Sunday, April 10, 2011

Collecting Manna: Rusty Reno

Reno is a master of mixing up the medicine we loathe to taste, yet cannot be healthy without swallowing. Here, in his In the Ruins of the Church (a book I wish I'd read ten years ago), Reno completes an appreciation of post-liberalism in its Radical Orthodoxy form, countering what I like to call "the Law of Substitutionary Conversion" with a warning against attempts to reform Christianity from the safe and distant heights of hipster irony and academic objectivity. Against the ambition to be sexy and relevant, even against the desire and deep-drive to out-create the creativity of culture all around us, Reno offers a decidedly unsexy, yet unavoidable word of warning. At the very least, I find it cuts uncomfortably close to the bone of my own Evangelical Catholic proclivities, and should do the same for anyone of a blue devil persuasion. His recent collection of essays, Fighting the Noonday Devil, is not to be missed.

Many offer courageous and articulate warnings against the modern "culture of death," and Christian witness does provide an alternative that has weight and substance. Nonetheless, no triumphant vision of peace emerges out of what twenty-first-century Christians actually say and do...Against the weakness of the gospel - in churches that do not seem to hear and in a culture increasingly blind - we are tempted by theory. We imagine that by sheer theological genius and intellectual virtuosity, we can reconstruct an all-embracing Christian culture, we can uncover and make present the glue that holds everything together. But guided by what might be rather than what is, we come to correct and perfect that which we have received in Word and Sacrament. As the editor's blue pencil excises and adds, violence and will to power reemerge. We re-create the distance we wish to overcome...our theorizing, our "new theologies," will hold together what Christ and his church seem unable to encompass and embrace.

Against this temptation we must keep our nose close to the ill-smelling disaster of modern Christianity, articulate about its failures but training ourselves to dwell in enduring forms of apostolic language and practice. Diminished vision may be the price we must pay. We may no longer be able to see our culture, stem to stern, through Christian eyes. We may no longer be able to see the complex shape of our contemporary churches as a creature of the gospel. We can only see what has been given us to see. But paying this price is necessary if we are to train our eyes to see the identity of Christ in the witness of Scripture and the practice of the Church. For no matter how high we might soar on eagle's wings if theological ideality, and despite our hopes that from such heights we might recover a vision of the full scope of the truth of Christ, we will be disappointed. Christ is in the concete faith and practice of the church, and only he can give the power and potency to a post-modern theology that is genuinely orthodox. The Son holds all things together in the Father.

Thus to escape the patterns of theological modernism, the first task is not to imagine and invent, for this opens up a distance between us and the concrete and enacted forms of our apostolic inheritance. Instead, we must train ourselves in that which modernity rejects most thoroughly and fatally: the disciplines of receiving what has been given. We must eat the scrolls that the Lord has given us and dwell amidst his people. Only then will the scope of an Augustinian ambition recover the intense, concrete, and particular Christ-centered focus that gives it the power of good news. Only there, amidst walls ruined by faithlessness, apathy, and sin, can we taste God's peace. (Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2002, 78-9)

Thesis 4: The Bible as Rosetta Stone

Thesis 4: The Biblical canon does not exhaust salvation history, but is a Rosetta Stone by which all subsequent history is to be understood.

Salvation history does not end with the closing of the Bible. As Katherine Doob-Sakenfeld has shown us, the Bible is not merely a “repository or databank of verbally correct information about God,” but rather, can be viewed as “establishing a trajectory for Christian living, a trajectory that the continuing community checks an rechecks by reference to the Bible.”(10) We can view the narrative of Scripture in similar fashion, not as exhausting God’s life with God’s people, but rather, as providing a snapshot of a relationship in motion. As in calculus, the narrative we have is a kind of derivative, establishing the rate of change at a particular point, and thus establishing a trajectory. Or, we could view the Bible as God’s Rosetta Stone, which, when laid alongside our own part of the story, enables us, with much difficulty and care, to begin to translate the strange language of God’s speaking, acting and relating in the present by reference to how God has been heard speaking, acting and relating in the past. While the canon itself has been closed, the story of God with God’s people continues to be written in the witness of the Church (and also of Israel).

