Pastoral (in this case, priestly) memoirs are quickly becoming a genre that I gravitate towards with an earnest interest and curiosity. Maybe it has something to do with this being a year in which I myself have become a pastor for the first time. Whatever the case, whether nonfiction (as was the case with Open Secrets) or fiction (as was the case with Jayber Crow), I have enjoyed hearing others' reflections on what the nature of the pastoral vocation is, full of all its strifes and dangers, toils and snares.
As such, I was quite excited to jump into another memoir, this time of a former Episcopal priest who left the pulpit to pursue teaching religion at a local university. Barbara Brown Taylor's writing, I must say, is first-rate, far more polished and tuned than, for example, Richard Lischer's in Open Secrets. She routinely compares her spiritual life to that of a variety of birds, connects her natural observations with her spiritual discoveries, and earnestly calls for a renewed attachment in Christian theology and practice between transcendence and immanence.
And much of the early sections of the memoir flow rather smoothly, describing Taylor's slow-and-then-sudden burnout from pastoral life, her ever-increasing drain from (as she would diagnose) an over-zealous attempt to become Jesus for others. Not only is her rhetoric and grasp of narrative tight, but so is her spiritual and theological wrestlings and wranglings as she navigates several difficult decisions in her faith-life. As a new pastor, I found plenty of wisdom and grace in the story of her "leaving" Church - in particular, there is the wisdom of recognizing the unique challenges of a fruitful season of ministry!
But about halfway through I began to be more and more surprised with Taylor's rationalizing. After all, when an evangelical (like me) reads the memoir of a mainliner (like Taylor), one would expect that the former would fit the category of the rationalist while the latter fits better the category of the experientialist, the spiritualist, etc. These are the stereotypes we have inherited.
Taylor would have us believe that she is more of an experientialist, more of a spiritualist, and not so much a rationalist or a dogmatist, but she does not convince. She finds herself hard-pressed in a vocation that she herself chose, and then less hard-pressed in a different vocation that she herself chose. For her to call one the better choice, the more spiritually freeing choice, the choice that fits best the character of God, is not so much spiritual discernment (like she narrates it as being), but much more like Aristotelian virtue-ethics, pursuing "the good life" whose end (telos) is happiness. To be sure, there's nothing wrong (necessarily) with pursuing a life that will make us less constrained, more free, and more happy. But there is also nothing more "spiritual" about that choice.
This interpretation of spiritual discernment appears most concisely near the end of the last chapter, where she re-interprets Jesus' saying of "hate your father, your mother, etc." to mean "go home, you don't have to go to Jerusalem and die." This is a rather stark and shocking (and bourgeois, might I add) re-interpretation of Jesus' view of discipleship! A far more honest reading would suggest that going to Jerusalem to die is precisely what Jesus thinks that Christian discipleship looks like. To think otherwise is to miss His point altogether.
As such, while I applaud Taylor's narrative and rhetorical skill, her ability to reflect on her life with verve and grace, I find the substance of her narrative unconvincing and, in the end, hollow. What she proposes as a more spiritual direction in her life sounds to me more lonely, more Self-actuated, and less full of Faith - that is, the kind of Faith it takes to say to Jesus "Yes, I will go to the Cross with You; Yes, I will follow You." Truly, Taylor's observations of the hurts caused by "box-y" forms of Church are real; but she does not take the time to consider what other kinds of hurts might be caused by an "un-boxed" form too.
Finally, near the end Taylor does embark on some rather surprising polemics against "Church-faith." She suggests that Jesus proclaimed a Kingdom but all He got was a Church, as though that were some great failure. She even relates the story of a friend of hers who has, in his own way, graduated beyond Church. Maybe Taylor sees herself as having graduated beyond Church too (she doesn't go in-depth on that regard)? Her ecclesiology is pitifully weak here, something that I am quite surprised by given the beauty of her sacramental experiences. I wonder where she found the idea that this was a healthy Christian notion?
In conclusion, though the words are beautiful and the story alluring, the actual narrative of Taylor's memoir is spiritually off-kilter. She sees her story as one of catch-and-release, with more freedom being an intrinsically good thing. That narrative is un-compelling for me, and it smells more like what one's psychoanalyst might advise than what one's spiritual director would. A good spiritual director would delve deeper than a simple change-of-vocation, change-of-church, change-of-place. A good spiritual director would suggest that something, perhaps, is going on inside that cannot be easily satisfied no matter the context. A good spiritual director would warn "Maybe it's not what you're doing but with what power, what goal, what foundation you are doing it." At any rate, the whole story smells like a rationalization, one told through a smiling face, whose smiling eyes confess that they are doing well, when in reality they are desperate to make their decision "the right one." Humankind is desperately in need of better ways of discerning the purposes of God with integrity; Taylor has not provided us that story.