02/27/06

Wells talks about accepting and blocking in chapter 7. This is in reference to a game in which each person in a group says one word at a time to make a story. Accepting would be taking what the last person said and adding a word to keep the story going – making an offer. Blocking would be saying a word that puts an end or leads toward an end to the story. Wells then compares this to Christian Ethics, as usual. This block may be done out of fear of what is unknown and a desire for security. The three main terms in this chapter are offer, accept, and block. I have already mentioned some aspects of these terms. An offer made can be a block or an acceptance. It is the action that proposes the next move to the next person. To accept is to take what is given and keep it going in the same or similar manner. To block is to take what is given and attempt to slow it or put an end to it. To accept all the time or block all the time is not right. Each can be a defense mechanism. A balance is needed. Wells then goes on to explain blocking in more detail. It can be both passive and active. If one puts a block up as a guard then it is passive. If one does it to act against what was said or done, it is active, which is often violence.

As a church, we need to learn to accept and not be so closed-minded. Wells says that we need to learn to use the word “And…” This would show that we are not always attempting to put up a guard or an end to a story. There are times when we need to be vulnerable. I believe that it would help us all to be more appealing, human, and accepting of others. Christ used “And…” He used this when it came to His death. His death was not the end. He rose from the dead and kept the story going. When we feel bogged down by confusion, stress, persecution, or a number of other things, we need to say “And…” and make the story go on to bigger and better things. For instance, there are many times that I have been confronted on religious issues by someone trying to sway me from my beliefs. I had to take what they dealt me and learn from it. It was important not to be defeated but rather to learn from every situation. This is something that the church needs to work on on both ends – conservative and liberal. We all think we are the right ones. Is there always an end to the story?

02/20/06

Wells talks of status in Chapter 6. Some of it made sense, and some of it was very hard to follow.

Wells talked about how people have inherent status, and also have a status that they try to imply to others. He also compared status to a seesaw. If I were to build and bring myself up, it would only be at the expense of someone else. I have experienced this much in life. If I remain selfish and try to speak of my accomplishments and well-being, then I would have to be doing one of two things. Either I would be building myself up, making the other person seem much lower in status, or I would be putting them down to make myself seem much higher in status.

Wells talks about how status is present in every interaction between people and is chosen by oneself rather than the other. I have felt this occurrence many times as well. As a Christian, I feel that I need to be aware of my projection of status. I need to remain approachable and selfless. The first things I say and the way I give myself off can make or break an interaction with someone.

The comparison of the church with status is Wells’ general argument and conclusion for chapter 6. First, it needs to be recognized that status is very apparent in the church. I believe that the church needs to step away from the idea of status and concentrate on its purposes and people – not focusing on the building or the politics. People need to be attracted to the church, but people also need to feel impacted by the church in a positive way.

02/15/06

Chapter 5 is definitely Wells’ best chapter yet. Everything is spelled out and the analogies are more obvious and intriguing. He opens the chapter saying, “The battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton,” which is a quote from the Duke of Wellington, reflecting on the Napoleonic wars. Wells points out that this is saying that though the actions in battle were important, they would have been inadequate, pointless, and futile had the soldiers not had the proper training to prepare them for such a battle. Essentially, the training and preparation was more important than the actions themselves. Wells says, “Ethics has become the study of the battlefield without much recognition of the training ground.” Ethics has become all about the actions of right and wrong, rather than about the people who are performing the actions, and why they are doing so. Wells uses another analogy in which a child died on the operating table. If one looks on the surface, they could feel sympathy for the doctor for having to deal with the complications during and after the operation. But, one doctor knew the whole story. This doctor went to school with the one who had the patient on the operating table. He said that this doctor was very lax and inattentive to detail during school. This is what essentially caused the death of the patient. How the doctor acted many years before would have greatly impacted and improved how he acted once he became a physician. This can properly describe ethics.

Wells distinguishes two main steps in ethics: moral effort and moral habit. Moral effort is that training ground and medical school. It is what one learns and becomes used to in order to obtain the proper moral habit. One must learn to live well, especially by developing suitable habits. This kind of development is not at all easy, however. It takes much discipline and commitment. The main commitment that needs to be heeded by Christians is worship: our practice for heaven. Worship should greatly make up our moral development and formation. When we put our total focus on God frequently, it becomes habit, and eventually comes through in our actions. The more time we spend with our Lord in communion, worship, and even conversation, the more we will become like Him.

