Читать книгу The Logic of Intersubjectivity - Darren M. Slade - Страница 10

2.0 Introduction

Discussing the novelist Michael Crichton, Brian McLaren remarks, “Crichton’s books incarnate the spirit of the day. And instead of offering a view from the outside, they serve to put readers into the postmodern world so we can see the rest of the world, including the modern world, from its perspective” (COOS1 §12a, 161). The same is true for McLaren, who attempts to “incarnate the spirit” of his own socio-historical context. Born in 1956, McLaren attended a Plymouth Brethren church during the 1950s and 1960s before having “a powerful conversion” experience through the Jesus Movement of the 1970s.94 His faith journey began in dispensationalism as a boy, then Calvinism as an adolescent, only to transfer again into “charismaticism” as a young adult, and finally settling within mainstream evangelicalism as a pastor (NKOC §Intro, xx, xxiv). Eventually, however, McLaren concluded that none of these approaches provided the vigorous spirituality that he craved (FOWA §1, 4; SMJ §, xiii‒xv, 5‒6). The thesis of this chapter is that McLaren’s natural temperament and personal history have combined together to create a public theologian whose personal, educational, vocational, and spiritual experiences are the basis for his philosophy of religion.95 Three sections will support this thesis: 1) the effects of experiential knowledge on religious belief; 2) McLaren’s religious journey away from fundamentalism; and 3) his resultant spiritual disposition. It is first necessary to discuss how life experiences shape a person’s religious sensibilities.

2.1 Experiential Knowledge and Belief Formation

According to the behavioral sciences, human information-processing typically involves two trajectories (a “dual-systems” approach). The first system is intuitive (nonreflective), which displays an involuntary emotional response to stimuli, while the second is reflective, which is slower and more deliberate. Oftentimes, intuition is the default system that informs cognitive-based reflective reasoning; and unless there are sufficient reasons to dismiss it, information-processing will largely depend upon a person’s emotions.96 Consequently, experiential knowledge will almost always receive priority over indirect, propositional knowledge, meaning people are unlikely to believe something contrary to their personal experiences. Labeled the “affect-as-information model,” people rely on emotion and, thus, rarely change their established beliefs despite the potential wrong-headedness of their convictions.97 This means that experiential-affective knowledge is essential to the formation and strengthening of religious beliefs.98

Significantly, McLaren describes his estrangement from Christian fundamentalism as the result of “cognitive dissonance,” a theory originating in 1957 by Leon Festinger. “I was in a sense losing the faith that my parents and church had tried to give me. But this was necessary, because I had to find a faith with my own name on it, not just theirs. I guess psychologists would call this cognitive dissonance—that I had two conflicting value systems at work in my mind” (FFR §9, 181). According to cognitive dissonance theory, information that is inconsistent or contradictory to people’s religious beliefs will propel them to alleviate the resultant negative emotional state (“dissonance”).99 People often engage in a deliberate suppression of the conflicting data, which can then manifest in the form of irrationally rejecting counterevidence, restricting interactions only to those who have the same beliefs, attempting apologetic defenses of the religion’s validity, and ad hoc rationalizing to explain away the discordant information.100

Once these reactions reach a sufficient level of discomfort, however, people frequently abandon their original beliefs. Although cognitive dissonance can produce maladaptive behavior, forcing some to avoid important data altogether, others simply change their beliefs in various ways. For McLaren, his cognitive dissonance culminated in retaining an affection for Jesus, who he insists is still the answer to life’s great problems (SMJ §1, 5), while also abandoning Christian fundamentalism. As he explains, this separation was the only way for him to maintain faith in Christ (cf. EMC §5, 35; JMBM §2, 13‒24; §23, 211n8).101 With cognitive dissonance in mind, readers are able to appreciate the psychological consequences of McLaren’s life experiences.

2.2 McLaren’s Religious Odyssey

As the Rector of an Episcopalian church once told McLaren, “Scratch the paint off a liberal . . . and you’ll find an alienated fundamentalist underneath.” It is in this sense that McLaren admits to being on a similar spiritual quest as theological liberals (GO §1, 59), using his writings as a medium for confessing his spiritual struggles (JMBM §2, 13‒24; NKOCY §Preface, xii). In fact, there exist several elements from McLaren’s chronosystem (i.e., historical context) to suggest that his experiential knowledge is the strongest determiner of his philosophy of religion.102 Hence, readers should not attempt separating the man from his literature, especially for someone who has placed so much of himself into his own writings.103 “I am a Christian, and all I write flows from my experience in that rich tradition” (NS §Preface, vii). Ultimately, for McLaren, following Jesus is, at its core, an existential journey rather than an academic chore (cf. GI, x):

I don’t just aspire to believe in God or think correctly about God. I want to love God and worship God and serve and experience God. If my view of God changes, well, that changes everything for me. This [spiritual] quest stirs up all kinds of psychological issues for me too, because my theology and my biography are deeply integrated in my ‘be-ology’—my sense of who I am and what I want to be as a human being. (NKOCY §Book Two, 159‒60)

Not surprisingly, then, McLaren’s “be-ology” began with his fundamentalist upbringing.

