On the Incarnation

One of the few books that appeared on both the Renovare Top 25 list and the listpeople submitted is Athanasius’ “On the Incarnation”. I don’t plan on reading and blogging about every book on these lists. However, I found it hard to resist a book called “On the Incarnation” less than a week before Christmas. What better time to consider the incarnation?
 

There is a great contrast between how Athanasius considers the incarnation and how we will celebrate it this week. For a book on the incarnation, there is almost no mention of what we consider the “Christmas story”. In roughly 90 pages, Athanasius never mentions shepherds or angels, he never talks about a snarky innkeeper or a Messiah-holding manger. It is not that Athanasius does not believe in the veracity of these historic events. In fact, the one element he does talk about several times is the virgin birth. Athanasius does not focus on the dramatic events of the Bethlehem night; instead he focuses on why God came in flesh. Athanasius writes, “The Lord did not come to make a display. He came to heal and to teach suffering men. For one who wanted to make a display the thing would have been just to appear and dazzle the beholders. But for Him Who came to heal and to teach the way was not merely to dwell here, but to put Himself at the disposal of those who needed Him.”

Instead of focusing on the displays and events of a singular starry night, Athanasius understands the incarnation through the resurrection and the crucifixion. The significance of incarnation manifests itself in God’s love for humanity that results in God making God’s self known through the life, teaching, and miracles of Jesus, so that all people might be saved.

During this Christmas season, may we not be overcome by the dazzle and the displays, but remember the bigger picture of who Jesus is and what Jesus came to do.

My Own Personal Top 25

In my previous post I listed the 25 books that people sent in as the most transformative in their Christian journeys. After the last post some late submissions came in: Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time by Marcus Borg, An Altar in the World by Barbara Brown Taylor, A Theology of Liberation by Gustavo Guitierrez, Walking the Bible by Bruce Feller, and Money, Possessions, and Eternity by Randy Alcorn.

Now that I have heard all of your great submissions, here is the list of 25 books that have most significantly shaped by understanding of God, myself, and others. I am not saying that these are the 25 best Christian books of all time, just the ones that have shaped my faith the most.



Soren Kierkegaard

My own personal top 25
in alphabetical order

1. A Plain Account of Christian Perfection by John Wesley
2. Celebration of Discipline by Richard J. Foster
3. Church Dogmatics by Karl Barth
4. Come Be My Light by Mother Teresa
5. Dark Night of the Soul by John of the Cross
6. I See Satan Fall Like Lightning by Rene  Girard
7. In God’s Presence by Marjorie Suchocki
8. Jesus of the Disinherited by Howard Thurman
9. John Wesley's Sermons by John Wesley
10. Letter from the Birmingham Jail by Martin Luther King
11. Life Together by Dietrich Bonhoeffer
12. Martin Luther's Large & Small Catechism by Martin Luther
13. On Job: God-Talk and the Suffering of the Innocent by Gustavo Gutierrez
14. Operating Instructions: A Journal of My Son's First Year by Anne Lamott
15. Origen: The Song of Songs, Commentary and Homilies by Origen
16. Overcoming Life's Disappointments by Harold S. Kushner
17. Preaching by Fred Craddock
18. Silence by Shusaku Endo
19. Struggling with Scripture by Walter Bruegemann
20. Take This Bread: A Radical Conversion by Sara Miles
21. Tattoos on the Heart: The Power of Boundless Compassion by Gregory Boyle
22. Teaching the Dead Bird to Sing by W. Paul Jones
23. The Divine Hours by Phyllis Tickle
24. The Powers That Be: Theology for a New Millennium by Walter Wink
25. Works of Love by Soren Kierkegaard

25 Transformative Books

In my most recent post, I noted the new book by Renovare, “25 Books Every Christian Should Read” and asked people what book they have read that has been the most transformative in their Christian journey.

I have learned several things from this exercise. First, people have a hard time narrowing down to one book. I got an email from one voracious reader who said he simply could not choose. Likewise, I received emails from many with the names of multiple books.

Second, and most obviously, the list from Renovare and the list I have received are dramatically different. Five books do appear on both lists (Athanasius’ Incarnation, Rule of St Benedict, Pilgrim’s Progress, Return of the Prodigal Son, and Mere Christianity). As is probably expected, the books I received are much more modern than historical. The only book that got multiple mentions is “The Shack”. The only author mentioned multiple times is Henri Nouwen.