Faithfulness to the canon, then, is in making it the measure of our times, with all its divergences and disagreements, without allowing it to exhaust or limit the surprising ways God continues to act in relationship with God’s people. As John Henry Newman beautifully notes, “Scripture cannot be mapped, or its contents catalogued; but, after all our diligence, to the end of our lives and to the end of the Church, it must be an unexplored and unsubdued land, with heights and valleys, forests and streams, on the right and left of our path and close about us, full of concealed wonders and choice treasures.”(11) Scripture leads to further adventures into the strange new world within its pages, and so remains a crucial site within which God’s people encounter God speaking today. It also provides, as in Calvin's famous image, a set of lenses through which to view all of reality in the fullness of its spiritual dimensions. History quite simply is salvation history, and through Scripture, Newman's adventure extends to the entirety of Christian existence and engagement in time.

NOTES
10 - Katherine Doob Sakenfeld, “Feminist Theology and Biblical Interpretation” in Biblical Theology: Problems and Perspectives: In Honor of J. Christiaan Beker (ed. Johan Christiaan Beker. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995), 251.
11 - Cited in Jason Byassee’s Praise Seeking Understanding: Reading the Psalms with Augustine (Grand Rapids: Wm. Eerdman’s Co., 2007), 240.

Saturday, April 9, 2011

Thesis 3: The Resurrected Christ as Hermeneutical Key

Thesis 3: The key to the identity of the Bible’s God is the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth from the dead by the God of Israel. All readings must therefore be Christologically oriented.

While various New Testament authors employ vastly different Christologies, for the Christian Church, they converge on the raising of Jesus from the dead by Israel’s God as the decisive moment of salvation history.(7) In Christ, a new creation has begun (2. Cor.5.16f), bestowing on the Church the ministry of reconciliation. According to Colossians, as the “image of the invisible God,” all things “hold together” in him, and “through him, God was pleased to reconcile all things” to Christ (Col.1.15, 19). As such, all attempts to read and understand the diversity of Scripture’s witness must use the ministry, death, and resurrection of Christ as their hermeneutical key. This means that the four canonical Gospels, which were almost universally accepted throughout the canonical-formation process as authoritative, hold a special place of privilege at the center of Christian Scripture as narratives about Jesus.(8) However, various non-narrative genres, such as the Old Testament psalms or dietary regulations, as well as New Testament epistles, can and must be read Christologically, as either prefiguring, unfolding, or wrestling with the decisive act of salvation and new creation by God for God’s people. In the event of irresolvable conflicts or impenetrable opacity, particularly in cases where certain passages seem incommensurable with the Gospels, Augustine’s recommendation of looking to the two-fold love commandment (Matt.22.34-40) is to be followed, for here, Christ Himself claims, is the summation of all Scripture.(9) By seeking to love God and love our neighbor – by no means simple or self-evident tasks – readings of Scripture will seek to participate in the ministry of reconciliation that is constitutive of the new creation revealed in the resurrection of Christ.

(Caveat Lector: The Christological focus should not be taken as an invitation to supercessionism. Nor does it exclude the importance of understanding the Old Testament as Hebrew Scripture. However, as these theses relate to reading scripture within the Church proper, it is equally vital that Christians not shy away from the centrality of Christ, which both influences the very naming of the Old Testament as such, as well as creates significant differences with Judaism. As in Thesis 2, these differences and tensions, canonized in scripture in places like Romans 9-11, are invitations and opportunities for dialogue and encounter with Jewish brothers and sisters for whom Jesus is not Messiah. Such disagreements must be acknowledged - but in love, can be an opportunity for mutual and even collaborative scriptural reasonings. I know of very few Jews who would appreciate sentiments such as "we basically believe the same things at the root-" my Jewish friends have no problem pointing out their strong divergence from my own faith claims, and such truthfulness is yet another lesson the Church must continue to learn through its dependence on the descendants of Israel.)

NOTES
(7) Brian Peterson, lecture 9.29.10. All references to Peterson’s lectures refer to those given as part of his course BI451 New Testament Theology, given in the Fall Semester 2010 at Lutheran Theological Southern Seminary.
(8) While various collections of NT texts such as the Pauline epistles varied in their inclusion in various canonical lists throughout the first centuries of the Church, the four Gospels are the sole constant. In claiming the Gospels as canonically privileged, I look not only to their exalted place in the worshipping life of the Church, but also to the Scripture Project’s claim that “the Gospels, read within the matrix of Scripture from Genesis to Revelation, convey the truth about the identity of Jesus more faithfully than speculative reconstructions provide by modernist historical methods” (Art of Interpreting Scripture 3).
(9) See Augustine’s On Christian Teaching (trans. R.P.H. Green. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997).

