A New Kind of Christian. By Brian McLaren.

I am way behind with my book reviewing.  Years behind, it would appear.  I live in hope that I'll be catching up soon, but I'm not sure how realistic that is.
Background - chat with my parents about church and life and lots of stuff.  Also, wondering about the shape of and vision for the church generally.  And this book was lent to me.

It's not my copy, and the handwritten comment in the front of the book is 'Enjoy and celebrate this excellent piece of heresy'.  Now, this comment was made tongue in cheek, but illustrates one view of this book (and other books like it).  There can be a temptation to throw it out, labelling it as heretical.  But I don't think it's quite so clear as all that.
The book is written as a series of conversations and communications between two individuals, with some accompanying 'storyline'.  One individual is a pastor, the other a high school teacher.  Their interactions consider the societal landscape and the place of the church in this.  There is much talk of modernity and postmodernity.  There's some helpful stuff on what distinguishes one from the other.  The book then serves as a challenge to move the church from a modern to a postmodern approach to things.  This will scare some and worry others.  The pastor, Dan, takes the role of the one being encouraged to move forwards, with the guidance, encouragement and challenge of the high school teacher, Neo.  The pastor writes in his journal:  "I'm scared.  The kinds of things I'm thinking will surely be considered heresy."  Neo encourages Dan to recognise that the Christianity of which we are a part is not simply Bible-based, but is also shaped by the foundry of the Modern Age in which it has been hammered out. 
I think the book helps to clarify a lot of stuff that I've been thinking about.  There can sometimes be a danger (perhaps this is particularly true in some evangelical circles) of worrying more about winning an argument than being God's ambassador.  There's some stuff that I'd probably question - some ideas about eternity seem a bit hazy, but that may be partly because I've only read it through once (relatively quickly) and not really delved fully into some of its conclusions. 
On the whole, though, I'd say it was a really great read.  It's wonderful to see that people are looking to press forward; not leaving scripture behind, but leaving behind some of the things that have, through the age of Modernity, been welded onto scripture.  It's written by an American, presumably mainly for an American audience, so you'll find things like characters saying 'I sure am', where 'I am' would suffice :)
There's also a lot on 'spirituality', which is obviously an area in which I am interested.  It's nice to see spiritual disciplines being bigged up in books.  Maybe I should drop Brian a line...
Further comments are welcome!  Particularly if you've read the book, but that's not necessarily a requirement :)

Cross Examined [book] by Bob Seidensticker

Two points to make first.  One, I was sent a free copy of this book to review.  Two, if you click on the link and go on to buy the book (and you’d be the first person ever to do this to anything I’ve ever linked!) then I get a small amount of commission.  If you don’t want me to get commission (and so delay my retirement to Barbados), feel free to use another method to purchase the book.
This book is written as an undermining of Christian intellectual arguments.  It is a novel, but in the dialogue between key characters, arguments are presented and then attacked (though the word attack suggests aggression, which there isn’t really much of in the book!)
In the original email I received offering me the book, I read:

Whether you consider yourself emergent, missional, organic, or just plain willing to engage, Cross Examined is a rich opportunity to engage the worldview of an atheist with depth who’s conversant with Christianity.

Bob Seidensticker has certainly gone to a lot of effort to present a clear defense of atheism, and in many ways he does this well.  For those interested or involved in apologetics, there might not be may surprises, but the atheist character in the novel, ‘Jim’, is eloquent and clear without the aggression of, say, Dawkins.  Pascal’s Wager (the, ‘you may as well believe in God because if you don’t and you’re wrong, you go to hell, and if you do and you’re wrong, you just end up living a nice life and then die without knowing you were wrong’) is all very well, for example, but once more than one religion exists, it rather crumbles…
However, I think I have a problem with this book.  That is, Christianity is not just attacked intellectually (which I don’t mind – Christians need to be well equipped in apologetics).  Rather, Christianity is undermined through the presentation of the key characters in the book.  There are basically three characters in the book:  Samuel, a church leader; Paul, his ‘apprentice’ – an ex-orphanage rescue project; Jim, an agoraphobic atheist.  The atheist is someone who you want to feel sorry for, because he has been wronged by the church, his life history is painful and Christianity has driven him, in many ways, to the brink.  The pastor of the church, on the other hand, is borderline megalomaniac (this may be a more American view perhaps; I’m not sure we have the structures in place to foster too many megalomaniacal church leaders here in England…) and will happily trample the needs and emotions of others to pursue his own vision.  For example, he tells Paul, who has been visiting Jim:

“Visiting this man takes away from your work.  He’s a diversion—discard him.”

