The Wondering Years by Knox McCoy

"[Defining yourself through church] is a cultural affiliation before it's even a personal one. It's a tricky task to deconstruct what you believe versus what you've just inherited through participation."

"...I'd had a pretty charmed life, and while that was great, no good thing can come from an existence where you are rarely required to be uncomfortable....Privilege you don't understand is massively dangerous."

"No one was around to help Harry fight his nemesis. No Hermione, no Ron, no Dumbledore, no anyone. No one was there to bail him out, and he alone was responsible for his choices. I know Harry Potter is about so much, but for me, it's about the process of growing up and the realization that all of the layers of protection in your life--your parents, your friends, your mentors, your church-- they all exist to support you, but they do not exist to do your life for you."

September 2019.2--Gulp by Mary Roach

Pros: I find intestinal talk fascinating, not gross. There were so many interesting stories here. (The only part where I said, "TMI" was the discussions how the posterior portion of the tract can be used for pleasure. All the tales of gas and poop were met with curiosity.) Her humor had me chuckling at times (and, in all honesty, feeling she was trying too hard at other times.) And then she said, "The extent to which healthcare bureaucracy stands in the way of better patient care is at occasionally outstanding" and I literally raised my hands in praise.

I recognize that all of my cons make me sound like a grumpy, scouling nun, but here they are.

Cons: It was kind of all over the place. It seemed a series of rabbit trails that did all happen to pertain to the gastrointestinal system, but somehow were disconnected. I also disliked Roach's tone which felt a bit haughty, like she had it all figured out and looked down her nose at all those foolish folks of yesteryear. Maybe I'm extra sensitive to that because it seemed she was also looking down at those who belief the crazy stories of the Bible. It seems obvious to Roach that if a person blind from birth describes the first people they see upon regaining their sight as "looking like trees walking around," Jesus obviously doesn't know how to heal people; also that since she's proven Jonah survival in a fish/whale/shark stomach to be scientifically impossible, that settles it. I just don't get it. We know it's crazy. That's why it's called a miracle. There's nothing surprising about the story if it can be replicated in a lab. Here's the thing: when I believe in a God that claims to have an actual virgin for a mother, and then to have risen from the actual dead, your telling me Jonah's story is implausible isn't really going to change my mind. Just saying.

Interesting and I'm glad I read it. Would recommend with my caveats.

September 2019.1--Crazy Busy by Kevin DeYoung

I've been trying not to discredit books just because their narrators/authors are imperfect. (See Where'd You Go Bernadette and Peace Like A River, even Biased and Sacred Rhythms.) Every author, by nature of their humanity, has biases and blind spots, brokenness and sin, that often come through in their work. I am trying to cultivate discernment... (as the idea has been illuminated to me by Phylicia Masonheimer)... learn to notice and learn from the good in imperfect works, rather than avoiding all viewpoints and conclusions different from mine. (The list of those agreeing with me is painfully short, anyway.)

That is why I'm pushing through and reading Crazy Busy. Others have said it is good, and I love the premise, but the first BIG hurdle was the the unlikeability of DeYoung's voice. I don't actually know that much about DeYoung, what he has said or failed to say, what he stands for or what controversies might surround him personally. In my mind he is part of the blob that is the Gospel Coalition, which I appreciate for many of its teachings, but also find saddening due to the lack of teaching, and apparent willful ignorance, of other things I find very important. In my mind, he's another smart white guy that others look to for teaching, and really he just keeps teaching because everyone is listening, and they keep listening because they're taught that that's what they should do. (I call it like I see it.) Anyway, this book's dedication only reinforced these ideas. I don't even know all the guys he was referencing by their first names, but I'm imagining I recognize at least Matt Chandler and Mark Dever, and probably definitely CJ Mahaney (cringe). Furthermore, his humble-bragging (that denied being humble bragging, which only made it that much more conspicuous) at the beginning only drove a larger wedge between him as a writer and me as a reader. The fact that he admitted doesn't practice the things he's going to write about (because he's too busy) made me question why in the world I should listen to him. It was clear that the people are just demanding his opinions on things, so he had to write a book on it.

But, onward and forward, because the author can be a flawed and even unlikeable vessel and still have true and helpful insights on a topic.

And good insights I found, indeed.

In seeking to unroot sin issues and bad habits, in addition asking myself what Biblical commands I am disobeying, it is helpful to ask: "What self-imposed commands am I obeying that I should ignore?" (31).

"We get worked up and crazy busy in all the wrong ways because we are more concerned about looking good than with doing good" (41).

