To hear some tell it, the answer to this question is an unequivocal "yes." To many secular writers in the US and other nations with similar legal precedents, and to some Christian writers in these nations as well, any restraint in one's speech or art is an abridgment of one's natural and inalienable rights. Conceding to the demands of conscience, or others pointing out that you have done something immoral or unethical is in effect an act of social cowardice and the question of how one's actions affect others is beside the point. To a Christian writer in particular, writing under the guidance of the Holy Spirit (obviously we should not expect to do so as the authors of Scripture did, but if we write in the name of our faith, then the Spirit should be with us in some fashion), this raises a rather frightening question: is the Holy Spirit the thought police?
Obviously in this world we have seen the terrible consequences of governments or non-governmental groups restraining the freedom of speech. One can even point to the Crucifixion as the ultimate affront to free speech--the authorities in power didn't like what Jesus was saying, and acted thinking they could shut Him up forever. But if you look at the words Jesus chose to speak, you'll see that He did not speak with thoughtless abandon.
Some would apply to this the term "self-censorship." Let's look at the connotations of that...in our society, the word "censorship" is a highly charged word, and not in a good light. Applying the word "censorship" is thus an instant ticket to shutting down a debate and in some cases can even border upon an ad hominem attack. Anyone who engages in "censorship," whether by coercion of others or in the restraint of one's own speech becomes the Thought Police.
We are rightly revolted by Orwellian images. And I would also say that we are rightly revolted by the other main form of coercion in our society--that is, political correctness, which is enforced by character assassination. For fellow sci-fi buffs out there, I would hold up for you two images of such repression: on one side, Orwell's iconic 1984, and Ursula K. LeGuin's The Dispossessed specifically her portrayal of the collectivist "utopia" of Anares, which in fact has all the makings of a dystopia if you don't simply ride along with the "consensus"-determined status quo.
Free speech as defined in the First Amendment refers strictly to the government's imposition upon a person's ability to speak, except when such speech is truly injurious (the classic "fire in a crowded theater" example, or other examples like putting out a contract on someone's life, or otherwise inciting to violence, or even committing fraud or libel). The government has no right to deny people to speak of their belief or unbelief or to require people to practice or not to practice, for instance, nor can it restrain political speech, including dissent as long as no violence is advocated.
So that's the first misconception. The First Amendment does not cover the actions of a private individual or other non-governmental entity, or the administrators of an Internet forum. I imagine many of my readers participate in forums and other private websites, and just like if you mouth off at work, the admin of a site has every right to censure, delete, or ban...you are in their "house," on their property, and if they want to control what goes on on their property, that is their absolute right and you can either obey the rules or leave. The First Amendment does not force them to amend their ways to suit yours. I use comment moderation. And since this is my blog, if I see spam or attacking remarks, I won't permit it. I am under absolutely no legal OR moral obligation to allow a free-for-all.
The First Amendment also does not protect a private individual from private blowback from their remarks. If I am rude to someone, or if I lie or otherwise speak falsehood, there is absolutely nothing stopping them from being rude in return, or otherwise being called on it. Unless something crosses that very hard, defined line of illegality as described earlier, the government cannot touch it. And should never be called on to do so.
Remember this. Legality and morality are two entirely separate constructs. Since government can only be trusted with an absolute minimum of power in order for society to function, given the corrupting influence of such power on our fallen natures (remember God's warnings against the establishment of a king in Israel, anybody?), by necessity what is acceptable under the law is going to be much greater in breadth than what is acceptable morally. The government cannot capably enforce anything else but this bare minimum, and should not. Overstepping in this manner is what creates the 1984 scenario...the thought police.
Now that we have covered what is legal, let's cover what is right, and the ways in which that can be abused--the Dispossessed scenario.
The society in The Dispossessed was one in which any speech the group did not agree on was punished by shunning or by demonization. This is what we know as political correctness, and most Christians will have had a run-in with it on at least one occasion. To speak too strongly on certain topics results in social censure, usually by attaching a label with "-ist" on the end of it (ex.: "elitist," "racist," "sexist," "ableist" and on and on ad nauseum). Now, if someone is speaking in hatred, to injure others or to abuse power against those individuals, such as refusing a person service because of their bigotry, then the label is deserved. But what about the individual who simply makes the mistake of disagreeing with the wrong person, however politely, and then has their character assassinated, or who speaks an unpopular opinion and the majority then paints them as a deviant?
