-
Website
http://www.jesusmanifesto.com/ -
Original page
http://www.jesusmanifesto.com/2008/02/07/making-room-for-the-non-academic/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
Maybe we should have some 'Easy Essays' like Peter Maurin liked to write, so the not-so-academic amongst us can grasp the goodies.
~Anna
http://www.thedorothydaycenter.com/resources/Ea...
I don't want to put the onus on the non-academics, but I can only post stuff that people submit. And I'd be happy to post stuff that isn't super academic. In fact, I prefer not to post too much academic stuff. So, consider this an earnest invitation for submissions.
I think that we can be a place where all sorts feel comfortable if all sorts submit material. I don't want it to be too academic. Nor do I want us to avoid academic material.
On the other hand, maybe I'm being a moron by assuming I'm one of those smart writers. :) In that case, delete this entry before I look like an idiot.
I suspect that a lot of the academic posts on this site are an attempt at grappling through lofty, challenging ideas in the attempt to flesh them out. It isn't a "nerd orgy"--a bunch of intellectual talk that doesn't go anywhere. Instead, it is an attempt to move from reflection to action.
After all, when I write academically, it isn't because I am trying to be an elitist. It is often my way of grasping at ideas in the best (and sometimes only) way I know. But my heart is always to work it out into the outflow of my life.
I'm glad this issue is being raised; thank you for the post, Ariah. I'm not sure there is a quick and easy answer to the issue, but I think we'd be better off if we commit ourselves to struggling with it.
The challenge for us is this: how do we explore challenging and lofty ideas on this site in such a way that non-academics still free to engage in the process of fleshing things out?
@Mark: I definitely didn't mean this is a critique of you, I can understand your struggle as an editor, and it's mostly my fault since your so willing to publish my simple stuff, I could be that other voice on the site.
That being said, thanks also for understanding the need to struggle with this.
@Michael: Thanks for chiming in. I'll be honest, I didn't read your post. I skimmed it, but I'll be honest, big words like 'ideology' and others scare me (I'm sounding like a wuss aren't I?). Even mentions of Marx and Ellul, though I love the reflections I've seen come from the writings, tend to be hard to digest.
@Anna and Joe: Thanks for the encouragement.
I believe the goal is not only to struggle with the academic issues, but to constantly try and struggle with them in such a way that others can engage (basically what Mark said)...
"how do we explore challenging and lofty ideas on this site in such a way that non-academics still free to engage in the process of fleshing things out?"
greetings.
If one reads Bonhoeffer for example, one will find a very academic theologian writing in the language of the academics of his time, a language that the church of his era did not understand fully. It took fifty or sixty years before his 'academic stuff' was able to translate into practical application. Basically what I am saying is that Bonhoeffer described his vision of real life Christianity, but it was done in academic terms that a later generation translated into something that could be practiced more readily. Rather than see it as an either/or proposition ("real life" vs. "academic") it should be viewed as a dialogue between Christians trying to take big issues or concepts and whittle them down into practical reality or vice-a-versa.
As I tell people in Bible study groups, we all have something to teach one another about the things of God, we all should share the goal of helping one another grow, but we all just have different ways in which to accomplish that. One of the things I like about this site is that the conversation, more often than not, is conducted in a Christian manner with an openness to hearing all the voices represented.
c'mon gang, that was a little funny...
mountainguy,
i think it would be refreshing to hear your observations and perspectives. go for it. your english shouldn't be a barrier for this. however if you're more comfortable go ahead and write in spanish. i am fluent in spanish and would be willing to translate. email me if you're interested ellens.joshua [at] gmail.com
by the way, my wife is from Peru, so i have a vested interest in the Latin American perspective. seriously, i think you should share ;)
Perhaps we could generously amend the Apostle Paul to add that neither is there academic elite nor common bloggers, we are all one in Christ. It is such an honor to learn and share with all of you.
Peace
much love
I guess maybe you need to qualify the statement 'academic lip service to the gospel.'
I understand that at the grass roots level academic discussions seem irrelevant, but in all respect the overwhelming majority of Christians are part of mainstream, denominational, traditional Christian congregations. While the (unfortunately) small percentage of house church, neo-monastic communities, etc are more interested in 'real life and experience' than 'the stuff of academics' it will be through 'academics' that the future leaders of denominational Christianity are able to take what your community has done and apply it to the traditional congregational structure, because in order to be clergy, pastors, ministers etc. in those congregations one must go through the academy. That is why I take issue with the notion that academics gives 'lip service to the gospel.' The academic arena is where the Christian leaders of tomorrow are able to formulate all the 'academic stuff' into workable plans in congregational structures where most Christians exist. Both sides of this conversation are doing valuable work that should not be looked down upon.
I am indebted to one of my professors who said "any change you want to make in the church will occur long after your dead." It took centuries for the Catholic Church to admit that Luther was correct on some issues he raised against it, and most of us will never see the church universal embrace the change advocated today.
An interesting footnote is that the Protestant Reformation began in the university before it swept through the church.