He points out that there are many "lazy" people out there who "need to get radical for Jesus" (44), but that many people are already have too much on their plate, and they need to learn that they can't take action on every worthy cause. They need to realize their limits. "Is it possible that God is not asking me to do anything about sex trafficking right now?" (47). I mean, honestly, I get annoyed about this coming from him, because my perception is that DeYoung's whole camp is so busy writing books and reading each other's books, and getting their theology right, and tweeting about gender roles, etc, that nobody seems to have time to make important issues like sex trafficking an actionable issue. But point taken. We can't all do it all. And honestly, perhaps my the pain of my annoyance comes from the plank in my own eye, because my MO is to be busy reading about all the issues and never act on any of them.

Future reading: Beyond Mission: A Passion for Christ, a Heart for Mission about how life is more than issues and tragedies and work, it is about the hope and joy of Christ. Will look into it.
He quotes John Piper: "We should care about all suffering, especially eternal suffering" (49) but points out that caring about and acting against are different. "Not giving a rip about sex slaves is not an option for the Christian. Not doing something directly to combat this evil is an option" (49). Again, my response is that YES that is true, but I still carry a burden of resentment for the section of the church that acts like other things are always actionable (like children's programs, another Bible study, another training program) but things like social justice are optional for those who might, but probably will never, have enough time. Still, "I can forget that my circle of influence will inevitably be smaller than my circle of concern" (51) is quite incisive and challenging to me personally, because I know that it is about time I figure out what my circle of influence is and take it seriously.

More further reading: What is the Mission of the Church? Making Sense of Social Justice, Shalom, and the Great Commission by Kevin DeYoung and Greg Gilbert, mostly because I'm curious what these GC guys have to say about social justice and mission. (Have I heard them say anything about it? Mostly I just assume they think it's a non-issue because it's never mentioned, in my exposure.) Most of what I hear about social justice and mission comes from more liberal and/or contemplative voices because frankly, they're usually the ones talking about it.

"The impression we get from the Gospels is that almost every day for three years, [Jesus is] preaching, healing, and casting out demons. Don't think Jesus is some kind of Zen master who does yoga and ponders the sound of one hand clapping. If Jesus were alive today, he'd get more e-mails than any of us...He was tempted in every way just as we are, yet was without sin (Heb. 4:15)...He was busy, but never in a way that made him frantic, anxious, irritable, proud, envious, or distracted by lesser things...Jesus knew the difference between urgent and important. He understood that all the good things he could do were not necessarily the things he ought to do" (54-55).

"Ultimately, Jesus was driven by the Spirit" (56).

Also, he was "deliberate with his priorities" (57).

Oh, to be both of those things!!! (And thank you, Kevin DeYoung, for acknowledging that the third person of the Trinity is Holy Spirit, not Holy Word!)

As an example of the finiteness of humans, he uses women's inability to do it all--an annoying example, if you ask me. In discussing the "choice" a woman has between being more present at home or at work, he points out two women (a Republican and a Democrat-yay) who chose to quit their jobs to spend more time at home. He calls it "a choice women seem more hardwired to make than men" (58). Can I give him the benefit of the doubt and think, maybe he is lauding the women he's seen lay down pride, while men cling to ambition with a death grip? He did say "seem" rather than "are," and we have to be grateful for that. But that defense is a hard sell for me, because it also esteems the way women are taught to be, particularly by the author's cohort of Christianity, devoted to the needs of others (so that, it would seem, men don't have to be). Obviously this is a trigger for me, because this passing thought would not seem to warrant such an over-sized reaction. But I want to SHOUT that we need to stop the lie that women are "hardwired" for this--more specifically, the lie that we have a firm grasp of what women are "hardwired" for at all. I'm not saying women and men aren't different, but I'm saying that the intricacies and implications of those differences are anything but obvious. I'm saying that what we think is "nature" is often "nurture"--that we don't understand that interplay as much as we think. I think it's far more accurate to say that women are taught, by our culture and especially by the church, that we are supposed to make the choice to spend more time at home, that this is our role (and no one else's). It's very ironic to me that DeYoung uses this example, and then in the next chapter talks about our cultures over-obsession with parenting, and how parents get too busy with parenting because they think everything depends on them when it doesn't. Seems to me that this message is unevenly taught across genders.

Okay, now I'm tempted to go off the rails. The comment about, "Maybe Jane would be the most popular woman in her village in some other country. But, no matter the culture, there is something not quite right about Jane's decision making" (61). Thankfully, the author did acknowledge his USA-centric viewpoint in his writing. But why even include this comment about a village in some other country at all? The point could be made without throwing in that other nameless, but probably more provincial, area of the world, in which it is doubtlessly more difficult to discern the error in one's ways. Is that distracting to anyone but me? Okay, back to discerning what is helpful even if the narrator isn't perfect. (I remind myself that none is, least of all me if I could ever even write anything.)

