Book Review for Jesus, My Father, the CIA, and Me: A memoir of sorts

What author would I like to meet?  Hmm...A living one?  Hmmm....Could we fantasize and meet a dead one?
I'd love to meet GK Chesterton.  I'd like to debate him even though I know I'd lose abominably.  I'd just like to hear his responses.

 

Jesus, My Father, the CIA and Me: A Memoir....of Sorts is Ian Morgan Cron's account of growing up Catholic with a father who on occasion worked for the CIA but mostly spent his days in a drunken stupor. I can divide this book up into three sections: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.

The Good: Cron is a good writer. This is obviously not the stuff of a ghost writer. Cron has an agile mastery of the English language and a scathing sense of humor to boot, both of which he puts to good purpose in his book. The first half of the book is filled mostly with humor, going to Catholic school with scary nuns, his first (and traumatic) experience as an altar boy and trying to fit in at school but failing miserably. These are experiences many of us can identify with and laugh at.

The Bad: About the middle of the book the story takes a dark turn. The humor is gone and replaced with a tone of bitterness and anger. He describes the hardship of having to live with an alcoholic father and a workaholic mother. Furthermore, Cron himself starts experimenting with drugs and alcohol as a teenager and by the time he's in college he's a raging alcoholic. In this section Cron loses his faith. He decides that God doesn't listen to the prayers of a young person begging to be delivered from the hell of an alcoholic home.

The Ugly: Because this book is published by a Christian company (and “Jesus” after all is in the title) I kept waiting for Cron to give an inspiring testimony of how he finally turned to God and was delivered from the hatred he had for his father and his own demons of alcoholism. He does write of being delivered from his addictions but no prayer is uttered, no explicit credit is given to God. I suppose it is implied: his psychologist is an Episcopalian priest, his wife is a Christian and he has a mystical fascination with the Eucharist.

When he talks of the Christian youth groups he attended in high school and college at the urging of well-meaning Christian friends he more or less sneers “it was dumber than I thought it'd be” (pg. 162). He also talks about God in an irreverent way which I'll assume we're supposed to chalk up to his bitterness.

Cron's turning point comes in the middle of a church service when he hears a voice asking him for forgiveness. He later concludes that Jesus was asking for his forgiveness. He gives it and things seem to take an upturn swing after that.

I guess that's the ugliest thing in this book: Cron's act of making God in his own image. Please show me in the Bible where Jesus asked anyone for forgiveness. Did the woman who bled for seventeen years demand it? Did the parents of demon-possessed children expect it? What about the lepers or the men blind from birth? In fact there's only one group of people I saw in the Bible that thought Jesus was accountable to them. They were called Scribes and Pharisees. A Perfect, Sinless Being would never ask for what He does not need.

I can understand being angry at God. All of us have been angry at Him at one time or another- some of us, like people with alcoholic or otherwise abusive parents have more reason than others, I'm sure.

But true repentance and salvation comes not when we call God on the carpet but when we understand that all humans are on the carpet, accountable for a sin-sick soul. We all possess lives that need God's forgiveness and His Son's sacrifice to pay what our sin owes. This crucial point is what's missing in Cron's book.

Somehow he ends up becoming an Episcopalian priest but he never tells us how he arrived there. And here's another ugly detail of the book: For a man of God, Cron has riddled his book with vulgar and coarse language. Unfortunately I'm seeing this as a disturbing trend in many Christian circles, literary or otherwise.

If you're wondering why I haven't mentioned Cron's father's work in the CIA it's because it really doesn't play a large role anywhere in the story. This book is mainly about Cron's father's and then his own substance abuse.

I think this book could benefit people who bear the scars of living in a household held captive by alcoholism yet at the same time, he doesn't offer a true path to healing and deliverance. For that you'd need to find a book that actually makes God and His Scripture as the focal point rather than a young man's angst.

 I received this book for free from Thomas Nelson Publishers

If you'd like to buy this book please do so through the link below, thanks!

