Baylor University

George W. Truett Theological Seminary

Christian Worship THEO 7316
Elí Gutiérrez

Chapter 1 “Homo Liturgicus. The Human Person as Lover”

James K. A. Smith, Desiring the Kingdom

Smith claims that liturgy shapes and constitutes our identities by forming our most fundamental
desires and our most basic attunement to the world. His book is about Christian education and
its pedagogy. However, he talks about such deep issues that he embraces many other topics. He
states that behind every pedagogy is a philosophical anthropology. For him, humans are more
than thinking things, we are liturgical animals. The Christian education should see the students
as a whole and not just as minds that need to know more information, they need to be formed.
In his words, education is a holistic endeavor that involves the whole person. What does that
have to do with Worship? Some may ask. For Smith, material practices that shape our identity
and forms our desire are also liturgies. Our identity is defined for what we love, and our love is
shaped, primed, and aimed by liturgical practices. We are more than thinkers, even more than
believers, we are lovers. Smith emphasizes that the way we inhabit the world is not primarily as
thinkers or even believers, but as more affective, embodied creatures who make our way in the
world more by feeling our way around it. He is providing a holistic anthropology in order to create
a better Christian pedagogy. In doing so he also touches the heart of Christian worship. Humans
are always aimed at something. Our nature is dynamic and intentional, so we are complex beings
and not statics dots on a diagram. For Smith the most basic mode of intentionality is love. We do
not primarily think or perceive the world, not even care and involve in the world, we primordially
desire and love the world. He is talking about ultimate love, that to which we are fundamentally
oriented. The love that shapes our identity. We are what we ultimately love. And our ultimate
love is what we worship. Our love has a goal. Our ultimate love is oriented by and to a picture
(not a list of ideas or beliefs) of what we think it looks like for us the good life. We are attracted
by these pictures of what good life is and they govern our decisions, actions, and habits. This is
what he means for “desiring the kingdom”. We all desire a picture of good life, a kingdom, but
not everyone desires the same kingdom. How does it happen? Habits. We are desiring,
imaginative, noncognitive animals and our picture of good life is inscribed in our habits and
dispositions. Habits are inscribed in our heart through bodily practices and rituals. Smith asks
how to apply this anthropology on cultural institutions, especially Christian education
institutions. How do the structures of such institutions must be shaped in order to form persons
with a correct picture of the good life which represent a competence against the worldly picture
of the good life? If Christian education is, in some significant sense, about the formation of a
Christian worldview, then we need to consider how the unconscious is shaped and formed. This
claim shifts from worldviews to social imaginary. Our way into the world is no through knowledge
but though understanding. It is precognitive, intuitive and affective. We should think about social
Christian imaginary. And because the understanding is essentially practical, to have a Christian
social imaginary the Christian practices are crucial.
 Unlike the book of Mitman, the book of Smith has captured my attention. I find it not only
very interesting but deeply important. I cannot wait to read how to put this into practice.
 I would like to discuss more specifically and with clear examples, how is the picture of the
good life that the world provides? And how is the picture of the good life that Christianity
provides?
 According to the anthropology that Smith proposes, how should be a Christian Service?