adamrshields's reviews
1902 reviews

Summary: An ethnographic study of an antiracism program in a Cincinnati evangelical megachurch.

Undivided was not a book on my radar. I had not planned on listening to the Holy Post Podcast which interviewed the author Hahrie Han. But then I got an email about a bonus segment which discussed the 2018 meeting at Wheaton College about what to do in response to Trump. I was well aware of that meeting and listened to that segment and then went back and listened to the whole podcast. If you are interested in just the interview, you can watch the YouTube video and skip to the 54 minute mark to get to the start of the interview.

Undivided in an ethnographic study of an antiracist training program in an evangelical megachurch. Hahrie Han became aware of it because of its involvement in passing a ballot initiative to provide free preK to Cincinnati students. She was told that the ballot initative was heavily influenced by a local megachurch. As she investigated she became intrigued because most DEI programs are not particularly effective at changing long term behavior. Han embedded herself in the church for nearly seven years to understand how the church and the program, which was eventually spun off to its organization, worked and what made it effective. Eventually the book discusses how it responded to the backlash to the program and the larger cultural backlash to antiracism programs within the US culture.

Undivided by Hahrie Han predominately traces four people while exploring the Undivided antiracism training program at Crossroads Church in Cincinnati. Han’s skill as a writer and researcher is evident throughout the book. Her four central characters are a Black male pastor (Chuck Mingo) who was the public face of the program. A white male participate in the initial program (Grant) who at the time worked for the Ohio Department of Corrections, eventually leading their social media team. Grant came to understand how much he didn’t understand about race, despite working in a racially diverse setting and having an adopted brother who was black. The third and fourth character are a Black woman (Sandra, a pseudonym) and a white woman (Jess). Undivided tells the story of these four characters of time and how they were changed by the program and by their relationships with one another. It is in large part the stickiness of the relationships with brought about the change within the characters.

I am a big fan of good ethnographic studies. Good ethnographic studies follow a group of individuals over a fairly long period of time to understand a context deeply. One of the best ethnographies I have read was Gang Leader for a Day, where a sociologist embedded himself in a Chicago housing project and local gang for years to understand how the culture and pressures of living in public housing and being within a gang worked. I was turned onto the model of ethnographic study after reading Slim's Table: Race, Respectability, and Masculinity
by Mitchell Duneier. I think I picked it up in the late 90s (it was published in ‘92) in part because I lived about two blocks from the restaurant at the center of that ethnography. Ethnography is inherently controversial because the act of embedding yourself into a community well enough to be able to report on the community impacts not just the community being studied (the observer effect) but also the researchers themselves are often changed because of the long term impact of the relationships. (At the end of the book, Hahrie Han say that her work with Undivided program and the people profiled and Crossroads church where the program was set drew her back to faith.)

I do not think I am an average reader for Undivided. I both have a good background in reading various ethnographies, but I am deeply invested in antiracism work in the evangelical world. I was interested in the book because I was well aware of a small meeting of Evangelical leaders which happened to be meeting at my Alma Mater, Wheaton College. Until recently I spent 15 years as a member of a different megachurch where I strongly advocated for racial awareness programs and called on the church to be more attuned to the need to center justice in their work. Throughout the 2016 to 2023 study of Undivided, I was involved in similar program in a different church and a different city. This story of Undivided is a largely positive one, but In 2021 I left my church after having lost faith that there could be change there.

There are a variety of reasons which I have mostly detailed in other places, but one aspect which I do not think got enough attention in Undivided, although it did get some, is that the megachurch model I think is inherently flawed. Even if I had full confidence in the leadership of my former church, I have come to believe that two aspects of the megachurch mean that I will never be satisfied. One, the megachurch model has been influenced by the Homogenous Unit Principle (HUP) of the church growth movement. Han mentions this in Undivided, but just in passing. The HUP was developed in a missionary context of India and then was brought back to the US and became part of a church planting and church growth movement in the 1970 to early 2000s. HUP suggests that the way to attract people to the church is to narrowly target a small demographic and cultural segment to meet the needs and attract just that group through culturally specific evangelism. A second aspect to the growth of the megachurch is not just HUP, but also targeting programming toward people who were not familiar with or uninterested in traditional church. My old church used to have the tag line, “A church for the unchurched.”

These two aspect matter to why predominately white evangelical megachurches are so bad at racial issues. The very DNA of most megachurches is a narrowly targeted cultural group. Willow Creek popularized Unchurched Harry and Mary as their target demographic and then proceeded to teach other churches to do the same. Part of my work in the late 1990s was working for a local association of churches and doing demographic reports for churches and church plants who were trying to find the narrow group they should be targeting in order to quickly grow. Once churches have this in their DNA, and then they prioritize being a comfortable place to go to church, avoidance of discomfort becomes the priority of the local church. A church that prioritizes avoidance of discomfort and who has a narrow cultural demographic as the base of its congregation, cannot address an inherently uncomfortable topic like race, which is not salient to most of the members because those members have been attracted because it is monocultural.

Again, it is mentioned, but the added layer to the problem is the increasing role of Christian Nationalism which has been empowered by the increasing reliance of fear of the other by the religious right. There have been whole books about the relationship of Christian nationalism to the rise of the religious right and how race is inherently tied into the very concept of Christian nationalism and to a lesser extent the development of the white evangelical movement. Books like Bad Faith by Randall Balmer and Religion of Whiteness by Emerson and Bracey approach the history and sociology of race within the evangelical church world.

The real draw to the book Undivided is how much the writing is centered on the characters. The reader learns about the program and about the issues of race within the evangelical world as the characters come to understand themselves and one another through the program and their relationships with others. These are not simply stories. As I hinted above in introducing the characters, each of them had significant changes in their life as a result of their connection to the program and one another. In many ways those changes were positive, but not all of them were. Undivided is in part about the cost that it takes to address race in a system that discourages the directness.

One of the difficulties of discussing race or economics or other topics that are “just in the water” is that language is difficult. For instance, Han occasionally uses the word “Whiteness” to describe the cultural belief in a system of racialization and hierarchy. Some readers view “whiteness” as meaning “all white people,” but the sociological definition does not mean all white people. Jonathan Waltonlikes to use the phrase “White American Folk Religion” instead of Christian Nationalism even if they have overlapping meanings because he wants to use language that is less fraught. The two different approaches of using whiteness to specifically name a problem with a name that can be misunderstood, or using a name like "White American Folk Religion" which needs to be defined but has less initial baggage is a topic that repeatedly comes up in Undivided. Studying the culture, something that people don't directly talk about because it is assumed to be understood, is necessary in a pluralistic world where people do not necessarily mean the same thing when using the same language.

