A D CLINKSCALES (4/15/10)

BOOK REVIEW: DAVID J. LOSE

THE INTERDENOMINATIONAL THEOLOGICAL CENTER

BOOK REVIEW: DAVID J. LOSE

CONFESSING JESUS CHRIST: PREACHING IN A POSTMODERN WORLD
GRAND RAPIDS: WM. B. EERDMANS PUBLISHING, 2003, $27

SUBMITTED TO DR. WALLACE S. HARTSFIELD II

IN PARTIAL COMPLETION OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
CAM 856: BIBLICAL PREACHING IN THE POST-MODERN WORLD

BY

ANTHONY D. CLINKSCALES

ATLANTA, GEORGIA
APRIL 15, 2010

A D CLINKSCALES (4/15/10)

BOOK REVIEW: DAVID J. LOSE

David J. Lose asserts that Christian preaching is a particular type of

confession made in response to the reading of the biblical text and the
particular context and circumstances of the hearers, and set within a
pattern of corporate worship. Postmodernism, among many things, has
pressed the church to release deceptive foundational securities, which Lose
has responded by affirming our need to live by faith alone. Essentially, Lose
suggests that Christian preaching should reclaim the ancient Christian
practice of confessing faith in Jesus Christ as a response to postmodernism,
including how it has seemingly de-centered and disestablished the church
and society. Lose has chosen to confront the postmodern challenge
concerning means by which to speak of truth and reality with integrity.
Lose begins by analyzing the problem then proceeds to construct
recommendations, followed by a discussion about the application of his
project implications, and concluding with an illustration of what has been
suggested through two sermons offered at the end of the text. The authors
aim in this text is to reclaim a Christian practice that rests not on empirical
proof but on a living confession of faith, leading not to certainty but to
conviction, and not coming from the domain of knowledge and proof but
rather from the realm of faithful assertion.
Lose acknowledges that postmodernity is a response to modernist
assumptions about the basis of knowledge, and languages ability to convey
reality. Thus, chapter one, The End of the World as We Know It the author
begins with his assertion that postmodernity is best understood as a
reaction to the Enlightenment quest for rational certainty that animated the
modern era. Lose begins his discussion with the basic connotations and
denotations associated with modernity and postmodernity as it relates to
foundationalism and realism. He ultimately suggests, as have others, that
postmodernity is quite difficult to define. Nonetheless, postmodernity has
evolved out of the desire of early modernist to guide society by a universally
valid rationality. Two schools of thought are immediately associated with

A D CLINKSCALES (4/15/10)

BOOK REVIEW: DAVID J. LOSE

this quest: the rationalism of Rene Descartes whereby certainty is

purported as subjective and existing only in the mind, and the empiricism of
John Locke which acknowledged that only a method of empirical
observation and verification could establish a reliable foundation for all
knowledge because rationalism stems from sensory experience. Both paths,
much like modernity and postmodernity, endeavored to respond to a decentered world through enlightened human reason. Essentially, modernity
embraced certainty, whereas postmodernity is comfortable with uncertainty.
This is the case because postmodernity has shifted the global focus of
foundational, fundamental structure to more local grounds.
Lose suggests that the fallacy of modernity was in that its
foundationalism tended to impose and enforce a center, establishing fixed
meaning, value, and truth. Accordingly, Lose suggests that postmodernity
resists the process of foundational legitimation because such a process
masks one particular groups use of power to define the legal, ethical,
cultural, religious, philosophical standards by which they judge other
groups. Thus, postmodernity may be seen as a movement of resistance,
resisting foundationalism and totalitarianism. Postmodernity suggests that
no ideas, claims or voices are more privileged than others. There has been
a shift from the emphasis on knowledge as governed by perspective and
power from an epistemological (from the science of knowing) substratum to
a hermeneutical (from the study of interpretation) grounding.
In chapter two, Critical Conversation Lose suggests that we can
transcend the modern-postmodern debate by refusing to accept its terms.
Lose identifies philosophical deadlocks including assumptions about the
correct means to construct foundations (rationalism vs. empiricism) and
discussions of how language refers to reality (logical positivism vs.
expressivism). Since postmodernist assert that language does not refer and
that reality is a fictive construction, Lose proposes that the only way to
resolve these issues is to actually reframe the questions by paying attention
to our actions over our metaphysical issues. Lose terms the response as

A D CLINKSCALES (4/15/10)

