I know I haven't written in a while. I've been busy running from one great opportunity to the next and have not stopped to reflect. Last week was the last full week of classes here at St Andrews. There are still several more weeks before the term is over, but instead of going to lectures students now have a reading period before their exams and final papers are due. There will still be a few seminars at St Marys in the next few weeks, but no classes will be held. So, last week was my last opportunity to sit in on classes and I tried to take full advantage of it.
[Click the entry title to read more]
3 comments:
I have been especially interested to observe the postgraduate seminars. I went to several on Wednesday. The first, called the scripture and theology seminar, meets once a week in lower college hall, an old stone room with an ornate fireplace and wood ceilings and a huge oval table dominating the space. Every week the 12 or 15 postgraduate students in the class are assigned a psalm to research. One of the students will research the Hebrew text, another the Septuagint, another the early Jewish commentators, others the early Christian commentators (Augustine, etc.), and still others later Christian commentators (Luther, Calvin, Barth, etc.). Then during the two hours of the seminar we gather around the table in a circle and each participant will share his or her findings while the two professors who lead the seminar facillitate discussion. I have found it quite interesting (even if arcane at times). I love the format, how it assumes everyone will take an active part in their own learning and will actual have something (literally) to bring to the table.
The second seminar I went to on Wednesday was the theology research seminar, which was held in lower college hall. This week a guest speaker from the U.S., Dr John Franke, shared a paper which touched on themes central to the emergent church conversation. It was a very interesting paper and I had a chance to dialogue with him afterwards for a few minutes about some of my concerns about the long-term sustainability of the style of church modeled in Peter Rollins' book, "How (Not) to Speak of God." In Rollins defense, he is not attempting to create a paradigm for the emergent church, but is simply describing how his gathering functions. Still, I feel like what he describes assumes a biblical literacy that his own gatherings will fail to provide in the long-term. In other words, the way his gatherings subvert traditional readings of scripture only works if one is already very familiar with the text as it has been traditionally interpreted. For example, in the second half of the book he includes several examples of gatherings in which traditional parables are twisted to upset the hearer's expectations. He is attempting to do what Jesus did when he originally told these parables (shock the audience by including an ironic narrative twist that challenges their presuppositions). However, the stories only work because the audience is already familiar with the originals. I think Rollins is so concerned with under-emphasizing the mystery of God that he has over-emphasized it. Anyway, enough critique of Rollins. It was helpful to be able to voice these thoughts to Dr Franke and get his feedback. I also read D.A. Carson's book "Becoming Conversant with the Emergent Church" this week, which has also been a helpful treatment of the issues from a traditional evangelical angle.
Later on Wednesday I went to a seminar about money in scripture and how it serves as a metaphor for our spiritual transformation. It was interesting, but not riveting. The paper was given by another guest speaker, Dr Stephen Barton (who is a well-known professor at Durham) and the semianr was attended by several of the postgraduate students and professors at St Marys. I have especially enjoyed the time of questions and response after the papers are given and have jumped in on numerous occassions to add my two cents (or two "pence" if you like).
The best seminar I attended last week was a philosophical paper by C. Stephen Evans. It was a real treat to hear him share and to be able to ask questions. The seminar was in the evening and only about 15 people attended, which provided a great atmosphere for lively and engaging conversation. Dr Evans is a very well-respected Christian philosopher at Baylor in Texas and travels widely giving talks and participating in debates. His paper addressed the traditional "arguments" for the existence of God, of which he felt the cosmological, teleological, and moral arguments still had a lot to say in our culture. He explained that while the arguments are not decisive (i.e. they don't really prove God's existence, much less the Christian God's existence) still they have never been decisively refuted. In fact many who are credited with having refuted them actually expressed doubt about their own refutation later in their lives (he provided examples from Kant and Hume). His approach is to walk the middle road between evidentialism and reformed epistemology, affirming both the value of natural signs for developing arguments for God's existence while also not dismissing that the natural signs can bring about warranted faith even when not developed into inferential arguments. I found especially helpful Evans suggestion that the kind of evidence God would provide if he were going to provide evidence of his own existence would be: 1) widely available, and 2) non-coercive. In other words, evidence for God must be evidence that could be explained away by those who choose not to believe. Otherwise it removes freedom of choice. During the discussion I had the opportunity to ask two questions. The first was about Lewis' moral argument in Mere Christianity and how he might tweak it. The second was about the "fairness" of the evidence God provides for himself if one believes that natural signs do not reveal enough information about God to be salvific. I was intrigued by his answers, which were too complex to recount here. Suffice it to say, it was a fascinating seminar that lasted a good three hours.
On Friday I met a guy named Ian McPherson for coffee before attending the Institute for Theology, Imagination, and the Arts seminar. I had met Ian at a seminar a few weeks ago and discovered that he is a retired education professor from the University of Dundee and a former high school theology teacher and Christian minister. Needless to say, we were both struck at how many things we share in common and so we decided to get together to chat about teaching theology. Ian has published quite a number of articles on the subject and is also writing a book on the theology of education, so I thoroughly enjoyed picking his brain. After coffee we both walked over to St Marys and attended a seminar with guest speaker, Prof John Milbank from Nottingham University. It was another fascinating paper about the World of the Imagination. Although I only understood about 60% of it (there was a lot of name-and-fancy-term-dropping) his paper and the discussion that followed gave me a number of good ideas for my Christian Imagination class at GCCS.
Friday afternoon I met with the University vice-principal for external relations, Stephen Magee, and talked about what St Andrews is doing to attract students from the States. It was interesting to hear him talk about all of the connections they have made in the U.S. and how strategic they are about getting international students.
This weekend Sharon and I relaxed at home, reading and recovering from quite a busy week. Church on Sunday was a real blessing and both of us were able to call our moms for Mother's day. This week my sister and brother in law will arrive on Thursday and visit for a few days and then we have some other friends coming after they leave, so the next few weeks will be full. We are absolutely loving our time here and feel like we are learning so much. If only the time didn't go by so quickly!
I praise God for the great time and growth you are experiencing. I wish I was there with you and not here studying for my last exam, AP Chemistry.
When you have time later, I would love to hear some of the stuff that you learned, like Dr. Evans' response to C.S. Lewis' Moral Law argument.
By the way, I like Dr. Evan's two points about God's existence.
P.S. Last year, I was exploring the following site:
http://www.bigissueground.com/
It has essays about a variety of debatable topics, including Christianity and the existence of God. I think it would be neat if you would use some of your new and old experiences and submit one or two essays.
Wile not as profound as Nikita's, I thought I might leave a comment. We're finally done with high school! Just today Mr. Zeigler had us do the hug a tree activity (Katie and Emily were quite cruel to Chelsey and picked the farthest tree away te he te he). Now that I have a little more time lol I plan to start reading some of the books you suggested. I just recently finished a rather weird book called Impossible Saints that I Picked up in a library book sale (definitely one of my favorite pastimes) and I still cannot wrap my head around what the heck the book was about. Cool title, weird book. I have Of Fairy Stories and Mind of the Maker (very hard to find them both, you obviously have access to a waay better library*jealous*). The Of Fairy Stories is in a collection of other writings from Tolkien, so I have to read another fifty some pages before I will get to that particular essay.
Anywho, have fun studying(he he) and be sure to check out the Costa Rica blog in a few days.
Post a Comment