An Icon of Christian Marriage: 50 Lessons for Marriage and Parenting

Tags

, ,

On January 1, 2012, my dear friend Gene Herr fell asleep in the Lord.  May his memory be eternal.

Gene was a member of Eighth Day Institute’s founding Board of Directors and played a huge role in the development of our work.  There are so many things to say about Gene, but I’ll save them for another occasion.  For now, I want to share a piece I came across at Gene’s memorial service.

Composed by his daughter Ellen as a gift for Gene and Mary’s fiftieth wedding anniversary, the following short and pithy admonitions – fifty of them, to be exact – offer priceless advice for married parents (they can just as easily be applied to friendships and extended families and communities).  Ellen learned these lessons from a marriage which reflected Christ’s relationship with the Church, one characterized by sacrificial love, humility, mutual service and obedience, the death of self, and resurrectional joy.  Gene and Mary Herr were an icon of Christian marriage and Ellen’s reflections give a glimpse into the kind of relationships and parenting we ought to all strive after:

50 Ways to Say “I Love You”: Lessons Learned from My Parents for Marriage & Raising Children

Buy her a book.  Listen when she talks.  Laugh at his jokes.  Take them to church.  Learn to love her weird friends.  Make your own weird friends.  Never have too much money.  Believe in her goodness.  Go to first music concerts & first football games only a parent could love.  Make time for family dinner.  Take time to pray.  Hold hands while you pray.  Recognize that sometimes love is a hell of a lot of work.  Never underestimate the power of a good therapist.  Plant a garden.  Make everybody work in the garden.  Teach them to care about what is happening all over the world.  Ask him if he ever will.  Turn off the TV and read.  Tell her she bears the burden of a great potential.  Buy him a journal.  Write in your own journal.  Honor the need to be alone at times.  Look for ways to enjoy each other’s interests.  Listen to his weird music.  Listen to your own weird music.  Teach her to notice and love the changing colors of leaves in the fall.  Always appreciate a lovely sunset.  Buy him a book.  Forgive.  Talk about the hard stuff.  Share the family stories.  Take time for family vacations.  Never stop learning.  Say “no” when you need to.  Say “yes” to love.  Remind him that “What you take, takes you.”  Ask her if she is quiet at her center.  At puberty, graduation, marriage, childbirth, or menopause buy her a book.  Make his favorite foods.  Call her “Mary, full of grace, blessed art thou among women.”  Encourage her to use her gifts.  Make birthdays special.  Love his dog.  Be willing to move . . . perhaps often.  Take care of yourself.  Take care of each other.  Love unconditionally.  Treat each other with respect.  Every birthday, holiday, or special occasion . . . buy a book.

Three Resolutions: Table Games, Good Fathering & Early Mornings

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

The advent of the first days of a new year can be as quotidian as the arrival of any others.  Or, they can be full of significance, offering an opportunity for new beginnings.  I like to think of them as an opportunity.  The Latin phrase “carpe diem” comes to mind: seize the day.  And that’s exactly what I intend to do.  I have three New Year resolutions for 2012, one provoked by an evening with my dad and two the fruit of recent reading.

My wife and I are both self-employed.  If you know anything about small businesses, you know owners often work around the clock.  We are no exception, although most evenings our family does sit down at the table for dinner and a game of “high/low” (each person must share at least one high- and one low-point of their day).

A week or so before Christmas, my dad dropped by my family’s house to check up on his three injured/ailing grandchildren (broken leg, post-concussion syndrome, and heart monitor – yea, it’s been a rough month in my household).  After a pleasant visit for an hour or so, I admit I was ready for him to go.  I had plenty of work to do and was anxious to resume.

To my initial chagrin, he instead suggested we play dominoes – a proposition that was impossible to resist once the kids got wind of it.  So we sat and played dominoes.  And we played dominoes.  And we played dominoes.  And I had a blast sitting at the table playing such a simple game with my family.

While Christmas shopping a couple days later, I came across the section of board games and recalled that leisurely and delightful evening of dominoes.  I decided on my first resolution then and there: regardless of looming work, my family will spend more time eating, talking and playing games around the table.  Together.

