are academic theologians useless?

Well of course not.
but..

In response to a post by Tony Jones, David Fitch, author of The Great Giveaway, as posted something I believe is of tremendous importance. He addresses people entering the academic life with three basic issues; (3) The Publishers Have Become the Pope and we need to deal with it, (2) There is a need for more Ph.D. pastors, and (1) The problem of the Tweener book. I think Fitch identifies some contours of very practical theological issues for today's church, not to mention uncovering the way consumerism affects theology. Definitely worth a read and a comment. I believe as the chair of Evangelical Theology at Northen Seminary, he does appreciate academic theologians at some level :) He writes:
"The tweener book is a book which is neither an academic monograph nor a trade book written for a broader untrained audience. These ‘tweener’ books are written for pastors, the theologically interested and well read, the leaders in the church who communicate regularly to the lay person/ who is not theologically trained or motivated. The problem is these ‘tweener’ books don’t sell 40,000 copies, never mind 20,000 copies. They cannot be priced as a monograph reference text for other professors/libraries that usually buy these books. They fall in between. They are risky and not as economically feasible for a lot of traditional publishers. Yet they fulfill probably the most important educational task. For it is among this audience of leaders - pastors-theologically interested readers where the significant changes are cultivated through books. The economics of these books make it imperative that serious theologians become more creative in marketing and writing publications that are in essence tweener publications."
UPDATE: The discussion was kicked off by Jonathan Walton's post, "Is the Theologian an Antiquated Relic of a Dying Institution?"

a call for theology lectures, cont.

So I have the first round of resources up, I hope to find more. It might also be possible to collect the various free papers and elements and collate them in one place as well. As Blogger hosts the site, I'm not sure if I can create another page just for these links or not. For now, I'll keep adding to the one post so that it's all in the same place. I'm also downloading them all to keep a local copy. Please keep suggesting them! I'm especially interested in class lectures so that those of us 100k and 6 years shy of a degree can keep up to speed :)

audio resources for theology (free)

I am currently in the process of finding all the best .mp3 , podcast, and even video I can find on the 'net. I am interested in lectures, especially class lectures, by theologians, especially the postmodern, post-Barth, systematic, kind. <--I don't know what that means either, but Google will.... Thus far, I have a number of links to Rowan Williams, some T.F. Torrance, some Hart and even some Jensen. I've already scoured Faith&Theology as well as some related links, but would love to be more comprehensive. All kinds of lectures are welcome. The iTunesU pages are woeful and pretty much impossible to find. When I think of how many wonderful lectures I attended that went unrecorded, I'm motivated to dig some out! Do you know of any? Any professors who allow their lectures out in the wild? If so, post 'em up in the reply section here, or email me!
ABC
Ray Anderson 
Karl Barth
Walter Brueggemann
Alain Badiou,
    David Bradshaw
    •  "Divine Energies in Eastern Orthodox Christianity," (in relation to Aristotle in the East and West) Pts One and Two
    • A video with response from Milbank, as well as other video discussions.
    John Caputo
    Noam Chomsky
    James Cone
    DEFG
    Marva Dawn
    Gordon Fee
    • 3 Devotions from a Vineyard Conference; 1,2,3
    James Forbes
    Makoto Fujimura
    • The Extravagance of Hope: The Mediating Role of Art in Culture, Part 1, Part 2
      Justo Gonzalez
      Stanley Grenz
      Gustavo Gutierrez
      HIJK
      David Bentley Hart
      Stanley Hauerwas
      Robert Jenson
      LMNO
      Alister McGrath
      Jürgen Moltmann
      Nancey Murphy
      Ben Myers
      Richard John Neuhaus
      Lesslie Newbigin
        Reinhold Niebuhr
          Oliver O'Donovan
          PQRS

