By: Michael Francisco

14 March 2005 Two Fundamental Problems with The Story We Find Ourselves In: The deeper problems with Brian McLaren's second book surpass the theological details.

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 McLaren explicitly contrasts the narrative form of Christianity with "doctrines" and "dogmas," both of which are outdated.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]

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.