2.2.1 Formative Personal Experiences

McLaren attended a highly conservative church that he admits had sincere followers of Christ, but his childhood experiences with the Plymouth Brethren exemplified some of the worst parts of Christian fundamentalism, particularly its widespread anti-intellectualism (GO §12, 187; GSM, x). For example, people often told McLaren that evolution was a lie and that God created the earth in six literal days (cf. GI, 147‒67).104 They also told him that only those within his denomination were saved, everyone else was going to hell, the world’s end was imminent, and academics are conspiring against Christianity, thereby making the study of science and philosophy immoral.105

There were socio-political tensions, as well. McLaren remembers at the age of eight, during the Civil Rights Movement, when his Sunday School teacher warned the class that marrying someone of a different race would be an affront to God (GSM, 85‒86). There was also a deep prejudice against “liberals,” where the term became a pejorative to foster hatred for other Christians (GO §1, 59; §8, 131). Likewise, his church wholeheartedly supported the Vietnam War, “which made no sense to me—even if communism was as bad as everyone said, were people better off bombed and napalmed to death?” (GO §1, 44). Soon, McLaren developed a suspicion of the “pro-war, anti-hippie churchy role models” (NS §1, 7), who seemed to oppose any and all social reform. From these personal experiences, McLaren started having real doubts about the sustainability and legitimacy of fundamentalist Christianity (cf. WMRBW, 94).106

McLaren reports that he had his first “faith crisis” at the age of twelve when he was told to choose between God and science (FFS §Intro, 17), making his passion for science increasingly incompatible with fundamentalism (COOS1 §6, 75‒76).107 He eventually rebelled by growing long hair and joining a rock band (FFR §9, 180‒81), despite having learned that “rock ‘n’ roll was really of the devil” (GO §1, 44). “By my teenage years, it was clear that I simply didn’t fit in the rigid Brethren box. My love for philosophy, evolution, and rock and roll were three spiritual strikes that counted me out” (GSM, x). By his twenties, McLaren befriended non-fundamentalist believers, including mainline Protestants and Catholics (NKOCY §Preface, xii), which were two groups that the Brethren considered enemies of true Christianity (cf. COOS1 §4, 53‒54; GO §8, 131). He eventually joined an Episcopalian church where the conservative Rector exposed him to theological liberalism, which helped him to value Christ’s love, justice, and sense of compassion. Then, his later encounters with Pentecostalism helped him to retain belief in Jesus’ active presence in the world (GO §1, 51; §1, 59‒60; §12, 186‒88).108 However, while McLaren remained attracted to Christ (SMJ §1, 5), he also knew he needed a more unrestrained spirituality.109

2.2.1.1 The Pursuit of a Liberating Spirituality

It is apparent that McLaren’s early writings are a response to his negative experiences with fundamentalism. “My own upbringing was way out on the end of one of the most conservative twigs of one of the most conservative branches of one of the most conservative limbs of Christianity, and I am far harder on conservative Protestant Christians who share that heritage than I am on anyone else” (GO §0, 35). While admitting he overgeneralizes, McLaren’s experience fits the growing cultural perception of conservative Christians as being pompous, egotistical, and intolerant of diversity (FFR §8, 166).110 Thus, he ended up wanting a liberating type of faith that beckons and unfetters people to join ever-expanding possibilities, not confine and limit them to old patterns.111 Not surprisingly, then, McLaren’s work resonates predominantly with those who have had similar experiences, and it explains why McLaren felt he gained a sense of spiritual freedom when joining the Jesus Movement (GSM, x). Here, McLaren’s faith in Jesus was revitalized as he became engrossed in the movement’s emphasis on “simplicity, a childlikeness, a naïveté, and a corresponding purity of motive that I have seldom seen since” (GO §1, 45).112 McLaren would later model a high school youth group, “the Fellowship,” after these experiences with the Movement by welcoming ostracized students into the club (cf. MRTYR §16, 121‒23).113 Eventually, however, McLaren felt the Jesus Movement had been “co-opted” by the Religious Right and “the religious marketing machine,” forcing him to doubt his faith once again (GO §1, 45). It was at this point that McLaren developed a lifelong cynicism for conventional paradigms (JMBM §2, 13n1), which would subsequently manifest in his educational, vocational, and spiritual growth toward a new paradigm.

2.2.2 Formative Educational Experiences

McLaren describes his higher education as one of “liberation” from spiritual myopia, which helped him to question the status quo of conventional religion (JMBM §9, 74). He obtained a Master of Arts in English literature from the University of Maryland where he was particularly fond of Romantic poets, medieval dramas, and philosophical writings (FOWA §Author, 215; NKOC §Author, 251). It is significant to note how he describes the Romantic poets, commenting, “They are of special interest to people doing postmodern ministry because romanticism was a recurring protest movement in the modern era representing a dissatisfaction with modern rationalism. In some ways romanticism anticipated postmodernism” (AIFA, 39).

What had influenced McLaren the most in college, however, was his graduate studies in deconstructionism and literary criticism, which he admits conditioned him to view religion differently (COOS1 §12b, 187).114 These studies made conventional paradigms feel inadequate and outdated, appealing only to society’s most unsophisticated religionists. Luckily, McLaren recounts, he had patient friends who expressed empathy toward his latest spiritual doubts (cf. AMP §16, 245), though he would continue to struggle with religion for most of graduate school (COOS1 §12b, 187‒88; FFS §3, 89‒92).115 During this time, it was two literary figures in particular who would ultimately have a major impact on McLaren’s philosophy of religion.

