其實這本書出了不久就買下,不過近來才讀完,故事如下:
當年FES對我們一批由澳洲回歸的留學生十分照顧,我也不時會上他們的辦公室。有一天總幹事竟有點空,問我有關澳洲那邊的事。我談到那兒大學團契的名字很有趣,不少用Evangelical這個字為名,如雪梨大學的團契就叫Evangelical Union。我又指出這個名字其實有它麻煩之處,因為不少人已經不知Evangelical是什麼,為推廣團契加添困難。總幹事就問為何會有此名?我說是因為當年要跟新派有所分別,所以捨Christian用Evangelical。不過學會的名字登記後就不能改,於是就用到今時今日。總幹事於是回應了一句-The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind。當年傻傻的我剛出來工作,有點閒錢,不理程度深淺就買下了這書,結果當然被丟在一旁。它最大的貢獻,就是跟The Complete Book of Everyday Christianity等書合作,一起托起我的手提電腦來散熱。
不過我們的緣份不只如此。上年08年初,有網上的朋友在讀此書,談到內容精彩的地方,於是我又再嘗試讀一讀 。內容仍然艱深,因為自己不是讀文史哲,而且對美國歷史差不多是零認識,所以到本年初才讀畢。整理後的筆記如下:
Noll, Mark A. 1995 The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind, Eerdmans.
Ch1 The Contemporary Scandal
Evangelical Protestants
-Many Virtues
-Very Visible
-But absent in the universities, the arts & other realms of 'high culture'
-Culture - 'To put it most simply, the evangelical ethos is activistic, populist, pragmatic, and utilitarian. It allows little space for broader or deeper intellectual effort because it is dominated by the urgencies of the moment.' p.12
-Education Institutions - absent, lost of intellectual leadership
-Theology - Neglected
Ch 2 Why the Scandal Matters
Why bother with the Mind
-Europeans who are intellectual, descended into lifeless formalism
-Mt 11:25-6, 1 Cor 26-8
-Getting involve in academia is a waste of time
Reasons for the Mind
-Utility - Answers to intellectual questions are useful
-History
--Great reformed theologians
--Danger of neglecting the mind
--God created the human mind to learn the Truth
Modern day heresies (p.52):
-Manichaeism - the world is divided into two disjointed sections - light and darkness
-Gnosticism - bible contained secrets such as the end time events
-Docetism - the physical world was of no significance, the flesh should be despised
p.55 "Our (American Christian) history has been pragmatic, populist, charismatic, and technological more than intellectual."
Ch 3 The Evangelical Mind Takes Shape - Revival, Revolution, and a Cultural Synthesis
-Revivalism - p. 61 "a new style of leadership - direct, personal, popular, and dependent much more on a speaker's ability to draw a crowd than upon that speaker's place in an established hierarchy"
-Anti-traditionalism, individualism
-Pragmatic(how to convert more? how to please the crowd?...), disregard the mind
The Separation of Church and State
-Religious deregulation
-Developed a market for different religions & denominations → populistic
A Christian-Cultural Synthesis
-Adopted republican theories of politics - political system should be partly democratic, partly aristocratic and partly monarchical
-Democratic theories of society - Liberty was highly regarded, Following the example of Protestants independence the Catholic, there were many democratic fragmentations in the church.
-Liberal views of the economy - individualism and market freedom
Christians emphasized on the similar concepts between the political system and faith and then accepted the whole political system without further questions.
Jonathan Edwards was regarded by the author as the greatest Evangelical Intellect in American history, yet his approval of revivalism discouraged intellectual pursuits. His contributions were to rebuke the assumptions that "matter in motion was the most basic thing in the physical world. He resisted the idea that the pursuit of happiness was the highest purpose of human life. He did not believe that human understanding depended ultimately upon humans. These positions, moreover, rested self-consciously on explicit Christian convictions." p.77-8 God was the basis for all.
Ch 4 The Evangelical Enlightenment
4 kinds of Enlightenment:
1. Moderate (Newton, Locke)
2. Skeptical (Voltaire, Hume)
3. Revolutionary (Rousseau)
4. Didactic (Scotland)
The fourth was chosen - "All humans possessed, by nature, a common set of capacities - both epistemological and ethical - through which they could grasp the basic realities of nature and morality." -> Common sense
This contradicted with the sinful nature of human that human by oneself cannot understand truth. But this understanding of the enlightenment gave the Americans theoretical and philosophical justification to establish their national identity. How convenient was that to build on 'common sense'!
