan deserves our strong appreciation for producing this “treatment.” In the end, though, I still find myself looking for more.

Peace Theology Book Review Index

Nicholas Wolterstorff. Justice: Rights and Wrongs.

Nicholas Wolterstorff.  Justice: Rights and Wrongs. Princeton University Press, 2008.

This is an important book, but also a bit of a frustrating book. Wolterstorff is a well-known Christian philosopher, long-time professor at Calvin College, more recently at Yale University, and currently in residence as an active retiree at the University of Virginia.

I really like his argument. He grounds justice in human rights and he grounds human rights in the inherent worth of each person.  He presents the case for seeing such an understanding in the Bible. I love that he brings the Bible to bear on this discussion, though his presentation is a bit disjointed.  He summarizes his interpretation of the biblical bases for a strong view of human rights, but then kind of leaves it behind as he turns to the philosophical tradition. It feels more like he is using the Bible as an illustration than as a fundamental source.

Probably because I am not a philosopher, Wolterstorff’s long and winding journey through philosophical argumentation did not hold my attention. I like where he ends up, but I did not find the process particularly enlightening.  One big surprise for me was his utter lack of attention to the political philosophers of recent years who have tackled the theory of justice (John Rawls gets a brief footnote early on, Ronald Dworkin gets a passing mention; Robert Nozick, Michael Sandel, Michael Walzer, William Galstone are all completely ignored). I found this lack to be surprising. By not engaging the political philosophers, Wolterstorff allows his discussion to remain on a highly abstract level once he leaves his biblical discussion.

It turns out that this book is part one of a two part work. In the midst of writing on justice, Wolterstorff realized that he needed a thorough treatment of love. He briefly addresses love here but promises a second volume that deal with it in much more detail. I look forward to this second book and believe that some of the problems I have with Justice: Rights and Wrongs (especially how abstract and philosophical it is) will be alleviated when the full work is complete.

One of the most attractive aspect of this work in my mind is Wolterstorff’s openness about his own commitments–he’s profoundly committed to social justice (having been active in anti-apartheid activism and supporting Palestinian rights in the Middle East) and he’s a deeply committed Christian who seeks to view everything through the eyes of his faith convictions.

His argument about justice, human rights, and human worth is profound and deserves careful attention. He provides bases for a Christian perspective on many of the pressing issues of our day that challenge injustice and oppression. Hopefully Wolterstorff himself and others will continue to push out implications of this understanding of justice and apply it to actual on the ground issues.

Peace Theology Book Review Index

Frank Schaeffer. Crazy for God.

Frank Schaeffer. Crazy for God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right, and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back. DeCapo Press, 2008.

This is an fascinating book for a certain population–namely past and current evangelical Christians who have at one time been influenced by the author’s father, Francis Schaeffer. That population includes me, so I indeed did find this a fascinating book. To readers who are not familiar with the Schaeffers, I am not sure this book would be worth reading.

Francis Schaeffer made his name first of all as a Presbyterian missionary in Switzerland who in time founded a ministry called L’Abri and specialized in ministering to young adults who had religious questions–whether because of disaffection with standard Christianity or out of post-Christian Western ignorance of Christianity.  Schaeffer was known as a thoughtful person who took the questions seriously.  And his wife, Edith, gained fame due to her hospitality and ability to write engagingly about the missionary work.

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, some of Schaeffer’s lectures in apologetics were published in North America and gained a wide audience.  The Schaeffer’s mission work increasingly attracted young Americans, heightening their fame.

They had three daughters and their youngest was their one son–named after his father, called “Franky” for many years, and now known as “Frank.”  As Franky came of age, he joined his father in ministry.  He helped influence Francis to exploit his popularity by joining with the emerging Christian Right in America to lead opposition to abortion and to defend biblical inerrancy.  They produced a couple of films and some best-selling books.

At the height of his popularity, Francis contracted cancer, dying in 1984–celebrated by that time primarily by his “co-belligerents” on the Right, including Ronald Reagan and Jerry Falwell.

