
This may come as a shock to you but
Book reviews. History. Religion. Politics

This may come as a shock to you but

Several years ago Anthony Flew shook things up in the world of philosophy and religion by changing his mind about the non-existence of God. In other words Flew is a theist now and not an a-theist. This should not be taken to mean that Dr. Flew is now a Bible believing evangelical Christian though. He came from a Christian home and his father was a preacher and expert Biblicist, but Flew was unconvinced then and now as an octogenarian is still so. But as someone who has made his life’s work philosophy, he has done something quite daring; when confronted with additional information he changed his mind and did so publicly. Some of his fellow atheists have accused him of hedging his bets ala’ Pascal’s Wager, but in reality Flew is very clear he doesn’t even believe in an afterlife much less a final judgment. Flew merely believes there is a Creator, omnipotent and omniscient, who has made all that we see and know in the universe. So some philosopher changes his mind and is no longer an atheist but is not a Christian; why would this book be important to read? First of all Flew gives a relatively nuanced breakdown on his change of mind about atheism that is very enlightening. Much of it has to do further scientific discovery which makes the idea of evolution occurring without an incredible mind behind it fairly untenable. An example that is given is the breakthrough work in understanding DNA , the basic building block of all living things. The idea that its highly sophisticated unfolding program would develop spontaneously by some mechanistic force seems more likely explained by a Creator. Perhaps of greater value to the Christian is the fact that the so-called traditional arguments for the existence of God which were articulated by theologians and philosophers in the Medieval era are not as unsophisticated and discredited as we’ve been lead to believe (for more information “google” the arguments for the existence of God). As Flew looks back to the classical Greek philosophers idea of God, he concedes their idea seems to most closely parallel the God of the Judeo-Christian scriptures, but for Flew to connect with that fact is going to be more a matter of relationship than philosophy.

“The sad part of living in the same town so long is you start to resemble your (very dilapidated) neighborhood…”
---Sylvester Stallone in “Rocky Balboa”
Although I wasn’t born there, I have lived in
I was thinking about the
1. Jack’s Burger Haus, Dell’s Hamburgers, Stu’s Burger Bar
2. Sister Ray Records and The Tape Shoppe
3. The Starlite Drive-In
4. The smell of Flueher’s Bakery in the afternoon
5. Kim’s Restaurant
6. The Big “Y”
7. Bob Kennedy’s “House of Guns” and all the other cool stuff
8. Trowbridge’s Store
9. KYJC #1 Radio and KSHA with all the cool clocks saying what time it was around
the country.
10. Golf-o-Rama

One of the bright spots in present-day evangelicalism is that the long impoverishment of it’s tradition of spiritual formation seems to be coming to an end. Witness the proliferation of books in the last two decades on the spiritual disciplines. When Richard Foster came out with Celebration of Discipline in the early eighties it was a bit of a radical book. Today, it is a classic of discipleship quoted by everyone else. Dennis Okholm has made an excellent offering in this field with his book which successfully makes the broadest principles of Benedictine spirituality accessible to Protestant laypersons. He makes a good point that St. Benedict actually preceded the existence of the Roman Catholic Church as we know it today and thus the tradition is actually more universally Christian belonging to neither Catholics or Protestants alone. That aside, Okholm invites the reader to consider the practices of listening, poverty, obedience, humility, hospitality, stability, and balance which are practiced to this day by those with a religious vocation. As an example, Okholm points out that the vow of poverty does not mean a monk has no resources. He actually has all he needs to do live his life and do his work. He or she just owns it communally instead of individually. A protestant can practice the same by generously sharing his possessions with others and creatively networking to pool things that are only used occasionally. Hospitality for Benedictines meant taking in and ministering to the needs of a stranger as if he were Christ in disguise. Protestants may not have a retreat house like a monastery does, but they might have a spare bedroom. Just treating the many strangers that cross our path in a given day as if they were Jesus Himself would be a form practicing Benedictine hospitality. The book does a good job explaining how all of these practices are directly connected with scripture and how they enable us to be more available to Christ that we might become more fully transformed. I would recommend this book to be read first and then follow it up with Henri Nouwen’s The Way of the Heart and Dallas Willard’s The Spirit of the Disciplines.

