9 | Christ and Crisis by Charles Malik

Although it is very short (101 pages), this book took me a while to read mostly because I couldn't decide what book I wanted to read next! As you saw in my last post, I read Silence (while I was also reading this book slowly) and, as promised, I also started Milton Friedman's Free to Choose. Andrew convinced me to prioritize reading this book (he just read it, too), and I'm glad I did!

This is my second Malik book this year--that is, if you count the 50 page speech I read in January. :-) He is a very readable author who exudes Heideggerian thought in every page. Obviously, I love this! He is also a strong absolutist, devout Christian, and skillful philosopher. Can you tell that I wish he wrote more books?

CHRIST AND CRISIS | CHARLES MALIK



In Christ and Crisis, Charles Malik examines the state of the world insofar as it relates to Christianity. He sees the world as in crisis, as it is "somehow under the judgment of Christ." In his forward, Malik offers us the following thesis statement:

"...if you turn with all your heart to Jesus Christ, on your knees, in the Bible, in the communion of saints throughout history, in your moments of absolute contemplation, in the great tradition, and above all in the Church, it is more certain than any mathematical proof that He will show you, not only why the perplexity and the crisis and the wrong and the flaw and the awful uncertainty of the moment, but how to overcome, in Him, all this havoc of the devil. In the life of the spirit the first principle is freedom; thus there is nothing fatalistically determined here; everything depends on the "if you turn with all your heart to Jesus Christ." Nothing will be revealed to you, and Christ in the crisis will ever remain an impenetrable mystery to you, if not downright nonsense and irrelevance, until you freely comply with this tremendous 'if.'"

Malik is suggesting that only with a perspective set on Christ can one accurately understand and solve the crisis facing the world today. This may remind you of what we read in 1 Peter 2:7-8. For those who do not believe, Jesus is "a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense," but for those who do believe Jesus is the "cornerstone" of faith and life. This theme is prominent throughout the work.

I don't know if I have anything to say about this book as a whole. He mentioned in the forward that he was writing seven meditations and in all honesty it is unclear to me how they flow together. So, instead of a synopsis, I will simply point out a few key passages that stood out to me.

In the first meditation, he goes into further detail about the crisis we are faced with: This crisis is, in its auxiliary components, political, militant, economic, scientific, intellectual, etc.; however, it is at its core a spiritual crisis. "It has to do with God, with how much men still acknowledge Him and how much they still over him." Knowing God, for Malik, opens ones mind to ultimate reality and allows one to reason more proficiently about any number of things.

I was encouraged by this section because, while he calls churches to action, he does not call churches to speak into politics, international conflict, science, etc. Instead, he calls churches to act in accord with their "sphere of competence." Malik explains,

"In the prevailing climate of materialism, secularism, and religious indifference they certainly are called to new heroic effort. They must keep the flame of the creative spirit burning. Let them attend to this properly, and everything else will follow. And the churches alone can fire the spirit to new heights of vision, daring and being. They alone can cause men to seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all else then will be added unto them."

In a world obsessed with secular, materialistic problems, the role of the Church is to maintain her three duties: First, she convicts us of sin and helps us maintain a fear of the Lord. Second, she spurns us on in our use of spiritual weapons to fight against the devil and the evil forces of this world. Third, she testifies to the glory and gospel of Jesus Christ. No matter what is happening in the government, world wars, scientific advances, or economy, the Church must maintain this calling and trusts the issues of the world into the hands of God.

Much later in the book, he goes on to discuss the struggle Christians face in the crisis of the world. It is multifaceted: We struggle against worldly temptations, against memories of our pasts, against slothfulness, against our own great pride, against our regular idolatry, and against the devil himself. In a very Heideggerian manner, he writes that the human condition is one into which we are all thrown--this means that the life of the spirit "is a life of constant struggle." We are constantly at war against these six fronts, which attack us according to our very nature of being human persons.

The fifth meditation also made me remember Heidegger, particularly of his concept of Dasein. Malik introduces the chapter with a quote:

"In the spiritual life one must catch himself where he is and speak from there. It is silly to start from anywhere else. Other stands land you only in abstraction, remoteness, and insincerity. ... Therefore let your present spiritual state speak, and with its speaking I beg you to laugh. Don't strain at something distant and far away. You are not real as you do so. You have plenty right before you to speak from and about."

