« February 2007 | Main | April 2007 »

I can’t believe how quickly time has passed since I last blogged. Board meeting Monday night; Tuesday was a 16 hour day as I was involved in interview candidates for licensing and ordination on our district in the Church of the Nazarene – a moving, but exhausting day. Wednesday and Thursday night had pastoral tasks, with final grades still waiting for my Intro to OT class. I wanted to spend some time today responding to two excellent responses to my previous post. It is a joy to think through issues with those through a dialectic that the blog provides – its own type of medieval “questionis”-format. So I’d like to highlight and respond to Eric Lee today, and hopefully Thom Starke tomorrow, possibly without the full care that their questions deserve, but at least with a little more care than would afford a quick two sentence response.

Since I began this post, our congregation member and Eric’s good friend, David Overholt, has been stricken with a serious illness (for David’s adventures and giftedness, see streamdavid.com). Eric and his wife Tiana and other members of the congregation, spent yesterday in the hospital emergency room and ICU unit with David. It was a long and scary day. In some ways it makes the response to Eric’s question more existentially real. I am extremely humbled by the strength, wisdom, compassion, prudence, and love that Eric and others showed for David. They were a real, authentic, profound Christian community.

We are still awaiting word on the full diagnosis and prognosis for David. Here was a living, breathing witness to friendship and the type of community that Eric, if I am hearing correctly, rightly wants to keep as part of the church, coming together in a time of intense need, hours of friendship behind it, joint wisdom in decision making. I want to affirm those involved in their care of David, their support for each other during this time. If you could have seen the faithfulness to Christ and the body of Christ in the sick body of their friend David that Eric and others showed for David and each other, it would have humbled you concerning the depths of their participation in the Love that is God revealed to us in Christ by the Spirit. It is in this context of admiration, honor, and love for Eric and those who gathered in the hospital, over the phones, weaving a web of prayer, love, and support, and in prayer for David, that I want to frame my post.

Eric Lee notes the tension between an earlier post that I have written concerning the use of the term “community” in our congregation and how Samuel Wells, in summarizing Hauerwas, “uses this word 'community' 9 times . . . Now, if this word 'community' is through-and-through deemed bad as an "abstract, therapeutic non-biblical language," would you fault Wells (and by implication, your mentor Hauerwas) in using this word 'community' so often? Would you chide Hauerwas for not titling his book 'A Congregation of Character', instead?”

Eric goes on to ask, “Are Wells and Hauerwas deluded and co-opted by all that is 'morally therapeutic'? Or, perhaps, are they trying to make community something that is Christian? Is theology as much about playing games of 'Taboo(tm)' with language as it is about rightly ordering and orienting our language?”

He concludes, “So, therefore, I must ask: what is a transformed use of the word 'community'? Is it possible that when you hear the word community within our congregation that we mean it exactly as Hauerwas and Wells mean it when they use it? Must we ditch words altogether, or should instead we live and talk in such a way that they might say, "hey, what they mean by community is not what we --the world-- mean" ...? And my prayer is that they ask us.”

I’d like to respond and use the occasion to cross the line from “reader of the Hauerwas text” to “pastor.” First, Eric is astute as ever in picking up this tension between my posts, and justly pushes me not to “play games of Taboo ™” but to engage in “rightly ordering and orienting our language.” He is wise in reminding me. Language is never an end in itself, but is that through which we are formed to the end that really is, ultimately in the Word become flesh.

I think (or I think that I think -- I’m willing to be persuaded differently!) that the distinction between “community” and a particular local/catholic church (i.e., congregation) is precisely about rightly ordering and orienting our language for the proper performance of the faith given the saints as part of the tradition of Christian “congregations,” that is, Messianic synagogues, a concrete, embodied “leading together” by God – the Greek etymology of “synagogue” -- of an Israel that includes Gentiles through Jesus by the Spirit,” to keep our language descriptive of what God has actually done in Christ by the Spirit rather than risking its abstraction into other types of political realities. We need to learn to think "Jewish" when we think church.