Book Review of Final Summit by Andy Andrews

In exchange for my honest review, Booksneeze gave me a complimentary copy of The Final Summit by Andy Andrews.  All I can say is that this review is definitely going to be honest and I'm glad I didn't pay money for the book. .
  Books like this are a growing problem in so called "Christian" literature and I was disappointed to see how many reviewers on Amazon gave the book a glowing report.  I was also surprised to see how many well-known Christian media personalities endorsed this book.  Where was their spiritual discernment?

    Plot:  David Ponder returns in this sequel of The Traveler's Gift. He is whisked away by the Archangel Gabriel to a meeting hall ( somewhere in heaven) where he meets other 'travelers.'  They are assembled here to save humanity from God's wrath and the subsequent end of the world.  They can only do so by correctly answering a question:  What does humanity need to do, individually and collectively, to restore itself to the pathway toward successful civilization?"


   The time travelers get five chances to answer the question before earth meets its doom in the same manner it did when the flood destroyed the earth in Noah's time.

     Ok, already spiritual red flags should be popping up in your head.  Did you catch the first theological blunder?  What must humanity do?  The time travelers-which include famous historical figures such as Winston Churchill, who's portrayed as a buffoonish hot head, Abraham Lincoln, Joan of Arc, King David and George Washington Carver, each come up with their humanistic solution to save mankind.

Did you catch the second theological blunder?  King David, a man after God's own heart informs people that all we need is self discipline.  Really?  Why'd he bother writing Psalm 51? Create in me a clean heart oh God and renew a right Spirit in me.. Others give equally self-saving answers 'restore hope,' 'seek wisdom' etc..

      In the end (SPOILER ALERT) all their answers were wrong, or rather they were part of the right answer.  Guess what the answer that will save humanity from God's wrath is?  Go ahead guess!  Ok I'll tell you:  What humanity needs to do, individually and collectively, to restore itself to the pathway toward successful civlization is (drum roll please)  DO SOMETHING!


  That's it.  That's the answer.  Do something.  Am I the only one who finds that answer a bit nebulous?

   I understand this is a work of fiction but that doesn't mean the author doesn't have a very real message in it, otherwise why did he bother writing it?

  I suggest Mr. Andrews read Jeremiah 17:9

The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked, who can know it? 

 Man can't save himself. Period.  That's why in Isaiah 59:15, 16 it says:

  The Lord saw that there was no justice, and He was offended.
He saw that there was no man-He was amazed that there was no one interceding:
so His own arm brought salvation,
 and His own righteousness supported Him.


 Why else did Christ come into the world if it was in our own power to save ourselves? John 3:16 is well-known but I want to put it here because it's my favorite passage of scripture:

For God so loved the world
That He gave His only begotten Son
That whosoever believes in Him
Will not perish, but have eternal life!


   So my main objection to this book is that it is, in fact, a humanistic book and not a Christian book.  If this book was published by a secular company it wouldn't matter but why is a Christian company promoting a book that has a decidedly unChristian message?

 My other objections is the way Andrews anthropormorphises Gabriel.  He characterizes him to be petty and arrogant. Those are sinful human traits.   When you give a sinless being sinful characteristics you are bearing false testimony to one of God's glorious beings.  Andrews also makes King David out to be awkward and bumbling not to mention ignorant of a Biblical solution for the problem. In addition to that, many people who, according to history, never became Christians are there in heaven.  That's a universalist belief, not a Christian one.

    The only positive I saw was the obvious historical research that went into the book, although the only person I didn't know about-and he was worth getting to know- was Eric Erickson who, according to Andrews was an Ally Spy who was the primary reason for Germany losing the war.  However, if I were you, I'd google for information on Erickson rather than buying this book to find out about him.

 Last but not least, the book is boring.  Most of the book takes place at a  meeting  with everyone brainstorming to arrive at the correct answer.  I've been to plenty of meetings, I really don't need to read about one.
   In conclusion, The Final Summit is a boring, poorly developed book filled with bad theology. I hope I have allowed you to make an informed decision about reading this book or not but you may notice that I haven't provided a link for anyone to buy it through my blog.