          Wolfhart Pannenberg
            Vinoth Ramachandra
            TUVW
            James B. Torrance
            T.F. Torrance
            Paul Tillich
              Kevin Vanhoozer
              Miroslav Volf
              John Webster
              Cornell West
              Merold Westphal
                Dallas Willard
                Rowan Williams
                Ben Witherington III
                NT Wright
                XYZ
                Slavoj Žižek
                Slavoj Žižek - John Milbank
                Slavoj Žižek - Cornell West
                Audio Series & Conferences:
                Veritas Forum: -hit and miss.
                Boston College: Front Row: 150+ lectures.
                Seattle Pacific University has some wonderful speakers on iTunes U.
                Maclaurin Campus Lectures.
                The Discourse Notebook:
                Baylor University: a number of lectures, some listed above.
                Sacred Modernities: "The aim of this conference was to take stock of these transformations in the context of what is often referred to as a ‘post-secular’ age comprised of ‘multiple modernities’." (via infinite th0ught)
                Other:
                Patristic audio books!
                Please Suggest Some More! :

                new gadget

                Hey, as some folks have suggested, I found a handy gadget for the site: a theological word of the day. It's cute and has some concise descriptions. Check it out, lower right.

                4 horsemen of the apocalypse: power

                Continuing the series on the 4 horseman of the apocalypse, our second horseman according to Revelations 6 is War. I am tempted to say that War in the US looks like leadership, but leadership is really just the fruit of what we believe about power. War is the destroyer, the fighter of fights, the unyielding hammer.



                #2, War: Power

                As Christians bent on success, we have largely ignored the consequence of our assumptions about leadership; what it is, how it works. You see this at Easter. We portray the cross as the greatest suffering moment in the world, not one among many. Jesus came to be one of us, not out-macho us. We’ve done an odd thing turning his taciturn manner into the latest Schwarzeneggarian muscle fest, because of what we believe about power. We don’t actually think it comes in weakness at all, and I think Good Friday may be a more appropriate holiday for us. As it turns out, the kind of power Jesus exercised was not one of military force, but love. This seems to go largely unnoticed in church.

                Our popular theology needs the forceful exercise of power, the King, the Pope, and the CEO. We don’t understand how the power of love works, and do not trust the Holy Spirit could be more “effective” than leadership that looks like AIG, Microsoft, or our political parties, so church leadership resembles Wall Streets’s convictions more than Christ’s. The church is chasing the same carrot the S&p 500 is: market capitalization. In doing so, we are unaware we’ve accepted Caesar’s rule.

                We don’t believe in power, we believe in divinly sanctioned power, but we assume they work the same way. We read Revelations and salivate over the coming celestial war and are don’t see the weak community that avoided fighting battles expecting God to deliver them in other ways. No wonder reconciliation is so rare. Case in point, Mark Driscol. Check out this New York Times Article. Seriously. Makes Ricky Bobby seem orthodox..

                More immediately, Christian leaders are always seeking “influence,” because we are so committed to leadership. Let me say from the outset that I am not anti-leadership. Good leaders are a real blessing, but they are a blessing because they lead differently. They don’t fall into the trap of seeking influence for influence’s sake more than love for others. The proof of our mistaken understanding is in the fruit of the “leadership life” we ignore – the burn out, adultery, the scandals, the fractured families, the high turnover rates, etc. Is there any larger neon sign something is wrong than pastor’s children? We have to ask , “if pastors are unable to love the minority voice in their own families, how can we believe we are trying to love the downtrodden in the world around us?”

                Our preoccupation with effective results makes us short sighted. It assumes a kind of control over a world we can manipulate, one subject to our rule, not God's. This doesn't make Of course, ineffectiveness a virtue though, either. As Yoder explains, “Only the person who believes that the “responsible use of power” from a position of domination is necessary... will then presuppose that the alternative is moral purity at the price of ineffectiveness.” (Yoder, The Priestly Kingdom, p.96) Ineffectiveness can assume the same kind of world effectiveness does.

                So what does that leave us? How then do we act, lead responsibly with the things God has given us? I think we must be committed to understanding and steeping ourselves in hearing what the bible says about power and leadership that runs counter to the world’s definitions. Our commitments must be to something higher- a vision of God’s love for the world that cannot consider anyone a means to an end. I should just close with Yoder again:
                The conviction that one’s morality and social style are expressive of a transcendent commitment and just of consequential calculation (I.e., what some call an ethic of ‘principle’), contributes to the holding power of individuals in the face of short-range conflict and opposition and protects against giving up the battle or ‘burning out’, standard temptations to those whose reasons for doing good is too closely correlated to manageable projections of effort.” The support of a [Christian Community] reinforces spocial reliability, enabling people to stand against the stream in the face of short-range ineffectiveness until longer range factors have time to work. (The Priestly Kingdom, p.97)

                seriously?