I don’t think anyone have ever accused Hauerwas as being coopted by the “morally therapeutic”!!! Yet in some ways this is precisely the criticism to which Wells’ analysis of the progression of Hauerwas’ thought leads for the “early Hauerwas”. I would like to join this and push a little farther. Wells shows that there is a development in the Hauerwas text over time “From Community to the Church” (pp. 90-125). In direct answer to Eric’s question, yes, I do think that Hauerwas would have served God better to have entitled his book, “Congregation of Character” rather than “Community of Character.” Wells documents (successfully, it seems to me) a movement away from “formal categories” in early Hauerwas texts like “narrative” or “community” to the precise Christian formations that are anchored in a real catholicity such as “Scripture” and “church”. Wells writes that Hauerwas has journeyed “from character to narrative, and from a formal claim for narrative to a prescriptive demand for the Christian narrative . . . The journey from character to community (via narrative) is part of a longer journey from quandary to the Church (via character, narrative and community). This latter journey sums up Hauerwas’ whole project. His overall concern is to shift the focus of ethical reflection from the individual in crisis to the Church in its faithfulness. The purpose of theological ethics, for him, is not to make quandaries easier, but to build up the Church” (p. 61).

It is that end to “build up the church” that I want to commit my work. I myself, however, wonder if the language of “church” itself runs the danger of becoming an abstraction this days. I want to keep focused on the very real bodies of those baptized the God gathers together in a particular place in worship of the Triune God through which the Spirit makes the body of Christ visible in the world through the mutual participation in the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist – that which makes a congregation most local is precisely that which makes it most catholic (universal). I know that Stanley himself has pointed me in this way through particular references to specific congregation events and practices.

Must we ditch “community” completely? No, of course not. “Community” can be a good word to describe Christian realities; it can also be a word that becomes a parody of what it partially describes by having it placed within other narratives than the biblical narrative that witnesses to Jesus Christ and thus the church catholic. “Community” cannot become an abstraction from the catholicity in locality that is the fundamental political formation of the church -- local congregations – those whom God gathers through baptism to hear the Word proclaimed and the Eucharist validly celebrated.

This gets to the heart of the matter. I am concerned that to prioritize a language of “community” over “congregation” translates a congregation into an already given notion of human relationships as defined by social scientists within a certain demographic cross section of North American society. By seeing a congregation as a subset of the larger subset of “community,” a congregation becomes seen as a particular instance of a more general type of human relationships that is likewise available without Christ. One naturalizes the supernatural.

I think that to sustain the Christian reality of “community” we must subordinate the language to the congregation. A congregation must be seen as what is more “natural” than “community” – “community” both within and outside the church is that which must sign, prefigure, and must be raised up and perfected in a congregation in the sacrifice of the Eucharist for the baptized. Amidst those whom God congregates in worship, the natural becomes supernaturalized through Jesus Christ becoming present to us in Word and Sacrament.

Given this, communities can be important within a congregation, even a part of renewal for the congregation as the "community" gives its life over to the congregation while sustaining its particular Christian witness. It seems to me that we need to think “community” as closely related to a Christian notion of “friendship.” A congregation might be made up of types of “communities,” but the congregation, as simultaneously local and catholic,” is not a particular representative instance of a wider human social phenomenon; it is humans “congregated” in the body and blood of Jesus to be made the body of Christ in the world through preaching the gospel to all nations and baptizing in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Here we find an analogy with Christology: Jesus is not a particular representative of a wider phenomenon of “relationship with God” that is equally available to human beings, but is the One to whom the desire for relationship with God points to as the unique union of the fully human, fully divine in one person in whom we participate in God by the Spirit through faith.

This has real consequences in the life of a congregation. Persons who gather in worship detect when the human construction of “community” becomes more important than God the Father’s gathering of individuals from the world by faith in Jesus Christ through the power of the Spirit to be made the visible body of Christ through the “community’s”, a subgroup within the congregation, use of verbal and non-verbal language. Rather than pulled together in the hospitality of the Triune God at a common meal in Christ, they feel repulsed, pushed away, their gathering called into question unless they already have passed the litmus test that adds membership in a “community” that is more determinative than faith in the Triune God as the people of God gather in worship.