02: Marginalia from the Book of Harbison





Friday, April 8, 2011

Thesis 2: Narrative Diversity

Thesis 2: The Bible is primarily a narrative about God with God’s people, which itself contains a diversity of testimonies about the experiences of individuals and communities with God.

In accord with the regula fidei (rule of faith) of the Christian Church and creeds, the primary literary form of the Bible is narrative, in which “plot holds together and integrates into a single whole what would otherwise be multiple and scattered.”(6) As a community that affirms both Old and New Testaments, the Church must read individual sections of the Bible in light of the larger story of God with God’s people, beginning with God’s liberating and sustaining covenantal relationship with Israel by which God sought to restore the original blessings of creation to a fallen world, culminating in the ministry, death and resurrection of the Jew Jesus Christ, and finding its ongoing continuance though the work of the Holy Spirit in the mission of the Church. Because God saves creation through a community of individuals, the testimonies and experiences that find their form in the various genres of the Bible are necessarily as diverse as the communities and individuals who experienced them.

In many cases, such testimonies diverge from, contradict, and even engage in argument with, one another. By canonizing such diversity under the ongoing guidance of the Holy Spirit, the Church has affirmed that such diversity, divergence, conflict and ongoing negotiation are not only central “characters” of the story of God with God’s people, but in fact constitute an essential part of the plot of that story. While, for example, various New Testament authors agree that the resurrection of Jesus Christ is the central event of history, how that resurrection shapes language, life and mission vary distinctly. The lack of closure and the canonization of inter-canonical argument constitutes as part of the Bible’s narrative form a witness to relational engagement with God and God’s people as a normative and foundational aspect of the revelation of the story of God with God’s people. Or, more pointedly, the life of God with God’s people is conversational.

Notes
(6) see Green 28 (repeated references indicate past postings)

Eight Theses for Reading Scripture in the Church

Next week, I'm going before my STM committee at LTSS (Brian Peterson, Michael Root, and David Yeago) to discuss the research I've been pursuing all year regarding the inter-relatedness of scripture and sanctification, particularly in regard but not limited to the Lutheran tradition. A major goal of my project is to formulate an accessible paradigm, applicable and easily appropriated in congregational life, to articulate and guide creative and artful engagement with the biblical words themselves.

In preparation for the colloquy, I wanted to post eight "theses" that I arrived at by the end of the Fall semester. They were originally formulated for an assignment asking how the church ought to read "difficult texts," such as those dealing with womens' ordination or violence. They are loosely modeled after, but by no means exhausted by or dependent upon, the nine theses offered by "The Scripture Project" in their revolutionary volume The Art of Reading Scripture. In nuce, my own working theses are:

A. Theses 1-4: Scripture as Story of God with God’s People
1: The Bible’s Authority is grounded in faith in the Bible’s God
2: The Bible is a narrative in which diversity and disagreement are embedded
3: The identity of the Bible’s God is revealed in resurrection of Jesus Christ
4: Canon does not exhaust salvation history, but establishes its trajectory
B. Theses 5-8: On the Church’s Use of Scripture within the Story
5: Central trajectory of the Bible’s narrative is missional
6: Church exists in a divided state, requiring diversity in interpretation
7: Scripture has multiple senses and can be used in diverse ways
8: Facing difficult texts requires Church to ask “how can we pray this text?”

These are not meant to be exhaustive, but rather, to serve as loci and impetuses for further conversation and study. Over the next few days, I will post my theses serially. These are works-in-progress, and I invite any comments, suggestions and insights. I pray they will open up conversation and discussion, and by the Spirit's grace, may prove useful for use in the life of the church.

~

Thesis 1: The Bible’s authority for readers/hearers is derived from the authority that the God of the Bible has for them.(1)

Long before postmodernism, St. Augustine asked in his The Usefulness of Belief: “what is more rashly proud than to be unwilling to learn to understand the books of the divine oracles from their own interpreters and to be ready to condemn them without understanding them?”(2) Augustine here urges his friend to risk submission to the tutelage of the Church for the sake of truth, such that understanding might be built on foundations of faith and charity, rather than suspicion and doubt. Right understanding, along with charitable readings, flow from faith, and one’s faith is shaped by the community to which one belongs. Regarding the Christian Bible of Old and New Testament, Joel Green reminds us that as the Church, “we are the people of God to whom these texts are addressed” and “that reading the Scriptures has less to do with the tools we bring to the task, however important these may be, and more to do with our dispositions as we come to our engagement with Scripture.”(3) Faith in the God to whom the Bible witnesses, or, at the very least, desire to believe in this God,(4) is thus a prerequisite if the Bible is to function authoritatively both for individuals and for the community to which they belong. Rudolf Bultmann’s observations about interpreting history thus apply even more stringently for biblical hermeneutics: “to understand history is possible only for one who does not stand over against it as a neural, non-participating spectator, but also stands within it, and shares responsibility for it.”(5) As readers of Scripture within and as Church, our interpretation is never neutral, but must always take place within an invested and intimate relationship with the God revealed by Israel and Jesus Christ, and in communion with Christ’s Body, the Church.

