Newsletter 51 (Spring '08)

 

By No Means a

Super Market

Sam Norton reflects on Andrew Simms’ book Tescopoly: How one shop came out on top and why it matters (Constable, 2007).

 

In the Bible, God shows direct concern for human economic activities, normally in the context of telling his people to seek social justice. To do so is a matter of personal obedience to himself. Shall we serve God who is just? The choice is ours; but Jesus warned, "You cannot serve God and Mammon".

            God's concern for justice leads to many specific injunctions against particular practices. One of them is uttered by Isaiah: "Woe to you who add house to house and join field to field till no space is left and you live alone in the land." (Isa 5.8). This is the context in which I read "Tescopoly" by Andrew Simms, a very thorough overview of the way in which Tesco functions as a monopolist: one who has joined all the fields together until it is left alone in the land. In many ways Tesco is simply a highly efficient corporation, a (rare) example of world-class management in a British company. Yet it is precisely the fact that it is so efficient, so effective in accomplishing its aims, that it has had such dispiriting and impoverishing effects on our communities.

 

Documentation

Simms details the ways in which, through the use and abuse of its dominant market position, Tesco actively harms those who supply it with goods, those who work within its walls, and the communities within which it finds itself operating. For example, Tesco consistently pays its suppliers less than the industry average, it is consistently late in paying invoices presented to it, especially by the smallest suppliers, and, through the exercise of essentially bullying tactics, it is able to 'borrow' more than £2bn a year from its suppliers for free. Internationally it suppresses wages in the third world and strips communities of their dignity (I was astonished to read that in a farm in Zimbabwe children are taught to sing "Tesco is our dear friend" in order to impress the visiting potentates.)

            My own concern is primarily with the impact on local communities in England, and here Simms marshals fascinating evidence. For every £1 spent in a supermarket more than 90p leaves a local community; whereas the impact of a 'local box scheme' (i.e. locally produced and delivered vegetables) is quite the reverse - for every £1 spent, £2.50 is generated in local wealth. In terms of jobs, supermarkets undermine a community further: it takes £95,000 worth of sales in a supermarket to sustain a single job, the figure for smaller stores is £42,000. Beyond this, the supermarkets, especially Tesco, support the use of casual and unlicensed labour leading to what is effectively a modern form of serfdom. Put simply the arrival of a supermarket chain in a town sucks money and livelihoods away from the local area in order to agglomerate capital for shareholders. Supermarkets impoverish communities in terms of income, social life and common civility.

 

In the name of freedom?

At this point a common defence is to claim that this is the operation of 'the free market', and that if the market chooses to support Tesco, and people benefit from its cheap prices, then we shouldn't interfere. Such a response is either naively ill-informed or else the expression of an understanding already corrupted by an anti-Christian value system. No sane person advocates a wholly unrestrained free market, or else bin Laden would have been able to purchase nuclear weapons long ago, and so the question becomes: is it right for the free market to operate here, in these circumstances? Is the operation of a free market in this context something that will foster and support our social values or will those values and goods be undermined by the free market? And, of course, particularly with regard to Tesco: what does it mean to talk about a free market when we have at best an oligopoly and at worst, in so many areas, a monopolistic environment? Simms points out that in 81 of the 121 British postcode areas Tesco is the dominant grocer, and is the number 2 in a further 24 areas. The operation of the free market is considered by the government to be inhibited whenever one trader gets more than 8% of the market - and Tesco has vastly more than that, in some areas going beyond 50%. In such a situation invoking 'the free market' functions as a ritualistic response in which all other considerations are subordinated to the one dominant value of Mammon. In other words, it is simply the expression of idolatry.

            Ultimately, Simms argues, we need fundamentally to rethink the legal foundations of the corporation. For this he can appeal to (of all people) Adam Smith's concern for a 'moral economy', and his fierce criticism of corporations. Meanwhile, as for us, we can shop elsewhere - and if this costs us time and money, this just might be the price of insisting that all trade should be fair trade, that justice is not a matter for cost-benefit analysis and, most especially in this context, "every little helps"'.

 

 

The ecology of community

David Kettle

‘Elevating profit above principles, ill-treating workers, driving farms out of business, killing off local communities and slowly poisoning the environment should speak for themselves’ writes Nick Spencer.1

            However he finds other, subtler concerns raised by ‘the tescover of Britain’. One of them arises from a need to uphold the principle of ‘subsidiarity’. This principle – of decentralized political and social power, articulated arguably in biblical teaching – ‘points away from our (super)market state and towards a richer, more localized retail ecology’. ‘On similar lines’, Spencer adds, ‘the biblical vision of wholeness celebrates variety, with ecological, ethnic and cultural diversity being one of life’s glories’.

 

Ecological metaphors

Such expressions of ‘subtler’ Christian concerns draw often upon language popularised in recent decades by environmental concern. Metaphors such as ‘ecology’, ‘biodiversity’, ‘gene pool’ and ‘sustainability’ line up against metaphors such as ‘clone’, ‘monoculture’, ‘barren’ and even ‘GM Church’2.

            Such metaphors are attractive today as the means of giving new articulation to certain concerns which are properly Christian. In the course of their religious use, the potential also arises for these metaphors to foster a deeper, richer imaginative setting for popular environmental concern itself in general (although things can also work the other way, so that our Christian imagination is distorted through captivity to an ecological conceptual framework).

 

Useful – why? 

Why are ecological metaphors so attractive today for expressing things we want to celebrate and defend, but which are being eroded? The reason is that the erosion in question is driven by rationalization - the impoverishment of personal and community life by ideological programmes for the rationalization of society.

            Modern society has, from its start, been about - in the words of Ernst Gellner - a turn ‘from gamekeeper to gardener’ in the ruling of society: in place of a life in community which subsisted and perpetuated itself naturally and informally from one generation to another (rather like a wild ecology) and from which a ruling aristocracy claimed its share of bounty, the modern state set about cultivating or civil-ising from scratch each new generation through state education etc. for individual participation in modern ‘civil’ society.3

            In recent decades, state ‘gardening’ or rationalization has come increasingly under the direction of a comprehensive programme of rationalization formulated by neoliberal economic ideology. The huge growth in information and communication technology and in transportation has given scope for the implementation of this programme with its quite revolutionary power of social transformation.

            In this context, ecological metaphors witness to a deeper, richer vision for human life in community.

 

Theological bearings

What theological considerations bear upon our use of ecological metaphors? Let me suggest three.

            First,  we need to locate and use them not in a renewed natural theology but within the slow unfolding in recent decades of a Trinitarian imagination after centuries during which Christian habits of imagination have tended rather towards deism.

            Second, their root meaning should be found in the diverse richness of personal life in  relationship with God rather than in any relatively self-enclosed non-human ecological system. In particular, we should take care to distinguish our use of them from that of ‘organic’ metaphors in romantic philosophy with its encouragement of ‘blood and soil’ convictions about human and cultural identity.

            Third, they should be put to use to indicate the informal, complex, tacit dimensions of life in which God’s creative power is at work. Especially they challenge the assumption that creative life is the product entirely of conscious choices made by individuals.

 

Christian soil

It is in such tacit informal ways that life in Britain remains informed today by Christian faith, nourished by the roots of such life in a history of engagement with Christian faith. It is vital that we can acknowledge this truthfully, and not dismiss it or misrepresent it.

            On the one hand, the fact that life in Britain remains nourished by (depleting) Christian insights and values points as a clue to the fact that she actually honours her own best inspirations when she welcomes the continuing contribution of Christians in the public square. Cardinal Cormac Murphy O’Connor has urged  that such a contribution remain welcome, despite recent vocal opposition in some circles.4 Joel Edwards, responding to protests by the national Secular Society following his appointment to the Equality and Human Rights Commission, urges powerfully: ‘To remove religious conviction from the public square is as sensible as removing the engines from an aircraft in flight. For a while the plane may glide and to all extent seem fine, but before long the altimeter will only be headed in one direction, by which time it is too late to start remembering how it was you got airborne in the first place.’5

 

Christian Britain?

On the other hand, to note  that the Christian vision has underlain ‘most of the achievements and values of the culture’ - as Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali has recently done6is emphatically not to claim ‘what it British is good, for it is Christian’. Rather, it is to stimulate the question ‘If so much that is good about Britain has Christian underpinnings, what might Britain need vitally to learn from Christianity today?’ 

            Such learning may be discovered precisely from Christians who come from outside Britain herself to live and work among us, bringing their own faith and bringing their own perceptions of us . Indeed there arises here the possibility of an intriguing historical parallel. Christian missionaries taught literacy to those to whom they went in order that they might read the Bible. As a result of this, however, they also became more culturally self-aware. Today, it seems, it is Christian people such as Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali and Archbishop John Sentamu who, coming from other cultures, are challenging us in Britain to be more culturally self-aware regarding the Christian underpinning of our own culture.

 

Church: a Voluntary Association?

If we acknowledge and affirm Britain’s Christian heritage, is this to affirm ‘census Christianity’ as the fulfillment of God’s calling in Christ today? By no means. It is, however, to acknowledge that ‘Christian’ refers properly to more than an individual decision and that ‘Church’ refers properly to more than a voluntary association, while allowing these their important place in Christian self-understanding. It is also perhaps to entertain a truth in Maurice Cowling’s words:

            ‘A religion ought to be habitual and ought not to involve the self-consciousness inseparable from conversion. What Christianity requires is a second-generation sensibility in which the oddness and arbitrariness of Christianity’s doctrines are so much taken for granted that struggle has ceased to be of Christianity’s essence. This is not a situation which can easily be achieved in the contemporary world; indeed, the religions which can most easily avoid self-consciousness in the contemporary world are the secular religions which are absorbed at the mother’s knee or from the mother’s television.’7

            We might wish to quarrel with Cowlings’ formulation here (are Christian doctrines really arbitrary? And surely to accept them is to let them release us for faithful struggle – that is, the struggle to know God and to fulfil his purposes better?) But his words do point us, importantly, away from Christian self-preoccupation and back to God. They also remind us indirectly what evangelism and conversion are actually like. John Bowen sees this reflected in St Augustine’s Confessions: evangelism is a work led by God himself, who leads us on an often tortuous and complex journey; a work which may be compared perhaps to farming or education.8

            Here is a corrective to the tendency to see mission and evangelism today as promoting a ‘Christian’ rationalization of life, a personal programme for consumers who can be persuaded to buy into Church. Here is a more ‘ecological’ vision of God and his ways among us, in which ‘human conservation’ has its own meaning within (and not in conflict with) the vision of human transformation by God.

 

Notes

1. Nick Spencer, Stop the Tescover (ACCESS 623)

2. See Peter Harris, A Whole Gospel for a Whole World (ACCESS 614)

3. See Zygmunt Bauman, Legislators and Interpreters, Polity Press, 1987, Chapter 4.

4. Cormack Murphy O’Connor, Religion and the Public Forum (ACCESS 618)

5. As reported by Ruth Gledhill, The Times, November 14, 2007.

6. Michael Nazir-Ali, Extremism flourished as UK lost Christianity, Telegraph, 11th Jan ’08.

7. Maurice Cowling, Religion and Public Doctrine, Volume III, p. 700.

8. See John Bowen, Evangelism in Augustine’s Confessions (ACCESS 612)

 

Comment

I AM BECAUSE I BELONG

 

Every now and again, perhaps when we are in another country or reading an interesting book, we may suddenly get a sense of a world of meaning of which we have little direct knowledge or experience. We may be drawn to discover more about that world, or we may simply be mystified by it. We may even be so threatened by it that we avoid it at all costs.

For those who are not Christians, the Bible may present such a world. The world of faith is very difficult to comprehend for those who have no faith. But there are worlds of truth that even believers in Christ may find difficult to grasp. For many white South African Christians in the time of apartheid, the Gospel demand for justice was such an area, dangerous territory that was best avoided. Slavery had a similar effect on the thinking of many Christians for centuries. We can all suffer from blind spots of one kind or another.

