Tony Sig

Hannah’s Child: A Theologians Memoir, by Stanley Hauerwas

Published by William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

ISBN: 978-0-8028-6487-1

My thanks to Kelly Hughes for the review copy!

This last Sunday, Pentecost Sunday, was at my parish a joyous celebration. We flew a dove in the procession, we read Acts 2.1-12 in 24 languages simultaneously in honor of the Spirit being poured out on all peoples, we prayed for, blessed and sent a pastor and his family as they prepared to leave us and return to ministry in South Africa having spent two years pouring in their gifts to our congregation, we had a baptism of a new child, pledging to raise the child in the faith and renewing our own baptism, and we even had a first communion.

I can think of nothing that would please Stanley Hauerwas more or that could sum up more appropriately the themes of Hauerwas’ new memoir, Hannah’s Child. Hannah’s Child is not a biography, thank God.  Rather than filled with dates and dry reportage, this book amounts to a theological reflection on his life. In fact originally Hauerwas had wanted the subtitle to be “A Theological Memoir” rather than “A Theologians Memoir” but Eerdmans didn’t think it would sell well! Which is, to be fair, probably true. But the original title itself ought to be an indicator of the theological character of the work.

Hauerwas’ mother and father had wanted to have a child for some time but they had remained childless. Desperate, his mother prayed the prayer of Hannah, promising to dedicate her child to the Lord should she become pregnant. It is then providential that that child should become, according to Time magazine, “Americas Best Theologian.” Whatever else he is, Hauerwas is at least controversial and few people who care about contemporary theology do not have an opinion of him. (Surprisingly, many in academia cannot reconcile themselves to his radical ideas. Hauerwas dryly notes that there seems to be a recent trend in younger academics to prove that they are not “Hauerwasian.” A trend I am more than happy to buck and hold in derision.)

As is to be expected, the book is filled with catchy one liners and quixotic stories:

“I don’t believe in California”

”I am not a pacifist because of a theory, I am a pacifist because John Howard Yoder convinced me that nonviolence and Christianity are inseparable”

”Most people do not have to become a theologian to become a Christian but I probably did.”

There are several themes that end up repeating themselves throughout. Whether this is intentional or not I don’t know; I don’t much care for authorial intent or original meanings of texts anyway.

Much of Hauerwas’ adult life was lived under the dark shadow of life with a mentally ill wife. Anne Hauerwas had bipolar disorder and was verbally abusive to Stanley and even their son Adam throughout much of the 20 years they were married. A large portion of the narrative is dominated by Anne and her behaviour. At times she manifested huge fantasies and delusions; sometimes believing that other men loved her and/or were being hounded by demons, from which only her and her bed could rescue them; or sometimes she would blame Stanley for all of the problems in her life; being an artist and having read feminist literature she thought him oppressive and patriarchichal. She showed very little interest in Adam even when he would win awards or get into great schools. Even after she left Stanley, she attempted drastic moves to pull him back into the swirling chaos, an attempt that ultimately failed. She died young of heart failure but she left an indelible mark on Hauerwas.

Besides Anne, the institutions where Hauerwas has worked have also exerted a lasting influence on him. He started out at a small Midwestern Lutheran school, Augustana. This is where he cut his teeth and was in turn cut by the world of academia of which to that point he knew little. Because of his minor involvement in disagreements over racism he stirred up enough waves to put him in poor relations with some in the school. His contract was not renewed. But he was to be picked up by Notre Dame. This is where he was to become a very Catholic Protestant, more Catholic indeed than most Catholics. This is also where he would come to know the work of John Howard Yoder. This had just as large an effect as anything else and he is to this day irreversibly in Yoder’s debt. He loved it there and would probably have never left but for the fact that Richard McBrien (who he affectionately calls “Dick” McBrien) became dean of the divinity school and enacted too many changes for Hauerwas’ liking.

“If you want to know where liberal Protestant theology has gone to die, one need not look much further than some Catholic theologians”

Hauerwas pulls no punches in his vivid descriptions of conflict with school and church leaders.

