The Mystery of Marriage by Mike Mason

The subtitle "Meditations on the Miracle" is very appropriate. This book reminds me of the writing style of John Eldridge; it has Scripture sprinkled in and seems to come from a Christian worldview, but is so romantic, metaphorical, and fluffy that I'm not sure exactly what the author is saying or how much I agree with. I like my books more straightforward, with outlined points and clear-cut summary sections. However, some of it was helpful.

My favorite part-- indeed, the most helpful for me, was his discussion of "Otherness" in marriage.

"The fact is that our natural tendency is to treat others as if they were not 'others' at all, but merely aspects of ourselves. We do not experience them as the overwhelming, comprehensive realities that we feel ourselves to be. Compared with us, they are not quite real. We see them as through a haze, the haze of our own all-engulfing selfhood..."(45).

Indeed, I often think of God this way. But loving someone, knowing and appreciating the being that they are, helps us learn to better know and appreciate the reality of God.

I liked his explanation of "the two becoming one":

"Inevitably, as we shall see, a couple will grow more and more like one another in character. Yet at the same time, for two to become one flesh does not mean for the hand to become a foot. It means, rather, for the foot and the hand to become coordinated, to start doing the same task, heading in the same direction" (140).

I also resonated with this:

"One of the commonest illusions about marriage is that it is meant to be a sanctuary, a place of familiarity and protectedness amidst the alien harshness of the world, a place in which the rigors of change and challenge and uncertainty are expected to be minimized, the shocks of life abated....God wants us to enjoy security. Unfortunately, we have a way of equating security with complacency."

What a helpful exhortation!

Still, for all these helpful tidbits, the sum of the book wasn't my style, and there were some parts I couldn't agree with wholeheartedly. Often it seemed that instead of supporting the idea that "Relating to God is #1; marriage is a reflection of that, and a way to learn to do that better," it was saying that "Make marriage #1 because if you're doing that, you're learning to love, and ultimately that's serving God." On page 157, for example, it seems that we are to be most concerned with "directly" submitting to our spouse, more than to God (though it is implied that submitting to a spouse is "indirectly" submitting to God.)

One particular thing I didn't like about Mason's style was his repeated aggrandizement of "love." It wasn't defined, the idea wasn't applied to various situations in life, but whatever it is, it seemed to be preeminent to this life, and the primary way to express it seemed to be marriage. Much was made of following love and being long-suffering and forgiving, holding to love's ideal rather than ever giving up on one's spouse. I am a firm believer in marriage; I believe God hates divorce. Still, I think in all this discussion, there should be explanation of how all these ideals apply to us in our fallen world. Particularly, some discussion of abuse situations should be noted. We should still discuss the importance of patience, steadfastness, and commitment, but the church has ignored how to handle very real situations of abuse for far too long.

If it sounds like I'm being harsh, I don't mean to be. On the whole I appreciated this book, unique from other marriage books I've read which tend to discuss only leadership/submission. I think I set my expectations a little too high when I read JI Packer's foreward:

"...marriage, being the most delicate and demanding of human relationships, as well as potentially the most delightful, is a terribly difficult topic on which to write wisely and well. I should have pointed out that the Christian world is already full of bad books on marriage, books written, it seems, by extrovert Pharisees for readers like themselves who want to reduce life to routines of role-play....Rarely however, has a new book roused in me so much enthusiasm as has the combination of wisdom, depth, dignity, and glow--I don't know what else to call it--that I find in these chapters" (9-10).

Watership Down by Richard Adams

The Hiding Place by Corrie Ten Boom

Life of Pi by Yann Martel

Yes, after reading this book I did put a banana in a pot of water to see if it would float. It did.

I enjoyed this book. Martel is a great storyteller. It takes a genius indeed to make a story of a boy alone at sea with only a tiger, after the cargo ship moving his family's zoo from India to Canada sank, seem not not only captivating but also believable! At the beginning the narrator claims the story will "Make you believe in God!" It's great fiction, great imagery, great metaphors... but the kind of ending I hate. The kind that makes you question the whole story you just read. ((spoiler alert)) At the book's end, two men come to investigate how the ship sank, and ask Pi about his experience. When he recounts his survival story on the lifeboat alone with the tiger, the men ask for a story that "does not contradict reality." At this point, Pi tells another story involving other people being on the lifeboat with him initially, and shares how each dies in turn- no zoo animals at all.

