I have just finished Chuck Culpepper’s Bloody Confused (Up Pompey in the UK) and recommend it. The last sports book I read was Buzz Bissinger’s 3 Nights in August of 2006. This, too, is a great book, but 2006?! That’s because I’m not a sports fan.
If you define the word, “follow,” very loosely, then I follow only two sports. First, the Formula One racing series based in Paris and watched, as far as I can tell, by absolutely nobody in this country. Second, I follow soccer.
It is this last sport (aka, football) that Culpepper writes about. He turns aside fourteen years of writing about the NFL, MLB, NBA, PGA, etc. in America, and relocates to London for an education in English Premiership football. You can hear his story in his own words here. His loyalties are with Portsmouth F. C., by the way.
A special thanks to Rick Phillips (Second Pres, Greenville) for his article, “Five arguments against future justification” published in this month’s Reformation 21. While he insists that it is not, particularly, a review of N. T. Wright’s much-anticipated, Justification: God’s Plan and Paul’s Vision, it may serve as an antidote or, at least, an anti-inflammatory salve.
Many thanks to Michael Bell over at Internetmonk for his latest insights. He has organized and graphically presented the Pew Forum results in such a way that some real conclusions appear. Of course, I tend to struggle under the weight of data, and, frankly, need the help! Thanks, Michael.
Of course, if time is of the essence, you should at least read Scott Clark’s take. He pulls from the vocabulary of his Recovering the Reformed Confession, so familiarity would help, but his understanding of what is behind Christianity Today’s attempt to understand the Pew research is pithy and helpful. Why do I sense that “evangelicals” know least of all . . . ?
Just in case anyone has been detained on another planet or otherwise unable to digest the sheer volume, here is a three-month chronicle of Religious Stuff in the press. Of course, I hear that God is dying a rapid death, . . . yet I can’t keep up with all the press He is currently getting!
[Editorial note: Remember, Tim Keller's 3/5/08 talk on God drew more Google-ites during Google's Authors@Google event than any other author, even Christopher Hitchens.]
Dan, Harris (ABC), “America is Becoming Less Christian, Less Religious,” March 9, 2009
David van Biema (Time Magazine), “Ten Ideas Changing the World Right Now: The New Calvinism,” March 23, 2009.
Jon Meacham (Newsweek), “The End of Christian America,” April 4, 2009.
Daniel Stone (Newsweek), “One Nation Under God?” April 7, 2009.
Ross Douthat (New York Times), “God and Politics,” [review] April 16, 2009.
Jessica Bennett (Newsweek), “A Semester With Jesus,” [review] April 18, 2009.
Hanna Rosin (New York Times), “Religious Revival,” [review] April 24, 2009. See also Robert Schlesinger (U.S. News & World Report), “God is Back: Religion’s Revival and Its Global Impact,” May 1, 2009.
Laurie Goodstein (New York Times), “More Atheists Shout If From the Rooftops,” April 26, 2009.
Stephen Prothero (USA Today), “Post Christian? Not Even Close,” April 27, 2009.
Amy Sullivan (Time Magazine), “Church Shopping: Why Do Americans Change Faiths?” April 28, 2009.
Dan Harris (ABC), “Young Americans Losing Their Religion,” May 6, 2009.
Dan Gilgoff (U.S. News & World Report), “Losing Religion, Keeping the Faith: Religious ‘Nones’ Aren’t as Godless as You Think,” May 8, 2009.
. . . and others?
Anchorage bands like Bullet for Daisy, Sunbury, and Kill Tango, are being exceedingly generous with their time and skills and tunes. You should find something to generously offer as well. Come hear them perform live at The Inked Monkey on Saturday, May 11th, and consider participating in an auction of items that have been donated by other generous folks [list of sponsors].
Breaking Grounds is a new venture to plan, fund, and build an indoor skatepark, the first of its kind for Anchorage. Most of the business planning aspects have been hammered-out by David Freswick, the executive director, and the funding stage is just getting started.
Join us May 30th at The Inked Monkey [Google map, great review by KTUU, Anchorage].
The fine folks at Monergism.com (thanks, John), have posted the recent talks of Dr. Michael Horton, “Good news people in a bad news world.” Michael Horton was hosted by the Reformation Society of Oregon as a part of their Spring Conference earlier this month.
Many know Michael’s recent book, Christless Christianity: The Alternative Gospel of the American Church [more]. These talks in Oregon are Michael’s first lectures related to his companion book to Christless Christianity (the manuscript of which has just been delivered to the publisher).
Here is a must-see interview by Adrian Warnock with one of my heroes, Vaughan Roberts of St. Ebbe’s Church, Oxford.
So, I attended the much-anticipated (from my perspective, at least) Chuck Klosterman talk as a part of the Bartlett Lecture Series at the University of Alaska. Many kudos to the administrators of the Bartlett Lectures, named for Senator E. L. Bartlett (learn more). It appeared to be a good turnout of interested students and curious old people (like myself).
I was, overall, pleased to hear Chuck’s talk. His reputation in music criticism circles is pretty far-reaching, so my ignorance and general disinterest didn’t help; “Chinese Democracy” is, first, a song by Guns N’Roses, and, only second, a hoped-for political outcome.