This is in effect social blackmail, and is often used against Christians who speak too strongly--both by those who do not wish to hear any religious speech outside the confines of a church or a private home, AND by Christians who cannot tolerate a lovingly dissenting viewpoint by someone in the faith. To destroy someone because you disagree with them is wrong...to put so much fear into that person that they will not speak on a perfectly legitimate subject is wrong, too. Even the terms "censor" and "thought police" have come to be used as bludgeons in this manner--say them and the person they are said to is just as dead in the water as the person accused falsely of racism.
Which brings us to Christian speech, and by extension, a Christian's art.
James makes it very clear in his epistle just how destructive an "unbridled tongue" is--and as soon as you evoke the image of a bridle, you have brought restraint into the picture.
In essence, the Christian surrenders free speech.
He or she legally retains that right, and should, because the government is incapable of doing anything else properly (and barely manages what it has) and social groups should not be trusted with that power, either. Even congregations can fall under that rule and get out of hand, without much constant, prayerful self-examinations, and history is riddled with examples of that getting horribly out of hand. Ignoring that would be revisionist history.
But to forgo the right to speak something because it is unconscionable, because it is a crime against the Holy Spirit, is an entirely different matter from being frightened by one's peers from speaking, or by one's government. It is nothing less than a matter of love for God, for our neighbors, and even for ourselves. A true relationship with God is not about being battered into submission until we are too frightened to do anything else. It is about recognizing that without Him, we are deathly prone to abusing our freedoms. And to truly take Him into us, it must be done utterly uncoerced, for such is inherently against the nature of love. So if I choose not to speak words that I know will be hurtful to others, if I respect their feelings as I would want to be respected myself, then I am not a coward. I am not surrendering to bullying or force. I am expressing love.
And no matter how much mockery or mischaracterization as "thought police" or "PC Nazis" we might endure for speaking this view, and more importantly, for living it...know that before our God, there is no shame in letting the Holy Spirit be the one true and capable arbiter of our expression as no human can be.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Sunday, June 20, 2010
The Christian Artist: Innovation
One of the strangest things for a Christian artist in today's culture is the apparent conflict between the popular conception of what constitutes innovation in art, and what it means to respond to the Spirit in the works one creates.
I think that in some circles, "creative" and "innovative" has been conflated with "transgressive." The more shocking a thing is to society, the more it defies the norms, the more innovative it must be, and the more of a work of art it must be. In this school of thought, the last thing you would want would be to come across as seeming tradition-bound, or adhering to more ancient schools of art or being informed by a set of morals that affects what you are willing or unwilling to produce. And if that is really what it takes to produce something of artistic merit...well, the devout Christian artist, musician, or writer is in a lot of trouble.
Fortunately, whether all recognize it or not, I don't believe creativity and innovation have anything to do with transgressiveness. That may be found in some creative works (whether we like those works or not), but transgressiveness has absolutely no bearing on one's technical merits, and if its intention is simply destructive, rather than done in a spirit of love...then I think it does little to nourish the spirit of those who interact with it in any way except perhaps in the sense of seeming to validate one's anger.
There is a time for transgressiveness--and that is when an injustice is being done to others. We as Christians are to be responsive to that, not to stand for it when others are being belittled or otherwise trodden upon. In our compassion the time may come to defy the norms of the society we live in, as it did for William Wilberforce and others who eventually extinguished slavery in the West. Where the social norm is one of cruelty and coldness, this is a case where a "transgression" is very much appropriate, if done with restraint and love. (My previous blog post has more to say on distinguishing the difference between true righteous anger and a worldly anger.) This is something the Christian artist can and should play a part in.
But if rule violation for its own sake, or for the sake of belittling Christianity, its principles, or cruelty to anyone is the kind of transgressiveness in question...I do not believe this is the way a Christian artist should comport him- or herself. And if there are any who might see a Christian's work as being of lesser worth for lack of these characteristics, then that is an acceptable price.
With that said...what is creativity for the Christian artist? I think that in the Bible we see many examples of it, both from the writers who were given truths and had to find a way to convey them so that we could understand them and connect with them, and from Jesus Himself, who used fictional stories--parables--to illustrate His own points. We can put language or colors or notes together in innovative ways exercise our abilities on time-tested, traditional ways, as Orthodox iconographers do. We may not all use the same sorts of disciplines as an iconographer does, but we can take from them a reminder to keep God first in all our creative ways. For in our creative spirit we are very much revealing how we are made in our Father's image, and our work should reflect this truth.