I suspect that individualism has had this kind of effect in much of contemporary British society. However, in many African societies there is an understanding that my identity cannot be separated from the identity of my community, and even of my nation. It is only through belonging that my life has meaning.

 Surely this is also at the heart of the New Testament understanding of what it means to be a Christian. As Christians we belong to the new covenant community, and our identity is indivisible from that community. We are "in Christ Jesus" not primarily as saved individuals but as members of the body of Christ, in which every part works together for the common good. Ministry and leadership in the New Testament is always plural. We cannot serve Christ on our own.

This presents a radical challenge to the "me" generation and to the children of consumerism.  It can be very hard for those who have grown up in this individualistic culture to accept the implications of conversion to Christ when these involve a willingness to yield our "right" to make our own moral and personal choices. To turn to Christ does mean to submit ourselves to the values and teaching of a community.  The truth is that human happiness comes not just from the pursuit of individual fulfilment but also from being part of a family and a community. Its just very hard for us to give up wanting to do it "my way".

Ian Cowley

 

Beowulf and cultural conflict

Stephen May

 

December 2007 saw the screening in local cinemas of a spectacular modern version of the Old English epic Beowulf. It was co-authored by Neil Gaiman, writer of the charming fantasy Stardust, (also recently filmed). Both it and the original version raise key questions of the relation of Gospel and culture.

            Beowulf is one of the oldest English language stories we have. Though preserved by monks and clearly Christianised in parts, it breathes the air of the pagan Danish homeland in which it is set. In both it and the modern film version, the hero Beowulf comes from the land of the Geats (in southern Sweden) to save the Danes from the monster Grendel, who is ravaging their hall. In turn he defeats Grendel, tearing off its arm in the process and nailing it to the door, Grendel’s hag mother in her watery lair and then finally, as an aged king in his own country, a dragon though at the cost of his life.

            Supposedly a textbook of pagan heroic values, J.R.R. Tolkien writes that in this and other Old English poems such as ‘The Battle of Maldon’, there is a Christian critique of pagan values which has been largely missed.

            The ‘Battle of Maldon’ tells of a heroic defeat at the hands of invading Vikings in 991 AD. It contains the famous lines: ‘Heart shall be bolder, harder be purpose, more proud the spirit as our power lessens! Mind shall not falter nor mood waver, though doom shall come and dark conquer.’[i]

            But, as Tolkien points out, these words - ‘held to be the finest expression of the northern heroic spirit’ - are the product of a situation that should never have arisen – and the poem tells us so. The invading Vikings are permitted by Beorhtnoth, the defending Earl of Essex to move across a causeway from an offshore island to the mainland for the sake of a ‘fair fight’. As the poem puts it, ‘then the earl in his overmastering pride (ofermod) actually yielded ground to the enemy as he should not have done’[ii]. The result of Beorthnoth’s ofermod – a word only used elsewhere applied to Lucifer! - is disaster for the people he should be defending. ‘Magnificent perhaps,’ says Tolkien, ‘but certainly wrong’[iii].

            Beowulf similarly regards his conflict with the monsters opposing him as a test of his individual glory. He abandons weapons in his conflict against Grendel so that his renown will be even greater if he conquers. And at the end of the story he is only saved from his own completely useless death at the hands of the dragon by the loyalty of a subordinate he has dismissed. He is, in the last words of the poem, lofgeornost, ‘most desirous of glory’.

            The result of Beowulf’s concentration on his own glory is disaster for his people. Whilst the dragon is dead, so also is he. The poem ends dismally with prophecies of doom for Beowulf’s people now that he is no longer there to defend them: ‘A Geat woman too sang out in grief;/ with hair bound up, she unburdened herself/ of her worst fears, a wild litany/ of nightmare and lament; her nation invaded,/ enemies on the rampage, bodies in piles,/ slavery and abasement. Heaven swallowed the smoke.’[iv] 

            In Tolkien’s words, ‘there could be no more pungent criticism… than (retainer) Wiglaf’s exclamation, ‘by one man’s will many must woe endure.’[v] In this, The Battle of Maldon, and even Middle English works like ‘Gawain and the Green Knight’, we see a sustained assault on pagan heroic values that questions what this took to be wholly admirable. There are lines, says Tolkien, ‘of severe criticism, though not incompatible with loyalty or even love’[vi]. The emerging English Christian culture loved the stories it inherited, but it did not adopt them blindly.

 

De-Christianisation

            All this makes especially ironic the treatment a secular modern age gives to the supposedly Christian elements in recent films. In both the 2007 digitised epic and a 2001 Icelandic-Canadian co-production (Beowulf and Grendel) attempts are made to ‘de-Christianise the story, and portray the ‘coming religion’ negatively. In the 2007 film, Unferth, a murderer, is portrayed both as the only coward in the tale and as a Christian. In the 2001 movie, a wild-eyed Irish monk starts converting the fearful Danes but proves laughably powerless against the monsters. All this is in line with most modern screen treatments of Christians, who are rapidly becoming portrayed as opprobriously as Jews were by Nazi propaganda in pre-Second World War Germany.

            Yet, for all this, such treatments can show the influence of Christianity. In the 2007 Ray Winstone version, Beowulf does not in fact kill Grendel’s mother but is seduced by her (Angelina Jolie); the product of their union is the dragon he eventually has to fight; before him, Grendel has been the product of a similar seduction of King Hrothgar, and the film clearly indicates that Beowulf’s successor Wiglaf will fall in turn. The movie tells therefore not just a story of heroic valour and conquest, but of personal weakness and temptation.

            In the 2001 film (a movie that will satisfy many people’s erstwhile desire to visit Iceland), the havoc wrought on the Danes is Grendel’s revenge for the murder of his father. Both movies ask the question therefore: who is the monster? Is Beowulf not a monster too? In the poem, Grendel is supposed to be a descendent of Cain because he is a killer, but as one of the soldiers puts it, ‘are we not killers too?’

            Indeed. A Christian comment might be that both films in their own ways make Christian points about human sin and frailty - for all that they fail to see this, and instead think they are vaunting pre-Christian pagan attitudes.

            In both ancient and modern engagements with this tale that stands at the beginning of ‘our island story’ we see fascinating examples of cultural conflict.

Notes

1.      Quoted in The Homecoming of Beorhtnoth Beorthelm’s Son, with Tree and Leaf, Smith of Wootton Major (London: Unwin, 1975), p. 166.

2.      Quoted, p. 168.

3.      p. 171.

4.      Beowulf, trans. Seamus Heaney (London: Faber and Faber, 1999), p. 98, lines 3150-55.

5.      Supra,p.175.

6.      p. 172.

   

Lapido Media

Introduced by the Director, Jenny Taylor

 

A NEW CHARITY BREAKS THE PUBLIC RELIGION TABU

 

It’s curious to hear Tim Stevens, Bishop of Leicester, chastising Michael N azir-Ali, Bishop of Rochester for ‘going to the media’ over integration and Muslim ‘no-go areas’, as if this were an act of irresponsible provocation.  But it’s typical.  For too long, the problem with freedom of speech in Britain, I contend, has not been the media’s lack of interest in religion, but the church’s desperate determination to deny them any access to it.  If, as Foucault maintained, knowledge is power, the church has been protectionist over its discourse.  They, like Hazel Blears, government minister responsible for community cohesion, ‘distanced themselves’ from his remarks – when there is plenty of evidence, some of which I have been publishing for years, most recently on my website (www.lapidomedia.com).  Several bishops said they did not recognize N azir-Ali’s description, even though, for example Channel 4’s Dispatches produced a documentary on the hazards of Islamic apostasy laws for converts to Christianity who, like one girl I’ve met, ‘Hannah’, have had to move home more than 40 times in 13 years whenever her family and their community discover her whereabouts.  She estimates there are maybe 3,000 others in her position in Britain today. 

            So I set up Lapido Media to ‘tell a truer story’ about religion in world affairs – the good news as well as the bad.  We believe the discourse about religion must change.  We believe that the country is heading for disaster if the words ‘faith’ and ‘faiths’ remain interchangeable; that, if we continue to ‘protestantise’ other religions, and pander to the equalities lobby that insists all faiths are just different paths to the same God (or no god), the country will become ungovernable, the academy dishonest and irrelevant, and public life moribund and increasingly Islamised.

            We launched the charity on December 6 last year at the Frontline Club.  We chose the venue – a hang out for foreign correspondents in Paddington, London – deliberately, to signal the breaking of the tabu about religion and the public square.  The event was packed – and packed with mainstream journalists.  I invited Dominic Lawson of the Independent to interview Dr N azir-Ali, our Patron, on the theme ‘ N eutrality or Truth? Reporting Islam post 7/7.’  Dominic wrote it up in his column the next day, with the headline:  ‘Could a robust Christian response be the answer to Islamic extremism?’  I was amazed at the amount of positive coverage.  Even C N N interviewed us for ten minutes, asking the most intelligent and penetrating questions I’ve ever been asked.  There seemed to be relief that someone was daring to discuss the elephant that’s been in the room for years, even decades. 

            What do we do?  We hold events and round tables where journalists can meet religion experts to discuss burning issues that have normally been off the radar – such as the tenacity of forced marriage as a cultural practice among second generation migrants; the meaning of the mosque; African diaspora religion and the power of Christ in traditional contexts.  We are training young Christians with specific expertise to talk scripture in the media.  We publish, teach and provoke.  We place stories from remote parts of the world in various political and media contexts where they can resonate.  Such as the story of a Canadian missionary I met who earned enough trust over three years in a remote N epalese valley to be able to address the spiritual roots of disease.  He built a latrine for the head man after explaining that his God died to remove our filth so we could be whole.  Government latrines (built by N GOs with a top down attitude) simply were not being used. The spiritual underpinning of behaviour and development has never been taught during the secular decades of the twentieth century, when so much could have been achieved and wasn’t.  A belief in spirits that prevent you defecating in the same place twice for fear of angering them cannot be tackled with secular materialism, only with a stronger spirit.  Similarly wars with spiritual roots cannot be ended without addressing the spiritual dimension.  I’ve told my stories to gathering of politicians and public officials, and there is usually genuine amazement.

            We are a network of journalists and broadcasters, academics and missionaries and we have years of experience, global relationships and second and third degrees.  And we aim to sharpen up the national conversation.

            The beauty of the web means that we can do it for minimal cost. Journalists are now coming to us for stories and contacts.  Intelligent, passionate, exciting Christianity can now tell its own story – the least well-told story in the world for as long as I’ve been in journalism – and there’s nothing to stop it going global.  Our website is carrying not just a Media Watch slot to keep people abreast of how religion is now being reported around the world (as well as a Reuters feed for context) but we are originating stories from wherever the church is at the cutting edge.  Missionaries are closer to the grassroots than anyone; we can read the signs of the times more accurately because where Jesus is, there the future is happening.  And then we tell Reuters !

            We need prayer and although we’ve got some funding for three years, there is no limit to what might be achieved if further funds are forthcoming.  We’re grateful to Jerusalem Trust and JW Laing Trust who had the courage to get us up and running.  And to those individuals who backed a hunch and gave us a break.  Too many to name, but this is a collective venture, born of faith and an unshakeable conviction that journalism matters to God as he builds his church.  It provides the light on the hill, the yeast in the lump.  Writing the vision, making it plain, enables those who read it to run, as Habakkuk said.  Or to quote the first journalist, John Milton from his Areopagitica:   ‘And though all the winds of doctrine were let loose to play on the earth, so Truth be in the field, we do injuriously by licensing and prohibiting, misdoubt her strength. Let her and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worse in a free and open encounter?”

 

Book reviews

Craig Bartholomew et al (ed) , A Royal Priesthood? The Use of the Bible Ethically and Politically: A Dialogue with Oliver O’Donovan, Paternoster/Zondervan, 2002, xxiv+445pp., £19.99 hb.

