A friend and I started a conversation eight years ago that has progressed in no more than five or six sittings, but on it goes. Tonight, I extended the conversation, replying to an email of his that has floundered at the bottom of my inbox since 2008.
The conversation is based on a segment of G.K. Chesterton's book, Orthodoxy, where Chesterton contrasts the rationalist and the mystic. Somehow, over time, we adapted these figures into the scientist and the poet. The illustration still carries, and I felt like our last two exchanges, which span almost two years, were worth sharing. I'd wait for his response, but that might not happen for a very long time.
His Question
Well this is an odd email to be sure, but you and i are both of us odd people. In my time this morning i was pondering a problem that you brought to my attention many years ago. i think i was a freshman. the question before us was which is better, i believe. the poet or the scientist... here after all these years i have my answer... enjoy.
There were five men standing upon the farthest bank of a raging sea. The winds howled, the waves cast themselves upon the shore. They said one to another. We have henceforth explored all there is to explore on this dusty sod whereupon we have found ourselves to be trodding. Let us endeavor as best as we are able to explore this strange and terrible foe before which we stand.
The first of them crafted a simple craft and leaping into it began to sail away. Rejoicing in the height of the waves and the strength of the wind, he was carried away. The others watched him progress with amazement.
The second began swimming with all his might. He began to swim to the bottom and explore the depths of the sea. He rejoiced to see the crevices and corals that populated the great mass of life beyond what we call the liveable.
The others began to lament and mourn, for they lacked the courage to venture out as the others. There also arose between them no end of quarrel in regards to their purpose. They covenanted between themselves that they would not set begin their endeavors until they had resolved to follow the path of the first or the second.
By the by, they came to an odd understanding. Why should not they do both? Albeit, why should they not do both together, for as they began their labors they found that one of them had great skill in building a vessel, while another helped. Both rejoiced. The other soon discovered within himself the burning desire to invite others who wandered by to join them in their quest.
The day arrived when they were to embark. With great joy these three began their journey. Together delighting in the depths, the waves, and the currents. Rejoicing all the more that they went together.
He who has ears to hear let him hear. May one with wisdom be able to instruct me in which path is best.
well that's it. what do you think?
There were five men standing upon the farthest bank of a raging sea. The winds howled, the waves cast themselves upon the shore. They said one to another. We have henceforth explored all there is to explore on this dusty sod whereupon we have found ourselves to be trodding. Let us endeavor as best as we are able to explore this strange and terrible foe before which we stand.
The first of them crafted a simple craft and leaping into it began to sail away. Rejoicing in the height of the waves and the strength of the wind, he was carried away. The others watched him progress with amazement.
The second began swimming with all his might. He began to swim to the bottom and explore the depths of the sea. He rejoiced to see the crevices and corals that populated the great mass of life beyond what we call the liveable.
The others began to lament and mourn, for they lacked the courage to venture out as the others. There also arose between them no end of quarrel in regards to their purpose. They covenanted between themselves that they would not set begin their endeavors until they had resolved to follow the path of the first or the second.
By the by, they came to an odd understanding. Why should not they do both? Albeit, why should they not do both together, for as they began their labors they found that one of them had great skill in building a vessel, while another helped. Both rejoiced. The other soon discovered within himself the burning desire to invite others who wandered by to join them in their quest.
The day arrived when they were to embark. With great joy these three began their journey. Together delighting in the depths, the waves, and the currents. Rejoicing all the more that they went together.
He who has ears to hear let him hear. May one with wisdom be able to instruct me in which path is best.
well that's it. what do you think?
My Response
I actually haven't forgotten about this email. It slowly sank, much like I expect the 2nd person did, to the bottom of my inbox, where it has remained until now.
Without too much effort, I assume you perceive a poet's bias on my part. If so, then you are correct. That said, I also think that, depending on the reader, one could perceive both groups in either role and find very adequate ways to justify their view. I will thus make my best attempt to justify mine.
Chesterton writes that the poet, upon lifting his head through the clouds, seeks only to set his head into the heavens. The rationalist, by contrast, seeks to fit the heavens into his head, and it is his head, then, that splits.
To practically illustrate this point, I will illuminate a conversation I overheard not 10 minutes ago at Starbucks. A young man and a young woman were having a rather deep conversation, and it became quickly apparent that he liked her and wanted to pursue a relationship. She is a Christ follower; he is not, though he had claimed to be in prior times. She held her ground well, and asked great questions. I think she was semi-formally trained in apologetic processes. His perspective was that God couldn't be believed because his existence couldn't be proven. The poor guy seemed to believe a lot of good things that aren't far off from the truth, and we both know how damaging the American church can be to inquisitive people on the edge of faith.
His frustration was evident, but his thought processes were underlaid with a layer of self-righteousness. He wanted to open up God-related questions of discovery, but all the while put an impetus of hard proof on belief, as if non-existence was any more provable. The point is, he was unwilling to accept what he could not fully understand. He seems to have lived life for some time in effort to fit God into his understanding, and when that plan broke down, he moved to a more ambiguous paradigm that requires little effort to understand because it is comparatively uncomplicated. But, as I hope he will learn in time, though his new paradigm is uncomplicated, it is also very narrow, and cannot lead to lasting satisfaction.
I acknowledge that, among the God's better qualities is his ability to confuse the poop out of me. I don't understand the man and I never will. He doesn't want me to; not all that well, anyway. I think God just wants me to understand that he's really big, he loves me, and he's not one to be tested or tamed. He is wild by my perspective. But I imagine perfection is quite wild and rogue - rather avant-garde to an imperfect person who doesn't know any better. What God does give me, however, is an ability to exist amidst his wildness. The Bible, I am convinced, is not meant to answer all my questions or give me a guidebook for life. Rather, God has provided me a story of his character and love, enough that I can relate to his innate wonder and goodness, even in the midst of all I can't understand or control.
When I buy into all of that, I am best equipped not only to associate with him, but also to share and develop communion among others so inclined. The only way such a community can happen, however, is when the parts constituting the whole are, in some capacity, free of a paradigm that demands complete understanding. In doing so, the community can move forward in a true path of discovery; not for answers, but for the enjoyment of a God who, though very wild, is also very good.
I hope my answer was worth the wait.
Post a Comment