Longing & Vocation

One consistent theme that has run through all of our readings has been that of longing. Everyone feels longing of some sort, at least when they are young, although they may suppress it as they grow older. All of our longings have a certain sense of nostalgia or needing to belong. Cornelius Plantinga Jr. puts it this way: “We keep wanting to 'get back', or to 'get in'” (World 5). C. S. Lewis describes this phenomenon in a similar way. “We want something else which can hardly be put into words—to be united with the beauty we see, to pass into it, to receive it into ourselves, to bathe in it, to become part of it” (Glory 8). Lewis’ words emphasize a unique aspect of this longing – the inability to define it. Often times, we cannot describe exactly what we are longing for in feeling this deep emotional pull.

One way that longing is expressed is through art, through music especially. Often when listening to a beautiful song, the dominant emotion conveyed by the music is that of longing. It is natural for art to display our longings, because they are often somewhat vague feelings, and emotion is the medium of art. Lewis describes “the inconsolable secret in each of you…the secret we cannot hide and cannot tell though we desire to do both”(Glory 3) These feelings, difficult to describe in words, can be more easily told through creations of art.

All of our longings are directed at some object, even if we cannot define what it is. We all long for something. As this is the case, the question must be asked, are there certain longings that are good, and others bad? Another way of putting it is; are there certain desires for things that are always bad, and others that are always good? Lewis addresses this when he says that, “Strictly speaking, there are no such things as good and bad impulses.” (Christianity 7) What he means by this is that an impulse, or desire, is not inherently good or bad. It is the context in which it is played out that gives it moral worth. For example, the desire for beauty, a good thing, can be destructive. It can lead to eating disorders and a preoccupation with oneself. This same desire, however, can also lead to a greater appreciation of the qualities of others and of the magnificence of God’s creation. In the end, the pursuit of beauty is the pursuit of God, because all that is beautiful is so because it reflects the beauty of God in some way. This pursuit only becomes evil when it is twisted away from its proper end. At their roots, all longings are good, because they all come out of our nature, but they all become twisted by sin, so that there is both good and evil that comes from every longing

Whenever our desires are fulfilled, inevitably we find that we are not completely satisfied. We may find satisfaction for a short time, but there is no lasting fulfillment. The longings return, because we long for more than this world can offer us. Lewis says, “Do what they will, then, we remain conscious of a desire which no natural happiness will satisfy” (Glory 4). All is not lost though. As Lewis points out, “A man’s physical hunger does not prove that that man will get any bread; he may die of starvation on a raft in the Atlantic. But surely a man’s hunger does prove that he comes of a race which repairs its body by eating and inhabits a world where eatable substances exist” (Glory 4). The very fact that we experience these longings points to there being a proper object of our longing that will fully satisfy it. The longings themselves, as well as the intermediary objects of desire, point to their final end. Lewis puts it best when he says:
“These things—the beauty, the memory of our own past—are good images of what we really desire; but if they are mistaken for the thing itself they turn into dumb idols, breaking the hearts of their worshippers. For they are not the thing itself; they are only the scent of a flower we have not found, the echo of a tune we have not heard, news from a country we have never yet visited” (Glory 3).
The true fulfillment of our desires shines through all the earthly things that we desire, which is why we seek them so fervently thinking that they are the answer. The glow coming through this world is shalom, or heaven. One day, when we are perfectly at peace with God, we will experience the true fulfillment of these longings. In the meantime, though, what are we to do with our intermediate desires? They cannot satisfy us, so we should not focus on them exclusively, but they must be recognized for what they are - expressions of our desire for Christ's Kingdom to be on Earth as in Heaven – and realize that they cannot be done away with. The answer to this dilemma comes in the form of vocation.

Vocation and longing are two important concepts that are not often linked, though they are integrally related. In Engaging God's World, Cornelius Plantinga Jr. quotes Fredrick Beuchner saying, “the place God calls you to is the place where your deep gladness and the world's deep hunger meet” (World, 118). Our longings and our vocation are related. Each of us longs for the same thing in one sense, because only perfect harmony with God, or shalom, will truly satisfy all our desires, but each of our longings for shalom are expressed, or personified, in different ways. Some people’s deepest longings are for good relationships, and they may be called to be peacemakers, possibly as counselors, or as a good friend or mother. There are others who long for knowledge, and they will probably be called to teach or expand our understanding of the world. Personally, I long for good built-environments, so I am studying architecture. No matter what the expression our longings find, it is our duty to work to bring this world closer to shalom, through the means of our vocation.