This is the third volume in the major Scripture and Hermeneutics series.  Fifteen scholars offer a short paper in response to Oliver O’Donovan’s seminal The Desire of the Nations, and Professor O’Donovan provides his response to each paper.  This is an academic text, probing, critical, and appreciative in equal measures.  Space permits reference only to those contributions which struck a particular chord with this reviewer.

                    There is but a sparse scattering of references to Lesslie Newbigin, mostly in a well-crafted piece by Colin Greene on the question of Christendom, and the possibility of a Christian state.  Greene sees O’Donovan as having offered a defence of the Christendom settlement as ‘a viable, valid and courageous expression of Christian mission’ along the lines set out in a more popular form by Newbigin.  O’Donovan accepts the comparison with Newbigin as both apt and welcome, but clarifies that Desire is not so much a defence of Christendom, as some shrewd advice to its rather too vociferous critics.  For O’Donovan, despite all its faults along the way, the Christian Church, and its leaders, issued a permanent, if sometimes slow acting, challenge to Graeco-Roman, and pagan, barbarities.  In a typically pithy rejoinder, O’Donovan adds: ‘the reason we have to be grateful to our ancestors is that they wrestled with conceiving Christian politics in practical terms, where our contemporaries usually get no further than newspaper-editorializing.’

                    An engaging feature of Desire is its scriptural exegesis, which is often striking and fresh.  Walter Moberly acknowledges this, but asks whether O’Donovan quite grasps the full sweep of the Old Testament, and is still too wedded to a historico-critical, as opposed to a canonical approach.  It is interesting to witness Moberly chiding O’Donovan for not adopting a sufficiently Christocentric approach to the Old Testament.  I have sometimes had similar questions about O’Donovan’s approach to the New Testament, which, to me at least, can seem to under-estimate the different character of the ethical material in the Gospels, as opposed to the Epistles.

                    Tom Wright offers a stimulating ‘even newer’ perspective on Paul, with the suggestion that much of what he wrote reflected a comparison and contrast between the developing Roman imperial cult, and the Lordship of Christ.  O’Donovan largely concurs, but traces such a reading of Paul back at least to Augustine.  For Wright and O’Donovan, Paul’s affirmative remarks about the role of the state can only be properly understood against this background, which surrounds the whole apparatus of the state with defined and limited purposes.

                    A number of contributors write from a transatlantic perspective, but often they seem rather at cross-purposes with O’Donovan.  Christopher Rowland, by contrast, offers a liberationist reading of the Book of Revelation with which, with a bit of arm twisting, he believes O’Donovan, with his essentially practical interests, might sympathise.  O’Donovan is willing to accept much of Rowland’s analysis, but sees this as within the main parameters of Christian tradition, rather than being as counter-cultural as Rowland suggests.   The Desire of the Nations was, after all, written in Oxford.

                    All in all, this book offers rich fare for those whose mental digestive juices, and diary, are up to it.

Peter Forster

 

Craig A. Carter, Rethinking Christ and Culture, A Post-Christendom Perspective, Brazos Press 2007, 220pp., £10.14 (pb)

For over fifty years H. Richard Niebuhr’s classic Christ and Culture has featured on the reading lists of many a theological student. The typology he crafted has proved to be illuminating and creative and many have found it persuasive. Like any good book it has prompted many discussions but mostly these were concerned with details of interpretation. Only a few scholars appeared to offer deep methodological or structural critiques. Among those who did were John Howard Yoder, James McClendon and Charles Scriven who argued that Niebuhr’s treatment of the Christ against Culture type showed that there was a fundamental flaw in the whole analysis.

                    Now Craig Carter has gone further than anyone in his critique in this splendid book. His thesis is that Niebuhr based his book on the assumptions of Christendom. Each of the five “types” presupposes a Christendom model, and the debate is carried on with this these parameters. Carter holds that Christendom must not simply be questioned but rejected as the paradigm context for Christian ethics and living today.

                    Much of the strength of the book lies in its penetrating thorough analysis. The arguments are carefully expressed with fairness and learning, and offer us more than criticism. The first half of the book re-examines Niebuhr’s contribution showing its strengths and weaknesses, chief of which are the assumptions of Christendom. The second half offers a post-Christendom typology of Christ and culture. Here the decisive concern is how far violence is legitimate in shaping life and faith in society. The typology developed is richer than Niebuhr’s and is offered with interesting examples. It will produce its own debate as it prompts many a reflection. Not the least, there are some creative biblical insights. This is high quality theological writing.

                    Carter believes that we are moving into a post-Christendom situation. This is a serious challenge for the Church and already we can discern how different groupings of Christians are responding. There is a sharp choice before us now: Jesus or Constantine? It is not a new choice, of course. Much of our thinking and living has gone on in a context where Constantine and his successors received more than was due to them. But those days are passing in the western world. The temptations of Christendom have always been with us. But, this book argues, a choice is necessary, not to see if Christendom can be retrieved and reasserted but whether and how we shall follow Jesus Christ the Lord.

Brian Haymes

 

Stephen Pattison, Margaret Cooling, Trevor Cooling, Using the Bible in Christian Ministry, Darton, Longman and Todd Ltd., 2007, 160pp., £14.95 (pb)

This is the third volume in the series Using the Bible in Pastoral Practice, a programme sponsored by the Bible Society and the University of Cardiff. The series is edited by David Spriggs of the Bible Society and Stephen Pattison of Cardiff University who (with Margaret Cooling and Trevor Cooling) is also the writer of this present volume.

                    I approach the work as a pastor or priest, perhaps browsing in a church bookstore, picking up this particular volume from the shelf to see if it would be of benefit in my ministry.

                    It is an appealing presentation, obviously a workbook "not be read then replaced on the shelves like a novel" (p. 9); 160 letter-size pages, divided into 16 units, each unit requiring up to three hours of preparation and work, a total of 48 hours. Spread over the course of a year, one hour a week for 48 weeks, and four weeks left for vacation!

                    As I believe in the centrality of the Word (with a capital) in my ministry, I'm interested in the theme, Using the Bible in Christian Ministry.

                    The title may be a bit misleading, however. "Christian ministry" includes all the people of God, though the book is "intended for those familiar with theology and ministry" (p. 10) -- in other words, for church leaders. "Christian ministry" is meant to be used interchangeably with "pastoral practice" they say on p. 10, and “pastoral practice” includes about anything that anyone called and ordered in the work of the church might be expected to do.

                    Unit 9 (pp 89-96), on "pastoral visiting and listening" focuses on that which is more closely considered pastoral ministry. This section I found especially helpful. Faith development, e.g. James Fowler, is well covered (pp. 81ff. and pp. 100ff.) but more attention could have been paid to leadership styles (note Reflections, p. 51).

                    The section on Public Worship (Unit 12) didn't appear to have a clear doctrine of preaching. The use of the Bible in preaching is a full study in itself. It also seemed inappropriate to include private devotions with communal or corporate worship.

                    The authority of the Bible is of course basic in such a work, but the "three views" of Unit 4 -- the Bible as 1) Blueprint and Pattern, 2) Model and Guide, and 3) Inspiration -- I found indistinct. The point, however, is to lead the participant to an understanding of how she understands the authority of the Bible and how this influences the way she uses the Bible in pastoral practice.

                    One must ask whether spending 48 hours with this workbook is worth time and effort. In spite of these criticisms, I would say that anyone who does devote that attention to this work will find their ministry given greater strength and clearer focus. Pattison, Cooling and Cooling have done a solid job and given us a good resource for examining our use of the Bible in pastoral practice.

Alan Reynolds 

 

Short notice

Alan Reynolds, A Troubled Faith, Word Alive Press (Canada), 2006, 181pp., £6.31 + shipping from Amazon

“With a gentle, yet strong and convincing style, Alan Reynolds offers a wonderfully readable and winsome defence of Christian truth” (Jeremy Begbie). “Alan Reynolds’ considerable wisdom is cumulative – a lifetime of listening to men and women who doubt, ask questions of God, probe the meaning of life. Think of this book as a leisurely evening in conversation with a pastor who has been through it all himself’” (Eugene Peterson). Suggestive section titles include ‘The God we cannot find and the God we cannot escape’, ‘The demonic dynamic in grief’, and ‘Have you tried doubting your doubts?’.

This issue's contributors:

Ian Cowley is an author and Vicar of Yaxley and Holme with Conington, in the Diocese of Ely

Peter Forster is Bishop of Chester

Brian Haymes is a Baptist Minister living in Manchester.

Stephen May is an author and Vicar of Norden in the Diocese of Manchester

Alan Reynolds is an author and retired minister of the United Church in Canada

Jenny Taylor is Founder and Director of Lapido Media

 

Newsletter 52 (Summer '08)

Islam and Europe

Colin Chapman

Having helped to found the agency Faith to Faith (www.faithtofaith.org.uk) which provides courses and resources for churches and colleges, Colin Chapman then lectured in Islamic Studies at the Near East School of Theology, Beirut, Lebanon. A new edition of his book Cross and Crescent: Responding to the Challenges of Islam was published by IVP in 2007. Here he introduces a new book by Philip Jenkins, whose earlier The New Christendom attracted much interest.

 

Islam and Muslims are frequently in the news these days. Stories in which they  featured this past year (such as the building in London of the largest mosque in Europe, and the question of giving Shari’ah a role in our judicial system) have probably left many people – including Christians – feeling bewildered and a little apprehensive. In these circumstances it is welcome to find a book which addresses many of the big issues by setting them in the context of Europe as a whole: God’s Continent: Christianity, Islam and Europe’s Religious Crisis, by Philip Jenkins (Oxford University Press, 2007). I have no hesitation in using the word ‘magisterial’ to describe this book. Here are some of the questions Jenkins raises and the answers he gives:

 

1. What do the statistics show?

Muslims in the UK number around 1.6 million, which is 2.7% of the population (compared to France where they are around 8 to 10 % and Holland where they are 6%.) The total number of Muslims in Europe as a whole is 24 million, which is 4.6% of the overall population. ‘Roughly Europe’s evangelicals, charismatics, and pentecostals outnumber Muslims by almost two to one, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future (p 74). On the sensitive subject of the higher birth rate among Muslim families, Jenkins predicts that by 2050 ‘we can expect that ethnic birth rates will have fallen to something like the mainstream norms’ (p 119).

 

2. What kinds of Islam do we find in Europe?

Challenging those who see Islam in Europe as homogenous and monolithic, Jenkins stresses the enormous diversity within Muslim communities – including everything from the pietists and the Sufis to the more politically-minded. He also draws attention to ‘the classic dilemma of the second-generation resident who finds himself caught between cultures, who feels utterly separated from the country of family origin and yet cannot identify with his own country of birth and upbringing’ (p 159). This is how he places the more militant sections of the Muslim community: ‘While sections of European Islam in recent years have acquired a strongly militant and politicized character, we have to understand this as a response to temporary circumstances; moreover, hard-line approaches still command only minority support. In the longer term, the underlying pressures making for accommodation and tolerance will prove hard to resist’ (p 120).

 

3. How should we use the words ‘Muslim’, ‘Islamist’ and ‘extremist’?

Jenkins points out that while the word ‘Christian’ is often used to describe practising Christians, the word ‘Muslim’ is usually used in a much broader sense to include those who are very nominal and therefore only cultural Muslims. He defines ‘Islamists’ as ‘activists who seek to establish Islamic political power, to reorganize society according to their vision of Islamic law’ (p vii). And he takes his definition of ‘extremist’ from the US National Intelligence Council: ‘We define Muslim extremists as a subset of Islamic activists. They are committed to restructuring political society in accordance with their vision of Islamic law and are willing to use violence’ (p vii).

 

4. How do we account for the extremists who resort to violence?

One whole chapter is devoted to analysing the development of contemporary terrorist movements operating within Europe. Responding to those who see violence as a post 9/11 phenomenon, he argues for ‘a more comprehensive accounting of terrorist violence’, suggesting that ‘Middle Eastern-related terrorism in Europe has far more complex origins, which cannot be readily associated with any one ideology, or necessarily, with Islam itself’ (p 207). For Jenkins, therefore, ‘The ascendancy of Islamic radicalism can be dated precisely to the year 1979, with the Revolution in Iran and the war in Afghanistan’ (p 209), and he devotes several pages to analysing the significance of movements like Tablighi Jama‘at, Hizb ut-Tahrir and Al-Muhajoroun.