NOTES
1 The formulation of this thesis is taken from Terrence Freitheim’s chapter “The Authority of the Bible and the Imaging of God” in Engaging Biblical Authority (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2007, 47).
2 See Augustine’s The Usefulness of Belief in Augustine: Early Writings (ed. J.H.S. Burleigh. Philadelphia: Westminster John Knox, 1979, 322).
3 Joel Green, “The (Re-)Turn to Narrative” in Narrative Reading, Narrative Preaching (ed. Joel Green. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003), 23.
4 As Brian Peterson has reminded us (at LTSS), even dead German guys whose historical-critical projects seem menacing to those of us who adhere to a more theological-exegetical bent often carried out their work in the assumption of faithfulness (lecture 12.10.10)! My concern here is that while faith is requisite for understanding, we not make faith into a kind of works-righteousness in which its integrity is measured by one’s adherence or confidence to contested and difficult doctrines. Rather, the Church is a mixed body, and we are all mixed persons in various stages of growth in faith, and so, I have written this thesis in the understanding that it is as broadly inclusive as possible.
5 Rudolf Bultmann, New Testament and Mythology and Other Basic Writings (trans. Schubert Ogden. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984), 150.

Thursday, April 7, 2011

"Throw Open the Doors of the Church!" A Personal Remembrance of Peter J. Gomes

“And we remember those who have died...”

Sitting in the stillness of the sanctuary during matins at Mepkin Abbey, I felt my heart stirred by these words of the hours. Somewhere in the world, far from this arbor of tranquility, someone died. And we are praying for them. The world is sustained and sanctified by intercessions such as these. It is good to be here.

Little did I know that this morning, numbered among those for whom the brothers and I prayed was the incomparable soul of a teacher, pastor, and friend. It was only later that afternoon, returning to the chatter and noise of the world of car stereos and computers, that I received the news from a friend: Peter Gomes was dead.

I never had the honor of hearing Dr. Gomes preach at his home church in Harvard Square. I was the recipient of the irreplaceable blessing of being taught the art of expository preaching by him when he was a visiting professor at Duke Divinity School during my first year of seminary. When during our first class meeting he announced, “most of you come to me thinking you can preach when you cannot; but for some of you, there may be hope; if you listen to me, some of you may yet become ministers of the Word,” I thought him inestimably arrogant. By the end of our semester, as he roguishly smiled and glanced mischievously through his horn-rimmed spectacles whenever we called him “PJ,” I knew and loved him as inestimably tender and utterly devoted to us as his students. I’m glad I didn’t drop the class.

Staying in the class, of course, cost me a year’s tuition. Refreshed after three years away from the academy, I had managed to make perfect marks in all of my classes, positioning myself to make a run at a merit-based scholarship that would have lessened my loans significantly. Then PJ gave me a B+ in preaching. Heartbroken and just a little hell-bent, I requested a meeting with Professor Gomes to plead my case. I will never forget sitting with him in the advent of the summer sun on the patio outside the Refectory, he in his straw hat and bright bow-tie, me with my entitlements and expectations, and hearing his verdict: “an A would have meant you have arrived as a preacher. You are a B+ preacher - this means you are already a good preacher. It also means you have room to grow to become even better. If I have you an A, I would have given you nowhere to grow.” Suddenly, I was grateful for my B+, even honored by it. That was the last time I saw or spoke with him.

PJ did not leave us orphans, however. Throughout his time at Duke, he often spoke in wistful tones of how “no one but Rick Lischer has been down to see me” in his dingy basement office, and despite the greatness of his demeanor and the nobility of his character, it was not lost on us how this famous man, who often shared his Cambridge kitchen with the likes of Julia Child, was undeniably lonely. It is one of the great injustices of my tenure at Duke that PJ was not extended the promise of community which so characterized the mantras of the school’s theological self-understanding.