Innovation is possible for a Christian. Artists like Dostoyevsky and Bach certainly broke new ground in their fields, and exercised tremendous creativity...but they did it for the glory of God. If you have been given the gift to do something that really is new, I believe this should be encouraged. There are few forms of art that are in and of themselves un-Christian. In music, for instance, there used to be the idea that certain tones were the "devil's chord." Why the occurrence of two notes that happen to have two particular frequencies together would be inherently evil I do not understand. Nor do I find genres of music inherently evil...heavy metal has been done and done well by Christians like Becoming the Archetype or Stryper (how could I NOT mention Stryper?). Rap, too. The only thing I would see as inherently degrading would be the sort of "art" that requires one to debase oneself as an absolute condition of performing that art.
Pardon a moment of crassness here, but this is why "Christian pole dancing" had better never, ever happen.
There is another facet of this I would like to mention. To some artists, the only art worthy of consideration is that done with no boundaries. Yet it is my experience that to write within certain constraints can itself be an exercise in creativity, just of a different kind. This is why if someone does want to adhere to very traditional forms or archetypes, I will never, ever look down on that sort of art--one only has to look harder, and then the soul and Spirit of the artist becomes evident. Other Christian artists may go down paths less trod, but if still guided by the Spirit, I believe we should be very careful not to be dismissive just because they may have chosen a form that we are not as comfortable using, if that form is not inherently degrading.
So to my fellow Christian writers and artists, I would say that you have no reason to fear that your faith means your creativity is any less than that of anyone else. What matters is if, in your work, you are providing a little window to God's kingdom for us here on Earth. And that is enough.
I think that in some circles, "creative" and "innovative" has been conflated with "transgressive." The more shocking a thing is to society, the more it defies the norms, the more innovative it must be, and the more of a work of art it must be. In this school of thought, the last thing you would want would be to come across as seeming tradition-bound, or adhering to more ancient schools of art or being informed by a set of morals that affects what you are willing or unwilling to produce. And if that is really what it takes to produce something of artistic merit...well, the devout Christian artist, musician, or writer is in a lot of trouble.
Fortunately, whether all recognize it or not, I don't believe creativity and innovation have anything to do with transgressiveness. That may be found in some creative works (whether we like those works or not), but transgressiveness has absolutely no bearing on one's technical merits, and if its intention is simply destructive, rather than done in a spirit of love...then I think it does little to nourish the spirit of those who interact with it in any way except perhaps in the sense of seeming to validate one's anger.
There is a time for transgressiveness--and that is when an injustice is being done to others. We as Christians are to be responsive to that, not to stand for it when others are being belittled or otherwise trodden upon. In our compassion the time may come to defy the norms of the society we live in, as it did for William Wilberforce and others who eventually extinguished slavery in the West. Where the social norm is one of cruelty and coldness, this is a case where a "transgression" is very much appropriate, if done with restraint and love. (My previous blog post has more to say on distinguishing the difference between true righteous anger and a worldly anger.) This is something the Christian artist can and should play a part in.
But if rule violation for its own sake, or for the sake of belittling Christianity, its principles, or cruelty to anyone is the kind of transgressiveness in question...I do not believe this is the way a Christian artist should comport him- or herself. And if there are any who might see a Christian's work as being of lesser worth for lack of these characteristics, then that is an acceptable price.
With that said...what is creativity for the Christian artist? I think that in the Bible we see many examples of it, both from the writers who were given truths and had to find a way to convey them so that we could understand them and connect with them, and from Jesus Himself, who used fictional stories--parables--to illustrate His own points. We can put language or colors or notes together in innovative ways exercise our abilities on time-tested, traditional ways, as Orthodox iconographers do. We may not all use the same sorts of disciplines as an iconographer does, but we can take from them a reminder to keep God first in all our creative ways. For in our creative spirit we are very much revealing how we are made in our Father's image, and our work should reflect this truth.