As a minister I frequently receive magazines which I would have to classify as “trade publications.” These are not about how to pray better or understand theology, but how to be a successful or more successful pastor. I guess this is good. Jesus was successful wasn’t he? Success is naturally tied in to buying this product or that which will make your church building and services really pop! And after all, with so many churches competing for souls, you have got to make your operation really stand out. With a better building or mailout campaign you might even be able to smash the competition. Another big issue I keep reading about in these magazines is how as an institution Churches have got to start being on the cutting edge of change. Apparently we are losing ground in the culture because we are not relevant enough or are out of touch with generational values. Perhaps I’m missing the obvious but our society is in a constant state of flux and to try to keep up with these changes seems like a fool’s errand. By the time you get in lock-step (or goose step) with the changed culture, it has already changed and you’re passe’ again. I guess going out of your way to be out of step with culture (like the Amish and other groups) is hardly a virtue either. Consider the great loss of life recently when an Amish Airlines jet crashed at the end of the runway when the horses pulling it didn’t get enough speed up! But I digress. It just seems to me that those within and without the Church really don’t know that much about what they really want in life which is why there is the constant tyranny of the latest and greatest fad always running in the background. Jesus Christ and the Gospel are the same yesterday, today, and forever. Maybe those of us who are clergy should take note of this once again and not be afraid that our story, our product really, is very old. But the surprising thing is that after 2000 years, the Gospel alone still has more power to save than any of the new and improved enhancements and techniques we employ to jazz things up a bit. There is just something about Jesus that is always so relevant!

“Saibarites” and “Gyrovagues” are words used by St. Benedict of Nursia to describe two kinds of Christians that are still alive and with us 1400 years after he wrote his famous Rule. A Saibarite, according to Benedict, is someone who determines right and wrong, spiritual or unspiritual according to their own personal taste. If they happen to like something or agree with it, it must be true and spiritual and worthy of pursuit. If they find something disagreeable or offensive to their sensibilities, then it must be wrong or unspiritual and be dismissed immediately. This is not to say that sometimes the very reason we dislike something is because it really is wrong and unspiritual. Many years ago I had a friend in Bible college that made racial slurs about black people. I find bigotry in bad taste but also quite sinful according to the teachings of Christ. But there are some people who tend to think that anything in conflict with their personal point of view is wrong and dismiss it quite uncritically. What is wrong with this line of thinking is that as Christians our truth comes from outside of ourselves. Man is a fallen creature in need of rescue not only from the flames of hell but also his own stupidity. Our minds and capacity to discern truth apart from the assistance God’s Holy Spirit, the Bible, and the community of the faithful is almost nil. We alone with unaided human reason as our guide consistently make the wrong choice (consider your investment history or how many unhappy married people there are). King Solomon wisely noted that there is wisdom in a multitude of counselors (Prov. 15:22) precisely because we need perspective outside of ourselves in order to discern the truth. Sometimes there’s an even darker motivation behind a Saibarite: pure, unmitigated, intellectual laziness. It is astounding how many of us suffer from an insatiable lack of curiosity about why things are the way they are. It’s like the bumper sticker I saw on a car recently that read “God said it, I believe it, that settles it!”. Although I can appreciate the well meaning sentiment about loyalty to God’s Word, I have a nagging suspicion the reality is more like “don’t bother me with any hard questions, because I don’t want my faith or assumptions about life disturbed!” The prescription for the Saibarite is really quite simple: take time when you hear a point of view that you don’t readily agree with and explore the reasons others might hold it. You may come to the same conclusion anyway, but at least you will have an understanding and perhaps even a greater toleration of people different from yourself. In some cases you might even have your mind changed completely which I would contend is truly one of life’s little miracles.




As a lifelong Oregonian, I am one of the few people in the










Just like any gemstone is enhanced by a beautiful setting, author Gerald Sittser has taken 2000 years of the history of Christian spirituality and made it shine by helping us to understand its particular context in time and application in the present. Sittser points us to the saints of old and tells us what makes them extraordinary is they believed there was “more, much more” they could expect to receive from God and that is our spiritual birthright. In some cases the ancients have some very relevant lessons for today’s Church. For instance the strong community life and corporate disciplines of the early church stand in contrast to the individualistic emphasis of today’s Christians who readily change congregations based on ‘felt needs’ and personal aspirations. Another lesson comes from the emphasis on the sacraments from the Middle Ages. While they may have held beliefs that were not totally rooted in the scripture, they were keenly aware they had no self-sufficiency before God and in humbly receiving the sacraments, they were receiving nourishment for their souls. Perhaps the best part of the book is his chapter on missionaries called “Risk”. Here we read about the great missionaries of the 19th century and are led to the realization that God doesn’t look for perfection but rather passion for Him in those He uses mightily. Sittser charges all of us to become saints today. Not the saints of ages past who lived in monasteries, the deserts of


I am not a novel reader for many good reasons. A lot of it has to do with the old adage “truth is stranger than fiction” and I might add to that a lot more interesting. That said, I had two events come together recently that led me to read The Last Jihad by best-selling author Joel C. Rosenberg. Recently I had been watching Glenn Beck on CNN and he had