This doesn’t seem like it should be words that come from the mouth of a pastor.  Now, I know as well as anyone (either inside of outside the church) that Christians can be the absolutely worst adverts for Christianity, but I think there’s only one Christian character in the book that I can think of that comes out of it all looking like a decent member of the community.
There are also occasional lines that present what I would consider to be slight distortions of the truth.  For example, Samuel says to Paul, ‘The Bible makes clear that an eternity in hell is what awaits the person who falls away from the church.”  I would disagree with the end part – ‘falls away from the church’.  Perhaps the author was trying to convey ‘rejects God’, but that’s not what he has Samuel say in this example.  I suspect this was deliberate.  Later, we’re told, ‘Faith is permission to believe something without good reason’. (Later still, we’re told, ‘faith is belief despite a lack of evidence’)  Again, I would argue that faith is based, at least in part, on reason.  If you had no reason to have faith, you wouldn’t have it, would you?
We’re also told, through Jim, ‘Think what a waste the entire universe is if the goal was simply to build one tiny home for humans’.  Whilst I can follow the apparent logic in this, I wonder on what grounds precisely the universe is a ‘waste’…
Further on, Jim argues,

Who would even consider worshipping a make-believe god when he was cared for by the very Creator of the universe? The only explanation is that the other gods were actually tempting, that they looked similar to the Israelites’ god

That’s not the only explanation, is it?  Isn’t that like saying, ‘who’d be tempted to be unfaithful to their wife when they’re the most beautiful woman in the world’, or even, ‘who’d be tempted to eat unhealthily when they’re offered the finest healthy fare’?  Surely part of our problem is that we’re tempted to do things that we really shouldn’t, however illogical they might seem.  After watching The Matrix, I, feeling emboldened and mostly invincible, decided to walk on the edge of Kingsgate Bridge [do NOT try this!!  It's stupid and dangerous]

It was something I really shouldn’t have done, but that didn’t prevent me from doing it.  The argument above suggests that I woudn’t do this.  Yes, it’s true to say I shouldn’t have done it, but I did.  Saying, effectively, ‘people wouldn’t do something illogical’ is, sadly, untrue.
Paul ends up rejecting Christianity (don’t worry – I haven’t completely ruined the book for you!  There’s more to it than that.)  And this is part of the narrative:

He thought back on the shackles he’d left behind. Only in the intensity of the debate had he finally seen the world through godless glasses.  He’d been a misfit within the church, but the defect wasn’t with him but rather his belief.
The medieval Christian constraints were gone. He felt a door to the twentieth century swing open, and he entered a rational world governed by intellect and logic.

Now, I suppose it’s inevitable that, as an atheist himself, the author would present it like that, but still it illustrates for me the underlying assumption that Christianity and Christians are backwards and (to a varying extent) bad.  Maybe I’m being hypersensitive, but that’s my take on it
Finally, I’m not sure what to make of the ending.  If someone could explain it to me, I’d be much obliged…  I put it down to sleep deprivation, but I honestly can’t work out quite what the author is trying to convey…

Hudson Taylor: An Adventure Begins.

The publishers of this book very kindly sent me an e-copy for me to review.


This book is part of the 'Trailblazers' series produced by Christian Focus 4 Kids (CF4K).  It is aimed at 9-14 year-olds.  I had previously read 'A man in Christ', which is one of the 'grown up' biographies of Hudson Taylor by another publisher.  I therefore came to the book with a knowledge of and interest in the life of Hudson Taylor.


