Review: To Change the World: The Irony, Tragedy, and Possibility of Christianity in the Late Modern World

by Sep 30, 2014Books

To Change the World: The Irony, Tragedy, and Possibility of Christianity in the Late Modern WorldTo Change the World: The Irony, Tragedy, and Possibility of Christianity in the Late Modern World by James Davison Hunter

My rating: 5 of 5 stars

This book will need to gestate for a while. There’s no way I can write a review at the moment. I can only offer initial impressions as to its value: I simply found his analysis of major Christian ways to view culture more intuitive—and more immediately helpful—than Niebuhr or even Carson. If I were you, I’d actually read the last chapter first, then go back and read the book. I wish I had; I like to be oriented first before I read a substantive book. In any case, that last chapter carries this great orienting paragraph:

The three political theologies discussed in Essay II are, in fact, the leading public edge of more complex paradigms of cultural engagement that I call “defensive against,” “relevance to,” and “purity from.” In using this phrase, “paradigms of cultural engagement,” I do not mean to propose anything as ambitious and inclusive as a formal conceptual model, akin to the one proposed by H. Richard Niebuhr in his masterwork, Christ and Culture. I merely refer to relatively different understandings of the world, ways of being in the world, and ways of relating to the world. These are, in short, different ways of thinking about and pursuing faithfulness in the world.

“Defensive against” is the Religious Right (think Falwell and Robertson). “Relevance to” is the Religious Left (think Sojourners, Jim Wallis, Randall Balmer). “Purity from” is the contemporary Anabaptist tradition (think John Howard Yoder). Hunter proposes an alternative that recognizes value in all three of these approaches but argues that all three are implicitly endorsing a will-to-power mode of cultural change. Hunter’s proposal is “faithful presence.”

As I read the book, knowing that “faithful presence” was Hunter’s thing, I kept feeling that it was too vague—until I got to the final chapters. While it could be developed much more, especially in practical ways, Hunter’s vision does seem to me to bid fair to be an alternative to the other three visions he critiques. It calls for promoting faith, hope, and love in whatever cultural space you occupy. Whether or not Hunter’s “faithful presence” creates intellectual/theological space for other writers to fill will, I think, be an acid test of his vision.

A final, sort of scattered thought: I’m not sure how different Hunter is in practice from Andy Crouch. He explicitly disclaims any idea of “redeeming the culture,” but he himself writes that the practical examples of faithful presence he gives “are less a blueprint to be applied than a catalyst for thinking about other imaginative possibilities for the transformation of culture in business, the arts, medicine, housing, and the like.”

Read More 

Review: Comanche Empire

The Comanche Empire by Pekka Hämäläinen This excellent book does what modern history is supposed to do nowadays: it gives a voice to the voiceless and the marginalized; it gives agency to the victims. And yet you can’t always predict what will happen when you go...

Review: Means of Ascent

Means of Ascent by Robert A. CaroMy rating: 5 of 5 stars This book is positively monumental. How does Caro do it? Well, I know how he does it. I read his book on the topic. He does it with a lot of hard and humble work (and some excellent help from his wife). I was...

Review: Think Again by Stanley Fish

Think Again: Contrarian Reflections on Life, Culture, Politics, Religion, Law, and Education by Stanley FishMy rating: 5 of 5 stars I have read multiple Stanley Fish books; I read quite a number of these columns when they were originally published in the New York...

Review: Why I Preach from the Received Text

Review: Why I Preach from the Received Text

Why I Preach from the Received Text is an anthology of personal testimonies more than it is a collection of careful arguments. It is not intended to be academic, and I see nothing necessarily wrong with that. But it does make countless properly academic claims, and...

Leave a comment.