Third, and perhaps most interesting, are the number of novels and books of philosophy and psychology. Many of these authors would not necessarily be described as “Christian” and yet their work has been transformative in Christian thought.

Fourth, almost half the books on this list begin with the word "The". If you want to write a book that transforms Christians' lives, begin with a definite article.

Without further delay, below is the list I have received (in alphabetical order). Since I did not ask people if I could publish their names, I won’t. Roughly half of the inputs received came from clergy, from a wide range of denominations

1. A Tale of Three Kings by Gene Edwards

2. Abraham's Curse by Bruce Chilton

3. Bless Me, Ultima by Rudolfo Anaya

4. Father Melancholy's Daughter by Gail Godwin

5. Gracias by Henri Nouwen

6. Jesus of the Disinherited by Howard Thurman

7. Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis

8. Oasis of Wisdom: The Worlds of the Desert Fathers and Mothers
by David G. R. Keller

9. On the Incarnation by St Athansius

10. Pilgrim’s Progress by John Bunyan

11. Return of the Prodigal Son by Henri Nouwen

12. Sex, Ecology, Spirituality: The Spirit of Evolution by Ken Wilber

13. Testimony: Talking Ourselves into Being Christians by Thomas G. Long

14. The Death and Resurrection of the Beloved Son by Jon Levenson

15. The Good and Beautiful God by James Bryan Smith

16. The Good Book by Rev. Peter Gomes

17. The Holy Longing: The Search for a Christian Spirituality by Ronald Rolheiser

18. The Notebook by Nicholas Sparks

19. The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind by Julian Jaynes

20. The Ragamuffin Gospel by Brennan Manning

21. The Rule of St. Benedict by St Benedict

22. The Shack by William P. Young (mentioned three times)

23. The Wounded Healer by Henri Nouwen

24. When the Heart Waits by Sue Monk Kidd

25. Wisdom Jesus by Cynthia Bourgeault

If you did not submit a book, feel free to make a constructive comment in the comment box below.

25 Books

Renovare has recently come out with a book that has an interesting title, "25 Books Every Christian Should Read." I am a sucker for this kind of stuff on a number of levels: I love history, I love lists, I am a Christian, and I love reading. So, my gut reaction to this was to think how doable it would be to read and blog on 25 Books in 2012.

Then I began to think more about this list. Did I really want to spend my time slogging through Dante and Dostoevsky? Do books like those have anything to do with the ministry I will be engaged in during 2012?

One reaction to this list would be to make my own. If you surf around the net, there are plenty of places where this is happening. Here is a link to someone making their own list on a napkin. However, to make a list of books I have already read and been formed by seems unchallenging.

Instead, I want to find out what books you have read that have been transformational in your Christian journey? What single title has changed the way you understand God, yourself, or others? Post your response below or send me an email. I will compile the list and read and blog on the top responses.

Let the debate begin!

God the Son: God as Reconciler

Throughout human history, people have sought to understand who God is and what our relationship is with the Creator.

Many times this wondering has led to an understanding of a God who is distant and vengeful. In some ancient religions, humans are even understood as slaves to the gods.

One of the truly distinctive teachings of Christianity is the concept that Jesus is the Reconciler. The one who reconciles humanity and God. In describing this act of reconciliation that follows the first act of creation, Barth writes, “He accomplishes, as it were, a second divine act… a second act which for all its newness and inconceivability is related to the first. God reconciles us to Himself, comes to us, speaks with us…” [413]

How amazing to know that the God who created all that is comes to us and speaks with us in order to reconcile a fallen humanity with an amazing Trinity.

God the Father: The Eternal Father

Referring to God, the first person of the Trinity, as “Father” is one of the most common ways God is addressed.

However, Barth’s understanding of “Father” comes from a different place than is commonly practiced. Most times, people seek to understand God from their human experience. Thus, because we know what a human father is, we think that tells us something about who thee “Father” is. Barth never seeks to understand God starting with human experience. Instead, when Barth seeks to understand God, he does so starting with God.

Barth quotes Athanasius, who wrote, “For God is not patterned after human beings, but rather, human beings are named fathers of their own children after God, who is preeminently and alone truly the Father of his own Son.” [393]

For Barth, the word “Father” is not a mere title. It is not a way that we understand who God is from our experience. Instead, God is truly Father.