Innovation is possible for a Christian. Artists like Dostoyevsky and Bach certainly broke new ground in their fields, and exercised tremendous creativity...but they did it for the glory of God. If you have been given the gift to do something that really is new, I believe this should be encouraged. There are few forms of art that are in and of themselves un-Christian. In music, for instance, there used to be the idea that certain tones were the "devil's chord." Why the occurrence of two notes that happen to have two particular frequencies together would be inherently evil I do not understand. Nor do I find genres of music inherently evil...heavy metal has been done and done well by Christians like Becoming the Archetype or Stryper (how could I NOT mention Stryper?). Rap, too. The only thing I would see as inherently degrading would be the sort of "art" that requires one to debase oneself as an absolute condition of performing that art.
Pardon a moment of crassness here, but this is why "Christian pole dancing" had better never, ever happen.
There is another facet of this I would like to mention. To some artists, the only art worthy of consideration is that done with no boundaries. Yet it is my experience that to write within certain constraints can itself be an exercise in creativity, just of a different kind. This is why if someone does want to adhere to very traditional forms or archetypes, I will never, ever look down on that sort of art--one only has to look harder, and then the soul and Spirit of the artist becomes evident. Other Christian artists may go down paths less trod, but if still guided by the Spirit, I believe we should be very careful not to be dismissive just because they may have chosen a form that we are not as comfortable using, if that form is not inherently degrading.
So to my fellow Christian writers and artists, I would say that you have no reason to fear that your faith means your creativity is any less than that of anyone else. What matters is if, in your work, you are providing a little window to God's kingdom for us here on Earth. And that is enough.
Monday, June 7, 2010
The strange experience of righteous indignation
One of the things I believe that we as Christians must be very careful of is not to confuse our own anger and temper with the true experience of righteous indignation. I think this very confusion is one of the things that makes it most difficult for us as humans to relate to God, because for us, anger is an out-of-control thing, an indiscriminate thing that operates on vengeance and not justice. We are, by and large, terrible at controlling the little anger we have, and imagining controlling something of godly intensity--what a frightening prospect!
And how often have we as Christians confused our own anger with that which is of God? How often have we become angry about some thing or another that we disliked, and tricked ourselves into believing this was God's will? How many times have we spoken words or committed acts to punish someone--as though it is ours not just to speak truth but make sure the other party really hurts and breaks down at our feet?
Recently I had a very startling experience that laid the difference out in no uncertain terms. I'd had a theoretical idea what it might be, but when I actually experienced it...it was startling indeed.
Now let me head this up by stating that I assume a normal psychological profile when I describe this...I do not think the telltales I lay out would apply to a sociopath, so if one has never had the experience of normal anger, and of the shame and guilt that rightly comes from letting that anger go out of control and realizing that you have hurt someone, hurt your own spirit, and gone against God by doing so, then this distinction would not apply. This also does NOT apply to cases where we started out with a grudge and inured ourselves to such a degree that we no longer feel anything. This is something we can know only of ourselves, furthermore...others' claims should be evaluated rationally just as we must evaluate all that we are exposed to.
Anyway, I recently came into a position where I had to directly confront a person about some comments they were making in an unkind spirit. The strange thing about the feeling I experienced then was how absolutely controlled it was, and I honestly do not feel that I was the one making any kind of deliberate effort to control it. I understood what I needed to say, and was able to stop at that point with no more. Later on, after I was out of the situation and it started to occur to me what sorts of sarcastic remarks I could have made, just how different it felt as I thought of those things. My mind was racing, my body was reacting, and everything threatened to run out of control like a nuclear meltdown...or perhaps more aptly, like a chemical reaction with the wrong balance of reactants. And that feeling is what I get when I am about to lash out at someone unprovoked, or take a legitimate objection to something too far.
For just that moment, though, while I was responding to what I needed to respond to, I felt a taste of what real righteous indignation is like: it does not burn out of control. It does not speak simply to be cruel or to show off one's wordplay. It speaks to make its point and no more. It is a state of alertness where the mind is exceedingly clear, but not the hyperaroused responses of an unassisted human anger. And above all, it is obedient to something greater: it occurs at the direction of the Holy Spirit. And that is truly what I believe moved within me that day. Admittedly I am not always comfortable speaking about the Holy Spirit moving within me, since I am not a demonstrative type. But that is truly what I believe happened.
Bearing in mind the caveats I first mentioned above, I think this is a very important thing to bear in mind that may help us to know...are we speaking from God's righteous indignation, or from the anger of our own sinful hearts? I think if we remembered this, we would be far less likely to do damage to each other in our uncontrolled anger.