"Parenting may be the last bastion of legalism. Not just in the church, but in our culture" (67). "It's harder to ruin our kids than we think and harder to stamp them for success than we'd like" (68). "I am responsible for my heart and must be responsible to teach my children the way of the Lord. But there's no sure fire input--say, the right mix of family devotions, Tolkien, and nutrition--that will infallibly produce the output we desire" (73) (ha!).

"If you keep burning the candle at both ends, sooner or later you will indulge in more and more mean cynicism--and the line between cynicism and doubt is a very thin one. Of course, different individuals require different numbers of hours of sleep; moreover, some cope with a bit of tiredness better than others. Nevertheless, f you are among those who become nasty, cynical, or even full of doubt when you are missing your sleep, you are morally obligated to try to get the sleep you need. We are whole complicated beings: our physical existence is tied up to our spiritual well-being, to our mental outlook, or our relationships with others, including our relationship with God. Sometimes the godliest thing you can do in the universe is get a good night's sleep--not pray all night, but sleep. I'm certainly not denying that there may be a place for praying all night; I'm merely insisting that in the normal course of things, spiritual discipline obligates you to get the sleep your body needs"--DA Carson quoted on p. 97 (holding in a tangent about this.....NEVERTHELESS...)

"I don't want you to think that hard work is the problem, or that suffering is necessarily the problem. If you have creativity, ambition, and love, you will be busy. We are supposed to disciple the nations. We are supposed to work with our hands. We are supposed to love God with our minds. We are supposed to have babies and take care of them. It's not a sin to be busy" (102). There is a difference, it seems, between busy and "crazy busy." "The antidote to busyness of soul is not sloth or indifference. The antidote is rest, rhythm, death to pride, acceptance of our finitude, and trust in the providence of God. The busyness that's bad is not the busyness of work, but the busyness that works hard at the wrong things" (like people pleasing, controlling others, etc) (102).

"One of the reasons we struggle so mightily with busyness is because we do not expect to struggle. Many Western Christians--and I'm chief among them--can easily live with the tacit assumption that we should not suffer....[Maybe we expect "big," momentous sufferings like cancer or job loss]...but day in and day out we don't expect to suffer. And the less we expect to suffer, the more devastating suffering becomes" (103).

Quoting Ajith Fernando: "To serve is to suffer....you will suffer if you are committed to people" (104).

"The one thing you must do"--be devoted=having a daily devotion??
"If you are sick and tired of feeling so dreadfully busy and are looking for a one-point plan to help restore order to your life, this is the best advice I know: devote yourself to the Word of God and prayer. This means public worship and private worship" (113).

"The pursuit of personal devotions is one of the strongholds of legalism. Anytime we talk about what we should do every day, we must make clear what Christ has already done for us. We can rest, because he worked" (114). "...the answer here is not simple willpower: 'I must spend more time with Jesus!' That won't last. We have to believe that hearing from God is our good portion. We have to believe that the most significant opportunity before us every day is the opportunity to sit at the feet of Jesus" (115).

Overall, a worthwhile read. I appreciated that DeYoung called out some unhealthy habits and harmful heart patterns about being frantically busy, but didn't turn it into a "just slow down" lecture. He esteemed hard work, and being devoted to service at personal cost. "If you have creativity, ambition, and love, you will be busy"=my favorite quote, I think. I also love the point that we should expect suffering. Seems that whether we do the stoic, stiff-upper-lip thing, or lament and feel all our feelings, we always seem surprised when suffering comes. Especially that daily kind. I love the encouragement that it is a normal part of doing life right in this broken world.

August 2019

When Rain Clouds Gather (now I know that time is September—I’m so ready for September!)
Where’d You Go Bernadette (not as perfect as I remember but still fun and a commentary on a subculture, and way better than the movie — of course!)
Good News for Those Trying Harder (the gospel illuminated; when will I remember to read this more often?)
The Gift of Being Yourself (thankful)
Pride (engaging! I’m on a P&P retelling roll)
Biased (so well-done, personal and scientific)
Behind the Beautiful Forevers (all the tears and praise hands)
The Fishermen (hauntingly good)
Dark Matter (excites for Recursion!)

August 2019.2--The Fishermen

This one will really reel you in. (See what I did there?) Chigozie Obioma's debut novel is tragic, violent, and tender all at once. It portrays the beautiful bonds of brotherhood and heartbreaking changes that befall a once flourishing family, and also raises questions about whether outside influences or personal choices determine our destinies--individually, within families, and for whole cultures and societies. Obioma is a master of metaphors, and through the Agwu family, "a metaphor for the paradox that is Nigeria," (Obioma says in a Huffpost Interview), we learn a lot about "colonial contraptions like Nigeria." Obioma's writing is lyrical and vivid, making his story and its themes accessible to everyone, just as he says he intended in this article where he talks about the "show don't tell" of good writing, and says: "I believe that fiction, with it's untrammeled nature, speaks to no one, and by so doing, speaks to all. It must transcend boundaries, time and space..." He certainly actualizes this goal beautifully.