If God is truly Father, how might that broaden our understanding of God? If Father is more than a title, much more than a metaphor, if God IS Father what does that tell us about who God is?

God the Father: God as Creator

When Karl Barth writes of God the Father as Creator, he does not understand creation as only a singular event in a distant past when stars were set in motion. Rather, creation, and God’s will, are most fully understood in terms of resurrection. Barth writes, “Resurrection is indeed the power of the cross and the gaining of life the power of the losing of life.” [388]

Today marks the first anniversary of the passing of Robert Hudgins, my father-in-law. Today is a sad day as we dearly miss this great man. No one can replace him.

But I am left to wonder if while we experience loss, if what Bobby has experienced is the fullness of God as Creator.

Barth goes on to explain, “He [God the Father] wills the transition of our life through death to eternal life. His kingdom is new birth.”

Today we walk through the darkness of the valley of the shadow of death, not realizing that where that valley leads us is to the fullness of creation, the "new birth".

Triunity: Thoughts on the trinity at 3am

In the 1990s it was popular to ask the question, What Would Jesus Do? It seemed that everywhere one looked WWJD was stamped on t-shirts, bumper stickers, and key chains. Last night, I read a new variation of the question on twitter, What Would Jesus Tweet?

This is not necessarily a bad question. It is better than basing one’s life decisions on filing in the name of a popular celebrity or athlete: WW_D (what would fill in the blank do).

However, as I am contemplating the meaning of the trinity at three in the morning, and reading some Barth, I think the WWJD question illustrates how we have not held on to the triunity of God. We tend to tear the trinity apart. In our limited understanding, God the Father seems more distant and even has a reputation for being judgmental. God the Holy Spirit, even in the church’s own liturgy, is under-defined. Jesus often seems to be the only accessible one in the three.

Yet, Barth’s challenge is to hold on to the unity of God: “We must say that all God’s work, as we are to grasp it on the basis of His revelation, is one act which occurs simultaneously and in concert in all His three modes of being.” [375]

So, perhaps a better question would be, WWTD?

Back in Barth: Unity in the Trinity

I apologize for my nearly month-long absence from this blog. After finishing the first book of “Church Dogmatics” I paused to read some other texts. One book I read, which I highly recommend, is Rabbi Harold S. Kushner’s, “Overcoming Life’s Disappointments.” I strongly suggest the book, you will not be disappointed.

Today, I return to the journey with Barth. This second book takes on the unfathomable subject of, “The Revelation of God, The Triune God.” Trying to understand the trinity by reading Barth is somewhat like trying to understand the complexity of the universe through the dense writings of Stephen Hawking. Although the task is not easy, most good things in life are difficult, so the journey continues.

One of the first points that Barth makes is the importance of the unity of the Trinity. Barth emphasizes that one must consider the trinity as one in name, one in essence, and one in divine being. He writes, “The Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God. And yet, they are not three gods but God in one. In the same way, the Father is Lord, the Son is Lord, the Holy Spirit is Lord; and yet there are not three lords, but the Lord is one.”

While the concept of unity in the trinity seems obvious, it is quite challenging. To this day, we give the three persons of the trinity distinctive names and tend to assign to them different roles, personalities, and characteristics. Barth strongly warns against this and challenges the reader to hold together the unity of God.

While I completely agree with Barth’s concept of unity in the trinity, it is thought-provoking to consider how we speak of God in ways that dangerously divide or carefully hold together unity in the trinity.

Too cool for school

Who says that theologians are not hip?

If you ever had any doubts, check out this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msLK1NfpEQQ

The Ground upon which I stand

Throughout the history of Christian writing and thought one refrain that has echoed across the centuries is “the ground of my being.” This phrase has been used to express what serves at the core of people’s identity and understanding of God.

Many times those things that serve as the ground of our being are well-defined and intentional. They are the result of working out our faith with much fear and trembling. Other times, we are less certain where our foundation came from.

For Barth, Holy Scripture, as the revelation of God, is at the ground of being able to speak about God. Scripture is core and central and the foundation upon which one stands.

In defiance of much modern thought of his day, Barth is clear that revelation comes in Holy Scripture and not in “philosophical, ethical, psychological, or political theory.” [283]

This is not to say that Barth rejects all modern sciences. Not at all. In fact he writes that someone who speaks of God should have an education in “the thinking of the philosopher, psychologist, historian, aesthetician, etc.”