I thought this quote was a really interesting way to think about how one's being-in-the-world is related to one's spiritual life. We do not have to pretend to be someone else or have some alternate experiences to enjoy a fulfilling life of faith; instead, he writes, "nothing is closer to our life than faith in Jesus Christ." In other words, one can be no closer to one's true state than when one is exploring his faith in Christ. I think this is a really beautiful idea.

Moving on, in his sixth meditation, Malik poetically describes something that many years of world travel led me to believe as well.

"Just as every creature of God has a goodness and a being all its own, so no one of man's creations is devoid of some goodness, some truth. Every people, every culture, every outlook has something to say, no matter how much it may otherwise be pervaded with darkness and error."

This sentiment is beautiful!!! I feel like so often when I hear others discussing other faiths or other cultures, there is a decidedly negative slant given to them. What Malik is saying in this beautiful quotation is what Gadamer tells us in his Truth and Method: We must approach what is different with an attitude of openness and put our own prejudices and beliefs to the test. This is not to say that we instantly disregard our beliefs and take on whatever is foreign; instead, we are to seek what is good in what we hear from those whose beliefs and cultural practices differ from our own, so that our own understanding of what is true, good, and beautiful may be expanded! The world becomes a richer place.

This goes along with the central idea from his final, and shortest, meditation: unity in the Church. For the highest aspiration of any believer is "to be granted to see a measure of true unity realized in his lifetime." The only way we can experience this unity is by humbling ourselves and looking for the best in others with our hearts and minds turned toward the Holy Ghost's directing. This message was so encouraging to me! May Church unity become a reality in my lifetime!

There were many, many other helpful ideas put forward in this work. As you will see in my conclusion later, I definitely suggest that others read it for themselves for a stimulating mental and spiritual undertaking. Among the various and sundry themes of the novel, one of my favorite qualities was Malik's constant questioning. He rarely offered a solution from the get go; instead, he challenged the reader to consider for herself what a solution may be to the problem set forward. This is an uncommon but greatly appreciated practice!

Conclusion: I will probably review some of my notes in time. I would recommend to anyone who is wanting a thoughtful and slow read. 8/10.

8 | Silence by Shusaku Endo

I'm just going to stop apologizing (to myself) for being so behind on my reading/posting all the time. With everything going on in the world and in my life, I'm proud of myself for reading even 8 books already this year!

Silence is a re-read for me. I'm actually going to be discussing this book with two of my best friends soon! I first heard of this book when I started dating Andrew several years ago; his best friend wrote a paper on it, so he was telling me all about the book! Then, in 2016, we watched the Scorsese adaptation of it and I was hooked! Here's the trailer:

The movie blew my mind. I wasn't ready to talk to Andrew about it for at least a couple of days--much to his dismay! I read Silence for the first time in 2017 and my mind has been chock full of questions and ideas about faith and suffering since then. Perfect kind of book for this blog, right?

SILENCE | SHUSAKU ENDO



As you most likely picked up on from the movie trailer, Silence is a story about two Portuguese missionaries, Garrpe and Rodrigues, who go to Japan in search of their mentor, Father Ferreira. The story takes place in the 17th Century--a time of intense persecution of Christians in Japan, as we will soon see. However, as the story unfolds, it becomes obvious that Silence is really about the Christian faith, suffering, and the coming-of-age of sorts of Father Rodrigues, from whose perspective most of the story is told.

The two fathers, or padres as they are called more commonly in the novel, set sail for Japan via an obscure and indirect route through China. Portuguese ships are forbidden from entering Japanese waters, so they must find an alternative means of entrance. While seeking a ship bound for Japan, they encounter their first Japanese: Kichijiro. He proves to be both a blessing and a curse to the padres.

Throughout the novel, Kichijiro becomes an image of doubt and humanity. When we are introduced to him, we condemn him for being a drunk, an apostatizer, a coward...by the novel's conclusion, we are beginning to understand that we ourselves are Kichijiro.

