Beauty in the 'dappled' things of life

On 23rd August Rhonda Watson died less than three years after hearing that she had Motor Neurone Disease. She was a 58 year-old wife, mother, grandmother, daughter and sister. She was also a wonderful teacher and talented writer. She was a personal friend, fellow church member, fellow Bible study member and sister in Christ.

At her funeral last week many wonderful things were said about her. A recurring theme was her love of writing and of language. Words were so important to her, and continued to be right up to her death. But Motor Neurone Disease took away her ability to talk in the early stages of the disease and so much of her last two years of life were spent without the ability to speak. But while she lacked speech, she wrote many things. These included notes and emails and a newspaper article titled 'This (speechless) life' (here). The latter shared her experience living without the ability to speak. One of the things she found helpful was to write letters to herself as she struggled day by day. She was inspired to do this after reading how Seneca, the Roman Stoic philosopher, had written letters to fictitious recipients.  She wrote these to remind herself "...about what gave [her] life meaning [and] to speak to [herself]..".

Eventually Rhonda decided that the things she was writing and the readings that she found helpful, might just be helpful for others in the midst of their own struggles. They were turned into a book and were published not long before her death.

'Remember: The things that matter when hope is hard to find' was published by IVP and contains poetry, literature, theological and philosophical writings, and biblical texts that helped and inspired her. She describes the book this way:

"This little book is my response and my effort to 'talk to myself' wisely, gently and yet firmly.."

It is a remarkable little book of 192 pages. It is a personal devotion that shares the texts she found helpful, her comments on them, some of her prayers and responses, and some of the wisdom born in the struggles of her life each day.  The book has eight sections:

Beauty and ugliness
Silence and speech
Fear and trust
Thankfulness and bitterness
Joy and grief
Delight and despair
Awake or asleep?
Life and death

She opens the first section of the book by reflecting on what it means to be ugly. Increasingly, in her last 2-3 three years of life, Rhonda spent most of her days alone with no one to impress. She pondered, "What is ugliness? What is beauty? Does being 'beautiful' really matter?"

She recalled Gerard Manley Hopkins' poem, 'Pied Beauty'.

Glory be to God for dappled things -
For skies of couple-colour as a brinded cow;
For rose-moles in all stipple upon trout that swim;
Fresh-firecoal chestnut-falls; finches' wings;
Landscape plotted and pieced - fold, fallow, and plough;
And all trades, their gear and tackle and trim.
All things counter, original, spare, strange;
Whatever is fickle, freckled (who knows how?)
He fathers-forth whose beauty is past change:
Praise him.

She reflected on Hopkins' poem and how he saw 'dappled', unusual, 'strange' and different things bringing glory to God.

"Their very strangeness is cause for praise to their creator. He sees something that strikes him as beautiful and praises its maker. He who 'fathers-forth' is the only one whose beauty is 'past change'. The speckled, imperfect, unusual, and dappled creatures are as they are; it is in the creator that beauty is found. He is beauty."

Rhonda finished this section with Psalm 27 in which King David speaks of God's true beauty and his desire "to gaze upon it". Finally she reminds us that in Christ we see this true beauty, for at the cross Jesus gave himself as a sacrifice for those with nothing to commend them. He gave up the beauty of God for the ugliness of the death that we deserve. But for Rhonda the resurrection that followed Jesus death was in her words "a beautiful moment of sweet victory over all that is marred and wrecked by sin" (1 Corinthians 15:42-44). Rhonda knew that the ugliness of Motor Neurone Disease and the death she would suffer, would be defeated and removed by the 'beauty' and perfection of Christ.

'Remember' is a wonderful devotional book that is a significant legacy that will help many people. It is an encouragement to those of us who knew Rhonda and, who also trust in Christ, to realise that Christ's victory is now Rhonda's victory too.

A new epistemology?

Professor Tim Clydesdale has written an interesting piece in the Chronicle of Higher Education in which he suggests a new epistemology is dominant in the universities of America. There are echoes of Allan Bloom's 'Closing of the American Mind' here, as he suggests that today's university student sees knowledge as something to be approached more democratically, with less acceptance of expert knowledge, and not necessarily an acceptance of traditional notions of 'knowledge for knowledge's sake', 'the transformative power of the liberal arts' and so on. This he rightly suggests represents a challenge to university educators. Since it's a higher education opinion piece he doesn't try to outline in detail his view on this presumed epistemology its philosophical foundations, but one part of his stimulating commentary caught my attention and intersected with the observations of many that notions of 'truth' and textual authority continue to be challenged (see for example my posts on 'Truth and the Internet' here and here). Many of us have observed how younger generations in particular (but not exclusively) no longer place as much credence on authoritative texts nor supposed knowledgeable people. It seems experience, credentials, publications and even position carry little value for younger generations who are quick to say 'So what?' 'I'm not so sure about that' or 'Well that's one opinion among many'. He wrote:

Today's students know full well that authorities can be found for every position and any knowledge claim, and consequently the students are dubious (privately, that is) about anything we [academics and scholars] claim to be true or important.