I am a huge fan of Hudson Taylor.  This book reminds us that he, 'longed after holiness, usefulness and nearness to God.'  The book is a clear reminder of God's faithfulness.  Hudson himself was quite a sickly boy, and yet God used him in an extraordinarily powerful way in circumstances that were more often than not very difficult.  God's strength in our weakness is one clear message of the book.

However, I didn't personally like the way in which the book was written.  First of all, a large proportion is devoted to Hudson's life before his move to China, which seemed to me to be disproportionate.  Also, the style of writing didn't work for me personally.  The book is written largely in the form of journal entries and conversations between key characters.  My understanding from the blurb is that many of these are based on actual events, but are not actual journal entries or conversations.  For me, this style is unnecessary, as I think a straightforward recounting of events could be written in a way that appeals to young people.  The book is also written through the eyes of Hudson's sisters and mother (mainly his sister Amelia).  I did wonder if this might make it more appealing to girls than boys, as it may provide a different 'slant'. 

Furthermore, there are a number of mistakes (editorially, not factually) in the text, which I found a little frustrating.  I suppose a number of young people wouldn't even notice these, but I felt it suggested the production of the book had been a little rushed.  If a story is worth telling, it's worth telling well, and this is certainly a story worth telling.

On the plus side, the book tells the story of a man made remarkable by his complete reliance on God.  It shows that he had a perspective on this life that allowed him to see beyond personal tragedy to the God that holds all things together.  His faith is testimony to the way in which God is able to work in His people.  His desire to serve the people of China and bring the gospel to them is an example each Christian can learn from.  He had a sense of urgency in the task God had given him. 
Also on the plus side, there are questions at the end of the book to get young people thinking around some of the topics raised.  It's great to see publishers encouraging readers to engage with the text rather than just read it!

I would encourage young people to read about and learn from the lives of Christians who have served God both in their own countries and overseas.  There is much to learn from someone who follows God closely, and Hudson Taylor was one such man.  However, given my reservations about the book, I'm not 100% sure that all those who read this particular book will necessarily be enthused by it.  That said, there are others who have found it helpful.

The Vicar of Baghdad.

"Some people are dead.  It is another normal day."
Life in Baghdad:  not exactly a walk in the park.
This book is the remarkable story of Andrew White, whose ministry has taken him to serving God and people in Baghdad.  It is a story of a man who has relied wholeheartedly on God as he struggles to see peace brought to a place synonymous with violence.
He meets with politicians, military personnel, terrorists, civil servants, religious leaders and countless others and all the while seeks to draw them together.  It is so refreshing to see someone who's cottoned on to the fact that religion is a vital part of society in some countries, and who recognises that peace will not come unless religious leaders are engaged with and encouraged to support the process.
He says, "Everyone needs to be involved in the quest for peace.  Peacemaking of the old woolly-liberal kind no longer works, if it ever did.  We cannot succeed if we do not engage with the military.  By the same token, we have to engage too with the people who choose to kidnap women and children and blow up buses.  We cannot confine ourselves to sitting down and drinking tea with nice people."
The progress that has been made over the course of the last decade is testament to an extraordinary man who serves an Almighty God.  It is a story of hope in the depths of despair.  A story of trust at all times.  A story of God at work.
It is also a story that may help us to understand better the situation in Iraq, as well as to understand better those of other faiths.  He argues that, "The mutual incomprehension between the Islamic world and the West is certainly one of the biggest problems facing humankind today."  It's also refreshing to see a man whose faith has been strengthened, not diluted, by his work with those of other faiths.
There's not a glorification of risk or danger, though both are presented throughout the book.  They tend to be dealt with in a matter-of-fact sort of way.  You don't get a sense that he is a man who thrives on such things.  Rather, he seems to thrive despite them.
I'd recommend the book for anyone who wants to have a better picture of life in Iraq, a fuller understanding of those of other (particularly Muslim) faiths and a greater realisation God's work in His world, even its most difficult parts.