Upon arriving on a Japanese beach, Kichijiro is the one who directs the padres to their first Christians. Garrpe and Rodrigues spend their first days and weeks hiding out in a hut outside of a secretly Christian village. In the evenings, one or two of the villagers will bring them a meal in exchange for having their confession heard or having their child baptized. The priests are torn between feeling like they are providing the villagers access to sacraments that have been unknown on the island for sometime and feeling like they ought to split up and find more Christians--and Ferreira.

After some time passes, the magistrate catches on to the uptick in Christian activity in the village and two mean are brutally martyred tied to stakes in the ocean. The martyr's recited a refrain from a hymn that is repeated throughout the novel:

We're on our way, we're on our way
We're on our way to the temple of Paradise,
To the temple of Paradise...
To the great Temple...

During the days of the martyrs' torment, Rodrigues spends a considerable amount of time reflecting on the silence of God during their suffering. He wonders,

"What do I want to say? I myself do not understand. Only that today, when for the glory of God Mokichi and Ichizo moaned, suffered and died, I cannot bear the monotonous sound of the dark sea gnawing at the shore. Behind the depressing silence of this sea, the silence of God. ... the feeling that while men raise their voices in anguish God remains with folded arms, silent."

While most of us probably haven't experienced suffering to this degree, haven't we all asked this question of God? "Where are You? Do You hear me in my suffering? Why don't You act in your omnipotence and omnibenevolence?" What I like most about this book is the honesty in the questions it asks. Many of us are afraid to voice this question and can breathe a sigh of relief what Padre Rodrigues asks it for us.

The martyrdom of Mochizi and Ichizo convinces the priests--and the villagers, for that matter--that they are putting the Christians in too much danger and must press on to other villages. Furthermore, Garrpe and Rodrigues decide they must split up, so they have a lesser chance of both being immediately caught as the only two priests in Japan.

At this point, we lose touch with Garrpe. Rodrigues finds himself alone in Japan and alone with his questions. He faces many more trials and is even betrayed by Kichijiro, ultimately winding up in a small prison with some Japanese Christians outside of Nagasaki.

In the prison, Rodrigues is again visited by Kichijiro, who asks for absolution and forgiveness from the priest. This leads Rodrigues into another incredibly interesting reflection: Why did Jesus say "What thou dost, do quickly" to Judas?

"What emotion had filled the breast of Christ when he ordered away the man who was to betray him for thirty pieces of silver? Was it anger? or resentment? Or did these words arise from his love? ... Christ wanted to save even Judas. If not, he would never have made him one of his disciples. And yet why did Christ not stop him when he began to slip from the path of righteousness? ... If it is not blasphemous to say so, I have a feeling that Judas was no more than the unfortunate puppet for the glory of that drama which was the life and death of Christ."

Again we have such an honest look into the mind of a faithful man. At the conclusion of the book, we see how Rodrigues grows in his understanding of Christ's relationship with Judas and this strange command to betray him quickly.

Later, Rodrigues is summoned from the prison to witness a strange and terrible event. On the journey, the interpreter that is with him barrages him with questions about the Christian concept of mercy compared with the Buddhist concept. Shouldn't a priest have pity on the flock and put their needs above his own? Enter the ethical dilemma of the novel: Should a priest apostatize so that Christians will not be tortured and killed? This is the question that Rodrigues wrestles with for the duration of the novel.

The question plays itself out before Rodrigues' helpless eyes: Three Christians are bound and taken out into the ocean on a boat. Garrpe is asked to recant his faith and fails to do so. The Christians are thrown overboard. As they sink, Garrpe struggles in the sea to save them and ultimately meets his own end as well. Rodrigues watches the whole spectacle from a distance, helpless to interfere.

Returning to the prison, the priest becomes utterly despondent. He endures many interrogations from the magistrate and ultimately faces his former mentor: Father Ferreira, now known as Sawano Chuan.  Sorrowfully to Rodrigues, the rumors about Ferreira were true--he had apostatized and taken on a Japanese life: name, spouse, children, occupation... The interrogations do not go as Rodrigues expects--rather than physical threats against his own body and life, he is faced with threats of others suffering in his stead.

In his cell, Rodrigues steps into the chair of the interrogator and brings his questions before God: How long will you be silent?

