The following are copies of email correspondence I sent and received regarding the adult education class we had a Rainbow Mennonite Church that studied the book, When Faith Meets Reason by Charles Hedrick. Note that a message from Charles Hedrick, the books editor and one of the contributors, is listed last.
From: Clif Hostetler To: Mennolink.org (to specific interest lists) Subject: When Faith Meets Reason Date: Sunday, November 29, 2009 7:45 PM
Phyllis Bixler posted an email about ten months ago (Feb. 13, 2009) on Mennolink that introduced me to the book, When Faith Meets Reason, by Charles w. Hedrick (Editor/Contributor). This past quarter I was part of an adult Sunday school class that used the book. We found the book to be a useful tool for initiating discussion about what to do when old understandings of faith don't hold up to modern understandings of reality.
Some in our class, including myself, were not entirely satisfied with the images of God suggested by the thirteen essays in this book. We found the images of God as described by Gordon D. Kaufman in his book In the Beginning Creativity to be more useful for us. Kaufman has also written a later book titled Jesus and Creativity which serves as a good follow-up to those of us from a Christian background.
______________________________ From: Jean Rodenbough, Greensboro, NC Subject: When Faith Meets Reason Date: Sunday, November 29, 2009 7:58 PM
I found your review most helpful, and something I can get hold of in my own always reforming theology and understanding of the Trinity, or of the Three Persons individually -- Recently I told friends who were here for a visit that I was becoming mostly a "Jesustarian" -- um . . . I may have already mentioned that on MennoLink. Jean who is prob'ly still a Presbyterian
______________________________ From: Clair Hochstetler, in Canberra Subject: When Faith Meets Reason Date: Sunday, November 29, 2009 8:32 PM
Ironic that just about five minutes before you posted this, Cliff, I had posted my own reflections on the quest to integrate science and faith - including resources for conversations with those who can't (surrounding the 150th anniversary of Charles Darwin's publishing his "Origin of the Species.") You can access my column at:
I mentioned, there, an off-list email conversation I had last week with fellow MennoLinker Dr. Douglas Swartzentruber about the Darwin Conference he recently attended at Pepperdine University.
I also highlighted a fairly new website from the Biologos Foundation:
which includes lots of articles from their blog regarding science, faith and their integration. It would be interesting to hear if your Sunday School class finds that site and its articles to be as stimulating as the other materials you have already been studying.
From: Phyllis Bixler, Springfield, Missouri Subject: When Faith Meets Reason Date: Monday, November 30, 2009 9:03 AM
Clif, I'm glad you found Hedrick's "When Faith Meets Reason" a helpful discussion starter. I, too, was "not entirely satisfied with the images of God suggested by the thirteen essays in this book." In part, I think, because I myself frame the "questions" in ways other than do a good number of these writers.
E.g., I have some problems with the title: "When Faith Meets Reason." Too often, it seems here and elsewhere, when the word "faith" is used what the writer really means is "belief." To me, "Faith" is a much larger and more important concept, which may include "Belief," but goes way beyond it to include all of one's self, way of living, etc. As such, much of it goes way beyond the reach of "Reason" as this is usually defined. In other words, I see both "belief" and "reason" to be referring to rather cerebral processes. And the longer I live, the more I realize that who we are, especially spiritually and religiously but also in every other aspect of our lives, goes well beyond the cerebral, beyond "belief" and "reason."
I do think both are important, however. And I do believe that one of the largest challenges religious people have faced during the last century and a half--but really earlier, beginning especially with the Enlightenment--is the way that science has challenged religious worldviews.
On this score, I want to recommend most highly a book I read just a few days ago, Huston Smith' "Why Religion Matters, The Fate of the Human Spirit in an Age of Disbelief." Personally, I found this book more helpful in my own faith as well as belief quest than the essays in Hedrick's book.
In part, I believe, because he comes to these questions from a lifetime of study, not just cerebral but also experiential study, of world religions. As well as someone well rooted in the specific religion he learned as child of Christian missionaries in China.
Hence, while I felt that the writers in Hedrick's anthology typically, though in fairness not always, were talking about "belief," Smith is talking about "faith." And that while they are trying to sift for and value in religion primarily that which will pass current definitions of "historicity" and fit our cosmological world view, Smith pointing out limits of our current definitions and worldview that keep us from appreciating what religion has of great value to offer. And one of the main themes in his book is how what he calls "scientism"--but not "science"--has brought this about.
Incidentally, recently I shared with a highly respected scientist friend some of Smith's ideas about "science" and "scientism" in some of the interviews he has given. She agreed with him entirely. Said he is making distinctions she tries to get across to her own students.
Anyway, I recommend Smith highly. And find it one of those provocative synchronicities that I was thinking of writing a post recommending Smith's book when Clif posted and gave me an opening.
