Hannah's Child: A Theologian's Memoir

by Stanley Hauerwas

A loving, hard-working, godly couple has long been denied a family of their own. Finally, the wife makes a deal with God: if he blesses her with a child, she will dedicate that child to God’s service. The result of that prayer was the birth of an influential -- some say prophetic -- voice. Surprisingly, this is not the biblical story of Samuel but the account of Stanley Hauerwas, one of today’s leading theologians in the church and the academy. The story of Hauerwas’s journey into Christian discipleship is captivating and inspiring. With genuine humility, he describes his intellectual struggles with faith, how he has dealt with the complex reality of marriage to a mentally ill partner, and the gift of friendships that have influenced his character. Throughout the narrative shines Hauerwas’s conviction that the tale of his life is worth telling only because of the greater Christian story providing foundation and direction for his own.

Genres: Theology, Memoir, Biography, Religion, Biography Memoir, Autobiography, Nonfiction

308 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2010

About the author

Stanley Hauerwas (PhD, Yale University) is the Gilbert T. Rowe Professor of Theological Ethics at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina. He is the author of numerous books, including Cross-Shattered Christ, A Cross-Shattered Church, War and the American Difference, and Matthew in the Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible.

America's Best Theologian according to Time Magazine (2001), though he rejected the title saying, "Best is not a theological category."

Reviews

[Nathan]

Stanley Hauerwas - the blue-collar, cursing theologian - is a beast. I mean this not in the British sense (though he can be that sort of beast if you are on the opposite side of a theological debate with him), but in that he devours books, works with dizzying rapidity, and writes more than most people read.
Yet the "vitae" within his "curriculum vitae" is equally interesting. His life has been a long struggle to understand the God of the Bible within the context of being an apprentice bricklayer, a student, a teacher, a father, and a husband to a mentally ill wife. His struggle to live with his wife forms the main conflict of his story - how do you love someone who cannot receive your love; how do you live with someone so delusional she might kill you in your sleep? For twenty five years, Hauerwas dealt with this conflict as he continued to publish and dedicate his works to a wife who gradually hated him more and more.
During most of his life, Hauerwas seems to have been a lukewarm Christian by his own estimation. He never could pray - until he began to write prayers to read before class at the end of his career. He also seems to have had a meager diet of Scripture.
How does such a preeminent theologian scrape by with such a limited engagement with the discipline of prayer and reading Scripture? By his own admonition, he wasn't even sure he was a Christian when he began teaching. But Hauerwas' story isn't about his own crappy spirituality, but about how the Triune God shaped and molded him over the years until he finally become a Christian - one who could respond prophetically to 9/11, who could write a heartfelt eulogy for his beloved father, or who could endure so much abuse from his wife without returning it. Despite his unspiritual disposition, Hauerwas was formed by a Master Craftsman and built up like well-layed brick house.
Another big theme in Hauerwas' story is the way in which friendship sustained him. Influenced by Aristotle and Aquinas, Stanley sees friendship as a virtue - something that we work at and is formed little by little over time. It is the iron that sharpens our own iron.
Of course, Hauerwas' wit and sardonic humor come through often in this memoir. For instance, commenting on what it is like to teach at a small liberal arts college, he blurted out in a staff meeting that "our task is to give parents the impression that by sending their daughters to Augustana [the college he was at] they would not lose the virginity they had already lost in high school." Ouch! Yet I can guarantee he was naming more truth than the school's admission brochure. Ultimately, for those trying to use Christianity to insulate themselves from the world, he would always quickly point out that the world is present in the church too.
Hauerwas' life is marked by erudition, but at the end of the day it's his prophetic character and ability to name (as he puts it) "bullshit in the church" that marks him as an important character in theology. At the end of his life, Hauerwas did live into his mother's prayer that he would be dedicated to the church; he is Hannah's child - a Samuel for yet another wayward generation.

