Interesting analysis Billy. I can see how more stories might make Christianity more interesting, and presumably more personally relevant to many because new stories might speak more directly to more people.
I am curious. Are there Jehosaphat related stories in Christianity? All I know of as Jehosaphat is the phrase jumpin' Jehosaphat. Chris From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 8:10 AM To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: [RC] Stories of Faith Stories of Faith The major thrust of the following article is that traditional Christian religion has largely become boring for believers. This characterization oversimplifies the gist of a thoughtful essay, but to make a point... Why is traditional Christian faith "boring." Why it is boring when it is ? It isn't always boring, it can be very important and meaningful in one's life. What, then, is boring about it ? Here is my theory : It is because of a limited set of stories. Granted, the sheer number of stories in the Bible is vast. The trouble is that in the course of a lifetime, actually long before one reaches solid middle age, just about everyone has heard all of the major stories , usually dozens of times, and a good representation of the minor stories, also multiple times. This is not a commentary on the truth value of these stories. Personally I think that most are either historically true, or, at a minimum, contain vital truths in a mythic context. The point is simply that these stories are repeated indefinitely and, for many people --probably most people-- they become less and less vital and engaging. Here is where the value of an ecumenical perspective is important. To use this example, suppose that you add stories about the life of Buddha to the collection of stories that a faith regards as expressing genuine spiritual truths ? Or stories from ancient Mesopotamia that provide precursors to many OT stories ? Or some ( by no means all ) of the stories which early Christians knew but that did not make it into the NT ? Like the Acts of Thecla, or maybe the Shepard of Hermes. This is not to say that adding such stories will be easy ; quite the opposite. It may be very difficult. But this does assume careful selection such that any added stories are congruent with the traditional Christian message. They don't have to agree with each and every particular, since that would be impossible, but they need to "fit" into the broader picture, to reinforce critical lessons or values In the case of Buddha, for instance, keep in mind that during the Middle Ages the life of Gautama was known in the West and understood to be that of a Christian saint, there are that many correspondences of value and outlook. Buddha, to medieval Christians was known as Jehosaphat, if you'd like to look it up, generally paired with the name Barlaam. This suggestion is made with awareness that the Unitarians, and some others, already do this. But I don't think they do it very well, and they may do it poorly because, for the religious Left, stories must be supportive of a non-spiritual ideology. We can call this ideology "secular humanism," which is OK as a shorthand but which is too much of a stereotype for anything like scholarly accuracy. But as an easy way to refer to the phenomenon.......... Now the point is that the purpose of adding good, relevant, inspirational stories should be strong desire to let the stories speak for themselves and to seek new levels of meaning in them as they might relate to our convictions and values. That would be a very different matter. Then you would have a situation is which stories of faith would be much more numerous than is now the case, more varied in nature, and present a whole range of challenges. The effect would be like adding a whole Testament to the Bible, or, at a minimum, a new Apocrypha. Not everyone would agree on how far to take this. For myself, I am a maximalist about it. This doesn't mean that there should be a 'million' new stories, but certainly well into the hundreds and maybe somewhat more. After all, the spiritual literature of the world is enormous in scope and most people are unaware of just how vast this is. But even a minimalist view could effect major changes, like just adding Thecla and, say, some Mesopotamian sagas. In either case, the entire "story dimension" of faith would undergo a profound transformation --for the better. Would there be problems ? I think so. But what is the price in terms of problems in perpetuating the status quo ? Seems to me if is far better to make the transition. To take this leap of faith. So that faith can be renewed. Billy ======================================= mm Ministry Matters Church for the Unaffiliated * By James K. Wellman, Jr. <http://www.ministrymatters.com/all/article/author/james_k_wellman_jr> * Posted on October 17th, 2012 The American religious landscape is experiencing some fundamental changes. The recent Pew Report <http://www.pewforum.org/Unaffiliated/nones-on-the-rise.aspx> highlights findings that question many of the assumptions that previous religious leaders and scholars have had about the American people. Pew points out that the rate of the unaffiliated is rising, and for those under thirty, it reaches to a third of this younger generation. And even more telling is that this group, who claim no religious affiliation, often remain believers in God and spiritual in various ways, but they are not seeking a religion; they are happy with what they have. This upends scholarship of the 1980's and 1990's, in which the younger generation was portrayed as "seekers", and many growing churches were called "seeker-friendly." What if today, no one is