-Apologetics - spiritual truth can be obtained through human faculties and investigated using empirical experiment.
-Theology - more on common sense reason and less on mystery
-Revivalism - there were natural law in spiritual realm for successful revival
-Bible - it was interpreted for the interpreters' own intent. The most significant concept was to treat the bible as a storehouse of spiritual facts just as Nature was to science.
-Nationalism - in Europe, the Enlightenment was anti-national establishments and the church. In American, Enlightenment, nation and church identified with each other.
After the civil war, the philosophy above was challenged. 3 responses
-Liberal - embraced new science, new form of old harmonies between Enlightenment & faith
-Populists/Fundamentalists - promoted the old form with new techniques such as mass media
-Evangelicals - in the middle e.g. Problem of higher criticism on the Bible
p. 105 "The main problem was that so much of the Christianized version of the Enlightenment depended on assumptions and thus so little actual thought went into developing the philosophical, psychological, and ethical implications of these views."
Change of social condition - modernisation, immigration, etc. -> required intellectual resources for a proper response but none
p. 107 "A secular spirit spread rapidly in the general culture. In response, the descendants of orthodox evangelicalism, many of whom would soon be called fundamentalists, did hold on to the basic Christian truths, but in order to do so they fled from the problems of the wider world into fascination with inner spirituality or the details of end-times prophecy."
Ch5 The Intellectual Disaster of Fundamentalism
Transformation of Universities
-Influx of students and new money
-Emphasis on new science, not on reconciliation between learning and faith
-Darwinism
-Money from businesses, withdrawal from churches
Ch6 Political Reflection
William Jennings Bryan(Democrat) as the representative for 19 century
Cross of Gold - the greatest speech
-Explicit application of evangelical principles to politics
-Extensive use of biblical metaphors in speech
-Champion ordinary people
-Scientific secularism as a threat to humility(e.g. evolution turns human into just mechanism)
Cross of Gold vs Leo XIII Rerum Novarum - a document on the social, economic, and political turmoil
-Speech vs document
-Speak to the mass for the mass vs reflection for the head of the hierarchy
-Use history in emotive and progressive style vs use ancient authorities with a careful methodology
Age of Bryan
-Populism
-Intuition, use common-sense
-Biblicism
-Activism
-Positive on progress of society
Fundamentalism
-Dispensationalism
-Individualism (private salvation rather than activism in public)
-Pessimistic outlook of society
An Era of New Beginning
-Roe v Wade in 1973
-Revival of activism
-Major New Right + Minor New Left
-"Murphy's Armageddon Observation: Those who don't learn from the past are condemned to write-end-times books." p. 174 (Very interesting quote of a summary of various predicted fulfillment of events in revelation in p.173-4)
Conclusion
-Revival of activism
-Supernatural at the expense of natural
Ch7 Thinking about Science
Basic principle - Scientific Investigations need to support the Christian World View
Darwinism
-1860 Only a minority within the church believed that Darwinism and Christianity was reconcilable.
-1870 Acceptance of the broad outline of Darwinism, indecisive on what to give up, which sparked the reflection of the relationship between science and faith.
-"Nature is as truly a revelation of God as the Bible; and we only interpret the Word of God by the Word of God when interpret th Bible by science..." p.183
-As Darwinism became more popular, the authority of science in fundamental circle decreased. First, there were efforts to harmonize Darwinism and the Bible. Later, Darwinism became an enemy.
Creation Science
-History p.188 onwards
-Young earth theory first proposed by Price, an Adventist, in 1923.
-Breakthrough in theory in 50's
-"The Genesis Flood" published in 1961 became popular
-p. 192 "since 1960, creationism has done more than any other issue except abortion to inflame the cultural warfare in American public life."