From: Phyllis Bixler To: Charles Hedrick (The book's Editor/Contributor) Date: Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 11:47 AM Subject: Responses to "Faith Meets Reason"
Hi, Charlie, Thought I’d share with you a dialogue about your essay anthology, “When Faith Meets Reason,” that occurred a few days ago on the internet discussion board, Mennolink. The first is by Clif Hostetler in Kansas City. The second is my response.
We had similar responses to the book, both in what we liked and what we found less than satisfying. The latter perhaps was not one of the aims you and other writers had for the book; and at a remove of seven or eight months since I read your book, my memory of it as well as of my response to it is likely oversimplified. And, typically, I tend to be more enthusiastic about a book I just read. All of which should make more sense when you read our two posts.
Clif gave me permission to pass along his post as well as mine—I believe he wrote to you telling him a group in your church decided to discuss your book. So I am copying this letter to him. And invite you to hit "reply all" if you send me a response.
I’m curious about whether you have received other reports of groups that have discussed the book and if so what those responses were. The book-related website certainly should have been a great assistance. Has the publisher had to print more copies?
Hope all is well with you. Best holiday wishes.
Phyllis
(The forwarded messages have not been included here.)
____________________________________ From: Charles W. Hedrick (The book's Editor/Contributor) (CharlesHedrick@MissouriState.edu) To: Phyllis Bixler Date: Thursday, December 3, 2009 9:13 AM
Hi Phyllis,
Always good to hear from you! I hope you are well, and I can see that you are still fully engaged in issues that are interesting.
About the Book: When Faith Meets Reason. The participants and I never talked about our aims for the book. I suppose the only thing they would all have agreed with is that the book would have properly honored Bob's memory and that it would have sold well (although we receive none of the proceeds from sales). What my hope was is this: That the book would have provoked readers to think for themselves and deliberately develop their own understanding of religion. The "models" of faith that each Fellow had developed was only that. Each was very personal and I really couldn't care less how anyone received my own statement if they reflected on the issues that brought me to the point that it did (I assume, but don't know, that this idea would be shared by the other Fellows, but must admit that some of them may think their ideas should be programmatic for others).
I have heard from three or four folks that the book was being used as a study guide in their churches, but I have not received many follow-up reports. The book has gone into a second printing (of sorts). Polebridge now does "on-demand" printing. So when the original run was expended they simply ran several hundred more to be able to fill the orders that were coming in. I sent the press some time ago a few improvements and corrections but am afraid that these have not been entered (the press has had a complete change of leadership and many things have fallen through the cracks while the new leaders have gained their "sea legs").
What Clif said about the book ("good for initiating discussion about what to do when old understandings of faith don't hold up to modern understandings of reality") fulfills my hope for the book! None of us (I think) wanted to develop a new faith for everyone to follow (i.e., a new construct of Christianity for the modern world). Today (if Christian) we are all in the same position of making sense of the impetus to faith (which the Christ event was) that the earliest "Christians" (they weren't really Christians like the after 4th and 5th century bunch) were in.
I really have a hard time wrapping my mind around your distinction between "faith" and "belief," since these words are virtually synonymous in my vocabulary. If one "believes" something it is part of their faith (as you seem to also think in part). I can make sense of your distinction if I think of belief as "proposition," like the Pastor in the Pastoral Epistles. There "Faith" really means proposition that one subscribes to (something like I think Bob Price was saying when he said "I really don't have any beliefs anymore and don't miss them), and so you can "pass on" propositional "truths." But if I say something like: "it is my belief that my wife is faithful to me." That statement is not a proposition but it is my faith, and the two (faith and belief) are synonymous. And when I said at the end of my article "or so I think today." I was not trying to say that my religion was in my mind (i.e., rational) but that I am a whole being and so could have said "so I believe today" or "so goes my faith at this moment."
As usual you are quite provocative and driving my little grey cells to this level at this hour has over taxed them! Now I am off to my modern Greek readings.
Cordially, Charlie
Charles W. Hedrick Distinguished Professor Emeritus Missouri State University Springfield, Missouri 65897 charles@charleshedrick.com Blog: http://www.charleshedrick.com
Robert Kaufman (RMC's pastor for those who don't know) on August 8, 2010 ended his sermon with the words shown below. I decided they were related somewhat to the theme of this book, so I've posted them here for future reference and reflection.
I may find it hard to have faith Yet I reside in faith I may not be able to trust in hope Yet hope finds me I do not find belief Yet belief seeks me I may not embrace the church Yet I reside in the family of God (authorship anonymous)
The purpose of this discussion board is to provide a forum for discussion of movies, books and adult Sunday school topics of interest to members and friends of Rainbow Mennonite Church.
