Review: Freely Sober

/ rtrube54 / 2 Comments
Cover image of "Freely Sober" by Eicka Andersen

Freely Sober

Freely Sober, Ericka Andersen. InterVarsity Press (ISBN: 9781514013366) 2026.

Summary: Writing for Christian women from experience with alcohol dependency and recovery, offers help in honest thinking about alcohol.

She was a Christian active in her church. She led Bible studies with other women, cared for her children and worked. And she increasingly suspected her relationship with alcohol wasn’t a helpful one, especially when she covered up her secret drinking and the effects of hangovers. And it was easy to justify. Drinks (sometimes too many) with friends. Wine while making dinner as well as with it. She knew the health effects of alcohol but continued to struggle with the need to drink. Finally, she acknowledged she had a problem, eventually reaching out to online and in-person groups, and finding renewed hope through her faith as she took steps toward sobriety. This is Ericka Andersen’s story and she writes for other Christian women who think it might be their story as well.

Instead of ultimatums or shaming, Andersen invites her readers to be “sober curious.”

“Being ‘sober curious’ was the catalyst for shifting my perspective in a life-changing direction. Being sober curious means asking questions about drinking–yours, theirs, and everyone’s. It means educating yourself about alcohol and asking insightful questions about how drinking affects you and those around you without judgment” (p. 22).

This “sober curious” approach is what is behind the “freely” in the title. Rather than add to the pressures in a reader’s life, she invites them, if they are uneasy about their own relationship to alcohol, to explore and then freely make their own decisions, empowered by this process and their faith. “Freely” also refers to the freedom she has experienced in sobriety “where you don’t question when, how much, or if you should drink at all.”

Each chapter comes with exercises that foster this curiosity. Perhaps the most important is at the end of the first chapter, “Let’s Come Clean.” Questions walk the reader through considering the impact of alcohol on their physical health, faith life, relationships, emotional and mental well-being, and professional life and calling. Then Andersen explores the question of whether Christians should drink. She comes down on this as an expression of our freedom in Christ. But if it fosters captivity rather than freedom, that is good reason to not exercise that freedom.

She then explore the unique tensions women experience, including social pressures. Andersen looks at how alcohol is used to self-medicate as a coping mechanism. Then there are the triggering situations that precede drinking and beginning to choose alternative responses when you recognize the triggers. Amidst all this her watchword is self-compassion and forgiveness. She calls out the bad theologies that stigmatize those who struggle with alcohol.

Instead, she traces a healing journey that begins with inviting God and others into one’s life. She talks about the places where one may find support. Healthy habits, positive triggers are discussed and identified. She honestly discusses the positive experiences one may associate with alcohol, and her own discovery that many didn’t require alcohol. Andersen is also honest about when we fail and that many relapse, and then get up and return to sobriety.

The book mixes spiritual encouragement with practical steps as well as honesty that admits that living sober can be hard but that “it works if you work it.” Andersen is candid about her own struggles and failures, including a relapse after giving a public testimony. The book also offers a variety of books, resources, and recovery groups.

While written for women, men can find benefit as well. This may be an especially helpful book for spouses of women going through recovery. It would not surprise me that alcohol dependency among women in the church is far higher than one might think. The good news is that one needn’t struggle in secret, that one can freely choose to be sober curious, that there is a community to support us, and a God who longs for our healing. Ericka Andersen’s book is tangible evidence for all of this.

_____________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

Review: The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State

/ rtrube54 / 1 Comment
Cover image of "The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State" by Jill Lepore

The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State

The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State, Jill Lepore. Liveright (ISBN: 9781324098423) 2026.

Summary The rise of machine rule and the corporations that make them, its impacts, and possible demise.

Artificial intelligence. Data centers. So much of what I read these days expresses the concern of these two connected things. Could artificial intelligence not only take our jobs and mimic our human creation but could it even take our lives? Large corporations are building data centers, many using as much power and water as a city and occupying, in many cases, formerly productive farmland. For historian Jill Lepore, these are manifestations of an underlying reality, one that has been decades in the making: the Artificial State.

What does Lepore mean by the “Artificial State”? Writing of the Silicon Valley billionaires leading this movement, aspiring to escape their own bodies and to upload their consciousness to computers, she observes: “The Artificial State they envision for everyone else, and have begun to build, is a future in which humans are ruled, and many replaced, by machines owned by the corporations owned by themselves.” The machines place human governance with digital infrastructure.