I had a conversation last week with a person who had a good friend who visited Mid-City over a year ago. God forgive me as pastor, but this person would not come back because of a sense of “superiority over other churches” that the congregation as gathered communicated to this one whom God had gathered with us. I have heard several such stories. Within the last year, I was at a wedding in which a member of a different congregation spoke that their “community” had 50 or 60 persons gathering in worship. It was expressed that they did not want any more people to gather because it would “ruin the sense of community” that they now have (and thus, be a lesser church?).

“Community” in this sense can easily slip to prescribe a closed social network that “congregation” cannot -- as a congregation we do not pick whom God gathers to us, but have to be made adequate to live with those whom God gathers in this sign of the age that is yet to come in its fullness. Community usually has a certain voluntary, relational understanding implied. In our cultural context, “community” becomes those whom I name as “my community” – those with whom, as Bill Hybels says, I would like to vacation, or, in democratic political theory, those with whom I voluntarily enter into a social contract.

My pastoral concern is that "community" closes off a congregation to the stranger, those whom God moves into our live involuntarily, or moves those with less social, demographic status to the margins of our congregation. Those we designate as the “core community” (usually those with higher educational, economic and social status) are perceived to have more importance than others who have less social stability such as persons who are children or students or visiting a congregation in worship or even those who have been around forever without drawing any attention to themselves – i.e., the meek. An example might be Sukuma. Sukuma has been a faithful congregant for ten years now; God has gathered Sukuma more faithfully in worship than any other person in the past decade within the congregation, including myself -- and I haven't missed many Sundays over the years!!! Yet I have never heard anyone express concern for him in “the community” – he is not very verbal, wealthy, nor institutionally important for the continued life of the “community.” As pastor, I believe that I have a special responsibility to make sure that Sukuma is not overlooked, but honored, received as a gift, even a model for the rest of the congregation.

It is precisely those like Sukuma that the later Hauwerwas wants to make sure are fully incorporated, and even centered, in our account of the church – to accept the least of these as a gift, to honor those who receive least honor in the society within the church, to keep us open to God’s gift in the stranger to make us a hospitable people, open to surprises. It seems to me that the traditional language, even biblical language, of “church” or “congregation” (with its etymological ties to synagogue, and thus the Jewish foreground of the faith given to the saints) can open us to the Spirit’s sanctifying presence, to form us to what we really are, to reality as it is, in a way that “community” cannot. This is not to become a word Nazi; yet it is to recognize that our language will both reflect and shape the primary commitments, stories, and tradition in which we live our life, consciously and unconsciously.

It is in this sense that I think that Protestants must learn from Catholics until the day when we can become visibly united. The “new religious communities” live in and under the authority of the bishop, even as they engage in the special Christian catechism and charism unique to each movement. For Catholics, congregations (parishes) don’t mature into communities in order to be really Christian; communities contribute to vital, faith-full congregations in order that they might mature into losing themselves in the larger local body of Christ, the congregation, to whom they contribute their own gifts, under the pastoral authority of the bishop who ensures the integrity of the local/catholic congregations Eucharist. Thus the unity of the congregation, its catholicity, is sustained in its locality as the Eucharist makes the church (as Christ gives Himself in the Eucharist by the Spirit). In contrast, Protestants historically and contemporarily struggle with schism, persons breaking off, leaving a congregation because it does not exhibit the type of “community” into which individuals feel drawn.

As I finish this post, word has gotten to me that Dave Overholt is conscious and speaking! We give thanks to God and to those faithful friends and members of our congregation who continue to walk this path together in a special way with David, in whom God has already taught us much by his weakness – we can’t wait for Dave to teach us in his strength!!

Posted by johnwright at 1:32 PM | Comments (11)

I have spent some time this week reading Samuel Well's book, Transforming Fate into Destiny: The Theological Ethics of Stanley Hauerwas. I never formally studied under Stanley, but I met him during my first semester at Notre Dame in 1983 and have read him ever sense. In many ways Professor Hauerwas has been the single most theological influence on my life and thought. That probably is no secret for those who know me.

As I have reflected, however, it seems to me that I have read Prof. Hauerwas different from others -- and this difference has come to provide tensions within the congregation at Mid-City over times. I often have not recognized these differences because of the subtlety of the differences. Yet these subtle differences make significant practical differences as they have gotten run through Southern Californian culture. Samuel Wells has helped me see shifts in the Hauerwas text over time.

