May 2008 – Knock knock
Posted by stimulusjournal on May 27, 2008
Our editorial gatherings can get a bit random towards the end of proceedings; such is the evolution of many “carefully-crafted” issues of this publication! So, as we write, David Cashmore practises his Fender chops, while Howlin’ Wolf, distinctively intones the Blues out of Cashmore’s other sound system.
“You wonder why any of those white boys bothered to imitate,” David muses. Our response: Because the likes of the Stones and the Yardbirds were British, and because, in North America, the Blues wasn’t for white boys. It is the same reason, the same need to respond, that has moved David to plug in his own guitar, adjusted his effects, and improvise along.
A purpose of an editorial is to entice the reader to engage with the offerings, something like the uncovering of a need. An editorial is somewhat like the opening joke of a long lecture. (It is also an opportunity for the editors to put in their fifty cents. Fifty cents doesn’t buy much cheese these days, so it is better invested here.)
Knock, knock.
Who’s there?
Richard Dawkins.
Dawk … who?
Dick Dawkins.
I don’t get it.
And neither, really, do we. In this issue Dennis Gordon examines Dawkins’ narrow, outmoded, positivistic take on science, God, and the universe. Mike Fouhy weighs in with an analysis contrasting the “Dawkinsians” and “Einsteinians”. He contends that only the logic of the latter’s approach really interfaces fruitfully with the way things are and, therefore, constrained to be – the empirical former approach is misled by the supposition of fundamental randomness.
Gareth Jones reviews and comments upon discussion, within Reformed theological circles, concerning the ethics of embryonic stem cell research. Jones questions glib analyses that downplay, for what he see as misguided ethical considerations, the potential such research has for life-saving, life enhancing therapies.
David Kettle enjoins us to sustain our interaction with Lesslie Newbign’s contribution to the development of theologically reflective mission within our post- Christendom contexts. Kettle encourages readers to review Newbigin’s writings without letting the voices of Newbigin’s critics ring so loudly in their ears that they can no longer hear what he has been saying.
Stimulus, being “the New Zealand journal of Christian thought and practice”, welcomes Maurice Andrew’s efforts in using the formative work of John Inge to assist in recognising the function of located association within the concrete realisation of God’s forgiveness in this land. Chris Carey-Smith and Edmund Little each interpret biblical texts. Carey-Smith digs over the parable of the four soils in light of the hermeneutics of Bernard Lonergan, while Little serves up a fulsome appraisal of the significance of the wine Jesus made available to the wedding at Cana.
This issue also reprints an article by John Bloom; the editorial team found it to be hilarious. Although written for the North American context, we think that it touches upon trends with which we, in Aotearoa New Zealand, are also all too familiar. Indeed, New Zealand is over-exposed to the influence of North America. “Organic” farmer and teacher, Adi Leeson, will agree, as will the others of the Ploughshares crew whom he recently accompanied (Stanley knives and sickle in hand) onto the Waihopai spy base!
The purpose of an editorial is to entice; therefore, note the subtextual threads we discern weaving through the contributions (science, biblical, theological, cultural, etc) of this issue – together they imply our overexposure to unfruitful foreign gods.
The universal shape of the gospel is never an excuse for the kind of accommodation that ends in capitulation to the supposed givens of surrounding culture. It is the very incarnational particularity – in Jesus Christ – of God’s story in the world that generates, confirms, and ultimately consummates the all encompassing relatedness of the gospel. Such particularity requires that people everywhere grapple with what it is to be Christian in their place and work out the praxis of that story, with integrity and persuasive power, in their own contexts. This grappling demands that we both recognise what our location gives to us and the possibility of God’s transformation of what is given in the light God’s ultimate gift. The reason we “need to” is both an imperative and a compelling desire – it is the same need to respond viscerally, incarnationally, that moves David to plug in his guitar.
Knock, knock.
Who’s there?
Revelation
Revelation who?
Revelation 3:20.
Gavin Drew and Bridget Jennings
for the editorial committee
