Ray S. Anderson (1925–2009)

A well-researched textbook addressing Self Care as much more then pop-psychology or self-help. Recovering from the school of "sacrifice and suffering" that typified much of my life in a conservative faith tradition (patriarchy/christianity), Anderson's thoughtful consideration of self-fulfillment (as opposed to self-gratification) moved me. He carefully examines the misreading of a number of passages in the Bible that have been used to lionize intellect over emotion and self-hate over self-love. He also introduced me to the Scottish philosopher John MacMurray:

"Thinking is not living. At its worst it is a substitutes for living; at its best a means of living better. ...the emotional life is our life, both as awareness of the world and as action in the world... Its value lies in itself, not in anything beyond it which it is a means of achieving." John Macmurray

Often made to feel ashamed for wearing my heart on my sleeve and taught to view my emotions and feelings with suspicion, I spent a number of years in the drag of mild depression. Other factors helped create this drag. But the deeply instilled notion that personal happiness, self-care, and emotion -- especially for females -- were signs of selfishness helped brew the perfect storm that once typified my life.

If any of my experience resonates with others, they will find Anderson's book a relief.

Why not five stars? Some hints of male preference in the beginning. This tone doesn't persist, but I found it a bit off-putting. Further, in the chapter dealing with shame I found Anderson parsed the word with two definitions. I do not think there is such a thing as positive shame that brings about healing. I argue that another word -- perhaps "awareness" -- would better match the positive meaning he suggests. see page 161

Beyond that, I value Andersen's perspective. So much so that after reading half of a library copy, I ordered one for my collection. I want to mark it up!… (more)

A very interesting book. Author distinguishes between the NT church at Jerusalem and the NT church at Antioch. He argues that the Jerusalem church was based on continuity with the Mosaic law and tended to look backward to determine and maintain its identify. The Antiochian church, however, took its identity from Christ and the Holy Spirit and was more future looking and emerged over time with a different theology, focus, and mission. The author argues that contemporary "emergent" churches should be looking to the Antiochian church for their identity and practice. An enjoyable, thought provoking, scholarly read.… (more)