I’ve just finished Arthur C. Brooks article “A Nation of Givers” in The American (April/May 2008). The article gives hard statistics to some things I’ve known both intuitively and anecdotally for years namely that as a whole, Americans are far more generous with charitable giving than all other Western countries but also that the backbone of charitable giving is the poor and middle-class who tend to donate money and volunteer time in greater proportion to their income than their wealthy counterparts (low income families give 4.5% of annual income to charity while those making more than $100,000 per annum give just 3%). The religiously active and politically conservative person also tends to give more money both formally and informally than their secular and politically liberal counterpart as well. In other words, Churchgoers who believe the government needs to cut back on social programs will predictably support their house of worship, but will also give far more to charitable causes that help the poor and disadvantaged in their community. They also tend to be the people who will stop by a bank and leave a check for someone they don’t even know who needs a liver transplant that they read about in the newspaper. One surprising note that Brooks made in the article is that religious people are 25% more likely to support non-religious but worthy causes (health, safety, and common good of people) and 21% more likely to volunteer their time to these same causes than their secular counterparts. What is truly fascinating is the statistics Brooks supplies on “forced” giving to the disadvantaged through higher tax rates, versus volunteer giving. A 10% increase in the GDP per person would lead to basically a 9% increase in charitable giving the next year. Conversely a 10% increase in taxation (forced giving) to fund social programs for the disadvantaged would lead to only 3% increase in the GDP. When people are making more because of a robust economy, it spurs them on to greater generosity which in turn is much better for the economy. The Bible says that God loves a cheerful giver but in light of this it would seem the American public ought to be grateful and our lawmakers should take notice that volunteered generosity is far greater force for the common good than coerced redistribution of wealth.


The only thing more baffling than people who write 1000 page autobiographies are the people who actually read them! I voted for Bush I in ’92 and Bob “ED” Dole in ’96 but was still curious about the wild popularity of Bill Clinton and hoping to hear his side of the story of what happened during his presidency. In my opinion, My Life is very illuminating when he describes his early years which included his father’s death before his birth, being raised by a young widow who left him with his grandparents while she attended nursing school, and then growing up with a step father whose alcoholism eventually broke up the family. Having known other men who have grown up in similar family systems, they learn to observe, negotiate, and survive. Unfortunately many who grow up in such homes have serious personal struggles we don’t always recognize, but in Bill Clinton’s life these skills were applied to the political life in such a way that the moniker “comeback kid” was quite apropo. There are times when

As a long time student of Roman history I have burned up many hours of my life reading some very interesting and not-so-interesting books on this expansive topic. Ferrero was a Roman historian in the early twentieth century and a professor and author with much acclaim in his day. So much so, that he was invited by President Teddy Roosevelt in 1908 to come to the


Everybody saw it coming. Real Estate values going up so fast that in some markets people were “day trading” meaning they were buying a property in the morning and selling it at a profit in the afternoon. The stock market was heating up to record high numbers along with speculation on barrels of oil for some future shortage that hasn’t seemed to materialize yet. Meanwhile our government wages war using subcontractors who patriotically post record profits all at the expense of the next few generations of Americans. Now awash in national debt, the dollar has tanked and with that the value of our savings evaporates in the inflationary spiral. Whenever people are 'getting rich quick' you can bet the farm that things will go the other way just as fast. Moneywise, the news is bad and quite frankly no one worth listening to on economics thinks things are going to improve for a few years. Like I’m sure you have been doing, the last few months have been a steady series of small adjustments. The $30 fill-up is pushing $50, sit-down restaurant dinners are now at home with “take and bake pizza”, and we won’t be getting a flat screen TV with our economic stimulus package but rather paying off a credit card balance which has been creeping in the wrong direction since last November. But I am particularly happy about two adjustments our economic problems have forced me to make. First, I am realizing how wasteful and consumptive my lifestyle has become. I’m turning off lights that don’t really need to be on. Trips to the store are planned with multiple errands and not just for a gallon of milk and I’m planting less flowers and more vegetables in my yard this year. Second, and more importantly, it has made me realize how much worldthink has penetrated my outlook. If our only index of present and future happiness is the economy doing well, then we are impoverished already. Slowly but surely, I am developing a ‘new index of happiness’ that is less material and more spiritual. Jesus Christ rightly tells us our lives really are much more than we possess and anxiety over this is both faithless and futile (Matthew chapter 6). Perhaps we would all be better served by basing our happiness on having a thriving relationship with the God who loves us, a host of friendships where we give and take, and a lifestyle that is noted for its simplicity rather than extravagance. This kind of wealth is far more certain to produce happiness in the long run and far less prone to disappear when times get hard.