The idea of ethnography centers the experience of the focus characters both as particular people, but also models who stand in for larger groups. The pastor, Chuck, grew up in the Black church and intially left Crossroads because of frustration over racial issues. But he came back and was hired and the social capital he earned through long term relationship with the church leadership allowed him some leeway to press in on difficult issues. But the tension on maintaining those relationships means that he was always wondering if he was not pushing enough or was pushing too much and if he was self censoring so that he could maintain relationship. Grant was a young white man who thought he knew it all because he had a black friend and a black brother. As he explored racial issues and the way that race played a role within his work at the Department of Corrections he became an activist. He started a prison ministry group at the church. And he work in his role as a social media manager to profile inmates through podcast interview and written profiles. But eventually he left the Department of Corrections because of backlash against his activism. Becoming a church staff members who continued his activism around racial issues there.

Sandra was a Black woman who was married to a white man. She grew up being taught by her father to not trust white people. After an early divorce and a young child, she was brought back to faith through Crossroads church. She eventually remarried a white man and had three additional children. Again, the book skillfully tells the story of how racial identity matters not just to white racism, but also the racial identity of those who are not black. It takes years and many small steps, but he comes to find her voice and understand how gender and race both play a role in her marriage struggles.

Jess is the youngest character in the book. She grew up in a family that was overt white supremacist, her father (who died when she was 11) had "White Power" and other similar tattoos and her uncle had a swastika tattooed on his chest while in prison. Jess also spent time in prison after a felony conviction and a serious drug addiction. While in prison she became a Christian and upon release she found Crossroads, regained custody of her son, and was just getting settled when she started participating in Undivided. She eventually completed college and becomes a social worker and presses back against the racism of her family and the systems she works and lives in.

It is very clear in Undivided that struggle is central to growth. The point is growth, not a particular destination. Even as the book is very clear about the struggle I think it may be too positively framed. The backlash, which is clearly the focus of the second half of the book I think is stronger than what just what is talked about. The book was published in September, 2024, which means it was largely finished in 2023 and written about events that were mostly 2022 or before. The reelection of Trump, the continuing overt Christian nationalism within the christian community and the backlash against DEI, immigration, and other topics I do not think have reached their zenith yet.

One of the strengths of Undivided is that Hahrie Han is not an evangelical insider. She is coming at the story with a different lens and different assumptions. But her not being an insider means that there are a lot of minor issues which I see as an insider. Some are minor fact problems like identifying Charlie Dates as the pastor of Progressive Baptist Church of Chicago starting in 2023. He actually became pastor of Progressive Baptist in 2011, but in 2023 also became senior pastor of Salem Baptist, jointly pastoring two different churches. The unusualness of the situation can be a part of why the detail was wrong. But there were a dozen or so similar minor errors that I think show a lack of evangelical editorial input. She also had some framing issues with describing people as "in the faith" in a way that felt very unevangelical. When she talks about Bebbington's evangelical quadrilateral and the National Evangelical Association, she incorrectly identifies them as nondenominational.

I think some of the lack of detail in the backlash section also is attributable to her outsider status. While she details the 2018 Wheaton meeting, she doesn't detail the 2018 MLK 50 or the 2018 T4G meeting which were both very much concerned with race in the Evangelical world. MLK 50 was jointly sponsored by the Southern Baptist ELRC and The Gospel Coalition (TGC) and is arguably part of the impetus of the national anti CRT movement. MLK 50 is regularly cited as evidence of those very conservative evangelical organization being "woke". TGC in 2019 published The Incompatibility of Critical Theory and Christianity, which directly identified the language being used in antiracism programs like MLK 50 or Undivided as being incompatible with Christianity. That eventually morphed into opposition to Critical Race Theory and the SBC's resolution about CRT and SBC seminary presidents unequivocally opposing CRT.That anti CRT eventually spread to school and political world with Trump's anti CRT statement in the fall of 2020. Part of the reality of the problem of race and Trump is that those who are opposing Trump and those who are trying to address race often, but not necessarily overlap.

As detailed more in the discussion on the Holy Post than in the book, many who were willing to speak out about racial issues are no longer willing or able to speak out because of the identification of discussion of race with political issues. One of the issues that led to my leaving from my church was the church's unwillingness to simply say that Marjorie Taylor Greene was not an active attender of the church. She was baptized in 2011, but according to staff who I have talked to, there is no evidence that she had any church involvement after 2013. In 2020, when she ran for congress she identified the church as her church and that she was involved in small group ministry there. The church was at the same time trying to address racial issues through small group and larger groups not unlike Undivided. In direct conversations with leaders at the church I told them that they could not be taken seriously as addressing race while avoiding other discussions trying not to offend. The problem is not conservative members of the church who are republicans, but the rhetoric being used.

I think Undivided made the very good point that to help people changes over time requires relationship. And that withdrawing from relationship precludes the ability to speak into people's lives. Undivided talks about how Jess' continued involvement with her uncle led to him having his swastika tattoo removed. And that she was able to discuss the problems of race within policing with officers who she regularly worked with in her role as a social worker. But the book also talks about how eventually Sandra and her husband divorced in part because of issues of race and his attraction to Christian Nationalism and how that impacted their relationship. There just are not simple solutions and what works in one case will not work in another.

What is helpful about Undivided, the book, is that is shows how slow on-going change through relationship matters. It also show why the context of a program matters as much as the program. It was not the six weeks as much as the context of putting people in settings where they can both build relationship and workout the ideas and context of what they were learning in settings where that matters. But the systems of white evangelicals and megachurches are not long term conducive toward addressing either race or broader justice issues. Isaac Sharp's The Other Evangelicals is in part about how choices have been made and are hard to unmake.

I do have some issues with some of the framing and there are some things that are mistakes more than framing problems. But I do think this is a very helpful book that I want to recommend to be read widely.

This was originally posted on my blog at https://bookwi.se/undivided/

Summary: A broad overview of the history of Black Christianity, with a second volume that is a collection of writing from Black Christianity.

Black Christianity in the United States is unquestionably tied to the (racial) history of the United States. That is a very basic statement but I think it is a good place to start when thinking about Walter Strickland’s new history of Black Christianity, Swing Low. Certainly good histories are contextually aware of the broader history while telling a narrower story. But it is not really possible to tell the story of Black Christianity without grappling with the racial history of the US because Black Christians in the US have always been subjected to that history.

I grappled with how to write that last line, because “subjected to” is a passive framing, and the Black Church has been anything but passive. At the same time, another incorrect framing would be to suggest that anti-Black racism in the US is a “Black problem”. James Baldwin was asked by Dick Cavett a variety of questions about that the “Black problem” in the United States. Baldwin answered Cavett’s questions about hope and frustration, but Baldwin also reframed the question to center racism as not a Black problem but a White problem. The problem of racism is not about the subject of the discrimination but the ones doing the discrimination. Part of what Strickland is doing in Swing Low is to show how Black Christians responded to racism by forming their own institutions and communities and theological beliefs and practices, but also that not everything in the Black church is a response to racism.

