Christian (or biblical) counseling is a topic that deserves more attention at places like Old Life that are lean sap and well-stocked seeking discernment. It strikes me that biblical counseling is another example of worldview, pietistic thinking that requires a biblical answer for each and every human problem. It also appears to suffer from a pietistic piety that runs roughshod over the regular ministry of pastors and elders who are ordained for the purpose of providing counsel, instruction, and exhortation — and they don’t even charge a fee for it.
Another part of the challenge of Christian counseling is the attempt to turn a human woe into a spiritual opportunity. I don’t mean to drive too great a wedge between the human and the spiritual sides of human existence, but since we do go to non-Christian physicians for help with ulcers and tumors, why do we need to go to Christian counselors for help with psychological problems or even broken relationships? What would be so awful if a person trained in certain areas of human existence wound up having a fund of knowledge about problems that Christians share with non-Christians? Are these problems the result of sin and the fall? Of course. Isn’t cancer or appendicitis also the result of sin and the fall? Of course. So why only go to Christians for help with the non-material parts of human misery? Why, I remember a time not too long ago when Christians thought treating depression with drugs was sinful. It is as if regeneration has powers that extend well beyond forgiveness, or as if sanctification leads to well-adjusted believers who will out perform non-believers in most areas of life — including happiness and well-adjustedness.
The Christian Curmudgeon reminded me of the dilemmas surrounding Christian counseling with his own reflections on depression. He writes:
Cowper’s depressions began when he was young. At his best, he was probably holding it at bay. He had at least four major depressive episodes in his life. On occasion he intended, though he failed, to end his own life. He died in despair, believing himself reprobate. His last poem, The Castaway, expresses his hopelessness with regard not just to this world but the world to come.
John Newton, with whom Cowper lived for a season and with whom he collaborated in the production of a book of hymns, testified that he did not doubt Cowper’s salvation. More recently, John Piper has given a similar assessment.
Despite the tragic course and sad end of his life, his hymns are given an important place in evangelical Christian hymnody. Six are included Trinity Hymnal. Just yesterday I sang with God’s people Jesus, Where’er Thy People Meet. Moreover, he is an object of sympathy, even of admiration, because of his affliction. He is sometimes held before depressed Christians, if not as an encouragement (how could a man with his end encourage) at least as a fellow sufferer.
Contrast that with Nevin. Several years ago, I wrote a review of a fine modern biography of this German Reformed theologian. It was not published by the media outlet to which it was initially submitted. (Happily it was published in Modern Reformation.) One of the reasons I was given for the review not being used was that it was not desired to call attention to him. And one of the reasons for not doing so was that he had been suicidal.
What? We sing despairing, suicidal Cowper but we suppress Nevin? I wonder why? Well, Nevin was not a poet, and he did not have a friend like John Newton. But, I think there is more. Cowper was a friend of Calvinist experientialism and Nevin was not. Nevin wrote The Anxious Bench while Cowper wrote O, For a Closer Walk with God.
Of course, the Curmudgeon’s point has less to do with Christian counseling than with experimental Calvinism. But he does point to another facet of the echo chamber affect that afflicts evangelicalism and its Reformed friends. And this affliction extends to Christian counseling. Even when we know that pastors and elders are supposed to be delivering pastoral oversight, which includes counseling of a basic kind, and even though we gladly receive the care of non-Christian specialists when it comes to a variety of human ailments, we generally refuse to subject Christian counseling to tough questions. The reason is that their models of human flourishing appear to point to a form of Christian piety that fits the conversionist ideal of a spiritual reorientation that radically changes a person’s entire being — from psychological make-up and worldview to plumbing.
Old Life 
Jed –
“I don’t have a out and out problem with nouthetic counseling per se, and from what I understand they are doing a much better job with integrating some of the medical sides of mental illness, but I don’t think it is without its limitations either.. . .Even nouthetic counseling, properly administered as I understand, lies outside the purview of typical pastoral ministry. It may be one of the few fields that does bridge churchly and worldly concerns, but still it isn’t exactly “ministry” in any confessional sense.”