But how did we get here? As a historian, Lepore traces the history of both technological developments and the ideology of technocracy from the first calculating machines to the latest AI releases. She traces the work on “machines that think” from the early computers of the 1940’s to the present. Lepore traces the increasing use of computers in political processes from computation to prediction. Then there is the revolution of social media, literally fueling revolutions and accentuating political divisions and propaganda. Finally, we enter the AI era where the possibility of machines both displacing humans on a massive scale and controlling their lives becomes a reality.

The second part of the book turns to the fall of the Artificial State. Lepore take a novel, as in science fiction novel, approach. Fundamentally, her thesis is that the very works that were meant as cautionary tales have been read by our contemporary tech leaders as a blueprint for the tools they build. She shows, for example, how Elon Musk completely misreads Douglas Adams’ Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. Lepore discusses the warnings inherent in the works of Isaac Asimov and more recently Murderbot author Martha Wells. She explores everything from the disposibility of earth’s environment, assumed by tech leaders, to the rights of robots when they evidence marks of sentience. By the way, she observes that the architects of the Artificial State are not particularly concerned about rendering the earth uninhabitable:

“They had escape plans: Elon Musk to Mars, Mark Zuckerberg to the metaverse, Peter Thiel to his land in New Zealand, Jeff Bezos to space, Sam Altman’s brain uploaded to the cloud. They weren’t saving humanity; they were preparing to abandon it.”

Lepore, however, is not pessimistic. She believes the Artificial State is not fated. She affirms the institutions of democracy, particularly the consent of the governed. For all the bandied-about intelligence, she argues that much of the Artificial State is badly conceived, on shaky intellectual, and technological foundations. Instead, she believes we have the chance to envision a better future rather than cede it to the tech titans.

But it is here that I have questions for Lepore. Where is the alternative intellectual framework that envisions life differently than in a tech-enabled future? Why have we so readily accepted everything from smartphones and social media to AI? Why doesn’t it trouble us to see huge server farms displacing food farms? Are we disturbed by species extinctions to fuel the energy intensive AI? What happens when we prioritize energy for datacenters over affordable energy for heating and cooking? Behind all this, I wonder why we have assented to all this. What does it reveals of our true beliefs and values?

Jacques Ellul, Lewis Mumford, and Paul Kingsnorth have gone further in articulating the intellectual framework need to resist techno-capitalism. In Against the Machine, Paul Kingsnorth envisions a culture that values past, people, place, and prayer. I hear Lepore only hoping to use political processes already eaten alive by techno-capitalism. I question whether, apart from these other things, it will have the substance to resist.

This said, Lepore offers a cogent historical analysis and an interesting study of the science fiction intellectual history tech leaders have misread. Understanding this “past” is important and I hope others will build on Lepore’s work.

Review: Sad Cypress

/ rtrube54 / 2 Comments
Cover image of "Sad Cypress" by Agatha Christie

Sad Cypress

Sad Cypress (Hercule Poirot, 21) Agatha Christie. William Morrow Paperbacks (ISBN: 9780063376151) 2025, first published 1940.

Summary: Elinor Carlisle is on trial for poisoning Mary Gerrard and will go to her death unless Poirot can show that someone else did it.

Elinor Carlisle is standing in the dock, charged with the murder by poisoning of Mary Gerrard, her lodgekeeper’s daughter. She pleads not guilty but the preponderance of evidence weighs against her. But the family physician has hired Hercule Poirot to investigate, and to find evidence that will exonerate her.

The back story, which Christie proceeds to tell is that Elinor Carlisle and Roddy Welman, are engaged to marry. Elinor is the niece of Laura Welman, whose health is failing. Roddy is Mrs. Welman’s deceased husband’s nephew. The two grew up in frequent contact, a relationship which had grown into love, at least for Elinor. Mrs Welman had always wanted this marriage. Both Roddy and Elinor had been living in London when an anonymous note is delivered to Elinor, warning of someone stealing the affections of Mrs. Welman in her illness.