I have read several histories of the Black Church, most recently Anthony Pinn’s Black Church History, Henry Louis Gates’ companion book to his documentary This is Our Story, This is Our Song, Isaiah Robinson’s Black Church Empowered and Raphael Warnock’s The Divided Mind of the Black Church. These are four different approaches to telling the story of the black church. Of those four books Swing Low is most similar to Isaiah Robinson’s Black Church Empowered. Strickland is an academics historian and theologian, while Isaiah Robinson is a local church pastor. But they are telling the story as Black churchmen.

Esau McCaulley in Reading While Black talks about (and expands in a number of interviews later) the difficulty of who gets to tell the story of the Black church. Generally, the academy has prioritized Black Liberation theologians in the more liberal academic world. And those few Black professors in the predominately White Evangelical seminaries are similarly narrow. McCaulley suggests that the third group, the Black church pastors and preacher (like Isaiah Robinson) are rarely invited to the academy. Swing Low I think oriented toward that third group. Strickland is a professor at Southeastern Baptist Seminary, one of only a handful of Black professors at SBC seminaries. But the story here is framed to center the middle of the Black church and prioritizes theological orthodoxy in his five pillars of the Black church. Claude Acho details those five pillars in his review, so I won’t detail them here.

The last pillar is deliverance or liberation. And it is exactly in that last pillar that much of the controversy rests. Warnock suggests that Black theology must center liberation and the parts of the Black church which do not prioritize all forms of liberation are rejecting Black theology. Strickland is less polemical and more descriptive in his approach. The final five chapters of the book are split between telling the story of Black Evangelicals and Black Liberation Theology since the 1950-60s. As McCaulley talks about in Reading While Black, there has been a choice on whether to pursue higher education in more liberal schools where liberal and liberation theology is centered, which is often contrary to Black church orthodoxy or going to predominately white conservative seminaries that tend to be more conservative and orthodox, but are often more overtly opposed to the black church. That racism within the white evangelical world, one which has tended to spiritualize and individualize liberation has created significant frustration as well as organizations like the National Black Evangelical Association and The Witness.

The liberation theology side of the story starts with James Cone and J Deotis Roberts among others in the first generation and then continues with the following generations of womanist theologians and the second and third generation of liberation theologians. It is clear that Strickland places himself and most Black Christians in the Black Evangelical camp, but I do think he is pretty fair in his presentation of the liberation theology side. There are weaknesses every approach to theology and I think that Strickland is trying to present those weaknesses while maintaining his evangelical convictions. Strickland was called to be fired just for talking about Cone in his seminary classes when it was mentioned in a NYT article in 2019. The calls for his firing are a good example of the problems of staying in predominately white seminaries as a Black Evangelicals that he details in the three chapters on Black evangelicalism. But Strickland is also pointing out that there are many areas where liberation theology strays from his conception of orthodoxy, not just in the embrace of sexual minorities as Warnock details, but in what Christ did on the cross and the role of suffering among other areas.

Part of what I appreciate about this project is the second volume which I have not picked up yet. That second volume is a collection of writings from the whole history and tradition of Black Christianity in the US. I have previously read significant parts of Plain Theology for Plain People by Charles Octavius Boothe, which Strickland wrote a new introduction to and republished. Reclaiming older works by Black Christians in the US is part of the work of reclaiming the black church’s role in US Christianity. Swing Low is a project not just about telling the history of the black church, but also about recovering the voices of the Black church for a new audience so that they can tell their own story.

This was originally posted on my blog at https://bookwi.se/swing-low/

Summary: An overview of the book of Acts, paying particular attention to the temple and how the early church integrated gentiles into it while maintaining integration with its Jewish background.

I may not have picked up The Challenge of Acts if I had not watched the last 15 minutes of an episode of the Holy Postwhere Skye Jehani was interviewing NT Wright about The Challenge of Acts. Skye asked about what NT Wright would say in response to churches who pragmatically say that you should narrow-cast to a narrow cultural group and not seek to be more inclusive because churches grow more quickly that way. (This has been the argument from the church growth movement who advocated for the Homogenous Unit Principle, which I have written about before here.)

NT Wright suggests in that video that part of the message of Acts is that the church is not really the church if it isn't grappling with the integration of the entire body of Christ. To narrow cast to a homogeneous cultural group is to distort the idea of the church so much that it ceases to be the church.

Other commentaries on Acts like Amos Yong's have suggested that much of the action of the book of Acts is the expansion of the church to a larger and larger group of people and each expansion had a sense of conflict that had to be dealt with. And Willie James Jenning's commentary on Acts spent a lot of time grappling with the role of empire, violence and prison.

NT Wright has several main points he is communicating with his book on Acts. First, he raises attention to temple motifs in Acts. That attention to temple motifs is part of what Wright's larger project with the New Perspectives on Paul movement is doing in trying to pay attention to Paul's Jewishness and not make Paul into an antisemite as some commenters on Paul have done historically. Wright instead suggests that Paul is trying to integrate Jew and gentile into the body of Christ, not as s replacement of the Jewish religious practice (supersessionism) but as an integrated reality.

Something I have not heard before that I do think is an interesting point is that Wright is suggesting that part of why Paul is seen in Acts as going first to Jewish synagogues is that he is trying to appropriate the Roman exception to communal idol worship that Jewish people had to Christians. Generally all people who were under the subjection of Rome had to come together to offer sacrifices together to appease the gods. Jews had been given an exception to that requirement. Wright suggests that Paul was trying to use that exemption, but he wanted to use it in a way that violated Jewish self-understanding.

Paul says that the gentile Christians did not need to be circumcised. If Paul had asked gentile Christians to be circumcised then it would have been easy to say to Roman officials that these gentile Christians were Jewish coverts and therefore not subject to Roman idol worship requirements. But Paul wanted to claim the exception while not making the gentile Christians live under full Jewish religious requirements. That both endangered Jewish exemptions from Roman law, and didn't given enough attachment for the gentile Christians to make them recognizably Jewish. This framing makes a lot of sense of the way Luke structures Acts' storytelling.

The Challenge of Acts was based on a series of lectures in 2022. The last book I read by NT Wright was Into the Heart of Romans, which was a whole book focused on a single chapter of Romans. The Challenge of Acts is the opposite approach, it is a broad overview of a whole book of the Bible, drawing connections to both Old Testament references, New Testament self understanding and the second temple culture of the era. Generally, Wright is taking about four chapters of Acts at a time. He gives quick overview of how Luke is structuring the story in the section and then highlights several points more thoroughly before moving on to the next section.
There are a couple of exceptions to this general approach. The introduction of the book of Acts takes a little more time as you might expect. And then Wright spends a whole chapter on Paul's sermon in Athens at the Areopagus. Wright suggests that this sermon has largely been misunderstood because it has been presented as if the Areopagus was a debating society and not a trial. Where Wright is often very helpful is drawing cultural connections that the average reader would not see, but the original readers would have assumed were clear. In this case, Luke seems to be referencing Socrates. Both Paul and Socrates were on trial for sacrilege or impiety. This is a connection that I have never heard before, but makes a lot of sense to the text. Paul was not simply using the altar to the unknown God as a way to build a bridge between them, but as a defense to show that Paul was not an atheist or impious person.