With the death of his father, Franky began drifting, trying his hand at movie production and other media work, but without much success.  In the midst of his struggles, he wrote a novel that caught a publisher’s attention and redirected his life.  In time, he joined the Eastern Orthodox faith and continued to find success as a writer.

Crazy for God tells this story from Frank’s point of view.  It ends up being quite an exposé of his own family and of the evangelical movement that he and his father found such fame with.  Again, for anyone who has been influenced by the Schaeffers, this will be fascinating (and somewhat scandalous) stuff.

My own time as a “Schaefferite” was short–from the summer of 1975 through the spring of 1977.  I was fortunate to encounter the “progressive” Schaeffer who asserted that Christians should never be afraid of any questions, who advocated environmental responsibility, and who challenged the empty materialism of Western culture.  My own turning point came with the release of the Schaeffers ambitious film and book project that sought to apply Francis’s apologetics on a grand scale, called How Should We Then Live.  I was on a team of three Schaeffer fans who taught a class on the book and film at the University of Oregon.  There is nothing like teaching a book to help one perceive the book’s flaws.  By the end of the class, I was convinced that Schaeffer did not really know what he was talking about–and combined his ignorance with a bad attitude.

Then, as I moved to the left politically and theologically, Schaeffer became an icon in the Christian Right.  I later learned that he had begun his career as a rigid, devisive fundamentalist, a close colleague of the legendary Carl McIntire in battles among American Presbyterians in the 1930s.  Sadly, these instincts never really left him.

Frank Schaeffer portrays his father as a mostly well-meaning and caring person whose brightest moments came in his non-judgmental acceptance of the troubled young people who flocked to L’Abri in the 1960s.  Francis tragically got caught up in his bigger “mission” that moved him away from the things he truly cared about–art, beauty, creativity.

While the book is well worth reading for anyone interested in the Schaeffer family saga (Edith Schaeffer somes off much more negatively than her husband), I ended up feeling surprisingly unenlightened.  Frank throughout comes off as a pretty unattractive character (which, I suppose, is a credit to his honesty).  I really didn’t feel much empathy toward him nor interest in his own journey.

The kinds of things I would have been most interested in–the intellectual dynamics in Francis Schaeffer’s ministry–were given pretty short shrift.  Likely Frank Schaeffer never really engaged with the ideas that pulled in many questioning young thinkers to his father’s orbit.  If one were to write a history of the most interesting evangelical thinkers of the past generation, Francis Schaeffer’s impact on awakening many people’s intellectual energies would be seen in its enormity.

But such a history is not what this book ultimately is about.  It is about the rise, fall, and recovery of a pretty uninteresting person who nonetheless rubbed shoulders with many who did (for better and mostly for worse) impact our society.  As such, it’s an important artifact.

Andrew J. Bacevich. The New American Militarism

Andrew Bacevich, professor at Boston University and retired U.S. Army Colonel, has emerged as a major voice in the discussion of American foreign policy and military actions.  His most recent book, The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism, a fairly popular level bestselling critique of “the illusions that have governed American policies since 1945” (reviewed here), follows upon an earlier, more substantial analysis–The New American Militarism: How Americans Are Seduced by War.

The New American Militarism is a cry of alarm from an American patriot, a military man who breaks with his former associates on the political right. The key problem Bacevich identifies is the tendency for Americans to link the military might of our country with idealism about the universality of American values–leading to a destructive tendency to use the military to further “the American way of life.” And one of the major casualties of this tendency, he fears, will be American democracy itself.

Even if Bacevich is more sanguine about positive role the US military has played in the world and could still play than I am, I found his book overall to be extraordinarily helpful–clearly written, forcefully argued, well-documented, and ultimately quite persuasive. It is great to have confirmed the conviction that our current military and global political behavior is extraordinarily self-destructive for our country.

 

Peace Theology Book Review Index