2.2.2.1 The Study of Walker Percy and Søren Kierkegaard

Remarkably, McLaren never intended to be a pastor, believing he could better serve God apart from the “religious bureaucracy and politics” of ministry; yet, his master’s thesis on the Catholic novelist and existentialist philosopher, Walker Percy (1916‒1990), who wrote substantially on semiotics and modernization, made pursuing a vibrant faith plausible for McLaren again (FFS §3, 92). Describing it as the “highlight of my higher education,” his Percyean research also introduced him to the existentialism of Søren Kierkegaard (1813‒1855), who was a major influence on Percy’s philosophy of religion (COOS1 §7, 91). For McLaren, Percy’s writings reflected the same anguish he had experienced with conventional Christianity.116

In terms of scholastic inspiration, McLaren is indebted to Walter Brueggemann, N. T. Wright, Francis Schaeffer, C. S. Lewis, Dallas Willard, John Caputo, Stanley Grenz, John Franke, Leonard Sweet, René Girard, and (most influential) Leslie Newbigin.117 Nonetheless, in terms of a religio-philosophy, both Percy and Kierkegaard are the most instrumental (and least recognized) of McLaren’s mentors. In fact, many are unaware of the philosophical parallels between McLaren and the existentialism of these two authors (§8.2.2). “My research led me to study Søren Kierkegaard in some detail, and his work also left a lasting mark.”118 In A New Kind of Christian, McLaren laments the absence of a Christian innovator: “Is there no Saint Francis or Søren Kierkegaard or C. S. Lewis in the house with some fresh ideas and energy?” (NKOC §Intro, xviii). In More Ready Than You Realize, he praises a Kierkegaard publication as one of the most influential, captivating, and inspiring books on evangelism he has ever read (MRTYR §1, 27‒28). McLaren even imitates Kierkegaard’s “indirect communication” so as stimulate critical thought (PTP, 125). He also quotes Kierkegaard extensively to argue that an overly analytical faith is a hindrance to authentic worship (SMJ §, 215‒16).119 It is no surprise, then, that McLaren is reminded of Kierkegaard in relation to social justice issues, “I’m reminded that Soren Kierkegaard said, ‘The essence of all true preaching is malice,’ by which he meant that unless the preacher is mad about something, he has no passion.”120 From here, it becomes evident just how Percy and Kierkegaard prepared McLaren for his later nonconventional ministry.

2.2.3 Formative Vocational-Ministerial Experiences

After graduate school, McLaren taught college English from 1978 to 1986. After marrying a Catholic woman, McLaren and his wife co-founded Cedar Ridge Community Church in Spencerville, Maryland, which began as a small fellowship in their home and quickly became a pronounced congregation in the community. McLaren became its full-time pastor in 1986 and remained there for over twenty years until 2006 when he resigned to become a full-time author and activist.121 As a pastor, McLaren felt his basic job description was to disseminate correct doctrines to the congregants, even though he started to question the validity of some of those doctrines (GSM, 23). However, McLaren’s church consisted predominantly of new believers who were transparent about their own doubts and routinely asked tough questions. McLaren ultimately realized that he shared just as many, if not more, of the same reservations as his own church.122 “What does a pastor do when he questions the stock answers he’s supposed to be convincing others of?” (NKOC §2, 17). Commenting that he entered ministry “with mountains of idealism,” McLaren quickly learned that hard work, sincerity, and prayer were not enough to be a successful pastor in the postmodern era; he had to find an alternative method.123

Then, a significant change occurred in San Antonio, Texas, around the turn of the century when McLaren, in a moment of divine clarity, believed he had finally comprehended the true nature of Christianity: faith is meant to be an intersubjective relationship with God and an existential appropriation of Jesus’ kingdom teachings (§8.2). At this point, McLaren experienced a dramatic change away from the mentality that “faith” equated to the dogmas of a particular belief system. Though scared to admit his changing convictions, the seemingly divine character behind this insight made McLaren confident that God was directing these changes (GSM, 22‒25; cf. NKOC §7, 84‒85). “My theology sincerely attempted to be biblical, but it had become so enmeshed with modernity, American consumerism, modern western rationalism, and a host of other things, that it somehow was out of synch with Jesus Christ. Through Newbigin’s writings, I realized I was a Christian who needed to be reached for Christ.”124 Over time, McLaren’s church reflected his newfound convictions, explaining, “We aren’t creating a ‘you’re in, you’re out’ mentality at our church. Our message is: The Kingdom of God is available to everybody, and now the ball is in your court.”125 He sought to create an environment that allowed for “adult integrity, clear intelligence, and open-eyed honesty,” hoping for an inspirational spirituality that would foster a more meaningful faith (FFS §Intro, 23, 25). Becoming increasingly open about his new insights, McLaren soon began his writing career as a public theologian and iconoclast.