From there he ends up in Duke where he has been now for I believe 25 years. Though he has frustrations with Duke, not least of which is the separation of the divinity school from the university, Hauerwas is grateful for his time at Duke.

His account of all these institutions is peppered throughout with names of friends; far too many names for me to recall. More so than Anne or his time in institutions, the theme of Friendship is ingrained deep in the narrative. Hauerwas has many many friends and he is eternally grateful for these friends, without whom he says he could not be the person that he is. Friends got him and his son Adam through his years with Anne, friends made him the intellectual he is, friends are people who keep him accountable. His second wife and total love Paula is his closest friend. I was reminded of the great warmth of C. S. Lewis’ account of “Friend Love” in his stellar little book “The Four Loves.” Of things left for Hauerwas to write on, I hope he dedicates a book to a Christian understanding of friendship.

Similar to yet different than the large role of friends in his life, Hauerwas pays particular attention, appropriately, to the churches where he invested his life. From Lutherans at Augustana, to Catholics and Methodists at Notre Dame and Methodist and Episcopalians at Duke, he sees in these parishes, the incarnation of his own theology. The Church figures large in all he has done, apart from which he couldn’t be a Christian.

Finally, thanksgiving for all of these gifts is the glue that holds his entire memoir together. He cannot go more than a few paragraphs without pausing to give thanks for his parents, his employers, his friends and the Church.

I cannot recommend this book enough. It is easily readable and I hope that many Christians can be enriched and challenged and blessed by the gift that is Stanley Hauerwas by the reading of this book. It is not an abstract nor academic work, most anybody can read it without trouble.  From it they could learn just how this theologian thinks of himself in relation to the Church, how he envisions himself serving, guiding and being guided by it.  I’ve found myself grateful for my own life, my friends and the Church on account of it. I will be digesting it for some time to come.

Reed Signature

Part I: A Better Bumper Sticker Part II: Prooftexts, Rights & Other Myths Part III: Coming Soon Part IV: Coming Soon Part V: Coming Soon

II: Prooftexts, Rights & Other Myths

If you want a peek at the rest of this series, Stanley Hauerwas’ “Abortion, Theologically Understood” is my cheat sheet.

After some study, it quickly became apparent to me that there is so much nonsense floating around masquerading as Christian abortion ethics that it was necessary to clear the air a bit before we could continue. This list was originally going to be a quick adendum to my first post but I soon realized it warranted it’s own roman numeral.

Below is a list of what I’ll call inappropriate categories to discuss abortion ethics. They’re inappropriate because they often mislead the lifers and the choicers into opposite sides on an issue that is, in reality, a proverbial rabbit hole. They’re grouped loosely into two categories: Scripture and Reason. Obviously, I think both will have something to say to my final ethic, but I think it’s best for me to explain just how I will use these two forms of authority by first clearly stating how I will not use them.

I also want to say out front that this discussion is distinctly Christian and uses my interpretation of the Church as a radically counter-intuitive community to the secular mindset. If you are not Christian, the arguments in these posts probably wont do much for you—rather, we’ll have to hope a Christian community living authentically will show you what we mean.

Scripture Holes
In most of the ancient cultures from which we get our Scripture, offspring is widely considered to be a gift. As my undergrad OT prof would say, “Israel’s greatest possession was not the temple or the promised land, but its sons and daughters.” For this reason, on intentional, systematic abortion Scripture is silent. Such an idea would’ve been as foreign as an iPhone.

This is unlike other ethical issues we’ve discussed on this blog where, at times, Scripture seems conflicted within itself or in contrast to contemporary experience. This is especially difficult for those traditions that demand something be explicitly spelled out in Scripture in order for it to be believed. Unfortunately, this leads to goofy interpretations of inculturated texts which only muddle the larger conversation.

1. Exodus 20:13, Deuteronomy 5:17 “You shall not murder.”
To cite this as a prooftext against abortion is a bit embarrassing. No one is arguing in favor of murder. Rather, it is whether or not we can define abortion as murder.