My second resolution is also related to dads.  I recently began reading a collection of essays by American novelist, Michael Chabon, titled Manhood for Amateurs: The Pleasures and Regrets of a Husband, Father, and Son.  In his second essay, Charbon notes how convenient it is for men to historically have such a “pitifully low” standard for good fatherhood.  After recounting an experience in a grocery store where a stranger praised him for being a good dad, presumably for merely having his son with him, he ponders what might merit comparable adulation for a mom.  His guess: “perform an emergency tracheotomy with a Bic pen on her eldest child while simultaneously nursing her infant and buying two weeks’ worth of healthy but appealing break-time snacks for the entire cast of Lion King, Jr.

A mother, Charbon goes on to observe, is not good or bad in a grocery store; she’s simply a mother doing her job.  Moms change diapers, wipe noses, prepare meals, do the dishes, wash the laundry, make doctor and dentist appointments, shop for clothes, et al.  Yet they are rarely ever praised for being good moms.  “Good mothering,” he thus argues, “is a long-term pattern, a lifelong trend of behaviors most of which go unobserved at the time by anyone, least of all the mother herself.”

Although this has changed a bit in recent years (e.g. more dads are cooking and helping care for babies), a long-standing double standard remains.  Charbon, however, is doing his part to buck it by working harder at being a good father than anything besides being a good husband.  He concludes: “The daily work you put into rearing your children is a kind of intimacy, tedious and invisible as mothering itself. . . . there is intimacy in your contact with their bodies, with their [poop and pee], sweat and vomit, with their stubbled kneecaps and dimpled knuckles, with the rips in their underpants as you fold them, with their hair against your lips as you kiss the tops of their heads, with the bones of their shoulders and with the horror of their breath in the morning as they pursue the ancient art of forgetting to brush.  Lucky me that I should be permitted the luxury of choosing to find the intimacy inherent in this work that is thrust upon so many women.  Lucky me.”  I’m with Charbon this year: I resolve to join him in bucking the double standard, to work harder at being a good father than anything besides being a good husband, to have the luxury of gleaning the intimacy that comes with helping carry my wife’s invisible lucky load.

While my second resolution may lead to less sleep, my third resolution almost certainly will.  I have always been a night owl.  As a toddler, my parents could never get me to sleep at a decent hour.  They eventually caved and let me sit up with them watching Johnny Carson.  By the second grade I had already started pulling all-nighters.  My buddy and I would build a fort and, with flashlights in hand, we would read the night away.

Although mornings and I have never gotten along well, two poets have challenged me to make an attempt at waking up early this year.  In his book, You Must Revise Your Life, Kansas poet William Stafford describes how his experience in an Arkansas camp for conscientious objectors helped him establish a pattern of waking early.  Too tired to read at night after a long day of hard work, he and a few other objectors began rising at four A.M. to study and write.  He has maintained that habit ever since and his explanation is simple: “That dawn time is precious: the world is quiet; no one will interrupt; you are rested and ready.”

Pulitzer Prize and National Book Award winning poet Mary Oliver also embraces early mornings.  Here’s what she says in “Why I Wake Early”, a poem I’m currently memorizing (I’ll sneak in a fourth resolution here: due to a flabby and ever-weakening memory muscle, I plan to memorize one poem a month):

“Hello, sun in my face. //  Hello, you who make the morning // and spread it over the fields // and into the faces of tulips // and the nodding morning glories, // and into the windows of, even, the // miserable and the crotchety –

best preacher that ever was, // dear star, that just happens // to be where you are in the universe // to keep us from ever-darkness, // to ease us with warm touching, // to hold us in the great hands of light – // good morning, good morning, good morning.

Watch, now, how I start the day // in happiness, in kindness.”

Stafford’s description of the early morning as an opportune time for uninterrupted work and Oliver’s ode to splendorous, sun-filled mornings have convinced me to rise before dawn, or at least to make an attempt this year.

My new year, then, seeks to be filled with table games, good fathering, and early mornings.  May your new year be full of delightful leisure with friends and family and of days that begin in happiness and kindness!  And for all you child-rearing parents, may it be full of the intimacy that comes with sharing the lucky load of raising those messy kiddos!

