On May 10, I posted a blog article titled ”In Admiration of John Wesley and Methodism.” This post expresses my admiration for Stanley Hauerwas, a contemporary Methodist scholar who is celebrating his 85th birthday next week.
Stanley Martin Hauerwas was born in Dallas
on July 24, 1940. He grew up in a working-class
household located in a suburban area of that Texas city. His father was a
bricklayer, and Stanley worked summers with his father from the age of nine.
Upon finishing high school, Stanley
enrolled in Southwestern University in Texas, the first in his family to attend
college. Then he went to Yale, where he earned his B.D. (M.Div.) degree in 1965
and completed his Ph.D. in theology and ethics in 1968.*
Even though he became a theology and ethics
scholar, he retained much of the blue-collar culture of his boyhood. His “salty”
language was criticized by some people who thought a university professor shouldn’t
use “unacceptable” language.
Hauerwas married in 1962, the year he
finished college, and six years later, his only child, a boy, was born. His
wife struggled with mental illness, though, and they divorced after 25 years of
marriage. In 1989 he married Paula Gilbert, a theologian and an ordained United
Methodist minister.
I first learned about Hauerwas by reading Resident
Aliens: Life in the
Christian Colony (1989), a book
co-written with William Willimon. That was a rich read for me, and it influenced how many Christians
perceived their role in society.
When I recently looked at the notes I took when I
read Resident Aliens again back in 2008, I wrote, “Thirty-six years ago,
the authors contended, ‘The
times are too challenging to be wasting time pressing one another into boxes
called liberal or conservative. The choice is between truth and lies’ (p. 160).”
And then in the concluding sub-section
of the last chapter, they aver that
the challenge facing today’s Christians is not the necessity to translate Christian convictions into a modern idiom, but rather to form a community, a colony of resident aliens which is so shaped by our convictions that no one even has to ask what we mean by confessing belief in God as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Hauerwas’s newest book is Jesus Changes
Everything, a small volume
edited by Charles Moore and released by Plough Publishing House in March 2025.**
Much in that book is a reaffirmation of what he and Willimon emphasized in Resident
Aliens.
In his ten-page introduction of the author, Moore
says that “Hauerwas eludes categorization. He is neither conservative enough
for the conservatives nor liberal enough for liberals” (p. xxiv).
In the concluding paragraph of that introduction,
Moore states,
Stanley Hauerwas and his writings were a large reason why 30 years ago I left a professorship at a seminary and moved 2000 miles with my wife to join the Bruderhof, a Christian community that shares possessions in common in accordance with the Sermon on the Mount.
Then, in an
article published by the Bruderhof in March 2025, Anglican priest Tish
Harrison Warren writes that she “became a pacifist because of Hauerwas” and
that she has “friends who went to seminary to study theology because of Hauerwas’s
work. His words change people.”
Hauerwas is a Mennonite theologian/ethicist, as well as being a lifelong Methodist and active
in an Episcopal church. Unlike Warren, I became a pacifist long before I knew
about Stanley Hauerwas, but I was delighted when I learned that he became a
devotee of Mennonite scholar John Howard Yoder.
Unfortunately, Yoder (1927~97), who was arguably
the most significant Anabaptist scholar of the twentieth century, badly
tarnished his reputation because of his “abusive behavior toward women,” which
became public in the 2010s. But his influence on Hauerwas was long before that.
In
The Politics of Jesus (1972), Yoder argued forcefully that the life,
death, and resurrection of Christ necessitates a nonviolent discipleship as the
definitive Christian ethic. Hauerwas adopted and extended that conviction: nonviolence
is not optional but obligatory for loyal followers of Jesus.
Authentic
Christians are “disciples” of Jesus rather than mere “admirers,” and the primary
task of the church is to be the church, a faithful community of Jesus-followers,
rather than an organization trying to do things for the benefit of society. Yes,
indeed!
_____
* I feel considerable affinity with Hauerwas.
Born just two years earlier, I am the son of a (working-class) farmer and the
first male in the direct-line Seat family to attend college, finishing with a
B.A. degree in 1959, graduating from seminary with a B.D. in 1962, and then
finishing work for my Ph.D. in 1966. When it comes to nationwide influence, books
written, and scholarly articles published, though, there is absolutely no
comparison.
**
Moore is a contributing editor and author for Plough, the
publishing arm of the Bruderhof community, introduced in my 12/5/20
blog post. Moore is also the editor of Provocations:
Spiritual Writings of Søren Kierkegaard (1999), a valuable, easy-to-read
book, as well as the compiler and editor of Called to Community (2016; 2nd
ed., 2024). Hauerwas wrote the Foreword to the latter.
I also read Hauerwas years ago, but did not take notes. I was impressed and influenced. Interesting that Hauerwas began his BD (MDiv) work the same time I did, and completed his doctoral work in 1968, as did I. But I didn't go to Harvard!
ReplyDeleteThanks for commenting, Charles. You and I completed our doctoral work at the same graduate school, that of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. And while it certainty was not as prestigious as Harvard, I still think it was an excellent school back then. I never had any regrets that I didn't (not wasn't financially able to) go elsewhere for my graduate school education.