I think dgh is right in drawing a parallel between at least some nouthetic counseling advocates and those who want to swallow up everything – including the common kingdom distinction – in worldview. For several years I shared a Presbytery with a nouthetic counseling minister who asked virtually every pastoral candidate “is biblical counsel sufficient for [fill-in-the-blank with a serious psychiatric condition]?” It seemed that the proper answer was, yes, it is always sufficient and preferable. To be clear, that was just one man but I’ve seen that kind of attitude in others as well.
A question a little ahead of my thought process is another point you suggest here. Isn’t this quasi-pastoral work out of someone who is not a pastor? I think I understand the history: in an age which “secular” counselors received people in office buildings, why not put biblical counselors in office buildings? But does biblical counsel “work” independent of ordained ministers and the overall ministry of the church? I wonder how well it comes off if we analyze like we do other parachurch ministries.
BTW, I am not saying nouthetic counseling is without value. But, to the extent that its advocates are like godzillas pushing over all the other buildings in the city, there’s a problem.
BTW2, I realize that nouthetic counseling may very much emphasize church attendance, etc. But still, IF it is all it is cracked up to be, should non-officers (ministers, elders) even be doing it?
I haven’t closely followed the development of nouthetic counseling in recent years, so these are real questions.
LikeLike
At the risk of confusing everyone: I’m a child psychiatrist whose main job description is to prescribe medication, as a consultant to clnicians/therapists in a public health setting. I believe one of my basic functions is to figure out whether a medication can be helpful, and to give my opinion about that to the child and parent. Also if medication may not be helpful, I can point to what should be happening in their counseling, though I do not do the counseling myself. I also from time to time have to (gently, sometimes not so) say something like “That is not a medication issue” – actually I’ll pretty much say it like that (wink).
In a public health setting, we are not so free to speak about spiritual concerns unless it is brought up first. However there is still a chance to do so especially to those who are upfront about their spiritual commitments. If I were consulting myself, I’m not sure I would want my psychiatrist counseling me about Christian things but I surely would want him telling me that a spiritual solution could certainly be part of it. This of course is a dilemma to a serious Christian but I’m not one at this point who believes, for example, that the Gospel needs to be said at every session I have.
Dealing with families, also, I believe that parents/guardians are the shepherds of their child’s spiritual life so I’m more likely to speak (separately?) with parents about that then the child… teenagers of course always being that in-between class of person.
And I’ll publicly ask for Dr. Hart’s prayers as I will be attending the CCEF conference this monrh in Louisville (smile). I’m sympathetic to nouthetic counseling but I believe its approach would have always encouraged collaboration with a physician, even a psychiatrist.
LikeLike
Lily, speaking of Lutherans and Solomon type wisdom to understand and provide care for struggling souls, have you picked up “Lars and the Real Girl” yet? It should be required viewing of all nouethic counselors.
LikeLike
1) I’m not sure I would want my psychiatrist counseling me about Christian things but I surely would want him telling me that a spiritual solution could certainly be part of it. 2) Dealing with families, also, I believe that parents/guardians are the shepherds of their child’s spiritual life so I’m more likely to speak (separately?) with parents about that then the child… teenagers of course always being that in-between class of person.
Response:
1) Thank you.
2) Thank you.
LikeLike
Zrim – nope, haven’t seen the flick, but it does look like one of those “must see” movies for warm fuzzies. It looks a great plot to showcase the role/value of family, friends, and neighbors in our lives?
In a similar vein of thought, I have been following Rod Dreher’s posts that chronicle his sister’s death and his planned return to his hometown because of the community’s warmth and support of each other. There is much to be said for the role/value of the support of family, friends, and neighbors in ordinary life – even more so, I would believe, with mental health issues. In my thinking, it’s all the more reason to be motivated to be actively supportive (eg: an advocate or our brother’s keeper) during each other’s rough times (along with the movie’s counselor if needed). Anywho, those are the thoughts that struck me while watching the movie preview I found online.
