Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.24 AVERAGE
4.24 AVERAGE
No book has so quickly changed my opinion on a topic as this one
James Smith does an immaculate job describing what Christian universities strive to do and how that has failed to be a proper counterforce for the "liturgies of the world." The whole philosophy in the book challenges how we view normal everyday practices that shape what our idea of the life are about. He challenges us to consider what it looks like to cultivate practices and rituals that shape our desires. The perspective reader should know that this is a moderately dense book for the subject matter. He's recently come out with what I believe is meant to be and easier read that covers the same topic. Overall, I'm excited to go back over this book again in the future and continue to ponder the ideas he's left me with. The book will challenge the reader to think about the central purpose of being a Christian and what Christian Ccommunity ought to look like.
James Smith does an immaculate job describing what Christian universities strive to do and how that has failed to be a proper counterforce for the "liturgies of the world." The whole philosophy in the book challenges how we view normal everyday practices that shape what our idea of the life are about. He challenges us to consider what it looks like to cultivate practices and rituals that shape our desires. The perspective reader should know that this is a moderately dense book for the subject matter. He's recently come out with what I believe is meant to be and easier read that covers the same topic. Overall, I'm excited to go back over this book again in the future and continue to ponder the ideas he's left me with. The book will challenge the reader to think about the central purpose of being a Christian and what Christian Ccommunity ought to look like.
challenging
reflective
medium-paced
Smith's basic thesis is this: since the Enlightenment, the Western world has viewed humanity as "rational animals" ("I think, therefore I am"). However, it is more accurate to say we are "animals of desire." A large portion of thinking is subconscious. All humans have a vision of the "good life." Companies, the military, sports teams, patriotism, and universities all tap into this desire for a good life with rituals or "cultural liturgies." Therefore, since we are creatures of desire, that should inform how Christian educators teach. Merely relaying information is not enough. Rather, we must help create habits that mold our desires.
Whether when I was in seminary or now in campus ministry, there is a lot of talk among Christians in such circles about worldview. The way it goes is that the university, for example, has a view of the world which is being taught to students in the classroom. Our responsibility as Christians is to teach Christian students a Christian worldview. Usually the emphasis is on the intellect and on belief. Your university professor will teach you to believe one thing but you need to critique that belief and have the correct Christian belief.
One of the main points of James Smith's fantastic book is that this way of engaging with the world buys into a false anthropology. It is the idea that humans are merely thinking creatures whose bodies don't matter. The battle happens in the mind and if we change what goes on in the mind then everything else in life will also change. Against this Smith argues (and note he argues, so this is not any sort of anti-intellectual book) that this is not how humans change our behavior. Most of what we do happens precognitively, before we even think rationally about it. We move through life as habitual people, doing things because we have been trained to do them.
We are still responsible for these things as it is our choices and previous actions that create these habits. But changing how we live and act is not as simple as just beginning to believe differently. Smith argues that the world around knows that we are shaped not just by thinking differently, and if the church only focuses on changing minds and beliefs we are doomed to frustration. In the end, Smith offers the Christian liturgy as the format for spiritual formation, it is within such regular rituals and repetitions that new habits are formed. Further, engaging in Christian worship involves our whole bodies, us as we really are, which moves us to change in actions.
Overall this book, and its sequel Imagining the Kingdom (I am not going to write a different review for that one) are a must read for pastors and campus ministers and all who work in ministry. Smith writes from a Reformed perspective (though perhaps not young and restless?) but his ideas and conclusions apply to Christians of all stripes. This is one of the most helpful and challenging books I've read in a long time in regards to how I do ministry on a regular basis. I know I will be thinking about it and returning to it for a long time.
One of the main points of James Smith's fantastic book is that this way of engaging with the world buys into a false anthropology. It is the idea that humans are merely thinking creatures whose bodies don't matter. The battle happens in the mind and if we change what goes on in the mind then everything else in life will also change. Against this Smith argues (and note he argues, so this is not any sort of anti-intellectual book) that this is not how humans change our behavior. Most of what we do happens precognitively, before we even think rationally about it. We move through life as habitual people, doing things because we have been trained to do them.
