Desiring a Conversation
Some Questions on Smith's Cultural Liturgies Project
When I first read
’s Desiring the Kingdom in 2012, I was in the midst of some serious questioning about education and what I was doing by dedicating my life to that vocation. It was both refreshing and infuriating, sometimes on the same page. I went on to read the sequel Imagining the Kingdom as soon as it was released in 2013, and felt wholly disappointed. I don’t know where I had hoped Smith would go with his argument, but it seemed clear to me that his trajectory was not my own. I purchased and began Awaiting the King in 2017, but never finished it. Whatever enthusiasm I had after the first volume in Smith’s Cultural Liturgies project after the first read had clearly waned in my own imagination. By that point, I was firmly committed to the Classical Christian model of education as well, which I had only the faintest inklings of in 2012.So, when I moved to Arkansas in 2023, I determined to finish the trilogy by starting over and working back through them. I picked up my copy of Desiring the Kingdom (hereafter DTK) and found that my appreciation for Smith’s argument had faded even more, with volume 1 proving much less compelling on a reread. I haven’t finished the other two, but I am committed to doing so before this Summer is over.
I was pleasantly surprised to learn that Smith is actually preparing a second edition of DTK, set for release in the coming months.
This news has prompted me to share a kind of wish list. Obviously, Smith doesn’t know me nor is he under any obligation to address concerns I have with his argument. But I don’t think I’m the only reader who once found the Cultural Liturgies endeavor compelling, only to have become less convinced over time. To be clear, I think my own calling still closely aligns with what Smith says he hopes for through this three-part argument. What follows are some thoughts I had on re-reading it which are worth considering. Who knows? Perhaps some of these will be addressed in Smith’s revised edition?
I’m going to offer the following thoughts in a kind of list. They’re arranged chronologically rather than by importance. I’m not going to cite page numbers, since these are more general observations. But I will aim for some precision when a specific argument warrants it. Since these stem from notes I jotted down during my second read, they might have a stream-of-consciousness feel at points. Still, I have edited my thoughts to end with a question on each observation that I hope will generate some conversation.
The example that opens DTK is compelling on first glance, but breaks down upon rereading. Any marketplace, even in the Biblical world, could be described similarly. Is Smith overselling the “formative aspect” of the Mall, especially given the decline of malls in North America?
In the opening chapter, Smith makes much of how what we “love” and what we “worship” are the same. I do wonder if this is a false dichotomy. Could what we “love” and what we “worship” be better understood as distinct things (just as Smith distinguishes between what we “know” and what we “love”)?
Chapter 2 says often that we are shaped by loves not ideas. Maybe this is true, though I’m less convinced today than I was in 2012. It seems like he is conflating the loves with the body, which is a bit frustrating. Isn’t this just an alternative dualism issue, like an inversion of Smith’s disagreement with “Rationalists”? Does this merely create opposite problems instead of solutions?
I wonder if Smith’s commitment to the Ideas of Phenomenology overpower his argument. In other words, does his “love” lead him to put the philosophical argument over other things, which might refute his logic?
Smith's project seems to be a via media between Rousseau and Bacon. While I want to say this could be a good thing, I’m not convinced it is. Is this a right reading? Or does Smith lean more one way or the other?
With 12 years of study between reads, I am convinced Smith’s criticism of “consumer capitalism” is faulty. My main concern is that it clumsily applies terminology (I have no confidence that Smith could define a “Free Market” based on what he says in the book). Also, DTK, which is about education and not economics, seems to argue that some kind of socially engineered economy is the only proper one. I wonder if this is addressed in Awaiting the King?
The intervening years have been harsh on Smith’s views on marketing, which might be coming off a kind of Mad Men-influenced overestimation. Budweiser and Nike stand out as examples of why marketing simply isn’t as blatantly influential as argued. That’s not to say ads are irrelevant, but they don’t seem to dominate the imagination in the way Smith contends. How do we need to think about ads in an age where marketing has become “personal brands”?
The whole section on fraternities looks like it needs updating. How might
respond to Smith's thoughts on this point?Smith says secular liturgies overpower churches because of weak hearts. Historically, though, isn’t that true of churches with weak doctrine? Would a church with strong doctrine be able to overcome many of the secular liturgies Smith worries influences the Christian too much?
Smith is constantly arguing against ideas (i.e. Libertarian individualism) while also claiming ideas matter less than hearts. This was a concern I had on the first read, though it seems much more pronounced the second time through. What would Smith say this book helps me to “love” to overcome these problematic “ideas”?
Smith rightly says the church and the university are separate with different sacraments roles to fill. It is not clear how his advocacy for campus worship solves the problem. And given the current mistrust of universities, as more and more believe such institutions will only promote loving things inordinately, what solutions are there? New colleges? Reformation of established ones? A return to vocational training?
I think we can consider the pastoral epistles, specifically their language to be soberminded, as a counter Smith's emphasis. Are we what we love? Perhaps, but what if that's only the case when we're not soberminded?
None of these concerns reduce the appreciation I have more Smith and his work. Criticism often sounds like it is entirely negative, even though the critical process is only effective where there the text proves itself valuable. So my own comments genuinely come from a place that recognizes Smith’s general argument has something worth discussing. And other than C. S. Lewis, there is no single modern Christian author of whom I have read so much of their work. As such, Smith’s writings contributed significantly to my development as a teacher and as a member of the Reformed community. The observations above are born more out of a desire to find common ground than a wish to sow division.
And I look forward to checking out the second edition of Desiring the Kingdom when it’s released. Maybe some of my initial interest will be rekindled?
I read DTK during my first semester teaching, and found Smith's articulation of liturgical formation helpful. It formed the backbone of my second year professional development plan; long before I knew who Josh Gibbs was, I put together a classroom liturgy. Was it super robust? No, but it helped orient my students to the difference between the hall and the classroom. I fell off the bandwagon in Cultural Liturgies book 2, and even more so when I heard Smith speak at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. As much as I love the Romantics and lean in favor of some of the postmodern insights, I think Smith is too willing to bring corrosive ideas into the church. Rather than evaluating those ideas by the truths of Scripture, Smith's criticism of churches leads to a tacit accepting of pernicious influences. All of that to say, I find Sean's list of criticism and questions helpful. I still love the heart-with-love-arrow diagram from Ch. 5 - I've gotten a lot of value over the years asking students to contemplate first what they love, and how they can shape their hearts to love the right things. And Smith gave me that tool.
I wanted to like his book, but I'm with you. Very unsatisfying. Jeff Meyer's The Lord's Service is far better even though it doesn't directly address the same topic.