2.2.3.1 The Public Theology of Iconoclasm

One major irony is the fact that McLaren does not view himself as a religious authority but, rather, a public theologian (WMRBW, 282), meaning he seeks to overcome the privatization and compartmentalization of religious faith so as to reintroduce and, therefore, legitimize Christianity as a means for bettering the world (§3.4.1).126 His goal is to transform Christianity from “a religion organized for self-preservation and privilege to a religion organizing for the common good of all” (GSM, 153; italics in original). Despite being proficient in church history, philosophy, theology, psychology, and ministry (BMF, 291‒303), McLaren humorously regards himself as “an amateur pastor and a hack theologian” (COOS1 §5, 71):127

I myself will be considered by many to be completely unqualified to write such a book of theology, being neither a trained theologian nor even a legitimate pastor if legitimacy is defined by ordination qualifications in a bona fide denomination. Rather I am only a lowly English major who snuck into pastoral ministry accidentally through the back doors of the English department and church planting. . . .In other words, I am a confessed amateur. . . .[who lacks] “proper credentials.” (GO §0, 34; §6, 115)128

What McLaren’s critics often misunderstand is that he deliberately tempers his credentials in order to assume the posture of a fellow seeker.129 As he explains, “I remember getting a feeling . . . that something I was doing was counterproductive to really getting through to the more postmodern people who were coming through our doors” (PTP, 117). Emphasizing humility is not only concomitant with his overall approach to religion (§5.1), but it highlights McLaren’s desire to enculturate Christianity for contemporary audiences (§4.4.2). Thus, McLaren’s self-deprecating specifically appeals to a new generation of disillusioned and disenfranchised seekers, who no longer esteem analytic-style learning or magisterial authorities (§4.4).130

Interestingly, this self-deprecation partly derives from McLaren’s distinction between “Nobodies” and “Somebodies.” The latter seek to conserve the status quo for their own benefit, but it is the marginalized “Nobodies” who create everlasting change (NKOC §16, 214‒15). McLaren, therefore, shrewdly remarks that he is not an ecclesial authority and does not ever want to be one (AMP §11, 180).131 “I work as a pastor and write books on theological topics, yet have no formal training in theology” (GO §9, 156). Accordingly, McLaren labels himself “a practitioner, not an academic” (COOS1 §Preface, 8) and a fellow pursuer of truth (cf. FFR §Intro, 19; FFS §Intro, 24; NKOC §7, 80‒81). These statements allow McLaren to distance himself from “the religious establishment” in order to appeal to the nonreligious.132 Hence, McLaren does not really feel it is beneficial to possess religious credentials (NKOCY §6, 55), especially when spiritual experiences can be much more instructive to Christian faith.

2.2.4 Formative Spiritual Experiences

By the age of sixteen, at the height of puberty, McLaren started having strong spiritual experiences, making him choose a lifelong pursuit for Christian vitality in the process. His encounters with other teenagers also had a major impact on his development. Seeing the dramatic change that Jesus had on the lives of others subdued McLaren’s instinct to escape his already “hyperreligious life” (NS §1, 6‒7). Nevertheless, one experience in particular stands out as the pivotal moment that would end up guiding McLaren’s religiosity for the rest of his life.133

One day at a youth retreat, McLaren prayed, “Before I die, please allow me to see the most beautiful sights in the world, and hear the most beautiful sounds in the world, and feel the most beautiful experiences in the world” (cf. §5.3.2). That night, while observing the majesty of the night sky, McLaren had an unforgettable, life-transforming experience of pure joy. He could feel the Creator of the universe watching him, causing an indescribable and uncontainable feeling of love that let him know God was paying attention. He began to laugh and then to cry until his stomach ached. Soon afterwards, McLaren heard other boys and girls on the retreat saying how much they loved each other. It was then that he realized God answered his prayer:

I had seen the most beautiful thing on earth—the glory of God shining through creation . . . And I had heard the most beautiful thing in life—human beings telling other human beings that they love one another. And I had felt the most beautiful feeling in life—to be loved, really loved, by a God who knows me—my secrets, my faults, my doubts, my wrongs, my shame, along with my strengths and dreams and hopes and gifts—simply to be known and loved.

The fact remains that it is twenty-five years later, and I am still on that same path, learning to open my heart in new ways, savoring the same beauty, desiring that same spirit (or Spirit) of joy and love to fill me. (FFR §9, 186‒87)

The experience later deepened that night through a vision he had while praying of a pair of feet wearing sandals. McLaren felt himself transform into the water droplets of a woman weeping at Jesus’ feet (cf. Luke 7:37–38). It was at this moment that McLaren dedicated his life to Christ. “From that night on, I was a wholehearted lover of the Creator, a person thirsty for the Holy Spirit, and a devoted follower of Jesus. That was my triune baptism into spirituality. . . .So everything I write about spirituality today has been tested in the crucible of my own experience during the nearly forty years since that night” (NS §1, 10; cf. MRTYR §14, 103‒4). Indeed, his starry night experience continues to influence how he interprets Scripture and how he understands the person of God today (GI, 185).

McLaren does point out that this pivotal spiritual experience occurred at a Southern Baptist retreat in a context that would eventually form the Religious Right. Afterwards, his continued exposure to conservative Christianity gradually soured as arguments about ancillary issues overshadowed his encounters with the divine (NS §1, 10‒11). The ensuing tribalism (§3.2.2) was enough for McLaren to realize that conservativism was not spiritually appropriate for him (GO §1, 50‒51), as expected from psychological studies on numinous experiences.

