Pensees

Photo credit: Tabitha Turner. Unsplash license.

Thoughts from my devotional time:

Part 1: Building on a rock

“Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock. And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell, and great was the fall of it.” (Matthew 7:24-27, ESV)

Whenever I read the Sermon on the Mount, I’m struck by the surreal nature of the whole message. It’s as if someone told us, “Well, obviously the sky is green, and the quickest way to get from New York to San Francisco is by way of Hong Kong.” Look at the Beatitudes – “Lucky you if you’re spiritually poor! The Kingdom belongs to you! Lucky you if you’re mourning, because you’ll be comforted! Lucky you if people push you around, because you’ll inherit the whole shebang!”

These things are – very obviously – not factual, at least about life as we experience it. Jesus is turning our expectations upside down. The world doesn’t actually work the way you think it does, He’s saying. You need to zig when everybody else zags. You need to do take dangerous path instead of the safe one. Where there’s smoke, don’t expect fire. Don’t plan ahead. Don’t budget sensibly. Live like the birds of the air.

Live an impractical life.

And then, here at the end, He comes out with this metaphor of a rock. Which seems an obvious contradiction. He’s been telling us to build castles in the air, and now He’s saying, keep your feet on the ground, No, more than that – build your house on a rock. You need solid foundations.

The point, it seems to me, is this – Jesus is telling us not to believe our lying eyes. The world is not what we think it is. Everything that seems solid is in fact nebulous (a preview of modern Physics, perhaps?) while the really solid things are invisible and counterintuitive and have to be taken on faith.

Part 2: Emotion in faith

I’ve been thinking recently about the problem of emotion in our Christian faith.

I was raised, as I’ve told you, in the Pietist tradition. We believe in having what’s sometimes called an “Ah ha!” moment, when we receive Christ personally, often in a very passionate way. Much in our tradition is aimed at keeping that passion worked up. We’re warned against growing lukewarm, losing our first love.

The more high church tradition, against which my ancestors reacted, dismissed such thinking as “enthusiasm” (a negative term for them). They recognized – very sensibly – that it’s not only difficult, but ultimately self-defeating to try to live with our emotions perpetually amped up. It wears you down, emotionally and spiritually. (Remember how C. S. Lewis, in Surprised by Joy, describes abandoning his faith as a boy with great relief, after having worked very hard at keeping his fervor up?)

But the high church approach, to us Pietists, seems cold and lifeless.

It occurred to me that imagining the created universe as music, an idea I’ve been playing with recently, might help resolve this conundrum.

If you think of the Kingdom of God as a musical masterpiece, a symphony or an oratorio, then we believers are members of the orchestra, or the choir. If you don’t feel like playing or singing today, it doesn’t matter. You perform your part anyway. Just do the work. The music is the main thing.

And quite often, the music takes you by surprise and you get caught up in it spontaneously.

So when I pray or go to church or serve the in my vocation and “I’m not feeling it,” I do it all the same. Because the music is the main thing.

If my mind is on the music – the Kingdom of God – the religious ecstasy comes on its own timetable. “The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.” (John 3:8)

3 thoughts on “Pensees”

  1. I touched on a similar theme in a lecture I gave to the Georg Sverdrup Society Summer Meeting last month. I highlighted the historical tendency in the Lutheran church to jump from one ditch to the other in terms of balancing the emphasis on the doctrinal/intellectual understanding of faith and the experiential/emotional transformation of behavior. Historically, whenever one is emphasized the next generation loses the other one and in trying to get the other back the ensuing generation loses the one. The legacy of the Lutheran Free Church carried on by the AFLC is an experiment in trying to keep the two in balance. One parallel I used for illustration purpose is the in driving a car, if your eyes focus on the horizon you steer much straighter than if you focus on the lines just in front of the car. So too we need to keep our eyes on the end result of our faith more-so than on the tools that help us get there.

    Along the same line I have observed in life that happiness is a byproduct. If we make happiness our goal it is always just out of reach. But if we ignore it and give ourselves to serving the two great commandments, loving God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength, and loving our neighbor as ourselves, it gives happiness a chance to sneak up behind us and jump all over us.

  2. It was a help to me, in dealing with these things, to learn about the early church. How did you become a Christian in the early centuries, and how did you worship, etc.? Among the Lutheran authors who were most helpful to me were the 16th-century Martin Chemnitz, the 19th-century Charles Porterfield Krauth, and the 20th-century Hermann Sasse and Werner Elert. For Chemnitz, I’d mention the discussion of tradition in vol. 1 of The Examination of the Council of Trent’ for Krauth, selected parts of The Conservative Reformation and Its Theology; for Sasse, the books We Confess the Church and We Confess the Sacraments, and for Elert Eucharist and Church Fellowship in the First Four Centuries. Also valuable were various things by Kurt Marquardt, including an essay called “Liturgical Commonplaces” and a book on the Church Growth movement.

    One principle I early settled on was that we do well to be guided by the early Church unless there is some good Scriptural reason not to. There usually wasn’t,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.