If you are interested, you can find Rod’s latest post here: http://tinyurl.com/6hq2pl6
From what I’ve read, when people are stricken with crises like mental illness, cancer, grief from a loss, or etc., it’s those who have the support of their family, friends, and community that recover quicker and thrive, or able to live well in the midst of adversity or a chronic illness. It’s those who do not have these temporal blessings that seem to fall through the cracks and do poorly. Our American individualism seems to belie our needs as social creatures.
P.S. Cranach’s blog had a great common sense post for cultivating/protecting mental health today, too: http://www.geneveith.com/2011/09/30/the-faith-to-be-idle
Yeah, I’m rambly this morning. Lots of good stuff to read. 😉
LikeLike
Hi Doc – this time, according to the web page, I really am caught in moderation purgatory – no ghosts to chase today!
LikeLike
Jed,
Of course, I knew you would disagree, but your explanation proves that while you can and must distinguish the realms, they are not disconnected — as you have shown, they work together. Both ministers of the Word and ministers of the State serve God in their particular realms, but if you pretend that they are not organically connected, you have to ignore reality. They both work together, each having its own realm of responsibility, but subject to the same authority, same source of life, same telos — Christ. You may as well try to separate Christ’s humanity from His deity. This is indeed a mystery, and why it is so complicated.
LikeLike
Don, I realize you are very selective in your dialogues so I won’t ask, but maybe you can tell Jed what “organically” connected means. We use that word a lot, but it’s more poetic than it is precise.
LikeLike
Don, I tend to think that you’re not distinguishing between people and spheres. Yes, body and soul are organically connected, and the spheres intersect with those creatures. But how that means creation and redemption are organically connected is befuddling. In my 2k mind, the spheres are sovereign and overlap, but one is not the antecedent of the other.
I find that those who are given to organic connection of the spheres instead of overlap are also given to thinking that cult drives culture, such that the state of the world is the result of the state of the church. But the church isn’t the cornerstone of society. The family is.
LikeLike
Michael,
By “organically connected” I mean simply two or more parts working together as a whole. For example, Jesus is both man and God — both “parts” work together to comprise the whole God-man. Its a mystery how this can be true, but if you are to study theology, you need to accept the lack of precision and marvel at the mystery because the Bible is more often poetic than precise.
LikeLike
Zrim,
I used the word “redemption” as short hand for new kingdom or new creation. The new kingdom does not replace creation but leavens it. And Christ is the King and cornerstone of both spheres, right? The fact that the society does not presently bow to the Kingship of Christ does not change that truth.
LikeLike
Frank, it’s certainly true that Christ is king over both spheres, though he does rule each differently. But when it is said that both spheres are organically connected I hear Constantine and Christendom. So where 1kers see organic connection 2kers see necessary distinction. I understand 2k’s critics think this an unnecessary bifurcation, but on top of the historical problems of Constantianism, you guys have the added burden of showing from the NT where there any grounds for making the ways of the world and those of the Spirit cohere. I mean, the antithesis and animosity between the two is all over the place. What do those who see organic connection everywhere think “My kingdom is not of this world” means?
LikeLike
Don,
Look, I don’t think you should be putting so much stock in my experience which hardly correlates to a universal commentary on reality. There certainly have been epochs in history where secular and sacred realms were organically bound, namely Eden, and Israel. However, that is where the organic unity of these spheres are unbound, at least until the return of Christ.
My account wasn’t really meant to say much of anything by way of 2k, but I can see why you want to take it there, but we really need to derive conclusions on these matters on a theological basis, not so much on a existential one.
The connection of the secular and sacred realms that you speak of in my case is far less than you make it, and to say otherwise is to decide you are a better interpreter of my experiences than I am, with almost no knowledge of the road I have walked beyond the quick blurbs here. I am not saying that to duck out of a 2k debate here, but simply to help you understand that my experiences aren’t really the best battleground to decide the debate.