2.2.4.1 The Psychology of Spiritual Experiences

For many conversion experiences, the concept of an ideal religious fit is paramount to a person’s overall decision to subscribe to a particular ideology. “What makes any voluntary conversion process possible is a complex confluence of the ‘right’ potential convert coming into contact, under proper circumstances at the proper time, with the ‘right’ advocate and religious option.”134 In McLaren’s case, he notes that his pacifistic temperament (GO §1, 61; §12, 183) would eventually mean Christian tribalism could not work for him (MRTYR §5, 57‒58). His developing philosophy would make characteristics such as “alive, genuine, purposeful, free, [and] kind” (FFR §9, 183) the leading distinctives of his newfound spirituality, indicating that an ideal religious fit would be one that aligns with what he learned from his spiritual experiences.135

Significantly, during adolescence, the reward center of teenage brains intensifies the neurotransmitters that respond to events, making a positive experience more memorable and intense.136 A consequence of strong emotional occurrences is the attentional funneling that narrows people’s focus onto “goal-relevant” information, meaning McLaren’s desire for a vibrant spirituality actually heightened his emotional connection to these experiences. Here, his salient emotions now become empirical evidence in confirming his burgeoning religious beliefs by attributing his emotional high directly to his starry night prayer (the “feelings-as-evidence hypothesis”).137 Deriving in part from the strong emotions associated with his conversion, McLaren now approaches faith with an emphasis on beauty (§5.3.2), creation (§4.3.2), and love (§6.2.4). The psychological implications mean that McLaren’s philosophy of religion derives from the experiential knowledge he obtained through mystical experiences (§6.2.2.3), ensuring that these factors would become the foundation of his overall spiritual temperament (cf. §8.5.1).

2.3 McLaren’s Resulting Temperament

The consequence was that McLaren’s formative experiences developed into a more compassionate disposition. As is typical of college-age adults, McLaren appears to have developed an “individual-reflective” spirituality where he detached himself from the customs and mores of his upbringing in order to question the validity of his beliefs. Though this stage is intellectual, it is also existential in the sense that McLaren needed to develop a spirituality that was his own (FFR §9, 181). Here, McLaren quickly realized that his natural disposition was not that of a fundamentalist. “This kind of environment was impossible for a boy of my reflective temperament—there wasn’t room there for a person like me” (FFS §3, 87).138 Once, when asked how he developed a gentler temperament that is now more concerned with showing compassion, McLaren reflected on a number of experiences, both in adolescence and in ministry, which make him “cringe” at how many people he has hurt. He reflected on one incident in particular when one of McLaren’s best friends “came out” as gay his senior year of high school. McLaren eventually perceived a mismatch between the homophobic rhetoric preached in fundamentalism and his own relationship with homosexuals (cf. NKOCY §17, 177). There were enough of these discordant experiences to make him realize that conservatism clashed with the kind of Christianity he wanted, namely a faith that cared more about people than dogmas.139

Most notably for the study of McLaren’s religio-philosophy is his resultant Hegelian-dialectical temperament toward faith. Having had a short but penetrating period of doubt (SMJ §1, 5), McLaren’s early tension between his environment and his emerging self-identity resulted in a thought process that first manifests as a dichotomist mode of thinking (“Stage 1 dichotomy,” FFS §3, 88; cf. “dualist faith,” NS §3, 30). Here, McLaren initially believes there can be only two choices for a particular theological impasse (both choices of which McLaren loathes). Eventually, however, he realizes that the predicament is, in fact, a false dilemma, which propels him to find a third alternative (cf. AIFA, 286‒87). In this way, McLaren’s Hegelian thought process tries to learn the best parts of each option within Christian tradition so as to create a synthesis that also eliminates each of their shortcomings (§8.4.1.2).140

McLaren’s religious journey exemplifies this dichotomist pattern. He initially felt he had to decide either to deny his doubts and return to the Plymouth Brethren or embrace his doubts and deny his Christian faith. Eventually, a third option manifested when he encountered other believers who portrayed their religion as “an adventure they were on with God . . . an adventure with joy and reality and purpose” (FFR §9, 182‒83; ellipses in original). From these experiences, McLaren learned the necessity of creating communities focused on expressing love (GSM, 56). In essence, McLaren’s exposure to fundamentalist believers provided a type of pro-social “deviancy training,” whereby he learned how to dissent against the social norms of fundamentalism and to reorient himself toward the common good.141

What had captivated McLaren in his teenage years was the good news of Jesus Christ (GO §1, 48). His resultant temperament made him realize that the problem he experienced among fundamentalists was not because of Christianity or the Bible. The problem was what some fundamentalists had done with their religion (AMP §16, 245). By the end of high school, McLaren had read the philosophical and theological works of multiple intellectual Christians (e.g., C. S. Lewis and Francis Schaeffer), who helped him to realize that it was possible to be a reflective thinker and still remain a believer.142 This exposure, coupled with several more powerful spiritual experiences, made it possible for McLaren to gain a better sense of a well-balanced approach to Christianity (FFS §3, 88‒89). Still, even with a newfound appreciation for critical thinking, there was one final temperamental result that proves essential to understanding McLaren’s philosophy of religion: his artistic personality.

2.3.1 An Artistic Disposition

As a child, McLaren developed a passionate love for nature and always felt he could experience God’s presence through creation (GSM, xii‒xiii; cf. GO §11, 177‒78). For him, the artistic beauty of nature made doubting God’s existence an absurdity. Not surprisingly, then, McLaren produced poetry about finding God in creation, commenting that he wrote song lyrics well before writing prose (FFR §7, 145‒49). To this day, McLaren maintains a penchant for creativity, including an interest in art, songwriting, and music (NKOC §Author, 53).143 Even in high school, McLaren was infatuated with the art of literature and decided he wanted to become an English teacher (NKOCY §1, 3). Hence, McLaren’s starry night prayer to God emphasized a desire to see and experience beauty. “Obviously, ‘beautiful’ was an important word to this adolescent fledgling musician/hippie/spiritual seeker” (FFR §9, 184).