Much of the focus on The Challenge of Acts is on Paul as you might expect from a scholar who has specialized in Pauline studies. Wright suggests that the book of Acts may have been written as part of Paul's defense in Rome, which may be part of the reason that there are so many court scenes in it. Even before Paul, Peter and the other disciples were brought before officials to get them to stop preaching. And while John and Stephen were put to death, those deaths are shown as unjust punishments. The other courts scenes were largely showing that the officials did not find the early church guilty of sedition or impiety, even if the people continue to misunderstand them and kept bringing them before the local officials and courts.

Like pretty much all of Wright's books, this is one that I listened to on first pass. (And unusually, Wright narrates the audiobook himself.) I tend to pick up the print version later and take a slower second pass. I have read well over a dozen of Wright's books, many of them two or three times. Wright's strength and weakness is that he keeps coming back to similar themes over and over again. Part of the strength here is that in discussing Acts, he moves outside of his main areas of work on the Pauline letters and shows how the implications of his work in Paul matters to other aspects of New Testament study. The weakness is that some of these themes have been well covered in other books. But I think that is less of a problem here than in some other books because while there are overlapping themes here with Wright's other books, the setting of the book of Acts and the method of a quicker overview of an entire book, brings a lot of new insight into why Wright's traditional themes of study matter in new ways.

This was originally posted on my blog at https://bookwi.se/the-challenge-of-acts/

Summary: An exploration of what could have been had evangelical history gone other ways.

I have always enjoyed history. But it has mostly been a reading hobby, not something I studied. Over the past decade, I have been more intentional about reading history to fill in gaps in my knowledge, but I have also read more about the study of history. I think it was John Fea’s podcast where I first heard about the 5 Cs of the study of history. Those five Cs are: change over time, causality, context, complexity, and contingency. All five are important to understanding history.

Isaac Sharp’s The Other Evangelicals does approach all five Cs in his exploration of five groups of people who have been marginalized in evangelical history, but in many ways I read this as a book primarily thinking about contingency, the “what could have been” had evangelical history gone other ways.

As with any recent history, my own story influences how I read. I grew up American Baptist. Traditionally American Baptists are considered a mainline denomination and would be included in the “liberal” part of Christianity. I didn’t really understand how liberal the denomination was as I was growing up in part because I was in an evangelical wing of the denomination. I do very much remember going to the only national youth gathering I attended as an American Baptist and one day of the youth conference primarily used feminine references for God. There was no explanation for it and it raised all kinds of questions for other students I was with. I spend a good bit of time that day talking to others about how there were feminine images of God in scripture and how God is not gendered as we traditionally consider gender in humans. I was mostly irritated by the poor presentation, but not at all bothered by the presentation of somewhat liberal theology.

In college I spent a year going to an intentionally interracial church (I only went one year because I didn’t have a car and it was a 35 minute drive into Chicago to go to the church. I never considered going to the Black baptist church that was within walking distance of campus for some reason.) I was aware of the problems of race within evangelicalism during college and explored the development of NBEA and Tom Skinner and John Perkins and other Black leaders within the evangelical world. I was hired to work by the SBC association in Chicago right out of college as I was going to grad school. That association at the time was one of three associations (of about 1200) in the country that was predominately made up of minority churches. I mostly worked with Black churches developing church-based non-profits and spent a lot more time in Black churches, some of whom identified as Evangelical, but most did not.

Part of my grad school was a Masters of Social Service Administration (an administrative focused equivalent to an MSW). I have always been on the progressive side of the evangelical works and have followed the work of Tony Campolo and Ron Sider and others since high school. Social justice and progressive causes were are always a significant focus of my work as a Christian.

It wasn’t until I was in college that I started to understand compmentarianism. The term was only coined a few years before I started college. I knew American Baptists ordained women and that not every evangelical denomination did. But I knew women pastors and just never really considered male only pastorate as a viable option. Another church that I went to for a little while in college was a very conservative church that had a large college contingent. Again, I went in part because I didn’t have a car and friends who did have cars went there. For several months the college ministry Sunday school class studied gender, including why that church was complementarian. I stuck it out through the whole study, but was completely unpersuaded. So I had context for the book in the feminist section as well as the liberal, progressive, and Black evangelicals sections. It was only the history of gay evangelicals that I really had no historical experience with.

One last point, I took two classes with Mark Noll in college and audited another when he was guest lecturer at University of Chicago Divinity School. Noll’s approach to rooting mid 20th century neo-evangelicals as part of a longer tradition of evangelical Protestants was my dominate way of thinking of evangelicalism until fairly recently. Matthew Avery Sutton’s essay about evangelical historiography gave language to not just my concern about the use and definition of evangelical, but also to the method of thinking about evangelicalism as historically rooted group of people that arose out of the English reformation. I still strongly appreciate Noll, Marsden and other evangelical historians, but I am now going be reading their history with more nuance than I did previously. That is a very long introduction to a fairly straight forward book.

The Other Evangelicals looks at the history of the Evangelical movement that arose in the late 1940s and early 1950s and the ways that his five areas of self-identified evangelicals who were liberal, progressive, Black, feminist and gay. In most of these sections there were fairly clear lines of who was in and who was out regardless of self-identification. In the chapter on liberal evangelicals, the main focus was on biblical studies and the fight over inerrancy. The Chicago Statement on Inerrancy was not the first fight to define what an Evangelical understanding of the Bible was, but by the time it was written in the late 1970s, it was clear that there was little tolerance for a more liberal stream of evangelicals who were less concerned with plenary inspiration and an error free bible.

The main illustration in the liberal chapter was Bela Vassady, a Hungarian WWII refugee who was one of the early professors at Fuller Seminary starting in 1949. Vassady was a European who identified as evangelical, but his stream of evangelicalism did not match up with Fuller’s understanding of biblical orthodoxy because he was too sympathetic to Barth and did not reject German methods of biblical theology outright. Vassady had helped to found the World Council of Churches and understood his role to be ecumenical. The story of opposition to Vassady was a good reminder that Christian colleges and seminaries have been accused of being “liberal” for a very long time. The influence of donors concerned about the mission of school and liberal drift has always been present.

