Rating: 
Summary: Brilliant commentary that is also profoundly spiritual
Review: I want to say outright that I really loved this book--both for the education it offers about fundamentalism as well as for the connection that it provides to a "vertical" experience of religion (an concept described by the author). After reading the book straight through over the evenings of one week, I was left with the sincere feeling that this work is not only a brilliant piece of contemporary religious commentary but is also a profoundly important look into the substance of the genuine teachings of Jesus Christ. Bawer offers his readers, quite effortlessly it seems, countless insights into what it should mean to call oneself a follower of Jesus (i.e., a "Christian") today. Many important messages based on the Christian principles of faith, hope, and love are interspersed by Bawer throughout his clear, concise, and very damning documentation of the beliefs, motives, and tactics of the modern-day promoters of a "god of wrath" who demands a "church of law." According to the author, this legalist god stands in direct opposition to the genuine message of Christianity. As a general description, I can say that this book is most plainly a superb collection of inter-related essays regarding a topic that most people know little or nothing about, but about which we all need to know everything. I admit that the basic premise of the book will be very threatening to many people, which will sadly limit its market to those whom are already open to its propositions. However, because the commentary is so clear and so indisputable it should be read by anyone interested in religion, politics, or social justice today. In fact, after reading the book, I decided that it was remarkable that Bawer dared to take on the long-overdue task of revealing so specifically and so persuasively the evil that is inherent in fundamentalist ideology and practice. I thank God that he did. The first few chapters of the book define the author's principle thesis: Fundamentalism is a profound distortion of historical Christianity as well as of the modern "liberal" interpretation of Jesus' moral code as contained in the canonical Gospels. The reader is shown how the fundamentalist movement (Bawer calls them "legalists") crosses denominational lines and how, although it is mostly a 20th century phenomenon, its roots in America go back to the morality and practices of the Puritan colonists. Following this very powerful introduction, there is a series of chapters containing progressive, yet separate, essays that track the development of Protestant fundamentalism in the 20th century. These chapters take to task the words and actions of most of the movement's central players, both past and present. The book contains a couple of chapters near the end that provide logical extensions of the author's main argument. The concluding chapter is a very powerful sermon (that could be read alone) which sums up the author's critical commentary in a moving and inspirational way. By the end, I was sorry there was not more of Bawer's sharp-witted insight and brilliant commentary on this subject. In short, I'd recommend this book to anyone. Anyone can read it (it is remarkably accessible for a book dealing with theology) and anyone can benefit from the history it reveals of "legalist" religion in America. However, if you care at all about the practice of Christianity today, or about the political agendas of the Religious Right, then I feel you MUST read this book. Bawer shows that there are simply too many connections between legalism and radical right-wing politics to ignore the history, motives, and tactics of the movement. In short, this book can be taken as a call for the very much larger collection of "nonlegalists" to take exception to the fact that the word "Christian" is so sorely (and so sadly) misused today to promote evil rather than good, exclusion rather than inclusion. I would also like to point out that there are many moments in the book where Bawer's thoughts are so profound and so inspired that they touched my soul as well as my mind. I continually felt impressed that God's grace was at work in this man as he wrote this book. If that means that I'm a "convert" already, then so be it. More technically, I was continually amazed by the author's ability to express complex ideas clearly and passionately all while managing to eloquently deliver many powerful spiritual messages. Much of the book could (and I think, should) be read (preached) from the pulpit in any Christian church in America. I sincerely feel that only good can come out of reading this book. Both the legalist and nonlegalist (to use the author's terminology) will find the book's messages to be compelling, thought-provoking, and perhaps even life-changing. Even if you disagree on religious grounds with the author's principle thesis, he makes it very hard to debate his conclusions. In other words, I am hopeful that this book could both educate and liberate any die-hard legalist--if only they would read it. Finally, I wish to mention an earlier book of Bawer's: "A Place at the Table." If, after reading "Stealing Jesus", you are impressed by it, I strongly suggest you read this earlier book by Bawer, too. The elements in "Stealing" which relate to homosexuals and their treatment at the hands of fundamentalists will become clearer and more meaningful once you have read "A Place at the Table." I, for one, think that the author's gay orientation is clearly a blessing to him and has obviously contributed to his profound ability to look deeply into himself and into others. And, as a parting comment, I think that those people who would dismiss this book merely because Bawer has honestly revealed the homosexual part of his nature will also ironically miss out entirely on his "fundamental" message: Fundamentalism (legalism) is not Christianity at all--and it is high time that the majority of us who claim to follow the teachings of Jesus and seek him as God today stand up and say so.
Rating:
Summary: It helps me understand today's ugly politics .
Review: Bravo! for Bruce Bawer. This great book has helped me reconcile what I think Jesus life on earth was about, versus what I hear being put forth in Jesus' name. I'm happy to affirm my belief that Jesus was about loving, forgiving, including, affirming. He was not about condemnation, theology, dogma, exclusion, judgement...