Readers and critics must not underemphasize McLaren’s artistic propensity. Much of what he declares throughout his line of reasoning and religio-philosophy all contain elements of an “artistic disposition,” defined here as a preference for unstructured and dynamic practices that accentuate self-expression, especially through artistic media. “What kept me on the religious path was not the fundamentalist God. . . .It was the holy and utterly loving presence I felt one night under a starry sky. . . .It was the creative spirit I felt when I composed music or poetry or opened myself to authentic art” (GI, 185). Thus, McLaren likely scores high on a psychological “openness” scale, meaning he is creative, inquisitive, imaginative, innovative, and open to new experiences. What is suggestive is that these artistic values developed early in life and are now what constitute his code of behavior as an adult. The experiential knowledge obtained during McLaren’s psychological development transformed into a heightened sense of “passion for ideas and ideals, passion for beauty, passion to create music and art.”144

2.4 Conclusion

What McLaren’s biography reveals is that he has developed an iconoclastic approach to religion with a propensity for challenging the status quo of his particular strain of Christian tradition. Not only do the events in McLaren’s life explain the shaping of his personality and temperament, but his life experiences also explain the more idiosyncratic elements of his religiosity that would, otherwise, seem eccentric to conventional theologians. They reveal why McLaren cherishes interreligious dialogue (§5.3.1), an allegiance to Christ but not to any Christian denomination (§6.1), a rejection of ontotheology (§8.1), a love for the marginalized “other” (§8.4), and an emphasis on the intersubjective and existential aspects of religious faith (§8.2). Nonetheless, it is important to remember that McLaren’s perception of conservative Christians is a result of his personal upbringing. While it may not be everyone’s experience, his writings do reflect an honest appraisal of his many encounters with fundamentalists. Consequently, since no person is detachable from their experiential knowledge, McLaren’s biography explains why he would seek out an alternative Christian paradigm. In other words, McLaren naturally sought out an approach to faith that would cognitively, affectively, and socially align best with his experiential knowledge.145 In this way, McLaren’s sense of compassion and dialectical temperament forecasts his subsequent moral disillusionment with the Religious Right and their adoption of neoconservatism.

94. McLaren, “Everything Old Is New Again,” 23.

95. While a brief biography is standard in other studies, they seldom make an overt connection between McLaren’s life experiences and his theological inferences. Thus, the purpose of this chapter is to present only those biographical details that directly contributed to McLaren’s religio-philosophy (cf. Christy, “Neoorthopraxy and Brian D. McLaren,” 3‒10 and Blackwell, “Return or Rereading,” 15‒19). For a detailed and comprehensive biographical sketch of McLaren and his career, see Burson, Brian McLaren in Focus, 10‒12, 31‒66.

96. See Sperber, “Intuitive and Reflective Beliefs,” 67‒83; Kahneman, “A Perspective on Judgment and Choice,” 697‒720; and Stanovich and West, “Individual Differences in Reasoning,” 645‒65.

97. Schwarz and Clore, “Mood, Misattribution, and Judgments of Well-Being,” 513‒23; “How Do I Feel About It?,” 44‒62; Clore and Gasper, “Feeling is Believing,” 24‒25.

98. Frijda et al., “The Influence of Emotions on Beliefs,” 1‒9.

99. Festinger, A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Cf. Festinger et al., “When Prophecy Fails,” 258‒69.

100. See esp., Eller, “Agnomancy,” 150‒80 and McLaren, Why Don’t They Get It? In one study, for example, it was revealed that those who accept the divinity of Christ, when presented with disconfirming information, paradoxically intensified their conviction in Jesus’ divinity once they also accepted the truthfulness of the dissonant information (Batson, “Rational Processing or Rationalization?,” 176‒84). See also the numerous studies cited in Harmon-Jones, “A Cognitive Dissonance Theory,” 192.

101. Cf. Aronson, The Social Animal, 185 and Harmon-Jones, “A Cognitive Dissonance Theory,” 185‒211.

102. McLaren comments, “Show me a person who has rejected faith, and nine times in ten I will show you a person or group nearby who turned him or her sour with their example of bad faith.” He also remarks in the same book, “The search for a faith that makes sense has been the most challenging and life-changing quest of my life” (FFS §Intro, 18; §1, 46). As Roger Olson explains, theologies do not develop spontaneously. All arise from the experiential challenges to the church as perceived and felt by particular theologians (Olson, The Story of Christian Theology, 15).

103. See for example, Garff, Søren Kierkegaard, xvii‒xxi.

104. Accordingly, as McLaren developed an interest in science, he grew weary of hearing anti-evolution rhetoric (NS §1, 7). He recounts, “When I was 13 my Sunday school teacher said: ‘You can either believe in God or evolution’, and I remember thinking: ‘Evolution makes a lot of sense to me’” (McLaren, “Changing Faith, Staying Faithful,” 14). Elsewhere, he comments that evolution “seemed elegant, patient, logical, and actually quite wonderful to me, more wonderful even than a literal six-day creation blitz” (GO §1, 44).

105. McLaren describes this period as “a full-dose, hard-core” style of fundamentalism that compelled its congregants to attend numerous church services, revivals, prayer meetings, youth programs, Bible studies, and devotionals. For more details on his personal life journey, see Brian D. McLaren, “How I Got Here,” Progressing Spirit (blog), April 11, 2019, https://progressingspirit.com/2019/04/11/how-i-got-here/; AMP §16, 245; FFR §9, 180‒81; FFS §3, 87; MRTYR §Intro, 11; and NS §1, 5‒6. Elsewhere, however, McLaren labels the Plymouth Brethren as only “mildly fundamentalist” (FOWA §6, 56).