If our work is an expression of our longings, then our attitude towards work must be quite different from the typical, dreary mentality of merely getting through the work day so that you can get on with the meaningful part of your life. Dorothy Sayers addresses this change of attitude in an essay titled Why Work. She says of work, “It is, or it should be, the full expression of the worker’s faculties, the thing in which he finds spiritual, mental and bodily satisfaction, and the medium in which he offers himself to God” (Work 6). When we work, we should be expressing our longings by doing, to the best of our ability. In this way, we are bringing this world closer to shalom, the state in which everything will be perfect. We will never reach our goal on this earth, but it is our duty and privilege to practice, or play make-believe, until the day in which we will experience the reality of a perfect world that will fulfill every longing.

As Christians, this is an imperative that we reform our understanding of work, because it relates to our witness to the world. When speaking about a carpenter, Sayers says, “What the Church should be telling him is this: that the very first demand that his religion makes upon him is that he should make good tables” (Work 8). Jesus would have made worse tables because He was more spiritual than any of the other carpenters he was around. Sayers putting it quite starkly, says that we have “Forgotten that a building must be good architecture before it can be a good church; that a painting must be well painted before it can be a good sacred picture; that work must be good work before it can call itself God’s work” (Work 8). Sayers’ point is that if we are working for the Lord, to glorify Him, we should not be turning out anything less than the best our efforts can produce.

All of us naturally long for beauty, or a complete family, or something we cannot define. It is an innate part of our humanity, because we were made for communion with God, and we have lost it through sin. Our longings point us back to God, but they can also lead us astray. In our Christian lives, we live out our longings through our vocations, which is the intersection of working for the glory of God and fulfilling our longings by trying to bring shalom to this earth.






Works Cited

Lewis, C. S. Weight of Glory. http://www.calvin.edu/~pribeiro/DCM-Lewis-2009/Lewis/weighofglory.pdf. Web. 10 Jan. 2011.
---. Mere Christianity. http://www.calvin.edu/~pribeiro/DCM-Lewis-2009/Lewis/MERE%20CHRISTIANIT-%201-4.doc. Web 12 Jan. 2011.
Plantinga, Cornelius Jr. Engaging God's World: A Reformed Vision of Faith, Learning, and Living. Eerdmans, 2002. Print.
Sayers, Dorothy. Why Work. www.faith-at-work.net/Docs/WhyWork.pdf. Web. 22 Jan. 2011.

Divine Humility

The Problem of Pain is an excellent book, and the chapter contains so much that it would be impossible to summarize, in this short of an essay, so I will not try. There was one section though, that really struck me. It is when Lewis is discussing divine humility. He says, “He will have us even though we have shown that we prefer everything else to Him, and come to Him because there is 'nothing better' now to be had.” Even when we come to Him as a last resort, or when given no other option, He still saves us.

Lewis' point in this section is that God uses pain to bring us to the realization that we need him. He accepts us coming to him because we realize we have “nothing better” than Him. We can complain all we want about the pain we go through, but God knows of the comfortable, that “The life to themselves and their families stands between them and the recognition of their need; He makes that life less sweet to them.” Our complacency blinds us to our need for Him, so He takes away our complacency. This is part of the answer to human pain. It exists to be God's “megaphone to rouse a deaf world.”

The wonderful side of this though, is that He does not required a good motive from us. He accepts those who come to Him because he is the alternative to Hell, as the last resort, that same as those who come to Him because they believe He is truth. Lewis says, “it is a poor thing, to strike our colours to God when the ship is going down under us; a poor thing to come to Him as a resort, to offer up 'our own' when it is no longer worth keeping”. He goes on, “If God were proud He would hardly have us on such terms: but He is not proud, He stoops to conquer”. That is the beauty of divine humility. Even in our admission of need we fall short, but God is gracious. 

