A Generous Orthodoxy - Beginnings

Before I get to the book itself, I wanted to let y'all know what I'm thinking as far as a structure for going through it. Since it is a pretty accessible little volume, with mostly short chapters, in lieu of doing 1 a week (20 weeks seems like overkill on this one) we can do it this way: All of the stuff that precedes Chapter 1 this week, next week do Part 1, then do it in blocks of chapters 5-10, 11-15, and 16-20. That puts us at +/-  50 pages a week. Too much? I don't want to rush through it, but I also don't want to drag it out. Please let me know what y'all think, if you want to break it down more or do it every other week instead of every week. I'm open.

Now, on to the book....

I guess my first comment would be on his writing style. I have to say I don't love it. It seems too apologetic and self-effacing while at the same time almost cocky. But then, he anticipates the criticism and criticizes himself (see last full paragraph, p. 38), making actual critique difficult without feeling as though you've inadvertently stepped into one of the boxes he's already identified as containing "orthodox watchdogs" (p. 37) or some other such folks that you know you don't want to be affiliated with. I find myself distrustful of the content because of the style, even though I don't take huge issue with the content itself to date. But granted, I've not even reached Chapter 1 yet. And the way he's presented himself makes moving into Chapter 1 almost like the result of a childish dare: "Oooh, I'm so subversive. Are you sure you want to read on? It's scary out there, so only keep going if you're super open minded. You've been forewarned...."  Okay, that's probably too harsh, and I know tons of people who love his style, but that's just my own gut reaction out of the gate.

Getting out of the tone zone and into content, a few observations:

I love Leonard Sweet's image of the swing for the idea of ancient-future spirituality, with the "simultaneous kicking-back/leaning-forward, kicking-forward/leaning-back." (p. 18) Without both, there is no movement, and spirituality would be a dead, static thing instead of the dynamic, living reality that it is. I find it true on a personal level as well, as I have to embrace (though not always love) my own past and learn from it in order to move forward in a healthy way. Not cling to it and wallow in shame, but at bare minimum acknowledge it and claim it as my own, taking responsibility for things good and bad, allowing God to redeem and restore my whole life.

I appreciate the way that McLaren links orthodoxy and orthopraxy. It seems so obvious, but is so often overlooked. (See James 1:22-25 among a whole slew of other passages) At first glance, though, I may want to add a bit to his definition of orthodoxy as "what God knows, some of which we believe a little, some of which they believe a little, and about which we all have a whole lot to learn." (p. 28) I would want to add:  "Some of which God revealed and gave us to know".  He affirms scripture, the creeds (Apostles' & Nicene) and doctrine as important, but I still am left feeling as though, despite his assurances that the book doesn't "[pitch] its tent in the valley of relativism" (p. 35), there is a lack of trust in capital-T Truth. I completely affirm his obvious desire to establish dialogue and approach one another - both within various branches of Christianity as well as those in other faiths - with love and a posture of learning, but at the same time, I want to maintain the right to talk about true and false in a more definite sense, not necessarily couched with tons of disclaimers that usually end in 'for me'. I don't particularly consider myself a black and white hard-liner. I'm fairly cognizant of all the grays, and am steeped in a theology that breathes 'tension'. And yet....

Finally, I want to quote and quote again his statement that "the Holy Spirit stubbornly refuses to abandon the church even when the church quenches the Spirit" (p. 30). There is so much angst and division in the body of Christ, and it's a tragedy of epic proportions. Instead of fighting for justice, love, and mercy in a fallen world, we're often reduced to fighting one another. I wouldn't want to quell the voices calling for change (see my previous post) - I mean, read the prophets. Not exactly warm and fuzzy towards their own religion. But as important as the critique is, we also need to look for points of contact. Thank God (quite literally) that His Spirit doesn't wait to move until we've got it right. We've not been abandoned, no matter how hopeless it looks or how crappy our experience with church and Christians has been. One of my favorite things about the Bible is all of the stories of God moving in and using terribly, utterly, tragically flawed people. Like me. And you.

Sorry if I just got preachy....

Okay, that's all I've got for now. Let's get this discussion rolling!