I have been striving over the last two years to make worship a habit – a constant part of life. I feel that I have had many successes, and some obvious setbacks. But this consistent longing for God appears in other parts of life – parts that one would not usually expect. I read the book Praise Habit by David Crowder (which I strongly recommend). It tells of the importance of the habit of worship through an analysis of the Psalms. It had many similarities to Chapter 5 of Wells. Once praise and worship become habit (once they become a normal, expected part of life), attributes of God will also appear in your own life. This is our ultimate goal as Christians.

02/08/06

In Chapter 4, Wells continues his talk of ethics as improvisation and drama. This time, he brings in the aspects of the script, rehearsals, and performances.

Scripture, in a way, is a constitution and script for Christians. We must seek to answer what it asks and live out what it directs. Plays were written to be performed – not just to be read. In the same way, the bible is not just for entertainment or reading – it is a way in which we as Christians need to be living.

Wells does one thing that many authors do not – he points out problems with his analogies and ideas to make clarification thorough. For instance, he points out four problems with the idea of discipleship as the performance of a script. One is that the script does not provide all the answers that need to be met in everyday, sporadic life. Our lives are not totally scripted out so we do not always know what to expect. In a connected way, the script also does not provide an outline for the Christian life. There are many aspects not noted by the Bible. Third, there is an implied idea that there was once a perfect world and we should strive for that once again. We need to look at the failures and drawbacks and learn from them just as we should affirm and exemplify successes. Lastly, Wells says that the idea of a script can keep us from being genuine. Though we need to have the basis of the Bible in our lives, our personalities and individualized actions are often what truly reach others. This definitely should not stop us from using the “script,” however. It is still very important to keep that strong grounding in scripture. The script is vital to our affirmation in how we live out our lives.

Wells then goes on to talk about improvisation. First, improvisation is inevitable. When we improvise in our everyday lives, we have to have those roots in scripture and Christianity or we will fall. Along with that, Wells says that improvisation is scriptural. Lastly, improvisation is ecclesial, or it deals with the church. The church should improvise and go through this together, even if one is technically by him/herself.

These ideas of improvisation in Christian ethics seem to be very breakthrough and effective. I have definitely been keeping these ideas in mind throughout the day.

02/02/06

In chapter 3, Wells talks of Hans Urs von Balthasar and his comparison of theology to drama. And he differs between three ways in which a person could view such a drama or story: epic, lyric, and dramatic. In the epic example, the person is not actually a part of the story, but feels as if they know enough information to influence it. In the lyric perspective, the observer is actually a part of the action and is influenced by it. The dramatic perspective takes the strengths of the epic and lyric.
The epic perspective is very unattached. Church sacraments become memorials, and God becomes third person – very distant. The lyric perspective has its shortcomings as well. The observer becomes so emotionally involved in the story, such as Jesus being on the cross. Everything should be more than just an event – it should be more dramatic. Wells explains this drama in a five-act play, which I find very intriguing and interesting.
First of all, the Father is the author, the Son is the actor, and the Spirit is the director. The main characters are God, Jesus, Israel, a Christian, angels, and demons. It is interesting to see that Wells has not used too many of his own ideas yet – he mostly has just been using examples from other theologians and ethicists, such as Balthasar and Tom Wright. Wright had an idea of a five-act play in which the fifth act was yet to be decided by the participants. Act I is Creation, Act II is the fall of man, Act III is Israel, Act IV is Jesus, and Act V is up to the Christians. The fifth act is the eschaton – the end. Wells makes a great statement that, “This is a frightening thing for those who have built up power and resources, but for those who have nothing to lose it is an unbounded joy” (55). I would definitely have to agree here. My brother talked about this very subject in a revival service sermon just yesterday. It is up to us as Christians to decide how the fifth act will play out, and it is amazing to think that we are in the midst of it as we speak.
Wells brings back the ideas of epic and lyrical thinking to illustrate how mistakes can be made within the play. One can see it all as a one-act play and one can think oneself to be in the wrong act. He also mentions various other specific mistakes, but I could not help but keep thinking about the fact that we are in Act V. He mentions that this has stemmed from baptism. It puts us in God’s story.