 

5. How do Muslims respond to secular society in Europe?

Jenkins is convinced that Muslims in Europe cannot be totally immune to the secularizing influences which have affected all Europeans – including Christians. So, for example, in relation to Muslims attitudes to gender and sexuality, he writes: ‘The longer Muslims live in Europe and experience its powerful cultural trends, the more they are likely to acquire the common attitudes towards gender and sexuality’ (p 203). He argues that ‘Globalization can contribute to the spread of extremism … but it also promotes awareness of progressive alternatives’ (p 146). Moreover he underlines the point made by Lesslie Newbigin in some of his later writings that, at a time when Christianity has become a largely privatised religion, secular Europeans find it extremely hard to come to terms with the religion of Islam which generally wants God to be honoured in the public sphere.  He also draws attention to the fact that Christians often find themselves marginalised in the same way as Muslims and, as Rowan Williams’ lecture in February 2008 pointed out, face many of the same challenges in a secular society as Muslims do: ‘… perhaps the issue is not so much a Muslim problem as a religious problem, a systematic failure by European elites to understand religious thought and motivation’ (p 259).

 

6. Are Europe’s problems to do with religion, or are they social, economic and cultural?

In analyzing, for example, the rioting of North African immigrants in many French cities in 2005, he asks whether ‘religious identity has anything to do with their social or economic situation’ (p 156) and ‘were these really Muslim riots?’ (p 175). He concludes that in cases like these, racial and economic issues were far more significant than religion: ‘Today, then, France and other European countries face a grave problem from a disaffected underclass, a menace that does not presently take explicitly religious forms, but could yet do so’ (p 178).

 

7. How should governments deal with Muslim communities?

Certain weaknesses and limitations of ‘multiculturalism’ are spelled out: ‘Some left and liberal thinkers now use an argument that for years has been the preserve of the political right, namely, that multiculturalism seems to mean the glorification of every society and tradition in the world except the mainstream, which was consistently denigrated’ (p 248). When, however, governments seek to relate to Muslims as Muslims, there can be unfortunate consequences: ‘… European nations are only beginning to realize the dilemmas of confessional politics. By seeking to respond to religious minorities, governments are in effect recognizing particular clerical and religious groups as the official representatives of their communities, treating people not as individuals and citizens but as members of collective religious/cultural entities, holding group rights’ (p 250).

 

8. Would it be a good thing for Turkey to join the EU?

While Jenkins is aware of the many arguments in favour, he draws attention to some of the possible demographic and political implications of Turkey’s inclusion: ‘If Turkey were admitted to the EU, it would soon be the most populous member of the European club, overtaking Germany before 2015. The country is almost entirely Muslim … Turkish accession would immediately change the overall percentage of Muslim Europeans from 4.6 percent to almost 16 percent … EU labor law means that Turks would also have the right to live and work anywhere within Europe, and millions from poorer regions would probably exercise that right’ (pp 256-7).

 

9. Is Christianity dying out in Europe?

In challenging some of the popular interpretations of statistics, Jenkins points to many examples of fresh expressions of Christianity in Europe and the growth of immigrant churches among Africans, East Asians and Latin Americans. This therefore is his general conclusion: ‘The recent experience of Christian Europe might suggest not that the continent is potentially a graveyard for religion but rather that it is a laboratory for new forms of faith, new structures of organization and interaction, that can accommodated to a dominant secular environment’ (p 19).

 

10. Do we have any reason to fear the worst possible scenario – the Islamization of Europe?

This is one of the fundamental questions which Jenkins poses at the beginning of the book, quoting Bernard Lewis: ‘Current trends show Europe will have a Moslem majority by the end of the 21st century at the latest. Europe will be part of the Arab West and the Maghreb’ (p 4). Jenkins is challenging this kind of prediction in many different ways throughout the book, and summarizes his conclusion in this way: ‘That Europe is acquiring much greater ethnic and cultural diversity is certain, but the religious implications are less clear. Visions of an Islamicized Eurabia sliding into Third World status rely upon a number of questionable assumptions not only about demography but also about the condition of Europe’s major religions, both Islam and Christianity. If these assumptions are incorrect, Christian-Muslim interactions could develop quite differently, and more benevolently. Europe could yet become the birthplace of a liberalized and modernized Islam that could in turn influence the religion worldwide’ (p 14).

 

If Jenkins provides considerable reassurance to Christians who fear the worst about the spread of Islam in Europe, there’s nothing in this book that can justify complacency. The book therefore leaves me with one further question: ‘Are Christians in Europe ready and prepared to address these issues?’. My answer would be that, generally speaking, we’re still woefully ill-equipped to face the challenges and the opportunities presented by the presence of Muslims in Europe.

            There’s still far too much ignorance, prejudice, fear and even arrogance among Christians when it comes to our responses to Muslims and Islam. Every denomination no doubt has its own specialists working in these areas. I dare to suggest, however, that every local church (even in the so-called ‘White Highlands’) needs to have some strategy – however simple - for teaching its members about Islam and Christian-Muslim relations. Likewise every theological college needs to have some teaching in these areas that is built into its core curriculum so that all students – and not just the enthusiasts – are encouraged to address the issues.

            The bigger picture described by Jenkins might help Christians to appreciate afresh the wonder and the relevance of the gospel to our society – the gospel of the One who reveals himself and who redeems the world in and through Jesus Christ.

 

 

ACCESS highlight

Keith Clements, ‘Bonhoeffer and the British’ (ACCESS 628)

Dietrich Bonhoeffer is known as a martyr at the hands of the Nazis and the author of Letters and Papers from Prison. As such, he has been portrayed as solitary hero. However, central for him in reality were social networks, institutions and friendships - including British ones.

             ‘Bonhoeffer was in many ways an anglophile,’ writes Keith Clements, ‘though not uncritically so, and this where he becomes most interesting’. Trying to explain the stand of the Confessing Church against the Nazification of the German Church, Bonhoeffer met an English incomprehension. In particular he found himself at odds with Leonard Hodgson of Faith and Order who, as Clements explains, ‘was trying to be fair in what one might call a typically English and, dare one say, Anglican way. But fairness was not what the struggle in Germany was about.’

            As Clements observes, some of the questions Bonhoeffer raised in the course of such dealing with ‘Anglo-Saxons’ (his term for the British and North Americans) have a bearing on our contemporary debates around ‘freedom’ and ‘human rights’. Clements recalls the response penned by Bonhoeffer and Visser ’t Hooft to William Paton’s  English vision for ‘the Church and the New Order’. This response seems effectively to involve the claim, says Clements, ‘You British are quite justified in your emphasis on individual freedom and rights. But please realize that you enjoy these values only because you have other values embedded in your life and culture that keep these values in place and prevent them from becoming demonic; like respect for others’ dignity; reserve and restraint; the recognition of privacy. All of these are sustained less by law than a tradition, an inherited way of life. Don’t assume, therefore, they can be transplanted so easily into other contexts where these other values are not so established or have been shattered.’ This has clear contemporary relevance.

            The exaltation of freedom and rights in Britain is associated with a similarly ‘disembedded’ exaltation of the individual and of reason. Also, there is a trust in the power of established institutions to safeguard all of these, which is challenged by Bonhoeffer. Clements quotes from an essay Bonhoeffer wrote on his return from a visit to the U.S., titled ‘Protestantism without Reformation’, noting ‘Provocatively, Bonhoeffer seems to be saying that Anglo-Saxons effectively worship the state as the source of the Church’s freedom to exist and act instead of seeing the real freedom of the Church lying in its obedience to God’s word, the truth that alone sets truly free’.

            All of which inspires us to reflect further on the tradition of public life in Britain, both its worth and the distortions to which it is prone. There could be helpful enrichment here for the critical self-awareness needed today regarding such matters as the vision of a ‘multi-faith society’ and the current arguments within Anglicanism.

DK

 

The unfinished dialogue with Lesslie Newbigin

David Kettle

Ten years on from his death, Lesslie Newbigin is remembered with affection by many who knew him, his writings are a continuing source of inspiration for those who turn to them, and organisations and individuals reflect the influence he has had upon them. However, there are key settings where he has been relegated to the margins. How much attention is paid to Newbigin by those concerned today for mission in British culture? In our ‘mainstream’ churches at least, and despite the fact that the topic of mission is constantly on the agenda, there is little reference to his work. Why is this?

 

A marginal figure?

Newbigin was in his time Bishop of Madras, General Secretary of the International Missionary Council, a popular lecturer, and the author of a dozen books and hundreds of articles. It may seem odd, therefore, to suggest that he always has been a marginal figure. Yet relative to various well established institutions and parties of allegiance with enduring influence, he has always been so. It is illuminating to begin by reflecting on this.

            Firstly, Newbigin was marginal to both 'Evangelical' and 'Liberal' parties in their mutual opposition (an opposition which he himself attributed to secular ideology).  Presenting challenges to each, he has often been treated with suspicion by both. Evangelicals have often been suspicious of him for his close involvement in the ecumenical movement.1 Because he refused to pronounce on the eternal destiny of particular souls, he has been suspected of universalism. Because he claimed on behalf of the church in each culture (in dialogue with the church in other cultures) responsibility to discern for itself the Gospel he has been accused of an 'existentialist contextualisation' which absolutises culture and exalts reception at the expense of objective revelation.'2 Liberals, for their part, have been inclined to dismiss his theology for placing the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ at the centre of a true understanding of the world in all its aspects (more of this below). More generally, he has been dismissed as simply 'conservative' in outlook.

            Secondly, Newbigin was marginal to academic theology. He never held an academic post and did not take bearings from current debates in academic theology. He never provided footnotes. To those schooled in post-Enlightenment, encyclopaedic traditions of systematic theology his theological writing could appear 'ad hoc', lacking in comprehensiveness or adequate nuance, or obsessive as one or another key act of illumination and conversion is pursued relentlessly. Intellectually he has been seen more often as a missiologist than a theologian.

            Thirdly, Newbigin was marginal to denominational church life. He was the enigma of a Presbyterian bishop. His own episcopal status remained unrecognised by the Anglican Church for many years. The Church of South India union scheme, which he hoped might be seen as pioneering the way for global Christian unity, was not thus received.

            Newbigin also sought to pioneer the way in other matters only to find his lead rejected. When the classical Christocentric model for mission was increasingly felt to be inadequate in the World Council of Churches, he formulated a Trinitarian missiology which would reflect more faithfully the activity of the Holy Spirit within and beyond a church called to witness to the truth of the Gospel and the finality of Christ. By the 1990's, however, this missiology had been displaced by views he had resisted as failing adequately to reflect this calling of the church.3

            Finally in the 1980's and 1990's Newbigin sought to pioneer 'authentic missionary engagement' with Western culture through lectures, books, the 'Gospel and Our Culture' initiative and a major consultation at Swanwick in 1992. This in turn has been set aside by many who ponder mission in our culture today.

 

Rebuttal or dismissal?

How should we interpret the critical reception of Newbigin’s missionary engagement with Western culture? Those who are familiar with various critical responses to him have often been struck by an asymmetry in the encounter between Newbigin and his critics, as follows. In the drama of such encounter, Newbigin and his critics each see the other as bound by assumptions calling for investigation. By implication, each must therefore be willing to explore their own assumptions and trust the other to do the same. However, whereas Newbigin typically presents with care his own argument and assumptions and those of his critics, often his critics count him as requiring no response. Sometimes his more liberal Western critics have become angry at his very suggestion that they hold assumptions of their own. Newbigin is simply dismissed without argument. As Tom Wright wrote in a previous Network newsletter, 'His insights have not been disproved, only ignored'.4 Even when a critical response is forthcoming, Newbigin’s critics seem often not to have listened properly to him: such criticism often relies precisely on assumptions which Newbigin has identified but which remain unacknowledged and undefended by those who hold them. 