[Anita Yoder]

At first, I almost lost patience with all the words in quotation marks. I wasn't sure I was up to reading a book that reads like a philosopher talks. But that changed soon, and the quotations evaporated, and he got into the stride of his story in a way that kept me thoroughly engaged.
I couldn't follow all his references to book and authors, but that didn't detract from the meat of the book. I was taken aback by all the times he writes lines like "I had no idea..." "I didn't know..." Especially regarding his young life and first years in college and teaching, I wondered if he's underrating his knowledge, or if he had no one to advise/guide/mentor him.
Probably my favorite lines in the book: (p.95) "There is no substitute for learning to be a Christian by being in the presence of significant lives made significant by being Christian. "...Significance" can of course be a misleading description of the lives that got my attention. Significance suggests importance. It suggests lives that make a difference and demand acknowledgement. But the lives of significance I began to notice were not significant in any of those ways. Rather, they were lives of quiet serenity, capable of attending with love to the everyday without the need to be recognized as "making a difference."
On friendship: p. 247, "...to be a Christian is not something you do alone. Our lives are possible only because of what others make of them."
He writes with enormous grace even about difficult, wrong situations and people. He's generous with his praise about his friends. I was fascinated by his loyalty to John Howard Yoder's theology, his courage in embracing non-violence, and his not-approving but not-condemning response to Yoder's abuse of women.
I wonder how the suffering in his miserable marriage shaped him, his loves, his focus. It's impossible to quantify the chaos he lived: the paradox of pain at home and fulfillment at work.
The last part of the book, esp the chapter "Patience and Prayer" was particularly delightful. There were several times I laughed aloud. p. 255: "Most 'spontaneous prayers' turn out, upon analysis, to be anything but spontaneous. Too often they conform to formulaic patterns that include ugly phrases such as 'Lord, we just ask you...' Such phrases are gestures of false humility, suggesting that God should give us what we want because what we want is not all that much. I pray that God will save us from that 'just.'" Yes! I fully agree!
p. 281 "...prayer names how God becomes present to us and how we can participate in that presence by praying for others.
p. 284 "...at times I have intimations that I am so enthralled by what I have been given that I almost forget who I am. Another name for such forgetfulness is humility. Humility is a virtue that rides on the back of a life made possible by having been given good work to do."
What a treat of a memoir.

[Melody]

I don’t think I was quite the right audience for this book. I simply don’t know enough about the world of theology and the people that inhabit it to make meaningful connections to the many people mentioned in Hannah’s Child.
However, Hauerwas’s story joined the forces that continue to chip away at my naive desire for humans to be something other than the messy, complex creatures they are. For that, I am grateful.

[Kaleb]

Shoutout to Evan for this book. I would like to say I’m quite familiar with Stanley, he spoke at my Christian Ethics class junior year.

There was a lot I liked. Stanley has a really distinctive writing style which made the book fun to read. Lots of sad parts to the story, especially his ex-wife's struggle with bipolar disorder. Lots of very interesting parts, like the controversy Stanley got into when he advocated for pacifism right after 9/11.

At times, he would introduce a ton of new people or theological concepts out of the blue, which was kind of confusing. I think someone who's more familiar with Christian academia or theology would enjoy this book a lot.

Quotes

When you are in love, and I was deeply in love, it is difficult to see clearly the one you love. We are opaque mysteries to ourselves and one another. I do not know if I saw clearly who Paula was. But I knew she was good for me. And I hoped I was good for her.

I think what is most destructive for living truthful and good lives is not what we do, but the justifications we give for what we do to hide from ourselves what we have done. Too often the result is a life lived in which we cannot acknowledge or recognize who we are.

[Drew]

Splendid book. Hauerwwas is a theologian on the faculty of Duke Divinity School. Texas boy--graduated from Southwestern in Georgetown, TX. His father was a brick layer and so was he. Very powerful voice.

Only book I have ever written quotes from as I read it. Here are some of the passages that caught my attention--

"I have, moreover, tried to live a life I hope is unintelligible if the God we Christians worship does not exist."

"The first task of the church is not to make the world more just but to make the world the world."

