Leonard Swidler, Professor of Catholic Thought and Interreligious Dialogue at Temple University, explores the challenges of faith and modernity. He has divided this book into four main sections, fluidly integrating its 36 chapters into a progressive and logical structure. He draws from modernity’s biblical scholars in order to defend his premise, which offers a way to amalgamate critical-thinking with an “inner encounter with the Transcendent.” Club Modernity adds Swidler’s voice to the conversations of Sartre, Borg, et.al.

Two curious things struck me as I began to read this book. The first is the physical format of the book and its binding. The format of its pages included minimal margins on both sides of the page, forcing the reader to nearly break the binding of the book’s spine to read the words located close to the book’s center. Likewise, there was no index or bibliographical citation at the close of the book, which for an academic book seemed odd. The second curiosity was the repeated inclusion of citations from Wikipedia. Normally, the academic world shuns Wikipedia and warns students to avoid it as an unreliable resource. Thus, for an academic like Swidler to use it several times seemed out of place. Additionally, the book seemed rushed to print, leaving multiple format, punctuation, and citation errors evident and unedited.

Swidler makes one minor presumption and two major assumptions in his attempt to defend his position. The minor presumption is seen in the academic language used, which borders on academic arrogance; one often wonders what audience the book is attempting to impress. The first major assumption noticed is how Swidler quickly makes claims and/or repeats the foundational claims of modernity’s liberal scholars, then goes on to build on their theories as being universally accepted. This is not the case for all biblical scholars, but Swidler has built a straw man that is ready to be defeated. The second is how he adds his own contributions to literary and biblical criticism, which champion the authorship of the gospel of Luke as being a woman (Luka), who wrote a “proto-Luke” as-well-as the authorship of the gospel of John as being written by Mary Magdalene, who was cryptically called the “beloved disciple” and referenced throughout the gospel.

Ironically, Club Modernity attempts to chart a middle way between postmodern critiques of the truth claims of the Bible and the proof claims of modernity. Swidler endeavors to satisfy the rigid demands of rationality over and against the mysticism of spirituality. Unfortunately, the book does not convincingly accomplish its goals. Undoubtedly, the book will find support in the circles of liberal scholarship and will dismissed as folly by the circles of conservative scholarship.

Reviewed by John R. Miller.

 From Pneuma Review Fall 2013.

Introduction

Many people, who are familiar with the history and teachings of the Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements, have likely heard of the revival known as the New Order of the Latter Rain. Was this a legitimate revival? Was it an authentic move of the Holy Spirit? Perhaps what is most commonly known about the revival was told with a negative emphasis on its fringe doctrines, which include the doctrine of Manifest Sons and personal prophetic words of direction.

There was no new doctrine introduced in the New Order of the Latter Rain. However, the movement is most remembered for its doctrinal controversies. At the center was an interpersonal conflict that became camouflaged by a denominational dispute. Nearsighted presuppositions obstructed objectivity. The sin of pride caused further division in the body of Christ. Yet, the fruit that remains demonstrates that both sides of this issue have proven to be effective in the ministry of the Kingdom of God. The words of David du Plessis are apropos:

The term “latter rain” must first be defined because it is used in many contexts to refer to several distinct movements of the Holy Spirit. In this essay, it will be referred to as the New Order of the Latter Rain (NOLR) to distinguish it from other “latter rain” revivals. Specifically, NOLR will refer to the movement which began in 1948, in North Battleford, Saskatchewan, Canada, and which spread throughout the world in various attributes and nuances. Several articles and books provide a non-polemical background for this movement.² Many other articles and books are written from an apologetic perspective.³ The term “latter rain” became popular to the Pentecostal Movement.⁴ David W. Myland illustrated this premise, first through the writing of hymns, then through the association of the natural rainfall in Palestine by pointing out the spiritual analogy of it.⁵

Contextually, the movement began one generation after the birth of the Classical Pentecostal Movement of Topeka and Azusa fame. The primary Pentecostal denominations have already been established; specifically, the Assemblies of God (AG) and its sister organization, the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada (PAOC). Socially, it is important to consider the impact of two World Wars. Eschatologically, it is important to ponder the impact of the re-establishment of the nation of Israel, the fear of nuclear destruction, the construction of the Berlin Wall, and the threat of Communism to the Western world in 1948. Ecclesiastically, it is noteworthy that the healing and/or evangelistic ministries of Oral Roberts, Billy Graham, William Branham, and T.L. Osborn begin around this same time.

The Fall 2013 issue (16:4) of The Pneuma Review features these articles:

The Credibility of Miracles: Excerpts from Miracles by Craig S. Keener.

New Order of the Latter Rain: A New Perspective by John R. Miller.

Find all of these articles individually in an easy-to-read format on the archive page: http://PneumaReview.com/fall-2013/