We are still responsible for these things as it is our choices and previous actions that create these habits. But changing how we live and act is not as simple as just beginning to believe differently. Smith argues that the world around knows that we are shaped not just by thinking differently, and if the church only focuses on changing minds and beliefs we are doomed to frustration. In the end, Smith offers the Christian liturgy as the format for spiritual formation, it is within such regular rituals and repetitions that new habits are formed. Further, engaging in Christian worship involves our whole bodies, us as we really are, which moves us to change in actions.
Overall this book, and its sequel Imagining the Kingdom (I am not going to write a different review for that one) are a must read for pastors and campus ministers and all who work in ministry. Smith writes from a Reformed perspective (though perhaps not young and restless?) but his ideas and conclusions apply to Christians of all stripes. This is one of the most helpful and challenging books I've read in a long time in regards to how I do ministry on a regular basis. I know I will be thinking about it and returning to it for a long time.
Back in 2018 James K.A. Smith spoke at my seminary. He spoke two days. The first day his talk was titled "Restor(i)ed Loves: The Contest for Our Imaginations." The second was title "From Excarnation to Reenchantment: Why Imagination Is Crucial for Mission." These two talks left me speechless.
While in the midst of my seminary degree, this man comes in and delivers two of the most riveting speeches I had heard. It feels like a watershed moment in my life. I had similar thoughts bounce around in my mind, but he articulated them and connected all the pieces for me.
I've shared these talks with colleagues and showed them to students. Smith got something really right. A missing piece in modern evangelical culture.
Something that Smith did in these talks was he captured my imagination! From the beginning to the end I was hooked. He starts with a clear thesis and follows it all the way through. (It seems he had time to process things after he had written this book!)
I say all of this, because I approached this book with high expectations. I expected a deeper discussion of the things he talked about in his talks. More notes I could write down in my journal and return back to year after year. And, sure, there are some quotations from this book I may refer back to, but by and large this does not have the magic effect his talks had.
Here's where I think he takes a step back from his talks.
First, the talks were focused. He was convincing us of one thing. "The world isn't trying to change your mind, it's trying to capture your imagination." Desiring the Kingdom suffers from trying to do too many things. It tries to convince us that we are loving beings, then show us that practices direct our desires, then that the world changes our desires by its practices, then shows us the Church's practices, then talks about Christian universities.... I was exhausted by the end of it all. This would have benefitted from a singular focus. Our "liturgies" matter!
Second, the talks engaged my imagination. Smith used amazing stories and references. He engaged me the entire time. But, here he hardly engages my imagination at all. His writing is (understandably) academic. The life and personality that bubbled out from his talks were suppressed by the academician language. What was a vibrant and engaging talk, became dull on the page when it didn't have to.
All in all I'd say this could have been split into three books. Book one could have focused on the baseline argument that our liturgies matter and that the world is trying to shape our loves. Book two could have focused on the counter liturgies of the church, and book three could have focused on the proposed liturgies for the Christian university.
While in the midst of my seminary degree, this man comes in and delivers two of the most riveting speeches I had heard. It feels like a watershed moment in my life. I had similar thoughts bounce around in my mind, but he articulated them and connected all the pieces for me.
I've shared these talks with colleagues and showed them to students. Smith got something really right. A missing piece in modern evangelical culture.
Something that Smith did in these talks was he captured my imagination! From the beginning to the end I was hooked. He starts with a clear thesis and follows it all the way through. (It seems he had time to process things after he had written this book!)
I say all of this, because I approached this book with high expectations. I expected a deeper discussion of the things he talked about in his talks. More notes I could write down in my journal and return back to year after year. And, sure, there are some quotations from this book I may refer back to, but by and large this does not have the magic effect his talks had.
Here's where I think he takes a step back from his talks.
First, the talks were focused. He was convincing us of one thing. "The world isn't trying to change your mind, it's trying to capture your imagination." Desiring the Kingdom suffers from trying to do too many things. It tries to convince us that we are loving beings, then show us that practices direct our desires, then that the world changes our desires by its practices, then shows us the Church's practices, then talks about Christian universities.... I was exhausted by the end of it all. This would have benefitted from a singular focus. Our "liturgies" matter!
