The Reader’s
Mood: Pseudo-Professor.
The
Environment: This is a good Saturday morning book if I’ve ever experienced one.
Sit down next to your kindred thinker; the latter must be prepared beforehand
for numerous interruptions in his/her book while you read some
thought-provoking quotations. Make sure to come prepared with writing utensil
in hand.
The Beverage:
French Roast.
The Music:
Mumford & Sons (for their eschatological vision, i.e.“there will come a
day, you’ll see, with no more tears and love will not break your heart, but
dismiss your fears”) but mix in a little Bach for good measure.
Smith’s foundation is his philosophical
anthropology. He believes that the Christian world has bought into an overly
heady, cognitive account of man. Instead, we are ‘liturgical animals”—lovers,
more than thinkers. “To be human is to be such a lover—a creature whose
orientation and form of life is most primordially shaped by what one loves as
ultimate, which constitutes an affective, gut-like orientation to the world
that is prior to reflection and even eludes conceptual articulation.” (51) This
love, this desiring, could also be considered to be worship. Worship is the
essence of human-ness and we are all worshippers; it is just a matter of what
we are worshipping. Our practices are what shape our desires; liturgies are
those ‘thick’ practices which determine what we love as ultimate—what we
worship at the end of the day.
With this in
mind, Smith undertakes an ‘exegesis’ of the liturgies of the mall, the
military-sports complex, and the secular university, demonstrating that they
are, in fact, religious institutions vying for our ultimate loves. He critiques
the ‘worldview’ model, because, while it has certainly been helpful and a step
in the right direction, it has no radar to pick up these clearly religious, but
not ideologically articulated liturgies. Smith then exegetes the church’s
liturgy (whether or not it is high or low church), demonstrating how our
practices carry—even when unsaid—a strong counter-liturgy which shapes and
trains our desires for the heavenly kingdom. Smith then unpacks, in the final
chapter, the implications for a Christian college education.
I resounded
with this book for many reasons. In college, ‘worldview’ talk was ubiquitous,
but I think we had an intuition it just wasn’t quite enough. I found Smith’s
view to be extremely helpful, namely, that worldview vocabulary, while
definitely good, does not do full justice to the reality that we are desiring
creatures—‘liturgical animals”—not just walking minds. It’s been helpful in how
I think about myself. I often conceive of myself as only a ‘walking mind’ and
get frustrated sometimes that even though I know something cognitively, I can’t
seem to just think myself into another practice. Instead, this book has given
me a vocabulary to understand why actually doing
things fundamentally shapes my desires and trains me to habits of virtue. It
makes me think more deeply about my practices. In that line, Smith reminded me
of Wright’s After You Believe. This
book has also added to my increasing conviction that a more intentional
liturgy--enacting the practices of the church throughout history--is more
effective for shaping our desires for the kingdom.
No comments:
Post a Comment