Of course neither recounting helps the men figure out how the cargo ship sank in the middle of the Pacific, but the men find the latter story more believable. Pi asks, "So tell me, since it makes no factual difference to you and you can’t prove the question either way, which story do you prefer? Which story is the better story, the story with the animals or the story without animals?" The men think about it and choose the story with the animals. That is the "better" story.

Pi responds, "So it is with God."

My response after getting this far was to stop and say aloud, "What a bunch of postmodern garbage!" To me, Martel seems to be mocking the idea of believing in God- making it seem like believing is just choosing a story that one prefers. It sounds like he's saying that truth doesn't matter, if there is a story that is more pleasing, more convincing, or perhaps more comfortable to believe for a particular person. The men at the end of the story preferred the story of a boy surviving heroically by training a tiger alone in a lifeboat. That was easier to believe than the horrible story of cannibalism and a boy watching his mother be murdered.

Well, here are more reflections from someone else with more organized thoughts. Generally I agree with him and he says it better than me: http://blogcritics.org/books/article/the-life-of-pi-by-yann/page-2/#ixzz1XbHvC3ae

Here was a book that was supposed to make you believe in God (or so the cover claims). Here was a book that took faith seriously, didn’t hold to that hard materialist worldview. After reading it, however, I think Martel substitutes a hard materialist viewpoint for a mystical post-modern view of the role of religion.

This ending weakened the power of the book for me. I find it hard to read this story any other way then to assume that the horrific story of murder and cannibalism is the actual story of what physically happened. What the author seems to be saying is that God is a better story. That religion is a tool to see life in a new light. That all things being equal isn’t it better to believe in the mystery and beauty of a wonderful story? Like a great deal of post-modernist thinking there is kernel of truth in this view. People of faith know that a cold materialist view of life fails to explain what it means to be human. It fails to explain art and beauty, love and wisdom, a meaning beyond ourselves. Faith surely encompasses tradition and experiences that can’t be tied down to cold hard facts. But what is missing is truth. Nowhere in the story does the issue of truth come up. Pi does not embrace religion because it is true or a warped human approximation of eternal truth. The contrast between the two stories is not between what is true and what isn’t between what captures the essence of what happened and what doesn’t. No, for Pi the difference is what each story offers. One offers pain and suffering and despair while the other at least offers some beauty, some hope.

Pi goes beyond an intellectual humility that realizes that it could be wrong and therefore keeps from encroaching on God’s authority. Rather, in Pi’s world there seems no ultimate truth; no standard to appeal to regardless of position or background. I for one, fail to see the point of religious belief it is not a valid truth claim; if it doesn’t speak to a reality (a deeper, even non-physical reality but truth nonetheless). Perhaps, I am reading too much into all of this but for me the spiritual moral of the story muddied the work rather than giving it weight.

The Help by Kathryn Stockett

I enjoyed this book. Couldn't put it down. It dealt with a heavy issue very personally.

I saw the movie the day after finishing. The book is better, but the movie was good!

One Thousand Gifts by Ann Voskamp

I didn't actually read the whole thing. I will refrain from either strongly endorsing or finding fault with it, though I will say during my reading of the first half there were moments when I felt like doing both. I suppose that is my feeling with most books that contain some truth but end up still being bestsellers...

I will say however, that I am grateful for the effect this book had on me. Voskamp challenged me with scriptures about practicing giving thanks. Her sensual, romantic giving of thanks for soap bubbles and cheese curds brought me to a place of longing for more of the practice in my own life. I know I am called to give thanks in all things, and give thanks for God's gifts, and it is unwise to overlook God's gifts such as these, but I wasn't content to stay there even for one second. Especially on days when I don't feel there are a lot of "little things" to be grateful for, and the harder I look the more bitter I become, what I need is not a sunburst in a camera lens but a strong, weighty promise of God that can truly sustain me. The reason that I could add things like a pink sunset and perfect ripples in the cup of water on my med cart to my own personal "thankful list" is because I know from whom they come, and am ultimately thankful for him!!

It is funny because most of the sermons I hear at church are about this very thing-- how the promises of God, the character of God, the Gospel of Christ, etc. are all we need, and that being thankful for these things in the midst of struggles and suffering is what will bring joy. And most of the recent sermons I've heard at church don't touch my heart. They leave me frustrated that I don't feel more gratitude. They feel me feeling a little guilty for wanting more.