When Mrs Welman has a stroke, they visit. Elinor finds Mary Gerrard, the lodgekeeper’s daughter has been keeping Mrs Welman company and helping the nurses care for her. For some reason, Mrs. Welman had taken an interest in Mary, and had paid for her education, including a finishing school in Paris. Mary is modest, and simply professes gratitude for the treatment she has received. And Mrs. Welman appreciates the company.

All may have been well and good were it not for a chance encounter between Roddy and Mary. He is immediately smitten, though Mary discourages him. Elinor sees this and it leads to the breaking of their engagement. Even then, when Roddy presses his suit, Mary discourages him. But Elinor is secretly heartbroken, and jealous of Roddy’s attentions to Mary.

Mrs. Welman, who detests being bedridden, has a second stroke. Despite surviving and improving, she dies overnight. About this time, nurse Hopkins mentions a missing vial of morphine fromn her bag to the other nurse. But there is no reason to see the death as having been from other than natural causes.

When Elinor meets with the solicitor, she learns Mrs Welman had died intestate, and that she has inherited the estate. Nothing goes to Roddy. Mrs. Welman had been distraught the night before she died and wanted her solicitor to make a provision for Mary, something she had been unable to do. Elinor settled £2000 on Mary. And she decided to sell the manor, asking Mary to clean out the lodgekeepers residence.

Meanwhile, Elinor wrapped up matters at the main house and made sandwiches from supplies she had picked up at the grocer, more than she could eat. So, she went down and invited Mary and nurse Hopkins to join her. When they sat down, she served Mary first, who took the top sandwich. Afterward, nurse Hopkins made tea that she and Mary drank. Then nurse Hopkins and Elinor went upstairs to look through some things. When they finally came down, they found Mary breathing with difficulty. Despite the doctor’s efforts, she died.

They found a lethal dose of morphine in her stomach. Since both Mary and nurse Hopkins drank the tea, the focus was on the sandwich she ate. Then a scrap of paper with the word “morphine” was found in the floorboard where Elinor had prepared the sandwiches.

It doesn’t appear anyone else but Elinor could have done it. She had motive, means (the missing morphine vial) and opportunity. But she maintained her innocence (even as she imagined she could have done it). And Dr. Lord believes her and seeks Poirot’s help. But will he find evidence that points elsewhere when the preponderance points at Elinor? Or will she go to the gallows?

In the end it comes down hidden secrets and small mistakes, things Poirot is skilled at ferreting out. But Christie made the evidence against Elinor seem so convincing that I wondered how Poirot could prove otherwise. And that’s what kept me glued to the story to the end.

Review: Early Christian Theology

/ rtrube54 / 4 Comments
Cover image of "Early Christian Theology" by J. Warren Smith

Early Christian Theology

Early Christian Theology, J. Warren Smith. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. (ISBN: 9780802874771) 2026.

Summary: A guide to the development of early Christian theology emphasizing diverse attempts to understand scripture.

One of the texts we used during my seminary education was J. N. D. Anderson’s Early Christian Doctrine. It was an important text helping me understand the centuries of debate behind the creeds we recited in church and the beliefs about Christ, about the Trinity, original sin, and the atonement that I took for granted. Anderson’s book was published in 1960. J. Warren Smith, professor of historical theology at Duke Divinity School, thought it was time for an update. His approach stresses how the theological debates of the early Christian centuries reflected the different readings of scripture in different Christian communities, wrestling with complex questions about the person of Christ and the nature of the Godhead. The challenge of the councils was to address those readings, resisting relativism while constructing a framework of belief that incorporated the best of those readings.

Smith’s focus is on the second through fifth centuries. The book combines chronological and thematic coverage, so that some chapters will recur to an earlier period to discuss a different theological theme. Smith begins with the foundations of scripture and worship in early Christian communities. While this is uppermost, he also weighs the influences of classical culture. Then he turns to the challenges of persecution and the early Christian apologists. This is followed by responses to the gnostic challenge.

Then chapters 4-6 turn to responding to various Christological errors including the formidable challenge from Arius and his followers, culminating in the councils of the fourth century. While there were politics and powerful personalities, what is also evident is the church’s struggle to find language to crystallize its understanding of the data of scripture concerning both Christ and the Trinity.

