Call of the Child -a bit of a review

The title pretty much tells you, but here's what the author says:

It is about two things, tightly interweaved but seldom thought of as connected. They are: Being a child, and being a peacemaker

And that's what draws me in -those two strands of Jesus' teaching- because they are strong themes from the gospels and it's good to see them in company with each other imaginatively and reflectively.

Further, he goes on to say something that felt like it spoke to where I'm coming to (again) at this point in time.

A child trusts. A child does not worry. A child can be oblivious to the challenges surrounding them. A child plays. A child is filled with wonder. A child knows that their father can fix anything. A child has no experience with fear or abandonment. A child has nothing to prove. A child has no need of reputation. A child feels inherently safe. A child sees no limitations and believes that anything is possible. A child is at peace.

So, of course, I was going to read this! (smiley face)

Bruce's starting point, theologically, is a fairly mainstream evangelical approach to bible and atonement. It is radical in pushing back against some evangelical views of God's love and punishment though arguably no less radical than the Reformers themselves. It is worth noting that he's not about asserting that background since he has no desire to argue about it but a willingness to discuss.

Bruce starts off by leading us into a reflection on the nature of God's fatherhood and the implications of a real Good News which is that God loves us fundamentally; that the Cross has created us as God's children irrevocably. You can get the flavour of this from page 18: 

This English translation of the Greek word huiothesia ... When translated as adoption it implies to us that we were not the Father's children until after we were adopted. But the Greek word does not mean that at all. The word actually refers to the act of placing a son. In the Roman context, that would be something more like a coming of age ceremony, or a proclamation that a son is fully the legal and rightful representative of his father. The point here is that we have always been the children of Father God. We were stolen, but the Cross has redeemed us and purchased us back from captivity.

It is in a footnote to this first chapter that Bruce makes the point that while it is common for people to quote Rom.3:23 "... all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God", in attitude this is often severed from the following verse which tells us that all are justified freely by God's grace. In a sense, he's trying to get us to think about that and weigh it more heavily in our estimation. I think that this is right.

Bruce mentions that he is from a military background, so it is interesting to read the chapter on war -I would commend it. Interesting, not least because of the discussion of the just war tradition and its misuse and abuse. As an American, he seems to be under no illusions about the USAmerican role in maintaning an unpeace-ful world.

I liked that the topic of peace and peacemaking is approached holistically -looking at social and political dimensions, a well-rounded view of security based in people-centred everyday living and psychological. This is all woven together with reference to the kind of personal attitudinal considerations that are the everyday concern of ordinary prayer with scripture in one hand.

Link-Love for this Review

I note that Bruce stays off social media -so there's only his blog/website and a buying location here.

The Call of the Child on Amazon
Bruce McKibben’s Website

Tag: #TheCallOfTheChild

Please also be aware that I'm reviewing here a book I had an e-preview copy of from the publisher via the Speakeasy network. The deal is that I review it within 30 days of downloading a copy. The deal is not that I have to be favourable; I'm free to like it, dislike it, be nuanced about it and whichever it is to tell it as I see it.

Posting peace -digital peacemaking

I got interested in this book because its "call us to embrace the radical ministry of peacemaking in response to our destructive online world." is very much been on my heart and at the back and sometimes the forefront of my mind for two or three years. To the point of trying to find others to work with in research and perhaps action. And peacemaking has been a core image in beginning to think about a Christian response. My concern has arisen mostly since the Brexit debate in the UK and I became aware of how polarised, hateful, uncompromising, spiteful, it could be. It was shocking to see and to be on the receiving end of trigger-seeking, mocking and reason-deflecting messages. When I used to play football (soccer) we had saying, "play the ball not the man". These trolls and bots were definitely in the other camp: "play the man, forget the ball". As I investigated further, it became evident that the business models, the way that the algorithms work to amplify the most basely emotive tweets and posts and the weaponisation of that by troll and bot farms aiming to sow dissent by disinformation and winding people up with ever greater degrees of hatred and contempt.

So I got to wondering what blessed peacemaking looks like amid all of that.. What is the calling of Christ-followers on social media? I've begun to experiment on Twitter with trying to engage differently, more humbly, asking questions, remembering that sometimes there are humans behind the words and expressions. At least sometimes I have succeeded to some degree. In doing this I've learnt from the failures and the pockets of relative 'success'. I've learnt about my own affectivity in relation to trolling, and about my own triggers.

As the author writes and with which I resonate:

I’m tired of the fighting. I’m tired of being afraid of the fighting. I no longer desire to engage in fruitless heated discussions and meaningless contentious debates that don’t have a redemptive or transformative purpose. I want my best energy directed toward Christ-centered, truth-advancing, life-affirming, grace-filled, reconciling communication. I want to be a Christ-motivated peacemaker.

So, that's what I came to this book with, seeking perspectives and ideas to underpin action and peacemaking presence. Does it help me/us?

I've been finding that it draws on a good range of thinkers and writers to situate our thinking about social media in wider cultural and psychological perspectives, and I think that this is helpful. There have been times when I've thought that the author was taking a rather negative view and not understanding the way that people actually use and deploy social media out of our God-given humanity but then quite often the more (shall I call it?-) appreciative case is made. This saves it from simply being a call to join a moral panic and begins to make it useful. 

I found it useful too that at the end of each chapter there are suggestions for experiments with social media and some of them are quite challenging at the level of personal formation -but then, that's important. I would commend this book as a way to help ourselves become digital peacemakers and I am considering using it with study groups. I'd say that the level is not simplistic or overly 'popular' but it should be accessible to anyone who is willing to think and to take seriously the insights of scholars of culture.

Occasionally, I think that the critical ideas relating to discarnation etc were overplayed. For example, I'm not sure I'm convinced by the idea that social media separates our communications and intentions from ourselves (p.61).  I think perhaps that social media extends, stretches, our attachment to what we 'say' through time and space. It thins it out. But the fact that we can feel in our guts the concerns about how what we post is received and responded to suggests that separation is not taking place. We are projecting ourselves, admittedly in an attenuated form, but we are invested. I think we may be in danger if we pursue the 'separation' thesis too strongly, of losing sight of the similarities between spoken wording and visually based wording. They both involve us concentrating some thoughts into a narrow medium and 'expelling' them to be received by others vai air or light. In that sense both are alienated from us physically. However, we do keep the connection emotionally, we continue to identify with our communication.

That said, I do think that the proposition that social media tends to involve self-expression rather than other-focus/concern is probably true. I'd see this as an effect relating to the affordances of the media in relation to the psycho-cultural hinterland of many users. And, of course, once a critical mass is reached, it creates a set of cultural expectations whereby more other-directed, learning-focussed communications are not well received.

I liked, on p.62 the comment that we post in a way like advertisers of products and services. And I think there is something important to that in foregrounding the expressivist culture of much of social media. However, I think that it is also important to notice that advertisers seek to post in ways similar to socmed users.

Quotes I found helpful or thought-provoking

press my attitude or the intentbehind my communication. I would gladly use an “I’m not angry” font or a “This is a sincere reply” filter or an “I’m honestly trying not to fight with you” typeface or an “I don’t know why you’re so angry at me right now, but I’m not angry with you and I’m sincerely trying my best to find a way to communicate in a way that doesn’t make things worse” emoji. As of yet, that technology is unavailable and a smiley emoji isn’t a sufficient substitute for in-person, in-flesh communication (p.59)

#PostingPeace

Posting Peace: Why Social Media Divides Us and What We Can Do About It