 

The Gospel and its reception

We might note that the issues raised here by the reception of Newbigin’s message are issues raised first by the reception of the Gospel itself. Whenever the Gospel is proclaimed, there is an encounter between assumptions. As the Gospel addresses our lives and worlds, assumptions and personal attachments to their very depths, it invites us to yield all wholeheartedly to the sovereignty of God and to find our deepest life and belonging here. However, the Gospel announcement may not be faithfully received, but may be heard by reference precisely to the assumptions and attachments which it addresses. These now entrench themselves as the basis on which the gospel is now either rejected as alien or is domesticated. Either way, the real gospel is effectively dismissed.

            This raises the vital question: where Newbigin’s missionary engagement with Western culture has been critically received, has it been merely dismissed on the basis of assumptions and attachments now entrenched - and with it, has the real gospel to Western culture been dismissed?

            In an article recently published in Theology (ACCESS 634)5, I invite Newbigin’s critics to review their response to Newbigin and to engage anew with his theology. In particular, in four respects where he has been broadly dismissed, I urge that he himself challenges assumptions behind these dismissals. These dismissals are (1) his concerns relate to an age now past (2) his own thinking belongs to a past age, (3) he unreasonably rejects the Enlightenment, and (4) his own theory of knowledge is (ironically) relativistic.

            The anonymous reader to whom my manuscript was initially sent by the editor of Theology remarked that ‘for many readers of Theology it would provide something of a new light on Newbigin’s theology’. It may be that such new light upon his dismissal will be one ingredient necessary among others, before Newbigin’s legacy of insight will be more widely recognised and enjoyed for what it is in Britain.

Notes

1.                See, for example David Smith's review of Lesslie Newbigin: A Theological Life, (Geoffrey Wainwright, Oxford University Press, 2000), Themelios, Vol 28 No. 1, p. 91-94.

2.                Bruce Nicholls, 'Towards a Theology of Gospel and Culture', in John Stott & Robert Coote (eds), Down to Earth: Studies in Christianity and Culture, Eerdmans, 1980, pp. 49-62.

3.                Newbigin, Trinitarian Theology for Today's Mission, recalled to this effect in Newbigin, 'Ecumenical Amnesia', International Bulletin of Missionary Research, 18(1), January 1994, pp. 2-5.

4.                Tom Wright, review of Geoffrey Wainwright above, Gospel and Our Culture Network Newsletter, 32, Autumn 2001, p. 3.

5.                David Kettle, Unfinished Dialogue? The reception of Lesslie Newbigin’s theology, Theology, Vol.CXI, No. 859, Jan/Feb 2008, pp.12-21. For a longer version see Stimulus, May 2008, pp.17-22.  

 

On dialogue

‘.. the only possible dialogue is the kind between people who remain what they are and speak their minds. This is tantamount to saying that the world of today needs Christians who remain Christians.’

Albert Camus

 

 

Comment

BIGGER, FASTER, MORE

I find myself at an age where I am increasingly pondering the nature of the world I grew up in the 1950's and 1960's. It was so different from the way in which Alison, my wife and I find ourselves living now. How did things become so different? What have we lost, and what have we gained? I don't want to find myself constantly talking about the good old days and how things were much better back then. It is surely true that something is lost and something is gained in living every day, as Joni Mitchell once wrote. But it does seem to me that somewhere along the way some important things have been lost.

            I grew up on a farm in South Africa, in a very different world from the world that I now experience. In some ways they seem to be like two different worlds entirely. When we moved to the farm in 1959 we had no electricity, no television, no regular water supply. Most of our food came from the farm rather from the grocery store in Newcastle, 25 miles away. My parents struggled to make ends meet, and I am now a rich man by comparison with most of the white farming families who lived in our area. However in those days we must have seemed unimaginably wealthy to the Zulu families who lived and worked on the farm.

            One of the things that has undoubtedly changed is the pace of life. My father would normally come home at around five o'clock in the afternoon, and he and Mom would settle down on the verandah with a drink and reflect on the day and just unwind. Then we would have supper, possibly play a board game, or listen to a radio show, or  read, and then go to bed, usually before nine o'clock. I was commenting to Alison recently on how busy our evenings are, how little time we have simply to spend tome with friends, how tired we seem to be so much of the time. Yet it is so hard to stop, or even to slow down.

            We have grown rich materially, and we have appliances and all kinds of stuff that my parents would not have even dreamt of. We are very busy, and we do get quite a lot done. But what is the state of our souls? In the service of Evening Prayer we ask that "we being defended from the fear of our enemies may pass our time in rest and quietness". I know that this is my heart's desire, and that it is God's will for me, and indeed for all his people. But it seems to me that it is increasingly difficult, and perhaps even impossible, to spend our time in rest and quietness in the world which we have now made for ourselves.

Ian Cowley

 

The Kirby Laing Institute for Christian Ethics

Introduced by the Director, Jonathan Chaplin

 

The Kirby Laing Institute for Christian Ethics (KLICE) was established in 2006 as the successor organisation to the former Whitefield Institute based in Oxford. Generous funding from the Kirby Laing Foundation made this possible. KLICE's aim is to promote research in various fields of Christian ethics and to communicate the results of that research in academic and wider church and public settings. KLICE is based in Tyndale House in Cambridge, a world-renowned independent centre for research in Biblical Studies, with links to Cambridge University. KLICE currently employs a staff of two: a Director, Jonathan Chaplin, and an Administrator, Tania Raiola, and is advised by a Council of eight. 

            A leading emphasis of KLICE's current activities is 'public theology.' Jonathan Chaplin is a political theologian currently working on various publication and education projects on the role of religion in a secularised, pluralist liberal democracy. KLICE is currently engaged in two collaborative projects in this area, one with the public theology think-tank Theos, the other with the Bible Society. The director has also been commissioned by Theos to write a publication on the role of religious language in politics. KLICE is also a partner in a three-year research project, on environmental theology and ethics, with the Faraday Institute for Science and Religion based at St. Edmund's College, Cambridge.

            One of KLICE's major activities is a doctoral support programme, formerly administered by the Whitefield Institute. This provides partial financial support to selected students working in the UK on ethical issues, but, equally importantly, also brings them to Cambridge regularly for research seminars. As of September 2008 this programme will have supported nine young scholars in this way. Most of these are located in theology departments but applicants are eligible from any academic discipline.

            Among the events KLICE has held since its establishment are a seminar on 'Theological Visions and Public Languages' (held in collaboration with three other organisations), its first annual Book Colloquium, on Oliver O'Donovan's The Ways of Judgment, and two book launches on environmental ethics. Its second Book Colloquium takes place on 3-4 September 2008, and is on Brian Brock's Singing the Ethos of God. KLICE also currently serves as the secretariat for the Ethics and Social Theology Group of the Tyndale Fellowship. Its annual conference from 9-11 July 2008 is on the theme of political theology. KLICE is organising a conference on 'Secularism' on 1 November 2008 in partnership with the Gospel and Our Culture Network.

            KLICE also publishes Ethics in Brief six times per year, which contains short articles on various themes in ethics written by specialists for a wide public. Recent issues have addressed multiculturalism, toleration, medical ethics, business ethics and sexual ethics.

            KLICE will continue to generate its own independent research and publications in public ethics, to support the research of others, and to collaborate as appropriate with other kindred organisations. For more information visit the website: www.klice.co.uk.

 

Book reviews

Gavin D’Costa, Theology in the Public Square: Church, Academy and Nation, Blackwell Publishing, 2005, 247pp., £22.99 (pb)

D’Costa is Professor in Christian Theology at Bristol (www.bristol.ac.uk/thrs/staff/gdc.html) and a member of the Christian Academic Network (www.c-a-n.org.uk).  His book is about the role of the Christian academic in the university.  Unsurprisingly he pays most attention to theology and religious studies, but other areas are considered and there is a fascinating discussion of physics (p195ff).  If you have appreciated such post-liberals as Stanley Hauerwas, John Milbank and Alasdair MacIntyre, then you should certainly get to know Gavin D’Costa.

D’Costa traces how theology (along with philosophy) lost its pivotal role in the Western university and then sets out an ambitious project whereby theology may once again become “queen of the sciences.”  The implications of that proposal are enormous, but, unawed, D’Costa sets out to rethink the role of education and challenge both modernist and postmodernist visions of the university.  He calls for a “post-liberal plurality of universities with differing traditions of enquiry” (p144).  He imagines what a Christian University and its academic practices might look like.  It is a passionate study.  D’Costa argues that “Christian culture and civilization are at stake if we do not attend to the nature of the university, a major institution that fosters the cultural and intellectual life of nations and trains the intelligentsia of the ecclesia. …. If the Church fails to transform education at every level, then the future of the Church and the world are in deep trouble.” (pp215,218)

               D’Costa writes from a Catholic, broadly Thomist background and readers from Protestant, and particularly Evangelical backgrounds will find it very different in approach to the Christian educational literature that they are familiar with.  There is (as D’Costa strongly agrees) no worldview-neutral position, but we usually remain unaware that we operate within a specific tradition, unless and until we come up against another.  For many of us D’Costa’s emphasis on the role of prayer, sacraments, communal commitment, virtue and exegesis ought to be salutary.  There are, he writes, “good theological reasons to be a sectarian committed to the common good.” (pp77-78)  Can we imagine a university prospectus that reads:  “candidates are required to have three very good A-levels, and need to be committed to prayer, virtue, and holiness.  Frequenting the sacraments is encouraged, sinners are especially welcome – as is a sense of humor.” (p115)?  D’Costa applies this vision to theology, but, if his argument is sound, it surely applies to all subject areas?  Or does it?  One of the very welcome features of this book is that D’Costa engages with the Reformational tradition of such scholars as Alvin Plantinga and Roy Clouser (p199ff).  His engagement is positive and sympathetic, but fails to grasp the significant differences between the traditions, most critically with regard to what we mean by ‘reason’, ‘faith’ ‘knowledge’ and ‘heart’ (see Clouser 2003, 2005, 2007 – unfortunately D’Costa appears only to have seen the first (1991) edition of Clouser 2005).  Nevertheless this is an important book and I hope augurs more interaction between our different Christian educational traditions.

References

Roy Clouser, Reason and Belief in God, Philosophia Reformata, 68, June 2003, pages 36-68

Roy Clouser, The Myth of Religious Neutrality: an essay on the hidden role of religious belief in theories, University of Notre Dame Press, 2nd edn, 2005 (especially ch 10)

Roy Clouser, Knowing with the Heart: religious experience and belief in God, Wipf & Stock, 2nd edn, 2007

Arthur Jones

 

Paul Cavill, Heather Ward, et al, Christian Tradition in English Literature: Poetry, Plays and Shorter Prose, Zondervan, 2007. 512 pp., £14.99 (pb)

This book has a clear and practical intention. It is aimed at contemporary teachers, students and readers facing a literary canon whose relationship with the Christian tradition they are less and less equipped to address. In the stark words of the Preface, ‘Ours is perhaps the first generation in over a millennium in which the Christian tradition is for some readers of English literature terra incognita, uncharted territory’ (pp.13-14).

               Ambitious in scope, the book covers a period from the emergence of the Old English elegies to the present in a series of brief survey essays. This vast field is subdivided into five periods: the Medieval Period; Renaissance, Reformation and Republic; the Restoration and the Eighteenth Century; the Romantics and Victorians; the Twentieth Century. For obvious reasons, it has been impossible to print texts, and readers are referred to readily available standard anthologies for almost all primary material.

               The authors are laudably insistent that it is always best to read the texts first, before turning to their introductions and accompanying questions. The latter vary considerably in style and quality. While it is possible to point to some little gems, e.g. the discussion of ‘Allegory’ (pp. 80 ff.) and the introduction to Patrick Kavanagh’s poetry (pp. 409 ff.), there are other sections whose emphases and rather too earnest imposition of a Christian reading would not provide reliable assistance for newcomers to particular works. It is a dismaying irony that the discussion of ‘The Bible and the Prayer Book’ (pp. 104 ff.) contains a number of noticeable inaccuracies.