Chapter 7 addresses Pneumatology including the critical work of the Cappadocians affirming the divinity of the Spirit and the eventual division over filioque. Likewise, chapter 8 on the incarnation also reflects the differences between east and west, as well as conflicts among eastern churches. The remaining chapters (9-14) address early concepts of the atonement, ecclesiology, particularly in North Africa, the Manichaean conflict over creation and evil, divine and human agency, deification, and early eschatology.

I was struck with several differences from Anderson. One is that the treatment of the church’s controversies was far more in-depth and nuanced. In addition, Smith helps us understand how the controversies were based in widespread communities. We see Rome in conversation with Constantinople, Alexandria with Antioch. Theological differences weren’t abstract conversations but based in believing communities. Smith helps us understand the different concerns that shaped the way different communities read scripture and formulated doctrine.

Given the mix of chronological and thematic material, a timeline might have been helpful. In addition, particularly around the discussions of Christology, charts that summarized the major tenets of key figures or movements would help. I would recommend that students using this text create their own versions of this. As a survey text, Smith offers bibliographies of primary and secondary sources for further study.

In conclusion, Smith aspired to create a worthy successor to Anderson’s book. I believe he has succeeded in that work, incorporating more recent scholarship. In addition, he helped me see theology as an ongoing conversation between Christian communities. Sure, it was messy and individuals were not always at their best. Would that we had the sense of the global community reading scripture together to understand the mind of the Maker.

_____________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

The Weekly Wrap: October 4-10

/ rtrube54 / Leave a comment
woman in white crew neck t shirt sitting on chair
Photo by cottonbro studio on Pexels.com

The Weekly Wrap: October 4-10

Reviewing Backlist Books

I do something atypical for a reviewer. While I read many new titles, I also read a number of backlist books–those that have been in publication anywhere from a year to several centuries or more. C.S. Lewis recommended we read one old book for every new one we read. I cannot say I do that. However, there are many older books that I want to read, as well as ones I learn of.

I am a reader first. Reviewing is something I began because others found the reviews I wrote helpful. My primary motive was just to remember the important things about the books I read and what I thought. But I discovered that at least some others valued what I wrote. And I was fortunate to persuade a number of publishers to send me books I was interested in. For free, no less!

But I will always be a reader first. That means I will keep discovering great old books as well as new ones. My hunch is that there are many others like me. They aren’t guided by the current book club books or the best-sellers. They simply pursue what they think of interest.

Perhaps it will be to read all of what an author writes. Or a book you are reading (or several) mention an influential book you’ve never read. Then there are those serendipitous finds at a library booksale or a secondhand bookstore. All those kinds of books will turn up in my reviews. Hopefully some will interest you. If nothing else, I hope it encourages you in the adventure of the reading life, discovering books new and old.

Five Articles Worth Reading

This year’s Nobel Prize in literature went to Canadian poet Anne Carson. If you are like me, you are new to Anne Carson. If so, “An Anne Carson Reader” is just the place to begin.

Carson is a classicist as well as a poet. “Anne Carson’s Seductive Strangeness” explores the intersection of those two worlds in her life and work.

In “Flowers for Frank,” Noah Swank reviews In the Realm of the Last Man, the new memoir by Francis Fukuyama. In particular, he explores why Fukuyama writes so much about his hobbies. For example: “The third chapter details Fukuyama’s lifelong experience woodworking, and the fifth gives us his thoughts on sports and music. The tenth is about art photography; the twelfth about woodworking again; the 25th about building computers.”

It seems we are endlessly fascinated with King Arthur and Arthurian legends. Angelica Frey explores “Why King Arthur Still Shapes Pop Culture.”

Finally, “Children of the Wasted Lands” explores why the stories we choose to read and heed are so important in shaping our lives.

Quote of the Week

Vaclav Havel was born on October 5, 1936. He observes the folly of thinking we can only lie once when he states,


“Lying can never save us from another lie.”

Miscellaneous Musings

The Cathedral of Theology is part of a new series published by IVP Academic, the “Pillars of Christian Dogmatics.” The metaphor of likening the framing of a theology to the building of a cathedral is arresting. I look forward to seeing if the book fulfills the promise of the title.

Elizabeth Strout continues to impress me with her depth of insight into the human condition. I’m midway through The Things We Never Say, a fascinating exploration of the secrets we keep and the lies we live to cover them.