The only connection between the secular and sacred realms with respect to my experiences with bipolar disorder has to do with the fact that I am a dual citizen, split between the polarities that all believers exist in. The secular help I received has gone a long way towards assisting me to live life in this world. The sacred guidance helped me understand my own struggles in a way that gave me deeper insight in the knowledge of God, connection to his people, and growing perspective and hope for the life to come. So without trying to clobber you with my very subjective experience, I found the treatment for my illness with respect to these two spheres to be very different, and the only common denominator between the spiritual and sacred realms is that I have had to live in the tension of straddling these two very different worlds. God’s rule in my life as I live between two worlds has also come in ways that I can also perceive the difference; in the world he governs through his providential, and almost imperceptible hand as he teaches me wisdom (something very akin to understanding Natural Law – but that’s another discussion entirely), and in the church he speaks directly and with certitude through Word and Sacrament and the spiritual ministry of the church.
So, if we want to address the nexus between medicine, counseling, therapy, et. al. and the spiritual life, and how that plays into the 2k debates, then I’m game. But, I really don’t think my own experience proves much either way on anything but an anecdotal or illustrative level.
LikeLike
Don,
I may be missing what you are saying, but from a Lutheran point of view, it sounds like what you call “the organic connection between the Church and the State, the soul and the body, redemption and creation, etc.” might be better described by what we would call the hiddenness of God or the masks of God working through our vocations. Dr. Gene Veith has written a good article that was published in Modern Reformation magazine which explains it much better than I ever could. Anywho, it may be worth considering.
Snippet:
“The doctrine of vocation is the theology of the Christian life. It solves the much-vexed problems of the relationship between faith and works, Christ and culture, how Christians are to live in the world. Less theoretically, vocation is the key to strong marriages and successful parenting. It contains the Christian perspective on politics and government. It shows the value, as well as the limits, of the secular world. And it shows Christians the meaning of their lives.”
Another snip:
“More broadly, in terms Reformed folk can relate to, vocation is part of God’s providence. God is intimately involved in the governance of his creation in its every detail, and his activity in human labor is a manifestation of how he exercises his providential care.”
http://tinyurl.com/yzswhhv
LikeLike
Jed,
I did not mean to trounce on your personal experience — please accept my apology.
LikeLike
Zrim,
But I do believe in 2 kingdoms, one temporal and one eternal, but both ruled by Christ as the means and end to His glory. How do you define the 2 kingdoms?
LikeLike
Lily,
Thanks. I will check it out.
LikeLike
Don, I think it’s reasonable to say that ever since Augustine everyone believes in two kingdoms. But after that it becomes a question of their respective natures and how they relate to one another, and the answers diverge among those who see an organic connection (theonomists and neo-Kuyperians) and those who see a necessary distinction (2kers). In addition to the kingdom of man being temporal and the kingdom of God being eternal, the former is ruled by law while the latter by gospel. How temporal/law and eternal/gospel can be organically connected is bizarre and is why 2kers suspect that the notion is a variant of law-gospel confusion.
LikeLike
Don,
I appreciate tnat, but I wasn’t fishing for an apology. I certainly didn’t take any offense to your prior comments, so no hard feelings amigo. All I was trying to communicate was the need to move the 2k debate to more objective ground, since it would be hard to draw any solid conclusions off of one man’s experience.
That said, I’d like to see how you are drawing such an organic connection between the church and the state, since I am more inclined to see a radical disjunction between the two. Separated by a a iron wall about two meters thick, coatec with teflon, and slathered in four inches of axle grease on either side.
LikeLike
That was inspiring Jed!!
LikeLike
Since this post is reaching the end of its useful life (Darryl has already published 2 new posts), I will try to address Lily, Zrim and Jed in my response.
As background, besides being steeped in the reformed tradition and doctrine, I have been heavily influenced by the thinking and journals of Ken Myers and his Mars Hill Audio Journals beginning, I think, in 1992. Some may know that Ken is my brother-in-law, so please don’t take this as an advertisement for his work, though I would be thrilled if you subscribed. (I was a Mars Hill subscriber before I knew that he had a sister and that she attended the same church as I did.)
