Well, since finishing up my thesis (woot!), I have begun to fall in love again with the printed word. While I read over 150 books and other forms of “literature” as sources for my thesis, it is very different to read for a thesis than it is to read for “choice.” So, in the several weeks since I submitted my thesis, I have plowed my way through four very different books.
Childhood’s End & Rendezvous with Rama | Sex God | The Irresistible Revolution
SciFi Novels
I started with some good old science fiction in recognition of the recent death of Arthur C Clarke. I had read several of his books previously, but not Childhood’s End and Rendezvous with Rama. Rama was an interesting and fun read, but it was Childhood’s End that really struck me. What a stark contrast of a story focusing on aliens visiting earth of a book written several decades ago compared to similar films of the last twenty years. I remember watching V on back in the late 80s and the story of how the aliens came to earth to harvest people for food, then movies like Independence Day furthered the idea that aliens would only come to destroy us or eat us. Anyway, Childhood’s End focuses on others coming to our world to guide us into a new way of being. In many ways, this book isn’t entirely different from the ultimate focus of 2001 – that humans one day will take a further evolutionary step into something beyond what we are today. Anyway, a fascinating read.
Sex God
Moving onto an entirely different topic, I read Rob Bell’s book Sex God: Exploring the Endless Connections Between Sexuality and Spirituality. I had previously read Bell’s Velvet Elvis and was struck by the new perspective that he brought to Christianity and to its connection to culture today. I had Sex God on my shelf for a while and finally got to reading it. I have to admit that the last third of the book seemed to start to drag – it seemed repetitive and almost like Bell was trying to fill pages. That being said, I don’t think it truly takes away from the perspective the book offers. Ultimately, the book is a solid (although not exceptional) exploration of how deeply linked our sexuality and our spirituality truly are. In a religious climate that continues to try to separate the two or make people deny sexuality (of any form) because of spirituality, Bell focuses on how we truly do experience God through our sexuality. It is important to note that he doesn’t limit sexuality in his definition to the act of sex itself, but instead widens it (appropriately) to focus on the quality of relationships with others – both within and without a marriage. He notes in several places that God did create humans as sexual creatures and as we are created in God’s image, our sexuality is there as part of God’s image within us.
I was also deeply appreciative of the fact that he, unlike most evangelicals (although I am not sure Bell would want to be called an Evangelical), uses the appropriate interpretation of Ephesians 5 when talking about the power relationship between husband and wife. Many evangelicals want to separate the passage after the statement of “submit yourselves to one another out of reverance for Christ” as the NIV (New International Version of the Bible) does. What is significant is that that verse should be paired with what follows (wives submit to your husbands, etc) and not separated. The Greek (original language of the letter to the Ephesians) doesn’t separate them – why should modern translators? Anyway, Bell focuses in one chapter on the mutual submission that couples should have to one another in their marriage relationship. And ultimately, he brings it to the Christian community – a call for us to submit to one another out of reverance for Christ.
The book is a very different style to read. If you are expecting long, detailed theological arguments on specific subjects quoting great historical theologians, you might get rather frustrated with his writing. He writes much as he speaks and I believe he writes this way to encourage this as the beginning of dialogues on this topic, rather than this book being the authority readers should just fall in line with.
While the book does have some flaws, I would seriously consider using this book as a discussion starter in small groups focusing on the topic of sexuality and I would also strongly consider its use in a youth group or within a premarital counseling relationship when talking about the issues of power, communication, and sexuality within a relationship.
The Irresistible Revolution
This is a book that has been sitting on my shelf for far too long. I knew what it was about through two sources – my colleague Jeff and the church he serves and through an episode of Speaking of Faith. Shane Claiborne is a participant in what observers have called a “new monasticism” – people who truly have given up what they have and have begun living together in faith-based communities trying to live our their faith in new, challenging, and prophetic ways. Unlike the traditional concept of monasticism, this form is centered within cities (such as inner-city Philadelphia where The Simple Way [Claiborne's community] lives) and focuses on living out their faith for the benefit of the community around them. The subtitle of the book is “living as an ordinary radical.”
I think the book sat on my shelf for so long because I knew (both consciously and unconsciously) that it would challenge me in incredible ways. When I heard the SoF episode while driving home from Dubuque last summer, at one point I had to pull over because I was just so deeply convicted by what I heard. The perspective that he brings really moves out of the liberal/conservative/evangelical/mainline /red/blue/republican/democrat dividing that we are so apt to do today. Similar to how McLaren titles his book, A Generous Orthodoxy, Claiborne cannot be painted into a corner as he is at the same time a strong evangelical who is absolutely anti war (of any kind), social activist, faithful disciple, etc etc etc.
There was much in the book that resonated with me – his perseptive on the Iraq War specifically. He traveled to Iraq shortly before the war started and he speaks of how he experienced being on “the other side” as he worshiped with communities in Baghdad as the bombs began to fall. A priest prayed that they might love their enemies and Claiborne realized that they were speaking of those who were dropping the bombs on their country. He journals about his experience here.
While there was a great deal else in the book that affirmed where I am spiritually, politically, etc, his words challenged me greatly about how these areas of my life must be far more integrated than they often are. Often, it is too easy to separate the political from the spiritual from the material. They are all deeply and intricately connected and all must be informed by the rule of love. I think Claiborne would like to be described as a “radical lover” – not in the contemporary use of the word “lover” – but instead as one who seeks to radically love as Jesus loved (and loves still today). He has a marvelous quote that highlights this when he speaks of his dream of a faith community:
…a community of people who have falls desperately in love with God and with suffering people, and who allow those relationships to disturb and transform them.
In many ways, the message that Claiborne offers challenges me on the same level as the sermon I linked to a few days ago. In Rev. Moss’ message, he notes at one point that the preacher’s role is to “keep catastrophe before the people” essentially to never let people get so comfortable that they forget (or choose to ignore) the realities of the world around them – both right next door and thousands of miles away.
There are so many levels that Irresistible Revolution struck me on that its impossible to put into words. It is worth a read, however, knowing that it will challenge, encourage, and disturb you.
The next books? Through a Screen Darkly by Jeffrey Overstreet and a return to my dearly loved A Prayer for Owen Meany
Ok – this isn’t really new news, but I finally got the album, 
After thinking more about the film over the last week, I have decided that a second viewing of TDK is not going to happen. I haven’t changed any of my thoughts about the performances, story, quality of the moviemaking, etc. The thing I keep getting stuck on is the violence in the film. The violence in the film is without purpose in any way. I know there’s the whole thing that is referred to (rather obliquely) in the film about Batman’s code of not killing anyone and how the Joker keeps trying to make Batman break this code. But the violence brought out by the Joker is just so over the top that it is sadistic. I know that was the point of the writers to make the Joker a totally sadistic villian. But the more that I see the sadistic forms of violence that we humans put upon others in real life (Darfur, Bosnia, shootings, wars, etc) the harder and harder time that I am having witnessing fictional sadistic violence in film.
Ok – this might be (ok likely is) a bit of a reach, but I saw some parallels between 