Secularization Thesis 4 – Bonhoeffer and Cox on Religionless Man in the Secular City

Tags

, , , , ,

In 1944 the German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote a letter from prison to his friend Eberhard Bethge in which he suggested that man had already “more or less” become “radically religionless”.[1]  By 1965, the American theologian Harvey Cox published his explosive book, The Secular City, in which he asserted that the “rise of urban civilization and the collapse of traditional religion are the two main hallmarks of our era”.[2]  He went on to clarify his terms:

Urbanization constitutes a massive change in the way men live together, and became possible in its contemporary form only with the scientific and technological advances which sprang from the wreckage of religious worldviews.  Secularization, an equally epochal movement, marks a change in the way men grasp and understand their life together, and it occurred only when the cosmopolitan confrontations of city living exposed the relativity of the myths and traditions men once thought were unquestionable. . . .  If the Greeks perceived the cosmos as an immensely expanded polis, and medieval man saw it as the feudal manor enlarged to infinity, we experience the universe as the city of man.  It is a field of human exploration and endeavor from which the gods have fled.  The world has become man’s task and man’s responsibility. . . .  The name for the process by which this has come about is secularization. . . .  It is the loosing of the world from religious and quasi-religious understandings of itself, the dispelling of all closed world-views, the breaking of all supernatural myths and sacred symbols.  It represents . . . the discovery by man that he has been left with the world on his hands, that he can no longer blame fortune on the furies for what he does with it.  Secularization is man turning his attention away from worlds beyond and toward this world and this time (saeculum = ‘this present age’).  It is what Dietrich Bonhoeffer in 1944 called ‘man’s coming of age.’[3]

Cox’s book thus argued for a radical secularized Christianity in which the Church’s agenda was to be set by the world.  It provoked such a controversial reaction that the following year Daniel Callahan published an anthology which included numerous reviews of Cox’s book, essays previously published in Christianity and Crisis, an exchange of views that appeared in Commonweal between Andrew Greeley, Michael Novak, Harvey Cox, and Daniel Callahan, four other essays written at Calahan’s request on Cox and secularism, and a final response by Cox along with an earlier article on Bonhoeffer published in Commonweal.[4]  Despite the initial explosive response to Cox’s argument, his book is rarely read any longer except as a representative work of the period.  Nevertheless, as George Weigel observes in his article on the 1960s in America, it did set into motion a whole host of debates about many of the major themes that continue to concern Christians today:

The cult of the new; the fondness for revolutionary rhetoric; evil understood in therapeutic categories; worship conceived as self realization; the celebration of action detached from either contemplation or serious intellectual reflection; insouciance toward tradition; moralism in place of moral reasoning; the identification of human striving with the in-breaking of the Kingdom of God…[5]

Weigel thus concludes that regardless of Cox’s intentions, “these are the things that people learned from The Secular City and its sundry offspring in the world of liberal American religious thought.”[6]  But this is not all that Cox accomplished, whether intentional or not, for he also set the stage in the United States for the reception of what is now considered to be the classic secularization thesis, articulated first in England by Oxford sociologist Bryan Wilson and, shortly thereafter, in America by Peter L. Berger.


[1] Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Letters and Papers from Prison, ed. Eberhard Bethge (New York:  Macmillan Publishing Co., 1972), 280.  Bonhoeffer’s famous reference to “religionless Christianity” will be dealt with in a later post on tradition.

[2] Harvey Cox, The Secular City: Secularization and Urbanization in Theological Perspective (New York:  The Macmillan Company, 1965), 1.

[3] Cox 1965, 1-2.

[4] Daniel Callahan, The Secular City Debate (New York:  The Macmillan Company, 1967).  Find reference for Commonweal article on Bonhoeffer

[5] George Weigel, “The Sixties, Again and Again”, First Things, April 2008, (get pp.).  Weigel’s article is an insightful examination of how six key moments in the sixties reshaped American political culture:  1)  The Assassination of John F. Kennedy in 1963; 2)  Griswold v. Connecticut in 1965; 3)  The Tet Offensive in 1968; 4)  The Kerner Commission in 1968; 5)  The Publication of The Secular City in 1965; and 6)  The Rise of Environmentalism in 1969.

[6] Ibid.