And how often have we as Christians confused our own anger with that which is of God? How often have we become angry about some thing or another that we disliked, and tricked ourselves into believing this was God's will? How many times have we spoken words or committed acts to punish someone--as though it is ours not just to speak truth but make sure the other party really hurts and breaks down at our feet?
Recently I had a very startling experience that laid the difference out in no uncertain terms. I'd had a theoretical idea what it might be, but when I actually experienced it...it was startling indeed.
Now let me head this up by stating that I assume a normal psychological profile when I describe this...I do not think the telltales I lay out would apply to a sociopath, so if one has never had the experience of normal anger, and of the shame and guilt that rightly comes from letting that anger go out of control and realizing that you have hurt someone, hurt your own spirit, and gone against God by doing so, then this distinction would not apply. This also does NOT apply to cases where we started out with a grudge and inured ourselves to such a degree that we no longer feel anything. This is something we can know only of ourselves, furthermore...others' claims should be evaluated rationally just as we must evaluate all that we are exposed to.
Anyway, I recently came into a position where I had to directly confront a person about some comments they were making in an unkind spirit. The strange thing about the feeling I experienced then was how absolutely controlled it was, and I honestly do not feel that I was the one making any kind of deliberate effort to control it. I understood what I needed to say, and was able to stop at that point with no more. Later on, after I was out of the situation and it started to occur to me what sorts of sarcastic remarks I could have made, just how different it felt as I thought of those things. My mind was racing, my body was reacting, and everything threatened to run out of control like a nuclear meltdown...or perhaps more aptly, like a chemical reaction with the wrong balance of reactants. And that feeling is what I get when I am about to lash out at someone unprovoked, or take a legitimate objection to something too far.
For just that moment, though, while I was responding to what I needed to respond to, I felt a taste of what real righteous indignation is like: it does not burn out of control. It does not speak simply to be cruel or to show off one's wordplay. It speaks to make its point and no more. It is a state of alertness where the mind is exceedingly clear, but not the hyperaroused responses of an unassisted human anger. And above all, it is obedient to something greater: it occurs at the direction of the Holy Spirit. And that is truly what I believe moved within me that day. Admittedly I am not always comfortable speaking about the Holy Spirit moving within me, since I am not a demonstrative type. But that is truly what I believe happened.
Bearing in mind the caveats I first mentioned above, I think this is a very important thing to bear in mind that may help us to know...are we speaking from God's righteous indignation, or from the anger of our own sinful hearts? I think if we remembered this, we would be far less likely to do damage to each other in our uncontrolled anger.
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Is rush hour for the birds?
Earlier this year, I was driving home after work. I sat at an intersection in busy traffic waiting for the light to change so I could get on the highway and finally head home after a long, physically and emotionally exhausting day at work. While waiting, I looked up, and against the backdrop of a sherbet-orange sky, I saw a flock of birds that must have numbered in the hundreds, wheeling and gyrating over the road as one, looking for a place to lay their heads for the night.
This sight filled me with awestruck wonder, this display of such life, and the realization amazed me, that God designed, shaped, and knew every single bird in that multitude, that he cared for them and loved them each.
Then I looked at the ribbon of traffic stretching into the distance, and I felt this very pointed reminder: these weren't simply cars in my way as I headed home. These were not obstacles set out there for the sole purpose of annoying and delaying me. Inside each vehicle was one or more people that God knew, that God designed and shaped, and cared for just as He does for those birds, and for me. They all wanted the same thing as the birds did, and I did...to just go home and rest.
I found myself deeply humbled by this--and I dare not look at a traffic jam the same way again.
This sight filled me with awestruck wonder, this display of such life, and the realization amazed me, that God designed, shaped, and knew every single bird in that multitude, that he cared for them and loved them each.
Then I looked at the ribbon of traffic stretching into the distance, and I felt this very pointed reminder: these weren't simply cars in my way as I headed home. These were not obstacles set out there for the sole purpose of annoying and delaying me. Inside each vehicle was one or more people that God knew, that God designed and shaped, and cared for just as He does for those birds, and for me. They all wanted the same thing as the birds did, and I did...to just go home and rest.
I found myself deeply humbled by this--and I dare not look at a traffic jam the same way again.
Brain burn-out, but for a worthwhile reason
Sorry for the delay in posting! I've had a little brain burn-out lately, but that was because of the time I spent getting my story submission ready. And a couple of nights ago, "Call Me Unto Heaven" was officially submitted to consideration in an anthology!
