At One by Grace
Dear Eugene,
We talk about the doctrine Sola gratia, Grace Alone, that we could comprehend God's saving act only and entirely as a favor unmerited, a mercy undeserved, a gift given out by the Holy Spirit according alone to Jesus Christ's redemptive sacrifice.
But isn't it also true, as I looked around even within just the small confine of my study room, about everything else in God's creation? What have we done to deserve our next breath?
The other day I was walking through a big mall--I like to park far away from the library to make every outing a pilgrimage (and give myself an excuse to excurse to the bookstore)--and I saw couples walking hand-in-hand, some lovingly, some habitually, some reluctantly. Many held together with only a weak magnetic pull, not enough for touching each others, good enough for acknowledging there is an other.
And I thought, How many of us swaggering man could swagger no more if not for the women who are there for us in spite of our swaggering? (I will let the opposite sex reciprocate her vice-versa.)
Therein lies the deep irony: If we are to say our self cannot live without our significant other, we are to lay an unbearable burden on a mere mortal ("It Ain't Me Babe!"); but if we are to say "I can live without you," we are to undermine the oft-tested trust and fragile interdependence that is a big part of the relationship and no small part of our self.
We are running the risk of losing something by holding onto it, holding onto something by risking to lose it. Catch 22 and a half. If we can only fully figure out what that half is.
I am sure there are theological formulations to somewhat answer to this conundrum; I have a few running in my head now. You know how bad I am sometimes in being too good at mapping out the unchartable, desecrating the sacred.
I have only an image to share (of which I am sure you know I am not the inventor). I see a Trinitarian Dance, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit dancing hand-in-hand, so to speak, lovingly, yes habitually, but never reluctantly, always fully-attentively, all-consumingly, wholeheartedly, giving and receiving from one another easily and ceaselessly, forcefully but never forcibly, always in perfect harmony, always at One.
And we are invited to join the Dance, not because we are dancers even half-decent, but because by grace alone God extends his invitation, one that we would instinctively resist, recalling our fumbling steps in the past, disbelieving the invitation was addressed to us and not someone "better," with a physique more ready, dancing shoes more polished, hands cleaner, heart more unwavering.
You know the English word "atonement" was invented by the Bible translator William Tyndale, because at the time of translation there was not a generally accepted native English word to convey the meaning of "reconciliation." Atonement literally means "at-one-ment."
God's invitation for us to dance at one with Him is to reconcile His people, His creation to Himself.
Learning to dance in step, Alex
We talk about the doctrine Sola gratia, Grace Alone, that we could comprehend God's saving act only and entirely as a favor unmerited, a mercy undeserved, a gift given out by the Holy Spirit according alone to Jesus Christ's redemptive sacrifice.
But isn't it also true, as I looked around even within just the small confine of my study room, about everything else in God's creation? What have we done to deserve our next breath?
The other day I was walking through a big mall--I like to park far away from the library to make every outing a pilgrimage (and give myself an excuse to excurse to the bookstore)--and I saw couples walking hand-in-hand, some lovingly, some habitually, some reluctantly. Many held together with only a weak magnetic pull, not enough for touching each others, good enough for acknowledging there is an other.
And I thought, How many of us swaggering man could swagger no more if not for the women who are there for us in spite of our swaggering? (I will let the opposite sex reciprocate her vice-versa.)
Therein lies the deep irony: If we are to say our self cannot live without our significant other, we are to lay an unbearable burden on a mere mortal ("It Ain't Me Babe!"); but if we are to say "I can live without you," we are to undermine the oft-tested trust and fragile interdependence that is a big part of the relationship and no small part of our self.
We are running the risk of losing something by holding onto it, holding onto something by risking to lose it. Catch 22 and a half. If we can only fully figure out what that half is.
I am sure there are theological formulations to somewhat answer to this conundrum; I have a few running in my head now. You know how bad I am sometimes in being too good at mapping out the unchartable, desecrating the sacred.
I have only an image to share (of which I am sure you know I am not the inventor). I see a Trinitarian Dance, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit dancing hand-in-hand, so to speak, lovingly, yes habitually, but never reluctantly, always fully-attentively, all-consumingly, wholeheartedly, giving and receiving from one another easily and ceaselessly, forcefully but never forcibly, always in perfect harmony, always at One.
And we are invited to join the Dance, not because we are dancers even half-decent, but because by grace alone God extends his invitation, one that we would instinctively resist, recalling our fumbling steps in the past, disbelieving the invitation was addressed to us and not someone "better," with a physique more ready, dancing shoes more polished, hands cleaner, heart more unwavering.
You know the English word "atonement" was invented by the Bible translator William Tyndale, because at the time of translation there was not a generally accepted native English word to convey the meaning of "reconciliation." Atonement literally means "at-one-ment."
God's invitation for us to dance at one with Him is to reconcile His people, His creation to Himself.
Learning to dance in step, Alex
Comments
Post a Comment