Secularization Thesis 3 – Historical Antecedents: Enlightenment, Weber and Durkheim

Tags

, , ,

While the meaning of secularization has developed significantly over the last two millennia – see the four-fold accretion of meaning to the concept in the previous post (Secularization Thesis 2) – a historical era and two towering figures played an influential role in the development of the secularization thesis.[1]  First and foremost, intellectuals of the eighteenth-century Enlightenment project believed in the supreme power of reason.  Through his intelligence alone, they believed, man could discern the laws governing the world and discover the truth about the nature of reality; man could now control nature and its destiny.[2]  The Enlightenment thus set the stage for a widespread submission to the idea that science and reason, instead of religion and divine revelation, provided solutions to the problems of life and offered the only valid paradigm for the search for truth through the scientific method.[3]  It was in this milieu that two other figures, often considered the founding fathers of the sociology of religion, developed their contrasting ideas that would prove foundational to the development of a secularization theory.

Max Weber

German sociologist and political economist Max Weber (1864-1920) believed that Western society, through rationalization and the subsequent rise of capitalism and the nation state, was moving away from traditional ways of life towards a more centrally controlled and bureaucratized way of life.  He believed urbanization and industrialization would inevitably and negatively impact religion.  In contrast to the enchanted traditional ways of life, such changes would lead to “disenchantment” and a world in which religion no longer had any role in public life.  Religion would become a private matter and could no longer remain an unquestionable source of authority.  Furthermore, he argued that Protestantism carried within itself the seeds of secularization, essentially for two reasons.  First, it promoted rationalization which led to disenchantment, and second, it encouraged scientific reflection upon the natural laws of divine creation as a way of knowing God which undermined religious explanations.  And yet, unlike many of his contemporaries, Weber did not view this decline of religious influence as a positive, liberating fruit of modernity; it would merely be the inevitable consequence of the scientific rationalism of the eighteenth-century Enlightenment.

Emile Durkheim

Unlike Weber, Émile Durkheim (1858-1917) had a far more positive prognosis for the future of religion, despite the fact that he was an atheist.  According to Durkheim, religion would always remain essential to all societies, traditional or modern, not because it is true but rather because it serves a public function by providing a sense of social solidarity.  While he acknowledged that religion seemed to be in decline during his lifetime, he refused to believe that it would die, not even at the hands of the reigning power of reason and science.  Instead, religion would inevitably revive and manifest itself in new forms that were reflective of the changing society.  In his words

there is something eternal in religion that is destined to outlive the succession of particular symbols in which religious thought has clothed itself.  In short, the former gods are growing old or dying, and others have not been born . . .  A day will come when our societies once again will know hours of creative effervescence during which new ideals will again spring forth and new formulas emerge to guide humanity.[4]

While the influence of the Enlightenment emphasis on science and reason obviously plays a central role in the notion of secularization as an inevitable demolishing of religion, the views of Weber and Durkheim have come to play a key role in the emerging debates over the secularization thesis.  Sociologist of religion Judith Fox notes in her article on secularization that contemporary theories depend upon both Weber and Durkheim in at least two ways.  First, like Weber and Durkheim, they present “large-scale explanatory models” based on observable trends.  And second, the assumption that social conditions impact religion found in Weber and Durkheim is consistently present in contemporary arguments.  Fox concludes by observing that some theorists, like Bryan Wilson and Roy Wallis “are explicitly Weberian in orientation” while “[o]thers such as Rodney Stark, Grace Davie and Charles Taylor, exhibit elements of Durkheimian thought in their challenges to the views of the former.”[5]  It is the explicit secularization theories of figures such as these, and others, that will be the focus of the remaining posts on this topic.


[1] See Judith Fox, “Secularization” in The Routledge Companion to the Study of Religion, 2nd ed., edited by John R. Hinnells (London and New York:  Routledge, 2010), 308-309.

[2] Following Mary B. Cunningham and Elizabeth Theokritoff in their introduction to The Cambridge Companion to Orthodox Christian Theology (Cambridge and New York:  Cambridge University Press, 2008), xviii, this thesis will use the word man in an inclusive sense:  “In the matter of ‘inclusive language’, we should clarify that many Orthodox authors, writing in English, are accustomed to using ‘man’ in an inclusive sense:  this is equivalent to the Greek word ‘anthropos’, a word which, depending on its gender, may refer to human beings of both sexes.  There are contexts in which one can just as well speak of humans singly (‘the human person’), or as a plurality (‘humans’) or as a collective (‘humanity’).  But none of the circumlocutions for ‘man’ fully conveys that sense, so important to Orthodox anthropology, of humankind personified as one unified creature – the one who falls in Adam, says ‘yes’ to God in the Virgin Mary and is raised from the dead in Christ.”

