While I was holding the washer shut at
the laundromat, I came across the following passage in
The Great Divorce:
"Blake wrote the Marriage of Heaven and Hell. If I have written of their Divorce, this is not because I think myself a fit antagonist for so great a genius, nor even because I feel at all sure that I know what he meant. But in some sense or other the attempt to make that marriage is perennial. The attempt is based on the belief that reality never presents us with an absolutely unavoidable "either-or": that, granted skill and patience and (above all) time enough, some way of embracing both alternatives can always be found; that mere development or adjustment or refinement will somehow turn evil into good without our being called on for a final and total rejection of anything we should like to retain. This belief I take to be a disastrous error. You cannot take all luggage with you on all journeys; on one journey even your right hand and your right eye may be among the things you have to leave behind. We are not living in a world where all roads are radii of a circle and where all, if followed long enough, will therefore draw gradually nearer and finally meet at the centre: rather in a world where every road, after a few miles, forks into two, and each of those into two again, and at each fork you must make a decision. Even on the biological level life is not like a pool but like a tree. It does not move towards unity but away from it and the creatures grow further apart as they increase in perfection. Good, as it ripens, becomes continually more different not only from evil but from other good."
Which of these metaphors would be most aptly describe the direction of emergent? Is it more complicated than this? Do we think it's more complicated than this because we think "simple" answers are dangerous? I would love to hear thoughts from all sides. I'll share more of what I'm thinking later. Believe me, I'm struggling with this one, so my questions are genuine, not antagonistic.
While I was holding the washer shut at the laundromat, I came across the following passage in The Great Divorce:
Which of these metaphors would be most aptly describe the direction of emergent? Is it more complicated than this? Do we think it's more complicated than this because we think "simple" answers are dangerous? I would love to hear thoughts from all sides. I'll share more of what I'm thinking later. Believe me, I'm struggling with this one, so my questions are genuine, not antagonistic.
6 comments:
"We are...living in a world where...every road, after a few miles, forks into two, and each of those into two again, and at each fork you must make a decision."
I believe this absolutely. Although I am completely unfamiliar with this passage, it is the image I use in my head* for our paths through life. Those decisions are choices made using our free will.
Still, while it's all well and good to have goals and make plans, I believe that this life will be easier and hold greater contentment if we turn to God for guidance in making those choices - before choosing those various paths.
The problem is we tend to make a lot of them without thinking, without realizing how important some of them might be and certainly without knowing for sure where they lead.
But the good thing is that we have so very many chances to get back onto the right path, the one God has chosen for us. The decision is ours, but He's the only one who knows what's coming. Which is why the wisest course is to consult Him as often as possible, to choose Him over everything else.
*Actually, I kind of picture it as the road map of the United States.:)
The most puzzling implication for Lewis' metaphors is my concept of our jobs as theologians. In interpreting the Bible I believe we trying to determine the core meaning the text had to the original hearers and then to relate our culture. In this way we always seem to be returning to a "home base." We stray, culture strays, and we return to "home base" by applying Biblical truths to our lives.
I do like the tree metaphor, though. If it is assumed, I can also see how humanity is engaged in an ever expanding journey away from "home base." I think we have to assume, however, that this is not essentially bad, since theologians are trying to guide the decisions we are making. In this way God is informing humanity's progress, and in many ways has done well. It is said there is nothing new under the sun. Certainly with modern technology it is easier to engage in various sins (gambling, pornography, gossip, etc) but these are certainly not new. On the flip side, we have made human rights and equal rights fronts, which is consistent with Judeo-Christian principals.
If I have to choose I choose the latter.
Good thoughts, Rebecca. Makes me wonder what type of metaphor determinists would use for the choices we make in life. Is everyone on their own timeline with those lines crisscrossing one another from time to time? I woul definitely recommend this book to you, it's very short and written like a story, so quick.
Eric, I agree that our view of how life works (circle or tree) could have serious implications for how we do theology. I'm interested to know your thoughts on how an "ever-expanding journey away from home base" wouldn't be inherently bad. I guess my basic question is: what do you consider home base?
I see how it is - you ask intriguing, open ended questions. Then, as it seems a response might be getting somewhere, you ask another.
You will be good at this teaching thing ;)
More on "home base" and its inherent qualities later...
Asking is the only thing that makes sense when you have a question. ;)
I've just requested the book from the library. I'll look forward to reading it.
Post a Comment