1. Because it's a long way from here, and the grass always looks greener...
2. Because the frisson between the various synods is invigorating.
3. Because the cardboard stereotypes of Missouri (conservative), Wisconsin (fundamentalist) and ELCA (liberal) members are uncannily accurate.
4. Because you can both be horrified by and admire American Lutheranism at the same time.
5. Because of people like ELCA member Ursula Stemm, who, commenting on a proposal by a Missouri Synod task force to remove the word Missouri from the denominational name, "believes an LCMS name change would enhance the state’s reputation."
6. Because of the anonymous ELCA commenter on the Pretty Good Lutherans blog who, with reference to that same proposal, innocently asks: "Any talk about removing the word “Lutheran” from their name? "
Bishop Brian of Destiny Church must have choked on his breakfast croissant last Monday to find he was the focus of a Herald column by Glynn Cardy, progressive Anglican vicar of St Matthew-in-the-City. Cardy, a man who knows what is is to be vilified by fundamentalists, not only proved that he knows how and when to launch an effective counter-strike, but how to rub salt into the wound by quite reasonably confessing the past pompous pretensions of Anglicanism. Bonus points for taking the high moral ground. It's a fine piece of writing.
If that's how the week began, Granny Herald ensured that Brian was also suitably remembered on Friday when the following piece appeared in the popular Sideswipe column.
Leaving no revenue stream untapped, Destiny Church deftly passes the plate on its website by encouraging people to pay to access the site's content through a VIP Club. For a $25 joining fee and $8 a week, members can download all of Bishop Brian Tamaki's messages, gain access to the Pastors Lounge in Auckland, get a discount off merchandise, reserved seating and preferential free parking at the annual Destiny Church conference.
What a privilege. Quite a marketing operation. Can we all hold hands and say narcissism together?
A very long time ago Desmond Ford (pictured) spoke to a small gathering - mostly SDAs, former SDAs and their friends - in Auckland, and I tagged along after reading about the event in the Good News Unlimited magazine. Ford was, at the time, the face of evangelical Adventism, a scholar who had been sidelined by his church for seeking to de-emphasise some of that tradition's less defensible distinctives. I really don't remember much about what was said, but I do remember Ford's sage advice: People who read grow, people who don't read don't grow. You don't need to read my books but you do need to read.
It was true then, and it's true now.
But how do you decide what's worth reading, especially if it comes to theology and the Bible? There's an awful lot of complete garbage out there.
Here's a short and partial list of criteria I find helpful, though I doubt Des Ford would concur. It's offered somewhat tongue in cheek, but then again, many a true word is spoken in jest... Feel free to add thereto, or disagree.
1. If it's featured in your local Christian bookstore (the sort that sells Joyce Meyer merchandise) score it -25.
2. If it's available in your local Christian bookshop - but not featured - score it -5.
3. Check the publisher and score as follows:
Fortress Press, WJK +15
OUP, Cambridge +13
Eerdmans, Continuum +12
HarperCollins, Orbis, Polebridge +10
Brill, +20, but then -20 because you can't afford it
Zondervan, IVP -10
Self published or no identifiable publisher -50
Holman, Concordia, Nelson -75
4. Check the author and score:
N.T. Wright, Ben Witherington, Darrell Bock -100
5. Check the endorsements and score:
Endorsed by Wright, Witherington or Bock -50
Endorsed by anyone at Dallas Theological Seminary - 100
Endorsed by James Tabor +5
Endorsed by Bob Price +25
6. Check any of the following:
You saw a positive review in Stimulus (NZ readers only) or Christianity Today +5
You saw a negative review in Stimulus or Christianity Today +15
It was mentioned on Jim West's blog +5
It's on the remainder table at half price or less +25
It cites scripture from the KJV, NKJV -100
It cites scripture from the NIV, ESV -10
It cites scripture from the NRSV, REB, JPS +5
It includes a useable index +10
The blurb on the back mentions Barth or Calvin as if they mattered -20
Total up your score. Anything in positive numbers is worth considering.
(For those who are interested, there's a recent article about Des Ford here.)
I've just noticed that Word & World now has its 2004 quarterly issues online in full. W&W is approachable theology from a committed Christian perspective, but not one weighed down with the baggage of Calvinism, what passes for evangelicalism, or crass apologetics. It's a commendable practice to make its wealth of archived articles available to all comers, including impoverished theology students, even if there's a five year time lag involved. The latest issue has me salivating for subscription status: In the Wake of the Beagle: Faith After Darwin, but alas, it's not currently in the budget. The editorial is however available, and once you recover from the title, it makes its point well.
