Apostolic movement: pretentious, intimidated or neither?

"Nothing new under the sun"

For all of you who have uttered the above phrase (this means you Solomon!), check out what 90 & 9 is up to in the month of July!

Let's get this straight

There are some people with whom I choose not to discuss literature. These people typically fall into one of two camps which I label: 1.) the pretentious and 2.) the intimidated. The pretentious folk are those who wield book titles or philosophies like battle axes and reference authors in order to stop conversation. The intimidated are those who view book titles or philosophies like battle axes and so will stop conversation if authors are referenced. The conversation stoppage is key in both cases for why I avoid these conversations in the first place.

Questions I have for the pretentious and intimidated

If I begin to suspect that I've found myself in conversation with one of these kinds of folks, I have a list of questions I pose which, ironically, are the same for both the pretentious and intimidated:

1.) What happens if you don't know everything?
2.) What does it mean if there are people who are more intelligent or well-read than you?
3.) Why are you feeling the need to prove anything to me?

Confession

There are times I have to ask these questions of myself, and what I've noticed about my own tendencies is that for whatever reason around Apostolic folk (vast generalization here), I am more likely to fall into the pretentious mode. At least part of the reason for this is an underlying belief I have that Apostolics should be better read than they generally are. This belief of mine is more accurately represented in the statement that people in general should be better read than they are, but as this blog is supposed to be centered on literature and the Apostolic movement, I'll specify.

What is "better read" (the word "read" used here rhymes with the color)?

Mortimer J. Adler wrote an excellent tome entitled "How to Read a Book" (if you haven't read it yet, try to find an audio recording, har har). In it he cogently explains the difference between being widely read and being well-read. He likens this difference to the difference between information and enlightenment. "To be informed is to know simply that something is the case. To be enlightened is to know, in addition, what it is all about: why it is the case, what its connections are with other facts, in what respects it is the same, in what respects it is different, and so forth." He goes on to explain that the beauty of enlightenment from a book is that "If you ask a book a question, you must answer it yourself...When you question it, it answers you only to the extent that you do the work of thinking and analysis for yourself." Furthermore, it should be noted that not all books are created equal to the task of teaching us just as not all teachers are equally equipped to teach.

Wait! So, why should Apostolics be better read?

Well, the Bible is a book and to be a poor reader of it is to be a very poor Christian indeed. Furthermore, if the only teaching you ever receive is from live persons (aka NOT from reading the Bible) then you've short-changed yourself in the enlightenment department because you've never asked your questions of the text itself. This statement requires an important caveat: remember that if you are doing the work of thinking and analyzing for yourself, you better be a good thinker and analyzer. Hence the need to read more and better quality literature. Reading is an art and thus it requires practice in various genres and styles, but always from the best teachers (aka books) that can be found. Your understanding can only be increased if there is an "initial inequality of understanding" which you, the reader, "must be able to overcome in some degree." (Quotes are more from Adler--everything so far is in the first chapter!) In short, Apostolics should be better read so that they can better read the Bible, increase their understanding of it and thus be better Christians.

Whoa! Are you saying that if I don't read the books deemed "quality" by you then I'm not being a good Christian?

Almost. If you are not reading books that are deemed quality (not just by me but by time and scholarship--click the link above), you are not going to be as good a Christian as you can be because you will never demand from the Bible all that you can get in terms of understanding.

Disagree?

I'm totally open to someone disagreeing with my stringent stance. In fact, to be honest, I'm hoping someone will! I'll even give you a hint about where you can start...there is an underlying assumption in all that I've said that something (I'm not telling you everything!) is an unqualified good. If that thing is not an unqualified good, then my line of reasoning is suspect. You may find other holes in it as well. Or you just might agree whole-heartedly! In any case, what's your take on the Apostolic movement's relation to literature?