I certainly hope for the best--whatever the outcome, I am most grateful for the opportunity to write and submit. If I hear more about it, I will definitely update you guys on the results! And if it does get published, I will be sure to provide all the details. It's my hope to hear something at some point in August of this year.
Right now, the only thing to do is pray and be patient. These things do take time, after all! :-)
I certainly hope for the best--whatever the outcome, I am most grateful for the opportunity to write and submit. If I hear more about it, I will definitely update you guys on the results! And if it does get published, I will be sure to provide all the details. It's my hope to hear something at some point in August of this year.
Right now, the only thing to do is pray and be patient. These things do take time, after all! :-)
Sunday, May 16, 2010
"Call Me Unto Heaven"--short story in progress
You've had a chance to see some of my musings on the faith...but as my profile mentions, I also do a little writing--mainly science fiction and fantasy. Until now, I've written only for my own enjoyment, but now I am working on a story set in the near future that I hope to share. Its title is "Call Me Unto Heaven."
Imagine that an unstoppable viral juggernaut has ravaged the human race, leading to its imminent extinction in this world. What if there had been a chance to stop it before it made that fatal change in its structure?
And what if, from all the world's previous plagues and disasters, we had learned all the wrong lessons, and instead of caring for the least of these we turned the Great Pandemic into a cruel game of blame-and-shame?
Even the one who watches it all unfold from orbit in isolation...can never truly be isolated after all.
Imagine that an unstoppable viral juggernaut has ravaged the human race, leading to its imminent extinction in this world. What if there had been a chance to stop it before it made that fatal change in its structure?
And what if, from all the world's previous plagues and disasters, we had learned all the wrong lessons, and instead of caring for the least of these we turned the Great Pandemic into a cruel game of blame-and-shame?
Even the one who watches it all unfold from orbit in isolation...can never truly be isolated after all.
Monday, May 10, 2010
The heart of worship is a very intense place.
Why do we as Christians worship? Why should we?
This is one of those subjects where I've seen misunderstandings from believers and nonbelievers both...and I deeply believe that how and why we approach can color our entire attitude towards our faith. I'm not talking about high-church/low-church divisions...I believe that the form worship takes is a very individual matter. What I refer to here is the reason for expressing our faith to God.
Criticisms from an atheistic perspective tend to take the form of attributing a vain ego or a toddler-like temper to God. God must be incredibly egotistical, they might say, to make worship a qualification of faith, and incredibly nasty to condemn people for failing to kowtow sufficiently. From a Christian perspective, it's not a criticism so much as a misunderstanding...God demands worship as a duty, something to do to show what good believers we are--and here's the checklist of what you MUST do when, or else you must be going to Hell for not doing enough and in the right way.
Both come from a fundamental misunderstanding, I believe, of the character and nature of God. The truth is, He is both incredibly human and incredibly unlike humanity as we currently know it. One thing the Bible makes very clear, both through His words through the person of the Father in the Old Testament and His actions, through the Persons of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit, in the New Testament, is that God is deeply, deeply passionate. "Cold" is the last word we could possibly assign to our God.
I believe that emotionality frightens some people. And it's easy to understand why. Perhaps the atheist leveling the criticism that God must be vain or temperamental is thinking of what happens when humans' passions become the strongest: we lose control of ourselves. We make ill-advised decisions, we lash out in anger, and we make unreasonable demands. And we should indeed be concerned about the effects our untempered passions can have on ourselves and others. The idea of living with so, so much more than that is terrifying, considering how poorly we do with the paltry passions we have in comparison.
Yet with that extraordinary passion--emotion so strong it would overrun our defenses in a nanosecond, God is able to be both just and merciful. Sometimes I believe that when He speaks of His feelings...and He does it much more often than you might realize...we react badly because we either do not see the underlying logic, or we experience that fear of what would happen if we had to try and control it. I don't know about anyone else, but I get the distinct feeling sometimes that it was hard for God to reduce living a faithful life to an enumeration of laws, as happens in Leviticus. There was a reason for doing it, of course--because we weren't relating to Him in a mature fashion, for starters, and to get us to see how we were falling short and why we needed salvation--but God's words in the Psalms (paraphrased: I want your hearts, not just a burnt offering!) and Jesus' frustration with the coldness of the Pharisees' legalism, and by extension, Christian legalism, really leads me to believe that the separation imposed by such laws hurt Him, maybe even as much as open denials and betrayals (though I can't truly be sure about that one way or the other).