Reasons for Popularity
-A more "reasonable" interpretation of the bible
-Rebound from the public policy for a mandatory Darwinism Curriculum
-Rebound to the knowledge elites
-Dispensationalists see parallels between new heaven and new earth and the Genesis 1-3
Damage Done by Creation Science to Evangelical Mind
-Justify pretentious claims for science
-Turn the negotiation between Christianity and science into a war -> the critiques within the science community on Darwinism was ignored
-Twist science and the interpretation of the Bible according to their own agenda
--Defending creation science = defending the Bible ... creation science is just one of the many interpretations.
--Lose ability to investigate nature as it is.
Special Question of the Bible
-Augustine - Disregarding the observations of the nature and extracting theories about the nature just from the Bible caused embarrassments and hindered evangelism
-Bacon - those who tried to develop a theory of Creation was trying to equate himself to the Creator. We should repent and know our limitations
-Galileo - nature as an important revelation, the differences between messages in scripture was due to the differences in the audience, and thus the information collected from our sensory was another revelation
-Warfield, biblical inerrantist par excellence - the Bible had nothing to do with age of earth or length of human history. Calvin would support evolution if he was born later.
Ch 8 Is an Evangelical Intellectual Renaissance Underway?
An Awakening Evangelical Mind
-Postfundamentalism
--Edward John Carrell
--Carl F.H. Henry found "Christianity Today"
--Billy Graham also supported "Christianity Today", willing to cooperate with other types of Christianity
-Help from the Protestant Mainline
--From older traditions that never became fundamentalists
--Baptists, Presbyterian, Episcopal...
-Maturing Immigrant Communities
--Lutheran, Mennonite, Dutch Reformed
--Dutch Reformed -> Grand Rapids Publishers, e.g. Eerdmans
-Across the Atlantic
--Eerdmans as distributor for IVP, bringing writings such as CS Lewis to US
Signs of Renewal
-Modes of Cooperation
--Around leaders - Billy Graham, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, John Scott
--Around Projects - New Bible Commentary, New Bible Dictionary, Christianity Today, IVF
-Influential writings of CS Lewis and Dorothy L. Sayers
-Renewed interest in classical protestant heritage
-Revitalization of institutions
--A number of seminary started to take academic research seriously
--After WWII, Christian academic associations appeared
--70s cooperation from individual academics in different Universities
-To conclude, there are improvements from fundamentalist-modernist 30's era.
Political Reflection - Not taken notes, not motivated to know the details of US politics
-Some progress made, but very limited
Science
-Origin of the Universe and Mankind still a very touchy topic
Philosophy
-American Evangelical did not care much about philosophy, nor had any controversial topic, so it was a peaceful setting for growth.
-American Evangelical philosophers worked closely with Dutch reformed community, but much of the original evangelical ethos were lost, e.g. common-sense, dispensationalism
Conclusion
-p. 239 "The scandal of the evangelical mind seems to be that no mind arises from evangelicalism."
Ch 9 Can the Scandal Be Scandalized?
-The title - first "scandal" - the message of the Cross, second "scandal" - same usage in the book
-A shallower version of the summary of the book, so no note-taking
作者在成書十年後寫了一篇The Evangelical Mind Today,有興趣者可以參考一下。
回應
好正的題目
好多人誤將明光社歸類為基要派或原教旨主義,這是十分之誤導的。明光社手法並不依賴基要教義(雖然他們相信基要教義,但那是手段而不是目的),實際上係佢地定位係「點樣得到最多人入會」。
一本八卦雜誌,佢其實係唔需要讚多過彈,佢亦唔需要真係好有道理,有人睇咪得,理得你。明光社唔係唔講道理,不過,佢花好多心思係自圓其說之上,道理等如民主派搶唔到民建聯既票源一樣。
如果當明光社係一般塔利班咁打,焦點唔清,好容易變成打搯草人。
佩服
單看summary﹐也知道這是本很硬啃的書。
佩服
單看summary﹐也知道這是本很硬啃的書。
無題
麥當勞
哇!超快回應 \(^_^)/ 曲線回應一下
-Europeans who are intellectual, descended into lifeless formalism
另一個看法就是基督教由成為羅馬國教時開始,跟權力巴結都沒有好下場。美國那邊搞政教分離,結果搞出了一個宗教市場(Religious deregulation)。為了生存,要爭客人;要爭客人,用最「有效」的方法去「傳福音」。
所以,認認真真地做個好基督徒,建立一間好的教會,搞一個好的機構,好難,很多引誘。如果又搞民粹又靠攏建制,結果會如何?
