it (theology) is no longer thought of as a human discourse that speaks of god but rather as the place where god speaks into human discourse. in other words, theology is understood as the site in which revelation makes its appearance in the world, the place in which theos (god) impacts, and overwhelms, the human realm logos (reason). consequently we do not do theology but rather we are overcome and transformed by it: we do not master it but are mastered by it.If theology comes to be understood as the place where God speaks, then we must seek, not to speak of God, but rather to be that place where God speaks. Through our words and actions we seek to be the site of revelation through which people encounter the life-giving Word of God.
pp21
At last, a book that’s come out of the “emerging conversation” that made my head hurt, it actually made it ache, my eyes blurred, my mind needed space to take it all in making me put it down a number of times to digest, a book that moves beyond the practicals of why and how churches involved in the “emerging conversation” go about their call to be “church” in a postmodern setting, and offers something to the wider theological community that might have been under the understanding that postmodernity and it’s deconstruction may not have anything to offer it’s conversation.
Many of the previous books on the “emerging conversation” / “emerging church” / “alternative worship” have opened my eyes, told me that I’m not alone, many of them have made me feel welcomed, accepted, enlightened, excited that there are other weirdos like me out there trying to do stuff differently, but this book…
This book made my brain hurt, it stretched me, it pulled me in one direction, then it pulled me in another, it made me think, it made me feel , it invited me into a theological dialogue that I hadn’t entered into before. It said things that I thought I knew, then asked me why I knew them, it asked me to think about truth, God, faith, Christianity and then offered me not only a postmodern critique of the traditional understandings but instead offered me a postmodern creative answer to some of the mode prevalent modernistic religious arguments and issues of our time.
What is important about revelation is not that we seek to interpret in the same way, but rather that we all love it and are transformed by it… Such enslavement to the idea of revelation as offering a naked insight into God has meant that the development of a robust theology of reconciliation has always proved difficult within much of the contemporary Church because of it’s emphasis upon the primacy of what we believe about our beloved over and above the insight that what unifies us is our desire to embrace the beloved. Pp 17-18
We all get God wrong, a lesson that Pete Rollins who’s grown up and lived in Ireland knows all too well, he’s seen the result of a Church and a world that argues over their particular interpretation of their revelation of God and Truth, and it’s to this Church that Pete writes this book. It’s this insistence that perhaps Christianity has focused on interpretation rather than our desire to embrace God that got me thinking, in particular that it is so important that a book like this needed to come from someone who is participating in the “emerging conversation” in order to get a few of the critiques attention.
Apologetics, says Pete has been limited to two arguments, wonder and word, either a case is build upon reason or upon the miraculous wonder in order to convince another of the “truth” of Christianity, in either case it’s seen as unreasonable for someone to be faced with either argument and still not believe. After deconstructing these approaches to apologetics he suggests a different way, a way in which a discourse is opened up, a powerless discourse that involves poetry and “hints” rather than one that is based upon an argument of wonder and reason. In this way we are being like Jesus, inspiring thirst in others rather than forcing our interpretations upon them…
In a world where people believe they are not hungry, we must not offer food but rather an aroma that helps them desire the food that we cannot provide. We are a people who are born from a response to hints of the divine. Not only this, but we must embrace the idea that we are also called to be hints of the divine. pp37
Pete throws his voice into what could have been explained as a void of active heavy theological thought in the emerging conversation in order to create something that I hope will become a growing theological conversation that will use the creative edge of the emerging conversation to stretch our understanding of God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, vocation, prophecy, ecology amongst many other streams of theological thought. The emerging conversation has long been seen as purely deconstructive with nothing much to offer, this is something that Pete is not ashamed of, infact suggesting that one of Jesus’ primary acts was the deconstruction of all religious movements, because if God is known, yet unknown, revealed yet concealed Christianity should then as a religion should always critique itself… Just as Jesus did.