The chapter of Black Evangelicals I think was important (although not new by any means) because evangelicals tend to think of themselves as theologically defined. The traditional definitions of evangelical by NAE or Bebbington are rooted in theological statements. But the chapter on Black Evangelicals makes clear that theology was never enough. Billy Graham opposed the methods of the civil rights movement, speaking against the 1963 March on Washington and MLK Jr explicitly on a number of occasions. Sharp quotes Graham, “There is only one possible solution to the race problem and that is vital personal experience with Jesus Christ on the part of both races…any man who has a genuine conversion experience will find his racial attitudes greatly changed.” (p127)

While the chapter on Black evangelicals includes a variety of people, the story is often similar to William Bentley’s. Evangelicalism was a theological tradition that took scripture seriously and at least claimed to value intellectually serious study. Bentley was exposed to white evangelicalism in the 1940s and was attracted to the theology, but was concerned that it “..could be doctrinally correct and, at the same time, hold backward attitudes toward such and important issue as race in America.” Bentley evangelically formed the National Black Evangelical Association in 1963 at a time when Wheaton and many other evangelical schools officially or unofficially still prohibited interracial dating on campus.

Much of the tension beyond explicit racism was rooted in different approaches toward evangelism and ministry. While many members of the NBEA agreed with Graham about the priority of personal conversion as the main method of solving social issues, the Black church historically had been more open to social action as a legitimate role of the church. (Although the National Baptist and the Progressive Baptists split in the 1960s along similar lines.)

The issues raised by Black evangelicals were not confined to just Black evangelicals, white progressives evangelicals also pushed the broader evangelical movement to think more clearly about social action as a role of the church. The 1960s protest movements, racism, war, and poverty were driving forces for progressive evangelicals who championed the working in marginalized communities as a central role of the church. But as the chapter concluded, the requirement for theological conservatism and the social requirement for individualism in approaching social issues like race, meant that progressive evangelicals had an uphill battle to draw attention to social conditions and social ministries that addressed the systemic causes of social problems.

The feminist story of evangelicalism is often assumed to be different than the actual history. The term complementarian wasn’t coined until 1988. While evangelicals were socially and theologically conservative, there were hundreds of women ordained within the SBC in the 1970 and the later orientation toward conservative gender roles was really a backlash to an earlier egalitarian movement.

Again, the concluding chapter on gay evangelicals prioritizes how evangelicals handling of scripture led to the cracks in the approach toward gay evangelicals. In many cases, those who were more inclusive rooted their inclusion on their reading of scripture. There was also a pragmatism that came to the fore as it became clear that changing orientation was not easy.

One of the problems of evangelicalism is a lack of imagination for any other contingency. In many cases, there are and have been many other paths that have been explored, but without knowledge of those paths, it is difficult to not make some of the same mistakes that have already been made.

The Other Evangelicals is very readable history. It is a history that I both knew a lot about but also had details and streams of evangelicalism that I was completely unaware of. I have been skeptical of the label evangelical since the early 90s when I was at Wheaton. The theological definitions of evangelicalism always seem to be less important than the social or cultural identity. The Other Evangelicals was far less political than I thought it would be. The progressive and liberal chapters were more about approach than particular content. And the chapters about feminists and gay evangelicals while they were more about content of those two areas again, came down to largely being about approach.

Evangelicalism grew out of a desire to be less fundamentalist than the early 20th century fundamentalism, but in many ways the evangelical movement never had a full break from fundamentalism. As fundamentalists of the early 20th century became less comfortable self identifying as fundamentalists and increasingly used the term evangelical, the fight over the approach that evangelicalism has toward culture has continued to be largely the same fight.

This was originally posted on my blog at https://bookwi.se/the-other-evangelic...

Summary: Discussion of how understanding the Medieval world and its books help to understand CS Lewis.

Over the years, I have read an enormous amount by or about CS Lewis. I am not Lewis scholar, I have not been systemically enough and I certainly haven’t read enough to know what the academy thinks of Lewis, but I have read read about 25-30 books by or about Lewis since starting this blog.

One of my complaints about the biographies of Lewis is that they say very little about Lewis’ discipleship, including Devin Brown’s which is about the spiritual life of Lewis. Part of what Baxter is doing in The Medieval Mind of CS Lewis is suggesting that a significant part of Lewis’ discipleship was the result of reading old books. That makes sense to me, although I do think that Lewis’ work with a spiritual director likely mattered to making that real.

What is helpful about The Medieval Mind of CS Lewis is the explanations of the references that are missed when we don't know about them. I have read a bit of Dante, but I don't know Dante well. I have never read Boethius and many others referenced here. What I love about reading young adult writer, KB Hoyle, is that she always has references and hints in her books. You can read her books without knowing any of the references and you get a good story. But as an adult reading her books, I get a lot more because I get the references. There is depth to the stories and the depth encourages rereading. That just isn't the case for a lot of current pop fiction. A lot of pop fiction assumes that the reader isn't paying attention, doesn't care about reference and is simply looking for an escape. Reading for escape isn't bad, I read for escape all the time. But I don't want to always read for escape. (It is not surprising that KB Hoyle taught at a Classical school before becoming a full time writer and publisher.)

I found The Medieval Mind of CS Lewis very helpful and if you like CS Lewis and want to understand more, you likely will like it as well. But I do have a concern, not about the book as much as the way that classical education is sometimes used. Recently a number of atheist or agnostics have been calling themselves cultural Christians, this trend seems to not be about Christianity as much as it is about shared culture. I get very wary of arguments for shared culture. I think there is real value in retelling fairy tales and old stories and finding traditional archetypes in those stories. That is part of what a good education should include.

But too often that encouragement to understanding western classics is not about understanding history, but to encourage a particular view of western cultural superiority. Doug Wilson is one of the biggest proponents of the Christian Classical school movement and the publishing company that he started and which publishes a good bit of curriculum for the Christian Classical School movement also published Stephen Wolfe's The Case for Christian Nationalism. Wilson and Wolfe and many others have been strongly influenced by Rushdooney (Christian Reconstructionist movement) and Robert Lewis Dabney (a proponent of white racial superiority as a requirement for being Christian.) The Christian Classical School movement does not need to promote western superiority, and people like Jessica Hooten Wilson (first link in this paragraph) are actively trying to promote a vision for Christian classical schools that is not rooted in western cultural superiority. But people like Thomas Achord are common in the Christian Classical School movement.