Yet, Barth advocates that we do not start with history or philosophy and then move to Holy Scripture. Instead, it is Holy Scripture that serves at the ground of our being and the other science help to give a greater understanding to God’s revelation.

An Unexpected Hope

Previously, in this blog, I have written about the impossibility of adequately and fully proclaiming the message of God's grace and the humility that is needed when the Word of God is encountered.

In so many ways, our finitude seems so limiting that we are left to wonder how we can ever hope to say anything about God.

And yet, before that lack of hope turned in to despair, Barth gives us a door to walk through--expectation.

Barth writes: When we have them (Word and faith), we do not regard them as possessions but strain after them, hungering and thirsting, and for that reason blessed. The same is true of the possibility of knowledge of God's Word. When we know it, we expect to know it. The assurance of its affirmation is thus the assurance of its expectation--the expectation which rests on its previous presence, on the aprehended promise, or as we can already say here, on received and believed baptism--but still the expectation. [225]

On one hand we know that we can never fully know. Yet, on the other, we strive with expectation, living in anticipation, hungering and thirsting for that which one day will be made fully known.

Living in Abundance

It is difficult to live a disciplined life in the midst of abundance. We have trouble saying the words no, or enough.

Of course, this is a great problem to have. Those who have little, those who have nothing, would trade places with us in a second.

But how do we practice freedom amongst abundance.

It seems to me that these questions are not only true of our physical diets but of our spiritual lives. Barth emphasizes that we live in God's unmerited grace. That conversations about God do not begin with the I, but the Thou. Our role in response to that is one of freedom and choice, freedom of obedience or of disobedience.

But I am left to wonder if we take all of this for granted. Do we live in such abundance of God's love that we lack the disciple to simply respond with a yes?

Humble Yourself

We want to be certain. We want to quantity, measure, and draw lines around what is and what is not. In our modern reasoning, we want to replace mystery with certainty.

On one hand, these efforts are well meaning as we struggle to work out our faith. Yet, the danger in these efforts is that we come to believe in our own truths instead of beginning with thee truth.

As a Wesleyan, we acknowledge that when we read scripture we do so using the tools of tradition, experience, and reason.

If I could add one more side to the quadrilateral it would be humility.

At one time in my life I thought that I could fully understand any and all scripture through diligent study and fervent prayer. Today I recognize that I understand very little. I went to seminary hoping to find the secret answers, I graduated with deeper questions.

Barth writes of the greatest limitation we face when reading scripture—ourselves:

Our concept of God and His Word can only be an indication of the limits of our conceiving… We cannot utter even a wretched syllable about the how of God’s Word unless the Word of God is spoken to us as God’s Word… It is for this reason and in this sense that we finally speak of the Word of God as the mystery of God.

May we embrace the mystery, live in humility, and begin all things upon the foundation of God’s Word.

Revelation Song

Many times we read the Bible simply as a history lesson of the past or looking to find hints to the mysteries of the future. While scripture gives us things, to limit our understanding to these two areas creates an incomplete picture.

Karl Barth not only writes of the Word of God as something that is written and preached, but revealed.

This revelation is not the stuff of fear inducing cataclysmic events—it is the revelation of Jesus Christ: “God with us,” “the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.”

This gift of revelation occurs by the free, unmerited gift of God’s grace and in any time and way that God desires.

Barth writes, “The Christ who comes again is no other than the Christ who has come, but this Christ as the One who now comes also to us.”

Come Lord Jesus, be our guest!

The Pointing Finger

What is the significance of proclamation? What is the meaning of scripture?

Karl Barth holds these two means of grace in a very high position. True proclamation and scripture are not mere human work, but God’s revelation. They speak of God’s presence in history and God’s future work.

However, as highly regarded as these gifts are, they are not an ends in themselves. Rather, their fullest function comes in pointing to Christ.

Barth quotes Martin Luther who makes an analogy of the modern day preacher and John the Baptist, “For we have John Baptist’s word and spirit, and we parsons and preachers are in our own time what John Baptist was in his time. We let John Baptist’s finger point and his voice sound: ‘Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world.’ We deliver John Baptist’s sermon, point to Christ and say: This is the one true savior whom you should worship and to whom you should cleave."