                "Rather than everyone here having to learn Chinese — I understand it’s a rather difficult language — do you think that it would behoove you and your citizens to adopt a name that we could deal with more readily here? ... Can’t you see that this is something that would make it a lot easier for you and the people who are poll workers if you could adopt a name just for identification purposes that’s easier for Americans to deal with?" Texas state Rep. Betty Brown
                In her defense, according to her publicist she, "isn't racist, she just wants to improve the voter identification process." I wonder if Rep. Brown knows Texas is a Spanish name? Or that English was not the first language in her state?

                p.s. the ability to displace one's own point of view is a profound Biblical virtue.

                the four horsemen of the apocalypse

                My teen years were full of metal. I thought I liked heavy metal, but now at my wisened age, I realize I liked thrash. Why am I telling you this? Metallica has a great song, The Four Horsemen, and it got me thinking about these figures. In Revelation 6 John paints a vivid picture of the spiritual powers that will be unleashed on earth and I wondered what the horsemen would look like today, so I've decided to trot them out on occasion and measure their coming. There were four, Pestilence, War, Famine, and Death by tradition, and as a theological exercise, it seems profitable to consider where they are already at work. I thought about an alternative Rapture Ready Index, but I figure considering them one at a time will make it look like I'm a diligent blogger carefully considering my words...here goes nothin'


                #1. Pestilence : Consumerism
                Pestilence is the devourer, the consumptive disease that rots us. And if there is one thing that may destroy us, it's our consumption: the commodification of just about, everything. Just watch T.V. – we sell success, love, belonging and joy -it just looks like shampoo, cars, bathing suits and beer. We devour everything without pity and the church has swallowed this agenda, hook, line and sinker. We spiritualize it, calling it evangelism. Faith has become another product that we are in control of, not a relationship. We measure success by what we own, not what we give away.

                You can see it in our obsession with trends and "the new." I recently came across this egregious example by a Christian consultant:
                "I'll be leading a discussion on what it means to authentically live out your brand on Friday, in addition to participating in two Q&A panels [both on Saturday]."
                mmmm. Authentic Brand Lifestyles (TM).

                Of course it's unfair to quote like this, so I'll keep it anonymous to protect the identity of all of us, but it is illustrative of how we think about our faith in church. I don't mean to single any person out, just the picture of our beliefs. Successful churches run a good business and market an appealing product. We consume more resources than we offer back to the world, on average, and we evaluate the productivity of a faith that claims "the seed grows and sprouts - how he does not know." (Mark 4:27) Now I’m not against advertising or getting the word out, and I'm certainly not against accountability, but neither do I believe Jesus was hoping to inspire a designer brand of clothing. ...certainly not Precious Moments figurines. I'm against that. With a 5lb sledge.

                Perhaps seeing the effect on our consumptive lust on the environment is a last sign: environmental disaster is a global, generalized symptom that happens after things we should have seen more directly: pornography consumption, human traffiking, injustice, haves and have-nots. By the time the environmental issues become apparent, we’ve already sold off most of our souls.

                So that's the new post series- If all goes well, I would like to proceed with some more constructive thoughts as well. Be sure to check back! If you have a moment, I have a short program that can help your faith succeed, no purchase necessary, void where prohibited...

                sermon: the cross.

                A sermon on the cross for Palm Sunday considering Matthew 27:32-50. I've edited for reading what I actually preached here.
                -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                We know how Good Friday ends. We've seen it. It ends in Easter and the glorious resurrection. The Gospels are written with a sense of holy wonder about what happened that Passover and in the later works of the New Testament there is profound theological development considering the implications of what happened at Golgotha, but it’s important to remember Easter didn't look that way 2000 years ago, not to the rest of the world. In the midst of telling his story, Matthew provides clues to see what the rest of the world saw that weekend.