[3] For a masterful examination of the impact of the Enlightenment on theology, particularly the way in which the overwhelming success of the sciences has distorted our willingness to accept other means of apprehending the truth, cf. Andrew Louth, Discerning the Mystery:  An Essay on the Nature of Theology (Wichita, KS:  Eighth Day Press, 2007).

[4] Émile Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, tr. Karen Fields (New York:  Free Press, 1995), 429.

[5] Fox 2010, 309.

Secularization Thesis 2 – A brief etymological synopsis

Tags

, ,

Before turning to the secularization thesis itself, a brief synopsis of the historical layers of meaning that have developed over the centuries around the concept of secularization will serve as a helpful starting point.[1]  The English word “secular” is derived from the Latin word saeculum which simply means an age or a century.  This temporal connotation was retained in the writings of the early Church Fathers in that it referred to this present world, which stood in marked contrast not to the religious realm, but rather to the world to come, i.e. the eschaton.  By the Middle Ages the word had developed into saecularizatio and indicated a monk’s renunciation of the rule of his monastic order and his return to the world where he joined the “secular” clergy who ministered to lay people.  As Gorski and Altinordu note in their article on secularization, this layer of meaning now added new spatial and individual dimensions to the concept:  “spatial, insofar as the sacred space of the monastery is opposed to the profane space of the world; and individual, insofar as the departure of the monk implies a loss of heart or commitment, if not of belief itself.”[2]  A third layer of meaning then developed during the Protestant Reformation.  Based on the argument that money and church property could be used better by worldly rulers (or at least purportedly based on such an argument), Protestant authorities began to seize control of them and thus gave the concept two political meanings:  “Negatively, it suggests unjust expropriation and illegitimate usurpation; positively, it suggests increased rationality and efficiency.”[3]  Finally, during the late nineteenth century a fourth and final meaning developed.  Following in the wake of the eighteenth-century Enlightenment, Western European societies sought to liberate their social institutions from clerical and ecclesiastical control so that individuals could think freely and create their own worldviews.  Dubbed a “secular revolution” by sociologist Christian Smith,[4] Gorski and Altinordu suggest that this revolution was interpreted differently by supporters and opponents:

Supporters of secularism, which included a good number of theologians and religious laypersons, saw themselves as champions of liberation and reason and viewed (and still view) their opponents as reactionaries and bumpkins.  Opponents saw themselves as defenders of sacred tradition and common sense and viewed (and still view) their opponents as wicked and arrogant.[5]

Gorski and Altinordu go on to observe that the divide between secularists and their opponents never has been a neat division between believers and atheists because there have always been believers who supported secularism for the sake of tolerance and peace just as there have always been unbelievers who opposed secularism for the sake of order and stability.  The concept of secularization, Gorski and Altinordu conclude, thus came to mean “liberation and toleration on the one hand, atheism and libertinism on the other.”[6]


[1] For this summary, see Philip S. Gorski and Atex Altinordu, “After Secularization?”, Annual Review of Sociology, 34 (2008), 60.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Christian Smith, The Secular Revolution:  Power, Interests, and Conflict in the Secularization of American Public Life (Berkeley:  University of California Press, 2003).

[5] Gorski 2008, 60.

[6] Ibid.

Space for a Stranger in the Night

Tags

, , , ,

After taking the Hall of Men to the streets a few times, I received an email from a disgruntled visitor.  He asked me to remove him from the email list, indicated that he would no longer be attending the Hall of Men, encouraged me to take a look at Matthew 6:5-6, and concluded with a happy face, which I interpreted as an indication that he was politely offering me a brotherly rebuke.

And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by men.  Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward.  But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

This passage would indeed be very poignant to our movement out of the hall if we were merely going outside to draw attention to ourselves by making a public spectacle of prayer.  Let me be clear:  this is not our intention!  Instead, our presence on a street corner is intended to be an evangelical proclamation of our faith.  Moreover, the reality is that for most of us it is quite uncomfortable to publicly sing a hymn, recite the Nicene creed, pray the Lord’s prayer, and read scripture on a street corner.  In fact, I seriously doubt if very many of the men who have participated in such a public stance have been hoping for someone to see them.  And yet, despite our innocent evangelical intentions, this email did cause me to continue reflecting on something that has bothered me for some time.