"to be a Christian meant that you could never protect yourself from the truth."

"Jesus does not tell us that we should try to be poor in spirit, or meek, or peacemakers. He simply says that many who are called into his kingdom will find themselves so constituted."

"We are complex creatures constituted by contradictions we refuse to acknowledge."

"But if God is the God of Jesus Christ, then God does not need our protection. What God demands is not protection, but truth."

"the problem with most pastors and theologians was that the way they went about their business did not require the existence of God."

"Change, if it is significant, takes time. At least change takes time if you remember that finally any change that is accomplished nonviolently comes about through persuasion."

[Barbara P]

After hearing Stanley Hauerwas speak at a conference sponsored by Fuller Seminary in Pasadena a couple of weeks ago I bought his book, Hannah's Child. Hauerwas was married to Ann, for 24 years, who lived with Bi-Polar illness. Hauerwas is a theologian who teaches at Duke University and is a noted scholar. Hannah's Child is the memoirs of Hauerwas that include his life with Ann, the family burden of mental illness and his efforts to try and make some theological sense out of mental illness. The memoirs address many other parts of his lifes journey and is beautifully written with zest, humor, sadness, struggle and Christian centered. Hauerwas was a faithful husband who tried to bring love and support to Ann even when most of her manic and depressed episodes were aimed at Stanley. As a Christian Hauerwas has no simple answers to the sorrow and heartache of mental illness except to return to Christian 101: be faithful to those given to you to love, find support for yourself, share your burdens, live to your fullest in the midst of the struggle and on and on. And most of all his belief that God was and is with Anne. She died in her late 50's of congestive heart failure. In the book he describes his mourning for Anne when she was alive and alone and when she was dead. He also addressed the impact Anne's illness had on Adam, their son. I could resonate with a particular statement: "I never felt sorry for myself. I thought that what Anne, Adam, and I were going through was hard. But I also thought that the only thing to do was to keep going. I had been given a job to do - I was a theologian.
As a mother to Lynda I was touched by another statement: My best advice for those who find that they must learn to live with someone who is seriously mentally ill is that their first duty is to survive. If you do not survive, no one will survive. Trying to survive is not selfish. You must strive to survive if you are to sustain any hope that life can go on. It was the anger, not the illness, at least insofar as those can be distinguished, that finally exhausted me.

[Hannah Notess]

I will admit that some of the more intricate theological parts of this book ("I used so-and-so's argument to prove such-and-such in response to so-and-so") were way over my head since I wasn't familiar with the discussions.

But this book answers a big question I always bring to any theology work: How does this person connect their life and their ideas? Where do these ideas come from? That's why I often struggle to read theology and philosophy in the first place - it often seems so divorced from stories and human beings who actually live in the world and have bodies.

I think I will be more interested in reading Hauerwas' theology now that I have a sense of him as a person.

[Nate Pequette]

Hauerwas says many times in different ways something to the effect that he hopes his life doesn't make sense "If the one true God is not fully present in Jesus Christ." Jesus Christ has made all the difference for Stanley Hauerwas and he believes for the world. This memoir explores that difference from his views of the church as a alternative reality, to his long suffering marriage to Anne who was bipolar, to his changing views of ethics and becoming a pacifist. He continually gives thanks to God for the gifts of his friends that helped him become Stanley Hauerwas. Highly recommend this book! I was inspired and challenged as I usually am by Stanley Hauerwas to live as a Christian, to live as if Jesus Christ actually did rise from the dead. This has made all the difference.

[Tim]

Hauerwas's memoir, is really that of an extrovert, relating the books and especially the people that formed his thoughts and life. It was a little dry at times in its detailings and his recounting of his life with his mentally ill wife was horrific, but mostly it is a celebration of friendship and an invitation to the church to ignore fads, power, and the desire for control and live in the freedom and uncertainty of Jesus. His pacifism and refusal to bow to nationalistic or capitalistic distortions of ethics and faith are so necessary for the American church. I am proud to say that Hauerwas has sworn at me personally (when I noted I was a historian), but have not allowed his personal charm to overwhelm my thought processes. I appreciate the centrality of the church to his thought and the general humor and humility of his writing. I also appreciate his inability to withhold comment on administrative yahoos in the university or church leaders with horrible metrics of success. It all makes me want to go back to the Hauerwas I have read and not yet read.