I think that Voskamp did what a couple dozen SovGrace sermons couldn't, by bringing me to the place of fighting for gratitude enough to grab hold of it and not let go. In my desire for joy and ultimately to obey and give thanks, I find myself writing on my list that, "I am a child of God, and heir of God, and fellow heir with Christ" on my list and MEANING IT. I so desire to continue to grow in this practice of giving thanks. I will give thanks for cool rain and for midnight giggles, but I will give my thanks to God and always focus my gratitude on his promises.

Just Courage by Gary Haugen

The subtitle, "God's Great Expedition for the Restless Christian," is appropriate. This book stirred something that had been lulled asleep by the me-centered Christianity with which I feel I am surrounded......... I am still not to a point of decisive action, but it is a start, and I am thankful.

The Cost of Commitment by John White

Highly recommended. A must re-read for me.

Cry, the Beloved Country by Alan Paton

Feelings and Faith by Brian Borgman

"We mortify and cultivate the emotions through truth. It is the discipline of thinking God's thoughts after him that aligns our emotions." (167)

"Our emotions express our values and evaluations. Our emotions tell us what we really, *really* believe." (128)

God in the Flesh by Don Everts

I pinpointed why I like Don Everts so much. His words drip application. I mean, he teaches Scripture in a way that is applicable. He explains people kneeling at Jesus' feet, carrying their sick to him, and leaving their nets to follow him, in such a way that the words aren't information to stow away, but perspective-changing, inspiring, and food that nourishes and becomes part of my being. I will definitely be re-reading this.

Between a Rock and a Hard Place by Aron Ralston

Autobiography of the guy who cut his own arm off to survive because his arm became pinned to a canyon wall by a boulder while hiking in Utah. I saw 127 Hours, was very intrigued, and immediately wanted to see how his version compared with Hollywood's. And I found that Danny Boyle was pretty true to fact, there were some changes, but the truth is-- both convey how crazy and terrible this experience was. It was unthinkably horrible, but makes you grateful for life.

Secure in the Everlasting Arms by Elisabeth Elliott

I've always liked Elisabeth Elliott, and benefited greatly from her wisdom and straightforward exhortation. Her logic exposes terrible contradictions between what I say I believe about God, and what my actions convey is really in my heart. She has taught me that if I really believe the sovereign goodness of God, I can trust and be content in many a situation.

I found her chapter on "moods" a bit disconcerting though. It's this quote from Oswald Chambers' My Utmost for His Highest that I found so troubling:

There are certain things we must not pray about--moods, for instance. Moods never go by praying, moods go by kicking. A mood nearly always has its set in the physical condition, not in the moral. It is a continual effort not to listen to the moods which arise from a physical condition, never submit to them for a second. We have to take ourselves by the scruff of the neck and shake ourselves, and we will find that we can do what we said we would not. The curse with most of us is that we won't. The Christian life is one of incarnate spiritual pluck.

Are we not to pray in ever circumstance? Even if moods are merely physical, we should of course pray! But I am more and more convinced of the interconnection among the physical, emotional, and spiritual realms. I insist that very rarely are moods merely the result of physical triggers, but usually a combination of many factors. Perhaps what Chambers is trying to speak against here is the "praying and doing nothing" approach, which clearly is also incomplete. I will be the first to (grudgingly) admit that moods are overcome by prayer, planning, and then often "faking it til you make it" or doing what is right even without feeling like it.

I was relieved when Elliott immediately quotes JF Starck:

Lord! When I am in sorrow, I think on Thee. Listen to the cry of my heart, and my sorrowful complaint. yet, O Father, I would not prescribe to Thee when and how Thy help should come. I will willingly tarry for the hour which Thou thyself has appointed for my relief. Meanwhile strengthen me by Thy Holy Spirit; strengthen my faith, my hope, my trust; give me patience and resolution to bear my trouble, and let me at last behold the time when Thou wilt make me glad with Thy grace. Ah, my Father! never yet hast Though forsaken Thy children, forsake not me. Ever dost Thou give gladness unto the sorrowful, O give it now unto me. Always dost Thou relieve the wretched, relieve me too, when and where and how Thou wilt. Unto Thy wisdom, love, and goodness, I leave it utterly. Amen.

I admit these two consecutive quotes strike me as a contradiction. But I will take it as a good lesson: fight, and pray.

