Yesterday afternoon, I received my contract in the mail. For the coming academic year, I will serve as Visiting Professor of New Testament at Duke Divinity School. It’s a wonderful opportunity for me to reconnect with my doctoral alma mater, for Margaret to have a base in Durham while she finishes up her dissertation, for all three of us to spend a year among wonderful friends, and of course it’s among the top two or three theological schools in the country.
 
I expect to be teaching all exegetical courses — a marked change from Seabury, where I rarely had the chance to teach exegesis and mostly taught intro courses. On the other hand, it means immersing myself in John’s Gospel, Romans, Luke, and 1 Corinthians (unless there’s an unanticipated change). No committee or administrative work, and I’ll probably look into the possibility of participating in a hermeneutics reading group, if there’s any interest.
 
Now, we have to get Margaret’s contract squared away, and find a place to live. But next year’s destination is set.

AKMA :: May.14.2008 :: Uncategorized :: 18 Comments »

On one hand, people want to interpret the Bible literally, as opposed to figurative or abstracted readings; the literal sense provides a bulwark against caprice and an assurance to humble readers. On the other hand, people want to distance themselves from literalists, who read the Bible too literally. As a result, interpreters devise elaborate defenses of what counts as “literal” (in a good sense) that’s nonetheless different from what’s literal (in a bad sense); they ascribe figurative force to the literal sense (“at this point, the literal sense is a metaphor”) and locate the determinative qualities of this literality in the text, even though the literalist is making the same appeal to “the text itself.”
 
It needs to be this way, because such readers insist that it can’t be that the Bible’s meaning is underdetermined, that the communicative gestures represented in a Bible might plausibly be apprehended differently by different readers who weight the different aspects of the representation (and indeed, “different representations”) differently.

AKMA :: May.13.2008 :: Uncategorized :: 8 Comments »

The Stereotypist’s commentary on signifying, and (family favorite) fainting goats.

AKMA :: May.12.2008 :: Uncategorized :: No Comments »

For a while, it looked as though iI might be headed toward a non-academic vocation (that looks very unlikely now); at that time, I looked forward to never again grading somebody. Our family’s homeschooling has long involved the happy premise that we did not need to characterize our children’s learning with the rough tools of four or five alphabetical short-cuts, and I lobbied heartily at Seabury against institutional structures that depended on grading.
 
So I read with interest Bob Sommer’s essay in Inside Higher Education which seems to speak with two minds about the subject. On one hand, “For me personally, grades are a secondary and derivative issue at best, an anguished responsibility at worst”; on the other, Sommer seems sufficiently unperturbed by the avalanche of problems he cites with the systems of grading and testing to declare, “My objection is not to all testing, only to summative (end-of-course) testing for an official record” (apparently overlooking the aspect of grading, at this point).
 
I very emphatically approve of teachers and students articulating an honest sense of progress and achievement in a given setting. Bravo! Brava! Hip, hip, hooray!
 
I’m not at all convinced, though, that letter grades provide the best possible, or even the most functionally appropriate, means for articulating that honest evaluation. Sommer notes that “In small classes one can replace grades with written narratives, if anyone cares to read them, but this will not work in large classes” — but even in small classes, narrative evaluation does not of itself satisfy the need for effective assessment and communication.
 
One thing’s for sure: Sommer’s article and the very ardent comments that hang from it raise once again the intensely important question of whether the relatively recent innovation of “grading” contributes to learning, or whether there might not be another way of assessing accomplishment that complements, rather than detracts from, the telos of teaching.

AKMA :: May.12.2008 :: Uncategorized :: No Comments »

This year, the Library Falcons have four hatchlings.
 

 
Margaret has been watching them, ahem, like a hawk.

AKMA :: May.11.2008 :: Uncategorized :: No Comments »

Margaret and I admire the Mothers Day op-ed comic by Jillian Tamaki and Mariko Tamaki. Each of us found slightly different emphases to appreciate, but we both found this very short memoir touching and theologically-provocative.

AKMA :: May.11.2008 :: Uncategorized :: No Comments »

This morning, I sent the deans of Seabury my resignation from the faculty.
 
I will miss a lot about Seabury: the labyrinthine navigation, the smell of a freshly-waxed chapel on the first day of classes, your choice of garths, the “Flaten All Boxes” sign. Please, someone, take a picture of the “Recreption Area” plaque. And especially the wonderful students who devoted so much time and effort and patience to the courses I led.
 

 
Margaret will make a trip to Evanston in a few weeks, to do the first push of boxing-up; Pippa and I will go back with her in June, after a memorial event for my father, to finish up the house and work on my office. At this point, we have a strong idea of where we’ll be, but until we get papers signed I’d rather not make any public statements. At this point, Plan A is kaput, Plan B is looking highly improbable, Plan C is presumably all set for Margaret, Plan D what we’re expecting for me, Plan E and I have agreed to continue our promising conversations for another year with no commitments either way, Plan F is probably out of the question, and Plan G wasn’t much of a chance in the first place. If all proceeds as expected, Margaret and I’ll be able to affirm our respective Plans very soon.
 
We’ve taken Step One, though.