 
   

Book Review of The Next Christians: How a New Generation is Restoring the Faith by Gabe Lyons

I was given a complimentary copy of The Next Christians by Gabe Lyons from Blogging For Books in exchange for my honest review. When I read all the praise for the author on the back dust cover I felt encouraged that I had made a good choice when selecting this book. Shortly into the book I was no longer encouraged. In fact, I had a hard time controlling my anger. Frankly, I prayed before writing this review so I could elucidate in a creditable way why I dislike this book so much.




First, a synopsis: Lyons is asked to go to Hollywood to give a movie producer demographic information in order to better market her product for Christians. (Not because she's a Christian but because she is impressed by the cash cow Mel Gibson's The Passion had become). Instead what she got was a dissertation of the different categories of people who consider themselves Christians and why they're all wrong. He then proceeds to tell her -and spends the rest of the book telling us -who the “right Christians” are.



First of all, if you're heavily involved in your church, church activities, have your kids on the church basketball team and ESPECIALLY if you homeschool, you are a “Separatist Christian”. Gabe informs us that these Christians want nothing to do with nonbelievers and hide inside their self made world that only involves fellow Christians. The are always offended and angry at nonbelievers and show it by voting against gay marriage and abortion. They give Christianity a bad image and are responsible for people not becoming saved.

Their motivation for retreating and separating from the broader culture can be attributed to a longing for purity, integrety, and holiness in life.  But by default, their choice to live outside the typical rhythms of culture makes them seem awkward, disconnected, and judgmental toward others....
.....They come across as 'holier than thou' and make mental lists of sins that, to them, are clearly wrong and unjustifiable for a 'true Christian.' Smoking, drinking, cussing, boys with earrings and tattoos, or even cutting your grass on Sunday might make it onto the list.  They sincerely believe that anyone who participates in these activites couldn't possible have a relationship with God.  Strangely, gossip, gluttony, and materialism never make their list.
   ....Another group of Christians is intent solely on getting people 'saved'. ...These Christians are motivated to 'win souls for Christ,' no matter who they offend.  (Chapter 3 pg. 32, 33)


Secondly, if you grew up high church, say Lutheran, Episcopal or Catholic, you're a “Blender Christian.” You're embarrassed by the image the world has attached to Christian believers and you want to make sure no one knows you're a Christian or, if they do know, you want them to know that you're “normal” just like everyone else. They accomplish this by living lifestyles that resemble nonbelievers more than believers. They also give Christians a bad image and are responsible for people not getting saved.



And don't think being a hip and groovy Christian is any better. Those who attend churches with coffee bars, worship to Christian rock music and listen to Contemporary Christian musicians are “imitator Christians”. They are not affecting the culture because they are following it rather than leading it.



Then there's the “Next Christians.” These are the good Christians who have got it right. Instead of being followers of American culture, they are the leaders of the culture. They accomplish this by organizing soup kitchens, working their way up into the upper echelons of Hollywood movie making, organizing fine arts displays and concerts, and otherwise serving their community. They have “engaged the culture”. There's no description of their personal beliefs, how they're saving anyone and in fact at one point Lyons admits that, since these people aren't actually sharing the gospel we don't really know who's getting saved, if at all. BUT. We know that they are showing beauty and love to their community and that is sure to lead people to God.



  Entire churches finally feel free to serve their communities and the world using all their talents. Churches are beginning to feel the power of seeing all their congregants come alive, from doctors co-opting to create clinics for the poor in urban centers to stay-at-home moms starting after school tutoring programs for at-risk children. (Previously) They'd bought in to the modern idea that the only good Christian activity was to convert others or give their money and time to those who could. Today they are discovering that their talent and creativity matter. (chapter 7 pg 104)



Now so far that sounds really good, right? Of course Christians should be serving their community, but why? For what purpose? So people can become acquainted with Christ and receive salvation? Not exactly. The “next Christians” have finally figured out:



 The longings they have felt to do good in the world -even if it wasn't explicitly connected to getting people saved (emphasis mine)- have been validated.(ibid)




But, hey, so what? Getting saved is only part of the gospel-another thing the old fogey Christians have gotten wrong. Getting people's souls secured in the after life is all well and good but we need to focus on the here and now. We need to RESTORE THE EARTH. According to Lyons, this is the ultimate objective of the “next Christians.”