106. McLaren explains, “To a teenager in the early 1970s, church culture seemed like a throwback to the 1950s—or the 1850s, or the 1750s, take your pick” (NS §1, 7). Developmentally, it is common for teenagers to question the religious beliefs of their chronosystem, especially as their cognition expands to include more analytical discernments. See King and Roeser, “Religion and Spirituality in Adolescent Development,” 435‒78.

107. Cf. Jones and Gerard, Foundations of Social Psychology, 191.

108. See also, McLaren, foreword to Generous Orthodoxies, xiv.

109. Like McLaren, few adolescents actually reject the religion of their childhood, particularly if they have a good relationship with their parents. See Kim-Spoon et al., “Parent-Adolescent Relationship,” 1576‒87.

110. See the multiple polling data in Kinnaman and Lyons, Unchristian, 26‒30 and Wright, Christians Are Hate-Filled Hypocrites, 14‒15, 186‒90, 200‒202.

111. McLaren, preface to Blue Ocean Faith, xiv.

112. McLaren states, “I became a committed Christian during the Jesus Movement in the early seventies, a context in which being a Christian felt more like following a leader than accepting a code or creed” (COOS1 §13, 207). He describes the experience elsewhere, “It was a movement known for being hip, not ancient; contemporary, not contemplative; and oriented around evangelistic practicalities, not spiritual practices” (McLaren, “Everything Old Is New Again,” 23). For a history of the Jesus Movement, see Hubery, “Jesus Movement,” 212‒14 and Lyra, “Rise and Development of the Jesus Movement,” 40‒61.

113. Cf. McLaren, foreword to A New Kind of Youth Ministry, 6‒8.

114. For McLaren, his exposure to deconstructionism was not an accident. Instead, much like the prophet Moses, whose Egyptian education prepared him for revolution, McLaren believes God had directed his graduate studies in order to prepare him for ministry during Christianity’s epochal shift (COOS1 §12b, 187‒88).

115. Developmentally, young adults will often attend religious services less but, paradoxically, also develop more religious convictions throughout college. See Barry et al., “The Role of Mothers,” 66‒78.

116. Streett, “An Interview with Brian McLaren,” 6. McLaren comments that Percy’s essays in The Message in the Bottle (1954) were especially influential to his theology (McLaren, “What I’m Reading,” 21). Here, Percy helped McLaren dialogue to himself about sensitive and problematic issues of faith while recognizing the limitations of people’s culturally embedded perspectives (FFS §3, 92‒94; GO §1, 52‒53).

117. See McLaren, “Becoming Convergent”; “Ruining Your Ministry for Good,” 56; foreword to What Would Jesus Deconstruct?, 9‒12; foreword to Renewing the Center, 7‒14; foreword to Manifold Witness, xi‒xiii; forward to Life at the End of Us Versus Them, xxi; “What I’m Reading,” 21; and Streett, “An Interview with Brian McLaren,” 6‒7. For an exploration of Leslie Newbigin’s influence, see Stewart, “The Influence of Newbigin’s Missiology,” 86‒111 and McLaren, “Brian’s Annotation.” For Walter Brueggemann, see McLaren, “Brian McLaren on Walter Brueggemann.”

118. Streett, “An Interview with Brian McLaren,” 6. In fact, McLaren even credits Kierkegaard for his postmodern ethos (Christy, “Neoorthopraxy and Brian D. McLaren,” 97‒99).

119. This Percyean-Kierkegaardian influence is more evident as McLaren mimics both of their writing styles, tactics, and religio-ethical conclusions. In fact, the three iconoclasts often have similar syntax and vocabulary. McLaren especially imitates Kierkegaard’s use of irony, humor, satire, hyperbole, and pseudonymous story-telling (cf. §5.4.1). As Carl Raschke remarks, “Postmodern thinkers have adopted Kierkegaard as their prime mentor” (Raschke, The Next Reformation, 163). Kyle Roberts also comments, “In many ways, the concerns that give rise to emergent Christianity parallel Kierkegaard’s critique of Christendom in his own context” (Roberts, Emerging Prophet, 6). For more on Kierkegaard’s influence on postmodern thought, see Best and Kellner, The Postmodern Turn, 38‒78.

120. Enns, “My Interview with Brian McLaren.”

121. FFS §Intro, 20; GSM, 50; NKOC §Author, 251; NKOCY §Preface, xii.

122. AMP §16, 243; EMC §1, 3; §32, 275; FFR §Intro, 18; LWWAT §1, 6; NKOC §Intro, xix. McLaren describes pastoring to a congregation of doubters: “The very formulations that sound so good and familiar to the ‘saved’ sound downright weird or even wicked to the ‘seekers’ and the skeptics. These people come to me and ask questions, and I give my best answers, my best defenses, and by the time they leave my office, I have convinced myself that their questions are better than my answers” (NKOC §Intro, xix). Though he found a faith that sustains him, McLaren admits to wanting to give up several times because of doubts and other troubles (FFS §Intro, 17‒18). See also, McLaren, “Emerging Values,” 34‒39.

