Mechanics and Mystics
A recent experience reminded me of how diverse two believers' worldviews can be.
One, whom we shall call the mechanic, emphasizes clarity of categories, consistency in terminology, and the making of distinctions. The mechanic loves systematic theology--the tracing of intellectual concepts throughout Scripture in order to develop a fully formed understanding of technical categories like progressive sanctification, sacraments, double imputation, and the three uses of the law. The mechanic's rhetoric is careful and nuanced. Whenever he uses a word, his audience knows precisely what he is referring to. He is a great teacher, because his arguments are easy to follow and always well constructed. His thinking is so clear that everyone who converses with him leaves understanding things more clearly than when he began.
The other is organic in thought and expression, with each idea blending into the others like rivers flowing into a single ocean. There is a unity of thought, created not by carefully constructed links of reasoning, but by the fact that no one idea exists in isolation. He is a mystic, taking reality as a thing to be experienced, not analyzed. He understands the unity of the body, mind, and spirit. His study lies in biblical theology--the developing of understanding as it was developed over the history of the Scriptures, each new book building on the meaning already developed by the previous ones. Metaphors and symbolism shape his rhetoric. He loves to encourage, build up, and apply truth to life, making him a great preacher. Everyone who converses with him leavings thinking more deeply than when he began.
Neither the mechanic nor the mystic are sinless men, of course. Even if they were, each has weaknesses the other can support and strengths the other needs. Mechanics run into trouble when they try to reconcile a perfectly holy and consistent God with His blessing of Hebrew midwives for lying. Mystics notice that God's command is not "you shall not lie," but "you shall not bear false testimony against your neighbor," and understand that meaning is not a deistic thing floating in the ether, but that truth, like God, is itself relational (which is clearly not the same thing as saying it is relative, although a mystic might not be able to tell you why). Mystics, on the other hand, are easily swayed by passion or tradition, or marrying the daughters of the land and being led aside to other Gods. The discerning aid of a mechanic can be used of God to rescue a mystic from worshiping at a rodeo-style church service beside a painting of Viking-Jesus and being convinced that God really is a Republican after all.
I hope the above illustrates that this isn't a distinction between conservative and liberal, Aristotelian and Platonic, or reason and emotion. It isn't better to be a mechanic or a mystic. A glance at the gospels makes it clear that Jesus Christ was the greatest mechanic and the purest mystic, as he was always infinitely precise and perfectly organic in his understanding of this created world.
As I'm sure every reader noticed by the fact that I started out by talking about two groups of worldviews, I tend to be more of a mechanic than a mystic. I have a logical, scientific mind, and I am skeptical of imprecision and unsupported arguments. If a friend makes statements that are not fully consistent with each other, I notice. And if my wife claims something I can prove wrong, I usually do, whether it helps our relationship or hurts it (or even matters at all).
But there is a part of me that is terribly sympathetic to the mystics. A part of me is drawn to martial arts, to learning by doing, to brooding and meditation. The same part of me has learned not to argue about the existence of God or the meaninglessness of libertarian free will, even though the mechanic in me believes intellectual honesty demands both in any discussion. I am part economist and part judoka, and I could not be myself without both. All believers are some part Mechanic and another Mystic. And I am convinced that being the Body of Christ means recognizing the distinct but inseparable roles for both.
One, whom we shall call the mechanic, emphasizes clarity of categories, consistency in terminology, and the making of distinctions. The mechanic loves systematic theology--the tracing of intellectual concepts throughout Scripture in order to develop a fully formed understanding of technical categories like progressive sanctification, sacraments, double imputation, and the three uses of the law. The mechanic's rhetoric is careful and nuanced. Whenever he uses a word, his audience knows precisely what he is referring to. He is a great teacher, because his arguments are easy to follow and always well constructed. His thinking is so clear that everyone who converses with him leaves understanding things more clearly than when he began.
The other is organic in thought and expression, with each idea blending into the others like rivers flowing into a single ocean. There is a unity of thought, created not by carefully constructed links of reasoning, but by the fact that no one idea exists in isolation. He is a mystic, taking reality as a thing to be experienced, not analyzed. He understands the unity of the body, mind, and spirit. His study lies in biblical theology--the developing of understanding as it was developed over the history of the Scriptures, each new book building on the meaning already developed by the previous ones. Metaphors and symbolism shape his rhetoric. He loves to encourage, build up, and apply truth to life, making him a great preacher. Everyone who converses with him leavings thinking more deeply than when he began.
Neither the mechanic nor the mystic are sinless men, of course. Even if they were, each has weaknesses the other can support and strengths the other needs. Mechanics run into trouble when they try to reconcile a perfectly holy and consistent God with His blessing of Hebrew midwives for lying. Mystics notice that God's command is not "you shall not lie," but "you shall not bear false testimony against your neighbor," and understand that meaning is not a deistic thing floating in the ether, but that truth, like God, is itself relational (which is clearly not the same thing as saying it is relative, although a mystic might not be able to tell you why). Mystics, on the other hand, are easily swayed by passion or tradition, or marrying the daughters of the land and being led aside to other Gods. The discerning aid of a mechanic can be used of God to rescue a mystic from worshiping at a rodeo-style church service beside a painting of Viking-Jesus and being convinced that God really is a Republican after all.
I hope the above illustrates that this isn't a distinction between conservative and liberal, Aristotelian and Platonic, or reason and emotion. It isn't better to be a mechanic or a mystic. A glance at the gospels makes it clear that Jesus Christ was the greatest mechanic and the purest mystic, as he was always infinitely precise and perfectly organic in his understanding of this created world.
As I'm sure every reader noticed by the fact that I started out by talking about two groups of worldviews, I tend to be more of a mechanic than a mystic. I have a logical, scientific mind, and I am skeptical of imprecision and unsupported arguments. If a friend makes statements that are not fully consistent with each other, I notice. And if my wife claims something I can prove wrong, I usually do, whether it helps our relationship or hurts it (or even matters at all).
But there is a part of me that is terribly sympathetic to the mystics. A part of me is drawn to martial arts, to learning by doing, to brooding and meditation. The same part of me has learned not to argue about the existence of God or the meaninglessness of libertarian free will, even though the mechanic in me believes intellectual honesty demands both in any discussion. I am part economist and part judoka, and I could not be myself without both. All believers are some part Mechanic and another Mystic. And I am convinced that being the Body of Christ means recognizing the distinct but inseparable roles for both.
posted by Norman at 12:53 AM
1 Comments:
Good stuff. What about those of us torn between the two?
Post a Comment
<< Home