THE GALLI REPORT - Friday, June 19, 2015

 

Friday, June 19, 2015

The Manly Dad I've been saving the link "A Dad's Life" until this Father's Day weekend. I appreciate the writer's reflections on the relationship between manliness and fatherhood—all the better that he interspersed his thoughts with self-deprecating humor. The theme is this: Manliness is chivalry, and chivalry is the impulse to seek honor by protecting the weak and the innocent. What you have just described is the essence of fatherhood. We might even take this a bit further: Fatherhood isn't just manliness. It's the purest form of the good side of manliness, the side that brings light into the world. And one conclusion is: Much of childrearing—the tantrums, and the sibling rivalry, and trying to get them to sleep, and will you please eat your dinner already!—is deeply unpleasant. But to paraphrase James Madison, if children were angels, fatherhood would be unnecessary.

Doctrine? What Doctrine? Recent Pew, Gallup, and LifeWay Research studies have highlighted trends in American religion we've been aware of for some time, like the disaffection of millennials from organized religion, the rise of the "nones," and so forth. There is something about a poll that puts an exclamation point on trends we've only vaguely paid attention to. One trend that hasn't received as much attention as I think it deserves is the increasing disaffection of all believers from doctrine. Joel J. Miller in his blog Theology That Sticks put it this way: As an acquisitions editor with Thomas Nelson I was privileged to see the inner workings of several megachurches by their pastors and their teams. Many of these operations are organizational wonders, staffed by earnest and top-quality people. It's impossible to walk away unimpressed. . . . One of the things I also saw was a downplaying of doctrine. Not just doctrinal distinctives pertaining to denominational affiliation, which you would expect. But most doctrine. That is especially true for teachings that may come off as divisive, are difficult to understand, or lack a readily apparent and practical application to daily life. Rod Drehrer refers to Miller's post in his own commentary on this phenomenon. Doctrine for doctrine's sake is not the point. Doctrine is the church's historic working out of what we mean by God, Jesus, salvation, forgiveness, grace, judgment, eternal life, and so on. If you're interested in knowing what such words really mean, you have to know a little doctrine. Inattention to doctrine is like eating a steady diet of only ice cream and apple pie. The lack of interest in theology is not new, especially in American Christianity, which has always emphasized the practical and experiential. But the polls do put an exclamation point on the need for a more balanced diet.

One's Reputation Isn't Everything One way to cow one's political opponents is to suggest that your view is the way of the future, and that your opponent is on the wrong side of history. This rhetorical ploy is often used today by the proponents of gay marriage, and it amounts to this: if you don't join our cause, people will think badly about you in the future. History is not so easily discerned, however, as this week's longish essay shows. I might add that instead of worrying about how future generations will judge us, we may want to give more thought to the Judge of all generations, and try to discern what he might have us do, no matter the consequences to our reputation.

Let the Blind See Here's a CT twofer: A review by Books & Culture editor John Wilson of an important book by former CT associate editor Collin Hansen (pictured left). Collin is making an argument for a more humble Christianity; that's noteworthy since he is a key player in a movement that has been regularly criticized for its lack of humility. The book could be a game changer. Chalkboards Frozen in Time Teachers and students scribbled the lessons—multiplication tables, pilgrim history, how to be clean—nearly 100 years ago. And they haven't been touched since. This week, contractors removing old chalkboards at Emerson High School in Oklahoma City made a startling discovery: Underneath them rested another set of chalkboards, untouched since 1917. So begins a photo essay that, for reasons I have yet to discern, held me fascinated. Was it the remarkable penmanship? The drawings? The prodding of my historical imagination as I recreated in my mind that 1917 classroom? I don't know. Probably all of the above and more. Who says history is boring?

Grace and peace,

Mark Galli Editor, Christianity Today

P.S. I did not mention the passing of Elisabeth Elliot because the traffic on our site was so phenomenal, I figured you'd seen it. But this just in from Wheaton College: some archive material, including prayer letters and an oral history. As I said, who doesn't like history? (HT to Bill Shuster)