In a piece that was published in Case 15 (here), I commented that for the postmodern person, knowledge, varies with the individual, circumstances and time and leads to the catch cry, ‘that might be true for you, but not for me’. Just as the serpent in the Garden of Eden suggested to Adam and Eve that they could have access to all the knowledge that God possessed as creator (Genesis 3:1-5), the deconstructive postmodernist (a term that I think comes closest to describing Clydesdale's 'new epistemology') suggests that we can have access to the tree of knowledge because we create it, it is in us.

While accepting that it is good to question knowledge and that some would see this more pluralistic view of knowledge as a good thing, Clydesdale contrasts this new attitude to that of students in an earlier age who were prepared to accept the authority of teachers and university professors more readily. He continues:

"Of course, this new epistemology does not imply that our students have become skilled arbiters of information and interpretation. It simply means that they arrive at college with well-established methods of sorting, doubting, or ignoring the same."

In my earlier Case 15 article I also pointed out that the process of democratisation of knowledge, has led to the creation of new interpretive communities where ideas are shared, interpretations are co-constructed and knowledge in turn is shared with others. Barthes wrote of the ‘death of the author’ over forty years ago, so this is not a new development, although I would agree with Clydesdale that it is a more common epistemological starting point than it was once. But for me, what have had the greatest impact have been the social changes inherent in modern western societies in combination with new forms of communication. The changing nature of families and their instability has meant that peer groups are now more important sources of advice, support and knowledge than was once the case. And while one could not blame new communication technology for the undermining of political, parental, teacher, police or scholarly authority, its development has accompanied significant social changes to families and the place of the church, and increasingly pluralistic societies precipitated by increasing globalisation, occurring at the same time that post modern thinking had taken hold of the academy (something that many argued is now changing).

The Internet continues to add weight to and support this shift from authorial and textual power to the reader/student and their interpretive communities. In particular, the Internet has done much to negate individual authorship in favour of shared authorship. Phenomena such as Wikipedia make it increasingly difficult to identify a single author and in effect supports the notions of the young that they will weigh every issue up, not just accept your view even if you're a teacher, professor, politician or even their mum. Once again, we need to recognise that universities, schools and families should be places where we encourage the young to question, argue and explore ideas. But what does this mean for the way we approach a different generation?

Clydesdale's conclusion is that we should approach our students with greater respect and with patience:

"The onus is on us to better convey the value that a robust intellectual life adds to the public good. And we need to begin by respecting our students (and the wider public) not just as persons but as the arbiters of knowledge that they have become. Specifically, we must respect students as thinkers, even though their thinking skills may be undeveloped and their knowledge base shallow. Moreover, our respect must be genuine. Students have keen hypocrisy sensors and do not like being patronized."

I find this a challenge, but I think there is great wisdom in what he is suggesting. While I will never retreat from my belief that there are truths which I will defend vigorously (most notably, biblical teaching and the gospel of Christ), nor will I compromise in watering down or sanitising the message of the gospel, we do need to consider how we engage with such a different generation whether as an academic, teacher, parent or preacher. Clydesdale's point intersects with the views of others in recent times including John Stackhouse who points out in his book Humble Apologetics that “If we are going to defend and commend our faith, we must do it in a new mode: with a different voice and in a different posture. Our apologetics must be humble.”

Clydesdale finishes with these helpful words:

"Some of us need an attitude adjustment. It is not just residential-college students who live in a bubble — many faculty members do as well. We take for granted our privileged status, become consumed by petty controversies, talk only to ourselves, and ignore the wider public that makes our work possible. It is tempting, I know, to want to curse the culture and withdraw into like-minded enclaves. But neither catharsis nor retreat will satisfy those who demand accountability, raise financial support for public higher education, or generate more students who cherish college as an opportunity to learn and think."

While Clydesdale was writing this article for a general higher education academic readership, we could also redirect his thoughts to any of us would be apologists and even preachers. This is something that Tim Keller considers at length in his excellent book The Reason for God, which I reviewed on this blog (here). The message of the gospel must not be sanitised or modified for this generation, but we must give careful consideration to how we engage a questioning generation in a consideration of the truth.

You can read Clydesdale's excellent piece here.

Freedom to choose: A biblical perspective

Is this fish free?

