| Brian
McLaren's immensely popular book, A New Kind of Christian, largely
begged the question - what is the new type of Christian really like?
The sequel, The Story We Find Ourselves In, provides a first view
of what Christians of this 'new kind' are like.
Written in Brian McLaren's trademark not-so-fictional fiction,
the sequel tells a story with many of the same characters from the
first book. A majority of the story follows Neo, the main postmodern
character, as he develops his narrative view of Christianity as
"the story we find ourselves in," with six "episodes."
(I will soon write a brief summary of these episodes separately,
with some commentary, for anyone who needs more background on McLaren's
book.)
What is the point of the story?
Brian McLaren presents this story of 'new' Christianity in order
to make larger points that go beyond the theological details of
each particular episode. One could engage The Story We Find Ourselves
In, by grappling with and critiquing many of the theological positions
taken. Such as the argument that Satan is a metaphor, not a real
person. [Some forthcoming Evangel Society articles will critically
discuss the theological specifics in depth.]
Setting these details aside, McLaren's overarching thesis relies
on two fundamental assumptions. These assumptions provide the framework
for the 'new' Christianity. Regrettably, these foundational assumptions
are troubling, and should be critically evaluated by anyone contemplating
the story that McLaren sells.
First, Mclaren presents Christianity as a "story," and
contrasts this new method with the traditional method of defining
Christianity by doctrine, or a set of beliefs. McLaren explicitly
contrasts the narrative form of Christianity with "doctrines"
and "dogmas," both of which are outdated.
Second, McLaren attempts to show how the new, narrative Christianity
can be more effective in reaching seekers who are turned off by
doctrine. Several seekers in the story are surprised by the postmodern
story, since they previously thought Christianity was just a bunch
of dogma.
Storytelling v. Doctrine
The new kind of Christian is supposed to be something more than
doctrine, something different than past forms of Christian beliefs.
The story-telling itself, constantly contrasted with doctrine, may
be the book's main point. Brian McLaren wants Christians to embrace
a new framework, a framework of story telling and anti-doctrine,
which he believes is the only acceptable framework for the postmodern
world. The six episodes are thus the postmodern version of old systematic
theologies.
Perhaps Brian McLaren would respond that he never intended for
narrative Christianity, which is new, to be in a dichotomy with
doctrine. Such an admission would be welcomed, but it would also
undermine much of the book. Over and over again, the book presents
characters interested in Christianity who complain about Christianity
being "a bunch of doctrines," or a "set of beliefs."
Doctrine is thus the enemy to which Neo's six episode story overcomes:
[See Examples]
|
Examples of Story v. Doctrine
|
- " Kerry suspected that Neo was not
a "biblical literalist" about creation, to which
Neo stated, "I think that the literalism of many of
my fellow believers is silly." (33). The story, for
Neo, gives something "so much more important than text-book-style
so-called objective facts and newspaper-style information."
(33).
- " The story of Neo is contrasted by
Glen with bad religion, "I always saw religions as
a bunch of doctrines that people argue about, or rituals
that they use to keep themselves from feeling lonely or
small in the big bad universe, or dogmas and scare tactics
that they use to keep the unruly masses in line." (59/0).
- " Neo tells his story to Maricel who
thinks "Neo's version of the story isn't literal enough."
Thus, "for her, it's either right out of the book,
black and white, completely literal, or else it's no good."
(69). Neo has pity on the literalist Maricel, who is caught
up in the "liberal and conservatives and modernity."
She is a "closed-minded fundamentalist." (70).
Neo explains that "in the modern world
people
thought that the greatest truths were simple and clear,
black and white, simple lines, no fuzziness or mystery."
To which the new story is contrasted (72).
- " Kerry learned in her childhood that
the Bible was an anti-intellectual document. For traditional
Christianity, the Bible explained the mysteries and tried
to make simple sense of things, whereas for Neo, "the
Bible seems to explore mystery, not clarify it." (82).
- " When the atonement came up, Dan's
wife presented the substitutionary view, to which Kerry
replies, "I've heard this all before
yeah, yeah,
I know all that already," which becomes a direct reject
of the old doctrine for the new story of "powerful
weakness" atonement. (101).
- " When Kerry wants to be baptized,
she wants to be baptized while specifically rejecting traditional
dogma, "Look, if I have to get the whole Trinity thing,
and the whole divinity thing, and all those theories, that's
all beyond me at this point." Then, Kerry confesses
that, "I'm starting to believe the story I've been
hearing from you." (110).
- " Neo asks Kerry, "Do you believe
in God, the Father Almighty, in Jesus Christ, God's only
Son and in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life?"
Kerry replies, ""I don't know about all the doctrines,
or theories or mysteries, as Dan called them. I don't know
all that stuff! That's the problem. Can I do this
am I crazy to even want tot do this
if I don't have
all that understanding?
Do I believe enough though?"
(112). Neo then reformulates the question to avoid doctrine,
""Kerry do you want to follow Jesus?" She
said "Yes, with all my heart."
- " Kerry complains that Christianity
used to not be a way of living, but instead "a system
of beliefs-you know, doctrines, dogmas, institutions, traditions,
rituals, rules, that sort of thing." (126). Dan replies
that a new kind of Christian needs to develop, in response
to the doctrine based form that Kerry rejected. (127).
|
In this way, Brian McLaren presents narrative as the necessary
replacement for doctrine, or dogma. Yet the postmodern Christian
narrative must invariably rely on doctrine. Even McLaren's idealized
postmodern storyteller, Neo, engages in doctrinal theology. The
only difference is that Neo hides his doctrine with the narrative
format, and acts much less certain about most doctrinal issues.