123. McLaren, “5 Books for Ministry,” 32; “Everything Old Is New Again,” 23‒24. McLaren once described his church as “a cross between Willow Creek, Vineyard, and an Episcopal service” (PTP, 128). See also, McLaren, “Fire Without Brimstone.”

124. McLaren, “Ruining Your Ministry for Good,” 56.

125. McLaren, “Brian McLaren on Outreach,” 122. To read a detailed explanation of how McLaren’s vocational ministry changed, in which areas, and why, see McLaren, “Ruining Your Ministry for Good,” 49‒63.

126. See McLaren’s book, Everything Must Change, for an expansive portrayal of his public theology. Cf. Marty, “Reinhold Niebuhr,” 332‒59; Cady, “A Model for a Public Theology,” 193‒212; and Rasmussen, “Reinhold Niebuhr,” 198‒210.

127. Cf. FOWA §Author, 215; GSM, x; NKOC §1, 9; §Author, 25; NKOCY §Preface, xii. See also, McKnight, “McLaren Emerging,” 58‒66.

128. This minimizing of his competency is especially noteworthy considering McLaren has received two honorary doctorates of divinity: one from Carey Theological Seminary in 2004 and one from Virginia Theological Seminary in 2010 (FFS §Intro, 20; NKOC §Author, 251). McLaren does hint elsewhere, however, that he is well-read on current scholarship but seldom cites other scholars to support his religious claims simply because it is provocative not to do so (GO §0, 34). Interestingly, Kierkegaard also strategically downplayed his ability to develop sophisticated theological systematizations (Come, Kierkegaard as Theologian, 3‒4).

129. Cf. FFR §Intro, 19; FFS §Intro, 24; WP, 30‒31, 41‒42.

130. Thomas Howe remarks, “McLaren’s discussions give evidence of his never having been very well versed in Christian doctrine,” (Howe, “A Review of A Generous Orthodoxy,” 83). Unfortunately, Howe’s review fails to recognize that McLaren purposefully downplays doctrine in order to highlight the existential need for imitation and action (§8.2).

131. He writes, “I’m not an economist, politician, or certified expert on anything really” (EMC §1, 2), nor “a professional philosopher” (McLaren, foreword to What Would Jesus Deconstruct?, 9).

132. McLaren explains that unlike modernity, which dissents with ecclesiastical authorities, postmodernity dissents with the hierarchical bureaucracies of corporate and political power. Authority is increasingly residing among the amateur, self-taught masses while the professional elite no longer have the same social dominance as before (cf. AIFA, 177‒78). McLaren labels this authority reversal as a “devolution revolution,” where relationships, dialogues, and power become more localized and dispersed among the general populace (AIFA, 92‒94).

133. For details of McLaren’s dramatic spiritual experience, see FFR §9, 183‒86; FFS §3, 88‒89; MRTYR §14, 103‒4; NS §1, 7‒10; and McLaren, “Changing Faith, Staying Faithful,” 14‒15.

134. Rambo, Understanding Religious Conversion, 87.

135. Cf. Richardson and Stewart, “Conversion Process Models,” 819‒38. McLaren also describes himself as naturally shy, which originates “from a temperamental preference for understating rather overstating” (NKOCY §20, 225).

136. Berger, The Developing Person, 418.

137. See Clore and Gasper, “Feeling is Believing,” 10‒44.

138. Cf. Fowler, Stages of Faith, 174‒83 and AMP §16, 249. Intriguingly, McLaren says he thoroughly enjoys speaking with nonChristians because of their thoughtful discussions and critical questions (McLaren, foreword to Reimagining Evangelism, 7).

139. McLaren would later remark that he is ashamed to have pandered to the hypocrisy of the neoconservative Religious Right out of distress of losing congregants and their monetary donations (NKOCY §1, 7). See also, McLaren and Schaeffer, “Brian McLaren Talks with Frank Schaeffer,” 00:45:17‒00:47:52.

140. In fact, the entire book, A Generous Orthodoxy, is about McLaren’s attempt to identify the best of all religious traditions while simultaneously learning from their mistakes. As McLaren explains, even the internal tension he experiences with his external experiences generally follow a cyclical pattern of “crisis management” where he first finds hope in God, then becomes disillusioned with his faith, then becomes elated once he finds an answer or formula to resolve the disillusionment, and then becomes depressed again when he discovers the answer is no longer satisfying (FFS §Intro, 17). This pattern helps explain why McLaren has had a “lateral conversion” multiple times, a phrase he uses to describe his perpetual movement from one Christian sect to another (FOWA §6, 58). As he writes elsewhere, “Back when I was a teenager faced with this unacceptable choice, I knew that I couldn’t accept option A or B, but had to search for, or make if necessary, an option C” (SWFOI §Pbk. Preface, ix).

141. Cf. Dishion et al., “Peer Group Dynamics,” 79‒92.

142. For the traits of a “reflective Christian,” see Taylor, The Myth of Certainty, esp. 13‒63.

143. For example, McLaren has a music album entitled Songs for a Revolution of Hope. McLaren even labels one of his fictional characters, an allusion to Christ, as the “poet” and “storyteller” (TSS, 30‒36). Interestingly, those with open personality traits often have a higher IQ and oral articulacy. See Silvia and Sanders, “Why are Smart People Curious?,” 242‒45 and Berger, The Developing Person, 419, 634.

144. Dahl, “Adolescent Brain Development,” 21.

145. Paloutzian et al., “Conversion, Deconversion, and Spiritual Transformation,” 399‒421.