DeleteDr. J. Alfred Smith, noted African American pastor and author, called SBTS "that Harvard ohe South." He was visiting prof. @ SBTS sometime in the 70s I think it was. I was guest speaker in his church in Oakland CA on MLK Sunday in January 1986, One of the highlights of my ministry.
DeleteThanks for sharing this, Charles. I don't remember hearing of Dr. Smith before, but I was happy to learn more about him on the internet. He seems to have been a very influential African American pastor and denominational leader. I think you were, indeed, highly honored to have been invited to preach in his church on MLK Sunday in 1986.
DeleteAccording to Wikipedia, he was born in May 1931, so he is now 94 years old.
Also, according to Wikipedia, "Ebony Magazine chose Smith to be one of the 'Most Influential Black Americans' and was one of the magazine's Top 15 Greatest Black Preachers of 1993'."
I got the year wrong, either through a slip of the finger on the keys, or a mental lapse. Either is possible. I prefer to think it was a slip of the finger on the key. I was at Allen Temple Baptist in Oakland MLK Sunday in January, 1996. I was pastor at FBC Kansas City Kansas 1992-1999. In 1995 I and Rev. Shedrick Banks, African-American ABCUSA pastor in KCK, brainstormed in organizing a cooperative meeting, kind of a seminar, of White Baptists and Black Baptists in KCK. In considering who we might get as Keynoter, I sought advice and someone said, "Get J. Alfred Smith if you can." So I contacted him and he agreed to come. While he was with us he invited me to come for MLK Sunday in 1996. I chose getting forgiveness over getting permission, and accepted his invitation w/o going through the governing board. It was a great time, and I am still in occasional contact with Dr. Smith.
DeletePS: I did get forgiveness!
DeleteThanks for this additional information, Charles. I'm sure Dr. Adams was happy for the invitation to come to Kansas City in 1995, for he was born in Kansas City.
DeleteHere are comments from Thinking Friend Mike Greer in Kentucky:
ReplyDelete"Thanks for the words. These days I think often of Hauerwas' words 'How many of you worship in a church with an American flag? I am sorry to tell you your salvation is in doubt.' And, 'How many worship in a church in which the Fourth of July is celebrated? I am sorry to tell you your salvation is in doubt.'"
Thanks, Mike, for sharing those words by Hauerwas. I don't remember seeing them before, but I found that he gave a talk at Princeton in 2007 that contained includerd them. I am certainly not surprised that he spoke those words--and I probably wouldn't use those same words in a talk/sermon, but I largely agree with what he said.
DeleteThen, I received these related comments from Thinking Friend Nancy Garner in Ohio:
ReplyDelete"Thanks for this tribute to Hauerwas. I was at a conference in England in 1991 on July 4th - so we (mostly Americans) were celebrating a bit when Hauerwas (the assigned speaker) got up and berated us (deservedly) for our Christian nationalism. It was powerful."
Leroy I remember you had "little zeal for 'The Zealot'" — https://theviewfromthisseat.blogspot.com/search/label/%22Zealot%22.
ReplyDeleteAnd Hauerwas, I assume, never commented on the historical analysis or "conjecture" in "The Zealot". I, however, now see a case for those Christians who believe both violence and nonviolence are biblical, just as some Christians believe there are biblical bases for The Prosperity Gospel and faith healing and creationism, etc.
Personally, I believe very much in "form[ing] a community, a colony of resident aliens . . ." Within such a community should be room for dialogue and discernment, using scripture along with secular writings, sociology, pragmatism, etc. Our evolved brains come from God, and we should use them for good, not evil. Examples: Let us develop methods of controlling nuclear weapons and prohibiting their use, adapting to climate change, not denying it is human-caused, mediating armed conflicts, not providing weapons to either side, providing foreign aid, not cutting taxes for the rich, building bridges, not walls, etc. All this is open to dialogue as we seek to apply ethics to everyday problems.
Thank you, Leroy, for this tribute.
The Bible has room for a flat earth, but it is not a flat book.
DeleteThanks for your comments, Phil--and I thought your long paragraph was especially meaningful. I have some problem with what you said regarding "Zealot." (And here is perhaps a better link to the blog post about that book which I posted in February 2014: https://theviewfromthisseat.blogspot.com/2014/02/little-zeal-for-zealot.html .)
DeleteI asked Chat GPT if "it" could find any reference to Hauerwas commenting on that book, and none was found. Then it asked if I would like for a conjecture regarding what Hauerwas might have said about it from his distinctive theological perspective. Here is the long response they gave after I said I would like for them to do that--and I didn't have any disagreement with that they conjectured:
"Stanley Hauerwas would likely have responded to Reza Aslan’s Zealot with a mixture of critical respect and theological impatience. On one hand, Hauerwas would almost certainly affirm Aslan’s emphasis on the political implications of Jesus’s life and death. In contrast to modern portrayals of Jesus as a mere moral teacher or spiritual sage, Hauerwas insists that Jesus was a deeply political figure—though not in the sense of revolutionary violence. For Hauerwas, Jesus’s politics are made visible in the cross, a politics of suffering love, enemy-forgiveness, and the formation of a peaceable kingdom. Thus, he might applaud Aslan for disrupting the sentimentalized versions of Jesus common in popular American religion.
