Levellers

Faith & Social Justice: In the spirit of Richard Overton and the 17th C. Levellers

Biblical Perspectives on Nonviolence and Peacemaking

Biblical Studies on Nonviolence and Peacemaking

  • Berrigan, Daniel, s.j. Daniel: Under the Siege of the Divine. Plough Publishing House, 1997.
  • Berrigan, Daniel, s.j.  Exodus:  Let My People Go.  Cascade Books, 2008.
  • Berrigan, Daniel, s.j.  Ezekiel:  Vision in the Dust.  Orbis Books, 1997.
  • Berrigan, Daniel, s.j.  Isaiah:  Spirit of Courage, Gift of Tears. Augsburg-Fortress, 1996.
  • Berrigan, Daniel, s.j.  Jeremiah:  The World, the Wound of God.  Fortress Press, 1999.
  • Berrigan, Daniel, s.j.  Job: And Death, No Dominion.  Sheed and Ward, 2000.
  • Berrigan, Daniel, s.j.  The Kings and their Gods:  The Pathology of Power.  Eerdmans, 2008.  (On 1 & 2 Kings.)  People are familiar with Berrigan as a nonviolent activist.  Some others know him as a poet. But this radical Jesuit priest is also a very powerful biblical scholar.  Yet these works are not technical, historical-critical, biblical commentaries (though Berrigan’s work shows how intimately familiar he is with biblical scholarship), but spiritual readings of biblical texts through the eyes of his radical, nonviolent faith and activism.
  • Bonhoeffer, Dietrich.  The Cost of Discipleship.  Fortress Press, 1940.
  • Borg, Marcus.  Jesus: A New Vision.  Fortress Press, 1994.
  • Borg, Marcus.  Jesus: Uncovering the Life, Teachings, and Relevance of a Religious Revolutionary.  HarperOne, 2008.
  • Borg, Marcus and N. T. Wright.  The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions.  HarperSanFrancisco, 2000.
  • Brown, Dale W. Biblical Pacifism.  Evangel Publishing House,  2003.
  • Brueggemann, Walter.  Peace. Chalice Press, 2001.  This is a revised edition of Brueggemann’s much earlier work, Living Toward a Vision: Biblical Reflections on Shalom.
  • Cassidy, Richard J.  Jesus, Politics, and Society:  A Study of Luke’s Gospel.  Orbis Books, 1978.
  • Cassidy, Richard J. John’s Gospel in New Perspective:  Christology and the Realities of Roman Power.  Orbis Books, 1992. 
  • Cassidy, Richard J.  Society and Politics in the Acts of the Apostles.  Orbis Books, 1987.
  • Chilton, Bruce.  Rabbi Jesus;  An Intimate Portrait.  HarperOne, 2008.
  • Chilton, Bruce.  Rabbi Paul: An Intellectual Biography.  Image, 2005.
  • Chilton, Bruce and R. Jacob Neusner, eds.  The Brother of Jesus:  James the Just and His Mission.  Westminster/John Knox, 2004.
  • Crosby, Michael H.  House of Disciples:  Church, Economics, and Justice in Matthew.  Wipf and Stock, 2004.
  • Crosby, Michael H.  Spirituality of the Beatitudes:  Matthew’s Vision for the Church in an Unjust World.  Orbis Books, 2005.
  • Dear, John, s.j.  Jesus the Rebel: Bearer of God’s Peace and Justice.  Sheed and Ward, 2000.
  • Dear, John, s.j.  Mary of Nazareth: Prophet of Peace.  Ave Maria Press, 2003.
  • Hays, Richard B.  The Moral Vision of the New Testament:  Community, Cross, and New Creation–A Contemporary Introduction to New Testament Ethics.  HarperOne, 1996. I don’t agree with Hays everywhere, but he does an excellent job of showing how nonviolence and peacemaking are in every strand of the New Testament.
  • Herzog, William II.  Jesus, Justice, and the Reign of God.  Westminster/John Knox, 2000.
  • Howard-Brook, Wes.  Becoming Children of God:  John’s Gospel and Radical Discipleship.  Orbis Books, 2004.
  • Howard-Brook, Wes and Anthony Gwyer.  Unveiling Empire:  Reading Revelation, Then and Now.  Orbis Books, 1999.