Anyway, Ken’s work is all about evaluating and appreciating the culture (music, art, literature, political theory) from a Christian perspective. As a result of listening to his journals for years, my reformed way of thinking underwent a radical transformation. Though still thoroughly reformed, I began to see how, once I fully acknowledged my destitute position as the result of my sinfulness, and the awesome grace of God in dying for my justification, God actually takes delight in me as I delight in the good things of His creation and engage it (both people and things) with greater dependence on God, humility,love, and thankfulness.
Please don’t hear this as triumphalism (I am too painfully aware of the remaining sin), or evangelical sappiness, or arrogance (I am probably not saying anything new to most of you.) But it deeply affected me and led me in a new direction which is what I believe Gerhardus Vos was saying in the following quote, which I have posted before:
Now, this new creation, in the objective, universal sense, is not something completed by a single act all at once, but is a history with its own law of organic development. It could not be otherwise, inasmuch as at every point it proceeds on the basis of and in contact with the natural development of this world and of the human race, and, the latter being in the form of history, the former must necessarily assume that form likewise. It is simply owing to our habit of unduly separating revelation from this comprehensive background of the total redeeming work of God, that we fail to appreciate its historic, progressive nature. We conceive of it as a series of communications of abstract truth forming a body by itself, and are at a loss to see why this truth should be parcelled out to man little by little and not given in its completeness at once. As soon as we realize that revelation is at almost every point interwoven with and conditioned by the redeeming activity of God in its wider sense, and together with the latter connected with the natural development of the present world, its historic character becomes perfectly intelligible and ceases to cause surprise.”
So, to Lily, I agree with Gene Veith about vocation — it is the reformed understanding. I would add though that our vocations are not only for us to show the love and care of God to others but for us to show our delight and love of God and His delight in flowing forth into His creation.
To Zrim and Jed, this is how I see the organic connection between the temporal and eternal.
LikeLike
Don, I’m not sure how one can read something like Meyers’ “Christianity, Culture and Common Grace” and come away with the notion that creation and redemption are organically connected. Isn’t that presupposition how we end up making everything “kingdom work”? But if Meyers is so influential for you he doesn’t sound all that wild about it:
Some Christians today use the word “kingdom” like a magic adjective that sanctifies any noun it touches. We read of “kingdom ethics,” “kingdom theology,” “kingdom values,” “kingdom justice,” “kingdom love,” “kingdom caring,” “kingdom priorities,” and “kingdom relationships.” All of these terms might well be referring to some good thing. But the glib transformation of a noun into an adjective is almost always an alert that jargon has replaced thinking, and one gets the impression that “kingdom” is being used incantationally, as what New Testament scholar R.T. France calls a “hurray-word.” S.H. Travis has written this warning: “Indeed, the current danger in some quarters is that a few mentions of the word ‘kingdom’ in any theological document will be enough to guarantee that it be received with uncritical enthusiasm.’”
And in the interest of necessary distinction over against organic connection, Meyers cites Calvin:
“…we must here set forth a distinction: that there is one kind of understanding of earthly things; another of heavenly. I call ‘earthly things’ those which do not pertain to God or his Kingdom, to true justice, or to the blessedness of the future life; but which have their significance and relationship with regard to the present life and are, in a sense, confined within its bounds. I call ‘heavenly things’ the pure knowledge of God, the nature of true righteousness, and the mysteries of the heavenly Kingdom. The first class includes government, household management, all mechanical skills, and the liberal arts. In the second are the knowledge of God and of his will, and the rule by which we conform our lives to it.”
Click to access ComGrace.pdf
LikeLike
Don,
Re: “Gene Veith about vocation — it is the reformed understanding. I would add though that our vocations are not only for us to show the love and care of God to others but for us to show our delight and love of God and His delight in flowing forth into His creation.”