[Jack Hayne]

As many have said, this is an excellent book. As Hauweras says, “a theological page-turner.” Somehow he captures, through his tone, what it means to grow as a person. While the early Hauweras is insightful, he is not as sophisticated as the later one, who eventually came to become, maybe even realize, that he was a Christian. Especially wrenching is his relationship with Anne...though the gift of his friendship with Adam, his son, may never had developed that way. In some ways, though I'm unsure on Hauwerwas’s stance on this, the book allows for a bit of predestination.

It is also an exciting book for anyone in the academy, no matter what level. As he allows a sneak peek behind the scenes at the friendships, the rivalries, misguided chairs, and relationships with students. Hannah’s Child for this is invaluable.

Hannah’s Child also acts as an excellent introduction to his thought and the developments he makes. It is a perfect place to begin.

[Glenn Wishnew III]

Hauerwas at his best — bracing, hilarious and truthful down to the very last page.

[Josh Wilhelm]

Having not yet read anything by Stanley Hauerwas (although I did hear him deliver the 2017 Laing Lectures at Regent College), this memoir made for an interesting way to encounter the Texas bricklayer turned theologian. Most notable was his nightmare-ish marriage to his first wife who suffered from episodes of severe psychosis. How Hauerwas continued to care for his wife and son, while also navigating the demands of holding down a job (while growing in reputation as scholar) is behind me. “Hauerwas’s law”, the oft-quoted line that “You always marry the wrong person” (challenging the notion of marrying “right” person) now comes with an added asterisk in my mind, in light of this marital backdrop. Also of note was Hauerwas’ friendship with John Howard Yoder. It is clear that the Mennonite scholar had a tremendous impact on Hauerwas’ own theological thinking, which Hauerwas retains despite acknowledging Yoder’s abusive behaviour towards female students that was eventually brought to light (also chronicled in the book).

[Neil Lettinga]

Stanley Hauerwas’s Hannah’s Child is Hauerwas’ memoir. Hauerwas tells a good story of a theologian who doesn’t really come to faith until well after he’s earned his PhD and has been teaching a writing for a while. He also faces up to some very difficult issues in his life, including marriage to a woman with bipolar disorder and the disintegration of that marriage. I found myself reading chunks of it aloud to my wife through the first two thirds of the book. Once he finds happiness in a second marriage and his career really stabilizes, Hauerwas kind of loses interest in the memoir, so the last third is fairly dull reading. Hauerwas describes himself as an essayist, who struggles writing books. That’s probably pretty accurate, and the essays that are the early chapters are well worth the price of the book. The last chapters just didn’t make very good essays.

[Dave Fagg]

For those who love the work of Stanley Hauerwas, you will love this book. He combines personal narrative with reflections on friendship, God, church, theological education, all of which are suffused with his characteristic humour, lack of bullshit, and straight out refusal to use contractions (e.g. don't, wasn't, wouldn't etc).

The most powerful part of this book is the inclusion of details of his life married to a woman who experienced regular psychotic episodes, and the pain he and his son experienced because of that.

For those who haven't heard of him before, it's still worth reading for its engaging insights into the task of a theologian.

[Nathan]

I read this as I held my sick little 9 month old son. For a theologian's memior, I don't think you can ask for much better. I think I was disappointed with how little I disagreed with Hauerwas. His vulnerable honesty was endearing. Hopefully I can come back and share some of the many quotes I appreciated.

[Ethan Zimmerman]

4.5
I suppose this is the type of memoir one might expect from a theologian and one with the character of Hauerwas. It's both a "theologian's memoir" and a "theological memoir." Hauerwas often transitions seamlessly from telling his story to reflecting theologically on his story. It's full of both profundity and hilarity. The use of aphorisms with little explication can leave the reader wondering what he really means, but often the effect can bring the reader into reflection upon the truth expressed. I recommend the book as a way to see the world through another's eyes and simply as an enjoyable read.