Professor Hauerwas called himself a "Catholic Mennonite" in the 80's; in other words, a Methodist. Stanley has never convinced me of this. I've always read Professor Hauerwas as a catholic; in other words, a Methodist. Not denying the influence of John Howard Yoder on Hauerwas or myself, nor the Christological, pacificist, non-Constantinian lessons that Stanley learned from the "radical reformation" tradition, I have always read Stanley more in terms of Aquinas, particularly through Alasdair MacIntyre, and Barth. Often, however, those who have read Hauerwas around me have read him through contemporary "Mennonite" experiences, particularly their concern with "social justice" and "community". Ironically, the non-Constantinian resources of Hauerwas' thought become undercut. Hauerwas becomes read as a "radical Protestant" speaking against "the powers" in order that the church might challenge the "powers" with more just social structures through exercising political influence by affiliation with other like-minded social movements. Within this reading (not without some support in his corpus, especially when read through Yoder), Hauerwas becomes a "communitarian" in which congregations live as a democratic community of discernment through a type of shared authority to empower persons to engage personally a counter-cultural life against the global capitalist-militarist culture in which we live.

It seems to me that Hauerwas, as a Methodist, uses Yoder to return to the high scholastic preservation of the pre-Constantinian Catholic tradition, the Christological center of which he also found in Barth. If this is so, Hauerwas' commitment to a Ressourcement of pre-Constantinian Christianity ironically become undercut through Hauerwas read through contemporary radical reformation ecclesial existence.

This is where Wells's reading of Hauerwas is helpful -- he reads through the polemic that characterizes the Hauerwas text to get to the positive agenda for congregations that is really Hauerwas' concern. Whereas the radical reformation readings of Hauerwas focus on the polemic (something that I can do as well given the depth of sin and pain that the world provides especially those who are poor or recent immigrants to the US or who live in places who have suffered from the colonialism of the Western liberal-democratic nation-state or the socialist nation-state controlled society), what Hauerwas is against, a Catholic reading emphasizes the positive side of Hauerwas' return to the sources within an evangelical, catholic, and orthodox Christianity. Wells gives a "summary of Hauerwas' constructive proposals" (pp. 126-30):

"(1) Stanley Hauerwas believes in a holy God who has revealed himself through the patriarchs, through Moses and Exodus, through the joys and struggles of Israel, through Jesus and the coming of the Spirit, and through the Church. He believes in the sovereignty of this God, in the way God rules through creation, providence and coming eschaton, in the definitive way God shows the character of his kingdom in the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Hauerwas also recognizes that the creation is not all that it was intended to be, that sin has infected the world to such a degree that, even after the coming of the Son of God, human projects are invariably subject to pride, jealousy and fear.

2. Hauerwas maintains that the holy character of the God of Jews and Christians is not self-evident from the workings of nature or the moral law in the human heart or the collective yearnings of humankind. Instead, it is revealed in a holy story, the story of Israel, Jesus and the Church, begun in the Scriptures and developed through the history of the Church. From this story Christians learn that God is revealed through human contingency. This means that human contingency is the location for understanding both the character of God and the nature of human response. The way of Jesus went to the cross, despite the pressing demands that the world be saved some other way, is the definitive part of the holy story.