In the end, Rodrigues is faced with a choice. Three Christians are suspended upside down in a pit, blood dripping slowly from their temples to keep them alive. He can either apostatize and save them, or maintain his priesthood and let them perish slowly. He chooses mercy for the Japanese peasant Christians.

As he approaches the fume to trample and renounce his faith, he hears God. The silence is broken.

"Trample! Trample! I more than anyone know of the pain in your foot. Trample! It was to be trampled on by men that I was born into this world. It was to share men's pain that I carried my cross."

I'll spare you my commentary and simply ask the question that plagues my mind: What would I do? What do I feel and think is right in this ghastly scenario? Is it more loving and merciful to maintain faith as a person responsible to set an example of Christianity for his flock? Or is it more loving and merciful to demonstrate the self-dying of Christ in an act of apostasy?

More happens in the book, but I will leave you with Rodrigues' final reflections on this experience and the presence of Christ with him in his most dire moment:

[Christ to Rodrigues:] "Your foot suffers in pain. It must suffer like all the feet that have stepped on this plaque. But that pain alone is enough. I understand your pain and suffering. It is for that reason that I am here."

[Rodrigues to Christ:] "Lord, I resented your silence."

"I was not silent. I suffered beside you."

"But you told Judas to go away: What thou dost do quickly. What happened to Judas?

"I did not say that. Just as I told you to step on the plaque, so I told Judas to do what he was going to do. For Judas was in anguish as you are."

...

"He had lowered his foot on to the plaque, sticky with dirt and blood. His five toes had pressed upon the face of one he loved. Yet he could not understand the tremendous onrush of joy that came over him at that moment. ... Even now I am the last priest in this land. But Our Lord was not silent. Even if he had been silent, my life until this day would have spoken of him."

Conclusion: Have read multiple times and will probably continue reading again and again in the future. Literally everyone should read this provocative book. 9.5/10

7 | The War on Normal People by Andrew Yang

I am literally the worst about these posts right now. I've been reading more, but with all the COVID-19 stuff going on, I haven't had time or access to my computer to write these posts. So, here we go: week 12 and review 7... Grace!

In light of the upcoming 2020 US Presidential Election, I thought it would be fun to read a book by one of Trump's (now former) challengers, Andrew Yang. Throughout the debates, I was always interested in his POV on things because his campaign seemed considerably more moderate than many of his left-wing competitors and the problems he discussed seemed so much more relevant than what we typically hear from politicians.

As a disclaimer, this post is not meant to push his viewpoint or anything political like that; it is merely another review of one of my (hopefully) 52 books for the year!

THE WAR ON NORMAL PEOPLE | ANDREW YANG



The book's full title includes a subtitle: The Truth about America's Disappearing Jobs and Why Universal Basic Income is our Future. Everything about this title is provocative! It is challenging the current way we understand our changing economy and suggesting a completely different economic system (i.e., replacing the idea that money is the measure of a healthy economy with the idea that healthy people are). Yang divides the book into three main parts: 1. What's happening to jobs? 2. What's happening to us? 3. Solutions and Human Capitalism.

The first section discusses automation and how the "normal" American will be affected by it. Honestly, I expected to hear more about Amazon in this section as that is what Yang spends the bulk of his speeches discussing. First, he describes what exactly he means by "normal:"

"The normal American did not graduate from college and doesn't have an associate's degree. He or she perhaps attended college for one year or graduated from high school. She or he has a net worth of approximately $36K--about $6K excluding home or vehicle equity--and lives paycheck to paycheck. She or he has less than $500 in flexible savings and minimal assets invested in the stock market. These are median statistics, with 50 percent of Americans below these levels."

As is typical throughout the book, Yang showed considerable data supporting these claims in the form of graphs, charts, and quotes from experts. Reading about the "normal" American really did a lot to open my eyes to my own affluence and privilege. I have felt very average as far as academic or economic success, but as a family with 2 master's degrees and a home I can see we live in a different world than a lot of other Americans. For a lot of my life I have felt like people who can't afford a $500 expense need to improve their money management skills, but this notion of "normal" helped me see things from a different point of view.

