Skip to main content

lessons from university - part one

One of the things that I have learned in my studies is that it is really important to give the professor what he or she is asking for. I have read a lot of papers where students have neglected to follow the instructions given for the assignment. No matter how good your writing is, if you don't answer the question or use the specified sources, it doesn't count for much. I have heard a few presentations by fellow students that were impressive in every way except that they were not what the professor had asked for. Unfortunate, perhaps, but you don't get points for being impressive. You get points for giving the professor what he or she asked for. Besides learning about the topic at hand, an assignment is given in order to help one develop the ability to identify what is required and to channel one's efforts towards that end. This is a very valuable skill and not as easy to do as it sounds. It also expands one's mind, heart, character, and knowledge in ways that would never be possible apart from a kind, but demanding mentor who pushes us in directions we would not naturally take ourselves. Left to our own devices, we often settle in mediocrity.

I have been reading Exodus, and this morning I was thinking about the words of the covenant that God gave to Moses and the Israelite people. Genesis starts with God wanting to establish an intimate and loving relationship with humans. This tenuous bond is broken again and again, and in Exodus 34, God gives instructions for living (the commands) as a way to bridge the gap - a concrete way for people to know what it looks like to walk with God. These words are to provide clarity and to give people a focus point for their energies. But in a pattern that is all too familiar, the Israelites prefer self-direction. They build their own version of god (golden calf) and direct their devotion towards it instead.

Many times, we think that we can worship God any way we want (we are free, after all), that we can serve God any way we want (usually at a time and place convenient to us), that we can live any way we want (we usually choose the most comfortable way), and as long as we live a reasonably good life, things will be okay. This is self-direction at its finest (or ugliest, depending on your point of view). It is like the student who ignores the instructions of the professor and goes ahead and does an assignment on whatever topic she likes and in whatever format she prefers. Not only is the assignment off-track, the motivation is wrong. The student is seeking to serve her own interests instead of surrendering herself to the learning process. She is loving herself instead of loving another. When the student is self-guided instead of teacher-guided, the learning will always be selective, and the student's blind spots will never be addressed. Learning is a humbling process. Being self-guided is not.

If I want to become God-guided instead of self-guided, I ask: What does he want? Have I taken the time to find out? Have I directed my energy towards pleasing him instead of making up my own syllabus? Have I surrendered to a learning process of his choosing instead of my own?
This is a photo from my part of town yesterday: frosty trees and beautiful blue sky.

Comments

Laura said…
OK, you have punched my midsection with this section. How true! We tend to go the path of least resistance in terms of our worship, our mission, our walk of obedience. What are the minimum requirements to get into heaven and will this be on the test?
Thanks Matte, for challenging my mediocrity! The life I now live needs to be a living sacrifice - not only giving up my rights/freedoms, but giving to God my devotion/attention/will.

Popular posts from this blog

what binds us together?

For the past few weeks, I have been reading a book by famed psychiatrist M. Scott Peck which chronicles his travels (together with his wife) through remote parts of the UK in search of prehistoric stones. The book is part travel journal, part spiritual musings, part psychology, and part personal anecdotes. A mixed bag, to be sure, and not always a winning combination. At one point, I considered putting the book aside, not finishing it, but then Peck started writing about community. He is no stranger to the concept. He has led hundreds of community-building workshops over the years, helped start a non-profit organisation dedicated to fostering community, and written a compelling book about the topic, one which greatly impacted me when I read it oh so long ago.[1]

In preparation for a course I am teaching next year, I have been doing quite a bit of study on unity and community. Once you start thinking about it, you see and hear evidence of it everywhere. (See my blog on the impact of b…

job hunting

I am on the hunt for a job. PhD in hand, I am a theologian for hire. The thing is, not a lot of places are hiring theologians these days, and if they are, they are usually looking for scholars with skills and experience outside my area of expertise. Today I found job opportunities for those knowledgeable in Religion, Race, and Colonialism, Philosophy and History of Religion, Islam and Society, Languages of Late Antiquity, Religion, Ethics, and Politics, and an ad for a Molecular Genetic Pathologist. Not one posting for a Dramatic Theologian with  a side order of Spirituality and a dash of Methodology.

I know, I know. My expectations are a bit unrealistic if I believe I will find an exact match for my particular skills. I know that job descriptions are wish lists to some extent, so no candidate is ever a perfect match. I also realize that one must adapt one's skill set according to the requirements of the job and be flexible. But there are so few jobs which come within ten or even…

building the church

Imagine two scenarios: 1) Give every person in the room a popsicle stick. Ask them to come together and put their sticks onto a table. Invariably, you end up with a random pile of sticks on a table. 2) Give every person in the room a popsicle stick. Show a picture of a popsicle stick bird feeder and ask people to come together and put their sticks on a table according to the picture. You will end up with the beginnings of a bird feeder on a table.

What is the difference between the two scenarios? In both, each person brought what they had and contributed it to the collective. However, in the first scenario, there were no guidelines, no plan, and no right or wrong way to pile the sticks. People came, placed their sticks on the table, and walked away. In the second scenario, people were given a plan to follow and as a result, something specific was built. Instead of walking away after they made their contribution, people huddled around the table to watch what was being built. Some were…