How is God at work in our world today?

What responsibilities do Christians have for seeking peace?  Are those responsibilities being taken seriously?

What can you do to bring peace to an area of conflict in your own life? 

Getting Your Kids Through Church Without Them Ending Up Hating God.

Now, I have lots of people telling me that I'm a great parent.  Flip, I even had people telling me that I'd make a great parent when I was still in my teenage years.  Nothing like a bit of pressure, eh?  But the thing is, these people don't get to see all my parenting, and I can assure you that plenty of it is below par.  Downright poor, in fact.  The people who DO get to see the full gamut of my parenting are my kids.  (Thankfully, Little Boy is a bit too small to discern some of my more minor errors...  Big Boy, on the other hand, I think is getting a pretty good grasp of my ineptitude)  Therefore, I, like most other Christian parents, (I would say all, but I'm guessing there are probably a couple of deluded ones out there...) sometimes worry that my kids will be put off God by me.  The juxtaposition of telling them you love God, and then living in close proximity to them, carries with it inherent risks.

Of course, there's a danger here.  Writing a book like this runs the risk of making people think that if their kids end up hating God, they as the parents are to blame.  But that's absolutely not the viewpoint of the book.  Rather, it's more a question of doing what can be done, and avoiding what is best avoided, in order to give your children the best chance to grow up into adults who desire to see their own faith nurtured and grown.  As such, this book is tremendously important.  It's written by Rob Parsons, who's part of the Care for the Family setup.  He writes well, and makes some really clear points about parenting.

Two church clones (I spent ages on it)

One of Rob's first points is to avoid the danger of trying to fit everyone into the same mould.  (That's not the green, furry stuff on top of old food, you understand, it's the jelly-mould variety)  The point being that God didn't make us identical, so why do we try so hard to turn people into church-clones?  Sometimes we need to see and support our kids' strengths, rather than suggesting (verbally or otherwise) that they can only flourish in church once they've got the right look/Bible knowledge/guitar skills/way of praying/etc.  Linked to this, there's the idea that we shouldn't be making mountains out of mole-hills.  Ok, so a lip-piercing might look gross in our eyes (perhaps that's the wrong phrase - I'm not suggesting having a lip-piercing in your eye...), but Jesus wouldn't look at them and say, 'once you've sorted out your gross facial adornments, I'd love to save you', would he?!  Yes, our kids need to be sensitive to others in the church, but it's not a one-way street.  I remember failing in this respect, when I was running the Youth Band and I squashed an idea that probably wasn't such a bad one, because it didn't seem the right way of playing the song...  The positive side of this (the do, rather than the don'ts) is to make sure our kids feel they belong in church.  It's OUR church, after all.  Given some of the sinners that Jesus hung out with, it would be pretty daft to fail to ensure there's a good welcome for our own children in our own church :)

Rob then goes on to talking about five things that could endanger our kid's desire to pursue the with-God life.  These are:  cynicism, hypocrisy, judgmentalism, over-busyness and over-familiarity.  Each of these, in its own way, has the power to rob our kids of the desire to follow God.  Each one can result in God getting short shrift from our kids, because of how we seem to live for Him. 

Arghh, the burning fiery furnace...

Rob goes on to say that we should be preparing our kids for disappointment.  Disappointment with others, with themselves, and with God.  We need to support them through disappointments, not hide them away from them.  One of my favourite aspects of many Psalms is the 'and yet' of the Psalmist.  Life sucks, yet will I praise Him.  My enemies want to kill me, yet will I praise Him.  That's precisely what we need to teach our kids.  Rob refers to Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, who say to the king, (slight paraphrase) 'Our God can save us from the furnace, but even if he chooses not to, we're not bowing down to your statue'.  They trusted God completely, even without knowing whether or not he would save them.