Perhaps these points seem obvious, but I think they are often lost. Preachers and scripture are often raised to exalted positions, as if they are the end in themselves. While good preaching and the reading of scripture are invaluable gifts of God, they are not the end.

Like John the Baptist’s long finger in the Isenheim altarpiece, all we preachers are called to do is to point to the one and only savior.

Words Fail Me Now

What can we say about God? What words completely and accurately describe God’s grace? None. All human words and understandings fall short.

In his closing paragraphs on dogmatics and proclamation Barth writes:

Even if we have again weighed everything and corrected everything and formulated everything better, as is our duty to the subject-matter of Christianity in respect of human talk about it, and even if our findings have been given the status of Church confession and dogma, we have still to say: We are unprofitable servants, and in no sense are we to imagine that we have become in the very least masters of the subject.

For someone whose life-work centers on preaching and teaching, it could be discouraging to know that I will never get it completely right. However, I find Barth’s words quite liberating. I do not need to strive to become the master of the subject, but to simply and humbly serve God.

Just Add Culture

It seems that nearly every day I receive junk mail and spam emails advertising sermon aids and illustrations. I can’t remember the last time I have used any of them. This is not to brag about my abilities or to criticize those who find these helpful, but simply because I have found that canned illustrations and stories seldom speak to the specific needs of people hearing the proclamation.

I am surprised that in the endless catalogs that fill my recycle bin that I have not yet seen a complete volume of sermons from Genesis to Revelation, bound in leather, from which the preacher could pull a book from the shelf and just speak a perfectly crafted word.

The reason this doesn’t exist (or I hope it doesn’t) is because true proclamation takes place at the intersection of where people live and the power of Christ’s presence.

Barth warns against the extremes of young preachers relying on books and older preachers relying on confidence. Either extreme can detach the preacher from the life of the people. These extremes leave preaching to an academic, instead of a transformative, act.

Proclaiming the Word of God is most effective when content intersects culture and the hope of Christ touches peoples' needs.

Which comes first?

In his writing on preaching and proclamation, Karl Barth frequently quotes from the book of Romans. This is no surprise, as Romans is an important source for Barth throughout his works. However, one area that made me think in a new way was when he quoted Romans 10:14-15,17:

But how are they to call on one in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in one of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone to proclaim him? And how are they to proclaim him unless they are sent? So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes through the word of Christ.


The question this raised within me is which comes first, preaching or faith?

Perhaps the answer seems obvious. We expect that someone hears a powerful sermon and that leads to faith. But Barth and Paul point in both directions. Paul writes that faith comes from what is heard AND what is heard comes through the word of Christ. Barth considers proclamation and faith as means of grace, both given by God, and that all means of grace should be considered equal.

This recalls a familiar story of John Wesley, who when he went through a crisis of faith was advised, “Preach faith till you have it; and then, because you have it, you will preach faith.”

So which comes first, preaching or faith? Perhaps neither. Maybe it is God’s grace that proceeds them both.

Hope in the Word: Talk about God and Church Proclamation

Over the last several years I have come to understand preaching as an impossible task. No matter how well prepared, designed, and delivered, no sermon can fully proclaim the message of God’s love and grace. Yet, every week I set out to do that which I have understood as impossible.

However, in reading Barth, I now have hope. For Barth, preaching, like all aspects of God, begins with God. True proclamation does not begin with the preacher, the lectionary, or a sermon outline. It begins with God. Barth writes that proclamation is “no such work of man… It is the Word as the enacted divine event.”

If proclamation is a work of God’s grace, and not the preacher’s effort, than there is hope in the Word. Hope that the Good News can be proclaimed and that lives will be transformed. This hope is not placed in my limited ability, but in the limitless love of God.

Exaggerated Death: The Necessity of Dogmatic Prolegomena

Both Mark Twain and Paul McCartney have been quoted as saying, “Reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated.” Today, perhaps, we could add the Church to this list. It seems that everyone from the secular humanist to the church statistician is predicting the death of the church.

However, Barth points out that while these reports of the church’s demise are presented as shocking news, fresh to our time, they are not anything new. Barth writes, “We need not regard the tragedy of modern godlessness as anything out of the ordinary, nor treat it as tragically as is presupposed in this conception of the necessity of dogmatic prolegomena.” In other words, when we speak of the things of God, we don't have to limit ourselves by the fear of unbelief.

Reports of the Church’s demise fail to recognize two important points.