My second concern with the way that understanding references to classics goes wrong is when they are stripped of their history and context. Jordan Peterson's new book, We Who Wrestle With God, was reviewed by Rowan Williams and Brad East. I have not read Peterson's books so I am relying on their reviews for context. Peterson's book is about reading the Torah. But his Torah reading is about finding the archetypal stories and reinterpreting them for meaning. East's review suggests that he does that by stripping them of their Jewish context and interplay, which even as a non-christian, ends up promoting a type of supersessionism. Rowan Williams (retired Archbishop of Canterbury), mentions similar concerns, but is more concerned about the way that divinity is stripped from the stories. God is simply a concept for Peterson, not a being. That makes sense since Peterson does not claim to be a Christian or Jewish. However, the result of that is that it is simply stories which we place meaning on. And that meaning is limited by our perspective. Williams' central critique is

I do not think that Rowan Williams is as wary of the natural law as I am, but I do think what he is pointing out with Peterson is exactly why I am wary of natural law. Natural law can end up being reduced to our feelings about how things are and finding reasons for why things are the way they are. Peterson, unsurprisingly to anyone paying attention, find archetypal reasons for preserving patriarchy in the story of Adam and Eve. And Doug Wilson has previously found similar natural law arguments for Christianity being rooted in patriarchy and hierarchy ("every biblical Christian holds to patriarchy.")

I do not think that understanding classical influences on Christianity is inherently supporting western superiority or supersessionism. But it can lead to that. I think part of how we avoid that is by paying attention not just to classical influences on Christianity but reading eastern Christian tradition as well. And reading modern authors like Nnedi Okorafor, who are referencing African mythology in similar ways to how Lewis was referencing Greek and Norse mythology. It will take work to keep ourselves aware of ways that we can go wrong, but it is worth it.

This was originally posted on my blog at https://bookwi.se/the-medieval-mind-o...

Summary: The Wild Robot discovers not just new animal friends, but also new roles for her life.

I still have not seen the new Wild Robot movie, but I am a fan of the book series. This is an early middle grade series, so I am not going to worry about spoilers here. People reading reviews are likely reading to understand what their kids are reading, not because they are reading themselves. (I read it myself, my 9 year old has already read the first book and my 11 year old was not interested.)

The first book, The Wild Robot, was a book about self-discovery, vocation, and meaning. The Robot is lost at sea, washed ashore on remote island without people and learns to communicate with animals while learning from them about how to survive. She adopts an orphaned goose and that care for her son both helps her to see her role as a protector and allows the animals to see her as safe. The meaning from caring for her son and others drives her to continue to learn and see the world with different eyes.

The second book, The Wild Robot Escapes, is thematically about home. At the end of the first book, Roz, the robot, leaves the island to be repaired. Roz is repaired but because her memories are not damaged, she continues to remember her life on the island and her son. She is sent to work on a farm with a human family. Roz see the value in helping the human family. She learns to communicate with the humans, farm animals and different wild animals that she finds as she escapes from her work on the farm. In process of escaping from the farm, she is again captured, but this time is interviewed by the creator of her type of robot. That creator understands the unique reality of Roz and works to help her get back to the island, but again has repaired and upgraded her body to make life on the island easier.

The third book opens with Roz back on the island, but the island is in danger from an unknown pollutant. Roz has previously been programmed to not be able to fight or harm anyone. But as she explores, trying to find the source of the pollutant that is harming her friends, she discovers that she can defend herself. There is a mix of themes. The role of nonviolent solutions that benefit all and the interconnectedness of all things are the two main themes. Because Roz can fight, does not mean that she thinks she should fight. Throughout the books it is known that some animals must eat other animals. Roz became an adoptive mother because of an accident where her son's parents were killed. Roz was the proximate cause of the accident, but did not intend harm. That distance is how animal death for food is also handled. Animal death for food is a necessity, but not celebrated as a positive good.

The interconnectedness of the environment is part of that animal death cycle. When one part of the animal world is harmed, it hurts other parts indirectly. When a water pollutant starts killing off fish that impacts animals who live on land. Birds fly away, some of those birds ate bugs, so there is an increase of bugs as a result of the water pollution.

Socially, Roz's son, Brightbill, has grown up and now leads the geese's migration. When he returns he also has found a new mate. Because Roz no longer is needed to care for her son, she is now free to care for others. And because she was upgraded in the last books, she can now get wet and swim, and so she starts to look for the source of the pollution.

It is not surprising for adults reading to see that the pollution is from human mining operations. The mining is for rare minerals that are necessary to build robots. Which is a nice touch of both reality and interconnectedness that is part of the book's theme. There are humans on the mining vessel and they are humanized and contextualized well. They are not evil, but are unaware of the harm they are causing. They also are not sure what to do with a robot who talks to animals and who tells them of the harm they are doing.

This is a middle grade book, so it is a happily ever after book. The pollution is cleaned up. The humans learn how to mine with less harm. The animals are able to return to their habitats after robots clean the environment. And Roz returns to the island to find a new role as grandmother.

I think there are areas for complaint about how environmental problems are handled. Robots are not simply going to be able to clean up pollution. And environments which were devastated and species who are extinct because of pollution are not going to be restored. But there is a hopefulness to the book that I do think is good even if it is too simple. Humans want to care for their families just like the animal parents want to care for their families. It is just a matter of gaining understanding. This is a reasonable theme for a middle grade book, but simple awareness is not enough.

I remember reading memoirs of James Cone and Howard Thurman back to back. And both had sections where they discussed their early assumptions that white people must not understand the harm that segregation and racial hierarchy causes. They both thought that what was needed was to explain the harm of racism, which would cause white Christians to repent and work to change systems. Both books grappled with the way they came to understand that knowledge is a necessary but not sufficient step toward change. Change requires that we do something with the knowledge that we have.

The Wild Robot Protects has a good ending, but it is one that is open for future books.

This was originally posted on my blog at https://bookwi.se/wild-robot-protects/

Summary: A discussion of how churches can harm, paraticularly those who have been previouly traumaized.

I think one of the reasons that people resist hearing about abuse is that trauma and harm are reception events. In other words, they are not universalized objective realities but subjective realities. Two people can experience the same events and be from similar backgrounds, and they can perceive those events differently. And in the research into trauma, it is not that one person is "right" and another person is "wrong" but that both have their own perception.

We have also had other people misunderstand us. We said something, and the other person either misheard what we said or what we said was accurately heard, but its meaning was still misunderstood. I think this is a universal experience, but moving that universal experience of misunderstanding to discussions of abuse and trauma is still difficult. I distinctly remember having a conversation with some guy friends about parenting and how we can't just assume that what was helpful with one child will work with another. We lamented that children need different things from us because they are different. It makes any relational connection difficult because it takes work to monitor the relationship and seek to understand differences.

Author Jenai Auman uses her own experience as an illustration of the process of "othering." This is not a memoir as much as an exploration of a topic where the author discloses her connection to it. The book opens with her very first day on the job, when she came to work an hour early to participate in a Bible study (unpaid) and was berated for being five minutes late. (She had just dropped her child off at daycare for the very first time.) I know some will read that description as not being abusive but simply a misunderstanding. But this is an important section because it sets up her discussion of definitions, and part of what is important about those definitions is that she is naming that the reception is what makes the harm harmful.

Leaders, in particular, seem to have a difficulty seeing that other's perceptions are their perceptions, not a direct attack on them. Othered spends a lot of time talking about leaders and narcissism because narcissism so often is connected to abuse and harm precisely because the narcissist does not perceive or care about the harm.