This is one of those rare books that I gave four stars to initially, but then because I couldn't stop mulling it over, and kept uncovering new layers of meaning, I bumped it up to five stars.

Books this one added to my TBR:
The God of Small Things
Things Fall Apart (re-read)

August 2019.1--Behind the Beautiful Forevers

"[Asha] was a chit in a national game of make-believe, in which many of India’s old problems–poverty, disease, illiteracy, child labor – were being aggressively addressed. Meanwhile the other old problems, corruption and exploitation of the week by the less week, continued with minimal interference. In the West, and among some in the Indian elite, this word, corruption, had purely negative connotations; it was seen as weakening India’s modern, global ambitions. But for the poor of a country where corruption thieved a great deal of opportunity, corruption was one of the genuine opportunities that remain" (28).
"The Indian criminal justice system was a market like garbage, Abdul now understood. Innocense and guilt could be bought and sole like a kilo of polyurethane bags" (107).
"Water and ice were made of the same thing. He thought most people were made of the same thing, too. He himself was probably little different, constitutionally, from the cynical, corrupt people around him--the police officers and the special executive officer and the morgue doctor who fixed Kalu's death. If he had to sort all humanity by its material essence, he thought he would probably end up with a single gigantic pile. But here was the interesting thing. Ice was distinct from--and in his view, better than--what it was made of.

"He wanted to be better than what he was made of. In Mumbai's dirty water, he wanted to be ice. He wanted to have ideals" (218).
"...the slumdwellers rarely got madf together--not even about the airport authority.

"Instead, powerless individuals blamed other powerless individuals for what they lacked. Sometimes they tried to destroy one another. Sometimes...they destroyed themselves in the process. When they were fortunate...they improved their lots by beggaring the life chances of other poor people" (237).
"In places where government priorities and market imperatives create a world so capricious that to help a neighbor is to risk your ability to feed your family, and sometimes even your own liberty, the idea of the mutually supportive poor community is demolished. The poor blame one another for the choices of governments and markets, and we who are not poor are ready to blame the poor just as harshly" (254).

Boo shows us everyday life for several residents of Annawadi, an makeshift slum of Mumbai. What we see is illuminating and terrible. Usually when I read non-fiction, five stars means "I enjoyed this so much" or "I'm so glad to know more about this topic." This time, it means "This book is so necessary--people need to know about this" and "It will make you feel terrible feelings and that is good.” Seeing the injustice, violence, and desperate efforts for survival is challenging to my sensibilities made so naive from privilege. But we must try to see and understand. For the stranglehold of poverty to be loosened, rule of law must be enforced and violence and corruption must end. The hope in all this is the continued good work of folks like @ijm. Next read: The Locust Effect.
•
Thanks to @definitelyra who brought this book to my attention months ago in her stories.

Honestly, I thought I already knew quite a bit about this topic, having done preparatory readings and then gone on my 6-week mission trip to a shandytown of Lima, Peru. That was the beginning of the learning process, but that experience painted a rosier picture of poverty, lauding the gifts of community experienced in such circumstances. And while there are certainly perils of the self-sufficient closed-off lifestyle of the average American, there is a difference between working together with a sense of fellowship and camaraderie, and simple proximity, lack of privacy, and similar circumstances.

Weaknesses: the stories of the impoverished being told by a privileged white person does serve to reinforce the unintentional bias a lot of us tend to have that these subjects can't speak for themselves, but alas, I'm glad Boo did it. Also, she is a journalist and writes like one and I find that a bit grating at times. But it's still a non-fiction work that grips like a great fiction book.

Strengths: this book shows what life is like for so many people, about which most of us would have no opportunity to learn, especially to learn in an accurate way.  Those of us who have the advantage of being completely ignorant of such things cannot even begin to understand the layers of oppression faced by the people in this narrative. Hearing their story is much more illuminating than reading abstract theories about the persistence of poverty, I think.

If you decide to read this, start with the author's note for context. "From where we are, it is easy to overlook that in these conditions it is blisteringly hard to be good. The astonishment is that some people are good, and that many people try to be. If the house is crooked and crumbling, and the land on which it sits uneven, is it possible to make anything lie straight?"

July 2019

Northanger Abbey by Jane Austen ⭐️⭐️⭐️
Liturgy of the Ordinary by Tish Harrison Warren ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Dear Martin by Nic Stone (re-read) ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Miracle Creek by Angie Kim ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Fruit of the Drunken Tree by Ingrid Rojas Contreras (re-read) ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Unmarriageable by Soniah Kamal ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️