The Smell of Sin and the Fresh Air of Grace by Don Everts

Aaah, a third book of sin for Sarah. Perhaps not a subject I should be dwelling on THIS much. Everts talks about that-- our focus should not be on sin. After all, he says, the gospel is all about saying YES, and we should find our motivation in how to live from dwelling on the goodness of the will of God, not the evil of sin. Still, as Everts points out, Jesus talks about sin, and uses some vivid imagery!! and we should pay attention to that!

Everts opens with a poem about a "bloody sock," describing a man sitting in a church pew sawing his foot off. How gross? How absurd? Mark 9:45 says that having one foot and being free from sin is better than self-inflicted amputation. Hmmm... As Everts says, we often disregard Jesus' images like this saying, "Jesus is just using hyperbole," and merely dismiss it rather than meditation on what the literary device is showing----- sin and its implications are important!!

Everts then unpacks metaphor after metaphor used by Jesus regarding sin. He does this in a simple, yet poetic manner, that is refreshingly difficult to file away as mere knowledge but cuts to the heart.

I am grateful for this book in my life.

Seven: the deadly sins and the beatitudes by Jeff Cook

Jeff Cook interestingly pairs the seven deadly sins with the Beatitudes' "pictures of a restored creation." I re-read this book and was surprised how my reaction to is has changed in a couple years!! Before I said, "Oh, thought provoking; interesting. Never thought of that before." Now I say, it is convicting at many points, and also disappointing.

First of all, for a Christian with a solid biblically-based worldview, this book would be a helpful read! For a "seeker" or for someone who only reads books of this "kind," I would recommend some other books to accompany it!

But on the whole, I want my response to center on the conviction and challenge God brought through the following 3 chapters:

• "Envy and the Mourner"- both feel a lack, and want. But

  Envy has the deadly ability to distract my heart and mind from the daily bread God puts in my hands each morning, focusing me instead on the gifts, status, talents, and joys he gives to others. This is not only a rejection of the good that God has given me; this is a desire to become someone I'm not, was never made to be, and will not enjoy becoming if my jealousy ever were to succeed (52).

  The mourner is the place to be, because "those who mourn expose their pain....[and] open themselves up to receive help, and in those spaces there is healing" (65). I want to be like the mourner, acknowledging envy as rejection of God's provision, and seeing my wants and longings as promptings for prayer, as ways to wait on God and eagerly anticipate his continued provision.

• "Sloth and those who Hunger for a Life Made Right" drew a contrast similar to the first. It also reminded me of the book Allure of Hope (see an older post). This world is broken, I am broken. I don't experience the abundant, FULL life for which God created me. What do I do with that? My tendency is to resort to sloth (perhaps similar to Jan Myers' "Path of Hovering") and trying to be unaffected, apathetic. Clearly, this is not the way it's supposed to be! Cook points to several of Jesus' parables and concludes that "in order to stay inside with the king, one had to be passionate about the king's concerns" (72), which is directly applicable to what God demands of his servants- we are to be passionate about his causes!! Now, in order to do this, we need God's help! Praise the Lord he gives it, by his lavish grace. I appreciated Cook's portrayal of how this happens by his contrast with the Tower of Babel and Pentecost: we are moved to be about the kingdom not by reaching God's level, but being ready and having him come and fill us!! Oh that's good!

• "Lust and the Pure of Heart" convicted me of how I look to others to fulfill my needs rather than purely, wholeheartedly seeking what is best for them, and looking to God to fulfill my needs. I appreciate that Cook points out that desires aren't bad-- they're are good, but need to be fulfilled rightly! And what a glorious proclamation that when we are pure in heart, our desires will be fulfilled in seeing God himself!

Though helpful and thought provoking, this book and this chapter in particular brought certain points that I cannot wholeheartedly endorse. For one thing, I wasn't in step with Cook's CS Lewis-like view of hell. Hell was portrayed as something we create for ourselves, and as much a reality in this life as in the one to come. Though I would agree that choices rejecting God;s will does not lead to life in any way, I think the hell after the final judgement will be worse than the negative, though destructive and powerful, consequences on earth, and will not just be the absence of God, but the pouring out of God's wrath. Cook says, "The seven deadly sins are the best description of life in hell. The real question for all of us not whether we will someday go to hell but whether we will ever come out" (174). Really?! My tendency is to excuse that, saying he's close and just being dramatic and using different words than I would use, but to be honest, I fear for those who might read this book and believe what he says!