               The incommensurability between discussion questions, which often assume a wide knowledge of an author’s work or a particular period, and the introductory essays is often uncomfortable. Bibliographies at the ends of sections are eclectic. Many of them seem rather out of date (although some standard works never go out of fashion), and references to good recent scholarship are not always easy to spot.

               The authors have provided helpful contextual information to support the discussion of particular texts, both within their short introductions, and in the longer essays on aspects of the Christian tradition. In addition, there is a guide to key biblical narratives which have become literary motifs, and glossaries of biblical and theological terminology. These are comprehensive and easy to use, if a little uneven. Do we need a gloss on ‘forgiveness’? On the other hand, a term like ‘hermetic philosophy’, which is specialised and obscure, receives no further explanation. I would have liked less reticent presentation of Roman Catholicism. A number of Catholic authors are discussed, as well as works explicitly related to a Catholic milieu, and other works reacting against Catholic teaching. Particularly in the light of popular cultural misrepresentations such as The Da Vinci Code, something more substantial than the brief remarks in a final outline essay on Church History would have been useful.

               There is clearly a need for a book like this, and the authors have done sterling work in assembling a vast array of material from which a survey course could readily be constructed. Teachers of Literature and Theology/ Religion/ Christianity will be grateful for this resource (though American and Australian users will notice the exclusively Anglo-Celtic choice of authors). It comes at a competitive price, and with the caveats already mentioned, certainly provides a point of departure for those setting out into an increasingly unfamiliar landscape.

Bridget Nichols

 

John Nurser, For All People and All Nations. Christian Churches and Human Rights. Geneva: World Council of Churches 2005.ppxiv + 220.

Much current debate about religion and human rights is bedevilled by the polarities typical of our secularised culture. On the one hand secularists see religion as inherently intolerant, fanatical and repressive against any notions of human fulfilment and therefore inimical to the very notion of “human rights.”  On the other hand, religious leaders themselves seem to be increasingly cautious about speaking of human rights as if it was essentially secular and humanistic in conception and therefore, like sex, only to be dubiously spoken about with pursed lips. John Nurser has put us in an incalculable debt with this book, which is a straightforward but detailed history of how in the post-1945 world human rights actually came to be enshrined both in the structure of the United Nations and in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In what will doubtless be a surprise to many, it is a story in which the churches – especially the Protestant churches of the USA and those which formed the World Council of Churches – were the prime movers.

               We tend to take for granted the structures and charters we have inherited. John Nurser reminds us that at the time nothing could be taken for granted.  Above all, nothing would have happened but for the visionary and indefatigable efforts of the American Lutheran Fred Nolde who, with other Christian – and Jewish – colleagues not only sought to arouse religious opinion in American during the second world war, but who on a single, fateful afternoon in May 1945 persuaded the drafters of the UN Constitution – against their initial judgment – to include a Commission on Human Rights in the new world body.

               Particularly impressive is how generously far-sighted and visionary were the American churches on the need for a new international order for the post-war world even before the USA was brought into the war in late 1941. Human rights was central to their concern, as it was to their European ecumenical counterparts like George Bell, J.H. Oldham and W.A. Visser’t Hooft. Not surprisingly therefore human rights became central in the concerns of the new World Council of Churches (1948), and its Commission on International Affairs of which Nolde became the first director.

               There is another aspect of the story which is critical for our present debates. Clearly, much of the earlier American concern for human rights was focused on religious freedom, being driven by the anxieties of Protestant missions for greater tolerance and access for evangelisation in strongly Catholic- and Orthodox-dominated countries. It was the great contribution of Nolde and his associates, however, to harness this particular (or even partisan) aspiration to the wider impulse for human rights generally. How we today can acknowledge a specifically religious basis for a charter of human rights, a charter set out in universal terms acceptable to people of all faiths and none, remains the great challenge. This book and the story it tells will continue to be instructive as well as inspirational.

Keith Clements

 

This issue's contributors:

Jonathan Chaplin is Director of the Kirby Laing Institute for Christian Ethics, Cambridge

Colin Chapman is an author and retired lecturer in Islamic Studies

Keith Clements is former General Secretary of the Council of European Churches

Ian Cowley is an author and Vicar of Yaxley and Holme with Conington, in the Diocese of Ely

Arthur Jones is Senior Tutor at the West Yorkshire School of Christian Studies

Bridget Nichols is an author and Research Assistant to the Bishop of Ely

 

Newsletter 53 (Autumn '08)

Given for food:

Creation and the limits of private ownership

 John Hodges

 Whether one holds a Biblical theist worldview or an atheist humanist worldview one has no doubt about the importance of food for sustainable life and for human progress. Food is the uniquely indispensable resource between life and death that today we call agro-biodiversity. The Genesis account credits God with forming the huge diversity of species suitable for food for humanity and for all other living creatures including green vegetation, seed-bearing plants and trees with fruits and nuts (Gen 1.11-12; Gen 1. 29-30) and later the animals, birds and fish (Gen 9. 1-3). Many followers of Jesus, including me, see the broad process commonly called evolution as the means used by God over long stretches of time to bring about the abundance and prolificacy of these food species along with all the other myriad life forms on earth. However, the importance of the Biblical account for me lies not in debating the method of making species but in God designating suitable (adapted) species as food resources and saying in these Genesis passages that He specifically GIVES these species for food. The socio-economic guidelines given to Israel later refer to ownership of land, property, wells, slaves, individual livestock and food, but not ownership of a food species.

            From the start of recorded human history at the time of settled agriculture some 12,000 years ago in the Neolithic period individuals have claimed ownership of a bushel of seed wheat, a field of growing wheat, a sack of wheat to be milled – but never until the last decade has it been possible to entertain ownership of the species or sub-species of wheat and thereby legally require a farmer to pay a royalty for use. Agro-bioresources have always been part of the Commons cared for, improved upon and shared by generations of farmers and their urban relatives. Today a small elite has a strategy to claim ownership of the food species and, further, of wild species that may be of value in the future. This new elite guide large businesses whose historic activities have mainly been to supply chemicals for intensive agriculture including herbicides, insecticides and fertilizers.

 

Recent developments

Recently the convergence of three new events has given this new elite an opportunity to colonize the global food chain just as a few huge oil companies dominate global oil supplies – in each case attracted by the guaranteed market. The three new events are: technology to transfer genes from one species to another; the recent legality of patenting living organisms1and thus charging a royalty; and economic globalization that increasingly embraces agriculture and the food chain. Five or six companies with global reach now employ molecular scientists to move the transgenes and lawyers to enforce compensation and royalties in the courts if farmers breach the contract, for example, by following the millennia old practice of sowing seed saved from their own harvest. Sadly in this scenario, normal scientific research protocols are restricted including peer review, publication of results and independent replication at least until patents are secured.

            Genetically Modified (GM) foods to date have contributed little to the quality of life for all, while providing huge revenue from the food chain for the owners. Unhappily the GM food saga has a number of negative angles. There was no market demand from consumers, whose awareness in the US is curtailed by the absence of labelling; while in the EU the introduction in 1999 of GM food was vigorously resisted by the consumer market and since then has been documented consistently by the EuroBarometer2. GM food raises uncertainties about human health, the environment and longer-term unknown effects in the biosphere. Many thinking citizens are deeply uneasy about the technology itself and indignant over the way GM foods appeared in the human food chain without prior public consultation, independent testing or long-term experimentation especially as, to date, they offer no benefit to consumers. In 2008, a major independent UN study by 400 independent scientists – the largest ever on this topic – and signed by 60 governments concludes that GM crops have not increased production on the farm3. Why have farmers bought them? The reason is that GM seeds to date have been modified for a genetic trait increasing biological resistance of the growing crop to chemical sprays that kill weeds and insect pests. The increased resistance allows more potent chemicals to be used less frequently thus reducing farm costs. However, since the chemicals are also sold by the same multinational that sells GM seed there is lack of clarity in the price mechanisms of sprays and seeds. Evidence is growing that the transgene resistance to these chemicals may be declining and/or that weeds and insects are, in the normal evolutionary way, developing higher levels of resistance to the chemicals – requiring more frequent spraying and negating the early benefit of lower farm costs. The theoretical evolutionary reasons that the desired effects of transgenes are likely to be short-lived were ignored in the rush to market.

            There are other issues that raise ethical and scientific questions about GM foods. One is the so called “terminator-gene” not yet in use that would render harvested seeds from a GM crop unable to germinate unless sprayed with a chemical. This technology aims to protect the ownership rights of the company but the counter fear is of genetic sterility being transferred into the environment. The transgene is designed specifically to stunt and negate the prolificacy of life that is unmistakably part of God’s order (Gen. 1.20, 22, 28, & Gen. 8. 22).

            In my view, research to understand the molecular structure of life is a justifiable part of the Biblical mandate given to man in Genesis to exercise responsible stewardship and use of natural resources (Gen 1. 26-28). The rush to market has provided no permanent benefit and opens human society and the whole biosphere to possible disruptions. Assessing unknown risk is of course impossible on a case by case basis and therefore rests on the level of knowledge and competence of those using it. Ongoing molecular research shows that the scientific model on which gene transfer is used for food is inadequate. It is now clear that within the genomes of species that we manipulate there are multiple levels of molecular activity and information flow of which we have little knowledge. The scientific and business elites show an audacious naivety to think that exotic genes can be moved without negative consequences into the genomes of stable species honed for integrated stability over millions of years. Once released from the laboratory, negative consequences are very difficult to reverse and eliminate.

            By contrast, gene transfer to produce products for human and animal health - for diagnosis, prevention and treatment of disease - are tested more thoroughly, subject to stricter regulation and used for individuals; and the patient is informed of possible side-effects before choosing.

 

Unlabelled clone food

A new scenario with intensified risks appeared in the food chain in 2007. Patents are now being issued for genetically modified and cloned livestock with the aim of marketing milk and meat. Again the US government has determined that labelling of such products is not needed. The response of the EU parliament in September 2008 was an overwhelming vote (622 to 32 with 25 abstentions) to ban food products from cloned livestock because of the suffering inflicted upon many animals in the failed attempts to produce a viable clone. In my view the human genetic risks are also high as mammalian genomes of livestock and mankind are very similar – shown by the Mad Cow (BSE) and variant Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease (vCJD) experience.

            The claim by some business and science leaders to feed the world better with GM crops is worthless and empty at present. Further, the promise to design GM crops for adverse environments in the developing world such as arid, swampy or salt conditions, etc., has been neglected as those markets offer a scanty return. The GM foods produced to date have been principally staple crops: corn, canola, and soya – all having huge markets worldwide.

            In this short article one cannot cover all the aspects or details of this complex topic. But in my view it is essential for followers of Jesus to view these development in agro-bioresources not only as an economic phenomenon as one might see manufactured non-essential goods but, by contrast, to recognize the unique contribution of agriculture and food to the quality of life within the creation mandate.

            Everyone knows that scientific knowledge can be used or abused. The use of gene transfer in the food species has so far, I fear, been used only for the financial benefit of a minority in the rich West. Meanwhile the evident global strategy to take ownership of the world’s seed resources threatens the three billion rural poor who have only their land and their labour and who need empowerment, not further burdens on their only economic activity - farming. The current use of knowledge about the wonders of the molecular structure of life runs counter to the Genesis mandate and conflicts with the deep Biblical concerns about caring for the poor.

Notes

1  The first patent for a living organism was issued by the US Supreme Court on appeal in 1980 in Diamond vs. Chakrabarty for an altered bacterium.

2.  The Eurobarometer is a regular survey of public attitudes throughout the EU

3.  The International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development, IAASTD, 2008.

 

Words to recall

…Will western governments have sufficient strength of mind and purpose to protect the peoples of Asia and Africa from the commercial greed and the domination of selfish private interests which in the West itself seriously threaten to deprive men of their real liberties and to drive the weak to the wall? It seems vain to hope that without some large increase in their spiritual capital the Christian nations can grapple successfully with these prodigious tasks.