BOOK REVIEW: DAVID J. LOSE

postfoundational in the sense that it seeks to leave the traditional debates

over foundationalism and representationalism behind, approaching
questions of truth and reality only indirectly via pragmatic grounds through
critical conversation referred to as critical fideism. Because of the
perceived inadequacy of language, Lose has included a section, Adequate
Translation to discuss the ability of language to refer beyond itself. In this
section we encounter exploration into the questions of linguistic
preferentiality so as to determine the possibility for conversation beyond
the confines of our immediate cultural-linguistic domains. Lose affirms that
this conversation is possible, and occurs quite frequently.
In the following section, Dialogical Realism, Lose discusses the
possibilities of speaking of the real and the true. Modernists declare that
reality exists and is waiting to be discovered and described, while
postmodernists contend that reality is nothing more than a social
construction, the projection of our desires, power plays, and language
games into our communal interactions. However, Lose suggests that
Haraway is correct in her assertion that in order to speak of the real we
must not only be responsible for our knowledge, admitting our perspective
and prior commitments, but also accountable. According to Haraway, the
interplay between speaking from ones position (responsibility) and
listening to the critique of others (accountability) leads to the kind of
situated knowledge that emerges from critical conversation and, in turn,
provides the possibility for speaking about the real.
In chapter three, Confessing the Faith, Lose examines more carefully
the Christian term and practice, confession. Lose investigates
confession in the New Testament, seeking to trace its semantic use and
function in the life and literature of the early church. Secondly, Lose
discusses three recent theological attempts to claim confession as a viable
and important concept in the postmodern age. Thirdly, Lose utilizes the
linguistic analyses of J. L. Austin, John R. Searle, and Mikhail Bakhtin to
describe confession more fully as a particular speech act in order to clarify

A D CLINKSCALES (4/15/10)

BOOK REVIEW: DAVID J. LOSE

his use of the term. In sum, confession is proven throughout the New
Testament to be essential to the life of the church, including ecclesiology,
missiology, and eschatology. Confession functions as the essential
Christian tradition, offering a communal identity and pattern for making
sense of the world. Moreover, Lose asserts that confession functions to
describe the practice of articulating that faith (and thereby activating and
even actualizing that tradition) in response both to the proclamation of the
word and the present circumstances and needs of the hearer and world in
such a way that it prompts faith or disbelief in the hearers.
In chapter four, Narrative Identity and Critical Distance in Preaching,
Lose draws from recent homiletical work to make a more concrete proposal
for preaching that simultaneously roots hearers in the tradition and
encourages critical reflection and response that enables them to
appropriate the tradition. Lose surveys two attempts to respond to the
postmodern challenge: firstly, Charles Campbells proposal of a postliberal
homiletic to describe the way in which the biblical narrative grounds
believers in the Christian community and thus supplies a narrative and
communal identity and participation; secondly, Lucy Atkinson Roses
proposal of a postmodern conversational understanding of preaching to
discern the means by which to preserve the critical distance necessary for
hearers to appropriate their identity and faith. Lose proposes that
maintaining both senses of confession permits one to preach in our context
both faithfully and adequately.
In chapter five, Confession and the Biblical Canon, Lose explores the
nature of the Scriptures as a collection of confessions, testimony, claims and
assertions that purport to speak of truth and reality both accurately and
with integrity. Lose deducing from Brueggemanns discussion of Scripture,
suggests that the authority of the Word resides entirely with the human
community that utters, interprets, proclaims, and ultimately verifies its
authenticity. Essentially, the preacher can give voice to the Bibles own
claims and in this way convince the postmodern thinker.

A D CLINKSCALES (4/15/10)

BOOK REVIEW: DAVID J. LOSE

In chapter six, Confession and Community, Lose begins from the

premise that preaching seeks to confess Jesus Christ shaped entirely by
Gods self-disclosure in the cross and resurrection of Jesus Christ. In this
chapter, Lose considers how we give shape to the confession of faith that
arises from our encounter with the Scriptures so as to offer it to the
congregation so as to spark, nurture, focus, and direct their ongoing
conversation of faith. Lose suggests four stages in moving from the biblical
text through the sermon to the faith community. Firstly, approaching the
text on behalf of the congregation. Secondly, listening to the texts distinct
confession of faith. Thirdly, discerning what that confession may mean in
light of the rest of the biblical canon, the communitys context, and ones
hermeneutical experience and expectations. Fourthly, articulating that new
confession for the community so as to actualize the text and offer it to the
community to be appropriated through the power of the Holy Spirit.
Overall, I think that Lose was successful in achieving his goal of
responding to the challenges of postmodernism. Also, his discussion
disclosed some of the opportunities of the present age to proclaim Gods
Word in a postmodern world. Being well informed of the critical arguments
concerning postmodernity, Lose uses skill and logic to affirm the simplest
solution for Christian proclamation in contemporary society. Lose suggests
the confessional approach to ministry, where readers ground themselves in
their most holy faith, firmly and unapologetically. This text helps the reader
to see the importance of individual effort in establishing order, clarity, and
truth. The confessional approach to preaching demands authentic witness
with conviction. This is key in moving postmodern thinkers to acknowledge
a claim and be moved to action. Furthermore, I concur with Lose that
pretentious proclamations of absolute claims are hardly as effective as
confessional claims. This text was well written, easy to follow. The author
was intentional about restating his rhetorical, literary aims and
accomplishments throughout the book. I understand that this text is
inherently confessional and political. Accordingly, Lose perpetuates a

A D CLINKSCALES (4/15/10)

BOOK REVIEW: DAVID J. LOSE

particular agenda; however, I respect the honesty and precision of the

argument. Moreover, I think Lose did a good job of reminding us of what
worked in the past. Thus, I am reminded of the old adage, if it aint broke,
dont try to fix it. I highly recommend this book to new and experienced
homileticians and hermenueticians! This is a much needed and helpful
discourse.