Second Naiveté: What is it exactly?

The “second naiveté,” first articulated by Paul Ricoeur, is “the literary and theological subject matter in front of the text that potentially can liberate . . . the text’s claims on the reader’s life and thought” (Mark I. Wallace, Second Naiveté, xiii-xiv). Ted Campbell applies Ricoeur’s hermeneutical approach, with McLaren’s approval, to establish ecumenism by avoiding systematic theologies in favor of simply affirming “the most basic common teaching of historic Christian communities, the gospel message” (Ted Campbell, The Gospel in Christian Traditions, 6; Brian D. McLaren, Foreword to The Gospel in Christian Traditions, vii-ix.). 

Okay, now that you and I are both thoroughly confused, let me try a different approach. The first naiveté is an uncritical acceptance of a biblical teaching sort of like a young child believing in Santa Claus. The second naiveté is a return to the first naiveté after one passes through a critical, rational, modernist approach to the Bible. One who reads the Bible with a second naiveté no longer engages the biblical text critically; rather, they read the Scripture as a narrative or a collection of symbols whereby the exact meaning of Scripture remains elusive to the human mind. This approach, which effectively dumbs down the mind by refusing to allow for the employment of reason, is eerily similar to the meditation practices of Zen Buddhism. Using the second naiveté, one may read the Bible, but one must not interpret it critically to discover its meaning. While McLaren (see below) advocated this method for others, he fails to employ himself as he constructs his Kingdom of God theology. 

In his interview with Jon Stanley, McLaren states that through reading the Bible with a second naiveté he was able to write The Secret Message of Jesus (Brian D. McLaren, “Why Everything Must Change,” interview by Stanley). By applying Ricoeur’s second naiveté, McLaren opts for a narrative approach to Scripture. Like McLaren, Dave Tomlinson also prefers to read Scripture by using a second naiveté (Re-Enchanting Christianity, 10). Peter Rollins, in his recommendation of second naiveté, says, “Such a reading involved placing oneself into the narrative, inhabiting the different characters, dialoguing with them, filling in the gaps of the story with one’s own experiences and ideas” (The Fidelity of Betrayal, 47).

My book, Neoorthopraxy and Brian D. McLaren, offers more insight into this topic should anyone be interested.