[Daniel]

I very rarely find a book that I can't put down. This is one of those books.

[Justin Lonas]

Simply luminous.

[Simon Robinson]

I've never read a memoir, so i had no expectations. This was on the recommended read for a course i am doing. Not sure what relationship it bears to same, but it wound up being a bit of a page-turner. I imagine it could be a little boring to some, as it gets a bit bogged down at times in 'we were here, with these peeps...' But i found it fascinating to read about this world-renowned academic who began his working life at age 7 as a brickie's labourer to his 'white trash' bricklayer dad. Stanley wasn't sure about whether he was a Christian, yet went off to study theology because he found it 'just so damned interesting.' He tried to make a living while caring for a mentally ill wife and raising a son. He's rubbed shoulders, worked with, and turned out of his classroom some of the most compelling theologians of the last few decades. In the end, its all about friendship. Stanley shared with a bluntness and straighforwardness that i love, but find so lacking in church and theological discourse.
Along the way there were tender moments, astonishing prayers and great nuggets of true wisdom. Very much worth the time. Thanks for sharing, Stanley.

[Jonathan Platter]

This book has a large number of positive reviews, and my own ramblings will hardly contribute much. I simply want to add that though the writing may be "dry" for a memoir (a quality which unfortunately leads one reviewer to give a largely negative review) it is a fairly lively book of theology. And though the genre is "memoir", the subject is theology.

In an interview on youtube, Hauerwas even states that he wanted to subtitle the book "a theological memoir" but had to change it for the publisher so that it had a broader appeal. This book should be read as a work of theology, and in this vein is has two virtues:

1) It can serve as an excellent introduction to Hauerwas' theology. This is a great service on its own, considering the massive quantity of books he has written, some of which are fairly technical. For those who are unfamiliar with how Hauerwas thinks and why it is important, this book can act as a primer. Because it is also a "memoir" it is less dry, as theology goes.

2) It is an exemplar of reflecting theologically on one's own life. Hauerwas admits his book is not properly written in the "confessional" mode, like St. Augustine's _Confessions_, but it comes close! Though not explicitly written as a prayer, the book frames his self understanding in the context of the story of Christ and his Church. Consequently, Hauerwas shows what it might look like to learn to tell one's own story in a truly Christian mode.

[Lyndon]

I never imagined Hauerwas would write a memoir. I have no reason for thinking this other than I thought he already appeared in all his writings. At least, I thought he appeared. "Stanley Hauerwas" requires describing besides the many tales told by his students or the persona developed by his readers and interlocutors. This book is such a description. Worthwhile in how Stanley places himself in the landscape of Texas, Yale, South Bend and Duke, he provides an account of his life as understood through friendship, suffering and doubt. This is not a book about "Stanley Hauerwas". It is a personal tale of how the Christian life takes a life lived. Who we meet is someone who happens to be called Stanley Hauerwas, and by no fault of his own, is in via like the rest of us who try to worship God faithfully and truthfully.

[Rod Buchanan]

In reading Hauerwas' books I wanted to know more about him. And get to know him I did. He holds nothing back and in his earthy style lets you in on his journey. Some may get bogged down with names and infighting of faculty at places they either don't know or care about, but for those somewhat aware of theological/academic figures it holds some interest. Some of these tales drag on a bit. Hauerwas is nothing if not honest, and his life is very interesting. As a side note, I thought it was interesting that he decries materialism while talking of his rather large collection of expensive art.

[Jacob Aitken]

I don't really endorse Hauerwas's project, but few books are written with such raw power. He tells his life story but focuses it around his ex-wife's extreme bi-polar disorder. The story, while utterly tragic at first, is simply too amazing to put down.

While his ex-wife is obviously crazy (and dare I say, demon-possessed--all the signs are there), Hauerwas does not hide his own faults.

