Dan and I are working hard on a whole new paradigm for living. That's obviously a huge statement but it's really true. There's so much of the philosophy that I absorbed as I grew up that I don't agree with now, based on reading 1.) the Old Testament, and 2.) the New Testament and 3.) living life. It's kind of interesting to break down one's beliefs and assumptions and let oneself question absolutely everything. It's a good exercise, but not for the fainthearted and honestly, it requires a good deal of energy.
At this point, the farthest I think we've gotten (I know that's terrible grammar, but it's how I talk, so you'll have to adjust), is the first chapter or so of Genesis. See, I grew up understanding that this world and this life was vastly inferior to heaven. Also that one should aspire to more and more "spirituality" which could loosely be described as hearing God talk to one (preferably in an audible voice or something equally dramatic), spending lots of time in contemplation and prayer, and going out and doing radical acts of faith that involved as little common sense and rational thought as possible, while simultaneously having the purpose of advancing the kingdom of God on earth. This was a broad topic, but did not really include working for a living 9-5.
Dan grew up with a less melodramatic presentation, but with roughly the same ideals. His parents are amazing in their acts of giving and service to others, in hospitality, looking after others with practical needs, and so on. The tension comes in trying to integrate this type of lifestyle with the daily grind and the very mundane and yet ongoing needs of one's family, not to mention the responsibilities of jobs and professions and communities. You can tell I've been chewing on this issue if you've read any of this blog at all.
I used to try to manage this tension by just doing it all, at a breakneck speed so as to fit everything in. Also if you've read this blog, you will note that this has not worked well for me or my mental and physical health. And as I read both Old and New Testaments, I am constantly struck with the lack of urgency in anyone's movements. When people did stuff, even truly great stuff, they seemed able to move at a deliberate pace. In fact, you can see that if they tried to move too fast or do too much, God would intervene to actually slow everything down. As an OT I would call that adding resistance so as to increase a person's ability to register feedback as one is doing a task - kind of sabotaging their speed so as to facilitate a slower, but more accurate quality of movement.
So let's assume that God does not need over the top acts of heroism done with one's full powers augmented by adrenalin. What does he want? What would be a good way of living so as to make one's life "count?" Well, the evangelical viewpoint is that advancing the kingdom of God requires presenting the gospel to the entire world as soon as possible and persuading as many people as possible to join the winning team, as it were. Unless you are of the Mennonite Central Committee viewpoint which tends to focus more on social justice than conversion and is thus suspiciously regarded by many evangelical Christians.
This viewpoint is really really addicting for several reasons. First of all, it assumes that members are truly "on the winning team." The rest of the world is not and that tends to appeal to the part of human nature that wants to feel that one is better than anyone else. No matter what you say to discount that attitude, trust me, it is everywhere in evangelical communities.
Second, it provides a cosmic scope of battle with good vs. evil and unimaginably high stakes. If you like drama at all, and are partial to epic storylines, this one is unbeatable. Furthermore, we are assured by prophecy experts that it will all work out in our favour (to put it mildly). Also, any opposition to our efforts, or any adversity at all, can immediately be assigned to a sinister, dark enemy. Persecution makes us grow and all that. Suddenly, not only does every coincidence and event have meaning, but the meaning has supernatural overtones that makes the Twilight storyline look tame.
Third, value is added to acts that, honestly, anyone can do. What would by most cultures simply be regarded as minimum decent behaviour, in this subculture can be elevated to "friendship evangelism," "outreach ministry," "random acts of kindness," (in the interest of attracting converts, of course), and so on. So fine, that's not so bad. However, this becomes truly bizarre when it becomes organized and structured into youth group activities that now are sandwiched into what would otherwise be regarded as just another pleasurable activity for upper middle-class people (such as a trip to Jamaica in winter, or a week of skiing, or a week spent learning extreme skateboarding moves, or a sports camp, and on and on . . .) and so the whole thing now qualifies as a charitable act where the group actually fundraises on the basis of this minimum decent behaviour.
(Now, don't get me wrong. I am aware that there are many missions activities and youth organizations that put kids in actually quite rigorous service itineraries. But let's please be aware that many completely secular organizations do the same thing. The issue I have is that there is the assumption that if evangelical youth go anywhere (inner-cities, Mexico, overseas, wherever) they are qualified and justified in providing what is considered to be significant help to those poor people, just because they are willing to go. And let me tell you, I think a lot of times they are willing to go in large part because of the sandwich of perks (ooh! travel!). And so lots of people donate considerable sums of money as if this is significant help to poor people. Let's call it what it is! It's a trip by middle class kids to see the other side. It's a sightseeing tour of how the other half lives. It's extremely expensive exposure. These kids do not necessarily have any skills that the people they came to "help" don't have. Probably they don't have half the skills those people have. The inherent arrogance of this kind of thinking is what is so attractive to young people and so offensive to me now. Painting a building is helpful in Africa. But really, did we have to fly 18 teenagers halfway around the world to paint a building? Could not that money have been spent both buying a great deal of paint and then employing some people who live there to paint the building?)