For example, Neo tenaciously holds to a doctrine of Evolution,
and rejects any literal interpretation of Genesis. There is no fluffy
story, or pluralistic conversation for Neo on this point of doctrine.
God must have used Evolution, because the facts tell us that Evolution
is true, "For me, Carol, we can't be faithful to God unless
we're faithful to the facts, faithful to the data, if you will.
And so instead of hiding from evolution, I think we'd be more faithful
to God to look it right in the eye and learn from it." (98).
Neo also explicitly endorses progressive creation as the basis of
his 'story.' (33). Neo also calls evolution "one of God's best
creations." (184). This hard-line doctrine of evolution is
an ironically dogmatic position for a character who is supposed
to embody the opposite of dogma.
Another example, Neo subscribes to a strict view of human freedom,
and rejects any form of strong sovereignty or predestination. According
to Neo, "God really is much more a companion, a conversation
partner with the people, guiding them, but not manipulating them,
not robbing them of that gift of freedom." (83). When discussing
death Neo contrasts being controlled with being free. (150). No
matter where you stand on these historic theological divide, you
must admit that Neo has taken sides in the debate.
Now, one can say that some doctrines are wrong, or that many doctrines
are wrong. But, calling into question all doctrinal beliefs is an
entirely different point. One is hard pressed to understand why
doctrine itself, the framework of doctrinal theology, must be abandoned.
Even setting that aside, McLaren must demonstrate how the narrative
form of Christian story telling differs from more traditional doctrine
based Christianity. A radical departure from Christian doctrine
must be adequately justified for this new movement to be a reformation.
This change without good enough reason is more like a revolution,
or session perhaps.
Finally on this point, McLaren uses the narrative method to present
an extremely timid form of Christianity. Many of the most radical
doctrinal issues are presented as 'questions' which the character
is unsure about. Such uncertainty cannot last forever, at some point
even the new kind of Christian will need to decide what they really
believe. Being perpetually agnostic about doctrine presents a weak
basis for any new Christian movement.
Storytelling helps Seekers
McLaren uses Christian story-telling to show how people who are
seekers can be reached. Of particular interest, McLaren specializes
in creating fictional seekers who are un-impressed with more traditional
doctrinal Christianity (Kerry, Glen, Kincaid, Europeans on the boat).
The main seeker of this book, Kerry, had a scarring experience with
Christians who held to strict dogmatic views of creation. After
being turned off by this old style doctrinal Christianity, Kerry
became somewhat agnostic until Neo came along and shared Christianity
as a more open story.
The most obvious problem is that all seekers respond well in a
fictional story. With all due respect to Brian McLaren, the fact
that seekers constructed by him respond well to his storytelling
is of little surprise. What happens when interested people start
asking harder questions? What happens when seekers want stronger
answers that the fluffy, non-committal Neo? What about seekers who
are un-impressed with Evolution as a foundation for belief? When
the seekers never ask hard questions, the largely open narrative
of Neo appears quite attractive. It is an non-condemning version
of Christianity without any of the hard-to-believe doctrines of
more traditional Christian communities.
Perhaps more importantly, how does narrative Christianity provide
new followers of Christ to grow spiritually? Many religions will
readily admit that Christ is a good person, or that his example
should be followed, but more is required to be a Christian. Without
many rules, and with more questions than answers, many new Christians
could be led astray by enticing false-doctrine. (Oops, there's that
doctrine sneaking in again.) Indeed, if God intended to reveal to
mankind some specific doctrines, it would seem to be a mistake to
deprive them of those doctrines in the name of some postmodern narrative.
Finally, McLaren seems to argue that the modern, doctrine-based
apologetic has failed. However, the only support for this necessary
premise comes from stereotyping and belittling of fundamentalists
who cannot get over evolution. Before abandoning apologetics and
evangelism, as it has been successfully carried out for years, one
should require stronger reasons than stereotyped creationists.
Conclusion:
Ultimately, Brian McLaren's second installment in the New Christian
trilogy leaves the careful reader with even more questions than
the first installment. How much should doctrine be abandoned, and
how much doctrine must we have to start the story-telling process?
With so many uncertain views, what do you say when seekers ask for
answers and not questions? Also, why must doctrine be abandoned
in the apologetic process?
The new kind of Christian, apparently, only knows that some doctrines
are important, and that seekers prefer story to propositional reasoning.
If The Story We Find Ourselves In, can be reduced to 'storytelling
is better than dogma, then this book is much ado about nothing.
No story telling form of Christianity can start from doctrinal neutrality.
Brian McLaren appears to have a monopoly on this new format, until
you start looking around.
Christianity does have a story, and one that is chock-full of doctrine.
To give just one example, B.B. Warfield wrote an essay entitled
"The Biblical Idea of Revelation," (Works: Vol. 1, p.3)
defending the revelation of God from a very narrative based review
of the Old Testament. The story that Warfield tells is quite different
from the one Neo tells. Both try to capture the Old Testament story,
but each employ different doctrinal ideas. Warfield represents the
height of nineteenth century, 'modern-rational' Christianity which
McLaren desperately wants to transcend. Properly understood, the
question is not doctrine or story, the question is, what story are
we going to tell.
|