Of particular interest is his time at Notre Dame and the liberalizing move of that Catholic institution.

The book reads better than most novels.

[James]

One of the things that mark's me out as abnormal is that I have been eagerly awaiting the publication of one of my favorite theologians memoirs for the past year. This book will likely not seen as his most important book (that would be the Peacable Kingdom), his most popular book (that would be Resident Aliens), but I found it refreshing to hear Hauerwas in his own words share some of his journey as a theologian and revealing the soil that his ideas came to fruition.

[Christian Wermeskerch]

I've never read Hauerwas before, but now I feel like I know him deeply. To think so introspectively - despite his claims that he doesn't - is a gift and I am happy to see it shared with the church. His process of seeing himself as Christianized, instead of a typical converstion story, might speak to a lot of readers well, as will his time with his mentally ill ex-wife.

[Judith]

Excellent book, the honesty, but lack of self pity, was very moving. It also communicated a real excitement about theology and why it is so important. Made me want to re-read what I have read of Hauerwas and read more that he has written.

[Chris Schutte]

A wonderful reflection on Christian growth and faithfulness from one of our most provocative theologians. He is also very humorous - I grinned and chuckled quite a bit, and even laughed out loud several times - not typical responses to theological writing . . .

[Steven H]

THE NOTED THEOLOGIAN TELLS THE STORY OF HIS LIFE

Stanley Hauerwas (born 1940) is an American theologian who was a longtime professor at Duke University. He has written many books, such as Resident Aliens; After Christendom; Unleashing the Scripture; Wilderness Wanderings; With the Grain of the Universe: The Church's Witness and Natural Theology; A Better Hope; etc.

He wrote in the introductory section of this 2010 book, “I have written this memoir in an attempt to understand myself, something that would be impossible without my friends. I have had a wonderful life because I have had wonderful friends. So this attempt to understand myself Is not just about ‘me’ but about the friends who have made me who I am. It is also about God---the God who has forced me to be who I am. Indeed, trying to figure out how I ended up being Stanley Hauerwas requires that I say how God figures into the story, and this is a frightening prospect.” (Pg. xi)

He explains, “My mother and father married ‘late.’ My mother desperately wanted children. She had a child that was stillborn… She had heard the story of Hannah praying to God to give her a son, whom she would dedicate to God… My mother prayed a similar prayer. I am the result. But I was named Stanley because the week before I was born my mother and father saw a movie---‘Stanley and Livingstone.’” (Pg. 3)

He notes, “Although I am now a chaired professor at a major research university, I still do not feel at home in the academy. I am sure that feeling has everything to do with class, but I also suspect that the sense I have had of never ‘fitting in’ has been a way to resist being taken in by my ‘success.’ I would like to think that I have never been able to develop an arrogance my accomplishments might justify; even so, this is more likely the result of a fear of power, and not a matter of virtue.” (Pg. 8)

While in college at Yale, “Although I still thought of myself as ‘not a Christian,’ I was beginning to think that through the study of philosophy there might be something to this Christian stuff.” (Pg. 10) He adds, “Intellectually, my greatest strength is that there is nothing in which I am not interested. Intellectually, my greatest weakness is that there is nothing in which I am not interested.” (Pg. 12) And, “I assumed that my parents would never want me to be anything other than straightforward. Bull____ was not allowed. Plain speech and plain thinking was the hallmark of their life, and I took it to be the hallmark of my life. I should like to think that this is still true of how I think and write.” (Pg. 44)

At Yale, “I certainly did not have a well-worked-out Christology. Indeed, I still do not. I am not even sure I believe in anyone having a well-worked-out Christology.” (Pg. 59) After graduation, the president of Augustana College interviewed him for a job, and “I suddenly realized that I was going to be a teacher for the rest of my life. Just as I had gone to divinity school not realizing that you usually go to divinity school to study for the ministry, it had not occurred to me that I was doing a Ph.D. to become a teacher. I have been teaching now for more than forty years, and I am still not sure what it means to be a teacher. But whatever it means, I have reveled in it.” (Pg. 75)