My biggest take away from this sections was his analysis of how the 5 largest occupations in the US--office and administrative support, sales and retail, food preparation and serving, transportation and material moving, and production--which employ 68 out of 140 million Americans (i.e., 48.5 percent) are going to be impacted by automation. Many of these jobs are comprised of tasks that are "highly repetitive and automatable."

The main job category Yang is concerned about is the 3.5 million-worker trucking industry. With self-driving trucks less than a decade away, Yang argues that trucking is not long for this country. What's worse, is that "as many as 7.2 million workers serve the needs of truck drivers at truck stops, diners, motels, and other businesses around the country." That is a total of over 10 million people who would be devastated by this kind of progress in automation. Imagine a world where these jobs dry up in under a year or two as companies make the changes necessary to save money and increase their bottom line!

I was surprised to continue reading about the potential for automation to impact even white collar jobs, such as counseling, practicing medicine, financial advising, etc. Honestly, in the grim world Yang is depicting, it seems as though the only jobs that are safe are technology development.

In part two, Yang discusses how these changes are and will impact humanity. Among other things, he discusses the consolidation of the wealthy in six major cities and the impact of unemployment and underemployment--particularly on men; however, what stood out most to me was his discussion on mindsets of scarcity and abundance.

"Scarcity has a profound impact on one's worldview. Eldar Shafir, a Princeton psychologist, and Sendhil Mullainathan, a Harvard economist, conducted a series of studies on the effects of various forms of scarcity on the poor. They found that poor people and well-off people perform very similarly on tests of fluid intelligence, a generalized measurement that corresponds to IQ. But if each group was forced to consider how to pay an unexpected car bill of $3,000 just before taking the test, the poor group would underperform by the equivalent of 13 IQ points, almost one full standard deviation. ... Activating scarcity through a hypothetical expense was also found to reduce correct responses on a self-control test from 83 to 63 percent among the less well-off participants, with no effect on the well-off. A mindset of scarcity is more than just 'stress'--it actually makes one less rational and more impulsive by consuming bandwidth."

I think seeing this study, along with several others he included, in concert with his definition of who the statistically normal American is really convicted me of some judgments and prejudices I have held toward people who are poorer than I am. What do you think about these ideas?

The final section of The War on Normal People discusses some of Yang's solutions to these problems: Universal Basic Income (AKA the Freedom Dividend), Medicare for All, Social Credits, and Human Capitalism. His main principles guiding this plan are 1) Humanity is more important than money. 2) The unit of an economy is each person, not each dollar. and 3) Markets exist to serve our common goals and values. I think these three principles could be developed a bit for clarity, but on the whole I support the premise of elevating the value of a human above the value of dollars. While some of his strategies and solutions are very interesting to me, as a fiscal conservative, I still have a good deal to wrap my mind around. In conclusion, Yang exhorts us:

"The age of automation will lead to many very bad things. But it will also potentially push us to delve more deeply into what makes us human. ... Through all of the doubt, the cynicism, the ridicule, the hatred and anger, we must fight for the world that is still possible. ... What makes you human? The better world is still possible. Come fight with me."

This book left me feeling a bit grim about the future to be honest; however, it also left me with a sense of urgency to love and serve those around me and to seek out and support elected officials who want to do the same.

Conclusion: Would read parts again for reference. Would recommend to a select audience. 7/10.

I'm thinking of reading Milton Freedman's Free to Choose next to get a conservative perspective on the economy. You know what they say... "The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him." Proverbs 18:17

6 | Reading Lolita in Tehran by Azar Nafisi

I know what you're thinking: Boy, Jenn, you're off to a great start by taking off all of February! (Is it rude to assume that my readers--that probably don't even exist--are passive aggressive?) Confession: Between a car accident and a sick baby, it took me all of February to read a not-very-long memoir. There's grace for that, right? (Read: a series of short books are coming soon--haha!)

Vladimir Nabokov's Lolita is a tale of an older man who takes a twelve-year-old girl captive for two years and rapes her. This is a demented idea, but, as Azar Nafisi draws out, it has something profound to say about humanity in general. Reading Lolita is a provocative idea in general, but the idea of reading it in Tehran is altogether outlandish! When I saw this book in one of the little free libraries in Fort Worth (anyone else love these little give-a-book-take-a-book stops?) I was instantly intrigued!