The way God reacted to that hurt, however, was to keep reaching out to us (even after the imposition of the law, the monarchy, and every other institution) to make the ultimate sacrifice for our benefit, to restore that right relationship and help us to draw closer. What wondrous love is this, indeed!
While I think it's always important to understand that God is so much more than we could possibly understand, we must also remember that He did create us in His image--that our spirits are intended to reflect His. What we feel, He drew from something of Himself. When someone we love turns their backs on us, doesn't it hurt? When someone tells us we are loved--even if we already are certain of their love--doesn't that warm our hearts?
God has far, far more emotional maturity than the two-year-old some people describe Him as. He does not "have" to be worshipped as an egotist "has" to have adulation. Rather, I believe that for Him, worship is part of the constant exchange that is LOVE. I'm sure it DOES feel good to be told that He is loved, and for us to express our thanks and our reliance upon Him, however imperfectly our worship is. But just because it feels good does not mean God will become rash or cruel because of it, as we might. I also believe that sincere worship opens us to be more receptive of His love, and that is what He wants--that He cares and wants to see us benefit from that openness. Certainly obedience is good; it denotes respect. And respect is a good place to start. But love...that's what God wants for us--to be a part of love.
And why should we not take care to respect God's feelings? Just because He is not prone to our excesses with His emotions doesn't give us an excuse, I believe, to trample all over Him. If we know we are hurting someone, shouldn't we stop doing what hurts that person? Just because a person is resilient, and heals from the wounds we inflict doesn't mean we should keep doing it. The hurt that person experiences, and what that does to our own spirits, is a terrible thing. God's may be the unquenchable flame, but what excuse do we have to hurt Him when we know full well that He does indeed feel that pain? How can we turn ourselves cold towards another Spirit?
And why shouldn't we do what we can to warm His heart as we would want done for us? If you read the Gospels, can you imagine the way Jesus' eyes would light up (figuratively, unless we're talking about the Transfiguration) when people treated Him with kindness and compassion? Yes, He still retained that emotional maturity in His incarnated state, but it's readily evident how much it meant to Him when someone was kind and loving. It feels good--and it opens the door to a relationship, a cycle of giving and receiving love that continually amplifies itself with each iteration. Even when someone gives a gift that is not needed--as we do when we worship, for God's survival does not depend on us as ours does on Him--it's still heartwarming to know that someone cared. It's the same, I believe, for God.
To sum up--for Christians who have gone into the rut of seeing worship as mere duty, something to check off the list, maybe spending some time reading the Bible to observe the depth of God's feeling would prove a comfort. His yoke is indeed light compared to the constant litany of rules we invent for ourselves and to share in His love is a salve to our souls and an exercise in kindness and compassion, not just obedience. For nonbelievers, I think that understanding the combination of emotion beyond our experience and control beyond our ability would be helpful--and the relational rather than unidirectional position of worship in the believer's life. Worship is not some appeasement of temper...it is an expression of love and a way of opening ourselves to God's voice. And that voice reminds us that we are loved.
This is one of those subjects where I've seen misunderstandings from believers and nonbelievers both...and I deeply believe that how and why we approach can color our entire attitude towards our faith. I'm not talking about high-church/low-church divisions...I believe that the form worship takes is a very individual matter. What I refer to here is the reason for expressing our faith to God.
Criticisms from an atheistic perspective tend to take the form of attributing a vain ego or a toddler-like temper to God. God must be incredibly egotistical, they might say, to make worship a qualification of faith, and incredibly nasty to condemn people for failing to kowtow sufficiently. From a Christian perspective, it's not a criticism so much as a misunderstanding...God demands worship as a duty, something to do to show what good believers we are--and here's the checklist of what you MUST do when, or else you must be going to Hell for not doing enough and in the right way.
Both come from a fundamental misunderstanding, I believe, of the character and nature of God. The truth is, He is both incredibly human and incredibly unlike humanity as we currently know it. One thing the Bible makes very clear, both through His words through the person of the Father in the Old Testament and His actions, through the Persons of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit, in the New Testament, is that God is deeply, deeply passionate. "Cold" is the last word we could possibly assign to our God.