  • Howard-Brook, Wes and Sharon Ringe, eds.  The New Testament: Introducing the Way of Discipleship.  Orbis Books, 2002.  If you want a 1 volume introduction to the New Testament that focuses on radical discipleship, sharing possessions, peacemaking and resistance to the violent Powers and Authorities, Howard-Brook and Ringe have edited that book here.  Perfect for beginning scholars or for adult Bible studies in churches.
  • Horsley, Richard A.  Jesus and the Spiral of Violence.  Fortress, 1993.
  • Horsley, Richard A.  Jesus and Empire:  The Kingdom of God and the New World Disorder.  Fortress Press, 2002.
  • Horsley, Richard A.  In the Shadow of Empire:  Reclaiming the Bible as a History of Faithful Resistance.  Westminster/John Knox Press, 2008.
  • Jordan, Clarence.  The Substance of Faith and Other Sermons, ed. Dallas Lee. New York: Association Press, 1972.
  • Jordan, Clarence.  The Sermon on the Mount. Rev. Ed. Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 1974.
  • Lapide, Pinchas.  The Sermon on the Mount:  Utopia or Program for Action?  Orbis Books, 1986.  The late R. Lapide was Jewish, of course, but this work belongs in the biblical studies on nonviolence.
  • Myers, Ched.  Binding the Strong Man: A Political Reading of Mark’s Story of Jesus.  Orbis Books, 1988.
  • Myers, Ched and Elaine Enns. Ambassadors of Reconciliation, Vol. 1: New Testament Perspectives on Restorative Justice and Peacemaking. Orbis Books, 2009. (Vol. 2 focuses on contemporary practices rather than biblical study.)
  • Rensberger, David.  Johannine Faith and Liberating Community.  Westminster/John Knox Press, 1988.
  • Richard, Pablo.  Apocalypse:  A People’s Commentary on the Book of Revelation.  Orbis Books, 1995.
  • Schussler-Fiorenza, Elizabeth.  Revelation:  Vision of a Just World.  Fortress Press, 1998.
  • Stassen, Glen H.  Living the Sermon on the Mount:  A Practical Hope for Grace and Deliverance.  Jossey-Bass, 2006.
  • Swartley, Willard M.  Mark: The Way for All Nations.  Wipf and Stock, 1999.
  • Swartley, Willard M.  Covenant of Peace:  The Missing Peace in New Testament Theology and Ethics.  Eerdmans, 2006.  This is Swartley’s masterpiece.  Most New Testament scholars finish their active careers by writing a New Testament theology that is the culmination of their scholarship.  Instead, Swartley wrote what they often leave out: the centrality of peace to  both NT theology and ethics.
  • Swartley, Willard M. Israel’s Scripture Traditions and the Synoptic Gospels: Story Shaping Story. Hendrickson Publishers, 1993.
  • Swartley, Willard M. , ed. The Love of Enemies and Nonretaliation in the New Testament.  Westminster/John Knox Press, 1992.
  • Swartley, Willard M.  Slavery, Sabbath, War and Women:  Case Issues in Biblical Interpretation.  Herald Press, 1983.
  • Swartley, Willard M., ed.  Violence Renounced:  Rene Girard, Biblical Studies and Peacemaking.  Pandora Press, 2000.
  • Trocme, Andre.  Jesus and the Nonviolent Revolution.  Rev. & Exp. Ed. Orbis Books, 2003.
  • Wink, Walter.  Engaging the Powers: Discernment and Resistance in a World of Discernment.  Fortress,  1992.
  •  Wink, Walter.  Jesus and Nonviolence:  A Third Way.  Fortress Press, 2003.
  • Wink, Walter.  The Human Being:  Jesus and the Enigma of the Son of Man.  Fortress Press, 2002.
  • Wright, N. T. Jesus and the Victory of God.  Augsburg Fortress, 1997.
  • Wright, N. T. Following Jesus:  Biblical Reflections on Discipleship.  Eerdmans, 1997.
  • Yoder, John Howard.  He Came Preaching Peace.  Herald Press, 1985.
  • Yoder, John Howard.  The Original Revolution.  Herald Press, 2003.
  • Yoder, John Howard.  The Politics of Jesus: Vicit Agnus Noster.  2nd ed.  Eerdmans, 1994. Original edition, 1972.