8 comments:
The following are copies of email correspondence I sent and received regarding the adult education class we had a Rainbow Mennonite Church that studied the book, When Faith Meets Reason by Charles Hedrick. Note that a message from Charles Hedrick, the books editor and one of the contributors, is listed last.
From: Clif Hostetler
To: Mennolink.org (to specific interest lists)
Subject: When Faith Meets Reason
Date: Sunday, November 29, 2009 7:45 PM
Phyllis Bixler posted an email about ten months ago (Feb. 13, 2009) on Mennolink that introduced me to the book, When Faith Meets Reason, by Charles w. Hedrick (Editor/Contributor). This past quarter I was part of an adult Sunday school class that used the book. We found the book to be a useful tool for initiating discussion about what to do when old understandings of faith don't hold up to modern understandings of reality.
Some in our class, including myself, were not entirely satisfied with the images of God suggested by the thirteen essays in this book. We found the images of God as described by Gordon D. Kaufman in his book In the Beginning Creativity to be more useful for us. Kaufman has also written a later book titled Jesus and Creativity which serves as a good follow-up to those of us from a Christian background.
Link to my review of the book:
http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/46294605
______________________________
From: Jean Rodenbough, Greensboro, NC
Subject: When Faith Meets Reason
Date: Sunday, November 29, 2009 7:58 PM
I found your review most helpful, and something I can get hold of in my own always reforming theology and understanding of the Trinity, or of the Three Persons individually --
Recently I told friends who were here for a visit that I was becoming mostly a "Jesustarian" -- um . . . I may have already mentioned that on MennoLink.
Jean
who is prob'ly still a Presbyterian
______________________________
From: Clair Hochstetler, in Canberra
Subject: When Faith Meets Reason
Date: Sunday, November 29, 2009 8:32 PM
Ironic that just about five minutes before you posted this, Cliff, I had posted my own reflections on the quest to integrate science and faith - including resources for conversations with those who can't (surrounding the 150th anniversary of Charles Darwin's publishing his "Origin of the Species.") You can access my column at:
http://chaplainclair.blogspot.com/2009/11/reflections-on-science-and-faith.html
I mentioned, there, an off-list email conversation I had last week with fellow MennoLinker Dr. Douglas Swartzentruber about the Darwin Conference he recently attended at Pepperdine University.
I also highlighted a fairly new website from the Biologos Foundation:
http://www.biologos.org
which includes lots of articles from their blog regarding science, faith and their integration. It would be interesting to hear if your Sunday School class finds that site and its articles to be as stimulating as the other materials you have already been studying.
-Clair Hochstetler in Canberra
______________________________
From: Phyllis Bixler, Springfield, Missouri
Subject: When Faith Meets Reason
Date: Monday, November 30, 2009 9:03 AM
Clif, I'm glad you found Hedrick's "When Faith Meets Reason" a helpful discussion starter. I, too, was "not entirely satisfied with the images of God suggested by the thirteen essays in this book." In part, I think, because I myself frame the "questions" in ways other than do a good number of these writers.
E.g., I have some problems with the title: "When Faith Meets Reason." Too often, it seems here and elsewhere, when the word "faith" is used what the writer really means is "belief." To me, "Faith" is a much larger and more important concept, which may include "Belief," but goes way beyond it to include all of one's self, way of living, etc. As such, much of it goes way beyond the reach of "Reason" as this is usually defined. In other words, I see both "belief" and "reason" to be referring to rather cerebral processes. And the longer I live, the more I realize that who we are, especially spiritually and religiously but also in every other aspect of our lives, goes well beyond the cerebral, beyond "belief" and "reason."
I do think both are important, however. And I do believe that one of the largest challenges religious people have faced during the last century and a half--but really earlier, beginning especially with the Enlightenment--is the way that science has challenged religious worldviews.
On this score, I want to recommend most highly a book I read just a few days ago, Huston Smith' "Why Religion Matters, The Fate of the Human Spirit in an Age of Disbelief." Personally, I found this book more helpful in my own faith as well as belief quest than the essays in Hedrick's book.
In part, I believe, because he comes to these questions from a lifetime of study, not just cerebral but also experiential study, of world religions. As well as someone well rooted in the specific religion he learned as child of Christian missionaries in China.
Hence, while I felt that the writers in Hedrick's anthology typically, though in fairness not always, were talking about "belief," Smith is talking about "faith." And that while they are trying to sift for and value in religion primarily that which will pass current definitions of "historicity" and fit our cosmological world view, Smith pointing out limits of our current definitions and worldview that keep us from appreciating what religion has of great value to offer. And one of the main themes in his book is how what he calls "scientism"--but not "science"--has brought this about.
Incidentally, recently I shared with a highly respected scientist friend some of Smith's ideas about "science" and "scientism" in some of the interviews he has given. She agreed with him entirely. Said he is making distinctions she tries to get across to her own students.