3. . . . . Though these two convictions underlie his constructive position, Hauerwas . . . . concentrates on the human response to revelation. Christians are called to be a holy people, the communion of saints, imitating the character of the one, sovereign, holy God. Like Israel and Jesus before them, the Church's vocation is to imitate God -- to be perfect even as the heavenly Father is perfect. Christian ethics is about forming the human response to God's revelation. And the human response is the Church -- a holy people, a historical community.
. . . Actions are good if they lead to the formation of good people; good people are those who imitate the reconciling, serving character of God; to sustain such people, and to teach them the holy story that reveals God's character, requires a community; and that community must begin by being nonviolent, because Christ was, and because refusing to use force demonstrates faith that God, rather than the means of force, is sovereign.
. . . The uniqueness of Jesus lies fundamentally in his acceptance of the cross as the way of disarming the powers that oppress us, and in the vindication of his nonviolent witness in the resurrection. Christ is at the center of Hauerwas' theology, in so far as Christ inaugurates and makes possible the peaceable kingdom -- the nonviolent witness of the Christian community. . .
The Church is called to be holy in the way that Jesus is holy: it should be wary of the temptation to control the wider society, since this invariably results in setting up some norm other than Jesus as the path for al to follow. The resort to violence indicates a lack of trust in God, a lack of faith in his definitive revelation in Jesus. In order to avoid resorting to violence, the Church must set up a form of politics which creates the right kind of conflict -- thus showing the rest of creation that politics is not simply a cover for violence. The politics of the Church is based on the practices of forgiveness. . . . .
4. The question of ethics should focus on what kind of person one wants (or is called) to be. One will want to develop practices that help to make on such a person, and learn to see the world as such a person would. This process is the formation of Christian character. . . . Character is most fully displayed in the way a person or a community responds to adversity. . . . In the face of the stranger -- the undesired pregnancy, the retarded baby -- the community of character recognizes the contingency and fit of all forms of life and affirms that the Church is a form of community prior to the family. Self-deception is a lurking trap, and only the truthful story of God can enable Christians to be truthful about their stories. . . . .
5. The Church seeks to reflect the character of the God revealed in the Christian story. In order to do so, it develops particular habits and practices modelled on its understanding of virtue. Just as one needs to study and train if one is to be a medical doctor, or to do an apprenticeship if one is to be a good bricklayer, or to learn skills of community-forming if one is to be a scholar in a healthy university, so one needs to practice with experts if one is to become a Christian disciple. . . . Cautious about the way love can become an abstraction, and starting from a position of faith, Hauerwas concentrates on hope. The key hopeful virtue is that of patience. . . . one can learn the time-consuming nature of that which is done well: thus worship and having children, two-time consuming activities, gain great significance in a patient community. Every society will gain from having communities that honour honour: the Church helps wider society not by leaving the practice of virtue in order to enter the world of hasty achievement, but by improving its own practice of virtue."

To end with patience as a virtue that enables faith, hope, and love, is interesting -- and very counter-intuitive. Yet it seems to me that this is right on. Patience drains the drama that we tend to spin in our individual and institutional lives and allows us to respond to situations in light of what God has done and will do -- and therefore is doing -- in and through Jesus Christ by the power of the Spirit. It reminds us that the church -- specific congregations -- is charged to produce, not influence, not impact, not numbers, not dollars, but saints -- holy persons. It is that which underlies our Eucharistic prayer to unity, constancy, and peace.

Two brief recent experiences that highlight this. Yesterday I took Pastor Deron and Sukuma to the Brazilian barbecue for lunch. Sukuma told me that we first met in the fall of 1997 -- nearly 10 years; we met downtown at the Bread of Life through the witness of Charisma Agony Barrett. Sukuma has been quietly patient with us -- he recently turned 34. During these ten years Sukuma probably has participated in more worship at Mid-City than anyone else, even me. He has held the same job with the County Parks and Recreation for 14 years -- working to care for a Rec Center in Barrio Logan with great expertise, willingness, and care. Sukuma represents the patient life, quietly going his way, thankfully accepting life as it comes, visiting his mother, letting God enfold his life within our congregation time after time. God has taught me much through the witness of Sukuma. He is the "least of these" to whom belongs the kingdom of God. It was a profound honor to share a special "feast" with him and Deron.

Second, since I did not have classes this morning, I was able to participate in the "holy waste of time" of our Lenten "liturgy of the hours." Praying the psalms, gathering in the sanctuary, listening to Scriptures, it reframed my whole day. I learned the patience that comes out of gathering together that opens one to the Spirit's bringing forth faith, hope, and love.

Sukuma and the liturgy of the hours this morning help me to make Professor Hauerwas' work intelligible to me in its truthfulness. "Radical Protestant's" tend to not learn the patience necessary to receive God's kingdom, but work to bring the kingdom to pass by their works. Patience requires catholicity, a confidence that God who began a good work in you (pl), will see it to completion on the day of the coming of Jesus Christ.