August 19, 2009 Posted by | Bible, books, discipleship, ethics, nonviolence, pacifism, peacemaking | 5 Comments

Why We Will Never Have “Socialized Medicine” in the U.S.A.

By “socialized medicine,” I mean, of course, systems like those in the United Kingdom or Spain where all hospitals (clinics, etc.) are government owned, private insurance can only be supplementary, and doctors, nurses,  and other healthcare workers are all government employees. It’s simple: That system may have its strengths (the Spanish and the British seem to like it), but it would violate the  U.S. Constitution–specifically the “takings” clause which forbids  nationalizing private firms without just compensation.  So, if you fear socialized medicine –don’t worry.  If you  long for it–move to Spain or the U.K.  It ain’t happening here.

What COULD happen here (although not with this current legislative session on healthcare reform) is socialized health INSURANCE similar to systems in Canada, Australia,  New Zealand, France, and almost every other industrialized, capitalist, democracy.  The doctors, nurses, etc.  do not work for the govt. They just BILL the govt. for fee for service.  This is usually called a “single payer” system.  Instead of thousands of rival health insurance plans (all looking over doctors’ shoulders authorizing or forbidding procedures),  the doctors, patients, and families make all the medical decisions and the govt. foots the bill through taxes.  It is possible, and certainly legal, that such a system could be put in place here: Simply expand Medicare (which ALREADY IS socialized health insurance) from covering everyone 65 and up to covering all U.S. citizens, PERIOD.

However, that option is NOT being considered currently in Congress. It was removed from discussion at the very beginning of the year. In my mind, that was a mistake, but there it is. What could happen, is that we could get a “public option” of govt. health insurance that COMPETES with private insurance. We also might get permission for the states that want to do so to experiment with single payer healthcare in their states (Canada’s plan began in one Province). If the public option proves popular, Americans could turn it into a single payer system.  So, what is being considered is NOT socialized medicine (no matter what Glenn Beck says) or even single-payer (no matter what all of Fox News says), but a centrist reform that, IF DESIRED BY THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, could one day become a Canadian style system.

It simply gives the American public more choices–something Republicans usually claim to want. If the private companies are superior, then they will beat the public option in the competition of the marketplace. If the govt. option is superior, it will win out.  Insurance companies and Republicans seem to be afraid that they cannot compete–or cannot without lowering their  prices. But isn’t that capitalism?

August 16, 2009 Posted by | economic justice, healthcare | 6 Comments

Are Christian Colleges and Universities Failing the Church and Kingdom?

Years ago, I heard Tony Campolo, Emeritus Professor of Sociology at Eastern University (St. Davids, PA), and gadfly evangelist who provokes his fellow evangelicals, ask whether Christian colleges and universities were failing both the American churches and the Kingdom of God.  Since he taught at a Christian college (now university–and now it has an entire program named after him), I didn’t take his question too seriously.  Or, I thought he was talking about those Christian colleges, usually very conservative, which were not very academically challenging (such as Palm Peace Atlantic, where I did part of my undergraduate work). Or maybe he meant those institutions which were once Christian, but now were purely secular institutions with little or no relation to the churches (Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Princeton, University of Chicago, Brown, Southern Methodist, etc.).

But recently, I have begun to think that’s not what Campolo had in mind.  Or, if it was, it is not what I have in mind in asking this question.  I  have begun to wonder if even those Christian colleges with strong academics and also strong connections to the churches, with a pervading Christian atmosphere and a desire to unite faith and learning, are failing the churches and the kingdom–are failing God.  This is a question, not a conclusion, and there may be exceptions that still prove the general rule even if the question is answered “Yes, they are.”