The mission of Eighth Day Institute is to renew culture through faith and learning.  To make any progress toward this end requires an engagement with culture.  I confess that I have long struggled over how publicly today’s Christian ought to engage culture with the Gospel.  This struggle became especially acute after a three-year term in Mexico and Colombia almost twenty years ago where I attempted to evangelize through public preaching, drama, music, miming, clowning, carpentry, door-to-door visits, etc.  After returning to the States, I found myself asking if such public measures were too forceful, too confrontational, and thus more harmful than helpful.  Similar questions continue to plague me, both before and after taking the hall to the streets.  Should we be preaching in Old Town Square on Friday and Saturday nights?  Are tracts effective evangelistic tools?  Should we be visiting door-to-door in our neighborhoods?  And more specifically, should the Hall of Men begin at the corner of Douglas and Erie with what is now being dubbed as the “Eighth Day Convocation”?

Although I still don’t have a definitive answer to such questions, there are plenty of scriptural precedents for public proclamation, both in the Old and New Testaments.  For example, I know that Elijah publicly challenged 450 prophets of Baal and 400 prophets of Asherah before the people on Mount Carmel in an extremely dramatic fashion (1 Kings 18:16-16).  I know that, after fleeing God’s command to preach against the city of Nineveh and landing himself in the belly of a whale, Jonah obeyed God’s call by proclaiming the word of the Lord to the Ninevites (Jonah chs 1-3).  I know that John the Baptist preached repentance in the wilderness of Judea to people from Jerusalem and all Judea and the whole region of the Jordan (Matt 3:1-5).  I know that when Christ saw the crowds He preached the most famous sermon of all time on a mountain.  I also know that in that sermon He called us the light of the world and admonished us to let it shine before men so that they might praise our Father in heaven (Matt. 5:13-16).  I know that Paul preached the good news about Jesus and the resurrection to Epicurean and Stoic philosophers in the marketplace of Athens and was then led to a meeting of the Areopagus where he made known their unknown god (Acts 17:16-34).  As described in an earlier post, I also know that the fifth-century urban liturgy in Rome was extremely public and inevitably served an evangelical function.  But I also know that many of us Christians today are extremely hesitant to be very public about our faith, despite the many examples of our forefathers and contrary to one of Paul’s prayers in which he asks God to give us boldness to publicly proclaim the mystery of the gospel (Eph 6:18-20)!  After last week’s Hall of Men meeting, however, I confess that I have been emboldened.  I am now more convinced than ever that the very least we can do in the public sphere is something along the lines of an Eighth Day Convocation.  Let me explain why.

Mak[e] supplication for all the saints, and also for me, that utterance may be given me in opening my mouth boldly to proclaim the mystery of the gospel, for which I am an ambassador in chains; that I may declare it boldly, as I ought to speak.

While reading selected passages from the Pauline Epistle to Titus during last week’s “Eighth Day Convocation” at the Hall of Men, a middle-aged man walking down Douglas couldn’t help but stumble into our group of twenty-four men who were taking up the whole sidewalk and most of the parking lot beside it.  Instead of forging a path around us, however, he paused long enough for one of our gathered men to notice his interest.  After opening a space in the circle for him, he hesitantly joined us.  During the hymn that we began to sing after the scripture reading, I noticed tears developing in his eyes.  They continued to flow during both the Nicene creed and the Lord’s prayer.  Afterwards, he was invited in to join us and, again hesitantly, he followed us inside.  After the evening lecture, I had the opportunity to hear his story.  Like many of us, his life is not easy and the last six months had recently culminated in a crisis.  The more we talked the more he repeatedly emphasized how miraculous this night had been:  how he just happened to be staying in the neighborhood for the week (he’s a Wichita West-sider), how he just happened to have followed a random impulse to take a walk at 8:45 pm, how unlikely it was to have run into what he called a “men’s prayer meeting” on East Douglas, and how he had never experienced anything like the Hall of Men in all of his years growing up in the Church.