seeking? And even more pointedly, what if people are not buying what churches and other religions are trying to sell? And how will religious leaders deal with the fact that there are fewer potential members even interested in religion? Has something fundamentally changed in how Americans do faith? Is there a shift in American religion? In Mark Chaves's American Religion: Contemporary Trends (Princeton 2011), Chaves highlights the continuities of American religion but it is the discontinuities that stand out. Chaves, like the Pew Report, shows that in 1957 only three percent of Americans would mark "no religion" in surveys, today, 17 percent make the claim. More to the point, in 1924, 91 percent of Americans agreed that Christianity was the only true religion, and today only 41 percent make the same claim. Even more striking is that today three quarters of Americans say that another religion (besides their own) can offer a true way to God. So, while a third of Americans are born again, nearly one in five claim no religion, and the majority accepts a pluralist vision of religion in America. Today, to not believe is a live option. And when one does believe, there is much less certainty that one's belief is the only one or the right one. We truly live in an open religious market; where in many regions of the country there is no expectation of religious affiliation, of attending and becoming members in religious institutions. In my own region, the Pacific Northwest, there is, in fact, a kind of reverse pressure: Why would you attend church or synagogue? And if you do there is little prestige or status related to it, in fact, to some degree one must defend being religious and being committed to a religious organization. Most youth sports and academic programs now regularly schedule practices and events on Sunday mornings. So where does that leave religious leaders in the country? In light of my research on American religion and my recent book on Rob Bell and a New American Christianity, I have three observations: 1. You Can't Be Boring Religious leaders have very little tradition in families and communities to bank on for potential membership. In a sense, a religious leader must produce a religious product that creates a world and a story that can energize a community toward a goal and purpose that people would not normally seek. This makes the task of the religious leaders incredibly demanding and daunting. There has to be a very good reason to go to church or synagogue. The quality of what is offered must be at least as good and as engaging as what other secular and sometimes other spiritual products might be offering. Some find this too hard. But in the case of Rob Bell, who created the Mars Hill Church in 1999, Bell took it for granted that no one would come to church unless he made it so engaging and so relevant to their lives that there was no other place that they would rather be. In a period of a year and a half, he went from a 1,000 in attendance to 10,000 coming to three services on Sundays. Bell put on a show, the energy was contagious and people wanted to come. So, instead of complaining about how no one is faithful, Bell embraced it and created a compelling presentation and message that people sought out. 2. Go Beyond Liberal and Conservative The old culture wars between conservatives and liberals are not only dead but boring. Because of the saturation of higher education, conservatives who claim a literal belief in scripture, and that the Bible is somehow a kind of history book and or a science text book simply holds little water for more and more people. And this is particularly true for those in the younger generation; an inerrant Bible is no longer plausible. Nonetheless, the moral codes and values of many conservative churches still do make sense; many find faithfulness and a strong family life important. But even here, younger evangelicals are more accepting of their gay peers. At the same time, the boilerplate liberalism that claims that religion is always and only about social justice, gay rights, and marriage equality, simply falls flat. Liberal religionists who claim that miracles don't happen and that God no longer speaks to them, is equally as narrow in its own way. What I found in Bell is a kind transcending of these hard boundaries and one-dimensional universes. Bell holds up a vision of family values, faithfulness, and even moral purity that was attractive; but what he thought really mattered was what Christians did with the gospel both in compassionate service to the poor and marginalized and in care for one another. For him, dogmas and claims of inerrancy turned the "flesh of the gospel back into words," when the gospel and the preacher's task is to "turn the word into flesh." But Bell was no liberal avatar or cold rationalist. Bell believes that God is bigger than our labels and concepts that construct for him. God can heal; God can speak; God's love will win in the end. And finally, for Bell, and this I found this to be his greatest gift, a style biblical preaching can make the Word of God en-fleshed for its hearers. For Bell, the story of scripture comes alive in his preaching in ways that moved his church to love one another, to spend millions on AIDS prevention and building thousands of wells for water in Africa. 3. Earn People's Attention Here is the message: No longer is there a safety net for religious leaders. Success will not given to them on a platter. They must make their religion matter. They must make it engaging. They must make it plausible. They must earn their congregations. And perhaps this is a good thing. -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
