books in august

Bridget Jones's Diary, by Helen Fielding

This was the ultimate summer read.  Not only was it so lighthearted and funny and honest that I wanted to immediate write a book just like this one, it was the perfect way to pass the time while my family and I were on vacation in Annapolis.  Pure, sugary entertainment.  The movie was a good adaptation (I'd seen it before I read the book), and the casting was spot on.  I love that Mark Darcy is based on Colin Firth's portrayal of Mr Darcy in the P&P miniseries, and the movie has Colin Firth in that role.  It's all too perfect.  A little more sentimental than the book, but still so perfect.

Helen Fielding's writing style here is so approachable and funny.  I wish I would have thought of it first - segmented journal entries, beginning with an update on calories, cigarettes smoked, weight, and whatever else Bridget's keeping track of that week.  I should have written this book.  

Perelandra, by CS Lewis

Such a different book from the other one I read this month.  I struggled with Lewis's first book in his Space Trilogy (Out of the Silent Planet, which I wrote about two years ago - oy), and this one started little better.  His imagination creates literal worlds, and it takes half of a book to give the reader that setting.  The plot doesn't take off till you get a feel for your surroundings.  Is this to the detriment of the story itself?  Probably not.  We're just not used to having to stick with something that reads a little more... classically.  I've got to exercise that muscle a bit more.  By reading something tedious.

Halfway through, though, this book is anything but tedious.  All I'm going to say is the scene with the frogs.  True horror.  The Un-Man, as Ransom names the villain of this adventure, is truly horrifying.  He's reminiscent of Dracula to me... and I cannot really explain why.  I just know I felt the same terror and dread reading about his mutilation of this beautiful world of Lewis's imagination as I did about the vampire's activity.  Sheer evil.

No matter what Lewis writes, he rewards you for walking through his world, no matter how long the journey may have taken.  Please take this journey.  You won't be sorry.

books in july

The Pilgrim's Regress, by CS Lewis

I enjoyed this.  It's difficult for me to not enjoy something by my friend Jack.  However.  I felt like this was something I'd have written in a literary analysis course... obviously not to the same effect as his, but it was very much a response to a prompt, in my opinion.  The way he used names of literary/psychological/cultural movements was even more overt than Paul Bunyan's original Pilgrim story.  I realize this was one of his earlier works, post-conversion, and that it detailed (in allegorical form) that very conversion, but it certainly does not do justice to the imagination and brilliance we see in his other works.

Go Set a Watchman, by Harper Lee

A much-anticipated sequel to what is perhaps the great American novel did not live up to its hype.  My opinion.  While it was fun feeling like I was reading something out of a time capsule (Lee wrote this before To Kill a Mockingbird), the plot was undeveloped, and the characters were not likable.  The highlights were the flashbacks to Scout's childhood, naturally - that was the character we fell in love with in the first place.  I didn't like grown-up Scout.  When you read about a book about a precocious young girl, don't you automatically assume she would grow up to be just like you?  I know I do.  And did.  But Jean Louise is nothing like me.  And that made me dislike her.  Ha. 

Perhaps the biggest hit to my soul was the tainting of Atticus's character.  How dare she.  The greatest father in all of literature... is not.  It's a sad story.  It's a messy reality.  And what about Jem?  He's simply been dead, without much ado or explanation.  Eh.  Not what I wanted.  I feel a bit disillusioned with Atticus, and with Scout, strangely.  An interesting read, but certainly not on par with her first published novel.  Read that one again. 

books in june

The Shack, by Wm. P. Young

Oh, The Shack.  Although I was rereading it to discuss with a friend, I realized about halfway through that I had never finished it when it was assigned for my Triune God class at college.  Sorry, Dr Hirt!  But I aced the term paper, so....