He finishes by calling us to prepare our kids for the world.  The nest might be a safe place to be nurtured, but we've got to teach them to fly.  He challenges us to give them a vision.  Both we and they need to get a grasp of what they could be.  We need to get them to a point where they will fly without us.  Give them a vision and the foundations to realise it.  As he says, it's not really our desire to have kids that don't hate God.  Our real desire is to have kids that love Him.
I think it's a great book.  I guess a fair bit is pretty obvious in some ways, but it's all brought together really well, and could be a really helpful resource.

The Litigators.

A Grisham.  A mighty fine Grisham at that.
Having said that, I've never read a Grisham that's disappointed me.  I'm a big fan.  I even loved Theodore Boone, which received very mixed reviews (although I'm convinced that about 80% of negative reviews were written by disgruntled people who couldn't work out that 'Grisham for a new generation of readers' meant that it was for a more junior audience...)
A couple of comments on The Litigators said that it was funny/amusing.  Personally, I didn't see that as a particularly noticeable aspect of the story, but there we go!
Absolutely loved the plot.  Amusing 'break down' of a character early on, some entertaining character development throughout.  I found the storyline predictable, but that didn't bother me in the slightest (just inflated my ego a little bit!)  The trial is portrayed in a great fashion.  There's a sort of inevitability to the course of events, but that doesn't detract from it being a great piece of storytelling. Absolutely loved his work. Again!

A simplified life.

As usual, the above link will take you to the Amazon.co.uk website, and I'll get a minute amount of commission if you choose to buy :)
This book is the gentlest book I've ever read.  I'm not even quite sure what I mean by that, but it is.
So what have I learnt?  Well, the life of the solitary is not easy.  The same difficulties I have when trying to 'settle' to prayer strike those whose choice is a 'settled' life of solitude.  "Yet the almost continuous conversations that go on in most of our heads most of the time when our minds are not otherwise engaged, proved a more intractable problem, and hinged on learning little by little to live as fully as possible in each present moment, and occupying myself with just one task at a time so as to break the ingrained habit of multi-tasking".  That helps me understand one reason I often find concentrating in prayer difficult.  It's because it virtually every other arena of life, multi-tasking is seen as positive.  When we try to focus solely in prayer, we are going against much of our training and upbringing.  In her early days in the cabin overlooking Bardsey Island, she describes worry about just sitting and watching and waiting, realising that everyone else was terribly busy doing things.  She says she 'had never felt so helpless', and yet she was still content to wait. 
She recognises an intricate relationship between her own life and progress, and the place in which she is living.  She often ties together her own internal experiences with the weather and seasons that surround her.  She sees a rhythm in the ebb and flow, and goes some way towards embracing this.  It feels like she becomes a part of her place, and perhaps that's a challenge for each one of us.  Tied in with this, she researches carefully her surroundings and the Christian history of her place.  Bardsey Island is steeped in it, and pilgrimages have been made there for centuries.  She learns of how Christianity shaped her place, and how her place helped define a distinct flavour of Christianity in that part of the world.  She learns much from the past, but doesn't allow it to stay there.  She tells also of a pilgrimage to Skellig Michael, off the coast of Ireland.  An island similar in many ways to Bardsey Island.  As she looks deeper into the life of those early Christian communities, she reminds us that, "Humility and service go hand in hand with holiness and even as I write these words I realize how counter-cultural they sound."  Surely we, too, should recognize such truths, and pursue them regardless of how counter-cultural they are. 
Throughout the book, there is such a strong message about 'place'.  "The sense of 'inhabiting' a place in the way former generations often did, is rare for us now."  Perhaps this, too, is a challenge for us. 

"For some years now when I have been asked how I live, how do I pray?  Do I have a rule; a timetable; how do I spend my time?  I have come to reply:  'I just live here.'  There is nothing special or spiritualized about a solitary life.  It is just one way of responding in faith to God.   Every life has a rhythm punctuated by the need to eat and to sleep, to work and to relax with enjoyment or sadness, contentment or anxiety.  It is no different for a hermit."

Maybe that's the same for all of us longing to live a holy life.  Maybe we should be able to respond, 'I just live here'. 

This book is a gentle and beautiful exploration of the solitary life in contemporary times