First, that the Church is not about us. The Church does not depend on crafting witty sermons or designing clever advertising campaigns, it is the work of God. The Church is a gift of grace.

Second, and building on that point, to say the church is dying is to say that God’s Holy Spirit is unable to do new things. If we look across the long lens of history, God’s Spirit has moved in new and fresh ways and will always do so.

Might the church look different a century from now? Of course. However, the Church is not dying and will never die because God’s breath continually gives God’s church fresh life.

Prayer like Grace: Dogmatics as an Act of Faith

I am not fast. I don’t have great hand-eye coordination. I am not the smartest person in the room. But I do have terrific endurance. That is why I have been able to withstand difficult times in life. It is why I am a distance runner. It is with this gift of endurance that I walk the first steps of this journey with Karl Barth.

In our dualistic thinking, we may see abilities such as endurance as personal traits, separate from our spiritual lives. We categorize and disconnect our physical, emotional, professional, and spiritual selves. However, Barth says it is all God’s grace. Our ability to reason and understand, to speak of the things of God, does not originate with us, it comes from grace.

Since all is grace, all must be surrounded by prayer. I was surprised to read the following quote at the beginning of what by all appearances is an intellectual volume of work:

“Prayer can be the recognition that we accomplish nothing by our intentions, even
though they be intentions to pray. Prayer can be the human answer to the divine hearing already granted, the epitome of the true faith which we cannot assume of ourselves. We do not speak of true prayer if we say “must” instead of “can.” According to Rom. 8 the way from “can” to “must” is wrapped in the mystery at the gates of which we here stand. With this reference we do not give anyone a means by which he can count on succeeding in his work. It must be said, however, that it is hard to see how else there can be success in this work but on the basis of divine correspondence to this human attitude: “Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.” [024]

How might we see grace and prayer as more than spiritual practices, but as gifts that encompass every area of our lives?

A Dynamic Dogma: Dogmatics as an Enquiry

If the subject of theology sounds stuffy and intellectual, the word dogma can sound repulsive to the modern (and post-modern) person. For many people, dogma is understood as a rigid set of unchanging beliefs, established millennia ago, and enforced with all of the grace and compassion of an anvil.

For Barth, theologies, dogmas, and scripture have meaning as they intersect with contemporary lives. To speak of the things of God can only truly be done while holding beliefs in one hand and the life lived in the other.

This is not only true for individuals, but for the area of Barth’s concern and critique--the Church. Barth challenges the Church to consider how its traditions stand up to “what Christian utterance can and should say to-day.” [016]

In making this statement, Barth is not advocating that all tradition and historic beliefs should be abandoned. Not by any means. However, the question before the Church is how does our rich heritage connect with the modern world? How does our dogma impact the life lived?

It is in asking these types of questions that our dogmas are no longer used as barriers to hide behind or standards for allegiance. Rather, dogma, more fully understood, can be a dynamic way of thinking that leads the Church to explore how it might give voice to the power of Christ in the world today.

Invariably Badly: The Church, Theology, Science

Theologian. This title calls forth images of a bearded scholar slumped over the desk of a cluttered seminary office or an aged pastor droning on about intellectual issues as his congregation catches up on its sleep. However, Karl Barth begins his voluminous “Church Dogmatics” by acknowledging that theology means nothing more than to “talk about God.”

With this definition, it seems that there are a lot of theologians today. Some may be well-informed, grounded, and thought-provoking. Others, well, not so much. Everyone from Stephen Hawking to Stephen Colbert is talking about God. However, for all this talk, no one is getting it right.

Barth’s opening pages acknowledge the impossibility of theology. He writes that the work of theology “would be meaningless without justifying grace, which here too can alone make good what man as such invariably does badly” (004) and that “Theology does not in fact possess special keys to special doors” (005). In other words, everything we say about God is inadequate and falls short.

On one hand, as a professional church person, this could be discouraging to realize that every sermon, song, conversation, and prayer is invariably done badly. Yet, I find this incredibly liberating. From the onset, I know that when I talk about God I am merely attempting to shed a single light on an unfathomable mystery. I don’t have to worry about explaining all that God is, because I can’t. Rather, it is God’s grace that will make up for my short-comings, accept our misstatements, and fully reveal who God is.

Let us talk away my fellow theologians, finding freedom in the fact that our talk of God will always be inadequate.