The story was better than I remember it being, to be honest.  I empathize with Mack (the main character) more now that I have a daughter.  That section was truly heartbreaking, and caused me to ask some of those same questions he struggles through (e.g.: "Is God a good father?").  But the writing is still awful, the dialogue trite, and the characterization of God not necessarily accurate or helpful.  It's interesting, in its way, but ultimately, just not great.  Young brings up a great topic for discussion - the nature of the Triune God - but as far as the portrayal of God Himself, it often falls into the two main heresies surrounding that doctrine: either the Persons of the Godhead are too one (to the point of being indistinct), or too three (to the point of being too distinct and separate).  God is three in one.  The more we try to put this mystery into words, the more we try to rationalize, the farther I think we get from the truth.  Truly.

I also think, unintentional though it may be, the author falls into other heretical ideas.  It's probably for the sake of story, plot development, characterization, etc, but the fact remains that God the Father was not on the cross; there is a hierarchy within the Godhead; and the Bible is the reliable and necessary source of truth.  I don't appreciate the treatment of church and/or religion as a manmade god, either.  The church is the body and the bride of Christ.  All who claim Christ are not all His, obviously, and the church is full of fallen human beings who misrepresent Him all the time.  But we are called to structure and order and relationship with one another as well as on an individual basis with God.  

Are these points nitpicky?  Is it really just semantics?  As a work of fiction, can we gloss over these seemingly little details?  I suggest (firmly) no.  While I appreciate the portrayal of God in the way He will reach down into our lives, radically change our hearts, and demonstrate His nearness, I think it's closer to the heart of God to believe truth about who He is above a heartwarming and imaginative, but ultimately dishonest, dream sequence.  

Letters to Malcolm: Chiefly on Prayer, by CS Lewis

This was such a timely read.  Written by Lewis in the format of letters to a fictional friend "Malcolm", this book answers many of the questions raised by Wm. P. Young in The Shack.  Jack's main discussion point is the way we relate to God, and how God relates to us.  Hence the "Chiefly on Prayer" subtitle.  In some ways, he supports the conclusions of The Shack: "We must lay before Him what is in us; not what ought to be in us."  God not only invites, but requires us to be honest with Him - in our moments of joy and especially in our times of despair.  He emphasizes the importance of communing with other believers through worship services, daily life, and the Lord's Supper; church is the way God relates to His people.  

The biggest, most important quote of the book in my eyes is, "Every idea of Him we form, He must in mercy shatter."  We as believers need to daily surrender our idea of who God is unto Him to be destroyed and built up in truth.  What a risky business is this faith!  

recent additions

I have an addiction to buying books.

I just hafta.

My recent finds at a local thrift store:

The Chosen, by Chaim Potok (have already read)

Davita's Harp, Potok

The Book of Lights, Potok

The Five People You Meet in Heaven, Mitch Albom (have already read)

The Devil Wears Prada, Lauren Weisberger

The Search for God and Guinness, by Stephen Mansfield (currently reading)

Out of the Silent Planet

Out of the Silent Planet, by CS Lewis

So maybe it's been seven months since my last book review... maybe I've been exhausted and watching too much Friends and sleeping and moving from house to house. 

Regardless.  This rather short novel took me a shameful amount of time to read.  My mind needed to be reoriented to read A) fiction, and B) sci-fi.  I really take for granted the fact that genres must be read differently, and I've been reading non-fiction like it's my job.  

Supposedly, this trilogy was born of a discussion between Jack and his friend Tolkien, lamenting the state of contemporary fiction.  Sigh, Jack.  Glad you're not around to see what they're putting out nowadays.

It's almost not necessary to comment on Jack's lush and imaginative descriptions.  I so appreciate the way he paints a scene into the reader's mind... even if the scene is so other.  I got lost in Malacandra.  

I'll be honest, this book started strong for me, got sleepy in the middle parts, and then it was all made worth it with the conversation/interrogation between Oyarsa and Ransom at the end.  Read it.  You'll see.

Why We're Not Emergent

Why We're Not Emergent (By Two Guys Who Should Be), by Kevin DeYoung and Ted Kluck

This is one I've been working on for... a while.  The 'emergent movement' is a relevant and important issue conversation that all serious Christians ought to engage.  As I think about the manner Kevin and I can portray our faith to the largely unreached Idaho Springs community, I want to guard against sacrificing foundational things for the sake of relevance... as the use of Scripture and the understanding of God and His Church are being redefined in the emergent movement. 