Posted by johnwright at 12:36 PM | Comments (30)

These passages this week are interesting in that this Sunday we will be gathering as a multicongregation, remembering Rev. Dr. Willis and Nancy Zumwalt as they get ready to move to Oklahoma next week. Bill and Nancy have been the model of unity, constancy, and peace in their service to the Triune God as faithful members of the body of Christ. "Retired" as missionaries who served in Taiwan, Bill and Nancy have served quietly but profoundly constructively in their presence among us. As the "saints" who are living among us, it is interesting to hear the Scriptures in light of their lives.

It is possible for persons to not notice the witness of Bill and Nancy, although it will be very apparent when they leave us. They have never lobbied for position or office; they quietly build up the body of Christ as needed as their gifts be. Nancy has led the Mission Valley Church of the Nazarene missions program for the past years. Bill has been organizationally active with us. Together they have helped us continue our close relationship with Mission Valley that has been so profound for all.

Every Sunday when I arrive, Bill, PhD in hand, years of leadership service in the church, is walking through the parking lot and around the building, picking up trash that finds its way onto the congregation's property in the city. Of course, he is also on hand for the non-English speaking congregations in case he's needed, keeping an eye on things, seeing how he can support others. If bread needs laid out, Bill is there to help. He watches as the kids file off the bus, fading into the background as he makes sure no children "slip off" to the taco shop or Burger King. He greets each pastor, makes sure each room is appropriately set up, and provides a pastoral sense to see if he can help out in some way later in the week. He'll check on the ministerial training of each in various ways so that each might continue their educational trek as they look towards Holy Orders.

Bill has served as secretary of the multicongregational board, as well as "dean" of our ministerial education program. He has advocated for non-English speakers to district boards from "the inside". He connects groups, persons, always behind the scenes; he is the sinews in Christ's body. He served as a member of our church board for years, quietly in the background. I remember when he was made a quiet comment at a contentious board meeting and a fellow board member pointed a finger at him and told him to "shut the hell up." Bill did not become angry nor resentful, nor ever vengeful at being so treated, nor bear long term grudges against the congregation when no one on the board or the congregation who was there ever expressed concern for him or apologies for being so treated. He continued in his quiet, constant presence for the unity and peace of the congregation, faithfully bearing wrong in service to Christ among the congregation.

It is perhaps little known that Bill did not grow up in a Christian home, nor did he come to the faith until his mid-20s. He was a high school gymn teacher, an ex-Marine who now is committed to the peace of Jesus Christ. God called him to God's Self in Christ, and before long, he was in Taiwan. He bears the scars of this service literally in his body. The air pollution from Taiwan has left a chronic lung problem that makes it difficult for him to preach -- after preaching he will cough for two to three days. Other ailments work at him, but he accepts his suffering with dignity and wisdom, enfolding it into Christ as he continues in his steady way. Throughout these times, Bill has taken care of his in-laws in their physical weakness, daily caring for them as they have moved from this life to life eternal -- first his father-in-law; this winter, then his mother-in-law as life slowly drained from her as she suffered with Altheimers. His sufferings have not been inconsequential, yet he lives life without drama.

Maybe you could speak some about Bill's witness, what you have noticed, the interactions with him -- if any.

Now turn to the Gospel reading, and pay particular attention to the parable from Luke 13:1-9. How does Bill's life among us help us understand this parable?

Similarly, read 1 Corinthians 10:1-13. How do "these things" combined with Bill's witness "serve as an example . . . to instruct us, on whom the ends of the ages have come"? Why is such a witness so important for the concrete life on congregations and the church over time?

Perhaps we can only makes sense of Bill's life and witness by reading the call of Moses in Exodus. What is the key to Moses' ability to continue his service over all the "trials," both from without in dealing with Pharoah, the Egyptians, and other enemies of the elect, and from within, the continual disruptions, fragmentations, grumblings, attacks, and idolatry that is to come? As one reflects on the Gospel and Epistle reminding of God's patience and mercy that gives room for the Spirit to change human beings into persons of faithfulness, constancy, and peace, how is this related to God's call? How has this call come to us in Christ? What implications does this have for us?