In Jesus I see not merely an individual who acted as a catalyst for a new religious movement, but also a subversive prophet who signaled the end of all religious movements. To be part of the Christian religion is to simultaneously hold that religion lightly…. Jesus employed a deeply deconstructive approach to religion which both affirmed and critiqued the movement that began in his lifetime. Christianity, following this deconstructive and subversive element in the life of Jesus, is then a religion which critiques its own religiosity. pp44
And, it would be amiss of a book that is inspiring a conversation about how we don’t talk about God to not include the idea of “Truth” in it’s pages. Truth, says Pete is relational, rather than being described or interpreted it is trans formative. This particular thought may well be amongst the most difficult to grasp for a Church that has for many many many years seen truth as something that can be proven, a descriptive reality that can be argued for, or in many cases can be fought and battled for. The idea that Truth is an act that causes transformation can be fairly relative, and it’s not really something that we can prove, instead its something that can only really be attested to by those who have experienced the transformation…
The Judeo-Christian view of truth is concerned with having a relationship with the Real (God) that results in us transforming reality. The emphasis is this not on description, but on transformation. This perspective completely short circuits the long redundant debate as to whether truth is subjective or objective, for here Truth is the ungraspable Real (objective) that transforms the individual (subjective)… The Truth in Christianity is not described but experienced… If we take truth to mean any act which positively transforms reality, rather than what describes reality…. pp56
But, how then do we interpret the scripture, or do we now see the scripture as something that cannot be interpreted, but instead something that can be described? Peter offers the suggestion that we interpret scripture in the same way that Jesus interpreted them, noting that Jesus himself held his own prejudices while reading the texts, but also suggesting that it’s precisely this prejudice that gives Jesus’ teachings their power and saltiness. Peter suggests that this prejudice is “love” and that while we use this prejudice in all that we read and is revealed to us then our faith becomes more than (just) an ethical/moral faith based on a moral/ethical handbook and is transformed into much more.
Jesus came to teach us a way of life that is dictated by the radical excess of love rather than an ethical rulebook… While ethics says, “what must I do in order to fulfill my responsibility?” love says “I will do more than what is required.” If, for instance, it was the right thing to do to buy a flower on Valentines Day for your beloved, then love says, “i will buy more than one.” Love is never satisfied by what is required but must always do more. pp65
One has to understand that this book is exactly what it’s title suggests, it’s a conversation about how we should not speak about God, it’s a recognition of how our current and previous dialogue/interpretations of God have lead us into wars, arguments, disagreements, denominational differences and an inspiring beginning of a dialogue that can, (if entered into) possibly see the end of such interpretations. This is a book that has come out of a postmodern theological dialogue and asks the Christian Church to cease arguing over “right belief” and to, instead focus on “believing in the right way”, and it’s this particular conversation that makes this book all the more important for us to read, and to dialogue over.
In order to discover this alternative reading, we must break down the word “orthodoxy” into it’s greek roots, ortho (right) and doxa (belief), and read them as if one was reading Hebrew – that is, from right to left. Thus “right belief” becomes “believing in the right way.” Thus we break down the binary opposition between orthodoxy and heresy by understanding the term “orthodox” as referring to someone who engages with the world in the right way – that is, in the way of love. Here religious knowledge is not something that is opposed to love, nor secondary to it; rather the only religious knowledge worth anything is love. pp66
If the theological conversation within this book wasn’t enough to inspire you to purchase the book then you may be further inspired by the thought that Peter decided that it was necessary to explore how such a conversation, such a theology, such theory translates into a liturgical framework. So, instead of continuing to delve into the thoughts in the first 3/4 of the book he has included 10 liturgical frameworks, including the thoughts and ideas behind the liturgy that have been formed by the faith community of activists that he is a part of in Ireland named IKON. This is a way in which Peter can show the reader how the ideas in his book can contribute to the Church community. These liturgies include liturgies from Easter, Advent and the Queer service which was held at Greenbelt 2005 that inspired so many people…
I hear that Peter’s got a new book coming out soon titled “Being Evangelised” and, if it’s anything like this offering I’ll be one of the first 20 people to get my hands on it and my teeth into it… but until then go out, purchase the book, enter the discussion, let me know what you think, I’d be interested in hearing other people’s views…
For too long the Church has been seen as an oasis in the desert – offering water to those who are thirsty. In contrast, the emerging community appears more as a desert in the oasis of life, offering silence, space and desolation amidst the sickly nourishment of Western capitalism. It is in this desert, as we wander together as nomads, that God is to be found. For it is here that we are nourished by our hunger. pp43
Pete’s Blog: http://blogs.ignite.cd/Pete/
Buy the book: How (Not) To Speak Of God
IKON Community Website: Ikon’s Website
Buy the IKON community cd “Dubh”: Dubh
Jonny Baker’s review of the book: How (Not) To Speak Of God
Read what Andrew Jones had to say: How (Not) To Speak Of God
Read what Scott McKnight had to say: How (Not) To Speak Of God
Read Brad Anderson’s review: How (Not) To Speak Of God
Book Information:
Title: How (Not) To Speak of God
Author: Peter Rollins
Paperback: 144 pages
Publisher: Paraclete Press (August 1, 2006)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 1557255059
ISBN-13: 978-1557255051
My Rating: 
About djwright
