Engaging Unbelief: A Captivating Strategy from Augustine & Aquinas

Rating:
Summary: Worth reading.
Review: Curtis Chang has an excellent idea: read Augustine and Aquinas, two great Christian thinkers, compare how they explained their faith to non-Christian contemporaries of their eras, and see what we in the "post-modern" world can learn. Overall, I think he pulls it off well. Chang is a thoughtful writer, and the book is well-organized and clearly (though not eloquently) written. (Chang seems to be one of those writers whose diction remains structured and careful even when he gets a bit passionate.)

I was happy to learn a bit about Aquinas (whom I had not read) and to bask in Chang's exposition of one aspect of the thought of Augustine (whom I have long appreciated). He argues that the two men entered into the stories of their non-Christian opponents, deepened them, and retold them as facets of the "metanarrative" of the Gospel. This subject particularly interests me because I am doing research on the fascinating (and long) story of how Western, Indian and Chinese Christians have related the Gospel to their cultures. Also, I wrote a book a couple years ago, Jesus and the Religions of Man, that relates the Gospel to modern religions and ideologies in a way rather similar to Augustine's approach in City of God -- maybe more by accident than by design. I think the period in which Augustine wrote resembled our own diverse, multi-cultural society in many ways, and we have much to learn from him. (And, it seems, from Aquinas as well.)

I also learned a bit about "post-modernism" here, at last. (The term being unnecessarily ugly, I have previously tried to avoid finding out what it referred to. Ignore it, and it will go away!) I don't think, as one reviewer below seems to, that Chang accepts the "post-modern" view wholeheartedly, nor ask us to. "Both (A+A) . . . enter the pagan and Islamic stories still retaining their distinctive Christian identities. They refuse to give in to some confusing syncretism or an intellectual appeasement that would change the essence of the gospel." I don't think Chang is unconcerned about truth, just because he emphasizes story. (Which he calls "narrative," yikes.) Story and truth need not conflict. The Gospel marks where the two cross and become one. Chang's approach is to find truth in non-Christian philosophy, and show how the Gospel deepens and supplements it. I think that is a valid, Biblical, and rational approach to any worldview that contains truth, as "post-modernism" undoubtedly does.

Chang talks about Islam in an indirect way, because he thinks Aquinas wrote Summa Contra Gentiles to help missionaries reach the educated, philosophical Muslims of his day. Islam is of course on a lot of peoples' minds, my own included. I think Chang is a bit hard on the Crusaders -- it would only be fair for us to enter their story, too, if we are going to enter that of the Muslims. Not everyone has the luxury of responding to armies with words alone. And I am not sure Aquinas was always entirely tolerant either.

Rating:
Summary: Using the Past to Illuminate the Present
Review: One of the most frequently forgotten biblical truisms is Solomon's repeated assertion that "there is nothing new under the sun." Christians, certain that their age and their time is unique, struggle mightily to devise "new" responses to "new" challenges. Modern Christians seem particularly susceptible to believing that the past cannot inform the present. In this information age, how can the indecipherable volumes of the ancients speak to the sound-bite interests of the postmodern generation?

In his brilliant, clearly-written work, Curtis Chang has demonstrated how the strategies and even the words of Augustine and Thomas Aquinas can bring hope to ministers struggling with "creating" a way to relate to the present age. At the mere mention of the names Augustine and Aquinas, the eyes of today's "hip" and "relevant" pastors and evangelists often begin to glaze over. This is a mistake. As Chang clearly demonstrates, the "great cloud of witnesses" that has gone before us not only observes but also reaches through the centuries to provide wisdom that is critical to today's challenge.

Do not be dismayed by the book's scholarly title -- it is written for the scholar and layman alike. The writing is crisp and, at times, poignant. Through the power of Chang's pen, difficult and complex works become accessible and inspirational. It is this accessibility that is perhaps Chang's greatest triumph. Even a small mind can read the complex and then "explain" it through equally complex prose. The good mind can take the complex and clarify it so that its ultimate answers seem almost simple. If you are confused by the challenge of reaching today's alienated and tribalized culture, read Chang's book -- and allow the past to illuminate the present.

Rating:
Summary: A good introductory work on Christianity and postmodernism
Review: Postmodernism is a notoriously slippery subject, but in this book Curtis Chang does a good job of introducing and explaining it; he then proceeds to give a plan of action for engaging it, based upon his reading of St. Augustine's CITY OF GOD and Aquinas' SUMMA CONTRA GENTILES.

To me, the most important facet of this discussion is how the Christian faith, which claims objective truth, can be communicated to people who do not admit the existence of such truth (at least in theory). The apologetic method of the past hundred or so years, the "evidence-that-demands-a-verdict" approach, isn't particularly successful anymore. Is there something that can replace it, so we can better communicate the faith to those that have rejected Enlightenment rationalism? That is the question that Chang attempts to answer here.

There is, as one reviewer below says, a danger in falling under the sway of postmodernist presuppositions oneself when attempting to engage with postmodernists. He believes Chang has taken this fall to a certain extent; I do not. By emphasizing the faith as story (or as myth even, remembering that it is a myth that happens to be true) rather than as a set of propositions that need to be embraced rationalistically, one need not tumble into subjectivism or relativism. To me, Chang does a good job of maneuvering between this rock and hard place.
I must also say that the previous reviewer's claim that Augustine himself fell into this trap, thus paving the way for Roman Catholicism's acceptance of devotion utilizing images and physical objects, is more than slightly wrongheaded. This reviewer is repeating (whether he knows it or not) old iconoclastic arguments that have been dealt with by both the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches, and it would do him well to read some of the works that Chang refers to when discussing this subject.

