{"id":15824,"date":"2018-01-11T13:52:15","date_gmt":"2018-01-11T21:52:15","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dminlgp\/?p=15824"},"modified":"2018-01-11T13:52:15","modified_gmt":"2018-01-11T21:52:15","slug":"reflecting-on-reflections-on-a-secular-age","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/reflecting-on-reflections-on-a-secular-age\/","title":{"rendered":"Reflecting on Reflections on A Secular Age"},"content":{"rendered":"

I begin this post by recognizing it is actually the first of a two part series, reflecting on Charles Taylor\u2019s A Secular Age<\/em>. Well, really, this first part is more of a reflection on reflections of Taylor\u2019s work, while I envision the second post to focus more on Taylor\u2019s thesis itself. I hesitate to analyze too much of Taylor\u2019s work through Jamie Smith\u2019s excellent reflection[1]<\/a>, especially as we\u2019ll be exploring A Secular Age<\/em> itself next week. But I\u2019m confident Smith will be the perfect travel companion to navigate its vast pages.<\/p>\n

The odd reality is that, with my ears attuned to hear him, I suddenly discover references to Taylor\u2019s text at every turn. As a Christian in the early decades of the twenty-first century, I am wading through a pool of many options as I choose what I believe and how I live in response to that. Without doubt, according to Taylor, I live in a \u201csecular age.\u201d Though what he means by that is in contrast to the common secularization theory of the \u201cdiminishment\u201d of religion.[2]<\/a> The difference is noted in what we feel<\/em> rather than think<\/em>; \u201cIt\u2019s more a matter of the difference between what we take for granted\u2014what we don\u2019t give a second thought\u2014and what people of that [previous] age[s] took for granted.\u201d[3]<\/a><\/p>\n

\"Secular2<\/a>Briefly, for example, Smith (and Taylor) notes that the age of secular2<\/sub> \u201cdisenchants\u201d the world, among its other implications, so by the time we enter secular3<\/sub> (the present age), the transcendent is diminished and only immanence remains. But we are actually quite fascinated by ghosts and demons and magic realms in this age (think about our popular movies and books). We like to imagine the possibility<\/em> of them[4]<\/a>, which fits well with Taylor\u2019s account of the shift of meaning from \u201c\u2019the world\u2019 into<\/em> \u2018the mind.\u2019\u201d[5]<\/a><\/p>\n

I\u2019m eager to explore more of Taylor\u2019s thesis in-depth in the next post, delving into his massive work on my own. But as I allude above, the references to Taylor\u2019s thesis are substantial. Earlier this week, as I set down Smith\u2019s text for the evening, I briefly picked up the most recent edition of T<\/em>h<\/em>e <\/em>Englewood Review <\/em>of <\/em>Books<\/em> (Advent 2017) and turned to the next unread book review before heading to bed. And there before me was a review of a newly released book based on applying the ideas of A Secular Age<\/em> to faith formation within the church! Andrew Root\u2019s newest book, Faith Formation in a Secular Age<\/em><\/a>, explores the distinctions of Taylor\u2019s three types of secularism, especially the second and third types. For instance, \u201cin secular2<\/sub>,\u2026 faith formation becomes a battle to keep the youth participating in congregations, thereby maintaining our hold on that particular religious space.\u201d[6]<\/a> Recognizing we are living in a secular3<\/sub> age, the church can respond \u201cagainst a culture that eschews transcendent experience; Root argues that we experience transcendence when we stand alongside and minister to our neighbor in their own death experiences (brokenness, lostness). In doing so, \u2018we find the real presence of Jesus\u2019.\u201d[7]<\/a> The reviewer of Root\u2019s text concludes enticingly that it\u2019s the first of three books Root plans to use to delve into A Secular Age<\/em> and its \u201cimplications for Christian ministry.\u201d<\/p>\n

What fascinates me about this book (besides wanting to add it to my growing queue of post-doctoral \u201cfun\u201d reading) is the noise being generated by Taylor\u2019s tome. More than once Smith contrasted Taylor\u2019s thesis with Douthat\u2019s Bad Religion<\/em> (which suggests to me that it might be worthwhile to re-read the book I\u2019d previously disregarded<\/a>).[8]<\/a> And multiple texts reviewed in my favorite book review journal<\/a> build their foundations off of Taylor\u2019s theory.[9]<\/a> What this suggests to me is that A Secular Age<\/em> is becoming\u2014or has become\u2014foundational in the exploration of cultural theory, of where we\u2019ve come from and who we are today; or, in Taylor\u2019s words, the \u201cconditions of belief.\u201d[10]<\/a><\/p>\n

