"Rumours of Another World" Notes: "Eyes of Faith" & "Practising the Existence of God"

So...first of all, a belated "Happy New Year!" to all & sundry. Second, without further ado, I now present my notes on Chapters 12 & 13 of Rumours of Another World:

Through a Glass, Darkly

In Chapters 12 and 13, Yancey tackles further real-world applications of the “two-worlds” principles he articulated in “Why Believe?” and “Earth Matters” (i.e., Chapters 10 and 11). Working from the bottom up, he elaborates, as always, on the ramifications of the three major world views on the issues:

• “Schizophrenic world” view: See pages 195-199 & 201. According to this view, the physical/natural reality, i.e., the world experienced by our five senses, is it; there’s no certainty of life after death, and everyone has to fight for his/her share of life’s pleasures; only the fittest & strongest end up earning the rewards of a fulfilling existence.
• “Schizophrenic church” view: See pages 200-202, 209, 214, & 221. The “Pharisee view” of the bunch officially acknowledges the spiritual/supernatural side of reality, but alternately ignores it and convolutes it into a spiritualized “schizophrenic world” view. Think “prosperity theologians,” as well as Christian leaders who scorn and dismiss people struggling with “moral failures.”
• Sacramental view: See pages 197-202, 212, 214-217, & 220-224. This view is the only one that doesn’t subscribe to the “survival of the fittest” mentality. According to Yancey, it sees the world “upside down” – it focuses on people’s hearts rather than their appearances, on kindness and love rather than the (physical or spiritual) “dog-eat-dog” mentality, and on spiritual rather than physical currency.

How do your perceptions of the three views listed above, as well as their logical consequences, inform your opinions about the following questions?

• Consider the story of the “Elephant Man” and how Yancey uses it to illustrate the “sacramental” view, as well as his description of Friedrich Nietzsche’s utter scorn for it. Do you agree with Yancey about the logical consequences of the diametrically opposed “sacramental” and “schizophrenic world” views (i.e., “schizophrenic world” = Nazism & genocide, “sacramental” = valuing the weak as much as the strong)? How does the “schizophrenic church” view fit in? Why do you think Christianity has so widely assumed its spiritual “survival-of-the-fittest” mentality? Is this type of schizophrenia even more dangerous than the “schizophrenic world” type? Why or why not?
• Discuss the “Hardship” and “Death” sections of Chapter 13 (“Practising the Existence of God”). The “schizophrenic world” view tends to scorn the “sacramental” view’s focus on the spiritual world over the physical, dismissing it as a “pie in the sky when you die” scheme intended to keep down the “have-nots” at the expense of the “haves.” Are these assertions true, even partially? How can we combat them, and are we fighting against the church itself to do so in some cases? How can we learn to value quality of life in both worlds?
• Look closely at pages 201-202, where Yancey describes God “making his appeal” to the “schizophrenic world” at large through both Christians and the poor/weak of this world. Why does Yancey “shudder at the sheer audacity of God” here, especially in light of the “schizophrenic church” view? How do you perceive the gap between the “appeal” God wants to make vs. the “appeal” Christianity as a whole is making right now? How can we bridge that gap?