In fact, Lyons asserts that telling the gospel is only half the story.

  I don't mean to diminish the importance of telling others about God's redemption accomplished on the cross, and we shouldn't deny that salvation through faith in Jesus has eternal implications. But shouldn't we be faithful to recount and live out the whole story?(chapter 4 pg. 57)



And what is the whole story?  Lyons declares it's “to restore the earth.”



  The idea of restoration is critical in the Next Christian discussion. They see themselves on a mission, partnering with God to breathe justice and mercy and peace and compassion and generosity into the world. They believe that ...they are turning back the hands of time to give the world a glimpse of what the world looked like before sin entered the picture. ..

..Is evangelism really the only use for the millions of church goers in our culture?..

  Now, put restoration back into the story. Instantly, you've created millions of jobs for all the 'unemployed' and bored Christians in the church - jobs they can get excited about. …. Instead of simply waiting for God to unveil the new heaven and the new earth, the rest of us can give the world a taste of what God's kingdom is all about......


...The bottom line is this: The next wave of Christian engagement seems inherently linked to this idea of restoration.” (pg. 60)

        That's a beautiful thought, I just don't see any of that in scripture. It is true we are to serve people here as Gabe points out. One day each of us is going to an give account to Christ for how we treated the poor, sick and neglected but I don't see anywhere in the Bible that says we're supposed to be cultural leaders and create some kind of Utopia here on earth.

The whole book gives me the same feeling that so many other books written by immature, arrogant so-called Christian writers have (Blue Like Jazz by Donald Miller comes to mind) . They condemn the Christian world for being narrow, negative and judgmental while they describe these same Christians in narrow, negative and judgmental terms.


I don't know where Gabe Lyons goes to church. Judging from all the name dropping, he moves in a very different social circle than my own. I'd like to know where he met all the "wrong Christians" he describes.  He doesn't cite references (or maybe just one). I've gone to church all my life and I've met plenty of sinners redeemed by grace but never anybody as flat and one dimensional as he describes. Oh, and by the way, someone needs to tell him that he didn't invent the idea of serving the community. Every church I've ever attended (I've been to a lot because I've moved around a lot) spent a great deal of time and effort plugging themselves into their environment and doing their best to address the communities' needs. I know that we, the body of Christ could do more and be less swallowed up in the busyness of our lives but that's no excuse for making sweeping generalizations about the people to whom you're supposed to be a brother in Christ.

Before closing I would like to address Lyons' presumption that all these “wrong Christians” are responsible for the negative view nonbelievers have toward them and Christianity in general.

I contend that “the bad image” that the world has toward Christians is for a very scriptural reason:

If the world hates you, keep in mind that they hated me first. If you belonged to the world, the world would love you as its own, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.(John 15:18,19)


All the world will hate you because of me. (Matthew 10:22)

And one more:

At that time the Son of Man will appear in the sky and all the nations of the earth will mourn. (Matthew 24:30)





   If the world is going to mourn at Christ's return why should we assume they're going to welcome any “restoration” Christians would have to offer?

And what about the majority of the Christian church that's living in exile and persecution? What's his solution to them?

In case you haven't figured it out, I recommend this book to no one.

.

Review on "The Liturgical Year" by Joan Chittister

I made a decision when I started this blog that I would not write any negative reviews. However, since I am writing reviews in exchange for complimentary copies of books from BookSneeze I find myself in a position of making an exception.


I requested the “The Liturgical Year” by Joan Chittester because I have a great interest in Church history and traditions and thought that this book would be an informative and enjoyable way to learn more about all the Holy Days, feasts and festivals that form “higher church” worship.

While Chittister does inform, I must confess there is much more fat than meat. By that I mean that there is bits and pieces of information regarding the origins of the church year, but it is inundated with flowery rhetoric of how all this beautiful mystery should increase our intimacy with Christ over and over again.