Anyway, I recommend Smith highly. And find it one of those provocative synchronicities that I was thinking of writing a post recommending Smith's book when Clif posted and gave me an opening.
___________________________
From: Phyllis Bixler
To: Charles Hedrick (The book's Editor/Contributor)
Date: Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 11:47 AM
Subject: Responses to "Faith Meets Reason"
Hi, Charlie,
Thought I’d share with you a dialogue about your essay anthology, “When Faith Meets Reason,” that occurred a few days ago on the internet discussion board, Mennolink. The first is by Clif Hostetler in Kansas City. The second is my response.
We had similar responses to the book, both in what we liked and what we found less than satisfying. The latter perhaps was not one of the aims you and other writers had for the book; and at a remove of seven or eight months since I read your book, my memory of it as well as of my response to it is likely oversimplified. And, typically, I tend to be more enthusiastic about a book I just read. All of which should make more sense when you read our two posts.
Clif gave me permission to pass along his post as well as mine—I believe he wrote to you telling him a group in your church decided to discuss your book. So I am copying this letter to him. And invite you to hit "reply all" if you send me a response.
I’m curious about whether you have received other reports of groups that have discussed the book and if so what those responses were. The book-related website certainly should have been a great assistance. Has the publisher had to print more copies?
Hope all is well with you.
Best holiday wishes.
Phyllis
(The forwarded messages have not been included here.)
____________________________________
From: Charles W. Hedrick (The book's Editor/Contributor)
(CharlesHedrick@MissouriState.edu)
To: Phyllis Bixler
Date: Thursday, December 3, 2009 9:13 AM
Hi Phyllis,
Always good to hear from you! I hope you are well, and I can see that you are still fully engaged in issues that are interesting.
About the Book: When Faith Meets Reason. The participants and I never talked about our aims for the book. I suppose the only thing they would all have agreed with is that the book would have properly honored Bob's memory and that it would have sold well (although we receive none of the proceeds from sales). What my hope was is this: That the book would have provoked readers to think for themselves and deliberately develop their own understanding of religion. The "models" of faith that each Fellow had developed was only that. Each was very personal and I really couldn't care less how anyone received my own statement if they reflected on the issues that brought me to the point that it did (I assume, but don't know, that this idea would be shared by the other Fellows, but must admit that some of them may think their ideas should be programmatic for others).
I have heard from three or four folks that the book was being used as a study guide in their churches, but I have not received many follow-up reports. The book has gone into a second printing (of sorts). Polebridge now does "on-demand" printing. So when the original run was expended they simply ran several hundred more to be able to fill the orders that were coming in. I sent the press some time ago a few improvements and corrections but am afraid that these have not been entered (the press has had a complete change of leadership and many things have fallen through the cracks while the new leaders have gained their "sea legs").
What Clif said about the book ("good for initiating discussion about what to do when old understandings of faith don't hold up to modern understandings of reality") fulfills my hope for the book! None of us (I think) wanted to develop a new faith for everyone to follow (i.e., a new construct of Christianity for the modern world). Today (if Christian) we are all in the same position of making sense of the impetus to faith (which the Christ event was) that the earliest "Christians" (they weren't really Christians like the after 4th and 5th century bunch) were in.
I really have a hard time wrapping my mind around your distinction between "faith" and "belief," since these words are virtually synonymous in my vocabulary. If one "believes" something it is part of their faith (as you seem to also think in part). I can make sense of your distinction if I think of belief as "proposition," like the Pastor in the Pastoral Epistles. There "Faith" really means proposition that one subscribes to (something like I think Bob Price was saying when he said "I really don't have any beliefs anymore and don't miss them), and so you can "pass on" propositional "truths." But if I say something like: "it is my belief that my wife is faithful to me." That statement is not a proposition but it is my faith, and the two (faith and belief) are synonymous. And when I said at the end of my article "or so I think today." I was not trying to say that my religion was in my mind (i.e., rational) but that I am a whole being and so could have said "so I believe today" or "so goes my faith at this moment."
As usual you are quite provocative and driving my little grey cells to this level at this hour has over taxed them! Now I am off to my modern Greek readings.
Cordially,
Charlie
Charles W. Hedrick
Distinguished Professor Emeritus
Missouri State University
Springfield, Missouri 65897
charles@charleshedrick.com
Blog: http://www.charleshedrick.com
Robert Kaufman (RMC's pastor for those who don't know) on August 8, 2010 ended his sermon with the words shown below. I decided they were related somewhat to the theme of this book, so I've posted them here for future reference and reflection.
I may find it hard to have faith
Yet I reside in faith
I may not be able to trust in hope
Yet hope finds me
I do not find belief
Yet belief seeks me
I may not embrace the church
Yet I reside in the family of God
(authorship anonymous)
Post a Comment