Freedom is a word on everybody’s lips. It seems everyone places high priority on personal freedom. However, the focus of individual desire for freedom often finds expression in varied ways:

• The economist wants free trade
• The feminist wants to be free from male oppression
• African nationalists want freedom from colonial rule
• The capitalist wants to be free from government control
• The teenager wants to freedom to make their own choices

Don Carson in his recent book “Christ and Culture Revisited” suggests that the desire for freedom is one of the big 4 cultural forces in secular western societies (along with secularisation, democracy and lust for power).

The freedoms people are seeking involve freedom from something – from oppression, control, fear, traditions, poverty, social institutions or values and so on. But as Tim Keller points out in his book The Reason for God - Belief in an Age of Skepticism:

Freedom, then, is not the absence of limitations and constraints but it is finding the right ones, those that fit our nature and liberate us.

Freedom and God's purposes

The picture of the fish above alludes to this idea that human freedom is related to God’s purposes for our lives. Tim Keller uses this illustration to make this point about freedom.

“A fish, because it absorbs oxygen from water rather than air, is only free if it is restricted and limited to water. If we take it off the hook and put it on the grass, its freedom to move and even to live is not enhanced, but destroyed. The fish dies if we do not honour the reality of its nature.”

Keller goes on to argue that freedom isn’t simply the absence of confinement and constraint. In fact, confinement and constraint can actually be a means to liberation.

But talk to non-Christian friends and you will see that the image of Christianity today is not freedom but bondage. Christians are the fun police and Christianity is a religion of don’ts. Many show their opposition in varied ways: “I want to do what I want to do.” “My sexuality is my business.” “It’s my body, I’ll decide what I do with it.” “Don’t tell be how to behave.”

Where can we go in the Bible for help in responding to our friend’s challenges in this area? Gal 5, Romans 6, John 8, and 1 Peter 2 are all good places to start.

Freedom from the law

Paul tells the Galatian Church (Gal 5:1-15) that they are free from the law and must avoid the temptation to believe that more is needed to experience true freedom.

“For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery”

Because tells the Galatians that because Christ has them free, that they are to enjoy the glorious freedom that it brings. They must not drift back into thinking that they can win favour with God by their own obedience or observance of the law. The law won't help the Galatians or us. Like them we can never be good enough in the eyes of God to earn his favour, “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Rom 3:23).

Freedom from sin

But Paul tells the Galatians that there is a second form of slavery that they had escaped. They are not just free from the law, they are also free from sin.

“13For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.” (Gal 5:13)

Paul has more to say in Romans 6 on our freedom from sin in Christ.

15What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! 16Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, 18and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness. 19 I am speaking in human terms, because of your natural limitations. For just as you once presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness leading to sanctification. 20For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. 21 But what fruit were you getting at that time from the things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death. 22But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the fruit you get leads to sanctification and its end, eternal life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Choosing slavery

Paul makes the point here that we aren't just free from sin and the law, we replace one form of slavery with another. You become slaves of the gospel (v17), a slave of righteousness (v18) and finally a slave of God (v22).

The imagery here is of the voluntary slavery – self-surrender leading to slavery (v 16). The voluntary slave was one often living in poverty who could offer themselves as slaves to someone simply in order to be fed and housed.

Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? (Rom 6:16)

Like voluntary slaves we have a choice – slavery to sin or righteousness. Jesus taught that no-one can be slaves to two masters (Matt 6:24).

There is a wonderful progression here: conversion involves self-surrender; self-surrender in turn leads to slavery; and slavery demands uncompromising obedience.

17But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, 18and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness. (Rom 6:17-18)

John Stott reminds us that: “We have here an exchange of slaveries. Each slavery is a kind of freedom (one authentic and the other spurious) and each type of freedom is a kind of slavery (one leads to death and the other life)”.

We were made for slavery to righteousness in accordance with the manufacturer’s design. It is possible for the fish to be free of the restraint of the pond, but if this freedom is not consistent with the way he was designed, it is a false freedom that leads to destruction. So too, for humans. If the freedom we seek is not in accord with God’s purposes then it is pointless freedom. No, the fish isn't free, and neither are we when we try to live our lives separate from God. We were made to give our lives in obedience to Christ, there can be no true freedom outside Christ. Jesus said:

"If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, 32and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." (John 8:31-32)

Related links

A review of Tim Keller's The Reason for God can be found here.

What’s your view of the world in 2008?

It’s New Year, which is not my favourite time of year, but I must NOT do a post on the problems with New Year’s Eve indulgences. I want to start the year with a post that is positive. One thing I do like about the New Year is the ritual people go through of making New Year’s resolutions. Yes, I know this is rolled up in superstition and people’s good intentions often lead nowhere. And I know that Jenny Craig and Weight Watchers make a stack of money in January each year. But I always like to start the year with prayer and reflection on where my life is heading, and where I have been in the last year. I also like to express thankfulness to God for his grace and mercy in my life, not just for the last year but also for every undeserved moment for which he has given me breath.