He recalls, “I discovered that the church might be important… I do not remember if I even went to church when I was working on my Ph.D. If I did, I went only spasmodically. I discovered that the church might make a difference because I thought you needed a community that spoke the language called Christian if Christians… were to perform the faith… Christianity was for me primarily still an ‘idea.’ To be sure, I thought I was a Christian, but I am not sure what that meant. I had done a Ph.D. in Christian ethics, for God’s sake. Surely I must be a Christian… I am not sure what I would have done at Augustana if I had ceased to believe in God, but increasingly I have some to believe that ‘believing in God’ is not a description that helps us know much about what it means to be a Christian.” (Pg. 87) Later, he adds, “I spent the next fourteen years at Notre Dame. I had been trained to be a theologian at Yale. At Notre Dame, I began the slow, agonizing, and happy process that has made me a Christian… there is no substitute for learning to be a Christian by being in the presence of significant lives made significant by being Christian.” (Pg. 95)

He notes, “I had started to rite at Augustana… I did not write because I thought you needed to publish to get tenure… but I wrote because I thought I had something to say.” (Pg. 111) Later, he adds, “I love to entertain… Teaching, after all, is a form of entertainment… it is all a commercial for theology. But I have worked hard to teach in a manner that will be compelling for students.” (Pg. 133)

He recalls, “I am not sure how many years we had been at Notre Dame when I began to think that I was more Catholic than Protestant. I thought it was dishonest for me to teach Catholics, to be supported by Catholics to worship with Catholics, and not to be Catholic. I came to the conclusion that it was time to explore what it would mean for me to become Catholic. To think about becoming a Catholic at Notre Dame … could so easily be understood as a grasp for power… I do not think I was looking for power. I think I was looking for a home… It is true that I had thought about Mary and had come to believe that she was the Mother of God. I had thought about the pope and could acknowledge that the bishop of Rome was the office of unity. I had thought about contraception, and I was pretty sure the Catholics were wrong about that one… Before I took the next steps, I thought I should tell Anne [his first wife]. She exploded. She told me that my becoming Catholic would be the last straw, that if I went any further along those lines the marriage would be over… Given Anne’s reaction, I did not pursue becoming Catholic.” (Pg. 139)

Anne ultimately had mental problems, and she died in her late fifties of congestive heart failure. “But the way she died server only to make me acutely aware of how lonely her life had been. That her loneliness was self-imposed does not make it any less sad. What possibly can be said about a life so lived? I am a Christian theologian. People assume that I am supposed to be able to answer that question. I have no idea how to answer that question. If anything, what I have learned over the years as a Christian theologian is that none of us should try to answer such questions… When Christianity is assumed to be an ‘answer’ that makes the world intelligible, it reflects an accommodated church committed to assuring Christians that the way things are is the way things have to be… For me, learning to be a Christian has meant learning to live without answers. Indeed, to learn to live in this way is what makes being a Christian so wonderful. Faith is but a name for learning how to go on without knowing the answers.” (Pg. 207-208)

He explains, “I write because writing is the only way I know how to think… That I have something to say is not a personal achievement. I have something to say because I am a Christian. I also have readers who are obligated to care about what I write. They are called Christians… I am an academic, but I do not have to write only for other academics. I write for a people who, no matter how ambiguous the identification ‘Christian’ may be, think that what theologians say should matter. I believe that God has given me something to say. I have been given the work of trying to imagine what it means to be a Christian in a world that Christians do not control.” (Pg. 235)

He concludes, “I have not written this memoir in preparation for my death. I am not finished. I have work to do. Still, I know that in the not-too-distant future someone will write, ‘Now Stanley died.’ I think often about dying. I had imagined that I would be quite frightened as I aged and the reality of death became just that---a reality. But I have been surprised to discover that to the degree I have contemplated my death, I have not been frightened.” (Pg. 282)

One need not be a huge fan of Hauerwas’s theology to enjoy and appreciate this interesting and insightful memoir.