I don’t know if I will ever see this stranger again.  I hope I do.  But even if I don’t, I do know that if we hadn’t been so public about our faith on the street corner, this evening would have been very different for this new friend.  He wouldn’t have heard what he said he needed to hear, he wouldn’t have been challenged to renew what he characterized as a spiritually bankrupt life, he wouldn’t have stumbled into what he called a clear sign from God, and he wouldn’t have experienced what he described as a life-changing encounter with a group of authentic Christian men who made space for a stranger in the night off the street corner of Douglas and Erie.

I realize that I’ve claimed to know a lot in this post.  I hope you’ll forgive me for claiming to be so knowledgeable.  Actually, I’m counting on it because there is one last thing I’m going to claim to know:  we will continue to occasionally begin our evenings at the Hall of Men in the streets with the Eighth Day Convocation.  Moreover, one of these nights this “men’s prayer meeting” will still end up in the Dillons parking lot at Douglas and Hillside with a group of men singing “Amazing Grace” to Mr. Bendowski’s bagpipes!

Secularization Thesis 1 – Intro

Tags

, , ,

Rodney Stark

Sociologist Rodney Stark opens his vociferous attack on what came to be known as the “secularization thesis” with a barrage of pre-thesis predictions of the immanent demise of religion.[1]  As early as 1710, for example, Thomas Woolston predicted that Christianity would be a thing of the past by 1900.  In a letter to his friend Voltaire, Frederick the Great accused Woolston of being too pessimistic and argued that religion was already crumbling and would fall far sooner than 1900.  Voltaire replied and predicted its end in less than fifty years.  Nineteenth century prophets such as August Compte and Frederich Engels made similar predictions, although specific dates were no longer offered.  In 1878 Max Muller complained that one could not escape widespread assertions, especially in the most popular journals, “that the time for religion is past, that faith is a hallucination or an infantile disease, that the gods have at last been found out and exploded.”[2]  Similar types of predictions continued into the twentieth century.  At the turn of the century, for example, A.E. Crawley suggested that religion was widely perceived to be an endangered species and was on the verge of extinction.  In 1918 Max Weber presented a lecture at Munich University in which he proclaimed the world to be “disenchanted”, which, in his words, meant that “there are no mysterious incalculable forces that come into play, but rather that one can, in principle, master all things by calculation.”[3]  Such prophecies of the collapse of religion, along with countless others, paved the way for the formal “secularization thesis” articulated in the 1960s by sociologists, both in Europe and America.

To speak of “secularization” today, however, immediately draws one into a complex debate that, after more than five decades of countless sociological studies, continues to rage unabated.  As Timothy Larsen, Professor of Theology at Wheaton College, suggests, the secularization thesis “has been defined, explained, attacked, defended, and examined in a bewilderingly wide variety of ways.”[4]  Moreover, he continues, the theory has pervaded reflections about Christianity in the West for at least the last four decades, a fact that is of particular importance to Christians since the thesis stands as “an intellectual challenge to Christian reflection today by asserting or implying that faith is a legacy of a more primitive intellectual culture that is destined to wither away as the light of learning spreads more widely, that Christianity will inevitably die out in the developed West, and that it is impossible for a secularized society ever to experience a serious, deeply rooted religious revival.”[5]  Larsen thus concludes, “like a shadow, the secularization thesis looms over much, but is nevertheless frustratingly hard to grasp or pin down.  Whatever imprecision they perceive in the thesis, theologians cannot afford to ignore this area of intellectual inquiry.”[6]  Heeding Larsen’s conclusion, the ensuing posts will therefore strive to bring the secularization thesis out of the shadows, to “pin down” precisely what is meant by “secularization” through an overview of the various positions put forth over the years.  Following this clarification, attention will then shift onto one of the more recent and most promising studies, published in 2007 by the Canadian philosopher Charles Taylor:  A Secular Age.[7]


[1] Rodney Stark, “Secularization, R.I.P.”, Sociology of Religion, 60:3 (1999), 249-250.

[2] F.M. Muller, Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion (London:  Longmans Green, 1878), 218; cited in Stark 1999, 250.

[3] Max Weber, Science as a Vocation….get citation

[4] Timothy Larsen, “Dechristendomization as an Alternative to Secularization: Theology, History, and Sociology in Conversation”, Pro Ecclesia, 15:3 (2006), 320.

[5] Ibid., 321.

[6] Ibid., 320.