The actual fact of it is, the needs of this planet are complex. They require people who are willing to roll up their shirt sleeves, take the time to learn the intricacies of culture, history, language, political topography, and who will also bring a specific and needed skill set to the table. Teenagers do not have these skill sets and so they should not be considered the frontline of workers in any place with significant needs. They are indeed very wonderful helpers and certainly their worldview will be unbelievably changed by such exposure, but it is incredibly egocentric to think that their presence in a devastated community (other than their own, where they may have some insight), is anything but another mouth to feed coupled with a variable amount of potential manual labour.
Okay, so that's a pretty long rant for one issue, but the evangelical worldview does tend to target youth with the seductive message that they are needed NOW and that they can ask other people to finance them to go anywhere with no knowledge and less skills. I'll stop now.
All of this stuff is simmering in my head as I consider my own motivation for everything I've ever done. Because I was one of those young people. I thought I was inherently better than anyone else just because of my inner knowledge of the winning team and my willingness to go anywhere in the world (with other people's money) to bring my oh so needed person to solve all those problems the people there obviously were not able to solve. Even though they knew their own history, language, and culture. And I didn't yet. Aaaagh! It just makes me cringe. Now, I realize that I don't quite have enough of a grasp of my own spouse's thought patterns to really communicate effectively with him on many topics without frequent eye-rolling, breaks to breathe deeply, and mutual forgiveness. If I can't do that with someone I love, and who loves me, it stands to reason I probably would have challenges with cross-cultural communication on any issue beyond what to bring to a potluck.
So to return to a new paradigm. I don't think that God empowered and ennobled me to save the world. What is my purpose? What is the meaning of life? (Besides of course the number 42 - which is the age I am, so maybe I'm good for now:).
Back to the beginning of Genesis. God makes the Universe and the world and the animals and plants and all that, stands back, evaluates it all, and says it's "good." This is a point to keep in mind. The physical world is good. Probably the spiritual world is, too, but I don't get that physical is inferior to anything. Quite the opposite, or God would have stopped with the angels and been content with that. They're spiritual after all.
Then he makes humans. This is what he says about that. "Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground." " (Gen. 1:26)
So his original idea is that humans are the rulers (or physical caretakers, as I think the ancient civilizations regarded rulers in that light more than even political rulers). Later on, after the second and more detailed account of making man, the author of Genesis writes this: "The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it." (2:15). But Adam is lonely and he needs help. He's given names to every single creature on earth and none of them are remotely suitable for a life companion. Not even the dogs and horses! So God made woman. To help Adam what? Make converts? I don't think so. To work a garden and look after a lot of animals.
My point is this. If the original kingdom of God on earth was to be fully realized, we would likely be caretakers of the physical planet such that we looked after the plants and animals and used them responsibly for food but also "knew their names." Adam's first task was to identify and classify animals and then look after them. He was a scientist. He was to understand and manage the physical world that God made and keep it "very good" (1:31).
It stands to reason that we are not as humans meant to try to escape the physical world. We are not entitled to disregard the physical needs of the planet and its inhabitants. We are being spiritual when we are being physical, in that we are doing what we were made to do by the God who gave us the "need to know" creation information in the Bible.
Here's the thing. Physical tasks are inherently frustrating. They are constrained by an unbelievable amount of laws and consequences - time being one of the worst. However, if we did not think of physical tasks as a waste of time in terms of eternal significance, I think we would all be able to enjoy our lives a bit more. So cleaning up (which is an endless task), feeding and soothing and co-regulating kids, walking the dog, looking at a tree and enjoying its patterns and structure, learning math, balancing a checkbook, folding laundry, becoming a master at one's profession, and looking into someone's eyes and trying to understand their point of view (which I think is encompassed in "naming" because I've read Madeleine L'Engle), are all directly living in the kingdom of God. Those tasks are not taking us away from the point of life. They are the point. Doing them well is the most human and spiritual task any of us can aspire to. Doing them poorly is part of what warps this world and tears at the fabric of reality (see, I still like an epic storyline).
So, while I started out this paradigm shift feeling frustrated that my life was so filled with mundane tasks that I couldn't get around to doing anything of value, I am finally moving to the viewpoint that the extent to which I devote my full heart and mind and soul to doing the physical and mental tasks (including those requiring a scientific enquiry) in front of me to my fullest potential, that is the extent to which I am somehow living as a citizen of the kingdom of God on earth. Which is weird but a whole lot more achievable than where I was coming from. I can slow down! I can afford to take the time to learn to do something well. I can go to work and go to courses and learn about interesting facets of psychology and human development and anything else that is interesting to me and all of that is exactly why God made me. Not to mention being a kindred spirit to my husband and sheltering and nurturing my children. Anything else is a sideline.
I know that a lot of you reading this who did not grow up with the hmm, what shall I call it, brainwashing? that I grew up with will be scratching your heads and saying, "duh." However, a lot of you can totally follow me. I know it. And I bet you anything you have dealt with the same tensions. And I have no idea how you've resolved them, but so far this seems like a good place for me to start a New Year.
No comments:
Post a Comment