From the intro: 

One of its critics has described the emerging church as a protest movement - a a protest against traditional evangelicalism, a protest against modernism, and a protest against seeker-sensitive megachurches.  Others, sympathetic to the movement have used the acronym EPIC: experiential, participatory, image driven, and connected.

The reason we (more "mainstream") evangelical Christians must take this movement seriously is that it is gaining followers with an attractive message.  Doesn't sound too horrible, right?  But at what cost:

-demoting to mere story the Holy Word of God, 

-reducing the Almighty to a weak (albeit all-loving) power with no semblance of majesty, holiness, or justice, or 

-redefining Church to mean an all-inclusive community of fellow journeyers with little direction beyond "live as Jesus lived"?  

One of the authors described the 'theology' thus: It reaffirms my place in the center of my own universe.  It's about me and my journey.  Is this true Gospel?  Or is it a dangerous sort of placebo for people who have been burned by traditional church, or seekers who can't tell the difference?  Ours is a religion that cannot be compromising to this self-serving, trendy culture.

The dangers of compromising Scripture:

We can wax eloquent about the beauty of the story and how the Scriptures read us, but unless people are convinced that the Bible is authoritative, true, inspired, and the very words of God, over time they will read it less frequently, know it less fully, and trust it less surely. 

The dangers of compromising who God is:

Where sin is the main problem we need a crucified Substitute.  Where pain and brokenness are the main problems, we need to learn to love ourselves.  God is no longer a holy God angry with sin, who, in His great mercy, sent His Son to die on our behalf so that divine justice might be satisfied.  God becomes a vulnerable lover who opens Himself up to hurt and rejection in order to be with us because we are worth dying for. 

I have no doubt that this message will find a receptive audience, but it is not the message the apostles proclaimed and for which they died.  Christians don't get killed for telling people that God believes in them and suffers like them and can heal their brokenness.  They get killed for calling sinners to repentance and proclaiming faith in the crucified Son of God as the only means by which we who were enemies might be reconciled to God (Rom. 5:10). 

The dangers of compromising church - who's in, and its structure:

There is a log of ambiguity, like "take part in spiritual activities" and "identify with the life of Jesus."  Then the thought came to me, If you stopped a random handful of Americans on the street, they would all aspire to identifying with the life of Jesus in much the same way they would hope to identify with the life of Martin Luther King or Muhammad Ali.  The tough part is that "taking part in spiritual activities" won't help a person in the afterlife, regardless of whether or not McLaren is ready to dialogue on that topic.  

...Many in the emerging church lament the central place preaching has received in Protestant worship services.  Pagitt, for example, decries how preaching has becoming "speaching."...The problem, according to emergent leaders, isn't with the people or the preachers, but with the method of one-way communication where one clear message is spoken to passive listeners.  ...Much of the emergent disdain for preaching is really an uneasiness about authority and control.  Discussion, yes.  Dialogue, yes.  Group discernment, yes.  Heralding?  Proclamation?  Not on this side of modernism.

In the final chapter, the authors urge us to consider the examples of the seven churches in the book of Revelation.  There is a message of warning for us, in the camp of the traditional and orthodox church,

The light at Ephesus had grown dim.  They had good deeds, but not in love for one another.  They defended the light, but they were not shining it into the dark places of the world.  ...It is sad but true.  Theologically astute churches and theologically minded pastors sometimes die of dead orthodoxy.  Some grow sterile and cold, petrified as the frozen chosen, not compromising with the world, but not engaging it either.  We may think right, live right, and do right, but if we do it off in a corner, shining our lights at one another to probe our brother's sins instead of pointing our lights out into the world, we will, as a church, grow dim, and eventually our light will be extinguished.  

and for them, the all-inclusive and organic emergent church,

Ephesus was under-engaged with the culture; Pergamum over-identified with the culture.  The Christians in Pergamum bore witness to Jesus, but they had compromised in what it meant to follow Him.  Undiscerning tolerance was Pergamum's crippling defect.  Their indifference to religious and moral deviancy was not a sign of their great relevance to the culture, or their great broadmindedness, or a great testimony to their ability to focus on God's love; it was a blight on their otherwise passionate, faithful witness.