What most caught my attention about Chuck was the great pleasure he finds doing stand-up before a crowd. He’s an author (of course), but his detached joy at entertaining others reminded me more of Andrew Dice Clay and less of, you know, David Brooks. It is evident that Chuck has, and exercises liberally, the gift of gab (“I detect, like me, you’re endowed with the gift of gab,” Ulysses Everett McGill). After about 20 minutes or so, I began to bob-and-weave with his ‘routine,’ but, prior to this, I was heartily disappointed. I had come with every intention of following his train of thought closely, examining his critique of popular culture, evaluating its merits, and so on, and so on. I had expected to receive intellectual conclusions but, it turns out, I first had to learn to ‘get the jokes.’
I think what this really means is that Chuck’s specialty is simply describing popular culture in a humorous, experiential way. What I had hoped for, and what had initially peaked my interest in Sex, Drugs, and Cocoa Puffs (and, to a degree, Killing Yourself to Life), was a thoughtful critique of what is good and what is bad about popular culture. One of the questioners asked about the rise of ‘Philistine’ music acts like The Jonas Brothers and Miley Cyrus, hoping to hear Chuck bemoan their destructive influence on better music. Instead, he described how these artists came to be, and how other artists will still find their audience. Chuck was almost exclusively descriptive. Indeed, all evening I heard very little criticism, and a lot of observation.
And his observations are voluminous! Chuck hops from one cultural artifact to the next, like a turbocharged sausage maker, sucking in mashed organs, grinding it up, and spitting it into tightly wound porcine-incased packets. Off to the market they go before we have a chance to critique his observations, asking how they came to be and why they’re relevant and if they are right or wrong. Seemingly, there will be no re-shaping of the sausages with Chuck; they are already sealed and smoked . . . and more are coming!
I asked Chuck what he thought about the tragically-titled “New Calvinism” movement noted by Time Magazine and hyped through The Resurgence. I had assumed his interest in Evangelical happenings based upon comments he made in Sex, Drugs, and Cocoa Puffs (232ff) about Kirk Cameron, the Left Behind series, etc. Chuck was aware of “New Calvinism,” of course; I think Chuck reads a lot, and remembers a lot! He observed “Born Again” Evangelicalism as a collection of people with a message of eternal life and earthly contentedness, and a desire (or admonition) to share this message with other people. Essentially, he described Evangelicals as (a) people with a belief, (b) for which they are very confident to share. Based on this, Chuck said nothing critical (positive or negative) about their beliefs as such, and said only a trifle about their desire to share their message (i.e. they are probably fueling much of what is happening in terms of internet growth). That’s all. Nothing more.
I have been pondering most of the day that, if your job is to write about popular culture, and you do so mainly for an American audience, wouldn’t it make sense to be rather “up-to-date” concerning the Christian scene? In all actuality, I think that my question may have been the stupidest question of the evening for Chuck. I think that I may have just unwittingly exhibited a bit naivete by expecting a “movement” within the Evangelical world to even register on Chuck’s pop-culture meter. It would seem that Christianity no longer represents even a sliver of popular culture in America. I knew this, of course (come on, I read David Wells!), but sometimes you know something, before you really know something?!
I would sincerely love to read Chuck’s observations about the Evangelical church and Protestantism in general. As far as my literature-dollars are concerned, I would happily purchase a book about Chuck’s visits to Protestant churches across the nation. Given one service each in a Dutch Reformed Church, an African Methodist Episcopal Church, and the Brownsville Assembly of God (Pensacola), Chuck could have a heyday! But, alas, on the Spectrum of Cultural Indicators in America today, Evangelicalism slots well below the new Guns N’Roses song (or album, or whatever) about China.
Are human beings still interested in studying what it means to be a human being? Yes, but maybe not for long; see In Tough Times, the Humanities Must Justify Their Worth in the New York Times.
As an aside, I just read in Mouw’s Calvinism in the Las Vegas Airport this morning Martin Marty’s explanation of his doctrinal persuasion by beginning, “first and foremost, I am a human being, but I find being a Christian to be the best way for me to be a human being . . .”
Justin Taylor at Between Two Worlds reminds me of my first real study of the Bible when Karen and I were first married. I had registered for a Bible as Literature class taught by my favorite professor, the late Dr. Kenneth Hovey (mySA obituary and dedicatory article through Paisano-Online). Dr. Hovey was absolutely brilliant, an astounding teacher who never, for a moment, stopped learning himself. Remarkable man.
His Bible as Literature class simply awakened my love for the Bible in a way I had never experienced. I had already developed a love for Dr. Hovey’s teaching methodology, but his winsome energy applied to the life of Abraham was so refreshing to me that I do not know what ever prevented me from delighting the Word of God prior to this class. But there was no delight. There was analytical plodding, diagramming, memorization, outlining, etc., but no delight. Until Dr. Hovey. His marching back and forth in the front of the classroom shouting the great speeches of Tamburlaine the Great (via Christopher Marlowe) translated well to the impassioned reading of the nuanced discussion between Abraham and his God in Genesis 18.
Justin’s post (Oxford University Press Apocrypha) brought this up only because Dr. Hovey had us read from the Metzger and Murphy edited Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical Books (NRSV). I lived in this edition, carried it to church (and cafes and Bill Miller), read it to my new wife, pondered it with the Reverend Steele (here and here and here), etc., etc. It was the second time I had read the entire Bible, and to do so with the guidance of Dr. Hovey, well, both Karen and I benefitted from this (and continue to benefit as a pastor).