Before taking it home, I read the author's synopsis on the back cover: It detailed a weekly gathering of women who secretly studied literature in Tehran. Always having dreamt of participating in a book club, I knew a historical novel about a book club of rebellious women was right up my alley! (As an aside, does anyone want to join a book club with me?)

READING LOLITA IN TEHRAN | AZAR NAFISI



Nafisi begins by explaining that no novel can ever truly represent a reality. Instead, novels--good ones, anyway--reflect truths that apply much more broadly to the human condition. This book is made up of several parts, each named to reflect another book. Part I is entitled "Lolita." She notes that of any work of fiction, Lolita is the one that best encompasses life inside the Islamic Republic of Iran. This book, but more precisely the entire corpus of Nabokov's works, shape the first part of Nafisi's novel. She answers the question: Why Lolita in Tehran?

"I want to emphasize ... that we were not Lolita, the Ayatollah was not Humbert and this republic was not a critique of the Islamic Republic, but it went against the grain of all totalitarian perspectives." She goes on to say, "The desperate truth of Lolita's story is not the rape of a twelve-year-old girl by a dirty man but the confiscation of one individual's life by another."

The ideas Nafisi draws out of Nabokov's Lolita, among other works, relate to Nafisi's own struggle to cope with her situation in Tehran. Nafisi takes hold of Nabokov's Lolita and An Invitation to a Beheading and shows how what really happens in the relationship between the oppressed and the oppressor is the loss of the individuality of the oppressed--this is what is being taken from women in Tehran, she argues. Her students struggle with a class between who they want to be, who they are in the "magical" living room the literature class meets in, and who they are forced to be in public, hidden under veils and robes.

"The only way to leave the circle, to stop dancing with the jailer, is to find a way to preserve one's individuality, that unique quality which evades description but differentiates one human being from the other."

The only way for the oppressed to escape becoming identified only as the oppressor sees her is to hold fast to the subtle idiosyncrasies that make her herself. As far as I can tell, this is the purpose of the literature class: it is an opportunity for the participants to remember what makes them who they are, even underneath the thick black robes of the totalitarian regime.

As someone who is not held under a totalitarian regime, I think my big take away from this section of the book is that in the mundane routine of life, which can at times seem particularly repetitive and deterministic as a stay at home mom, it is important to hang on to things that make you take hold of who you are. For me, that has been music, art, embroidery, reading, and writing! As simple as this blog is, it helps me maintain my grasp on what makes me me!

I spent a considerable amount of time on part one of the text, as Lolita is the book Nafisi says most describes the Islamic Republic of Iran; however, in hopes of this post being a readable length, I will be more brief in summarizing the remaining three sections.

Part two of the book takes us back in time and is perhaps even more fascinating than part one--it is about Nafisi's experience as a professor at the U of Tehran during the Islamic Revolution in Iran, told through the lens of The Great Gatsby. My husband and I are total nerds; we just watched a documentary about the change in power from the Shah to the Ayatollah, so it was exciting to read a first-hand account of it!

During a lecture series at the U of Tehran, Nafisi explains to her students that Gatsby is best described by the unifying theme of loss--specifically, the loss of a dream. She relates Gatsby's ultimate demise to the future she foresaw for Iran:

"He [Gatsby] wanted to fulfill his past dream by repeating the past, and in the end he discovered that the past was dead, the present a sham, and there was no future. Was this not similar to our revolution, which had come in the name of our collective past and had wrecked our lives in the name of a dream?"

The last two sections of the book, on James and Austen, struck me for a few reasons. Both emphasized the unique role of a heroine who is not what one might expect. Daisy Miller, for example, is James' heroine who possesses none of the desired qualities of a protagonist: she is unattractive, of less than average intelligence, and other unamiable qualities you may be imagining. At the same time, the antagonists had very attractive qualities. So, how did Daisy Miller manage to be the protagonist? Empathy. This is the trait that makes a good protagonist and, according to Nafisi, a good novel. I've never thought about this in such explicit terms before, but I tend to agree.

Nafisi also showed how James and Austen used quite mundane scenarios to set their novels; this is quite a turn from the racy Nabokov or the flamboyant Fitzgerald. The villains don't appear as boldly as Humbert in Lolita, but they create vile scenarios for the protagonist nonetheless.