Not one to remain a victim of fate, PJ took matters into his own hands. As the semester drew to a close, he announced to us that he had “visited Mr. Dean Gregory Jones, and informed him that I had received less than satisfactory hospitality from the school, so he ought to provide me a blank check for me to take my beloved students to dinner at the Washington Duke.” We could only imagine the conversation, the slack-jawed visage of the Dean at the audacity of this tiny man from Harvard with the tremendous ego, his wounded pride, and his appreciation for his students. We feasted on prime rib, several bottles of fine wine, and a little taste of ivy-league elitism to the tune of over $1000 - PJ’s only regret was that smoking was not allowed, so he could not purchase a box of cigars. Such was his love for his friends.

If PJ valued feasting on the fineries of the material world, he was even more committed to teaching us how to administer the bread of life, the Gospel of Jesus Christ, in our preaching. Much like our last supper at the Wa-Duke, Prof. Gomes viewed the sermon as a table prepared for the parish that must be set with care and boldness, a sensual ravishment that not only nourished spirits, but also transformed lives. He never ceased reminding us that “people come to church to hear something from you that they cannot hear or find anywhere else. If what you are saying is what they can hear from Oprah or NPR, you might as well not say it.” The preached Word is not just homiletic pyrotechnics or fast-food moralisms; under PJ’s tutelage, we came to see it, truly, as a foretaste of the feast to come.

Nor did he let us forget the great responsibility placed on our shoulders as we climbed into the pulpit. “You must have faith,” he intoned, “that God has given you this Word, for this place, in this time, for these people, at this moment. Do not give us this nonsense of ‘I’d like to suggest to you...‘ or ‘its my opinion that...‘ or ‘I invite you to consider...‘ You are the preacher. This is the church. Proclaim with boldness the Gospel of Jesus Christ. If you don’t, how can you expect it of them?” PJ self-assurance and his confidence in the Word of Life enabled him to empower others to go and do likewise.

Such confidence, however, carried the additional responsibility of boldness. “On Easter Sunday,” he asked, “what do you think is on most people’s minds? Spring time and bunnies? New life? NO! They are thinking, ‘that blasted Jesus, just when you think he is gone, here he comes to bother us again! They are thinking, why must he continue to intrude on my life! And in such a fashion! No, what most people are thinking, and won’t express, is this: they don’t know if they believe in a real resurrection then, and are not sure they can believe in the same for themselves today. They are looking to you. Will you avoid this, or will you go there with them?” PJ taught us to be unafraid of speaking of proverbial elephants in the room, to take seriously people’s questions, not as excuses, but as genuine struggles, and ardent desire to believe, to hear someone believe enough to proclaim it, rather than postulate it. Preaching demands truthfulness and true faith - such a teaching has never failed me in my own ministry.

Putting our finger on such questions, and wrestling with them until we could find the confidence to believe God’s promises regarding them, occupied most of our time with PJ. I have never read the Bible so much in community - or so fruitfully, or enjoyably - as we did in our weekly seminar sessions. Those who were preaching would bring their texts and research to the table - always on difficult texts like Romans 13, Matthew 19, Joshua 23, and so forth - and for three hours, we would argue, challenge and imagine together not just how to preach these texts, but also how to hear God’s own answers to our own difficult questions. In four years of seminary, this has not happened in any other class. Yet here, the Word of God was truly living and active. PJ taught us to love the Bible, and the Gospel it contained.

As we all became comfortable and familiar with one another, humor became our general mode of discourse, and as anyone who knew him will attest, PJ was the master of sass. He often mocked his own baptist heritage, lamenting his hymnody’s obsession with “blood...its always about ‘the blood,‘ there is a ‘fountain of blood...‘ I wonder what all the women must be thinking each month.” He never tired of calling Karl Barth “old man river, who could have stood to write about fourteen less volumes of those blasted dogmatics of his.” And he never missed an opportunity to slip in self-promotion: after making some generally profound point, he’d wryly add, “if you don’t believe me, read my book.” He was a man who took himself entirely too seriously, but in a way that overflowed in endless chuckling and uplifting spirits.

It became the motto of our class to repeat PJ’s favorite baptist self-criticism. Remarking on the frequency of altar calls in services, he would suddenly sweep his arms into the air, instantaneously revert to preacher mode, and proclaim, “throw open the doors of the church!” Laughter ensued. Yet, this was precisely Peter Gomes‘ mission and purpose in all he did. Whether it was in performing the perfection of homiletic artistry, guiding hapless students through the strange world of scripture to make “preachers of them yet,” or in robbing the riches of the seminary to give to the poor who were his, PJ longed that the doors of the church would be flung wide open to all, and with them, the heights, depths, width and breadth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the riches of Holy Scripture.