Rating: 
Summary: God=both merciful and just:Can the law and love not coexist?
Review: Although Bawer's prose is commendable, his content unfortunately, brings me back to the original question he was being asked - Are you a Christian? The basic precept of a Christian is that God is both just (He commands us to obey Him) and merciful (He loves us enough to make the provision by which we Can obey Him. Praise Jesus Christ our Lord). Bawer misses the concept that Christ did not come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it. Hence, to divide Christians into the Church of Law and the Church of Love, is unfair and unknowing. True, individuals exhibit clear manifestations of black and white attitudes, as Bawer describes. But he also shows that he clearly is one of the individuals about which he writes, while a whole society of followers of Jesus Christ exist with the understanding that our God is both - 1)our Creator and law giver and 2)our provider and redeemer, forgiving and loving us as truly only God can.
Rating:
Summary: A strong start, but ultimately disappointing.
Review: Bawer's book starts out brilliantly and had me tentatively recommending it to people by the end of the first chapter. He makes some very insightful points, and he has the enviable ability to create a sound bite that actually has deep meaning; there were several points in the book where he sums up complex spiritual issues in one terrific sentence. Unfortunately, the book does not live up to the promise shown at the beginning. The points Bawer brings up about Fundamentalist Christianity are all valid, but his support for many of them is rather weak. He does not use footnotes, his references are incomplete, and the bibliography adheres to no style I've ever seen. This wouldn't matter if I wanted to accept his work as truth in and of itself, but I prefer to check sources. Bawer also tends to express opinion as fact. He twice makes the claim that legalist Christians (his term for Fundamentalist Christians) know their doctrines are untrue, although they will never admit it to themselves. To make such a claim is arrogant and uninformed-Bawer does not know the true feelings of individual legalist Christians. I know several people who fit Bawer's definition of legalists, and they hold their beliefs more dear than anything else, including things most people cherish such as family and career. If scientific or empirical evidence refutes these beliefs, the evidence is wrong, and the people who bring this evidence against Christianity are deceived. One could easily and truthfully say legalists are just putting their heads in the sand, but that doesn't mean they do not believe their doctrine. Bawer also rails against Pat Robertson, his editors, and his readers for not checking facts or having any knowledge about the subjects of his writing. The one incident Bawer uses as an example is a reference to Marie-Henri Beyle in Robertson's book "The New Millennium." Robertson states that Beyle is the birth name of Voltaire, but Bawer points out that it's actually the birth name of Stendhal. Robertson is therefore a distorter of history, and since no one caught the mistake four years later when the book was reprinted, his readers are unlearned and manipulable. I showed this Beyle error to three of my friends. Between us we have five graduate degrees, including three Ph.D.s. None of us knew Voltaire's birth name. It seems unlikely that this one sentence in Robertson's book (which is very badly written and full of bizarre claims) implies malleability or a lack of education. If it does, Bawer should check page 112 of "Stealing Jesus" where he confuses Lao-Tse, the founder of Taoism, with Confucius. Overall this is a disappointing book, perhaps because I expected more actual research and less opinion, especially when discussing leaders of the Religious Right. The sketchy, sometimes incomplete supporting evidence for Bawer's statements coupled with the lack of references make me question the overall accuracy of the book. A far better look at the evil aspects of Fundamentalist Christianity is Tom Sine's "Cease Fire," though he tends to get preachy near the end.
Rating:
Summary: This should be required reading for church leaders.
Review: I thought I knew everything about fundamentalism, since I was a preacher's daughter, raised in a fundamentalist church. This book opened my eyes to fundamentalist history I had never known. I literally studied myself out of false Christianity by taking the Bible literally, as they taught me; I saw that my church was everything the Bible taught against. Bawer is astonishingly accurate, for someone who didn't grow up in fundamentalism. His analysis of the psychological attraction of religion that doesn't require thinking is absolutely correct, and the American religious history in the book has never been known, at least among Christians. People in mainstream churches think those of us who try to warn them about fundamentalist religion are just bitter; they underestimate the fundamentalist movement and the seduction it works on Christians who don't know the horrific mind-control it exerts on its disciples. Pass this book around your church; it opens eyes. Rev. Judy Romero-Oak, Taos, NM
Rating: 
Summary: Important Reading Despite Some Flaws