To conclude:

Emergent Christians, to use the language of Revelation, have many good deeds.  They want to be relevant.  They want to reach out.  They want to be authentic.  They want to include the marginalized.  They want to make kingdom disciples.  They want community and life transformation.  Jesus likes all this about them.  But He would, I believe, also have some things against them, some critiques to speak through other brothers and sisters.  Criticisms that shouldn't be sidestepped because their movement is only a "conversation," or because they only speak for themselves, or because they admit, "We don't have it all figured out."  Emergent Christians need to catch Jesus' broader vision for the church - His vision for a church that is intolerant of error, maintains moral boundaries, promotes doctrinal integrity, stands strong in times of trial, remains vibrant in times of prosperity, believes in certain judgment and certain reward, even as it engages the culture, reaches out, loves, and serves.  We need a church that reflects the Master's vision - one that is deeply theological, deeply ethical, deeply compassionate, and deeply doxological. 

This seems to me a message we all need to "catch".  

Unseduced and Unshaken

Unseduced and Unshaken: The Place of Dignity in a Young Woman's Choices, by Rosalie de Rosset

I never read new books... which is part of the reason I was drawn to this one in the first place.  I was first drawn to it because of its assertion that young women need to read the classics; however, it calls for much more than that.  Dr de Rosset (a professor of my mom's at Moody) wrote this "collection of essays [as] a thoughtful provocation to speak well, read often, make choices that reflect the character of God, and even to establish a theology of play or leisure."

This book touches on topics that all Christians, not just young Christian women, need to tackle.  It demands a return to critical thinking, holy leisure, discipleship one generation to the next - and in that, a love and understanding of tradition - as well as what it truly means to be a "formidably self-possessed young woman with a fully realized, detailed moral sensibility", as one critic says of the character Jane Eyre.  

This is not a typical self-help, Christian how-to for women.  It is a serious, well-researched work whose author pulls no punches.  Unseduced and Unshaken is surprisingly as much an advocate for the rights of the all too silent women in the Church as it is a directive for them.  We have a high calling as women.  Are we living up to our potential in furthering the kingdom, or are we content with the quietness and mediocrity of our lives?  Are we all right with the mediocrity of our women's Bible studies that are too often watered down biblical truths packaged for blithe, unthinking women who care little for being challenged with harder theology?  Do we see Mary of Bethany sitting serenely at the feet of her Rabbi, or do we see her in passionate discussion?  Asking hard questions, learning what it means to truly follow Him?  

Everyone needs to read this book.

My favorite chapter, if you've time for nothing more, is entitled "Mindful or Mindless: a Theology of Play".  This is the section that compares stories like Titanic to Casablanca.  Superficial, hasty, but passionate romance versus authentic, deep, but composed romance.  Scandal versus honor.  Sex versus love.  There is more to what she has to say here: developing a philosophy of leisure, fasting from media, reevaluating the music we listen to.  Her several paragraphs on hymnic worship and tradition are particularly weighty.  Read what she says at the end of the chapter:

What I am suggesting to you today is that you remember the best of what was and include that best with the best of what is, or you will break the link in a historical legacy given to us by God.  This means that popular culture can have a thoughtful place in your life, but should not dominate you by the very definition of popular.  This means that it would serve you well to have at least a portion of your experience the classics in music, art, theology, and literature - those things that have been with us for generations.  That understanding will then help you look at today's music, art, and literature critically, helping you to choose and enjoy the best of it.  Having gone through the process of changing your diet, you will find yourself unable to go back to junk food.

The teacher (and fellow young woman believer) in me craves to go through this book with our youth group girls.  To consider why Twilight is not up to snuff.  To consider the dangers of reading cheap fiction.  To consider the movies we watch, and their portrayals of women and romance.  To consider what we do with our free time, whether we are in fact rotting our brains.  To consider what the role of women is in God's plan, and how we can follow Him in that. 