Truthfully, as a primary audience of Taylor\u2019s book, as Smith suggests (\u201cSecular Age<\/em> amounts to a cultural anthropology for urban missions\u201d[11]<\/a>), one who relates to the world easily with novelists, stories, and poetry[12]<\/a>, much of Smith\u2019s summary of Taylor\u2019s book resonates with me, and I\u2019m chomping at the bit to explore more of it. I want to look at the social imaginary (my friend Chris Smith does just that in Reading for the Common Good[13]<\/a><\/em>) and the temptation of nostalgia as a product of modernity[14]<\/a>. I\u2019m curious about the fullness of poetry or a birdsong transporting us to a sense of transcendence, especially for my friends who don\u2019t have other recognitions of the divine (say, Christ). I wonder about the \u201cplacement of religion\u201d beyond just \u201chuman flourishing.\u201d[15]<\/a> I sense that Taylor\u2019s discussion on the Age of Authenticity<\/em> and the value placed on choice<\/em> will help me understand today\u2019s social landscape better.[16]<\/a><\/p>\n

And hopefully most important, understanding the secular age we live in gives us an enhanced ability to know and appreciate others better.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

[1]<\/a> James K.A. Smith, How (Not) to be Secular: Reading Charles Taylor<\/em>, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2014.<\/p>\n

[2]<\/a> In Taylor\u2019s thesis, this theory would be in line with what he terms secular2<\/sub><\/em> (Smith, 21).<\/p>\n

[3]<\/a> Smith, 28.<\/p>\n

[4]<\/a> Contra the secular1<\/sub> age, which didn\u2019t imagine this possibility, because this was a reality taken for granted in that age.<\/p>\n

[5]<\/a> Ibid., 29.<\/p>\n

[6]<\/a> Jim Honig, \u201cThe Whole Enterprise of Faith Formation\u201d Review of Faith Formation in a Secular Age<\/em> by Andrew Root\u00a0Englewood Review of Books<\/em>\u00a0Advent 2017, vol 8, n1, 26.<\/p>\n

[7]<\/a> Ibid. If I follow Taylor\u2019s thesis (via Smith) accurately, I\u2019m not convinced that our culture \u201ceschews transcendent experience\u201d; rather, it’s looked for not in experiencing a supreme deity, but in the \u201cfullness\u201d of life.<\/p>\n

[8]<\/a> See Smith, 85n7, where he compares Taylor\u2019s \u201cAge of Authenticity\u201d with Douthat\u2019s \u201cAge of Heresy\u201d.<\/p>\n

[9]<\/a> One of my favorite titles referencing it is Zombies, Cylons, Faith, and Politics at the End of the World<\/em><\/a>, in which \u201cthe authors take great care throughout this book to continually connect Taylor\u2019s theories to the cultural artifacts that they use to illuminate our present social condition.\u201d See also Acedia and its Discontents: Metaphysical Boredom in an Empire of Desire<\/em><\/a>, among others.<\/p>\n

[10]<\/a> Smith, 18.<\/p>\n

[11]<\/a> Ibid., xi.<\/p>\n

[12]<\/a> cf. Smith 24, 137.<\/p>\n

[13]<\/a> C. Christopher Smith, Reading for the Common Good<\/em>, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2016, 41-49. cf.\u00a0\u00a0http:\/\/englewoodreview.org\/c-christopher-smith-reading-for-the-common-good-review\/<\/a><\/p>\n

[14]<\/a> K.A. Smith, 134.<\/p>\n

[15]<\/a> Ibid., 83.<\/p>\n

[16]<\/a> Ibid., 85.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

I begin this post by recognizing it is actually the first of a two part series, reflecting on Charles Taylor\u2019s A Secular Age. Well, really, this first part is more of a reflection on reflections of Taylor\u2019s work, while I envision the second post to focus more on Taylor\u2019s thesis itself. I hesitate to analyze […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":85,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[829,471,186],"class_list":["post-15824","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-secular","tag-smith","tag-taylor","cohort-lgp7"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15824","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/85"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=15824"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15824\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":15825,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15824\/revisions\/15825"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=15824"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=15824"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=15824"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}