Patrick Wensick’s The Great Black Swamp is a history/memoir of the northwest quadrant of Ohio, which was largely a swamp until drained, beginning in the late 1800’s, leaving some of the richest, and flattest farmland anywhere in the world. Wensick grew up in one of the small towns that sprang up there, Deshler. I lived for four years in Toledo, and drove all over this area, which is basically endless fields of corn and soybeans, with only a drainage ditch separating the road and the fields. Those drainage ditches and their ecological impact form a major part of this narrative.

Next Week’s Reviews

Monday: J. Warren Smith, Early Christian Theology

Tuesday: Agatha Christie, Sad Cypress

Wednesday: Jill Lepore, The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State

Thursday: Ericka Anderson, Freely Sober

Friday: Lynneth Miller Renberg and Adam R. Renberg, Candles in the Darkness

So, that’s The Weekly Wrap for October 4-10.

Find past editions of The Weekly Wrap under The Weekly Wrap heading on this page.

Review: The Righteous Mind

/ rtrube54 / Leave a comment
Cover image of "The Righteous Mind" by Jonathan Haidt

The Righteous Mind

The Righteous Mind. Jonathan Haidt. Pantheon Books (ISBN: 9780307377906) 2012.

Summary: Why different political and religious groups have such different beliefs about what is right and wrong.

All I need to do is scroll through my social media feeds to see how moral people have very different understandings of how to bring their religious beliefs to bear on public life, including politics. Just compare the vibe on X (formerly Twitter) and Threads. Furthermore, engaging across those differences seems virtually impossible. Why can’t reasonable people come to a meeting of the minds?

In The Righteous Mind, Jonathan Haidt examines the moral psychology behind our deepest divisions. The first part of the book shares a breakthrough in his own thinking, confirmed by research, that explains why good, rational people disagree. He discovered that moral intuitions related to gut feelings come first. Then conscious reasons follow in a post hoc fashion. We use reasons to justify our intuitions. He uses the analogy of a rider and an elephant. The elephant is our intuitions, the rider our reason. The elephant goes where it wants and the rider tends to justify where it went. In this case, the elephants rule. However, it was interesting to learn that when people were given time to rationally consider a moral situation rather than just react, reason played a more determinative role. Otherwise, intuition rules the day. You need to speak to the elephant, or even address the path.

The second part begins with observing that liberal-progressives are WEIRD. That is, Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic. When he was at Penn, he discovered that a two block walk to a local McDonald’s revealed people who reasoned from very different moral foundations. He recognized that there was more to morality than the WEIRD embrace of care (vs. harm) and fairness (vs. cheating). He eventually identified three additional moral foundations on which conservatives drew for their moral intuitions: loyalty/betrayal, authority/subversion, and sanctity/degradation. Eventually, he identified one more foundation they shared: liberty/oppression. This both helped explain the divides but also why conservatives enjoyed certain advantages.

The last part of the book looks at group behavior, something Haidt calls “the hive switch.” He argues on the basis of evolutionary biology that we are drawn to groupish behavior, transcending self-interest. Furthermore, groups practice binding rituals through music, movement, dance and more. The morality of the group both binds us to each other and blinds us to those not part of the group. This explains religion, sports fans, music group followers, and politics.

The explanation of evolutionary biology was the densest part of the book and seemed crucial to the third part of the book, which I felt cohered the least. It seemed speculative to me. More helpful were the descriptions of how groups bind and how this blinds us to others.

The book doesn’t say a particular group is better or worse. What Haidt does is help us understand how we are different and the different foundations that shape our moral intuitions. While conservatives emphasize three more than others, we all draw upon all six to greater or lesser extents. While it won’t resolve differences, finding common ground with someone we differ with is a place to begin. Also, the realization that all have moral foundations engenders respect as opposed to deprecation.

What the book doesn’t address is the justification of immoral actions on moral terms or deviations from a group’s moral foundations. What happens when progressives cheat? Or what happens when conservatives subvert institutional authority? Real politicians (or church leaders, for that matter) do not always act morally even by their own standards. What Haidt does help us see is how we use reasons in a post hoc fashion, but this involves a redefinition of fairness or authority. But Haidt doesn’t speak to the erosion of moral foundations. Perhaps he will one day write a sequel on the unrighteous mind.