                You see, in church on Palm Sunday we see crowds of pilgrims celebrating the arrival of the new king on a donkey. We see the palm fronds waving in celebration; a symbol of triumph. But the rest of the world saw thousands of pilgrims from all over the world enter that same city, and there were other more powerful flags waving. Pilate moved a legion of Roman soldiers into Jerusalem to squash any thoughts of uprising during the volatile Passover. We see Jesus, stolid before the rulers of the earth, resolute in his convictions, but the Roman Empire saw a Jew, maybe even an innocent one. Still, to keep the peace, it was easier to execute him. That’s what governments do, after all, they keep the peace. And sometimes sacrifices have to be made…

                We sometimes speak of Golgotha like a dreadful rock concert, in which everyone crowded at the base of a sacred mountain to see the climax of a cosmic tale. But the Romans didn’t see it that way. Archaeologists tell us they chose hills near roads for crucifixion so that people traveling could look and see the advertisement: Rome demands loyalty. And like real estate fliers and homeless people, Jesus met his fate at the side of the road.

                As Christians we read the Passion as a story about a world gone mad, crucifying God. But the Roman soldiers were trained to keep the peace, so of course they cast lots to decide who kept the prisoner’s clothes: they didn’t want cause a scene. We see the heavens turn over, the powers defeated in spiritual battle for the universe. But the soldiers saw no such threat. Matthew tells us they could sit down to watch their prisoners. No need to be at the ready.Jesus was not even a martyr. He didn’t enflame the hearts of 1000’s to take up arms against their oppressors. There were no riots over his death. There wasn’t even fiery sit in. Sometimes we wonder why there aren’t more documents that tell the dramatic tale of what happened, why there are no records of the day.

                The answer is that the rest of the world simply didn’t care.

                The weekend that Matthew Mark and Luke describe was much more bleak than we like to see. It was utterly insignificant to the entire world, save a few. At the cross, all of humanity rejected God. From top to bottom in Matthew -from the marble lined halls of the Roman rulers to the criminals hanging with him; from the devout religious leaders to the average Joe headed to a Passover celebration. Even his committed friends abandoned him; everyone rejects Jesus. It is total and complete.

                At the cross, we see everyone in no uncertain terms say NO to the Son of God.

                Crosses are fashion accessories now. They are our pride, with good reason. But they are also symbols of our rejection of God. The cross judges us because it reveals the true nature of our hearts: we are opposed to God. The cross judges us because it uncovers how we reject the life God offers us to core. It shows that in truth, we revile the kind of like we see in Jesus, regardless of our religious convictions. And as much as we speak of wanting to be like Him; live lives of obedience, love; of community, justice and healing, the truth the cross shows us is that in our deepest places, we do not want God at all.

                The cross is humanity’s NO to God.

                And Matthew tells us that all the people had the same contempt for the crucified one: “Save yourself Jesus!” We reject the ways he rejected our rules for living. God, of course would use his power to save himself, for right makes might, or perhaps might makes right, but either way, a real God would tear himself off that accursed thing.

                The world cries out to Jesus, “Stop pouring your life out for others!” “Stop listening to the Father like that!” “That’s not real life!” Neither the devout nor the average can imagine a God that would pour his life out, just let it be taken like that. They understand a God that might send Elijah to someone good enough, but they don’t believe people who are good enough end up on crosses.

                And so the cross is their NO to God.

                Ironically, the Chief Priests and Teachers take Psalm 22 on their lips and use it to deride Jesus. They take the very same Psalm Jesus cries out his lat to the father with, unable to believe that his life could be the one they need, could be the very thing their faith was to point them to.

                The cross is their NO to God.

                But despite all this, in fact, because of all this, the cross is God’s YES to humanity. Despite our inability to believe, our utter rejection of the kind of life Jesus offers, still, he goes there for you. For me.

                He faces the heart of our evil, our unbelief and he still loves and lives. So as much as the cross judges us, judges our No to God, it is Christ’s YES to us.

                “Yes, I will have you”
                “Yes, I understand you are unable”
                "Yes, I want you"

                The Good News is that his Yes is stronger than our No.

                It tears the temple curtain. It shakes the earth. It releases his spirit to us. For us now, the call to follow, to pick up our own crosses, to love and give in the hidden places, the painful places, is not a commandment to martyrdom, but a commandment to join Jesus in real life, the kind of life Jesus has, the kind that lasts even after death, the kind that sets people free. It’s a different kind of life that starts at the end of our own ability to save ourselves, our own ability to be good enough.