Any undergraduate student in biblical studies would do well to check out the offerings, going back to Vol. 1 (1981), for suitable supplementary reading for course work. The 2004 themes include 1 Peter and Violence. W&W is produced by Luther Seminary (ELCA).
For the second month in a row Otagosh has made the Biblioblog Top 50, up from caboose (#50) to baggage compartment (#45). It also appears for the first time on Halfdone, a list of Kiwi blogs, debuting at #62.
A great posting over on the Dunedin School: The Three Worst New Zealand Theologians of all Time. Do click across and check it out. Apart from the slight but understandable twenty-first century bias (there really were some complete cowpats in earlier times) I find myself moved to raise holy hands and shout amen. The winners are:
(3) Brian Tamaki. I can't decide whether he'd be either flattered or insulted (maybe both?) to be called a theologian, but doubt he could spell the word to save his mortal soul.
(2) Michael Baigent. He would be able to spell theologian, but would probably feel the designation was beneath him.
(1) Ray Comfort. I'd completely forgotten that he started out on a soapbox in Cathedral Square. These days he's moved up to banana boxes. He might be able to spell theologian, but would he really know what it meant?
Coincidentally, James McGrath has a word of Comfort on his blog at the moment, also worth clicking through to.
The publicity keeps rolling in for Brian Tamaki's Destiny Church, but it's probably publicity he'd rather not have.
It seems the Destiny franchise loves to practice the "give" way of life... by giving to Brian.
Brian Tamaki is given up to $500,000 every year in donations from Destiny Church members on top of his six-figure salary, according to a former employee.
The 7000-strong congregation is encouraged to donate money in an annual "First Fruits" offering in an October service, which is gifted to the self-appointed bishop for his own use, rather than funding church activities.
The practice... is based on Old Testament scripture, in which the people of Israel would give the first produce of the land each year to the priests to eat...
Lynda Stewart, a former financial administrator for Bishop Tamaki and his wife Hannah, was a member of Destiny for seven years but left after he was appointed as a bishop in 2005...
Soon after, the congregation were encouraged to give personally to Bishop Tamaki which was justified with scripture, which Ms Stewart says was taken out of historical context.
"The Bible was being used to manipulate people to give money for his personal use to fund his flashy lifestyle," said Ms Stewart. "And the people blindly accept what Brian says."
Nice! I'm all for it. Imagine a half million dollar bonus where the humble sheeple show their deep appreciation for you, the Lord's anointed. Of course, Bishop Brian's flock tend not to include the wealthy, educated and well off. Those generous donors tend to live in less salubrious suburbs and pull in a modest paycheck, while some receive welfare. Brian however is a different kettle of fish. He and wife Hannah do live in a mighty fine home with all the flash toys provided. Funny that...
Dr James Harding, a lecturer of theology at Otago University and a Christian, said the "First Fruits" offering was given in the Old Testament era because the Levite priests had no land to make a living from.
"[The offering] was to give them a living wage, so to speak, it was in that context. Quite a different context to Auckland in 2009," said Dr Harding.
"It is somewhat of a strain, quite a stretch I think, to use passages from the Old Testament to justify this. I'd be very interested to hear how they justify it theologically."
Indeed. Even for those of us with some small prior experience of money-grubbing apostles and empire-building evangelists, the rationale behind this particular cash-grab is stunning. Not even Herbert Armstrong on his worst day was quite this crass.
I'm put in mind of a bloke called Byron Klein, who was pastor of the church my family attended when I was a kid. Byron drove an old VW Beetle with a lot of ks on the clock, including not a few in dropping us brats off home after confirmation classes. He and his wife Dawn, who worked as a nurse at the public hospital, adopted a child before raising their own family. Byron could see the potential in a lot of people when nobody else could, including alcoholics who were battling the bottle. Their home was open to any and all. He'd put the hard yards in to graduate from seminary, with a working knowledge of all three biblical languages (Greek, Hebrew and German!) and like most ministers then and now was rewarded by being underpaid and under-appreciated. You didn't have to be a Christian to know that he was a thoroughly decent and compassionate human being. He and Dawn were inspirational in a very down to earth way that had nothing to do with liturgy, doctrine or theology, and they weren't atypical.
The bloated pulpit parasites of the prosperity gospel (their prosperity!) seem to be another species altogether.
1. Because it's a long way from here, and the grass always looks greener...
3. Because the cardboard stereotypes of Missouri (conservative), Wisconsin (fundamentalist) and ELCA (liberal) members are uncannily accurate.
5. Because of people like ELCA member Ursula Stemm, who, commenting on a proposal by a Missouri Synod task force to remove the word Missouri from the denominational name, "believes an LCMS name change would enhance the state’s reputation."
"