I spent way too long working through Othered because I just kept needing to put it down and pick up something else for a while. I very much want to understand trauma and how it works and learn from those who are in some place of healing, but I have a low tolerance for it in my reading. I find it easier to be with people who have a trauma background in person or in my spiritual direction work than I do reading about it. I am not completely sure why that is, but it is something that I keep running into as I read. I spent nearly 2 months slowly reading Othered, a fairly short book.

There is a lot that I appreciate. Jenai Auman has done good work to understand the current state of trauma research. And she explains it well. She connects her personal harm and the harm of others well to how churches work. And I think one of the ideas she articulated well and I just had not explicitly thought out was that part of why churches need to work to understand trauma isn't just so that they do not harm, but that so they can respond well to those who have been harmed in other spaces. As I said above when talking about parenting, something that isn't harmful to one person who does not have a trauma background, very well may be highly damaging to another person who does have a trauma background. (Again all that caveats about not all people who are traumatized will react or respond in the same ways.)

If we as the church are called to love and accept all and work to incorporate them into the body of Christ well, that means we need to do the work to understand and respond. It is not unlike the problem many churches have with disability. In a theoretical way, most Christians believe that the church should be inclusive of disability, but disability it comes to actually making their buildings and programming inclusive for people with disabilities, and the costs and work that it takes, many churches do not actually complete the work that is required.


This was originally posted on my blog at https://bookwi.se/othered/

Summary: A books about discernment.

Anyone who is a regular reader of my book reviews probably knows that I have been on a long-term reading project about discernment. I listened to an interview with Emily Freeman on the Gravity Commons podcast, and then a couple of days later, Audible had a sale on How to Walk Into a Room, and I picked it up.

One of my convictions about discernment (you can read my most recent summary of what I think about discernment here), is that while discernment includes decision-making, I am more interested in formational discernment, how we are formed toward Christ so that we both intuitively follow Christ's lead as well as how we consciously make decisions. I think both parts are important, but How to Walk Into a Room is mostly about the consciously deciding aspect of discernment.

Over the past decade there has been a near constant discussion about the rise of the 'Nones", those who no longer identify as part of a specific religious community. Those nones are not necessarily leaving Christian faith, but they are leaving a religious community for one reason or another. One of the findings of the research study that was detailed in The Great Dechurching, is that most people stop going to church when they move. It is less an intentional withdrawal from church than a lack of motivation to find a new church. Another large group of people stopped going to church during Covid and never found their way back. But Freeman is talking about a third group of people, those who are intentionally trying to discern whether to continue in a church or leave because of specific reasons. Those reasons can be different, spiritual harm or abuse, differences in theology or practices, personality conflicts, etc., but there is conscious intention to ask God if they should continue or leave. In many cases, these people are not leaving faith, they are leaving a specific community and intend to go to a new faith community.

Freeman walks through a four-part process of discernment that would apply to a number of different decision making steps. She includes other examples like work/vocation or continuing education, but her main example is her own process of deciding to leave her congregation.

The four parts are the acronym PRAY: Point & call; Remember your path; Acknowledge presence; and Yield to arrows. Point and call is easily remembered because it is probably the most tangible. Started by Japanese rail workers, point and call is a safety practices of naming out loud the simple steps of a process so that both the person naming and those around them know and can see the steps of the process. This is one of the main benefits of spiritual direction, specifically naming areas where you see God at work or where you have questions so that you can have a second person walk with you in seeking God.

Remember your path is somewhat like a calling/vocation/rule of life. I have been in a group with Jonathan Walton who has completed a book on building a rule of life (it will be published 2025) and he is leading us through the content of the book in a shortened form. While Freeman doesn't exactly mean a rule of life in her "remember your path" there is a significant overlap because the remember your path is partially about calling/vocation and partially about the guardrails we have.

Acknowledge presence is about acknowledging the presence of God in the process. This is part of the Prayer of Examen and is what is meant when there is a call to worship or invocation in a worship service. God is always with us, but there is reason to specifically remember God's presence.

The fourth part is what we most commonly think of as discernment, identifying the arrows (red, green, yellow) that we see around us with the help of the Holy Spirit. Where does God seem to be leading? Is that an open door? The value of a book like this is in the illustrations and the illumination of wisdom about how we can get the process of discernment wrong. Not every seemingly closed door is closed. Not every seemingly open door is open. Our history, emotional and relational make up, our personality and intellect all matter to this process. Having a community around us can help us to discern whether we are seeing rightly. But especially when the question is about whether we should be leaving the community of faith we are in can be difficult because we do not always trust the advice and wisdom of people who might be making a different decision.

I read this alongside Jenai Auman's Othered: Finding Belonging with the God Who Pursues the Hurt, Harmed, and Marginalized. Othered is particularly about ways that the church can traumatize or further injure those who are traumatized. How to Walk Into a Room has good discussion about the role of trauma on discernment and that is helpful, but there are many ways that discernment is impacted beyond trauma. Our culture, and theology, our experience, and personality all impact our discernment in various ways.

As I skimmed through reviews on Goodreads before writing this, I found two main complaints that were common among the negative reviews. The first was complaining that this was "not biblical' or that it was simply a self-help book. I think much of this type of complaint is from a stream of Christianity that distrusts that individuals are led by God. At the end of the book Freeman talks about how she and her husband have found a place in a local Friends (Quaker) congregation. The original heresy that Quakers were charge with was believing that the Holy Spirit directly guided them. But it wasn't only Quakers that have had this charge. Ignatius, the founder of the Catholic Jesuit order, also in his Rules of Discernment, assumes specific individual direction by the Holy Spirit in his Spiritual Exercises. How To Walk Into a Room was not specifically making the case for individual and corporate direction by the Holy Spirit, it mostly assumes that the reader already believes this. But much of the negative reviews specifically name this as why they rated the book poorly.

Most of the rest of the review that are negative are about the specific reason why Freeman and her family eventually decide to leave their church. The reason is somewhat obscured because Freeman is careful not to directly share the story of her child. But something about that child's sexuality causes Freeman and her husband to reevaluate their understanding of the theology of sexuality. It isn't only her child, but also other relationships. But the most proximate cause for leaving the church is her changing ideas that come about because of her child.

There are obviously many Christians who believe strongly one way or another about LGBTQ+ issues. But several reviews I read about How to Walk Into a Room specifically condemned Freeman for changing her mind because of experience or proximity. And I do think this is an area where there is a lot of misunderstanding. Experience and proximity is one way that God can use us to change our mind. The apostle Thomas changes his mind about the possibility of Christ's resurrection because he sees and touches Jesus. Peter changes his mind about whether Gentiles should be part of the church because of his experience of a vision of God. Paul changes his mind about whether Jesus was the messiah because of his experience of being blinded and healed. Post-biblical era, there are many other similar examples. Many abolitionists became abolitionists after experience with slavery. John Wesley and Richard Allen both resisted the ordination or licensing of women to preach until they directly experienced women who they identified as called by God. And many changed their mind about the sin of usury because of their experience with the rise of capitalism. That doesn't mean we always accept something as a result of experience. How to Walk Into a Room explores the role of experience on discernment. But experience and proximity are influences on our understanding of discernment.