hevangel
你有讀過哲學,我沒有,而且你對基督教的認識也不淺 - 只要你肯讀,一定會讀完 ^_^
一切教會前途必被陰乾
我又上頭,想講講「建立一間好的教會,搞一個好的機構,好難,很多引誘」,特例係指所有的教條宗教。
教會要很認真地辦下去,其權力來源總離不開:
1 對自然、宇宙、及宇宙起源的詮譯權;一個沒有宇宙論的教會是相當殘缺的。
2 對神諭、道德價值、及宗教傳統的詮譯權;一個沒有道德價值的宗教,是很難持久(超過一百年)維持其同質/近質性的。
3 非宗教的權力來源,例如世俗權力
頭兩個,宗教力量很明顯在近代後都敗陣下來,只能「存在」而不能佔據有關詮譯權,甚至連競爭力都沒有;我們可以說現代是世俗主義霸權的年代,連耶穌的道德水平都可以被質疑。
如果教會只依賴第三個權力來權,那麼,教會遇到道德問題是遲早的問題,不論是中國古代「教會依順皇帝」,還是西方古代「教會凌駕國王」,只不過是方法不同。
教會還會遇到更大的問題:為什麼非宗教的權力來源要把權力分享給教會呢?我們有現代宗教,現代宗教可被利用之處,遠遠比起傳統宗教為多。傳統宗教要巴結世俗權力,也必然無法成為主角。
什麼是「現代宗教」?
傳統宗教相信神、靈、佛、道(指輪迴之類)等超自然觀念,以超自然概念約束人類。如果,我們發現所有神靈佛道都是由人類創造的呢,後果是什麼?那就是人類對人類的崇拜。
人類崇拜的方法很多,文化民族主義是最常見的方式,拜金主義是另一個方法。民族主義不需要詮譯宇宙的來源(事實上那些什麼「宇宙微波背景幅射」只是小眾研究,在現代在意宇宙起源的人根本不多),他們要詮譯的是民族的起源,尤如民族至古以來已有一樣神話,忽視民族是必須依靠印刷術及大量印刷媒體的事實。以「現代宗教」去形容文化民族主義是很適合的。而拜金主義就當然把人類詮譯為經濟動物,又是一樣的神話。
同樣是神話,但是現代宗教的神話比起傳統宗教的神話卻大為生動。而傳媒(不論是紙印刷還是互聯網印刷)又取代了教會更容易製造話語權,成為現代教會,傳統宗教教會前途豈有不被陰乾之理?
宗教市場
其實不計超然價值﹐宗教市場也沒有什麼不好。美國那些成功神學﹐不論以教會發展﹐還是教徒心理來看﹐也很成功啊。
回麥當勞
我同意如果只有no.3的權力來源,好快玩完。
另一方面我又想問,現代宗教其實出現了好一時間, 為何傳統宗教現今還在?如果為時尚早,何時(ie多少年)會死?
