Listening to: Schubert: Symphony No.9
Hi everyone. In case you didn't know I've been away for a week in the Lake District, so sorry for the blog-silence. I had a good time, and read a fair bit which should mean lots of blogging coming up, but I probably won't have time to get any thoughts down so maybe it won't.
Last night I started a book of sermons by Helmut Thielicke on Jesus' Parables. By way of a preface he discusses the idea of the parables as "God's picturebook", and how the world can also function in this way. It has some baring on one of the niggling thoughts of this year - the gospel in creation - so I thought I'd post it at length:
For anybody who does not see the world from the point of view from which Jesus Christ, the teller of the parables, sees it, the whole profusion of parabolic images turns into a confused labyrinth; for him the doors are shut instead of opened. Are the birds of the air and the lilies of the field really nothing more than pointers to the Lord of creation, who cares for all his creatures? Or are they not also figures of a world of nature that is dumb, nature that is silent to me, that goes on its way, careless of my concerns and my loneliness. Are the stars just symbols of an eternal order or are they not also a sign of orderly processes that go on quite indifferent to my lot? May they not chill me with the cold of cosmic space rather than make me feel the pulse-beat of a Father's heart? And one thing more; may not the picture language of this world lead us to gods and idols instead of to God? Do not all the pseudo absolutes and all the isms, the hubristic attempts of philosophy to attribute to a single phenomenon - whether it be spirit, matter, or an idea - the prerogatives of ultimate reality - do not all these have their source in this same attempt to interpret the picture language of this world and derive its favorite symbols from it?
[...] In the parables of Jesus the opposite way is taken. He first shows us his Father and points to the "heart of all things." Then from there the things themselves gain their meaning. We start with God and then learn to discover the world anew; but anybody who tries to discover God through the world sees only the distorted reflections of created things, a reflex of his own mind.
That is the reason why the picturebook of created things is in itself of no use at all. Indeed, it confines and limits us to this introverted creation. The mystery of our temporal and eternal destiny is disclosed to us only in the great textbook of God - the Word in which he speaks to us and tells us who he is and what his purposes are. But it is of the mercy of his condescension that in doing so he employs the images and figures of our world. And these images are helpful and comforting; they find us where we are at home. They are so homely that they make us feel at home and give us the certainty that God is not in some remote, inaccessible beyond, but that he gives to everything around us a relationship that leads to his heart, not only grain and fruit, but also the far country and the father's house, summer and winter, lamps and night, money and clothing, weddings and death.
When we read the parables we are surrounded by the scenery of a world that is very near, our world. But everything depends upon our finding the right entrance from which their meaning is discovered [...] The heart of all things discloses the things themselves; but the things themselves do not reveal the heart.
(pp.11-12, The Waiting Father: Sermons on the Parables of Jesus)
As an aside, does anyone feel that this kind of "God is the key"/"God must be the starting point" argument you find in Barth, Forsyth and so many others often seems to assume that if you just start with the right intellectual starting point all will work out ok? I.e. dump natural theology and start with the concept of the Crucified Lord and all becomes clear.
Perhaps this misses the need for repentance and faith and for the work of the Holy Spirit. Only with the Gospel preached as wisdom of God, accompanied by the Spirit, and grasped by faith, will the world open up to us.
PS for an fascinating story about the encounters of Helmut Thielicke, Karl Barth and Billy Graham have a read of this post.
I guess the hope is that 'beginning with the crucified Lord' *is* repentance and faith. It is (or it ought to be!) a giant metanoia (change of mind) and a switch of allegiance. But yes if it was only 'assent' and not 'trust' we'd have a problem. But Barth (for one) is definitely not arguing for the gospel as just one more worldview whose explanatory power makes it preferable. It is *itself* a power made effectual by the Spirit which demands that we begin at the cross. It's not that we decide the cross explains things best. It's that the gospel overpowers us and commands us to begin again. The word of the cross chooses us - we don't choose it, sort of thing.
ReplyDeleteYou're probably right as usual Glen. I'm just being overly suspicious I guess.
ReplyDeleteWell no - even if certain theologians avoid the trap - many, many don't. So you're right to be suspicious.
ReplyDeleteI remember reading about a journalist interviewing Barth who asked Barth why he followed a christocentric method. Barth was horrified. He said he was not following a christocentric method at all. He was only trying to seek after Christ. The thought of making Christ into a 'method' appalled him. And I think that sort of distinction is so important to uphold - and many don't. So be suspicious by all means.