The broader "room" metaphor I thought was less helpful than the PRAY acronym. But there is truth to the metaphor that we are called into and out of spaces and that God is with us regardless.

Part of the difficulty of discernment is that we will not come to a single universal conclusion that applies to all people at all times. To think we will is to misunderstand what discernment is. And that is really the problem with the way that many people understand Christianity. It is not that we can do anything and ignore the bible and the creeds, but that everything about Christianity is in part an interpretive process of discernment. All interpretation of scripture is an interpretation. All application of scripture is an exercise in discernment based on that interpretation. All of the discernment and interpretation is fallibly guided by our understanding of the direction of the holy spirit as part of the universal body of Christ. If you have not picked up How to Walk Into a Room and do not believe in the inclusion of LGBTQ+ people into the body of Christ, I want you to know that the subject is here. But I also would encourage you to still be willing to listen to the process that Freeman walks through here because that process is not just her conclusion, it is a process that can have more than one conclusion.

This was originally posted on my blog at https://bookwi.se/how-to-walk-into-a-...

Summary: Inspector Gamache is back at the job but corruption and murder are still present and it is up to Gamache to save everyone.

I am a huge fan of the Inspector Gamache series. I reread the whole series a couple of years ago and participated in a group blogging project by a number of book reviewers who also love Gamache and Louise Penny. I definitely pre-order all books by Louise Penny and read them immediately. I have both read the print versions and listened to the audiobooks. There is a new audiobook narrator for this 19th book, bringing the series to three narrators now. The new narrator is Jean Brassard, who is from the area where the books are set. He does a good job with the narration and feels pretty similar to the previous narrators in the style and tone of the narration.

I did enjoy The Grey Wolf, but it feels like the story has been told already. Gamache is the head of homicide he is back in Quebec and splitting his time between Three Pines and Montreal. While in Three Pines he gets notice that the sensor of his apartment in Montreal indicates that it has been broken into. Beauvoir checks it out, but can't see anything missing or wrong, so they chalk it up to a bad sensor. The next day, Gamache's coat is delivered to the police headquarters with two notes inside. And that starts a long thread that leads to an investigation of corruption and murder.

The book is well written if the thread of corruption had not already been done a couple of times. I noticed that Armond is again described as being in his late 50s, which is exactly how he was described in the early books. Since that time Beauvoir has married Annie and both of the Gamache children have children. No less than 10 years have passed, but Gamache is still in his late 50s and at the top of his game. I don't think that Penny makes Gamache into the near superhero that he has been in some of the books, but still, a number of the choices seem forced or go over the same ground as other books

I do love this series and this book ends, but also has a cliffhanger. So there is another book coming. But I wonder whether the series should be wrapped up. Some characters from the previous books show up and we have to decide if they are good or bad. Part of the reason for the title is a discussion about whether a character is the good wolf (grey) or the bad wolf (black) and the cover designer just drew two grey wolves. It is a sign of laziness with the whole project.

As I have said many times, I love this series because of the characters more than the mystery. This book got a little too complicated trying to throw up red herrings to keep the reader interested. I was pretty sure I knew what was going on long before Gamache did. But I also tend to just let the story happen because I know that Penny regularly tries to mislead the reader. I think Penny is trying to be too clever with the plot and not focused enough on the characters.

But I am going to be contributing to the problem with the weakness of this book because I will keep pre-ordering and keep reading. The Grey Wolf was not a bad novel. But it wasn't as good as I thought it should have been. Maybe that is unfair, but it is a series that I love. So I am holding it to pretty high standards.


Previously posted on my blog at https://bookwi.se/the-grey-wolf/

Summary: A book of wisdom.

I am a fan of memoirs, especially memoirs written toward the end of life that evaluate life and what is important. This isn’t a memoir, but it has the feel of a memoir. Why Everything that Doesn’t Matter, Matters So Much is a series of essays. Some of this retrods ground that has been trod before. I love Charlie’s thoughts on music and art and what it means to be an artist as a Christian, but I have heard those parts before.

What I haven’t heard is anything from Andi, Charlie Peacock’s wife. From the book it is clear that I just haven’t been paying attention, because she is the better writer. It is not that Charlie is a bad writer. I think he has important things to say and I think that his role as musical mentor and sage is important, but she has grappled with life and her thoughts in a way that I think shine brighter.

Part of what is important here is that they are both showing the struggle of the Christian life even as relatively successful people. Part of what she ends the book with is a discussion of success. They emphasize that their view of success isn’t money or records sold or influence, but the deeper things of life. And I appreciate that they share vulnerably and appropriately about struggles with health and marriage and vocation and trauma.

Charlie clearly says he was not the husband and father he should have been. Andi held things together while Charlie toured and made records and dreamed dreams. Dreams are important, but as Charlie says at one point, there is no possible way to fulfill every dream. Good dreams get passed by all the time because we just can’t do it all. Especially because we can’t do it all, we need to prioritize the people around us not just how much good we can do.

It is very clear that Charlie has done a lot of soul searching and emotional and relational work over the past decade and beyond. A chapter talks about his health and how his body revolted about a decade ago because he has subjected it to abuse and trauma without attention. And that forced him to grapple with many areas of his life that he had been reluctant to grapple with. Part of what I think is important in that discussion is that he and she both said that things got much worse before they started to get any better. Grappling with trauma and our limitations and weaknesses and the harm we have done to others often causes pain. But the options are to work through the pain and suffering toward healing or to resist that invitation to a more abundant life.

I do think that Christians have a lot of magical thinkings. “If you believe in Jesus everything will work out” is magical thinking. We need more stories like this where everything is not magically better. I can read between the lines and see where growth has happened; and where there is still more room for growth.

Personally, I was drawn to Andi’s chapters on hospitality, self care, vocation and marriage. These are people who have lived through struggle and who do not have it all together in all areas, but they have live through difficult times and are continuing on. I thought the book probably could have been trimmed a bit, but it is always hard to know what needs to be trimmed and what just wasn’t what I needed to hear, but was good to have in it for others.

This is a book of essays and I treated it like a books of essays. I dipped in and out in the midst of other reading. Most chapters were in the 15-20 page range. There were a few that were significantly longer. I think I read almost all of the chapters in a single sitting so that I would not have the ideas split up. But this is more a book about wisdom than a book about ideas. And that is part of what I loved about it.

Originally posted on my blog at https://bookwi.se/why-everything-that...