Here’s why the question comes to mind: the behavior of most of the graduates of Christian colleges and universities is not noticeably different from the behavior of the rest of the (pagan, secular) culture.  Why aren’t the graduates of Christian colleges who go on to, say, Medical school, irritants to the system, questioning the practices of medicine in our society in light of the gospel? And after medical school, why aren’t Christian doctors uniting to build practices and institutions that offer free medical care to the poor–regardless of what our culture does? Do we find a higher than average number of the members of Doctors Without Borders (Medicins sans Frontieres) to be products of Christian colleges and universities? What about the members of Physicians for Social Responsibility?  Do we find doctors who come from Christian colleges treating nurses better than most doctors? Do we find them taking less money and living simpler so that they can provide more care to more people?  I don’t think so.

Because the healthcare debate is front-burner, I thought of Christian doctors first, but I don’t mean to single them out. What about graduates of Christian colleges and universities who go on to law school and become attorneys? Do we see them take the normal big money jobs, or do we see them living simpler than other lawyers so that they can use the law to bring justice to the poor and marginalized? All lawyers are expected by their profession to do a certain amount of pro bono (free) work, but do we see graduates of Christian colleges doing more of this?  Are they volunteering for the cases no one else wants, like death penalty appeals or defending accused terrorists?  Are they taking the lead in defending human rights and civil liberties?  Do other lawyers consider them a pain in the neck for the way they constantly work to make the system more just for everyone?  I have no doubt that some do, but is the percentage any greater from Christian colleges than from secular ones?

If our church-related  colleges and universities were truly, uniquely, Christian, we’d expect the education majors to teach in areas with less glamor and resources–or push for changes in curriculum that better educated the young. We’d expect the graduates that went into politics to put Kingdom goals (justice for the poor and marginalized, peacemaking, care for the earth, work  for the common good) at the top of their list–and we’d find few if any involved in scandals and corruption. We’d find them refuse to slander colleagues or opponents–not even to win elections–and to defend the character of those whose policies they opposed–to practice humility. If our  colleges and universities were truly producing “Christian” education, would not the business majors be in the forefront of efforts to reform banking practices or create opportunities for the poor. The founder of  no-interest “micro-lending” to the poor was no product of Christian college, but Muhammed Yunus, a Muslim in Bangladesh.  A recent survey of 3 prominent societies for Christian business leaders, many of whom were graduates of church-related colleges, found that less than 1% had even heard of micro-lending and most were skeptical  that it could “work” to alleviate poverty–though the success rate is phenomenal and widely praised by international development experts.

I could go on through field after field of inquiry asking similar questions.  And they all lead me to wonder WHY our Christian colleges and universities–no matter denomination or theological tradition–are making so little impact on our culture through their graduates?  If we find these educational efforts valuable, and I still do, what about them needs to change so that they do not continue to fail the churches and the Kingdom of God?

I do not have the answers to this–not even a few of them.  But I think I finally understand  why Campolo was asking the question–and I think the time is long overdue for more of us to ask the same question.

August 15, 2009 Posted by | education, Kingdom of God | 9 Comments

Defending Private Property Through Universal Healthcare

At this link, there is an excellent article that argues that single-payer, universal healthcare would NOT lead to socialism, communism or fascism. Rather, it may be the best way to defend widespread home ownership and small farm ownership in America. ( 3 of 4 home foreclosures are healthcare related. 70% of bankruptcies are healthcare related.) I would also argue that it encourages small businesses (they don’t have to wonder how to provide healthcare to employees and can then offer higher wages) and makes large businesses more competitive (lack of universal healthcare adds $500-=$1000 to every car made in America, reducing our competitiveness with other countries).

I am sending this article to the WH and to leaders in Congress. We need to change the way the debate is being framed on healthcare. Please read and distribute widely.

August 15, 2009 Posted by | economic justice, healthcare | 8 Comments

Income Inequality At All Time High: New Study.