A final note. Beginning next week, we will not post bible studies. Instead we will distribute a book called As If the Heart Mattered: A Wesleyan Spirituality by Gregory S. Clapper. It is an excellent, profound but simple book with short, penetrating chapters to introduce us into living in an openness to the Spirit to transform our passions, our affections, to cleanse us from inward sin and fill us with love of God and neighbor. My only concern is that Clapper does not quite emphasize as John Wesley how personal engagement in the works of mercy plays a role by which the Spirit sanctifies us. I hope that the book serves us well. We're waiting for it to arrive from amazon; we will distribute it at your bible studies next week.

Posted by johnwright at 4:03 PM | Comments (2)

I'm just getting back from the Wesleyan Theological Society meeting in Kankakee, Illinois where the weather was down right ugly -- bringing back repressed memories of 25 degree temperatures and 30 mph winds from an earlier life -- but the friendship and collegiality was beautiful. Steve Long gave three outstanding papers in conjunction with the Wesleyan Philosophical Society, and Frances Young's lecture at the beginning of the Wesleyan Theological Society was profoundly moving. Perhaps later this week I can share some more reflections on the program. The panel in which I participated seemed to have been well received, and brought out, I think, some important issues within the Wesleyan tradition. Tom Oord did a very fine job responding to my paper, highlighting the issues and showing where I need to revise some.

While there, I was handed a copy of the typeset galleys for my upcoming book, Telling the Story of God: Narrative Preaching for Christian Formation -- now available for advance order from both IVP and amazon.com, as well as other places. Last week before I left, I completed the index for the book. The book has taken a long time to finish with life as it is, so I must confess to excitement seeing it come to fruition. As part of these galleys, I saw for the first time excerpts from the blurbs -- the responses from certain persons that both I and the press chose. When I returned home, I was able to see the full versions on the IVP web site. I also discovered that Jamie Smith had blogged on it as well.

Here is what is written at IVP's site:

"Out of his own rich experience as a scholar and preacher, John Wright summons us to 'reinvent' preaching through a rhetoric that draws us out of the comfort zone of a cultural narrative where the biblical text dissolves into a happy ending and, instead, places us into the biblical narrative where we are taken up and transformed by God's story. In clear and compelling language that often rises to eloquence, this book exposes the subtle but almost sinister shift in North American Christianity by which the horizon of contemporary world culture has displaced and replaced the biblical horizon of God's narrative of creation and redemption by a fusion of individual piety and national religion. Authentic preaching then seeks to renarrate a world that makes truth relevant to its own existence by forming a Christian community--the church--that finds its life within God's narrative. Such preaching draws the church out of the world in order to place it back within the world to live out God's narrative of salvation, justice and hope. I wish that I had read this book forty years ago when I began my own preaching ministry!"

—Ray S. Anderson, Senior Professor of Theology and Ministry, Fuller Theological Seminary

"Challenging some of the most determinative conceits represented by contemporary American homiletical practices, Wright provides an alternative account of preaching by helping us reclaim a tragic dimension internal to our lives as Christians. Deeply erudite, Wright draws on the work of Hans Frei and George Lindbeck to develop an account of preaching in which the church becomes the subject as well as the agent through which Christians learn again to have their lives narrated by the gospel.

One of the most surprising aspects of this extraordinary book is its ability to help us recognize that current forms of sermon practices can be traced to the Puritan attempt to move the individual from sin to salvation in such a way that it provided reassurance of what it meant to live in God's elect nation. As a result, Wright traces the current accommodated character of American preaching to what people oftentimes associate with a conservative religious movement. This analysis alone makes this an important book, but even more significant Wright provides a constructive alternative to such accommodated forms of preaching by providing us with examples that can shape an alternative imagination."

—Stanley Hauerwas, Gilbert T. Rowe Professor of Theological Ethics, Duke Divinity School

"John Wright very clearly exposes both the prevalence and dangers of the split between 'personal salvation' and 'mission of the nation-state' preaching in North American culture and calls us instead to the kind of preaching that will immerse our listeners in God's larger story. His many helpful insights into such topics as a 'homiletic of turning,' comedic versus tragic moves, therapeutic and managerial functions, and elements of congregational contexts will positively affect your preaching and pastoral care. This is a significantly constructive book!"