I ask that we as women raise the standard that's been set for us by the world and our churches - in dress, demeanor, critical thinking, and our pursuits.  It's time we take ourselves seriously.

thrifty!

All this for $0.30.  No lie.  

Yes, please, I think I will.

Thus far, then, our Lewis collection:

The Abolition of Man

The Chronicles of Narnia

The Four Loves

The Great Divorce

A Grief Observed

Mere Christianity

Miracles

Reflections on the Psalms

The Screwtape Letters

The Space Trilogy (sans Out of the Silent Planet)

Till We Have Faces

The Weight of Glory

...And some biographies.

Your Life in Christ

Your Life in Christ: The Nature of God and His Work in Human Hearts, by George MacDonald

If the title alone doesn't do it for you, let me preface this review by noting that everything this guy writes is about two miles above my head.  Ok.  Now that you're properly warned, here's what my dear friend Jack has to say about Mr MacDonald:

I dare not say that he is never in error; but to speak plainly I know hardly any other writer who seems to be closer, or more continually close, to the Spirit of Christ Himself.... I have never concealed the fact that I regarded him as my master; indeed I fancy I have never written a book in which I did not quote from him.

I could not agree more, nor have put it better myself (as is all too often the case with Lewis and me).  MacDonald has such a distinct perspective on so many aspects of theology, and while I agree with the majority of it, there are glaring dissimilarities between what I believe to be true and what he argues with such passion.  I would encourage you to read him for yourself and see what you think... rather than use my space and your time to split hairs and indict one who is clearly more intelligent and spiritual than both you and I.  Ha.

So.  Read this book.  Even if you can't get through the denser stuff (it's all pretty dry, honestly, and as I said above, so far over my head), I urge you to read the chapter entitled Opinion and Truth.  Heartbreakingly relevant in this period in my life, I am almost certain it will be in yours.  Listen to what he says on page 206:

Do you ever feel thus toward your neighbor: 'Yes, of course, every man is my brother.  But how can I be a brother to him so long as he thinks me wrong in what I believe, and so long as I think him wrong in his opinions and against the dignity of truth?'  I return: Has the man no hand that you might grasp, no eyes into which yours might gaze far deeper than your vaunted intellect can follow?  Is there not, I ask, anything in him to love?  Who said you were to be of one opinion?  It is the Lord who asks you to be of one heart.  Does the Lord love the man?  Can the Lord love where there is nothing to love?  Are you wiser than he, inasmuch as you perceive impossibility where he has failed to discover it?

Ouch.  Can you relate?
Here are three other excellent quotes (seeing as I am doing a thoroughly inadequate job of reviewing the book as a whole.)

But if anyone be at all otherwise minded -- that is, of a different opinion -- what then?  Is it of no consequence?  No, verily -- it is of such consequence that God will himself unveil to them the truth of the matter.  This is Paul's faith, not his opinion.  Faith is that by which a man lives inwardly and orders his way outwardly.  Faith is the root, belief the tree, and opinion the foliage that falls and is renewed with the seasons.

Let us think to ourselves, or say to our friend, "God is.  Jesus is not dead.  Nothing can be going wrong, however it may look to our hearts that are unfinished in childness."

I find in Paul's writing the same artistic fault, with the same resulting difficulty, that I find in Shakespeare's -- a fault that, in each case, springs from the admirable fact that the man is much more than the artist.  It is the fault of trying to say too much at once, of pouring out stintless the plethora of a soul, swelling with life and its thought, through the too-narrow neck of human utterance.

And if that doesn't convince you of MacDonald's brilliance... I'm not sure what will.

The Abolition of Man

The Abolition of Man, by C.S. Lewis

Though this book (or, rather, collection of essays) is a mere eighty seven pages, I think I read it about three times by the end of it.  His mastery of the argument and the English language oftentimes goes right over my head; I had to reread sentences, paragraphs... Jack, I know you're brilliant, but what exactly did you just say?

Once I grasped where he was headed, I became completely enmeshed in his defense of objective morality.  I was not expecting literary criticism in the defense, though that, and his understanding of ethics flouted by technological and scientific advances, certainly makes me wonder what he doesn't understand or what arena does not fall under his umbrella of expertise.  Further, the connection he sees between this worldview and education makes it an essential read for any Christian, sociologist, and educator.