A new economic study shows that income inequality is at an all-time high.  The top 1% of Americans gained over 50% of all economic growth from 1993-2007.  Why does this matter? We don’t think that everyone needs to have exactly the same amount of wealth, do we? No. I believe in a more complex form of equality than that. But this means that the super rich got much richer while everyone else went backward or stayed the same–often by working multiple jobs.

Basic to the American idea of equality of opportunity (I believe in more than this, but this is deep in our national consensus morality) is the absence of an aristocracy and the ability to move out of one economic class into another.  But we have been moving away from this.  Economic mobility is now easier in Britain (which still has an aristocracy) than in the U.S. which supposedly doesn’t.

The implications of this study are wide reaching–far beyond what I can reflect on here.  But I would say this is a strong argument for the  reintroduction of the inheritance tax  on property of a $1 million or more. It’s not a “death tax,” but an anti-aristocracy tax.

August 14, 2009 Posted by | economic justice | 1 Comment

My Apologies to Progressives, Women, and Decent People in General

Why, because I supported a scum-bag in John Edwards last year!  In my defense, I didn’t know he was a scum-bag. I didn’t know he treated his wife like trash, cheating on her when she was in the hospital for cancer.  I did not know he would father a child by his mistress and spend months denying it. I didn’t know he would endanger Democrats’ chances at the White House by running for president when he knew this was out there waiting to be discovered.

Look, if I am going to call Gov. Mark Sanford (R-SC) an anti-woman, cheating, louse of a husband (and I am), if I am going to call Sen. John Ensign (R-NV), an anti-woman, cheating, louse of a husband (and I am), I must say the same about former Sen. John Edwards (D-NC). Slime and scum.

Yes, I supported him because of his economic populism and peace stances which were stronger than both Clinton and Obama. But MAN did I show poor character judgment.  So, to all women, progressives, Democrats and just people concerned about slimy scumbags, I’m sorry.  I hope I won’t be fooled again.

UPDATE:  Thanks for the kinds words in the comments, but I keep thinking I should have detected such large character flaws. After all, I didn’t like Edwards in ’04. I thought he was too slick and a poor running mate to Kerry. (How do you lose a VP debate to Dick Cheney?)  I had worked on Dennis’ Kucinich’s campaign in ’04, hoping that he would push the debate and push even Howard Dean in a more progressive direction. Then the Kucinich campaign went nowhere and Dean self-destructed after Iowa. We Dems were stuck with Kerry–and Edwards. But I thought Edwards the most improved candidate in 4 years: championing the poor and the environment and peace and human rights–and repenting his ’02 vote to authorize the war in Iraq.  He should have repented his scumbag adultery!

August 13, 2009 Posted by | U.S. politics | 7 Comments

R.I. P. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (1915-2009)

I just learned of the passing of  one of the giants in church history and historical theology, who  also made a gigantic impact on theology through his translations of German works into English.  Geoffrey W. Bromiley (1915-2009) passed away on 07 August 2009.  Bromiley was born in Lancashire, England (U.K.) in 1915.  He earned an M.A. at Cambridge University and a Ph.D., DLitt, and DD from Edinburgh University. Ordained a priest in the Church of England, Bromiley served as a Rector of St. Thomas’ Church, Edinburgh.  In 1958, Bromiley was called to be Professor of Church History  at Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, CA–retiring from that post in 1987. 

Bromiley wrote several volumes of theology, including a one-volume Historical Theology, but his largest impact on theology has to be his translations.  Bromiley translated many of the volumes of Karl Barth’s Church Dogmatics from German, translated the 10 volumen Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (ed, Gerhard Kittel, etc.), translated all 3 volumes of Wolfhart Pannenberg’s Systematic Theology, as well as works by Helmut Thielicke, Jacques Ellul, and Ernst Kasemann.  Most recently,  Bromiley translated  the 5 volume Encyclopedia of Christianity from the German, completing the 5th volume in 2007 at the age of 92!

