A Heretic’s Guide to Eternity: A Review
January 13, 2007
I think I first met Spencer Burke at the first Emergent Convention in San Diego (’03). I had been checking out Spencer’s project, The Ooze, and had appreciated his way of thinking about things. I also had the opportunity to read his book, Making Sense of Church, in which I found his metaphors for the church and the culture to be very intriguing.
I received a copy of A Heretic’s Guide to Eternity awhile back and have been waiting for a “break” in the craziness of school and work to give it a good read. Well, that break never really came, but I wanted to get into the book so I read it this past week. One thing that I really appreciate about Spencer is that he isn’t afraid to just say what he thinks. He’s not afraid of alienating the more conservative “emergent” folk by saying and writing those things that are important to him. Because of this trait in his writing especially, Spencer is not afraid to openly share some of his very progressive thoughts on theology.
Spencer writes with the assumption that religion is not the answer for those that seek God and spirituality today. Today’s religion and traditional institutional churches are providing answers to old questions, and increasingly being seen as irrelevant by the world. Not irrelevant in that “They’re singing hymns and I want cool music with candles” or in that “I would come to church if they would just show some cool video clip from The Matrix each week…” Irrelevant in that the church is not where people turn to today for spiritual experiences. The pastor is no longer seen as the most educated or wise person in a local community. People are looking elsewhere - outside of institutional churches - for ways to connect to God.
Spencer has an extended list of the differences he sees between spirituality and religion. Here are just a few of them:
“Spirituality is concerned with conscious living and with cultivating the sense of interconnectedness. Religion, by comparison, is often held captive by pseudo-orthodoxy and tends to be concerned with professions of belief rather than transformational living.
Spirituality seeks to move beyond authority structures that have dominated organized religion, instead ascribing authority to each individual. Religion, on the other hand, confers authority to a select few in leadership. It tends to be hierarchical and exclusive.
Spirituality begins its discussion of the sacred from the desire for an integrated life. Religions often operate on a sin-redemption paradigm, which has little resonance in today’s society.” (59-60)
Spencer says that he doesn’t speak about moving past institutional faith and religion just as an “attempt at being cool” but rather because “it is an acknowledgment that we live in a new age in which the restraints of religion inhibit the flow of God’s grace into the world” (99).
Throughout his book, Spencer draws on a variety of sources from scripture, to social theory, to eastern religions and pop culture. In his chapter, “All We Need is Grace” he comes right out and says “I now incorporate a panentheist view, which basically means that God is ‘in all,’ alongside my creedal view of God as Father, Son and Spirit” (95). As he acknowledges in the book, this view causes some traditional Christians to grimace and not want to hear more from him. But he believes that it is a very compelling idea when it comes to understanding God. Spencer writes:
“A panentheist view points to the radical connectedness of all reality and infuses the world with the idea that all life is sacred and therefore to be nurtured and cherished. It is a relational theology that declares that God is to be found in the world with us, not just when we get our ticket to heaven. Panentheism fits well with the increasing emphasis on faith as something firmly rooted in this world.” (195)
Finally, Spencer discusses why he considers himself a universalist, again a claim you don’t hear often from Emergent folks. In calling himself a universalist, Spencer holds out for the fact that there can be many things within the world’s different religions that are true and valuable and that no single religion own heaven or God. “When I say I’m a universalist, what I really mean is that I don’t believe you have to convert to any particular religion to find God. As I see it, God finds us, and it has nothing to do with subscribing to any particular religious view” (197).
As the tagline of this blog suggests, I am one who is struggling to find what an open and progressive theology might look like in the world today. I think Spencer Burke is a good example of who is on a similar journey. As he writes in his book, he is still committed to Jesus, who remains an important aspect of his faith. But Spencer has the courage and the desire to be a heretic, whom he describes as “a spiritual insurgent, one who rises up against the established order from the inside - one who heralds a newer way, another option, a fresh view” (xxiii-xxiv).
I think Spencer may in fact be that person for many who are frustrated with today’s institutionalized church. But - it’s hard to think that “religion” and traditional churches are so close to the death that Spencer pronounces when I find myself with so many friends who I know are going to school and getting ordained to go out and get jobs in those very dying churches. I agree with much of what Spencer writes - and I do think that a large portion of churches today are, in many ways, irrelevant and are not the places where people are turning to for spiritual direction.
But as one who is in the process of ordination (PCUSA) and pursuing a possible calling in a traditional Presbyterian church, I have to believe that there is possibility of life within the institution. In some ways, it may be possible to be a heretic from within the church. After all, Spencer does say that a heretic is one who will “rise up…from the inside.”
A Heretic’s Guide to Eternity is worth the read. I hope that Spencer won’t entirely give up on the traditional church, because there are those who hope to see something new come from it yet. But I appreciate much all of what Spencer has to say about spirituality and his idea of what it means to be Christian in the world today and recommend his book(s) to you.
Tags: Controversial, Emergent, emerging-church, Eternity, Heaven, Hell, Heretic
Posted in 
Adam Walker Cleaveland: I am a 28 yr old 
January 13th, 2007 at 11:02 am
Adam,
Have you read Diane Butler Bass’ book Christianity for the Rest of Us?