Why Work

With no offense meant to Lewis, this piece by Dorothy Sayers is far and away my favorite reading of this class. The reason is simple, she expresses my longing and calling and frustrations better than I could ever have. All the while making them clearer and more distinct. I honestly can barely sit still from excitement.

I am studying architecture, and I love all things related to design. Maybe too much. I get excited over well tailored jeans, or a solid, well proportioned fork. I try to avoid Walmart or Meijers as much as possible because I cannot stand the cheapness. I think it would disgust Sayers as well. She says, “We should ask of an enterprise, not 'will it pay?' but 'is it good?'; of a man, not 'what does he make?' but 'what is his work worth?'; of goods, not 'Can we induce people to buy them?' but 'are they useful things well made?'”

Sayers argues forcefully that as christians, we should care deeply about the quality of work. The image she presents is that of a craftsman lovingly creating beauty, not for profit, but for the sake of the work. It is not that the worker should not be compensated, it rather that the motivation for work should not be the reward of profit, but the work itself. She says, “So long as Society provides the worker with a sufficient return in real wealth to enable him to carry on the work properly, then he has his reward. For his work is the measure of his life, and his satisfaction is found in the fulfillment of his own nature, and in contemplation of the perfection of his work.”

This is the opposite of how we moderns or postmoderns view work. For us, profit justifies the work, not the other way around. I am reminded of the medieval belief that banking was sinful because the banker did not produce any goods, so he must simply be leaching money off of those who are actually producing. I do not think that this is a correct or just view; banking is just as noble a trade as farming is when it is done well. The view though, that the product of one's work is more important than the profit one receives is illuminating.

I think that the importance put by Sayers on quality and beauty is key. If we really did everything as if we were doing for God, we would not settle for shoddy, ugly work. It is sad that we have “Forgotten that a building must be good architecture before it can be a good church; that a painting must be well painted before it can be a good sacred picture; that work must be good work before it can call itself God’s work.”

Vocation

I found Plantinga's chapter on vocation to be a difficult one in a way. The material was covered well in Prelude, so I understood his points about vocation, and I agree with them. My difficulty was that the entire section on vocation and education seemed to be a plug for christian liberal arts colleges in general and Calvin in particular. Now, I do not have a problem with plugs, but it did not seem to fit the message of the rest of chapter.

As I understand it, vocation means that we should serve God in all areas of our lives, trying to redeem every area of the world to bring the kingdom of God to earth as much as possible. In the section on vocation, Plantinga says that the Christian going to a secular school, “may expect to stand against these ideas without caving in to them and without hardening into pious anti-intellectuals. If so, they expect a lot.” Fair enough, being a Christian in a hostile environment is hard, but then he goes on to say that “if they expect to develop a mature Christian philosophy of life without the help of their professors – in fact, with the hindrance of some of their professors – they expect even more.” As students, we cannot be expected to maintain strong Christian beliefs with out our professors holding our hands? While I am going to a Christian college, and I do think that is the best thing for me, I am not expecting my professors to guide my Christian beliefs. To be honest, I know more dedicated, thoughtful, even intellectual christians that went to secular universities than Christian ones. I do not mean this in any way to denigrate Christian education, because I think it is a great thing, but to say that a well developed christian coming out of a secular school is some sort of miracle seems misguided at the least.

How are we to redeem education if we cannot participate in non christian institutions as students? C. S. Lewis himself was a student at a secular college, though he was not a christian at the time. Despite this, I have never read anything where he warns against students studying under non christian professors.

Man or Rabbit

I liked this reading. Mostly because it allows me to talk about one of things that most infuriates me, that being evangelism for the wrong reasons. It might be more accurate to say evangelism of the wrong thing. What infuriates me is that in much of modern evangelism, we talk about what Jesus has done for us, or how He has a wonderful plan for your life, or how he wants to bless you, but we do not say that we should believe simply because it is true. Lewis says that, “If Christianity is untrue, then no honest man will want to believe it, however helpful it might be: if it is true, every honest man will want to believe it, even if it gives him no help at all.”