Case in point, see page 169:

God has already done all the work necessary to rescue you and me from slavery to sin, and now we stand in the space between our past and God's future.

Yes! Right on! Then he continues,

We live in the desert between the hell we long to leave behind and the heavenly reality we pray consumes every cell of our bodies. It is the shadowlands. Hell is still with us, and heaven is all too slowly breaking in. Saved from a world of darkness, we still must peer through the gray of a world in which the full light of day has not yet dawned.

Um, kind of. Sounds ambiguous, or maybe misleading to me. I wouldn't say that slavery to sin is equal to hell. Yet I think I see the point he's trying to make, and yeah, I get it.

Similarly, the chapter I struggled getting through was the "Wrath and the Meek Peacemaker" chapter. I agree with the idea that WE are not to be wrathful. Cook quotes Dante saying that wrath is "a love for justice perverted to rage and spite," (124) which is obviously bad. Maybe we're just arguing semantics here, word choice, but I believe that scripturally, God does display wrath. Of course, his wrath could be defined as Arthur Pink describes it: "[God's] eternal detestation of all unrighteousness...the holiness of God stirred into activity against sin," (from http://bible.org/seriespage/wrath-god, which has lots of scripture references to the wrath of God). Anyway, we shouldn't have wrath, it is to us to be meek peacemakers and trust God to deal out vengeance. Moreover, we are to be grateful that Jesus has exhausted the wrath of God toward believers!

Cook quotes Jesus saying, "all who draw the sword will die by the sword," as meaning, "Jesus categorically said that the way of wrath is not the way of God" (132). I wish that Cook would have said that God has wrath, and is just in doing so. I wish he would have said that because of Jesus, his wrath against us is gone, for he sees us as righteous, and his wrath is only toward evil. I wish he would have said that because we trust the all-knowing, all-powerful, forever-just God to deal justice and vengeance, we don't need to! I look to Jesus as an example of a peacemaker, he brought us peace with God by his blood. As his followers, we are to be like him, working to bring reconciliation between God and man!

It is possible that Cook and I agree on this point, we are just using different words and focusing on different aspects. I agree that for a human, wrath is a sin. I just wish he would have said it differently.

I also wish there had been more attention drawn to what I consider the gospel message, which I think is essential to any discussion of sin. Cook talks at length about the crucifixion, talking about how Jesus was meek through out it; in his introduction he talks about the Last Supper and fruit; but he never talks about the reason Jesus died being our sin. He never talks about our sin deserving punishment aside from the forgiveness available by Jesus' atonement. I understand that atonement is not the focus of this book, but rather the contrast between destructive sins that are appropriately called "deadly," and the full life that is available in obeying Jesus and being truly blessed. I admit this is something I wish my "gospel-centered" friends would focus on a little more. Still, Cook's only summary of the gospel is as follows:

God is working to see our world abound with the kind of life that he has. God is presently entering the hearts and minds, the communities and relationships, of broken human beings. This is the solution to the sin problem. This is the gospel.

and I find that sadly incomplete.

And finally, in his last chapter and final juxtaposition of the deadly sins and Beatitudes, Cook concludes,

Both call us to serve them, to eat, to enjoy, and to believe. But only one draws us into reality. Only one promotes life.

And only one will make us happy.

Eek.

True. But is that the point?

Respectable Sins by Jerry Bridges

And The Shofar Blew by Francine Rivers

And yes, yet again, Mrs. Rivers. You just can't beat a good page-turner with endearing characters that you love and hate, that also inspires you to pray, wait on God, and trust HIM to work.

Unspoken by Francine Rivers

Oh, Mrs. Rivers, you have done it again. I could not put this book down. It was a great story. It made the biblical account come alive. And it convicted me to trust God and be busy about studying and trusting him, like the Bathsheba in this story.

Unafraid by Francine Rivers

I confess that at first I thought "historical fiction" about the life of Mary would be quite cheesy, but needed to read *something.* Well, Francine Rivers, you have done it again. Her characterization and story-telling make the story worthwhile. And beyond that, I found it challenging to think of how Mary -and Jesus- lived. Mary learned to wait on God, to trust his plan even when she didn't understand it and it was different from her plan. Jesus spent his life figuring out and carrying out the will of the Father, completely selflessly. Wow. I enjoyed it. And will probably get another novella in the "Lineage of Grace" series shortly.

Love that Lasts by Gary & Betsy Ricucci