Now that in itself is a good thing. Anything that increases my intimacy with my Savior is something worth exploring. It's just that she never specifies how exactly it happens.  She never really describes each part of the church year or how it increases my intimacy with Christ. Furthermore, my intimacy with Jesus Christ is developed through the study of Scripture as well as worshipping with Christ's Bride, His church, something that is never brought up in the book, which leads me to my second complaint.

My second complaint is much more serious and why I won't recommend this book to anyone. According to the author, the purpose of so much focus, meditation and worship of the death and resurrection of Christ is so we can follow His example and be better people.

On page 7 Chittister states:
This book....is an excursion into life from the Christian perspective, from the viewpoint of those who set out not only to follow Jesus but to live as Jesus lived, to think as Jesus thought, to become what Jesus had become by the end of His life.  (Emphasis mine)

Is she implying that Jesus wasn't complete when He came to earth?

On page 47:

To know our place in the universe is to recognize that God is God. We are not masters of the world. We can make no demands on it. All we can do is to try to live our place in it well.”

I'm not interested in knowing my place in the universe. I'm interested in knowing my place with God. This smacks of universalism.

And frankly, that is exactly what is asserted and reasserted throughout the book. According to Chittester, the point of observing the liturgical year is not to celebrate our salvation but to try to be better people. That sounds good but it's a very subtle heresy that says, "I can produce my own salvation."   That philosophy is no different from any other religion.  Buddhists try to be better people as do Hindus and Muslims.  As Christians we don't try to be better people.  We throw ourselves at the mercy of God and with the publican say, "Have mercy on me, Oh Lord, a sinner!" (Luke 18:13)

Then through Christ's transforming grace we are refined as he completes a good work in us.  (Phillipians 1:6)

In chapter 9, about Advent, page 62, Chittister declares, It is while waiting for the coming of the reign of God, Advent after Advent that we come to realize that its coming depends on us. More self-salvation.

In the very first chapter of the book:
The seasons and feasts, the fasts and solemnities...lead us deeper and deeper in to the self, beyond the pull of the present, higher and higher into the One who beckons us on through time to that moment when we will dissolve into God, set free from time to become one with the universe.

What? Are we talking about Christianity or some quasi Christian/Buddhism?

One thing that the book is void of is any mention of the Holy Spirit. In Chapter 10 page 65 Chittister claims three Advents: The Lord's birth, the coming of the presence of God recognized among us now in the Scripture, in the Eucharist, in the community itself. This coming makes Jesus present in our own lives, eternally enlivening, eternally with us.

She states the third coming as the second coming of Christ but she completely skips over the coming of the Holy Spirit. The closest she comes to is referring to the time of Pentecost as an “outpouring of the Advocate, and call to mind again the Second Coming at the end of time.”

In scripture Jesus is called our advocate and the Holy Spirit is the intercessor so here she's misnaming the Trinity. (12John 2:1-6; Romans 8:26)

In her chapter on joy (chapter 11), her emphasis is once again on self-based salvation. Page 71 states:

Joy, the deep-down awareness of what it means to live well, to live productively, to live righteously, is made out of self-giving, simplicity, and other-centeredness

No, joy comes from knowledge of the saving grace of Jesus Christ, not works, “lest any man should boast.” (Ephesians 2:8,9) My joy transcends my sinful, selfish human nature that I'm helpless to overcome. It comes from my salvation through Jesus Christ. When I accepted His punishment for my sin, the Holy Spirit came to indwell in me and transformed me into the likeness of Christ. Yes, now I can follow Christ and do His will, but only through the enabling power of the Holy Spirit. Only after we have become new creatures through Christ can we  claim with James  that "faith without works is dead" (James 2:17)

In other words, salvation produces works; works do not produce salvation.

Frankly, salvation doesn't even seem to be a goal of Chittister, just some vague notion of being 'a good person here on earth'.
Sin separates us from God, our goal is to be rid of sin and be reconciled with God.

 Chittister never once credits God, Holy Spirit or otherwise, for enabling her to forsake her own selfish nature and to do the work of Christ. This is the main issue I have with this book and I cannot, consequently, recommend it.

For more information on Joan Chittister and liberal Catholicism there is an excellent 2 part series at:
http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Item/786/the_failure_of_liberal_catholicism.aspx