J. H. Oldham, The World and the Gospel, 1916

 

Comment

WHERE YOUR TREASURE IS, THERE WILL YOUR HEART BE

 

Earlier today I helped to lead the annual Harvest service in our local Church of England primary school. The children took an active part, with readings and prayers and a Powerpoint presentation which they had put together. There was a short mime about one poor farmer in El Salvador who is very thankful for his meagre harvest, while nine rich consumers in the West simply go the supermarket and buy whatever they want without ever stopping to give thanks. Harvest gifts, tinned goods and packets and fresh produce, were brought by many of the children and next week they will all be taken to the local night shelter for homeless people, where food stocks are desperately needed as the cold months set in.

            So harvest is alive and well in our local community. It provides a great opportunity to communicate some important values, and to talk about consumerism and poverty as well as encouraging a spirit of thankfulness for all the good gifts around us. But after the harvest service I was talking to one of the teachers about our collection of food for the night shelter. She said to me, “We need to be doing this more often than just once a year.” She said that she had decided to go and visit the night shelter herself and see whether we could not do more to help and support their work. She knew that the next step for her was to go and meet the people at the night shelter, to start a relationship instead of just sending a gift.

            The service at the school had also prompted me to think about what more I and others should be doing in response to the issues we were looking at. Giving a couple of cans of food once a year to the homeless is a start, but surely it is not enough. I was reminded of the principle of the tithe, the offering of one tenth of all that God has given us. In tithing we give the first fruits of our own personal harvest back to God. We acknowledge in a practical and sacrificial way that all we have and all we are comes from God. It seems to me that tithing is not very fashionable in the church these days, and we look for ways to make it easier for people, less demanding, less shocking. But if we take tithing seriously we will administer a serious corrective measure to the tendency in most of us to let mammon take hold of our hearts. As someone once said, if you want to know where a person’s heart lies, take a look at their cheque book.

The other challenge which came home to me through my visit to the school this morning was the need to go and spend time with those in need. It is so easy to say that I am too busy, that there are too many other important things that I am involved in. But if Jesus is truly my Lord, my model, my example, then I know that I have to go and be with those who are hungry, sick, naked, a stranger or in prison. Talking about the issues is not enough. Even sending gifts and buying fairtrade is not enough, although its a good start. It is relationships that matter in the Jesus way of doing things. Somewhere, somehow, I need to have a relationship with those who do not have the privileges and the good things that I, by the grace of God, enjoy.

Ian Cowley

 

Trust in the market

David Kettle

At the centre of the recent global financial crisis is a collapse of trust. 'London's money markets froze because of a trust collapse; banks don't believe each other when they say their businesses are sound and will not default on their obligations', writes Will Hutton.1 The aim of Gordon Brown's part-nationalisation of the major British banks is to restore trust between banks and maintain the trust of small depositors in their banks (an act of prompt international leadership acclaimed by new Nobel Prize Winner, economist Paul Krugman2). Trust is fundamental to our economic system.

            Upon what is trust placed in the market, on what grounds, and to what end? This multifaceted question invites Christian reflection.

            We might open up the question by asking, why the recent collapse of trust? Will Hutton blames the abandonment of integrity and fairness as being 'fuddy-duddy obstacles to "wealth-generation"'. Trust rests upon trustworthiness, and when this has been scorned out of greed, trust is withdrawn. According to Hutton, only a revival of integrity and fairness will save us now. He believes such a revival requires a government-led increase in business regulation.

            Many will consent thus far. However, a Christian appraisal will go further. First, we will be wary of trusting regulation for more than it can deliver. Integrity and fairness make demands beyond the requirements of any regulation, and the sources which inspire these virtues and inspire trust in them lie themselves beyond any system which at bottom serves profit alone, however regulated. The market needs to be nourished by a moral culture. Christian faith has important things to say about the foundations and formation of such a culture.

            Second, while moral culture can provide necessary nourishment for an economic system, it can also (understood in a Christian setting) critique it. Authentic moral culture is not captive to any system. Accordingly it challenges any system which in practice defines all good for us through its 'plausibility structures'.

            Robert Wuthnow lists aspects of the market which are today ascribed moral character: participation in the market as a producer or consumer is viewed as a direct form of participation in public life, analogous to voting; the market as seen as providing individuals with a sense of freedom and dignity and helps to shape moral character as a testing-ground for the development of talent; the market is frequently the accepted context of moral crusades (e.g. campaigns on behalf of fair trade, and of the environment); and ‘there is a comparison and implicit corollary between market freedoms and other freedoms. This places the idea of the free market on the same moral plane as freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom of thought'.3 Christians will be wary, however, of a tendency for the market to define the moral.

            Third, Christian faith will challenge excessive trust in ideology. It will dispute the ideological faith which assumes economic rationalisation to be an unqualified good and sanctions its subversion of created spheres beyond its own. Such is the ideological trust, it seems, which today sponsors the un-mandated social revolution through which are living, and which indiscriminately sanctions the extension of the market into traditional 'commons', reframes as market transactions what was first pioneered - often by Christians - as public service, and proposes absolute private property rights in new (e.g. intellectual, or GM species) realms.

            When ideology is the object of such basic trust, such that people are willing to entrust and risk everything in its service, we have reason to suspect idolatry. Capitalism can become a fertility cult which entrusts itself to capital as defining, self-propagating and breeding wealth in the form of credit. The Christian vision of economic activity as service is lost; the destiny is forgotten, as portrayed in Dante's Inferno, of those who love as fertile that which is not so.

            Can we trace any encouragement for idolatry back to Hayek whose philosophical reflections provide the basis of the neoliberal ideology of recent decades?4 Well, Hayek showed the Romantic idealist inclination to trust in biological metaphors. In circular fashion he assumed and trusted in the existence of something ('the market') analogous to a human mind or a self-regulatory organism with a coherent, immanent purposiveness of its own. But 'the market' invites no such basic trust.

            At this point it is interesting to compare Hayek with Michael Polanyi, as does Philip Mirowski5. Both wrote in defence of liberty against the false pretensions of central organisation by communist states. But Polanyi disagreed with Hayek in his diagnosis of the problem and therefore of its solution. Polanyi's different understanding of knowledge and of science envisioned economic agents attentive to the telos of economic activity as such, and  envisioned spontaneous order among such agents as informed by such attention and knowledge.

              Polanyi seems to promise a sounder philosophical basis than Hayek for a democratic capitalism in which economic freedom fits with the wider freedom of humankind willed by God, and wealth-creation defers to the wealth of creation and the Creator's purposes for his creatures.

Notes

1.            Will Hutton, Observer, Sept 28th 2008

2.            Paul Krugman, 'Gordon Does Good', New York Times, 12th October 2008

3.            Robert Wuthnow, 'The Moral Crisis in American capitalism', Harvard Business Review, 60.2, pp. 76-84.

4.            See David Harvey, A Brief History of Neoliberalism, Oxford University Press, 2005.

5.            Philip Mirowski, 'Economics, Science, and Knowledge: Polanyi vs. Hayek', Tradition & Discovery, Vol 25 No. 1, 1998, pp. 29-42. (text accessible on the Internet)

 

Network news

Mission in Western society today can be approached theologically through a threefold cultural setting: it must engage paganism, an enduring Christian heritage, and secularism. This is the theme of a continuing series of three Network day conferences. At the first, held in 2006, Tom Wright gave 130 participants a day of lectures on Christian Mission in a Pagan Culture.

            The third, on secularism as a context of mission, is planned for Friday 24th April, in Cambridge. The main speaker will be John Stackhouse, from Regent College Vancouver. This event is being organised in partnership with the Kirby Laing Institute for Christian Ethics, with the Director Jonathan Chaplin doing most of the work owing to David Kettle's recent ill health. Further details will follow.

            The second conference, Mission - in Christian Soil? was, you may recall, planned for 2007 but despite excellent speakers (led by Elaine Storkey) and workshop leaders it had to be cancelled owing to few registrations. Why was this? The question lingers for some of us. Is it that those with a heart for mission do not see the Christian nourishment of our culture as significant for mission? Is it that those who see the Christian nourishment of our culture see no reason to think theologically about mission? Is there a popular equation between attention to our Christian heritage and a narrow, strident nationalism?

            This current newsletter encloses the reading material prepared as background reading for the above, second conference. If you care to read it and have any ideas why we had to cancel this conference (and no other), David would be interested to hear your views.

 

Newbigin Centenary celebrations

Later in 2009 plans are being made in Britain and overseas to celebrate the centenary of Lesslie Newbigin’s birth. Watch this space!

ACCESS highlights

The current ACCESS list is a mixed bag, as ever - not of good and poor, hopefully, but varied in kind.

            Some items offer good starting-points for discussion by housegroups wishing to reflect on the Gospel and our culture. Written in popular style, they address a topic of broad interest in an introductory and thought-provoking way. Among these are pieces on strident secularism (MacClaren, 646), the wellbeing of children (Northcott, 650) and the Church (Spencer, 654).

            Other items offer good starting-points for reflection by groups of Christian ministers or leaders. A little more scholarly in theme and presentation, they summarise in an informative way topics of importance for ministry. Among these are articles on alternative worship (Atkins, 642), religion and art (Hancock, 645) and icons (Reed, 653).

            Then there are thought-provoking pieces. Is it really the case that Christian in Turkey find themselves oppressed more by a secularism imported from the French Enlightenment than by Islamic beliefs? Does Richard Neuhaus do well to propose an addition to Richard Niebuhr's classic fivefold typology for Christ and culture, in the form of 'Christ without culture', having in mind a form of faith unwittingly domesticated to culture?

 

Book reviews

 

Colin Greene and Martin Robinson, Metavista: Bible, Church and Mission in an Age of Imagination, Authentic Media, 2008, 278pp, £11.99 (pb)

Both these energetic authors once worked together at the British and Foreign Society, and it was during those years that their vision of mission through ‘radical cultural engagement’ arose.  Here they develop this vision into a rich (though often dense) book.  In a ‘post-Christendom, post-secular, post-colonial and post-individualistic’ context, they propose a ‘cultural hermeneutics’ that entails an integration of ‘societal imagination’, ‘cultural icons’ and ‘the nature of, and encounter with the Bible as Scripture’.  They believe postmodernity opens up considerable opportunities for the Church to interweave all three perspectives.

                    Part One tackles the theme of culture.  Central here is the category of narrative – in particular, the complex story of ‘modernity’ and ‘postmodernity’.  The notion of ‘metavista’ describes the emerging (‘post-postmodern’) world, with its confusing, buzzing multiplicity and unsettledness.

                    In Part Two we are led to consider the Bible, and as might be expected we find a heavy stress on Scripture as narrative.  The Bible’s story is said to comprise four stories – creation, Israel, Jesus the Messiah, and the church.  There are sensitive discussions of scholars associated with this ‘storied’ outlook, although the authors’ anxiety about over-relying on historical enquiry is arguably too strong.  (N. T. Wright’s approach is rather subtler and more varied than is suggested here.)

                    Part Three focuses on the Church’s calling: the missional community is to indwell and reconfigure Scripture’s story/stories, and thus participate in God’s unfinished drama.  The future ‘belongs to those who will tell stories that re-imagine our present possibilities and so contribute to changes in our present cultural topography.’  Ours is the Age of the Imagination: the contemporary Church ‘has been for some time beset by a profound failure of the imagination’, and, ironically, in the midst of a widespread ‘aestheticization’ of culture.  Hence the authors’ stress on the crucial role of the arts for the missional enterprise (and their lucid discussions of films such as The Matrix).

