God's Economy

A newish book by Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove. Here's the blurb about the author:
J W-H is an associate minister at St. John's Baptist Church. A graduate of Duke Divinity School, Jonathan is engaged in reconciliation efforts in Durham, NC, directs the School for Conversion (newmonasticism.org), and is a sought-after speaker and author of several books. The Rutba House, where Jonathan lives with his wife, Leah, and their son, JaiMichael, and other friends, is a new monastic community that prays, eats, and lives together, welcoming neighbours and the homeless. Find out more at jonathanwilsonhartgrove.com
(I added some links for you!)

The book opens with a sort of gentle undermining of the author's original position on economy and justice - he questions his early desire to get to the White House (he was planning to become President and change things from the top down...) as simply another desire for power. His background and current life (as part of an 'intentional community) seem to lend more weight to his arguments. He clarifies some of the issues with economy and justice ("the rich spend more on diets than the poorest of the poor spend on food") and examines the desire for power as a means of helping others. He notes that, according to one survey, the average American wants 40% more than they have now, regardless of their current financial state.
Following Jesus' teaching, he suggests that we should live lives of service. He also notes that, in the time of Jesus, the main economic 'system' was family households, and when Jesus calls us to be like children, this is a state of financial worthlessness and utter dependence on the father of the house.

He reminds us that "we have to struggle with the challenge of how to rely completely on God in world where it looks like we have to fend for ourselves to survive."
He also makes a brave (considering it's a largely American audience) link between the methods of Jesus and those of Al-Qaeda. A subversive approach that offers hope and a future to those with little or none.

I'm still only about halfway through, but am enjoying the book at the moment.
Don't think I'll manage to convince the family into a commune right yet though...


*** part 2 ***
(Part two of the blog, that is - the book itself isn't in parts!)
JWH questions our desire to 'safeguard' our future on earth with insurance and savings and the like. He says rather that "God's children plan ahead by investing ourselves now in the never-ending kingdom of abundance". What God has given us should not be diverted to the world's system of abundance, but should be reinvested in the kingdom from which it comes. Thinking about it like that makes sense - when you have a guaranteed eternal future available, invest all you can in it! 'For where your treasure is...' Jesus doesn't offer us unbridled success in the world's system, but indestructible/irremovable certainty of 'return' in heaven. JWH does a better job than I'm doing of clarifying the Bible's position on prosperity though (read the book, not this blog...). Kind of like if you're wanting to get prosperous by following God's laws right, then you've missed the point. I guess because blessings on earth are a gift, not part of your earnings...

Theodore Boone.

Ok, so I loved this. I didn't even see it coming (he normally publishes in February, because that's when a mate and I swap the books for our birthdays!) but happened to be browsing on Amazon when I saw it was to be released on the 3rd of June. I pre-ordered and it arrived (1p less than advertised too) a couple of days ago. I read it a couple of days ago (why wait, with a Grisham) and I have to say I loved it.

Now, I've also read a few reviews online and people seem pretty critical of it. They seem to think it's a bit childish. I, however, loved it. I am a big fan of children's literature, so maybe that helped, but I wouldn't say it was just a kiddies book anyway! It is, however, more suited to a young audience than some of his earlier work. And if they weren't expecting something a little different, perhaps they didn't read the big letters on the back where it says, 'high intensity legal drama for a new generation of readers'. :o)

I liked the way it was written - there were a couple of expressions and phrases used that I really enjoyed, here's a couple of them:
"...he whisked by Mrs Goodloe at the curb without speaking because she'd lost her hearing and most of her mind as well. He did smile at her, though, but she did not return the smile. Her teeth were somewhere in the house."
"The man tried to look menacing, and he was successful"
Just thought they were nicely put, really.
I thought that the characters are well introduced, and there are various threads hanging at the end of the book, presumably for the next installment. The storyline works for me: sure, it's a little far-fetched, but it is fiction, after all...

Theodore Boone

The Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ.

As soon as I saw this book on the shelf, I guessed that it was going to be a weird attempt to undermine the gospel. And I was spot on.
Don't get me wrong, I think Pullman's an exceptionally good writer (in the ability sense, not the moral sense!). But I'd already felt let down in a big way by the end of 'His Dark Materials' trilogy, where God is reduced to a wizened old man in a cage. Thus the low expectations (which were, upon reading, met!) on seeing this book in Tesco.
Extraordinarily, the book is billed thus: "In this ingenious and spell-binding retelling of the life of Jesus, Philip Pullman revisits the most influential story ever told."
Having read the book, I'm not sure how it can be called either 'ingenious' or 'spell-binding'. I found the first large chunk of the book stilted and badly written. The back cover screams 'THIS IS A STORY' at you. My response would be, 'not a very good one'.
Brief summary would be to say that Jesus and his twin brother Christ are born to Mary, following a conversation with an "angel" (although Pullman seems to be desperate to suggest that the angel was some bloke at the window just calling himself an angel) Jesus grows to be a carpenter and then great teacher (inspired by John the Baptist's example) while Christ his brother follows him round with a pen a paper (tablet and stylus) taking notes. Christ has intermittent conversations with a 'stranger' who helps him to discover a great role and purpose. Christ goes on to betray his brother, be mistaken for him following his death and is then given the chance to 'rewrite history' by heavily editing all his notes to make Jesus sound better than he really was.
But lets look at some positives to start with. Firstly, Pullman does rely on scripture for much of 'Jesus'' teaching. Strangely, there are times when it seems that the author couldn't decide whether to write this in an archaic form, or a refreshing, up-to-date fashion... Secondly, the book itself will perhaps open up some lines of conversation with others about the truth.

However, the negatives are perhaps more glaringly obvious. Pullman makes a number of desperate attempts to 'demiraculise' (Ok, so that's not actually a word, I know) the miracle stories. Classic example being the feeding of the 5000 (or the 'crowd' as Pullman says). "[Jesus] took the loaves and the fishes and blessed them, and said to the crowd "See how I share this food out? You do the same. There'll be enough for everyone. And sure enough it turned out that one man had brought some barley cakes, another had a couple of apples, and a third had some dried fish, and a fourth had a pocketful of raisins, and so on; and between them all, there was plenty to go round. No one was left hungry." Well, we've heard that explanation before, and it never has been of any real value. Why would the disciples have wanted to send everyone away to eat? And why would those people who had thought to bring food have brought enough to feed others too? And why would there have been 12 baskets of leftovers? It's just all clutching at straws. And that happens time and time again. It's always trying to downgrade the truth and I found myself swinging between frustration at Pullman and pity for him. It's such a tragic waste of great talent.

But perhaps more insidious is the direct attack on truth, "...we must be prepared to make history the handmaid of posterity and not its governor. What should have been is a better servant of the Kingdom than what was." So basically, the gospel is made up, because it's a better story that way. Well, I have to say, Pullman's made this lot up, and it certainly didn't turn out any better!
Some of the storyline is woefully predictable, when you take into account the fact that this is written by someone who appears to have an axe to grind. Most notably, perhaps, the fact that 'Christ' (Jesus' twin brother...) has sex with someone. It had to happen. Any reason for a bit of sex these days!
I've written more than I intended to here. For another view on this book (well, similar view, different reviewer!) check this out.
Pullman's own website claims, "I'm not in the message business; I'm in the “Once upon a time” business." I don't think he's being entirely honest :)
I think if I could use one word to sum this book up, it would be 'lame'. That sounds really harsh I guess, but I mean it in both senses of the term. I feel that the book is crippled by the author's apparent desire to undermine the gospel.