Review: 'The Great Emergence' by Phyllis Tickle lacks insight
By
Elizabeth Leib, Special to the Times
In print: Sunday, January 4, 2009
|
|||||||||||||
|
If you're looking for a guide to the ways Christianity today is changing, you won't find it in The Great Emergence, written by a former religion editor of Publishers Weekly. Phyllis Tickle devotes much of her book to the various elements that make traditional Christianity hard to maintain — elements as unsurprising as the impact of Darwin and Freud, and as unconvincing as the popularity of mythology expert Joseph Campbell's televised conversations with Bill Moyers.
Then she offers an exceedingly murky description of what is taking the place of the old religion. In a few words: Something's coming, can't say quite what. She even presents several diagrams that are supposed to show how the Emergence is coming about, but they're finally no more illuminating than her prose.
Tickle says a few things clearly, for example that Scripture's authority has been weakened by acceptance of gay rights and ordination of women as ministers. Her reasoning here is lucid enough: Since Paul declared that women are to be silent in church, and the Bible unambiguously condemns homosexuality, progressive movements are forcing re-evaluation of tradition.
But she goes on to make assertions that she fails to justify. The Great Emergence, she states, "will rewrite Christian theology — and thereby North American culture — into something far more Jewish, more paradoxical, more narrative, and more mystical than anything the Church has had for the last seventeen or eighteen hundred years." Maybe it will, but is it too much to ask for an argument supporting such a sweeping claim?
Every 500 years, Tickle says, the church experiences a transformation. The most recent of these was the Reformation of the 16th century, and now it's time for another. But what the coming earthquake will bring remains obscure in this brief, unauthoritative volume. You'll find more substance in the daily newspaper. And probably a better grasp of history.
Elizabeth Leib is a freelance writer in Tampa.
Poet sings praise of treatment in 'Scattershot: My Bipolar Family'
By
Elizabeth Leib, Special to the Times
In print: Sunday, November 23, 2008
|
|||||||||||||
|
Poet David Lovelace in his memoir Scattershot: My Bipolar Family has a message for his fellow sufferers: Accept the neurological facts of your disease and take your pills! That central directive will be useful for anyone affected by bipolar disorder who may be harboring uninformed beliefs about its origin and cure.
Lovelace gives an insightful, sympathetic account of how members of his family struggled with the disease beginning in his early childhood. As the disease worsened for Lovelace's father, a minister, and his artist mother, they retreated to various coping solutions; then they found their sons also showing many of the same symptoms. Without any clear answers to his parents and brothers' problems, and with the disease becoming increasingly troublesome in his own life, Lovelace spent years out of contact with his family, self-medicating with a variety of drugs.
At first, Lovelace's parents interpreted their own unusual behaviors within the context of fundamentalist Christianity. Instead of seeking medical help, they tried to resolve their problems — including depressions, manic breaks and even involuntary hospitalizations — with prayer and hope.
As a young adult discovering his artistic gifts, Lovelace found justification for his disease in the biographies of well-known writers who also were bipolar. Eschewing conventional drug therapies for the excitement of rock star-style experimentation, Lovelace finally crashed and had to be rescued by his depressed father.
Lovelace offers this conclusion: "Some of us take lithium and antidepressants, and most everyone believes these pills are fundamentally wrong, a crutch, a sign of moral weakness, the surrender of art and individuality. Bulls---. Without medicine, 20 percent of us, one in five, will commit suicide. Denouncing these medicines makes as much sense as denouncing the immorality of motor oil."
Elizabeth Leib is a freelance writer in Tampa.
Daniel Gardner dials down your anxiety in 'The Science of Fear'
By
Elizabeth A. Leib, Special to the Times
In print: Sunday, August 3, 2008
Irrational fear is on the rise in America in spite of the realities of modern life. In the past 70 years there have been significant positive gains in human safety and longevity in all parts of the world. For example, with the exception of the Middle East, terrorism worldwide is on the decline; life expectancy in the West has increased from age 59 to 78; and malnutrition in the developing world has fallen from 28 percent to 17 percent. Such positive news seldom makes its way into Americans' confused perceptions about the true nature of risk in the modern world.
In The Science of Fear, Daniel Gardner says we are easily manipulated by our fears, primarily because we are hard-wired to function in the past. Gardner's ideas rest on recent advances in neuroscience, affirmed, he believes, by the philosopher Gilbert Ryle. Whether or not you accept Gardner's assertion that the brain is nothing more than a physical organ, his analysis nevertheless helps us understand how political, marketing and media forces, to name a few, exploit human psychology to inflate our fears.
"Be fearless until you know the facts" is the message of The Science of Fear. In this lucid analysis Gardner examines how our rational minds and our intuitions are exploited for profit by those who stand to gain from our misjudgments.
Focusing on relatively minor risks, we typically ignore the dangers we genuinely face. Do you believe that there are 50,000 pedophiles on the Internet? Although widely reported by news sources, the statement is pure gossip. Did you avoid air travel in the months after 9/11 in favor of car travel? Many did in spite of the fact that the risks of car travel are many times those of flight.
Gardner's book may not cure you of all fear, but it will help you defend yourself against unnecessary anxiety. And in today's culture, we could all afford to be less frightened.
'Opting In' carries this message: Child, career — balance is key to success
By
Elizabeth A. Leib, Special to the Times
In print: Sunday, June 15, 2008
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Opting In: Having a Child Without Losing Yourself is the most sympathetic, nonjudgmental treatment of women's issues to have appeared in many months. Amy Richards' insightful examination and reconciliation of motherhood and feminism is an eye-opening departure from conventional approaches. Her feminist parenting tent is large and accommodating, offering a space within which same-sex, unmarried and single parents, along with traditional partners, can find common-sense solutions.
Richards' book was written in response to the 2003 New York Times Magazine article "The Opt-Out Revolution," about the trend of highly educated women abandoning careers for full-time parenting.
Opting In draws different conclusions. The author's research reveals that "few woman actually permanently catapult their career ambitions; some have a leisurely approach to their jobs, taking time away when their kids are young, but most stay in the paid work force for a good percentage of their adult lives."
Richards takes on the restrictive judgments we make of ourselves and others. Of gender stereotyping, she points out that avoiding rigid expectations of what is masculine or feminine can allow kids to access the best of both. And as much as she encourages a wide variety of attitudes, she expresses regret about women who lose their ambitions after becoming parents. "Staying balanced is a great example to give your children; to be consumed with your children at the expense of your own identity ends up punishing both you and them in the end."
Richards knowledgeably refers to feminist history as she explores the dilemmas contemporary mothers face in balancing family, work and friendships. And she's convincing when she asserts that women who want strong, intelligent children must be themselves equally smart and assertive.
Elizabeth A. Leib (813) 892-5704 elizabeth@raintreewriting.com