Greg, powerful ideas can be powerfully dangerous. While there is foolishness in just talking smack without ever doing anything, there is also foolishness in ignoring ideas and embracing anti-intellectualism. This isn't simply a question of balance between the two--it is a question of finding the proper relationship between ideas and practice. Ideas without practice is mere talk, but practice without ideas is mere activity.
James, I'm not at all convinced that the Reformation began in the university...not really. The reason the magisterial reformers get credit is that they were able to broker deals with people of power because of their lofty status in the University. But there were non Academics spreading ideas before it got to that point. It is a murky history. And the Radical Reformers were largely outside of the University.
I'm all for advocating intellectual rigor. But I'm not sure that has to go hand-in-hand with affirming the University. I think most of the problem with the bad relationship between Church and Academy is on the Academy side of things. I don't believe in the "trickle down" theory of ideas. We need to plunder the Academy and bring it back into the church.
I know the solution to this scenario is hardly to read more, but at the risk of being scouffed at, I'll suggest a book (especially to James): Helmut Thelicke's "A Little Exercise For Young Theologians." The book pretty much changed my perspective on this very issue and gradually shifted the blame (in my eyes) away from the local congregations who I previously thought just wanted to remain in ignorance, and onto the Academy who nonchalantly practice "power over" others with their theological language and expertise. A lot of it agrees probably with what Mark is getting at in his latest post to this thread.
I read that book when I was finishing my undergraduate education before entering graduate school. The professor who asked us to read it wanted us to understand that the knowledge we had gained (and would gain) in college made us dangerous to the church especially if we used it to exercise power over other Christians or to damage their faith. I hope that I have never done either in my preaching, teaching, or writing because that will never be my intention. I may try to make people stretch and exercise their minds (as well as my own) but only so we can better understand what it means to follow after Jesus.
Mark,
I actually think the Protestant Reformation was university driven, most of the leaders came out of that environment. The Radical Reformation was a different animal altogether, most of its early leaders came out of the priesthood. However, I think you are correct to point out that there was also a grass roots reformation occurring simultaneously. Sounds a bit like what we are seeing here, huh.
Mark,
Your preaching to the choir, but I guess my perspective is a little different since I am coming out of a private Christian university setting where I have personally seen the 'trickle down' effect of ideas leaving the classroom and being put into practice in the creation of urban ministries begun at the student level and turning into full fledged domestic missionary activity by supporting congregations (which were previously not open to doing domestic missionary work) with the creation of Christian operated free medical clinics, education programs, homeless ministry, etc. From what I have seen and done in congregational settings I think that as our generation begins to enter leadership/clergy positions in congregations the missional nature of the early church will have a resurgence on a much larger scale as more and more students go through Christian seminaries and universities and are prepared for ministry by a younger generation of professors. That's the way I see it playing out, just based on my personal experience.
What that meant then, was that if I simply said what I had trouble believing or concerns I had, all most people heard was 'heretic', 'atheist', 'troublemaker', etc, and they felt it was unfounded because the reasons I had didn't make sense to them. At worst it could be dangerous to their own faith, and Boyd was advocating extreme caution in this area.
I've been very thankful for the people here for the fact that they have created an open area to discuss some of these issues; that has freed me to work on some articles of concepts I've studied over the last few years. Unfortunately my 'default' is to right extremely densely; my professors at university actually mark me down for using language that is too complex!!
So I have about 6 articles in the works, but it takes me a while to digest and break them down to the point that they cover the same material, but are 'on the bottom shelf'. As the saying goes, if a five-year-old doesn't get it, you probably are explaining insufficiently.
The usual challenge is that the barrier of entry until now (Barth, Ellul, Bonhoeffer, even people like Chesterton) required being deep enough in Christian studies and action to see a need, and usually relying on some of the above academics for help moving out of the status quo. Mark's doing a great job knocking that dependency down, by fostering conversation in places like these, but everyone else here is absolutely correct; more needs to be done.
I would be honoured if you (Ariah, Joe, MountainGuy, anybody else) would critique my work as it comes out; let me know if it's not accessible enough and I'll definitely edit based on your suggestions.
Peace
What I mean is that each one of us is on a different "level" or in a different field of discourse and will therefore define what is "academic" or "non-academic" quite differently. I certainly have family members who wouldn't bother reading your original post, Ariah--they'd dismiss it as too high falutin'. (And I can only dream about writing a novel!) All this to say that I definitely appreciate this discussion--this is a serious problem in the Church and I'm glad so many are thinking deeply about it--but it's never just a simple dichotomy.
Mark, this is EXACTLY how I'm working through things. It's funny, because I know I have academic aptitude but I don't ever really think of myself as a "high and lofty" type of thinker... but glancing back through some of my posts I see several hallmarks of academic-style writing that may be more off-putting than I had ever intended (my intent is quite the opposite, really).
The thing is, I don't want to sound "smart", I want to engage with others these ideas that are challenging me. I could give a darn if I sound smart or if I sound like an elementary reader. So... Thank you, Ariah, for mentioning this and thanks to everyone for the great discussion. It's something I need to consider probably more actively than I generally do.