世俗權力吸納宗教
生物演化論有個觀念叫「Extinction through absorption」,我並唔係主張尼安德特人與現代人類真係有雜交,但教會同世俗「雜交」卻是鐵一般的事實,而教會一些特質被世俗社會吸收然後扔掉,那是我的預測。
教會之所以仍然未吸乾,不外乎頭兩個權力來源尚未吸乾,那是對宇宙的詮譯權,與及對道德的詮譯權。在我讀書的時候,仍然有學校禁止在生物科教授進行論(今日叫演化論)。我買了科學雜誌,當中有一頁講到「人的演化」,我同事會講「我唔信呢一套」。今日我故意地把電視超過一半時間播創世電視,刻意聽下蘇穎智講道德底線同巴比倫滅亡,留意到有個節目叫「驚世的創造講座 」,裡面講大爆炸理論中的爆炸奇點有違物理定律(留意物理定律在大爆炸後一個短時間才有物理意義,所以無問題),因此推論出有上帝;佢仲打算丙達文西一鑊,不過我要做運動無時間聽佢講。
我認為,教會雖然一早就失去兩方面的支配權,但要說失去話語權卻言之尚早。我想這個話語權一兩代人後會大為變淡(即是連教書的一批也消失了),而往後的發展我應該無機會看得見。
我認為時間發展係好快的。羅素去美國教書,因為佢不可知論觀點(被誤解為無神論)而失去大學教席,那不過是二戰前的事件。今日,失去教席的已經變成教授神導演化論的老師。然而,歷史發展係很曲折的,我認為基督教價值幾容易適應東亞的現今的環境,因為東亞人道德很保守。
世俗權力吸納宗教的過程的曲折,正正是很有趣的不神聖同盟。我不是說個人與個人之間的勾結,而是教會可以在建制外給予「和諧」的基礎,而建制又得到教會的祝福。社會思潮改變大致上都是對他們共同不利的,總有些反例但大致就是這樣,所以他們能建築成共同利益。問題是,建制(尤其是民主建制)是可以改變的,教會也可以改變自己的制度,一時依賴皇帝,一時依賴民粹,可是,宗教傳統與宗教經文的改變是很慢的。在這個不神聖同盟之中,教會可以付出的,長遠比起建制的少,所以教會長遠要燃燒自己的話語權作出較多的支付。
我也要講講文化民族主義。其實民族的文化內容是可以任意篡改的。一個社會在歷史上會產生過很多價值矛盾的文化,全部都是歷史,全部都是文化,歷史越長矛盾越多。就算在一些歷史很短的民族,他們的歷史文化很少價值矛盾,但這些文化總不可能全數帶進廿一世紀,哪些文化可以留下,哪些文化必須放棄(例如科舉制,反對亂倫),如果真的由文化民族主義決定的話,那怎會不是任意挪用呢?因此,文化民族主義看似生硬與原教旨,實際上它沒有宗教一樣改變遲緩的問題。
我也回應 H 君。
所謂「宗教市場也沒有什麼不好」,我很同意這個自我感覺良好(但不同意這是事實),其實教會與教徒都不會感到不好的,甚至是感到很成功的,因為教會「轉型」壯大了。可是如果不自欺欺人的話,以他們的觀點,整個世界實際上是不斷道德倫喪之中,如果他們只沉醉於他們的壯大,而忽視道德不斷倫喪的事實(他們觀點看見的事實),那麼他們實在轉型得太完美了。憂心的人只是類似 Mark A. Noll(此書作者)這一類人,或者是自由派信徒,他們在不神聖同盟下倒是容易變成「兩面不是人」。蘇穎智本身他輔導過很多同性戀家庭居暴力,他很清楚德不斷倫喪的事實(他們觀點看見的事實,尤其是蘇穎智基於工作經驗深信同性戀是家庭暴力的來源),跑了出來公開喊話,立刻幾了箭把。如此,自由派信徒(左翼佛教,或其他宗教也有如此定位)更加無位走,但自由派一旦失語,宗教就會更加失語。
回麥當勞
不好意思, 我其實想到怎回, 不過近來有點小忙, 抱歉 m(_ _)m
回麥當勞
福音派在學術界的影響差不多是零,這是書中的其中一個結論。不過福音派在民間的影響力還在,原因為你所列出的三大權力來源並不完整,最少有一個大類叫心靈慰藉。基督教因為被希臘哲學方法的影響,發展出有一定解釋能力的神學體系,不過解釋不是一切,而且在就算在神學中不時會以信心或人的有限為探究的終結。另一方面,在教會的運作中,一些MegaChurch也會使用當代音樂和小組等模式,滿足信徒心靈的需要,也實在是吸引了不少人。
後現代的興起,解釋的重要性比性感的重要性其實在此消彼長。例如早前在我鵝頸穚塞巴士入紅隧,看見一個過期的招牌,是之前一個佈道會的廣告,佈道會名為"人可以向禱告上帝"。我突然醒悟後現代的影響有多大。當現代性還是主流,第一個問題是上帝的存在,第二就是人為何要禱告,因為人可以自己解決問題。後現代的一代卻會因為有超然的神祇來聽他傾訴而動心。
書中指出福音派在理性上的退卻由美國內戰後已經開始,其實有過百年的時間,不過明顯地福音派在美國社會還很有影響力。香港沒有美國的基督教傳統,不過要福音派在香港被吸納和extinct,有點難度。