"Only the Tao [Lewis' term for the Way of objective truth] provides a common human law of action which can overarch rulers and ruled alike.  A dogmatic belief in objective value is necessary to the very idea of a rule which is not tyranny or an obedience which is not slavery.  I am not here thinking solely, perhaps not even chiefly, of those who are our public enemies at the moment.  The process which, if not checked, will abolish Man, goes on apace among Communists and Democrats no less than among Fascists.  The methods may (at first) differ in brutality.  But many a mild-eyed scientist in a pince-nez, many a popular dramatist, many an amateur philosopher in our midst, means in the long run just the same as the Nazi rulers of Germany.  Traditional values are to be "debunked" and mankind to be cut out into some fresh shape at the will (which must, by hypothesis, be an arbitrary will) of some few lucky people in one lucky generation which has learned how to do it" (81, emphases mine).

Phew.  Will have to read this one again.  You need to, too.  Trust me; it's worth the effort.

The Four Loves

The Four Loves, by C.S. Lewis

"If I may dare the biological image, God is a 'host' who deliberately creates His own parasites; causes us to be that we may exploit and 'take advantage of' Him.  Herein is love.  This is the diagram of Love Himself, the inventor of all loves."

Seriously.   The book itself was a slow build, but if the above quote from Lewis' conclusion as the culmination of his sketch on love is any indication... You know you're in for a treat.

Personally, the chapter on Friendship is what did it for me.  Of all the loves, says Jack, Friendship is the least natural, the least biological, the least necessary in the strictest sense of the word.  "'You have not chosen one another but I have chosen you for one another.' The Friendship is not a reward for our discrimination and good taste in finding one another out.  It is the instrument by which God reveals to each the beauties of all the others."  These Friends are the ones we find almost by chance, surprised that we "see the same truth".  We meet Friends and think, "What?  You, too?"  I'm currently reading a biography of Lewis, and according to his biographer, this is what he found in his "First Friend", Arthur Greeves, reading Norse mythology - an early, deep love of Jack's.

The Eros chapter went a bit over my head, to be perfectly honest.  I may have to reread that one.  A line I particularly appreciated, though, reads thus: "...The 'headship' of the husband, if only he can sustain it, is most Christ-like.  The sternest feminist need not grudge my sex the crown offered to it either in the Pagan or in the Christian mystery.  For the one is of paper and the other of thorns."

Jack is becoming one of my favorite poets and - easily - philosophers.  He commands such an harmonious understanding of sociology, theology, philosophy and psychology.  Please, please read this one.

The Great Divorce

The Great Divorce, by C.S. Lewis

How on earth could I have forgotten the brilliance of dear Jack?  My love for (and envy of) his command of language?  The way he articulates belief?  His sheer imagination?  So glad am I to have been reintroduced!

I read this today.  A) It is that brief, and B) it is that good.  Lewis wrote this little piece - obviously reminiscent of Dante's Inferno - as an allegory describing Heaven and Hell, in order to counter the idea of universalism.  The theme is direct, but whether or not you agree with his theology, this book is worth the read for the issues it raises, and his gorgeous descriptions.  

Please read!  You won't be sorry!

The Time Traveler's Wife

The Time Traveler's Wife, by Audrey Niffenegger

Phew.  Finished and emotionally drained.  I must say this is the most interesting and compelling novel I've read in far too long.  Thanks, Audrey, for this imaginative and enlightened look on love, relationships and life.  Plus, having already seen the movie, it was delightful to imagine Rachel McAdams in the title role and Eric Bana as Henry.  Perfect.

This is the kind of story I'd wish to write: segmented and careful and closed.  Just with less sex and language, is all.  Had I read it before I was married, the treatment of sex and marriage would have messed with my mind a bit; so with that disclaimer, I cannot recommend it in good conscience to, say, our youth group girls.  As for me, I was entertained, involved, and completely sold on the idea.  Yes thank you more please!