My most memorable New Year’s Eve was at midnight atop a freezing craggy hill west of Gerringong (in NSW) with my entire Beach Mission team leading them in prayer as the year 2000 began. I’m not sure what the team thought, but I bet it was memorable even if only because we were frozen within a whisker of hypothermia.

In the interests of healthy self-reflection, I have a suggestion for this New Year. Why not make 2008 the year in which you consider your view of the world. I’ve been reviewing Simon Smart’s book A spectator’s guide to worldviews: Ten ways of understanding life for Case magazine. The book has been published by Blue Bottle Books and is available from Anglican Youthworks (in Sydney) and Christian bookshops for $AUS24.95. Just how many of us have carefully considered the very foundations of our beliefs? I want to recommend that you read this very useful book. For at least two reasons:

• First, to make sure that we understand the set of beliefs through which we view the world. Do we understand why we hold the beliefs that we do and know what guides our actions?
• Second, to help us understand the views and positions that others hold. On what foundations might my friends, colleagues and family base their lives?

Reading this book with each of these frames in mind will also strengthen the apologetic skills for those readers who see themselves as Christians. When we attempt to share our beliefs with others it is helpful to know from which worldview framework they are coming.

The book has ten chapters, written by a variety of well-known Christian authors. Each chapter deals with a different worldview – Christian, modernism, postmodernism, utilitarianism, humanism, liberalism, feminism, relativism, new age spirituality and consumerism. Each chapter of the book has a common framework that consists of a summary of the worldview, a section that deals with points of agreement and departures from Christianity and a discussion section with questions for individual or group study. The book also includes a series of narratives or interviews with people that attempt to ground the various worldviews in people’s personal stories.

You might be sceptical and ask, is this just an academic topic for academics and theological students to offer fodder for discussion and debate? Well, yes, and no! Worldview is a great topic that can stimulate deep academic and theological discussions, but it is also foundational for anyone who wants to discuss ideas and ponder life with others. It is helpful to be sure of why we believe the things we do, and why others confuse and frustrate us by not being able to see the world just the way we do.

For example, Andrew Cameron’s excellent chapter on Utilitarianism will help you to understand (in part) why some people you know don’t want to debate at length Christian opposition to topics like abortion. Why some people’s eyes glaze over when we speak of the rights of the unborn child. You will see how the utilitarian belief, that we should do all that we can to create more happiness (or more accurately utility), has influenced their view of the world and the way they make decisions. Why they seem to place more emphasis on the consequences of their actions (rather the 'rightness') when making a decision – what impact will this action have for others and me? Why they might be reluctant to discuss whether an action is right or wrong. It will also help you to see understand the Achilles heal of a worldview like Utilitarianism – why Christians believe that Peter Singer is so wrong on so many things including euthanasia, infanticide and abortion. The belief that an action is only right or wrong because of its results fails to accept that we frequently face decisions that require us to decide whether our action is right or wrong. It will also point to the foundational beliefs of a Christian worldview that leads Christians to reject utilitarianism and utilitarian thinking and argument.

In contrast to utilitarianism, a Christian worldview assumes that humanity owes its origins to God as creator who’s very character is reflected in his creation; that this life is not all that there is; that all people were created in God’s image and have value; that each life is ‘inviolable, unrepeatable and irreplaceable’ (to Quote Pope John Paul II); that true happiness is not founded on the utility of our actions but on an understanding that God seeks to have a personal relationship with us through Christ.

Of course, worldviews are complex and internally diverse (i.e. there are many versions of utilitarianism, postmodernism etc). As well, it is likely that the average person has a worldview influenced by many (if not all) of those discussed in this book. For example, in trying to understand why someone is indifferent to your arguments on abortion, it is likely you’ll need to understand how your view of truth differs from their view of truth (see the chapter on Relativism), why their views on common good and choice are different from your’s (see the chapter on Liberalism), why your view on humanity is different from their view (see the chapter on Humanism) etc. This highlights one of the strengths of this book, ten major worldviews are presented in parallel for consideration and discussion.

This is very much an introductory book. If you have already studied some of these topics the book probably won’t offer any new knowledge. But it does offer a good overview of the topic packaged in a very readable format. It would be excellent for individual reading and reflection or for reading with a group of people. It’s an easy read that many people will find helpful in unpacking the beliefs that are foundational to who they are and perhaps some of the unhelpful baggage from various worldviews that they might have picked up along life’s way. Think about this idea for 2008.

On this New Year’s day I want to wish readers of this Blog God’s richest blessings, I pray that he will bless and use each of your lives for good, bringing honour and glory to his name.