What with the trendy Eastern-Orthodox leanings of the “Emergent” church movement conversation (evidenced by a disdain for propositional truth, an emphasis on social activism, and a bent toward all things mystical), I found this passage in Abraham Kuyper’s Lectures on Calvinism
The [so-called] wise men of our generation maintain that religion has to retire from the precinct of the human intellect. It must seek to express itself either by means of the mystical feelings, or else by means of the practical will [read: good deeds]. Mystical and ethical inclinations are hailed with enthusiasm, in the domain of religion, but in that same domain the intellect, as leading to metaphysical hallucinations, must be muzzled. Metaphysics and Dogmatics are increasingly tabooed, and Agnosticism is ever more loudly acclaimed as the solution of the Great enigma. On the rivers of sentiment and of feeling, navigation is made duty-free, and ethical activity is becoming the only touch-stone for testing the religious gold but Metaphysics is avoided as drowning us in a swamp. Whatsoever announces itself with the pretension of an axiomatic dogma, is rejected as irreligious contraband. And although that same Christ whom these very scholars honor as a religious genius has taught us most emphatically: “Thou shalt love God, not only with all thy heart and with all thy strength, but also with all thy mind,” yet they, on the contrary, venture to dismiss our mind, or intellect, as unfit for use, in this holy domain, and as not fulfilling the requirements of a religious organ.
From Lecture 2: Calvinism and Religion, given in 1898. The rampant anti-intellectualism and that wearisome ringing of the anti-theology/anti-doctrine gong are further proof that we have forgotten that we have minds for Christ, not just hearts. In fact, we can’t have one without the other. Faith, love, hope, joy–these are not uncaused, arbitrary emotions: they are responses to truth, to historical facts, to reality. We simply cannot obey the Greatest Commandment without our minds and hearts both fully engaged and responding to the real, historical person of Jesus Christ as revealed in Scripture. Anything less just isn’t Christianity…
gmail.com
12 responses so far ↓
1 Donnie Hiltz, III // Apr 1, 2006 at 4:28 pm
Hear, hear!
2 Laur // Apr 1, 2006 at 4:32 pm
so what befuddles me is what to do with “strength…”
3 Aron // Apr 1, 2006 at 5:04 pm
I’m not sure, Laur. Maybe the point of the “with all your…” phrases is less about giving us a checklist, and more about emphasizing that our love ought to be from the totality of our being (heart, mind, and soul), to the highest degree (all of our strength), and to the exclusion of all else (all of our [heart|mind|soul]). I’m pretty sure he didn’t mean that we should all become power-lifters for Christ. Even more sure, however, is how much I dig that you wrote “befuddles.” Classic.
4 Laur // Apr 1, 2006 at 11:19 pm
hahahahaha. i’m glad you appreciate my rather curious vocabulary. :)
the reason that this is an issue near and dear to my heart is because my little sister is a division I basketball player and i am the family invalid. ok, well, i’m not really an invalid, but i do have chronic, apparently undiagnosable back problems. anyway, the bottom line is that i know for sure that one thing God wants us to honor Him with is our bodies, but it’s hard to figure out what that looks like, even given your most helpful comment on the subject.
thoughts?
sorry if that was more than you cared to know…
5 Laur // Apr 1, 2006 at 11:20 pm
oh, btw, excellent book on loving the Lord with all your mind is out there by gene edward veith. it’s actually a pretty significant source for my book…
6 Aron // Apr 2, 2006 at 12:21 am
Well, whatever the Lord in His wisdom may have withheld from you regarding brawn, he certainly seems to have made up for in brains. And, in my estimation, you’ve far from buried that talent. Your persevering love for the Lord, especially in the face of whatever difficulties your back may bring you, gives him a measure of glory most people will never have the opportunity to give… “For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake…” (Philippians 1:29, ESV)
Thanks for the book recommendation — I’ll check it out. There seem to be a few of those out recently: “Fit Bodies, Fat Minds,” “Full Gospel, Fractured Minds,” etc…
7 The Flim Flam Man // Apr 4, 2006 at 2:44 pm
Would you let me know what your source is for defining Eastern-Orthodox and emergent as similair paths? I thought I knew what Eastern Orthodox and emergent meant, guess not! From what I knew, or thought I knew ‘never the twain shall meet’.
8 Aron // Apr 4, 2006 at 3:26 pm
That conclusion falls out from an assessment of 1) the writings of some of the Emergent folks (e.g., Miller, McLaren) themselves; 2) the necessary byproducts of Modernism (well-expressed by Kuyper, and more recently Schaeffer) and post-modernism upon which the Emergent conversation stands; 3) the philosophy of the EO church, i.e., all is mystery, we can’t ever do justice to God’s majesty with human thoughts or words, so (basically) “why try?” - let’s stick to the mystical (the recent Theology Unplugged radio series on “Orthodoxy” had a brief section on this).
Please let me know if you think I’ve overstated or misrepresented the case.
9 The Flim Flam Man // Apr 4, 2006 at 3:45 pm
Not at all. Might be another case of same terms being used for different definitions is all. I thought the only Eastern Orthodox church was the one that split from the RCC in 1054. Great Schism, Latin Catholic & Greek Orthodox history.
My bad.
10 Aron // Apr 4, 2006 at 4:02 pm
Yep, that’s the EOC I mean.
11 The Flim Flam Man // Apr 4, 2006 at 5:04 pm
Serious?!?! The emergent movement is allying itself with the Greeks?!?! Where’s the twain, where’s the twain!!! That is a huge surprise. I thought they (GOC/EOC) were more about knowing God through faith & reason than through mysticism. I’m out of the loop man.
12 Aron // Apr 4, 2006 at 5:34 pm
No, no–not officially, there just seem to be very similar tendancies in both groups. But again, I could be wrong.
Leave a Comment