If there is one complaint about the book, it is Chang's reliance on contemporary, critical church history works. One is given a picture of the church of both Augustine's and Aquinas' times as muddled, ignorant and compromised. Undoubtedly there were some elements of the church that were like that (as there are today) but one needs to balance that picture by reading more positive appraisals such as Rowan Greer's BROKEN LIGHTS AND MENDED LIVES, which includes a valuable discussion of Augustine and his times.

All in all, though, this is a work well worth reading by anyone who is interested in the clash between Christianity and postmodern culture.

Rating:
Summary: A few good points, but blemished.
Review: The author points out Christianity has faced prior challenges from a hostile culture. The first after the fall of Rome, when pagans sought to blame social problems on Christians, the second from a rising Islam.

The challenges stimulated Augustine (413 A.D) and Aquinas (1260 A.D.) respectively, whose responses took the written form of "The City of God" and "Summa Contra Gentiles", two key works in the history of Western civilization.

The author compares the two responses and concludes they share methods that allowed successful disarming of the threats: "entering the challenger's story", "retelling it", and "capturing" it in the broader logic of Christianity.

This is the natural thing to do: understand the challenger's position better than they do, show how it doesn't answer the questions they think it does, then demonstrate your position encompasses theirs. Easy to do when on the side if truth (what "is"), impossible for opponents to duplicate.

Thus chapters 2,3,4 are golden. But sections of chapters 1 and 5 aren't. The author, based in academia, asserts post-modern denial of human ability to determine truth is the dominant threat; that utopianism suffered a shattering blow in WWI and WWII and is dead.

A stronger case can be made post-modernism is a minor linguistic procedure; take the leading post-modern theorist from the ivory tower, put him on a dude-ranch, away from TV, baling hay for a few months and post-modern pretensions vaporize.

One can't function in the world while taking seriously the idea there are only myths people fabricate to avoid cognitive dissonance, or dominate others. That truth is not knowable. It is simple to see through post-modern gamesmanship, once language methods they use are understood. Post-modernism seems credible because it is poorly explained. And the other academics confronting it are also verbalists.

The college student, leaning against a pillar, vexing the author by asking "How can you know anything is true?" will, even if no one is there to answer, one day graduate and get a job. 5-10 years later, the campus nonsense will be a dim memory, lost in real-world experience. Time will have been wasted and a life diverted from greater richness, but it needn't be terminal.

By contrast, utopian idealism, the denial of human sin, has been reformulated on the assertion humans are only mechanically derived animals; complicated bits of matter to be manipulated to a higher state by an elite which believes it has higher vision (replacing God with their own desires).

This idealism has spread far from academia. It shapes nations, political parties, education, law and people's lives, on a moment to moment basis. From Darwin to Marx to Freud to Stalin to Hitler to the 60's culture to modern hate groups, socialists and activists; all linked by the belief humans can "progress" to a perfect world they imagine. Christians understand a fallen humanity cannot. Utopianism IS a virulent threat, corroding the culture as a now invisible assumption.

So one must keep the book's title in mind; it's about engaging "unbelief", not disbelief. But the author dismisses disbelief, the greater threat, too readily. Unbelievers go quietly into the night, like a forest of deadwood clearing itself. Disbelievers do not.

Another concern is an author too far gone "entering the challenger's story". He seems to accept the premises of post-modernism; that life is about myth-making and story-telling, seemingly conceding the concept of truth. He urges incorporating the opposition's beliefs, which he apparently has done.

If the author saw in Augustine the idea of taking captive opponents' ideas, a clearer picture of how the Church in Rome became the Roman Catholic church snaps into view; the praying to Mary more than God (goddess worship), rituals involving physical objects (rosaries, statues), papal (human) infallibility, icons such as paintings of Jesus and other human-built objects of veneration.

Protestants have historically seen this as idol worship of false images, contrary to biblical law, but similar to pagan customs. It seems one can enter the opponent's story a bit too much. There is the impression Augustine's battle with Roman pagans was not conclusive, trading away some of God's laws for the church, so as to cease hostilities. Is this why we have thousands flocking to offer prayers to a tortilla whose shadows look like Mary?

In the end, the author suggests addressing the post-modern era in its own language: film-making. Protestants would say this a call to create false images of worship; idolatry. That there is a good reason there are no physical descriptions of Jesus. That Christianity needs spiritual doctors, not herding people into dark isolation rooms to see human contrived, out-of-context images flashed before them for emotional manipulation.

The author says the post-modern Augustine or Aquinas probably won't be one of the white male Christians with impeccable credentials, but will most likely be someone on the margin, as Augustine and Aquinas were: "...a single Pakistani woman who has an abortion before coming to Jesus and is a budding film-maker."

Ruinous conclusions drawn from an interesting comparison. Perhaps the problem lies in misuse of the sources he returns to for inspiration. Or far more likely, perhaps the problem is intrinsic to the sources. Because there is a pattern.

A more comprehensive and practical presentation from the Protestant understanding (marginalized in this book) is "How Now Shall We Live". Christianity needs to be understood as a comprehensive world-view before one can easily deal with the disbelievers and unbelievers. And you don't have to give up on truth in the process.