"However, Hauerwas would strongly reject Aslan’s portrayal of Jesus as a failed Jewish nationalist or political zealot whose mission was co-opted by Paul and others into a spiritualized religion. That reading, in Hauerwas’s view, is historically reductive and theologically tone-deaf. He might argue that Aslan, like many modern historical Jesus scholars, engages in a form of secular historiography that tries to get behind the Gospels without attending to the narrative coherence and theological intent of the New Testament witness. For Hauerwas, the story of Jesus told by the church is not a distortion of a truer historical Jesus but the normative rendering of who Jesus is—the one whose nonviolent, truth-telling life exposes and subverts worldly power by refusing to kill.
"As he wrote elsewhere, 'Jesus is Lord, and everything else is bullshit.' That includes attempts to reduce Jesus to a cipher for modern ideologies, whether liberal, nationalist, or revolutionary. In that light, Hauerwas might have seen Zealot as another example of what happens when theology is subordinated to Enlightenment rationalism—when Jesus is rendered intelligible only on secular terms, drained of his eschatological and sacramental identity.
"In sum, Hauerwas’s likely critique of Zealot would not be that it is too political, but that it is political in the wrong way: by trading the cross for coercion and the church for failed revolution."
Thinking Friend Ken Chatlos is a retired history professor of William Jewell College. He sent me an email this morning with these comments:
ReplyDeleteThanks for your article on Hauerwas. An engaging and thoughtful man. I have read four or five of his books, including one that talks about growing up in Texas, and another that talks about his early teaching career (when he was at Notre Dame and when he had troubles with his troubled wife).
Some years ago he came to Jewell to teach a seminar for faculty working on a particular project. I enjoyed participating in his seminar, including his rough language (Something common to me, after four years in the Air Force).
I am not a pacifist, although I think America has fought destructive and senseless wars to enrich the military industrial complex throughout my adult life. I have not read Hauerwas, although I do approve of finding community in our living and thinking. Indeed, my wife and I sold our house three years ago and moved to live with our daughter and friends, which we enjoy very much. I see Jesus as traveling back and forth between quiet time with his disciples and public times for much of his ministry. The Sermon on the Mount, for instance, was delivered very publicly. He also got into political economics, both talking plenty about debts, and "cleansing" the temple of money changers! So what I have to say may be on the peripheral of Hauerwas.
ReplyDeleteI am still engaged with the enlightenment project. I find higher criticism of the Bible a necessary part of understanding it. I find science a necessary tool, when well done. Plenty of pseudo-science corrupts our science and our theology. Still, when we work in good faith, we can often build bridges. For instance, one of the most interesting books I have read was The Beginning of Wisdom: Reading Genesis by Leon Kass (2006), even though he is conservative enough to have been George W. Bush's chairman of the Council on Bioethics. I learned that the creation story followed a ladder of being and movement from the etherial light on day one to mankind on day six. Also, I had never noticed that Abraham and Isaac never talked again after the binding of Isaac. Isaac and Ismael did, however, meet for Abraham's funeral. I still champion the importance and improvement of democracy, although as a recovering Democrat I fear we live today more in the Second Republic of CSA, rather than the failing USA. Democracies do tend to slide into oligarchy, which has been a bipartisan USA failure for decades. So I agree there is a case for keeping national flags, including American, out of churches, and I may yet end up on a hippy commune somewhere far from the seat of power. Did I mention that Jesus said a lot about forgiving debts? I have a deepened appreciation for 1 Timothy 6:10 "For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, and in their eagerness to be rich some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pains. (So much for the prosperity gospel.)
In summary, I am grateful for the community Leroy has created for us.
Craig, thanks (as always) for your thought-provoking comments and for your closing words of affirmation. I have no idea how many people read the comments posted after each blog article, but I think probably a sizeable number of the "community" do read the comments and know of your regular contributions here.
ReplyDeleteSince you have not read Hauerwas, I encourage you (and others) to purchase his latest book, "Jesus Changes Everything," which is fairly inexpensive. Or perhaps you could find it in a nearby library. (There are three copies in the Mid-Continent Library--and when I just now checked, all three are checked out.) There are 25 short chapters and I read, and thought about, one chapter a day for 25 days. It is a good summary of Hauerwas's distinctive ideas over the past 35+ years.
Just a couple of comments about what you wrote. Certainly, all real communities are important, but Hauerwas writes almost exclusively about the importance of the community of Jesus-followers--and they may or may not be a part of a church. He is often critical of the latter as often being more form than substance.
Then just a couple of brief comments about the Sermon on the Mount. Yes, it may have been delivered publicly, but it was intended primary for the disciples of Jesus (the Twelve and others who were his closest followers)--and it was a call to devout Christian discipleship: "...seek first [God's] kingdom and [God's] righteousness [or justice]" (Matt. 6:33, NIV).
And regarding your last point, in the Sermon on the Mount, as you know, Jesus declares, “No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money" (Matt. 6:24, NIV).