2. Exodus 21:22-25 “When people who are fighting injure a pregnant woman so that there is a miscarriage [...]“
This text is a piece of property law. If a pregnant woman is assaulted and dies, then the case is treated as an act of murder. However, if only the fetus dies, the husband is paid a fine since he has been robbed of a potential source of progeny. Interestingly, this text seems to draw a distinction between the life of the woman and the life of the fetus. However, its whole concern is on accidental abortion, not the intentional termination of a fetus.

3. Psalm 139:13-16, Jeremiah 1:5 “[...]it was you who knit me together in my mother’s womb[...]“
These poetic passages are the most common “prooftexts” that I’ve seen. Certainly, they can say something to the debate but we must not put too much weight on their interpretation. They say nothing of a fetus’ status as a “person.” They are poetic expressions of God’s foreknowledge—God knew his creation before we were born, before our conception even. It’s not completely irrelevant, but it’s certainly not preoccupied with our modern definitions of personhood.

4. Luke 1:44 “For as soon as I heard the sound of your greeting, the child in my womb leapt for joy.”
This passage is entirely Christological. The author is not attempting to say something about the status of the unborn John as a person, but the importance of Mary as the mother of Christ.

Reason Holes
In the public debate, abortion ethics are discussed primarily according to the criteria of Reason. Too often, this has Christians falling into categories that have no foundation in our faith, but rather in secular ideals.

1. A Women’s Issue
Why is that we say only women have abortions? Was it just a woman who conceived of the child in the first place? The man who impregnates a woman and abandons her makes a decision about their child—whether he wants to or not. Gentlemen, it’s time we start taking responsibility for where we’re installing our appliances.

2. A Conflict of Rights
Unfortunately, abortion is too often reduced to a competition between the rights of the mother vs. those of the child. Whoever said anything about rights?! As a Christian, I have no right to life—I have no rights at all! Life is a gift from God and no one has any claim to deserving it. No Christian has autonomy over their own bodies. We died to that when we decided to follow Christ and belong to one another. Negotiating rights is the way Liberal societies like ours achieve cooperative agreements between individuals who have absolutely nothing in common except for a fear of death and a mutual desire for protection. As Stanley Hauerwas observes:

“We Christians do not believe that we have inalienable rights. That is the false presumption of Enlightenment individualism, and it opposes everything that Christians believe about what it means to be a creature.

3. Privacy
This is the preoccupation of Roe vs. Wade and the most common argument for abortion today. In light of Christian community (and I must reiterate that this only makes sense within Christian community) the right to privacy or individual choice is distinctively unchristian. We are accountable to each other to see that individual choices both edify the community and exemplify God’s renewal of creation.

4. The Sanctity of Life
I addressed this in my posts on nonviolence. A Christian does not preserve life because he believes it to be inherently sacred but because, as created beings, we don’t see another human’s life as ours to take. Our respect for life is not a statement about life, but rather about its creator. Again, I go to Hauerwas:
“To say that life is an overriding good is to underwrite the modern sentimentality that there is absolutely nothing in this world worth dying for. Christians know that Christianity is simply extended training in dying early.”

5. Determining When Human Life Begins
This is an impossible task—both scientifically and Scripturally. Moreover, shouldn’t Christians be as hopeful as possible? Didn’t Jesus make a point of radical inclusion for just these gray individuals from the fringe of society?

6. Quality of Life
It’s misleading to say that “no unwanted child should ever be born.” Just who is that doesn’t want them? The mother? Isn’t this the point where the Church should step in and say, “we want them” or “God wants them”? Is this not one step away from advocating infanticide amongst the poor?

7. What if Mary had decided to abort Jesus?
“What if Hitler’s mother had decided to abort him?” Don’t waste time with hypotheticals.

Having cleared the work desk a bit, we can now move forward in building a Christian ethic. To all those visiting our blog for the first time because of the volatile nature of this series:

Have at me!

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 201 other followers