As long as this “delight and love” is not akin to a current popular teaching of “hedonism,” I don’t think Lutherans would disagree. Although we would necessarily say that we show our delight and love of God through love and service to our neighbor. We place emphasis on the fact that God does not need our good works whereas our neighbor does need our good works, and that we love our neighbors freely, not under threats or by compulsion, but with a free and merry heart. We simply love and serve God through loving and serving our neighbor.
And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me. (Matthew 25:40)
P.S. What a treat to be related to Ken Myers! His thought provoking work at Mars Hill Audio is impressive. Natch, it’s never 100% agreement since there are interviewees (eg: Dallas Willard) that offer things incompatible to confessional Lutheranism.
LikeLike
Lily & Don – “delight” in vocations
I don’t know, we can’t all be professional thinkers, musicians, or youth pastors. Some of us have to simply count the number of heads we have to support and go get a job. As for myself, I have a comfortable job, but let’s just say I delight in it significantly less than I do Sunday worship. And if, as they say, I were to win the lottery I wouldn’t be there six months from now.
Yes, we approach our jobs Christianly. We work unto God, not merely unto man. We thank God for providing. Now you say we also must “delight” in our jobs? You have not adequately accounted for the post-Fall nature of work: it’s painful toil, hindered by thorns and thistles. Thus, a man spends his day sawing hog torsos. A woman inputs data under the watchful eye of her ogling supervisor. Cleaning public toilets, roofing in the Summer heat – you get the idea – isn’t the job itself burden enough? Must we also demand “delight”? And if someone doesn’t delight, should he question his spiritual estate? “Delight” is a lofty word but, in this context, it can be a heavy burden.
LikeLike
Michael,
DING DING DING! Thanks for mixing in the perspective we observe in Ecclesiastes: life in a fallen world is fraught with futility and toil. Or as Jeff Buckley says (in the words of Leonard Cohen)… “love is not a victory march, it’s a cold and it’s a broken hallaleuia.”
Sure we can delight in anything we do in service to God, but not all of us have jobs that are delightful in and of themselves. Not everyone gets to be batman, I know since my application to be the Dark Knight seems to have been lost in the shuffle of the dreams of 7 year old boys throughout the world. So I guess waiting tables will have to do for this vigilante at heart.
LikeLike
Hmmm…. MM. I’m surprised you didn’t take issue with the free and merry heart also. 😉
I don’t know about you, but I wasn’t baptized in pickle juice (goofing for fun here), so I have delighted (had great pleasure) in my station and vocations that have consisted of making meals, changing diapers, weeding gardens, balancing the company books, editing papers, creating marketing materials, driving kids to sports events, and other such mundane things. I have also not delighted in my station and vocation at other times. So… I’m thinking both are true and since I’m a confessing Lutheran, I don’t worry about my emotions.
Jed, please re-apply for the Dark Knight position. We need you. 😉
LikeLike
P. S. Should I remind you how delightful it can be to hug and kiss your kids, not the mention the bedroom delights with a spouse? Perhaps you really should think over this dismal Eeyore view of all the different vocations you hold? (yeah… you deserve being given a really hard time on this subject!)
LikeLike
Solomon seems to have had a hard time living out the perspective he had in Ecclesiastes. He could have passed for a Christian hedonist today. Or, he clearly saw the futility but did not live up to the “Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. For God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil.” I wonder if he wrote that before or after his numerous female dallyings or his propensity for setting up worship shrines to pagan deities? Perhaps he did that to impress the foreign woman he was not supposed to fratenize with. He was the original Dos Equis man- he and Freiderich Neitszche.
LikeLike
Although it seems that old Freiderich scared more woman off than enjoyed their companionship.
LikeLike
Jed, I loved the “slathered in four inches of axel grease on either side.” Nice!!! I have heard and read many neo-Cals imply, and even directly state, that it is through our vocations that we help bring in the Kingdom of God to earth and as a means of cooperating with God for our progressive sanctification. Why do we always want to find ways for ourselves to enter into the realm of the means of grace?