Part three was one of  the more interesting sections for me to read because Nafisi shared a lot about her experience living under the Islamic Republic's rule, the death of the Ayatollah Khomeini, and Iran after his death. I feel like my understanding of Iran really grew through reading this book and did a lot to open my eyes to different opinions about the Islamic Republic from within Iran. Probably the most impactful way she did this was by talking about her students and the way they survived the changes and restrictions.

Conclusion:
Would read again. Everyone should read this and expand their perspectives on the Middle East and Islamic culture. 9/10.

5 | Life Together by Dietrich Bonhoeffer

I always thought my first Bonhoeffer book would be his Ethics, but here we are! My church encouraged life group leaders to read Bonhoeffer's Life Together, and, while I am not a leader, I think understanding more about biblical community is important! Plus, having read another biblical community book already this year (Letters to the Church, Chan), I felt prepped to read another!

Bonhoeffer is such an interesting character in history to me! I know people who love him and people who hate him, so I was excited to finally pick him up and give him a read. He did not disappoint--this was my favorite book so far this year!

LIFE TOGETHER | DIETRICH BONHOEFFER



First, I must say: What an introduction by John Doberstein! He unfolds the narrative of Bonhoeffer's life and situates this text comfortably within it. Before I comment on the rest of the book, I wanted to mention a quote from this introduction because it contains a theme that has been present in several of the books I've been reading so far:

"Christianity could never be merely intellectual theory, doctrine divorced from life, or mystical emotion, but always it must be responsible, obedient action, the discipleship of Christ in every situation of concrete everyday life, personal and public.

This Bonhoeffer quote unites the ideas of Schaeffer, who wrote about truth as a total reality, and Wittgenstein, who wrote about faith as a passion and not mere knowledge or belief, in my mind. How? Well, I'm so glad you asked! For Bonhoeffer, faith--or worldview, ultimate reality, or whatever you want to call it--encompasses every situation in all of life and marries knowledge with action. His notion of Christian faith held a grip over his life that persevered even throughout his imprisonment and execution. His belief captivated every part of his life (Schaeffer) and filled him with strength, joy, and hope (Wittgenstein). Anyway, that's not the main purpose of the book, but I find it to be interesting and hope you do as well.

Bonhoeffer's book explores the nature of community as a brotherhood (and sisterhood) through Christ and in Christ. All in all, I think this means that Jesus Christ is the purpose of Christian community, in the sense that we come to understand ourselves in relation to the gospel more fully together with other believers, and the strength of Christian community, in that Christ provides the unifying cord that eternally bonds believers together as brothers.

He goes on to describe how we ought to relate with one another in fellowship, from morning prayer, to Scripture reading, to worship, to intercession, he emphasizes how our alone and together time is shaped by Christian community and how this community leads us to worship God.

One theme that plays out throughout the text is the theme of humility. He expresses time and time again that life together works best when the believer maintains a humble attitude, particularly an attitude which has been shaped by the mercy and grace of the Gospel of Christ. The most interesting application of this to me is the notion of silence and speech.

In dialogue with God and others, it is important to maintain a balance between silence and speech. For Bonhoeffer, silence is a form of putting the other above yourself--of seeking to understand before seeking to be understood, if you will. Silence gives the other the opportunity to express themselves first and, therefore, puts the other above the self. This is true both with God and men. Bonhoeffer writes:

"We are silent before hearing the Word because our thoughts are already directed to the Word ... We are silent after hearing the Word because the Word is still speaking and dwelling within us. We are silent at the beginning of the day because God should have the first word."

This understanding of silence does a lot to shed light on all of the biblical references about being still before God. We are demonstrating a humility, trust, and reverence for God when we wait on Him in this sense of silence.

Bonhoeffer goes on to discuss the humility of speech:

"There is a wonderful power of clarification, purification, and concentration upon the essential thing in being quiet. This is true as a purely secular fact. But silence before the Word leads to right hearing and right speaking of the Word of God at the right time. Much that is unnecessary remains unsaid. But the essential and the helpful thing can be said in very few words."