[7] Charles Taylor, A Secular Age (Cambridge, MA and London, England:  The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2007).

At the Corner of Douglas & Erie: Taking the Hall to the Streets

Tags

, , , ,

April 26, 2011

If you’ve ever been to the Hall of Men, you are familiar with our tradition of preparing ourselves for the evening lecture by singing a hymn and reciting the Nicene creed.  Last week, we did things a bit differently.  Thanks to our own Mark Pemberton, the evening’s festivities began as usual with a home-cooked meal.  After dinner, we exited the Ladder and gathered around the Eighth Day pole where we publicly sang our faith to the tune of a 13th century hymn by St Francis of Assisi, proclaimed our faith with the words of the Holy Fathers of the first two Ecumenical Councils (Nicaea in 325 A.D. and Constantinople in 381 A.D.), and prayed our faith with the words taught by our Lord Jesus Christ.  Following this somewhat strange venture to the outdoors under the night sky, normalcy was quickly restored as we headed back inside for a great lecture by Fr. John Flora on St. Maximos the Confessor and a lively discussion to conclude the evening.

Our procession to the Eighth Day pole was motivated by two factors.  Surprisingly enough, a local abortionist served as the initial provocation.  When I learned that an abortion clinic might be opening across the way, I immediately hit the streets.  After a week of marching around the block of the proposed clinic begging God to bring life instead of death to that block, a burden for the south side of Douglas began to develop.  As I walked along Douglas and through the back alley my prayers grew more passionate as they connected to what my eyes saw:  real human faces and homes and buildings where real people live and work.  My prayers for the renewal of culture in our community were no longer abstract.  They were now concrete and embodied as I prayed for particular people and places with both my heart and body.

The following week, after thanking God for His mercy and protection (an optometrist is moving in instead!), my attention shifted to my dissertation.  One of the pieces I wrote that week was a verbal tour of a fifth-century urban liturgy in Rome.  At a time when the Roman Empire was crumbling, the Church was standing strong.  And it was also hitting the streets.  Sunday and weekday festal worship consisted of a series of services that lasted as long as six to eight hours and took place in various locations throughout the city in the presence of hostile pagans.  Aidan Kavanagh, Benedictine monk and Professor of Liturgics at the Divinity School of Yale University (d. 2006), describes and explains this public presence of the Church’s urban liturgy best in his work, On Liturgical Theology:

The time-scale of this entire series of services was the whole of a Sunday.  The space-scale of it was the whole city. . . . No doubt relatively few people attended them all, nor do they appear to have been expected to do so.  One attended however much one’s ability, piety, and health permitted. . . .  this full public liturgy, this urban act, this duty owed to God like taxes were owed to the state (the word leitourgia was used in antiquity to designate both sorts of  acts) was simply the Church manifested in its deepest nature in the human civitas as the presence, the embodiment in the world of the World to come, of the Kingdom, of the new and final age.  It was the Church of Jesus Christ being most overtly itself before God in the world on humanity’s urban stage.

Kavanagh concludes by arguing that such a liturgy would have inevitably impacted both the Christian participants and the pagan observers.  It would have served an evangelical function by exposing Roman pagans to the Word of God through psalms and scripture and, in Kavanagh’s words, it would have given Christian participants “a certain robust self-confidence in owning their Christian faith as it faced challenges such as the collapse of western civilization and the creation of new cultures.  It pulled them together in all their urban diversity to focus on making a World after the mind of God in Christ.”  Kavanagh couldn’t have stated the mission of Eighth Day Institute any better.

At a time not all too different from fifth-century Rome, we too face the challenge of a collapsing western culture.  If we do not come together as Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants to make “a World after the mind of God in Christ”, the pagans will prevail and our rich western tradition will be lost.  We have a responsibility to manifest and embody the presence of the World to come in the public square of this world.  And Eighth Day Institute intends to facilitate moments of such embodied manifestations of the Good News of Jesus Christ.  That’s why, if you were driving down Douglas last Thursday evening around 8:30 p.m., you might have seen a group of Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant men singing and praying at the corner of Douglas and Erie.  And who knows, if you happen to be on a late run to the grocery store sometime in the near future, you might even hear them singing Amazing Grace to bagpipes in the Dillons parking lot at the corner of Douglas and Hillside!

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started