{"id":16147,"date":"2018-01-26T00:22:41","date_gmt":"2018-01-26T08:22:41","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dminlgp\/?p=16147"},"modified":"2018-01-26T00:22:41","modified_gmt":"2018-01-26T08:22:41","slug":"the-wrath-of-gatekeepers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/the-wrath-of-gatekeepers\/","title":{"rendered":"The Wrath of Gatekeepers"},"content":{"rendered":"

Last week we were assigned Charles Taylor\u2019s 700+ opus text, A Secular Age<\/em>, which I quickly realized would take me the better part of a decade to digest. When I saw this week\u2019s text, The Soul of Doubt<\/em>, by Dominic Erdozain, I looked forward to quickly reading the 266 pages and getting my post written early. I started making my way through the text on Monday afternoon.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s now 10:45pm on Thursday night and our posts are due by midnight, if that tells you how far off base I was in my assumptions. This small book is packed with ideas and insights that deserve to be explored at a much more leisurely pace, without a looming deadline or panicky realization that I need to write SOMETHING, even if I don\u2019t feel ready to do just that.<\/p>\n

Erdozain\u2019s book is intriguing and offers a fresh perspective on historic Christianity as it has crept toward what Taylor refers to as this secular age. Where Taylor told us HOW the stage was set for unbelief, Erdozain discusses WHY doubt and unbelief are products of healthy faith. The chapter on Luther alone makes this book worth the price, as it helped me flesh out my own issues with Luther and, to be honest, a big part of the Reformation. I have always felt that many of the Reformers actually became the thing they detested \u2013 gatekeepers and power-mongers. Or as Erdozain puts it, \u201ca message of liberation looked like a doctrine of control\u2026he replaced one kind of \u2018servitude\u2019 with another.\u201d[1]<\/a> Charlotte Methuen summarizes Erdozain\u2019s point, \u201cthat Luther moved from a conviction that faith could not and should not be coerced, to the implementation of a system of visitations in Saxony that required church attendance.\u201d[2]<\/a><\/p>\n

It\u2019s Erdozain\u2019s conclusion that the strictures placed by the Reformers actually lead many believers to skepticism. \u201cIt emerged from an essentially moral intuition that a dangerous God cannot be real \u2013 cannot be the real God.\u201d[3]<\/a><\/p>\n

I disagree with the idea that a loving, merciful God cannot be dangerous. Fire is good, but it can be dangerous, for example. I think dangerous is perhaps the wrong word here. Vindictive, cold, unkind, autocratic \u2013 these are words that come to mind when I think of the God often portrayed by the Church (Protestant and Catholic). It amazes me that any Christian feels that killing another human being based on a difference of beliefs could ever please God. I think skepticism grew as believers \u2013 be they philosophers, theologians, scientists, bakers, or artists \u2013 were faced with the cognitive dissonance of a reportedly loving God who, wrapped in sovereignty, seemingly directed Church leaders to punish anyone who did not believe or act according to the Rule of God (as interpreted by those leaders and no one else). Skepticism says, \u2018This is not the God I read about or experience.\u2019 Erdozain quotes war poet Wilfred Owen as writing this to his mother: \u201cI am more and more Christian as I walk the unchristian ways of Christendom.\u201d[4]<\/a> A good paraphrase might be that I become more and more Christlike as I defy the gatekeepers of Christianity.<\/p>\n

One of the things I struggle with is the idea that our secular age came from either science & reason OR doubt. Taylor suggests science and reason gripped the culture, Erdozain suggests doubt by people of faith. I think they are really saying the same thing. As Reformers questioned the actions of the Catholic church, as science began to show us that perhaps the earth isn\u2019t flat and that an apple landing on your head is due to gravity, not a persnickety demon, the voice of reason\/wisdom opened new avenues of thought among the masses. For those who were simply done with the church (and this continues until now), science provided an easy \u2018excuse\u2019 to embrace secular thought and set aside all religion as superstitious nonsense. On the other hand, as more and more people of faith embrace science, reason\/wisdom allow us to see that science can point us to the Creator rather than away. This reason\/wisdom is, I believe, what Erdozain refers to as the conscience. It did not suddenly appear during the Enlightenment; it was being explored in the pages of Proverbs, Psalms, and other Scriptures. It has simply taken awhile to get through to us.<\/p>\n

One of Erdozain\u2019s comments that has stayed with me about the Reformation era is that \u201cthe dominant emotion was fear.\u201d[5]<\/a> The religious leaders who claimed to be bringing freedom in Christ, relied on fear to keep people in line. Fear of punishment, fear of death, fear of a cold, autocratic (but merciful) God. There was no room for open doubt, but that alone caused deep-seated doubt to grow. Once it was boldly written and spoken, doubt became public. Fear ruled for 20-ish centuries (and in some ways it still does) in the West. Christians have long used fear (\u2018you\u2019re going to hell,\u2019 \u2018wait till you meet your Maker,\u2019 \u2018one day you\u2019ll stand before the judge,\u2019 \u2018Do you know where you would go if you died today?\u2019) to motivate salvation. Even our language about sin includes wrath and cold judgement.[6]<\/a> Now that we are in this secular age, people just aren\u2019t afraid of God or judgement anymore. Sin doesn\u2019t feel like a death sentence, and hell doesn\u2019t register on most people\u2019s radar except as an epithet. So with Erdozain\u2019s discussion of the Reformers in mind, I think we have to start looking for ways to avoid being gatekeepers who promise pain and trade in fear. What kind of language can we instead use to discuss God, sin, redemption, etc.? How do we tell our stories from a position of trust, hope, and love?<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [1]. Dominic Erdozain, The Soul of Doubt: the Religious Roots of Unbelief from Luther to Marx,<\/em> (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 21.<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [2]. Charlotte Methuen, Review of The Soul of Doubt: the Religious Roots of Unbelief from Luther to Marx,<\/em> (Review number 2031), DOI: 10.14296\/RiH\/2014\/2031, Accessed January 24, 2018.<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [3]. Erdozain, 262.<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [4]. Erdozain, 264, taken from Wilfred Owen, Collected Letters<\/em> (Oxfort: Oxford University Press, 1967), 461.<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [5]. Erdozain, 264.<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [6]. Note \u2013 I\u2019m not opposed to discussing sin with people, but I am opposed to trying to strike fear in their hearts about it.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Last week we were assigned Charles Taylor\u2019s 700+ opus text, A Secular Age, which I quickly realized would take me the better part of a decade to digest. When I saw this week\u2019s text, The Soul of Doubt, by Dominic Erdozain, I looked forward to quickly reading the 266 pages and getting my post written […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":91,"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":[1111,1113],"class_list":["post-16147","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-erdozain","tag-the-soul-of-doubt","cohort-lgp7"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16147","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\/91"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=16147"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16147\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":16149,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16147\/revisions\/16149"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=16147"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=16147"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=16147"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}