The kind of silence Bonhoeffer is referring to is not a dumb or thoughtless silence; rather, it is a reflective and humble silence. It is an opportunity to reflect on what is truly important in God's word, or the speech of your brother, and to respond in a simple and helpful manner. This is the purpose of speech.

Another important instance of humility in the text is in servant-heartedness. The Christian is to humble himself and see his brother in the same light he sees himself in--the light of the Gospel. This was made most evident in what Bonhoeffer wrote about confession. When a Christian hears his brother's confession, even the most grotesque sin will not cause him to judge his brother. This is because the truth of the Gospel--Jesus' death on the cross for our sins, the worst of all sins--has humbled him and unified him with his brother.

Overall, this book has things I agree with 100% and things I will have to think about some more before I decide if I agree or disagree with them. I really like books that leave me thinking! Strangely, one of my main takeaways from reading this book is that I need to read more of Martin Luther--Bonhoeffer references and quotes Luther repeatedly in this text! Maybe after a "fun" book, I can pick up Luther's large catechism or commentary on Galatians--I've heard great things about both!

Conclusion:
Hope to read again and again. Would recommend to a friend. 9/10.

What do you think? I feel like it's time for a novel next! Any suggestions?

4 | A Christian Manifesto by Francis Schaeffer

I can definitely tell that writing these blogs is helpful for me. It's amazing how fast I forget what I read if I don't sit down and think about the ideas within a text! Can anyone else relate with this? I also think writing helps me process the questions raised by a particular text.

I picked up Francis Schaeffer's manifesto on clearance at Half Price Books a few years ago. (Is this anyone else's guilty pleasure?) I thought it would be interesting based on other Schaeffer I read in my undergrad. It was a faster read than other works I've read by Schaeffer, but just as enjoyable.

A CHRISTIAN MANIFESTO | FRANCIS SCHAEFFER



A Christian Manifesto was written in response to the Humanist Manifestos before it (1933, 1973). It is not only theological but is also practical, as many of Schaeffer's other works are. This writing style is refreshing to me, because I find that many authors suggest theoretical ideas that seem excessively unclear in application.

Unsurprisingly to anyone who has read him before, Schaeffer's central theme in this manifesto is the notion that one's worldview/ultimate reality/faith determines the way that person understands and interacts with the totality of reality. Schaeffer doesn't understand Christian doctrine as informing "only Man's personal needs (such as salvation), but also man's social needs." In this book, Schaeffer dichotomizes the impact of having either a Humanist worldview or a Christian worldview on politics and government.

Humanism, as he is using the term, "means Man beginning from himself, with no knowledge except what he himself can discover and no standards outside of himself. In this view Man is the measure of all things, as the Enlightenment expressed it." Schaeffer continues, "Nowhere have the divergent results of the two total concepts of reality, the Judeo-Christian and the humanist world view, been more open to observation than in government and law." This is the central theme of the first five or so chapters--my favorite section of the book.

One point in this part of the book that seems particularly relevant is Schaeffer's analysis of the first amendment: First, that there would never be a national church. Second, more interestingly, that the state "should not impede or interfere with the free practice of religion." He points out how this is very different from the way the national government uses the first amendment "to silence the church" today. He supports his case by appealing to historical interpretations of the first amendment (Justice Douglas 1944, Massachusetts Constitution 1853, Northwest Ordinance of 1787, Terry Easterland 1826, etc.)

He goes on to explain that as humanism becomes the norm in our society, and the norm that, he argues, is supported by our government even as other religious views are suppressed, men begin to implicitly believe that God has no role in the physical world and ethical laws have no guiding principle besides nature. These beliefs shape our relationship with the physical world; this fact is why Schaeffer emphasizes the importance for Christians to allow their faith to shape their total reality. Schaeffer argues, Christians that do not understand their faith in this way allow liberalism to creep into churches and anti-Christian legislation (i.e., abortion) to go into effect in our country.

After about chapter five, Schaeffer begins describing the way Christians ought to relate with the government. His last lines are an adequate summary of this for my purposes: "It is the responsibility of those holding this view to show it to be unique (the truth of total reality) for individual salvation and for society--by teaching, by life, and by action."

Conclusion:
Would read first 5 chapters again. Would recommend to some friends. 6/10.