When I read Vos’s quote I was not sure what he meant by “new creation.” Was that the new heavens and earth that come along with Christ’s 2nd advent or the “new creation” Christ won at the cross? Amills, Postmills and Premills all have different understandings of the new creation and how it comes about ie., whether quickly or gradually.
LikeLike
Some scholars do debate whether Solomon was the author of Ecclesiastes, so, my point might be a mute one.
LikeLike
Don, what Zrim said. Plus, have you read Ken’s All God’s Children and Blue Suede Shoes? It’s very two-kingdom because he is following Meredith Kline on the distinction between cult and culture.
LikeLike
http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/internet-comments-talk-show/1359602/
Here’s a video that all bloggers might want to watch:
LikeLike
Darryl, did you put Zrim up to digging up a 20 year old article that he wrote, 🙂 and while you have referred to Ken’s 1989 book before, suffice it to say that his views have evolved. I think you will agree with me if you went to his web site and found something more recent that he has produced.
Zrim, perhaps you have read Milbank on this subject. Leithart has compiled a summary of the first part of Milbank’s Theology and Social Theory: Beyond Secular Reason (Political Profiles) at http://www.leithart.com/2010/02/05/once-there-was-no-secular/
LikeLike
Michael,
Did you miss the other conclusions of Ecclesiastes that every man should eat and drink, and enjoy good in all his labor, for it is the gift of God; or that there is nothing better, than that a man should rejoice in his works; for that is his portion.
Now, go and obey God 🙂
LikeLike
Don,
You have been a good sport- through all my nonsense anyways. This really is a good site to learn from and get good and thoughtful responses at. Sometimes I come close to crossing the line of what is appropriate or not. Thanks for not taking offense.
LikeLike
Lily:
You are bright, creative, and probably quite resourceful. As for me, life is good. Adding those two things together doth not a command make.
Don:
An observation is not a command. I’m not sure your “organic connection” of the two kingdoms commitment will allow you to grasp why the Larger Catechism tells us to “delight” in the Lord’s Day but merely be “content” with our estate.
LikeLike
Don, I didn’t respond enough to your Ecclesiastes comment. You more than I am aware of the unique literature that is Ecclesiastes. Do you believe that “there is nothing better for people than to be happy and to do good while they live?” Do you see the author delighting in his days on the earth? If you are constructing a command to delight in our vocations, you’re going to need a surer footing than a quote from Ecclesiastes.
What an intriguing book! Personally, I think the message of Ecclesiastes is not far from Paul’s words that “those who have wives should live as if they do not; 30 those who mourn, as if they did not; those who are happy, as if they were not; those who buy something, as if it were not theirs to keep; 31 those who use the things of the world, as if not engrossed in them.” If so, Ecclesiastes is telling us pleasure is not ultimate, but enjoy it nonetheless. Wisdom is not ultimate, but seek it nonetheless. Work is not ultimate, but enjoy it nonetheless. Know that all these things are all provisional, and if this world is provisional, a space is opened for us to seek what is eternal. Then, knowing what is eternal (or one could say, that which is redemptive) we may enjoy, in proper measure, that which is fleeting, and, in itself, vain.
But, of course, I could be wrong.
LikeLike
Don, I don’t know if Meyers’ views have evolved to align with yours. Being kin, maybe you know something I don’t. But if they have then I’ll stick with paleo-Meyers.
And just to add to Mike’s latest remark concerning Paul, consider Jesus’ own words on the cost of being a disciple, namely that one must hate his own mother and father, wife and children, brothers and sisters and even his own life. I really can’t think of a more poignant or provocative way of casting the temporal order against the eternal: the highest temporal institution (family) and the highest temporal good (life) are to be, as it were, hated if they get in the way of eternity. Yet, the fifth and the sixth commandments still stand as well. You talk of mystery, but what escapes me is how the organic connection theory can make sense of such a paradox. The 2k you eschew has a way of understanding there is a time for everything.
LikeLike
MM, I’m glad you have a good life. I do wonder if:
1) Reading the Song of Solomon twice for every excursion into Ecclesiastes might be good medicine.