You can talk about how your mother has a wonderful plan for your life, our what LSD did for you, but that is not at all a reason to listen to your mother or to use LSD. Lewis says, speaking of whether Christianity is true, that “Isn't it obviously the job of every man (that is a man and not a rabbit) to try to find out which [is true]”. In God and the Dock, Lewis says "I didn’t go to religion to make me happy. I always knew a bottle of Port would do that. If you want a religion to make you feel really comfortable, I certainly don’t recommend Christianity." Wanting good life is a horrible reason for believing in Christ. I do not think that having the wrong motives will keep you from Christ's grace any more that any other sin, but that does not make it right.

Sanctification will give us better reasons. Lewis as always puts it well; “We shall bleed and squeal as the handfuls of fur come out; and then, surprisingly, we shall find underneath it all a thing we have never yet imagined: a real Man, an ageless god, a son of God, strong, radiant, wise, beautiful, and drenched in joy.” To say that Christ is a means to an end, whether it is money, or social standing, or being a good person is despicable. I am as much a hypocrite in this as anyone, and I have no excuse. I hope that as I mature I will become more of a man and less like a rabbit. I am sorry if this post sounded like a rant.

The Inner Ring

In The Inner Ring, C. S. Lewis talks about what we now call cliques. He calls them inner rings. An true inner ring is characterized by the desire for exclusivity, not a common purpose. A common purpose is what characterizes true friends, so they will be exclusive to a certain extent because not will have the same interests. Lewis says, “the difference is that the secrecy is accidental, and its exclusiveness a by-product, and no one was led thither by the lure of the esoteric: for it is only four or five people who like one another meeting to do things that they like.”

Lewis talks at length on how we all naturally desire to get in to the inner ring. There are a range of reasons, for this, from wanting to be needed, to simply feel superior to those who are still outside. Whatever the reason, though, Lewis says that nothing good can come of it. In fact, he says that, “Of all the passions, the passion for the Inner Ring is most skillful in making a man who is not yet a very bad man do very bad things.” This is the bogey man of peer pressure that our parents always warned us about. When someone who is in says everyone is doing it, then how can you say no if you also want in.

I have moved around a lot. Whether it is because of this, or for some other reason, I have felt the desire to get in to the inner ring a little differently than I think most others do. I could be wrong though, and this might be more common than I thought. While the desire to get into a certain ring is there, and it is strong, I have always wanted to be part of more than just one ring. To be outside and alone is bad, but to be in and suffocated by lack of variety is also.

In both cases, the key seems to be to search for true friendships. “The quest of the Inner Ring will break your hearts unless you break it. But if you break it, a surprising result will follow. If in your working hours you make the work your end, you will presently find yourself all unawares inside the only circle in your profession that really matters.” He who would gain his life must lose it. This seems like the task of a lifetime. I know I am nowhere close to breaking the desire for the inner ring.

The Wrong Reading

First off, I misread the syllabus so I thought we had to read the whole book, rather than just the chapter on Eros, so I wasn't quite able to get all the way through it. Because of that though, I read the chapter on Affection, and I think it really helps to understand what Lewis says about Affection when looking at Eros. Eros is almost always intertwined with Affection, which can make them hard to tell apart sometimes.

Affection is the love that a mother has for her offspring, but it is also that of the offspring for it's parents. It is more than that though. It is also the love that draws to completely different people together. It is the love of the familiar. Affection is somewhat hard to define because it is a “diffuse love”.

On Eros and Affection, Lewis says,”There is indeed a peculiar charm, both in friendship and in Eros, about those moments when Appreciative love lies, as it were, curled up asleep, and the mere ease of and ordinariness of the relationship (free as solitude, yet neither is alone) wraps us round.” The picture here is of domestic tranquility and the familiarity that allows you to be completely at ease. He goes on, “No need to talk. No need to make love. No needs at all except perhaps to stir the fire.” This is not Eros, this is not the love that “enters like... an invader, taking over and reorganizing”. Affection is different from Eros, but it is as much a part of a lasting good relationship as Eros is.

Lewis describes this, saying, “As for erotic love, I can imagine nothing more disagreeable than to experience it for more than a very short time without this homespun clothing of affection.” I think you can see this in the difference between people who are dating, or newlyweds, and those who have been happily married for decades. The first often fit the of lover pining away at the thought of their beloved, while the long married couple might not even talk to each other often, but it is because the depth and familiarity of their love means they don't have to.