Review: This is a book critical of the Christianity espoused by the "Christian Right," written by a conservative Christian. Bruce Bawer was for many years the film critic for the conservative American Spectator, and he is a devout Episcopalian. Many Americans who are not themselves evangelical or fundamentalist Protestants are unaware of what it means to be one. Evangelical Protestants believe that you become a Christian by going though a ritual of being "born again." You "confess that you are a sinner," and "ask Jesus into your heart as your personal savior" (to paraphrase how evangelicals trying to "save" me have put it). Fundamentalists are all evangelicals, but they add other key beliefs--a belief in the inerrancy of the Bible, a belief that the "end times" described in Revelation and other prophetic books of the Bible are imminent, and a belief that only those who are fundamentalists are "true Christians." For example, Pat Robertson refers to mainline Protestants like the Methodists and Presbyterians as "the spirit of the Antichrist." Bawer examines both the history of fundamentalism and how it manifests in the "Christian Right" of today. He describes how fundamentalism is a product of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, with emphasis on the role of clergyman John Nelson Darby in developing the apocalyptic scenarios that many fundamentalists believe in, of Cyrus Scofield, a fundamentalist bible commentator, in bringing Darby's exotic method of interpreting the Bible to American Protestants through his Scofield Reference Bible, and of apocalytic author Hal Lindsey in popularizing the Darby "end times" scenario for a mass audience in books like "The Late Great Planet Earth." Bawer then goes on to look at important "Christian Right" figures like Pat Robertson, Ralph Reed, James Dobson and Bill McCartney. Perhaps the most telling point Bawer makes is showing how far fundamentalism has departed from the long-standing doctrines of Protestant sects like the Baptists. For centuries, Baptists espoused the autonomy of the individual in interpreting the Bible and relating to God--the formal terms were "Bible Freedom" and "Soul Freedom." Yet in recent years the Southern Baptist Convention has been torn by the efforts of self-styled "traditionalists"--really extreme fundamentalists--to impose all sorts of doctrinal litmus tests and mandatory readings of the Bible on the Convention, its institutions such as theological seminaries, and its churches. Bawer shows convincingly that Christians from earlier eras would not recognize the "Christianity" of fundamentalists. While Bawer's book is a good introduction to many issues, it has some flaws. The most serious is his relative neglect of the importance of fundamentalists' belief in Biblical inerrancy, which is just as central to their worldview as are their apocalyptic beliefs, maybe moreso. Fundamentalists essentially believe that the entire Bible was dictated by God, and therefore is completely without error and must be unquestioningly accepted. This view is the source, for example, of fundamentalist calls for "creation science" to replace the science of evolution in high school biology classes. Bawer gives this subject too little attention. There are also places where his Episcopalinaism intrudes itself, as in his calls for religion to become more ritualized. On a more technical note, a book which includes as many quotes from obscure sources as Bawer's ought to have footnotes or endnotes. While Bawer's book is imperfect, it is a good start for anyone who is interested in the "Christian Right" but is not familiar with the beliefs and dogmas of fundamentalists.
Rating:
Summary: On not becoming what you hate
Review: This promising text, is in the end, an unfortunate example of just what it tries to resist: a demonization of the "enemy" as "un-Christian." Sadly, this tract will become gospel for those who haven't taken the time to get to know fundamentalists as individuals, rather than as a composite monster. As an author of two books on scripture and an avid-anti-fundamentalist, I fear that this book will simply draw sharper lines between "us" and "them," when it could have become an exercise in compassion.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting and Thought-provoking
Review: I found the book Stealing Jesus to be one of the clearest explanations of fundamentalism I have ever seen. I like, and agree with, his descriptions of the Church of Love and Church of Law. I found, however, his depiction of the Catholic Church (of which I am an active member) as a part of the Church of Law to be somewhat inaccurate. I agree that historically what the author said would be true but presently, my understanding is that the Episcopalian and Catholic Churches are very similar and I find his treatment of the differences to be somewhat oversimplified.
Rating:
Summary: Fundamentalists: Modern Pharisees of the Church of Law
Review: An excellent book that traces Pharisees through history, from the time of Jesus up to the present time, where it is manifest in Fundamentalism. Its chief proponents being the likes of Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Jerry Falwell, and Gary Bauer. The Fundamentalist Pharisees have replaced depth, mystery, and the awe of spirituality with theological doctrines of man along with its insistence on legalistic conformity and obedience to authority. In contrast, mainline churches, which have been accuses of socializing the gospel and being "liberal", have not forsaken the message of Jesus, which is love and charity. This book does a wonderful job of demarcating the essential differences between the Church of Love (i.e. following Jesus and his example) and the Church of Law (i.e. following the strict guidelines of a first century lawyer, Paul). The Church of Law indulges itself in argument over what version of scripture is "right"; on whether salvation can be lost; or when and in what way people should be baptized; in whether people can speak in tongues; whether men should be clean shaven or women should be permitted to wear pants. Etc. The Church of Love cuts through this theological and superficial meandering, which is ultimately the folly of man, and follows the way of Jesus, where people try to love and help one another, especially those who are downtrodden, including the homeless, the hungry, the poor, and the outcasts of society. Jesus and his Church of Love are about inclusion; about having one's heart in the right place and allowing it to lead you to charity. In contrast, the Church of Law, consisting of Fundamentalist Pharisees, cares little about inclusion or love and concentrates on theological correctness and doctrinal conformity.
Rating:
Summary: Christians of all persuasions should read this book
Review: Thought-provoking, penetrating analysis of a topic largely taken for granted. Learn about christian church history and find out if you adhere to a "church of law," or a "church of love." If you like books on Christianity, this one will be hard to put down.
|