Students and colleagues at Fuller Theological Seminary describe Bromiley as combining scholarship with a strong dedication to the Word of God. 

Rest in peace, faithful pilgrim.

August 12, 2009 Posted by | Obituaries | 7 Comments

Brief Thoughts on Gary Dorrien

DorrienIt’s been awhile since I posted in my series of “Brief Thoughts on Contemporary Theological Voices.”  These are not intended to be comprehensive studies of particular thinkers, but mere introductions from my very subjective viewpoint–which the reader may do with as she or he wishes.  This is separate from my series on theological mentors, on personal heroes, or on major theological  dialogue partners. I previously offered Brief Thoughts on Marcus Borg and on N. T. Wright.

Gary Dorrien (1952-) is an Episcopal priest, a widower with one grown daughter, and currently Reinhold Niebuhr Professor of Social Ethics, Union Theological Seminary in the City of New York, having previously been both chaplain and professor at Kalamazoo College in Michigan.  His current role at Union is a homecoming since he is twice an alumnus (M.Div., 1978; Ph.D., 1989), having earned two degrees at Princeton Theological Seminary ( M.A., 1979, Th.M., 1979) in between his Union degrees.  He is also one of the major voices today in reviving the American theological tradition of the Social Gospel–which he does from a post-liberal perspective.  As a scholar, Dorrien wears two hats:  The first is as a theological historian, an interpreter of various strands of Christianity, especially in North America.  The second hat is as a strong proponent of a revived Social Gospel and of economic democracy (or democratic socialism) in a U.S. context.

In Dorrien’s first role, interpreting the work of others, he has been praised by many whose views he doesn’t share. Yes, they say, he’s not one of us, but he has understood us correctly.  The number of different theological strands that Dorrien has interpreted both sympathetically and critically as a theological historian is pretty amazing.  His works in this regard include the following:

  • The Neo-Conservative Mind:  Politics, Culture, and the War of Ideology (1994).
  • Soul  in Society: The Making and Renewal of Social Christianity (1995).
  • The Word as True Myth: Interpreting Modern Theology (1997).
  • The Remaking of Evangelical Theology (1998).
  • The Barthian Revolt in Modern Theology: Theology Without Weapons (2000).

It also includes Dorrien’s award-winning 3 volume history of the American form of Liberal theology which has been widely praised as carefully noting both strengths and weaknesses.  I have loved this series, although I only have one foot in this tradition, because I found myself understanding American liberal Christianity better than I ever have before. (Note: I am referring to genuine theological liberalism: anthropocentric starting point, revising doctrinal claims in light of modern science, etc. This is in strong contrast to the popular way that both fundamentalists and journalists refer to any non-inerrantist or non-fundamentalist as “liberal.”  Also, one should  not assume that liberal theology and politics go together and conservative theology and politics go together. That has often been the pattern, but there have been many exceptions.)

  • The Making of American Liberal Theology I: Imagining Progressive Religion, 1805-1900 (2001).
  • The Making of American Liberal Theology II: Idealism, Realism, and Modernity, 1900-1950 (2003).
  • The Making of American Liberal Theology III: Crisis, Irony, and Postmodernity, 1950-2005 (2006).

Those 3 volumes belong on the shelves of every minister and theologian in the U.S.–and because we export our theology, many overseas  as well.  I only hope  Dorrien eventually edits a sourcebook of primary materials to go with those volumes of great secondary interpretation.

In his role as an advocate for a renewed Social Gospel,  Dorrien stands on the boundaries of the liberal tradition and Barthian/ post-liberal critique of that tradition.  He knows that the Social Gospel was originally too dependent on evolutionary views of human history, was too optimistic, too white and male, and without strong enough theological foundations.  But he is horrified at the retreat from a Social Gospel to an individualistic “gospel” of personal prosperity (“health and wealth”) and support for structures of the status quo.  Dorrien’s passions are for economic democracy and for an anti-imperialist foreign policy that takes human rights and peacemaking seriously–though I don’t think Dorrien is a pacifist anymore than the namesake of his endowed chair at Union, Reinhold Niebuhr.  Anabaptist-style liberationist that I am, I take issue with Dorrien’s Niebuhrian realism and just war thinking–but his internationalist anti-imperialism is a welcome change from either the militant Nationalists or the Neo-con imperialists.  Dorrien’s publications as a Social Christianity advocate include:

  • The Democratic Socialist Vision (1986).
  • Reconstructing the Common Good: Theology and the Social Order (1990, repr., 2008).
  • Imperial Designs:  Neoconservatism and the New Pax Americana (20004, 2006).
  • Social Ethics in the Making:  Interpreting an American Tradition (2004, 2008).
  • Economy, Difference, and Empire:  Against Domination (forthcoming, 2009)–already on my Christmas list.

I share more of Dorrien’s economic and political views than his theological, but he makes an excellent dialogue partner.  My kind of Believers’ Church vision will never be dominant, always a minority voice–but I would rather be interacting with a dominant church culture along the lines of a Garry Dorrien than along the lines of the Religious Right which has set so much of the agenda from c. 1979-c. 2007 that it was hard for any other voice to be heard at all.

As a historian, I think Dorrien has few peers. As an advocate, I think he represents the kind of liberal Niebuhrianism that once dominated the churches in this country.  That liberal Niebuhrianism has problems from my perspective–but not as many as what replaced it.  It remains to be seen whether Dorrien’s prescription for a renewed Social Gospel along liberal Niebuhrian lines (taking on board critiques from many angles) can overcome the weaknesses of former incarnations–but it will be exciting to watch and see.

August 10, 2009 Posted by | theology | 2 Comments

Mentors #7: Dan R. Stiver

stiver It’s been awhile since I last added to this series on Theological Mentors.  As usual, Danny cannot be held responsible for my theological errors–since that’s doubtless due to my being a poor student. 

Dan R. Stiver currently occupies the Cook-Derrick Chair of Theology at Logsdon School of Theology, Hardin-Simmons University, in Abilene, TX.  Logsdon and HSU are related to the Baptist General Convention of Texas and is a partner institution with the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship.  When I knew Danny, he was Professor of Christian Philosophy at my alma mater, The (old) Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, KY (before the fundamentalist takeover of the early ’90s).

Dan is a product of Midwestern American upbringing (Springfield, MO) and of the old “moderate” or non-fundamentalist stream of Southern Baptist life.  He was educated at William Jewell College in Missouri, an institution with both Southern Baptist and American Baptist ties. He then earned his Master of Divinity at Midwestern BTS in Kansas City, MO.  He earned his Ph.D. in theology at SBTS where he was the last doctoral student of the late Southern Baptist giant, Dale Moody.  He has held pastorates in Missouri and Indiana.  A theologian with a philosophical bent (not all that common for the Baptist tradition), Danny taught Christian philosophy at SBTS for 14 years, from 1984 to 1998. (I arrived in his classroom in 1986–he’d had enough teaching experience to be confident and still enough passion and experimentation to excite students who were often  unsure why they, as student ministers, had to study anything philosophical! In the last year of college, I had discovered Karl Barth and so came to seminary with a decidedly anti-philosophical bent!)

I was worred that theologies which rely over much on philosophy, whether the Platonic metaphysics that influenced the Church Fathers (didn’t know there were Church Mothers then), the Aristotelian thought behind Thomism, liberal process theology, Kantianism, etc. were always diluting the gospel and distorting it–either in conservative or liberal or some other direction.  I found that Danny was far from naive about these problems, but that he believed that all theology must interact with various philosophical currents (ancient, contemporary)–even if they are wary of substituting a philosophical “foundation.” or starting place for the Church’s One foundation, Jesus Christ the Lord. Theology is interacts with philosophy as part of its missionary nature.