Second, the talks engaged my imagination. Smith used amazing stories and references. He engaged me the entire time. But, here he hardly engages my imagination at all. His writing is (understandably) academic. The life and personality that bubbled out from his talks were suppressed by the academician language. What was a vibrant and engaging talk, became dull on the page when it didn't have to.
All in all I'd say this could have been split into three books. Book one could have focused on the baseline argument that our liturgies matter and that the world is trying to shape our loves. Book two could have focused on the counter liturgies of the church, and book three could have focused on the proposed liturgies for the Christian university.
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced
This is a book I will have to sit with and live out. The ideas certainly have the potential to be life-changing and perspective-altering, but I think the author would agree that just reading the book and absorbing its philosophy will not convince me of its truth. Hoping I can adopt more counter-cultural liturgical practices, and I can check back in on this book!
Seems repetitive
I liked this book and admire Smith's thoughts on love, the church, and “liturgy of the mall” notion. However I’ve read Smith before and I felt like I was rereading a book I already read but I wasn’t and I checked twice while reading this.
I liked this book and admire Smith's thoughts on love, the church, and “liturgy of the mall” notion. However I’ve read Smith before and I felt like I was rereading a book I already read but I wasn’t and I checked twice while reading this.
The fact that it took me 3.5 months to read this book says more about the hecticness of my schedule as a first year teacher than any negative aspects about this book. Smith does an excellent job of looking at things in a new perspective and I fully bought into his argument that Reformed Christianity in particular has idolized the intellectual world to the neglect of the whole human being. I also really liked his emphasis on physical place and his discussion of how habits end up forming our character at times more than intellectual beliefs do. All-in-all, I liked his framework a lot.
Where I was less convinced was in his applications. While I understand where he's coming from in his approval of having communion and church services multiple times a week, I don't think adding regular worship services above what God has prescribed is exceedingly wise. I wasn't fully comfortable with Smith's semi-pacifism (though I do have serious concerns with the approach the US has taken w/wars in the past couple decades). And I am not completely convinced by his vision for what Christian universities should look like (though having attended one for 4 years, I can testify to the fact that the academic/chapel divide very much exists and needs resolving).
That being said, even where I disagree with Smith, Smith provided thought-provoking insights that made me think about these issues more than I had in the past. And like I said earlier on, I really liked his "you are what you love" matrix, especially when he expanded on what exactly he meant by that.
Overall, this was a solid book that I really enjoyed and which gave me much to chew on.
Rating: 4.5 Stars (Excellent).
Where I was less convinced was in his applications. While I understand where he's coming from in his approval of having communion and church services multiple times a week, I don't think adding regular worship services above what God has prescribed is exceedingly wise. I wasn't fully comfortable with Smith's semi-pacifism (though I do have serious concerns with the approach the US has taken w/wars in the past couple decades). And I am not completely convinced by his vision for what Christian universities should look like (though having attended one for 4 years, I can testify to the fact that the academic/chapel divide very much exists and needs resolving).
That being said, even where I disagree with Smith, Smith provided thought-provoking insights that made me think about these issues more than I had in the past. And like I said earlier on, I really liked his "you are what you love" matrix, especially when he expanded on what exactly he meant by that.
Overall, this was a solid book that I really enjoyed and which gave me much to chew on.
Rating: 4.5 Stars (Excellent).
The best types of books are the ones that, while you're still reading them, you're thinking, discussing, and talking about the content that they're positing. Desiring the Kingdom is that type of book. Since starting earlier this week, I found myself constantly thinking through many of the things that Smith posits and argues for.
In sum, Smith argues that contra models of philosophical anthropology that argue for humans as "thinking beings" or "believing beings," that we humans are more appropriately "loving beings". We are driven toward what we love, or desire.