AKMA :: May.10.2008 :: Uncategorized :: 6 Comments »

I beg your pardon, but today was a very full day and its outcome involves several tasks for me to execute carefully and sequentially. As I get these squared away, I’ll be in a position to say more. Thank you for your patience.

AKMA :: May.09.2008 :: Uncategorized :: 1 Comment »

On a walk back to the Center from Small World, the “Pruit Igoe” section of Koyaanisqatsi played on my iPod. I can sort of understand not enjoying Einstein on the Beach or some other Glass works, but even twenty-plus years after Margaret and I were first captivated by the film and music in a small theater in New Haven, these compositions still knock me out.

AKMA :: May.08.2008 :: Uncategorized :: No Comments »

“That was depressing, even for a Finn.” — Olli-Pekka Vainio, author of Justification and Participation in Christ

AKMA :: May.08.2008 :: Uncategorized :: No Comments »

• Obama has not shown that he can’t win over white blue-collar voters — he has shown that he’s not as popular as Clinton is among them. “Obama hasn’t proved he can win… white working-class voters“ — yes he has, he just hasn’t won as many of them as has Clinton. There’s a very significant difference between Obama running against McCain in a general election and Obama running against Clinton in a series of primaries whose main function is to determine the Democratic Party’s nominee. It’s possible that white working-class Democrats will support a pro-war Republican in the general election, but the strongest sponsors of the “Obama can’t win” refrain belong to the Clinton campaign’s spin factory. It would be interesting to see how many of them pontificated four years ago about how “electable” John Kerry was. Oh, and Obama didn’t suffer a “big loss” in Pennsylvania — last I saw, Clinton’s margin came in at about 9%, which (if that counts as a “big loss”) would make Obama’s win in North Carolina a “crushing demolition.” In fact, Obama seems to have made much greater gains among Clinton-favoring Pennsylvanians than Clinton made among Obama-favoring North Carolinians.
• Speaking of political figures, it was good of the New York Times to notice that Jeremiah Wright is not the only bombastic preacher who’s aligned with a presidential candidate. Of the two, I find, Wright vastly more plausible than Hagee, but the dominant media culture has defined Wright as “unpatriotic” and “controversial,” whereas Hagee has not been scrutinized and characterized with nearly the fierce (and, in effect, partisan and I dare say racist) attention. Thanks, Jennifer, for catching that.
• Cheers for the Open Humanities Press! I would wish that their numbers increase, but that’s practically inevitable; perhaps, “May your rise to prominence be swift and expansive!”
• A propos of nothing in particular, I wondered yesterday how Washington would react if the 1977 Hanafi Muslim siege took place today. Same cast of characters, same behavior — just a more intensely-charged atmosphere of fear and anti-Muslim anxiety.
• Three theological notes worth remarking. First, Jason links to Stephanie Paulsell’s apologia for academic preparation for ministry. I’m on board with both sets of observations, but I’d probably put it more strongly. A particular anti-intellectual bias has crept into church life, and those who venture to name it will be labeled “eliltists” — but I can’t escape the conclusion that if the gospel matters at all, it matters in ways that benefit from knowledge understanding, and critical reflection. To repeat myself: if you were having heart trouble, you probably would not go to a doctor just because she had a pleasant bedside manner and was open to ideas from lots of different approaches to medical treatment. Ministry involves the cure of wounded souls, with far-reaching consequences, but people deprecate learned preparation for that vocation. Sigh.
  Second, Jason points to Doug Chapin’s pointer to a survey that suggests that “fundamentalists” don”t know their biblical content as well as those whom the report’s author calls “critical” readers. The labels don’t matter much, though this comes as no surprise to me. What matters most is that “Even within highly secularized nations such as France, the U.K. and Holland, broad majorities report a positive attitude towards the Bible, describing it as ‘interesting’ and expressing a desire to know more about it” and “Broad majorities also describe the Bible as ‘difficult’ and express a need for help in understanding it – suggesting, according to the authors of the study, a ‘teaching moment’ for the churches.” This corresponds to what I’ve experienced in every situation — except those where parish or institutional leadership has inculcated the anti-intellectual mediocratism I alluded to above. The vital point isn’t that so-called fundamentalists don’t know the Bible well, but that the vast preponderance of people sense that they don’t know the Bible well, find it difficult to learn about, and want to know more.
  Third, Tripp pointed me to this post about “what the church can learn from Wikipedia,” a premise about which I’d be more positive if I didn’t see so overwhelming an anti-intellectual bias to so many quarters in church life (Left Behind and da Vinci Code, anyone?). I’d just as soon not rely primarily on ground-up Jesusphilia as nuritional guide for healthy faith.

AKMA :: May.07.2008 :: Uncategorized :: 3 Comments »

I just received word from Seabury’s email newsletter that my [former] colleague Frank Yamada has accepted a position as Director of Asian American Ministries and Associate Professor of Hebrew Bible at McCormick Theological Seminary in the Hyde Park consortium of seminaries on the South Side of Chicago.
 
Frank will be a tremendous catch for McCormick, and his departure from Seabury will sadden everyone who continues under the Seabury banner. Congratulations, Frank (and Michelle, and Steven and Adam)!

AKMA :: May.07.2008 :: Uncategorized :: 2 Comments »