                At the cross, Jesus says Yes to us in love and life.

                necessity of OT pt2: tension in scripture

                Just today I found this wonderful post about the tensions in scripture, tensions the OT is rife with! It's a wonderful overview of how to consider scripture that jives with my previous post, but is much more practical. I highly recommend you read it! And the site, Chrisendom, in general. Here's a little taste:
                Truth is relational. In 1 Corinthians 13:6 Paul writes that love 'does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices in the truth'. Notice that truth is contrasted not with falsehood, but with unrighteousness. To live truthfully is to live justly, to walk with God. As is well know, Jesus claimed to be himself 'the truth'. Truth is ultimately this person, and the word 'person', it should be noted, is relational. In Christ's life, relationships, acts of mercy, kindness, death and resurrection we find Truth. To claim that 'the Bible is true' is a proposition that may thus need to be reframed more relationally.
                Check it out!

                the necessity of the Old Testament for theology

                One of the misgivings I have about my seminary experience is that there was no Barth in it. Seriously. I took the "core" academic classes for 10 years (don't ask...), and only in one class, Church Theology, was Barth mentioned in a 1 week unit. Appropriately enough, the unit focused on the Romans commentary and the radical rejection of human pathways to understand God. In the years since I have had to wrestle with Barth's later systematic thinking largely through books and blogs. (and one of these things is not like the others) Seminary taught me some basics, provided information ,but not always how to think about things. Understandably, there are so many basics that must be mastered in seminary, and I sympathize with the position my professors are put in. I mean, 20-somethings coming to seminary because it's extended Bible camp; to "succeed" in the Christian world, or simply stay in school until they figure out what to do, - these things seem to stack the deck against serious theological inquiry. Oh and funding, but I guess the postmodern considerations of outreach that really are not postmodern much at all pay the bills. Looking back, I think the person who most taught me to think theologically, besides Ray Anderson, was my favorite OT professor, J. Butler.

                I have always wondered if OT Christian Scholars must think more theologically because their discipline affords them a better perspective of the interaction of God's Word with His people. Despite being Marcionites...I wonder if OT theologians must learn to think theologically because the material is that much more foreign, that much more expansive over time, and they must reason in the face of more mystery. And perhaps their approach to the OT is actually more Christological - they endeavor to understand the OT world and God's revelation in it on its own terms, always knowing that the anchor in the future is coming. Some OT professors, I think, understand eschatology a bit better intuitively, perhaps because they spend their lives studying something incomplete, knowing everything examined is subordinated to something yet to come. I felt there were more tensions that were seen as such in my OT classes and in my experience which allowed professors to decouple their interpretations from so much necessity of how church should run. There is always this idea in the back of everyone's head, "Yeah, but that's the old testament...,"afterall. The sheer awkwardness of the text forces us to think in new ways. Does God endorse genocide? (1 Sam 15:2-3) What about polygamy? War? It forces us to be more responsible with our thinking. Or at least me - who knows what the OT scholars of the world are really like?


                I recently looked at an old paper I wrote about Jeremiah. It was bad, really. But I still remember the comments Brueggeman wrote about the subject; how reasonable the temptation to follow the Baals, was and still is. How utterly human the foreign Gods were. There was, writing that paper, such a sense of the existential questions swirling about ancient Israel for me. Survival was at stake, and I had to wrestle later to think about where the Word was in the midst of the struggle, and I heard the prophets answer back that life was in the caring for others.

                We assume that the NT is talking about us. The popular hermeneutics of churches today, in order to solidify and construct churches, finds rules and principles and archetypal plans for organization in the NT that seem timeless, as if the NT church is the endgame, instead of the beginning. We read the NT and see ourselves as part of the church simultaneously oppressed and triumphant instead of citizens in an empire that must be corrected, as the prophets bear witness. Not so many people look at the OT and say we must become a kingdom again (though there are some). And so we recognize there is something else going on in the text, something that we must work to understand, or abandon. There is mystery in the Old Testament because they are somehow not completely ours, and we must listen more closely to the other in them.

                So thanks, OT professors, for refusing to be just history teachers.