After setting the stage for humans as "loving beings," he then proceeds to show how various institutions put forth "liturgies" that set out to shape our desire for other, lesser kingdoms. He shows this by exegeting the liturgies of the mall, the sports stadium, and the university. This cultural exegesis, as well as showing the distinction between "thick" and "thin" habits, was probably one of the most helpful things for me.
With an understanding of other "liturgical institutions," Smith then proceeds to exegete the liturgies of the church. For someone who has a pretty substantive ignorance of the liturgy of the church, this was helpful and clarifying - as well as challenging - to think through. As one who has drank deeply from the "Reformed" stream of thought that is cautious of anything Romish, it was a helpful corrective to think about history, tradition, and sacramentalism - even if I walk away with some minor disagreements with Smith.
Smith concludes with a brief chapter on how to incorporate some of these liturgical elements that drive us to "desire the Kingdom" into a distinctly Christian education. This was a good chapter, though not really meaningful for a broader audience (which is understandable since Smith originally aimed to write DTK for those thinking about Christian education.)
My only disagreement is that it seems that Smith's emphasis on humans as "desiring" animals can sometimes, in my mind, be pressed to far. For instance, he argues that contra man as "thinking" or "believing" being, we are, firstly, driven by desire. Therefore, we should start with "liturgies of desire" instead of thinking firstly about right thinking or right believing. My only question would be, Why does there need to be a hierarchy of motivations? It seems more appropriate to think of desires not hierarchically but all mutually feeding the others. For instance, what I think will help shape my beliefs, which in turn helps change the scope of my worship, etc. Humans are beings who are motivated by thoughts, beliefs, and desires that are all helping to shape human person.
Minor critique aside, I want to conclude by saying that this book was really good. It has already helped me to have a critical eye toward potential "secular liturgies" that are at war with my desires. Not only that, but it has also helped me to think more appropriately about what it is we do as the gathered people of God each Sunday as we remember what Christ has done and long for his return. I very much look forward to reading the other two books in this series.
In sum, Smith argues that contra models of philosophical anthropology that argue for humans as "thinking beings" or "believing beings," that we humans are more appropriately "loving beings". We are driven toward what we love, or desire.
After setting the stage for humans as "loving beings," he then proceeds to show how various institutions put forth "liturgies" that set out to shape our desire for other, lesser kingdoms. He shows this by exegeting the liturgies of the mall, the sports stadium, and the university. This cultural exegesis, as well as showing the distinction between "thick" and "thin" habits, was probably one of the most helpful things for me.
With an understanding of other "liturgical institutions," Smith then proceeds to exegete the liturgies of the church. For someone who has a pretty substantive ignorance of the liturgy of the church, this was helpful and clarifying - as well as challenging - to think through. As one who has drank deeply from the "Reformed" stream of thought that is cautious of anything Romish, it was a helpful corrective to think about history, tradition, and sacramentalism - even if I walk away with some minor disagreements with Smith.
Smith concludes with a brief chapter on how to incorporate some of these liturgical elements that drive us to "desire the Kingdom" into a distinctly Christian education. This was a good chapter, though not really meaningful for a broader audience (which is understandable since Smith originally aimed to write DTK for those thinking about Christian education.)
My only disagreement is that it seems that Smith's emphasis on humans as "desiring" animals can sometimes, in my mind, be pressed to far. For instance, he argues that contra man as "thinking" or "believing" being, we are, firstly, driven by desire. Therefore, we should start with "liturgies of desire" instead of thinking firstly about right thinking or right believing. My only question would be, Why does there need to be a hierarchy of motivations? It seems more appropriate to think of desires not hierarchically but all mutually feeding the others. For instance, what I think will help shape my beliefs, which in turn helps change the scope of my worship, etc. Humans are beings who are motivated by thoughts, beliefs, and desires that are all helping to shape human person.
Minor critique aside, I want to conclude by saying that this book was really good. It has already helped me to have a critical eye toward potential "secular liturgies" that are at war with my desires. Not only that, but it has also helped me to think more appropriately about what it is we do as the gathered people of God each Sunday as we remember what Christ has done and long for his return. I very much look forward to reading the other two books in this series.