I believe that emotionality frightens some people. And it's easy to understand why. Perhaps the atheist leveling the criticism that God must be vain or temperamental is thinking of what happens when humans' passions become the strongest: we lose control of ourselves. We make ill-advised decisions, we lash out in anger, and we make unreasonable demands. And we should indeed be concerned about the effects our untempered passions can have on ourselves and others. The idea of living with so, so much more than that is terrifying, considering how poorly we do with the paltry passions we have in comparison.
Yet with that extraordinary passion--emotion so strong it would overrun our defenses in a nanosecond, God is able to be both just and merciful. Sometimes I believe that when He speaks of His feelings...and He does it much more often than you might realize...we react badly because we either do not see the underlying logic, or we experience that fear of what would happen if we had to try and control it. I don't know about anyone else, but I get the distinct feeling sometimes that it was hard for God to reduce living a faithful life to an enumeration of laws, as happens in Leviticus. There was a reason for doing it, of course--because we weren't relating to Him in a mature fashion, for starters, and to get us to see how we were falling short and why we needed salvation--but God's words in the Psalms (paraphrased: I want your hearts, not just a burnt offering!) and Jesus' frustration with the coldness of the Pharisees' legalism, and by extension, Christian legalism, really leads me to believe that the separation imposed by such laws hurt Him, maybe even as much as open denials and betrayals (though I can't truly be sure about that one way or the other).
The way God reacted to that hurt, however, was to keep reaching out to us (even after the imposition of the law, the monarchy, and every other institution) to make the ultimate sacrifice for our benefit, to restore that right relationship and help us to draw closer. What wondrous love is this, indeed!
While I think it's always important to understand that God is so much more than we could possibly understand, we must also remember that He did create us in His image--that our spirits are intended to reflect His. What we feel, He drew from something of Himself. When someone we love turns their backs on us, doesn't it hurt? When someone tells us we are loved--even if we already are certain of their love--doesn't that warm our hearts?
God has far, far more emotional maturity than the two-year-old some people describe Him as. He does not "have" to be worshipped as an egotist "has" to have adulation. Rather, I believe that for Him, worship is part of the constant exchange that is LOVE. I'm sure it DOES feel good to be told that He is loved, and for us to express our thanks and our reliance upon Him, however imperfectly our worship is. But just because it feels good does not mean God will become rash or cruel because of it, as we might. I also believe that sincere worship opens us to be more receptive of His love, and that is what He wants--that He cares and wants to see us benefit from that openness. Certainly obedience is good; it denotes respect. And respect is a good place to start. But love...that's what God wants for us--to be a part of love.
And why should we not take care to respect God's feelings? Just because He is not prone to our excesses with His emotions doesn't give us an excuse, I believe, to trample all over Him. If we know we are hurting someone, shouldn't we stop doing what hurts that person? Just because a person is resilient, and heals from the wounds we inflict doesn't mean we should keep doing it. The hurt that person experiences, and what that does to our own spirits, is a terrible thing. God's may be the unquenchable flame, but what excuse do we have to hurt Him when we know full well that He does indeed feel that pain? How can we turn ourselves cold towards another Spirit?
And why shouldn't we do what we can to warm His heart as we would want done for us? If you read the Gospels, can you imagine the way Jesus' eyes would light up (figuratively, unless we're talking about the Transfiguration) when people treated Him with kindness and compassion? Yes, He still retained that emotional maturity in His incarnated state, but it's readily evident how much it meant to Him when someone was kind and loving. It feels good--and it opens the door to a relationship, a cycle of giving and receiving love that continually amplifies itself with each iteration. Even when someone gives a gift that is not needed--as we do when we worship, for God's survival does not depend on us as ours does on Him--it's still heartwarming to know that someone cared. It's the same, I believe, for God.
To sum up--for Christians who have gone into the rut of seeing worship as mere duty, something to check off the list, maybe spending some time reading the Bible to observe the depth of God's feeling would prove a comfort. His yoke is indeed light compared to the constant litany of rules we invent for ourselves and to share in His love is a salve to our souls and an exercise in kindness and compassion, not just obedience. For nonbelievers, I think that understanding the combination of emotion beyond our experience and control beyond our ability would be helpful--and the relational rather than unidirectional position of worship in the believer's life. Worship is not some appeasement of temper...it is an expression of love and a way of opening ourselves to God's voice. And that voice reminds us that we are loved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)