Summer Reading #1

I think what I’ll do is just talk about each of the books and then do a final blog to sum up and look at the big “So What?” question.

First up - "How (Not) to Speak of God" Peter Rollins.

Peter Rollins is a lecturer in philosophy and founder of “Ikon”, a community of spiritual practice in Belfast. The book reflects both of these aspects and is in 2 parts – the first a more philosophical discussion about God and the second outlines 10 Ikon services. Ikon are working to create a space for people to explore issues of faith and encounter God and they employ "Christian narrative" working from the principle that "only God can give God". They seek to deconstruct ideas of God in an effort to "rediscover the place of mystery in faith". They also deal with subjects such as uncertainly, absence and transcendence. The services outlined are interesting. What is also interesting is that all the books I read have an element of dealing with the big philosophical issues of God, but seeking to relate this to actual practice - "what does/would it look like"

The first half of the book deals with how we think and speak about God -

“That which we cannot speak of is the one thing about whom and to whom we must never stop speaking".

Rollins looks at this issue that "God" is unspeakable, that we try to "colonize" the name God with concepts. The tension we deal with is between faith and theology;

"Our fragile faith is fanned into life in the wake of what we believe to have been the incoming of a life-giving encounter in which we feel connected with, and transformed by, the source of everything that is...such faith cannot be reduced to the mere affirmation of religious dogma, a regular visit to some religious institution or the reciting of mechanical prayers. For Christians testify to being caught up in and engulfed by that which utterly transcends them".

"Theology...is that which attempts to come to grips with this life-giving experience...here the source of our desire is rendered into an (intellectual) object that we can reflect upon"

Rollins talks about looking to the Christian Mystics as part of the solution to this dilemma;

"Instead of viewing the unspeakable as that which brings all language to a halt, they realized that the unspeakable was precisely the place where the most inspiring language began".

The book is challenging and thought provoking, using parables and stories to illustrate points. It's the kind of book that I can get very excited about because the book begins to create space for me to engage with what I believe about God but in a way that is not dogmatic. I think part of this journey I'm on is to deconstruct myself as a Christian. I want to be a different kind of Christian, I don't want to be inauthentic. I think some of the attraction of the books I read over the summer is that they give me permission to feel more comfortable in my own skin - it's OK to ask questions and maybe view some things differently from the mainstream. Not the kind of Christian that is completely certain, but someone who can live with uncertainty and ambiguity. Again this is not an intellectual exercise because what I found fascinating is that I had this exact conversation with Matt on the streets one Saturday night along the lines that Rollins outlines

"The argument is made that naming God is never really naming God but only naming our understanding of God"

That's pretty much what Matt said and actually, I agreed with him, how can the finite mind grasp the infinite? All of our talk of God can only be mediated through our limited intellect; we do reduce God to a set of propositions. That’s the way our minds work – we categorise things. which makes it very difficult for us to see things with fresh eyes, but Rollins (like Rahner - I know I keep going on about him!) helps us to do just that. He illustrates it with the rabbit duck illusion - you can either see a rabbit or a duck but we can't just see the lines devoid of the rabbit or duck.

One of the things I'm not comfortable with as a Christian is doctrinaire approach to evangelism - I liked the following quote;

"The dialogue replaces the standard monologue of those who would wish to either clone the other, making them into a reflection of themselves, or exclude the other, making them into a scapegoat who embodies all our fears and insecurities. ...The alternative is not relativistic acceptance of every position but rather a dialogue in which we treat everyone we meet as an individual who we can learn from and perhaps teach..

(We) can engage in a genuine dialogue in which we are prepared to rethink in relation to what the other says (instead of inauthentic dialogue in which one pretends to be open to the insights of another, but in reality one is not prepared to place one's own thinking into question). Rather than being a sign of weakness, this powerless approach is a sign of strength, for one is committed to the idea that if we genuinely seek truth from above, we will not be given a lie, for God will not give scorpions to the one who seeks bread."

A last thought from Rollins

"How many of us have learnt too late that our initial idea, that by serving the world we will help bring God to others, has eclipsed the wisdom that in serving the world we find God there."

That's something I am coming to understand more and more.