It was Dan’s genius to mentor students who took VERY DIFFERENT approaches to theology and were attracted to different philosophical currents: From evangelical rationalists who were disciples of Carl Henry, to process theologians (either in the form of the evolutionary theology proposed by Dan’s own teacher, British Baptist Eric Charles Rust, or in the more dominant Whitehead-Hartshorne school), to Marxist-inclined liberation theologians, to “post-structualist” Deconstructionists.  After freeing myself from an inordinate fear of philosophy (while remaining alert for the subversion of the gospel by alien thought forms), I found that my own philosophical interests were quite  eclectic: My deep  respect for Martin Luther King, Jr. led me to read the Boston Personalists and my fascination with Dorothy Day led to the very different Catholic Personalists, especially Jacques Maritain. My attraction to liberation theology kept me critically engaged with Marx (and heterodox Marxists like Gramsci, Bloch, and Enrique Dussel) and my interest in Jewish thought led to Buber and Heschel.  Dan encouraged all of this and more.

It took awhile, then, to grap Danny’s own philosophical interests, except to think he’d read everything and everyone twice over! (He hadn’t, but it sure felt that way!) Dan has strong interests in philosophy of language, especially religious language and has been a major dialogue partner in the modern/post-modern divide, without being wholly in the “camp” of either the Deconstructionists and Post-Structuralists (Foucault, Levinas, Lyotard, etc.) or that of the “Anglo-American” post-modernists (influenced by J.L. Austin and the later Wittgenstein). His first book, The Philosophy of Religious Language: Sign, Symbol, and Story (1996) mapped the lay of the land and staked out some of his own ground.  It is clear that the Catholics Hans Kueng and David Tracy, as well as the Reformed Juergan Moltmann and the Baptist Langdon Gilkey, as well as Dan’s own teacher, Dale Moody, were large influences. 

   It was also clear that Dan was attracted to narrative theology (an interest I shared), but more from the perspective of Paul Ricoeur (1913-2005) than to Hans Frei or Hans Gadamer.  I had stumbled onto Ricoeur myself both because of my strong attraction to narrative theology (Ricoeur helps one weave together narrative and liberationist strains in a way that I think Frei does not) and my commitment to pacifism–Ricoeur himself was a Christian pacifist–although still drafted into the French army in WWII. (Ricoeur was quickly captured and spent the war in a German concentration camp, teaching philosophy!)  But Ricoeur’s work is so large and so wide-ranging that I never knew what I  thought of the project as a whole. Dan was a tremendous help with his second book, Theology After Ricoeur: New Directions in Hermeneutical Theology (2001).

Dan eventually came to be part of my doctoral dissertation committee and, although mine was a work on theological ethics, he kept me seeing how my project fit into larger conversations in philosophical theology.  I THINK it was Danny who  once told me that there was a large difference between Christian philosophers who were trained first as theologians and those who, however theologically well informed, only had philosophy degrees. (Surprisingly, the latter are often more conservative than the former, as a survey of the Society of Christian Philosophy will show!) That’s been Dan’s main influence: introducing me to conversations and dialogue partners rather than teaching me HIS views on everything.

In fact, I still don’t know Dan”s views on a great number of things. I’d love to see him write his own systematic theology! I don’t know if he shares my Christian commitment to pacifism, although I do know that he is deeply committed to Christian peacemaking and  human rights and is a member of the Baptist  Peace Fellowship of North America. (We have to get Danny to one of our summer conferences, peace camps, sometime.)  I know little about his politics except that he is a registered Democrat and, like all true Baptists, a STRONG advocate for church-state separation and for religious liberty for EVERYONE. 

If I am a provocateur, Dan is more of a mediator. He likes to get people of very diverse opinions engaged in real dialogue and see if new insights emerge.  There is something DEEPLY, profoundly Christian about that and I hope I learn more of it from my friend and teacher.

August 9, 2009 Posted by | Baptists, mentors, peacemaking, philosophy, theological education, theology | 2 Comments

Anniversary of a Good Thing

44 years ago, today, then-President Lyndon Baines Johnson (D) signed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 into law. The single most effective piece of civil rights legislation ever crafted, it finally gave teeth to the 15th Amendment.

August 6, 2009 Posted by | race | 8 Comments

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started