[Andrew]

I don't know how to describe this book to you, don't remember how it came to be on my Kindle, haven't read anything by Hauerwas before, and couldn't remember, when I started reading, the summary of Hauerwas's theological angle.

All I had was that Hauerwas was known to be an interesting guy, had said some interesting things, was respected by some other thinkers I've read, and that I had been looking forward for some years to reading this book.

It was good, but I don't know whether to give it three stars or four, or what the criteria should be, and Goodreads doesn't afford the luxury of half stars.

There were lots of names mentioned that I didn't recognise and a couple that I know to be 'problematic', as they say.

I was very moved by the narrative around his ill first wife. I went off and found a secondhand copy of 'Naming the Silences: God, Medicine and the Problem of Suffering', which I'm looking forward to reading.

I love the bit where he talks about how the apparent need for a thinker to have 'a position' gets in the way of true investigation.

Here's something to know about Hauerwas: he was named by Time magazine as America's best theologian, and then the following week Sept 11 happened. He's a pacifist who works in the area of ethics and he said that the US shouldn't go to war in response to the terror attacks. This book is largely about friendships and how they have carried him, but he lost some friends in those days.

He genuinely is an interesting character and I'm pleased to have read this book.

I've written a lot of not saying much here. Maybe a quote from Hauerwas would have been better, and leave it at that:

"We are complex creatures constituted by contradictions we refuse to acknowledge. The novelist [or memoirist?] must help us see our complexity without providing comforting explanations. We must be taught to see our pain and the pain we cause in others without trying to excuse ourselves by offering explanations.

"I think “ethics” depends on developing the eye of the novelist. If my work is compelling, I suspect it is so to the degree I am able to write like a novelist. If I have a novelist’s eye, it is not accidental. I have, after all, spent many years reading novels. Reading novels will not necessarily make one better able to see without illusion, but it can help. My ability so to see, moreover, depends on how I have come to understand what it means to be Christian. I fear that much of the Christianity that surrounds us assumes our task is to save appearances by protecting God from Job-like anguish. But if God is the God of Jesus Christ, then God does not need our protection. What God demands is not protection, but truth."

How good?

[Amy]

I admire Stanley Hauerwas, but I do not particularly admire this memoir. The early part of the book about his family and upbringing comes across as superficial, and the sections about how he developed his theology require an advanced philosophical education. If you don’t already know the debate between Barth and Brunner—and there are dozens more examples like this—don’t bother with this part. Of course, there are plenty of people who have deeply considered these distinctions, but Hauerwas could have made this book more accessible by briefly explaining what he took from each philosopher, instead of simply name-dropping them. (An important exception is John Howard Yoder, whose work inspired Hauerwas’s pacifism.)

For me, the memoir became more compelling when Hauerwas discussed his own theology, which he details in the text, rather than relying on his audience to make connections with outside readings. As a writer, I was particularly drawn to his explanation of time and narrative in the context of the Resurrection. He writes:

“The world simply cannot be narrated – the world cannot have a story – unless a people exist who make the world the world. That is an eschatological claim that presupposes we know there was a beginning only because we have seen the end. That something had to start it all is not what Christians mean by creation. Creation is not ‘back there,’ though there is a ‘back there’ character to creation. Rather, creation names God’s continuing action, God’s unrelenting desire for us to want to be loved by that love manifest in Christ’s life, death, and resurrection.”

For much of the book, Hauerwas treats his first wife, Anne, who had bipolar disorder, primarily as a burden who disrupted an otherwise idyllic life. I’m not sure that he means to be so dismissive of what it must have been like to have her illness, but it’s hard to say. He presumes to blame himself for having been too good, too energetic, so that Anne did not, in his words, have to take responsibility for herself. The fact that she failed to thrive after their marriage ended undercuts this hypothesis, as he admits. I softened toward him as the book went on – his home life sounds like it was extraordinarily difficult – but I felt he failed to fully explore the dynamics of his first marriage.