2) Bourbon. This may be the missing link in enjoyment of vocations according to Walter Percy and perhaps a cure for the inner Eeyore?
http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/09/walker-percy-bourbon-and-the-holy-ghost
What better organic connections for our vocations than the Song of Solomon and bourbon? Perhaps the Reformed need more Lutheran friends to remind them of these things? LOL. Lutherans do seem to be more earthy oriented connections. Hence our belief in the Real Presence in the bread and wine of the Eucharist solves many things. 😉
LikeLike
Lily, you’re hilarious.
As a blues fan, I pretty much have to drink whiskey, but I also can’t help but notice that Women + Whiskey got some of the blues greats in a lot of trouble. That combo produced great songs, mind you, but there were some unintended consequences like drinking poisoned whiskey(Robert Johnson)and getting one’s neck slashed(Lead Belly, for one).
But I like your kind of counseling. I think you’d develop a client base rather quickly with that appproach.
LikeLike
John,
Thanks. We are all brothers in Christ after all.
LikeLike
True dat, Don; I advocate much more patience with each other!!
LikeLike
With patience as the foundation we can then be snarky with each other in the process.
LikeLike
Zrim,
It escapes you because you are not even trying to catch it. Take up and read Milbank for example. In the same way you gave up your charismatic perspective when you began to read DGH and others like him, just maybe you’ll experience a third baptism in the Spirit — or is it the fourth since your first prepared you for the second, and DGH already ushered in your third.:)
LikeLike
MM – a blues fan…. well that sure explains the inner Eeyore! Unless, possibly, there is hope for you and you flunk this scientific personality test for Pooh counselors. Is it possible to find you may have shades of a hidden Tigger somewhere, somehow, someway?
http://www.half-asleep.com/pooh/interact/quiz/quiz.php
Here’s to hoping you flunk (clink). 😉
LikeLike
MM,
If a Spirit inspired observation leading to a statement preceded by the word “should” does not indicate an imperative, maybe there is a new 2k way of viewing Scripture as well as creation that I need to understand.
Have you considered the possibility that your view disregards the cosmic nature of God’s salvation; and assumes that salvation is limited to individuals collectively referred to as the Church. This type of thinking is inevitable since the enlightenment has bequeathed us with an individualistic perspective of the world, as well as many truly beneficial outcomes.
LikeLike
Lily, I think the Reformed could stand to learn a lot from the Lutherans about earthiness and organic connections. But I’m bound to protest your consubstantiation and am not persuaded that it solves temporal problems. I’ll take the Reformed doctrine of the real presence to aid eternal disconnections and Neil Diamond’s “Red, Red Wine” to patch over temporal rough spots.
Don, I never had a charismatic perspective to give up (though I was tempted by Rome once before coming to Geneva the way one might be tempted by a worldy wise woman; but pentecostalism is only tempting the way a bar fly is). And, thanks, but I’m good with one baptism.
LikeLike
Don –
Really, you’re going to interpret Ecclesiastes like you do Deuteronomy? And, again, it’s a tough argument to say Ecclesiastes is about how we should delight in our vocations. As Astro would say, “rotsa ruck” with that argument.
I’m individualistic? I’m happy with the wisdom of my forbears and the larger church in the Larger Catechism’s exposition of the 5th and 10th commandments. “Delight” in the Lord’s Day and be “content” with our callings. You’re the one who’s veered off into a private interpretation.
You also said:
“Have you considered the possibility that your view disregards the cosmic nature of God’s salvation; and assumes that salvation is limited to individuals collectively referred to as the Church.”
I say Astro, you say cosmic. You’ll have to let me catch up with “cosmic,” since I’m still back on “organic.” Rather than divine my assumptions, can you state your position on how to describe who is saved? And then relate it to this discussion?
PS. Like Yeazel says, thanks for hanging in there. The conversation here is direct but not meant to be personal.
LikeLike
4th and 10th, not 5th and 10th.
LikeLike