I picked it up before Christmas, haven’t made it through it yet, but she highlights some of the life and vibrancy to be found within spiritually vital mainline congregations.
January 13th, 2007 at 1:02 pm
Adam,
Thank you for this review, as most i have read have been negative. I too received a pre-published copy to read and review but with my health i have been unable to do it. Very thought=provoking stuff! i think many associated with emergent are not progressive in their theology and are still VERY evangelical and recognize a need for change within the church but still too strongly connected to evangelicalism. AT LEAST THIS IS MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE.
Jim,
I heard Diane speak here in Richmond in November and met her. SHE is FANTASTIC and someone emergent needs to be connected with more. I think i bought the book you mentioned so i look forward even more to checking it out. She gave a great talk.
Adele
January 13th, 2007 at 1:43 pm
Thanks for the review Adam…always appreciate the cutting edge of your blog. I’ll definitely have to check out Burke’s book.
January 13th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
Whenever I read the irrelevance and death of religion and institutional churches, whether it’s coming from emergents or from atheists, I get scared and worried because I don’t see what other structures are appearing to take the church’s place.
I’m not talking about worship or spirituality but about the service that a church community provides for the members of that community.
A concrete example might to think about a situation where a young couple with a two or three kids is going along fine until something happens like a grandparent dying and their church community swoops in to provide them with childcare and maybe a few meals while they deal with the situation. Or there could be any number of other examples of the church community caring for its members.
For me, the really cool thing about the institutional church and organized religion is that whether I move to Boston, Atlanta, Austin or San Francisco I know that I probably will be able to find a church where I can be part of that kind of community, or at least churches give me a place to start looking.
When those churches have died off because of their irrelevance, when we are all responsible for our own spiritual experiences and looking for God in everything, where should I look in a new city for a community?
January 13th, 2007 at 5:50 pm
this is the first positve review i’ve read of burke’s book… everything else has been negative. i’m curious as to what it was specifically about the book that made you consider it a good read and a good recommendation–aside from what you’ve mentioned above.
despite all the negative reviews i’m still interested in picking it up and taking a gander.
January 13th, 2007 at 9:35 pm
Adam,
Thanks for the review. It’s questionable as to whether I’d read it, but interesting nontheless. I have to say though, that in my opinion the insitutional Church is not irrelevant because of its faith (orthodox Christianity) but because of its practice - and I too do not mean what happens for 58 minutes on Sunday morning. Now, if there’s something in Chrsitianity that needs a re-working it’s certainly Ecclesiology, which is where Missiology I think is so important. The institutional Church lost its mission over 2000 years. It’s not panentheism or “spiritualism” or any other “ism” in theology that will save the Church. Just a return to what our original call was - service & witness.
When I see you quoting Burke with - “As he writes in his book, he is still committed to Jesus, who remains an important aspect of his faith. - ” I think, yeah, the Unitarian-Universalist Church is really relevant today. Jesus as an “important aspect of his faith” is like saying that coffee is a key component of my diet. Yes, but my life certainly doesn’t revolve around coffee. And if Jesus Christ is not central to one’s faith, then what is he? There’s not much room to equivocate on Jesus.
Anyway, that’s just a few thoughts. I’ve done a little reading recently about the Anglican Church during the 20th Century and have been absolutely fascinated at the different waves of theology passing through over the years and how not one of them really seeemed to stick - and then I hear echos of stuff on this side of the pond and think “it didn’t seem to be that relevant there after a couple decades, why should I believe it now?”
January 14th, 2007 at 7:56 am
Thanks for the review. I’m going to pick up the book. For me, the problem isn’t the “institutional church” that’s dying, with its liturgies and heirarchies, but the ability of Christians, including the pastors, to commune together authentically. I really do think that’s the deepest issue.
January 14th, 2007 at 11:20 pm
Adam,
I just finished Spencer’s book this week. It’s been sitting on my shelf since it was released. It was interesting since I read it after the Diana Butler Bass book mentioned above.
On Universalism…
Have you read the Evangelical Universalist? It was written under a pseudonym. But it articulates a decidedly Christian view of universalism that takes seriously our sacred texts and grounds its universalist views from there.
It seems that Spencer’s universalism is more of the “unitarian” strain…
I would love to hear your thoughts on if you see anything problematic with one articulation of universalism over the other.
peace
January 15th, 2007 at 3:15 pm
I’m with Don. The problem isn’t orthodoxy, but praxis. We don’t have to become heretical to serve Jesus–I actually would think that inhibits it. We have to be careful that we’re not inventing a God to worship, but serving the God our spiritual forefathers served and encountered; specifically, the God who has loved us in Christ.
January 18th, 2007 at 7:46 pm
Adam,
I like the new look! Interesting review - I hadn’t heard of this book, and I want a copy now!
Once, there was a tendency amongst at least some emergents in Australia to write the institutional church off as irrelevant. I think we’ve moved away from that now, however - now you frequently hear people pointing out that you can’t dismiss your origins, you can’t dismiss the forces that have shaped you and given birth to you. It’s a bit like dismissing your parents as irrelevant.
Not only that, but it highlights the fact that the emerging missional church movement needs the institutional church movement as much as the institutional church needs the emerging church.