—Dr. Marva J. Dawn, theologian, author, educator with Christians Equipped for Ministry, and Teaching Fellow in Spiritual Theology at Regent College, Vancouver, British Columbia

"If you think preaching should focus on getting individuals to heaven and guiding America (back) to greatness, then do not read this book. If you think that Christians make the church and that its purpose is to help them, then run away from this book. For here John Wright proclaims the biblical gospel that God intends the church 'as the visible body of Christ in the world.' Setting the biblical story over against cultural stories that have falsified the gospel and emaciated preaching, Wright calls for a homiletic reformation that preaches the congregation into the biblical story. Wright is right about what is wrong with our preaching and our churches, and his corrective guidance in this book is the cure we need. Attentive to rhetoric, filled with pastoral insight and sermonic exemplifications, this book is essential assistance in becoming 'the rhetorical embodiment of the biblical story'--that is, the church."

—Brent Laytham, associate professor of theology and ethics, North Park Theological Seminary

"The church should be worried about this book. It comes as an invitation to rethink the task of preaching, but three pages into it you'll realize that Wright is not giving us another 'how-to' book for adding to the plethora of 'messages' delivered every Sunday. No, this little book is packed with minor-prophet-like punch, arguing that preaching is the practice by which the North American church has fallen, but also gives us a glimpse of how preaching could help it stand. Providing a brilliant historical and theological diagnosis of the problem with so-called biblically based, need-centered preaching (whether liberal or conservative), Telling God's Story winsomely sketches what authentic 'biblical' preaching looks like: not conscripting the Bible to legitimate the cultural narratives of consumerist individualism or triumphant nationalism, but rather finding ourselves in the biblical story as an alternative to both. If the church is properly said to be a polis, then this book unpacks the 'politics' of homiletics. It should be required reading in seminaries across North America. And we could hope that pastors already immersed in ministry would be willing to risk reading this book. But be forewarned: it will radically change your understanding of your charge to 'preach the gospel.'"

—James K. A. Smith, associate professor of philosophy, Calvin College

"This is an important and timely book. John Wright has presented us with an excellent volume on narrative preaching. As you would expect of a good text on preaching, it is very helpful with regard to the mechanics of narrative preaching. But Dr. Wright offers us much more, especially as he embeds narrative preaching in a thoughtful and reflective ecclesiology. The book is written in such a way that the reader experiences what the book describes as Dr. Wright leads us through discussions of preaching as comedy and tragedy and ultimately through narrative preaching as a means of inviting listeners to participate in the redemptive story of God. This volume will be an invaluable resource both to preachers and students of preaching."

—Ron Benefiel, president, Nazarene Theological Seminary

Telling God's Story: A must-read for preachers (and everybody else!)

I just had opportunity to read the manuscript for a book due out in May: Telling God's Story: Narrative Preaching for Christian Formation (InterVarsity Press). This is, hands-down, one of the best books I've read in months, and certainly the most exciting book I've ever read on preaching that actually thinks about the nature and task of the Church. (Imagine that: a book on homiletics that is actually tethered to ecclesiology and not just current trends in rhetoric or corporate sales strategies.) InterVarsity asked me to provide an endorsement for the book and I was glad to say the following:

The church should be worried about this book. It comes as an invitation to rethink the task of preaching, but three pages into it you’ll realize that Wright is not giving us another “how-to” book for adding to the plethora of “messages” delivered every Sunday. No, this little book is packed with minor prophet-like punch, arguing that preaching is the practice by which the North American church has fallen, but also gives us a glimpse of how preaching could help her stand. Providing a brilliant historical and theological diagnosis of the problem with so-called “biblically based, need-centered preaching” (whether liberal or conservative), Telling God’s Story winsomely sketches what authentic “biblical” preaching looks like: not conscripting the Bible to legitimate the cultural narratives of consumerist individualism or triumphant nationalism, but rather finding ourselves in the biblical story as an alternative to both. If the church is properly said to be a polis, then this book unpacks the “politics” of homiletics. It should be required reading in seminaries across the North America. And we could hope that pastors already immersed in ministry would be willing to risk reading this book. But be forewarned: it will radically change your understanding of your charge to “preach the Gospel.”

Posted by johnwright at 11:07 AM | Comments (2)