Young preachers are often told that whenever you step into the pulpit, you bring with you every single pastor, teacher, and preacher who has ever influenced you, and that if you’re not careful, the claustrophobia will get to you. I am ashamed that I had not heard of PJ’s aneurism towards the end of last year, equally sad that it was not until the night of his death that I unwittingly offered prayers for his soul. And yet, I am thankful for the life he lived, the wisdom he shared, and the gift of the voice he gave to me. It is with great joy that I can now say, truly, that PJ will be with me in spirit in the pulpit, shouting with the whole communion of saints, “throw open the doors of the church!” If I can continue to heed his voice, my words may yet do justice to him, and to the Lord he now serves in the eternity that he made so vividly present by the words he gave us in his life.



(click here for a beautiful eulogy, chock full of PJ's humor, by William Willimon)

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

A Keg in the Desert Shall Spring Forth

We all know that when Satan tempted Jesus to turn stones into bread, the Son of God resolutely declined. But what if the Sneaky One had rejoindered, saying "fine - take these stones and from them make BEER?" The fact that he did not is proof that the devil is not a Lutheran, if Jesus was, he would have had a hell of a time finding a snappy Bible verse counter here.

Thankfully for salvation history, no suds were spilled that day in the desert. However, a non-denominational Iowa home-brewer is putting the party back in penance by undertaking the Lenten discipline of abstaining from all solid food except water and beer (see the story here). Aside from raging jealousy (alcohol is verboten for this blogger this season), I'm also quite intrigued. Eric Marrapodi of CNN, describes J. Wilson, the home-brewer and suds enthusiast whose blog's motto is "an ideal condition of harmony, beer and joy" as " not a suds-soaked frat boy, but a careful home brewer with an eye for history and a hope for a spiritual breakthrough." Nor is he the first to undertake such an endeavor:

"Three hundred or four hundred years ago, a group of Paulaner monks in a Bavarian region had made a stronger beer in a town called Einbeck and they called it bock. The monks started making a stronger beer, a double beer, called doppelbock," Sorensen said. "The story goes the monks would give up eating and literally would drink this 'liquid bread' to sustain them through their Lenten fast."

And apparently, the monks were on to something. In addition to imitating their imbibing habits, Wilson has also taken on other contours of their devotional discipline:

He said has been reading through the Old Testament book of Psalms, meeting with a pastor and tried to increase his prayer life as part of the spiritual elements of the fast. He also spent last weekend visiting an group of monks at Conception Abbey in Missouri.

He said there have been many little spiritual breakthroughs living like a fasting monk in the modern world.

"I think in the first few days there were lots of little tidbits of enlightenment. I felt like I was in a tunnel and really focused. You could live among the craziness in the world and be a focused Christian."

Definitely a discipline to ponder for future journeys with Jesus into the heart of the Lenten season. Apparently, Wilson is keeping a blog, Diary of a Part-Time monk, where you can follow his exploits.

In the meantime, if the devil offers you mug of frothing beer in the midst of your desert sojourn, perhaps the correct response would be to take it, chug it down, and then chuck the empty glass at the horny little bastard so you can contemplate in peace. Martin Luther would be proud, and, I like to think, so would the Lord.

Friday, April 1, 2011

Collecting Manna: Jeremie Begbie on Bach

What Bach's music provokes us to imagine...is a subtle relationship between natural and artistic beauty, where the two are not seen as fundamentally incompatible, but where natural beauty is the inhabited environment, trusted and respected, in which artistic beauty is born, even if born through sweat and struggle. The vision of making beauty is not one that sees the artist as striving for creation out of nothing, fashioning and foisting order where none is given, or pursuing a fetish for originalty...still less is it one of defiantly challenging God...

The vision is rather of the artist, as physical and embodied, set in the midst of a God-given world vibrant with a dynamic beauty of its own, not simply "there" like a brute fact to be escaped or violently abused, but there as a gift from God of overflowing beauty, a gift for us to interact with vigorously, form, and (in the face of distortion) transform and in this way fashion something as consistent and dazzlingly novel as the Goldberg Variations, art that can anticipate the beauty previewed and promised in Jesus Christ. (from "Created Beauty: The Witness of JS Bach" in Resounding Witness, ed Begbie et al (Eerdman's, 2011), 108)