                    Greene and Robinson cover an impressive amount of ground, and include fine summaries of key debates (Brown’s theory of ‘the death of Christian Britain’, Stout on Hauerwas’ purported ‘sectarianism’, the ‘emerging Church’, and so on).  Although much of the writing is clear and down to earth, the tendency to overload sentences with jargon and abstractions may well put off some readers.  Even in the introduction we read: ‘Thus we have chosen a signifier that speaks not from the supposedly legitimating functions of a metanarrative or a hurriedly revamped metaphysics, but from a relatively unclaimed space or “clearing” (to use Heidegger’s suggestive phrase) – so, therefore, a meta-“space” or meta-“vista.”’  No one will doubt that many hours of reading lie behind the book, and many of the technicalities are explained, but the paperback packaging does suggest something more generally accessible.

                    Also, there are some odd headings that do not obviously refer to the text they head up, and some passages are oddly disjointed.  Perhaps this is a result of dual authorship (indeed, ‘we’ and ‘I’ are both used). 

                    Nevertheless, there is a sense of energy and urgency about Metavista that matches the huge importance of its themes.  It is likely to be widely read, and will certainly help push the current Bible-Church-Mission discussions far ahead.

Jeremy Begbie

   

Ken A. Van Til, Less than Two Dollars a Day: A Christian View of World Poverty and the Free Market, Eerdmans, 2007, 180pp, £8.99 (pb)

Despite the current economic crisis, the market economy remains the dominant form of economy in the world today. But can it meet the basic material needs of all human beings? From a survey of the teachings of scripture and the church, Van Til argues that, because all humans share God’s image and God’s world, justice demands that they have access to the basic sustenance that allows them to take part in human society.

                    While the free market is responsive to consumer demand, the author argues, it is unable to respond to the needs of the absolute poor because they lack the spending power to convert their needs into economic demands. Van Til identifies and expounds three schools of thought that uphold the notion that economic justice depends on basic sustenance for all within a market framework:

·        the ‘capability’ approach championed by the economist Amartya Sen;

·        the neo-Calvinist school emanating from the Dutch theologian and statesman Abraham Kuyper (1837-1920);

·        the school of ‘social economics’ associated with the International Journal of Social Economics.

                    The author’s treatment of the second of these schools contributes most to the originality of his book. From it he propounds a system of justice, based on the notion of social ‘spheres’, that recognizes human diversity and understands justice to mean not only that all human beings receive their basic needs but that citizens receive equal treatment and producers receive reward proportional to their contribution.

                    Van Til is adamant that his scheme incorporates and complements, rather than opposes, the system of distributive justice provided by the free market. For him, the market is necessary to address absolute poverty, even though it is not sufficient.

                    It is refreshing to read a Christian approach to poverty and wealth that affirms what is good about the market economy. The rarity of such treatments, even before the credit crunch, reflects the church’s difficult relations with business and its reluctance to put it at the heart its vision for poverty alleviation. Van Til’s adoption of the notion of spheres helps him to avoid these pitfalls and to see the economy as a sphere of human life that is fundamental to human flourishing.

Peter S. Heslam

 

Daniel J. Treier, Virtue and the Voice of God: towards a theology of wisdom, Eerdmans, 2006, 278 pp., £16.99 (pb)

Sometimes within the church one hears the dismissal, “That’s all just theology”. The implication is that personal “devotion” finally has as much to do with theology as Jerusalem has to do with Athens, and that is supposed to be, at best, not a lot. The rejoinder may be given, “Well your view is just pietism.” The first attitude in its concern for “personal spiritual formation” is danger of losing sight of that which indicates what is truly formative, and actually transformative, in terms of the normative understandings of Christian faith. The second attitude in its concern for explicating the complexities of Christian teaching is in danger of turning the communitarian Christian exploration of truth – i.e. faith seeking understanding – into an impersonal science separated from formative education in faith, and the transforming practice of faith.

                    Both attitudes, in different ways, marginalise Scripture-formed wisdom and the practice of Christian virtue. However, today the problematic modernist tendency of dividing theology from practice, understanding from faith, canon from community, knowledge from virtue, and teaching from wisdom, is being redressed in a number of approaches involving more holistic, post-critical, narrative-formed ways of thinking and being Christian.       

                    Daniel Treier is such a redresser. He identifies the problems, exegetes an overarching biblical-theological motivation, explores and connects the complexities, and points towards a more integrated vision. Like Ellen Charry,[i] Treier seeks to recover the practical integration of theological reflection within the church’s formative practices that generate Christian wisdom and virtuous living. With Charry, Treier associates the growth of the academy – and the subsequent supposed apologetic need to conform theology to the “scientific” paradigm – with the detachment of theology from Christian wisdom and virtue. Treier, again like Charry, returns to the pre-modern roots of theology in the exploration of the wisdom of God as an embodied, pastoral, formational, enterprise. In ways that follow (but also seek to correct) MacIntyre,[ii] Treier recovers the significance of virtue, both as essential to the church practice of theological reflection, and as a proper consequence of theological engagement.

                    Treier is less an innovator than a master synthesiser. He traces a host of connections – mostly within current post-critical discourse – among theology as wisdom; the theological reading of the Scriptures as a dialogical, church-framed, Christ-centred narrative; the speech-act conception of meaning; the gospel as public truth, etc. The book provides a wealth of discussion that cannot be noted in a review such as this.

                    Treier stresses the embodied character of theological wisdom, and the fruitfuless of a cultural-linguistic approach to doctrine, and has no brief for a one-dimensional propositionalist hermeneutic. Nevertheless, he is concerned that Christian faith should not be reduced simply to the “grammar’ of what the Christian may say consistent with the church’s culture and language game. Not only is the core content of faith something ultimately independent of our modes of expression, the Word of God is not bound by our modes of expression and must be able to speak anew.

                    This interdisciplinary book evidences considerable mastery over a wide range of, mostly contemporary, hermeneutical and theological considerations. However in its complexity it still reads like the PhD thesis from which it originated. Exhaustive, it is a somewhat exhausting read. A post-critical taste for full-bodied complication (contrasting with the thin soup of journalistic modernism) may remain difficult to digest, in spite of the improved nutrition.  Nevertheless, the closing chapter – exploring the Trinitarian inculcation of wisdom via Barth’s theology of revelation – offers something of the integration towards which Treier’s book, as a whole, is directed.

                    Deserving a special note is Chapter 2: Wisdom and Living Virtuously in Communion. A key theological exegesis of Proverbs 3:13-18 leads to discussion of the pivotal wisdom of Christ and, via consideration of the Spirit, to a multifaceted discussion of practical reason. In this way Treier unfolds the biblically-indicated shape of Christian virtue to be made manifest within, and by, the community of faith. However, one wishes that all the Hebrew and Greek had been transliterated.

                    The book has provides by way of a very useful resource 46 pages of endnotes, a 17 page bibliography, an index of names and subjects, and an index of Scripture references.

Gavin Drew

 

Short Notice

Chris Eerdman, Countdown to Sunday: A Daily Guide for Those Who Dare to Preach, Brazos, 2007, 206pp., £8.99

"Chris Eerdman describes how, through the week, through faithful discipline, the preacher peels off the many masks of the text until he or she comes face to face with God. But in the process, the preacher peels off his or her own masks, and, like it or not, comes face to face with himself or herself. This is a book to challenge and encourage preachers, and is also a book for anyone who is ready to come face to face with the truth."

Samuel Wells, Chaplain, Duke Divinity School

 

The Nova Research Centre

researching mission in Europe, innovating mission in Europe

introduced by the Director, Darrell Jackson

 

In April 2007 I moved from Budapest to Redcliffe College, Gloucester, to establish a new Centre with a research interest in mission in Europe. I had previously spent three years working as a researcher in European Mission with the Conference of European Churches.

 

The Nova Research Centre was officially launched at Redcliffe in January 2008. Redcliffe has a tradition as a mission training college. During its eighteen or so years in Gloucester it has developed undergraduate and postgraduate programmes that assume as a basic starting point that contemporary mission is undertaken in intercultural, globalised, and post-colonial contexts. Nova has become a key part of this vision and reflects the desire of the College to better understand the nature of Christian mission in contemporary Europe.

            ‘Europe’ defies simplistic attempts at definition, categorisation, representation, or description. Diversity, complexity, plurality, and transition are words that come readily to mind in the effort to describe Europe. There is ample evidence to suggest that Europe is simultaneously pre-Christian, Christian, and post-Christian. Equally there are pre- and post- forms of secularity and modernity. Newbigin clearly helps some European countries make sense of the context for mission but in some countries his analysis is resisted and even felt to be wrong. There are some European Christians who still consider Constantine to have been a good thing.

            Set against this background, what does a Research Centre located in a mission training College in the UK do and offer? Nova is working in four areas. Firstly, it carries out field research, mainly, though not exclusively, through a qualitative research approach. Secondly, it carries out research commissions for Mission Agency and Church clients. A third area of activity has been to develop a historical mission archive with a particular focus on Europe. Finally, all of its research activity is integrated with the teaching of European Studies and other programmes at Redcliffe College.

            Nova’s first major research report was titled ‘Mapping Migration in Europe: Mapping Churches’ Responses’ and was a collaborative project with the Churches Commission for Migrants in Europe and the World Council of Churches. A second research-led activity is to publish material on the issue of ‘New and Emerging Mission Movements in Europe’. Opportunities to contribute to newspapers and magazines have been taken and Nova staff have contributed to significant articles in Time and Newsweek dealing with themes of Christian faith in Europe. A number of Christian agencies have also used Nova for consultation purposes.

            The key concern for a missiologist with an interest in Europe must surely be the nature of Christian public witness in the diversity of European contexts, whether in the public square or political arena. A central assumption underlying the work of Nova is that public witness in Europe has to be four-fold and includes public proclamation, public assembly, public action, and sometimes public confrontation. Nova’s research interest lies in the discovery of innovative ways of engaging in public witness within Europe.

 

            A significant frustration in this work is presented by a peculiarly British way of reading European cultures, societies, and politics. Apathy, prejudice, and a lack of conviction breed a feeling that Europe is not really a legitimate sphere of mission activity and reflection. Too many people seem incredulous therefore that a European Research Centre should be based in the UK. This frustration is compounded by the real challenge of the secularisation of European politics and the ideological gains of contemporary liberal individualism in the public square.  In this situation, the public proclamation and public action of the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Evangelical Churches is often viewed with suspicion by the European population and perceived to run counter to the European vision. Public assembly in Europe draws on various models and experiences of Church-State relationships, of course; and where Christians have deemed these forms of public assembly to be inadequate for contemporary Europe, Nova’s research interest naturally focuses on the emerging expressions of church that are taking their place alongside the so-called historical Churches of Europe.

            Where the State Church model is in decline there is an increasing loss of the Christian story. Intriguingly, there is however at the same time a new interest in whether the Christian story has any relevance to contemporary Europe. Time and Newsweek have had a long-standing interest in European religiosity and these two were joined in 2007 by the Economist which finally acknowledged that European religiosity could no longer be ignored by its journalists. European Islam and migration were important catalysts in this respect but European Christians have also been making increasingly effective contributions to the public political, cultural, and economic realms.

            Nova is constantly monitoring and commenting on these and other developments the European cultural and political contexts as well as Christian responses to these in mission and evangelism. A regular digital research-led bulletin features news and stories illustrating these areas. The Nova website also carries an increasing amount of material that will be of interest to those with a concern for mission in Europe. The research bulletin can be subscribed to by visiting the website at <www.novareasearch.eu>

This issue's contributors:

Jeremy Begbie is Research Professor of Theology, Duke University, U.S.

Ian Cowley is an author and Vicar of Yaxley and Holme with Conington, in the Diocese of Ely

Gavin Drew serves on the editorial team of Stimulus (New Zealand). He has worked for the Bible Society in New Zealand and as Dean of Studies for the Bible College of New Zealand at its Wellington branch

Peter Heslam is Director of Transforming Business, Cambridge University (www.transformingbusiness.net)

John Hodges is retired Professor of Animal Genetics who has served with the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) where he started the UN activities for the conservation of livestock agro-resources in developing countries and was involved in drafting the Convention of Biodiversity

Darrell Jackson is Director of the Nova Research Centre and Lecturer in European Studies, Redcliffe College, Gloucester