In our modern muddle, we judge things only by whether or not they are new. The new theologians, says Chesterton, do not worship the sun or moon; they worship the clock.
But what happens to new things? They become old. ‘Living in a world that worships swiftness and success no longer means living in a world of new things. Rather it means living in a world of old things; of things that very swiftly grow old.’
Dale Ahlquist, The Complete Thinker, p. 100
‘There is nothing new under the sun’ takes on a new sense in our culture. There is nothing new because everything is on the verge of becoming a fossil at any moment.
Isaac Watts paraphrases Psalm 90:5-6,
Time, like an ever rolling stream,
Bears all its sons away;
They fly, forgotten, as a dream
Dies at the opening day
Psalm 90:3-6 states,
3 You turn people back to dust,
saying, “Return to dust, you mortals.”
4 A thousand years in your sight
are like a day that has just gone by,
or like a watch in the night.
5 Yet you sweep people away in the sleep of death—
they are like the new grass of the morning:
6 In the morning it springs up new,
but by evening it is dry and withered.
I cite Psalm 90 for this purpose: our constant discarding of the old in favor of the new is a parable of life, an illustration of the brevity of existence. Somehow, because we realize the pace at which we are moving, that we are vapor, we have come to exalt the new – at least for a moment. Our contraptions have taken our form. They become old quickly, but never have the chance to mature. Instead they are only replaced. And so, as vapors ourselves, we make vapors, and sweep them away as if they were hay on a field. It’s a strange, strange form of trying to put ourselves in the place of God; as if Psalm 90:3-6 were speaking about us rather than God, and our contraptions are what spring up in the morning and by evening is dry and withered.
I’m not being clear here. This line of thought is happening as I write. But let me close out this post by dealing with the main point I had in mind when I saved this quote:
We think we have become better than our ancestors who worshiped the sun and moon; but at least those things were not things that they had created. We worship the clock. They worshiped what is ancient and God-made. We worship what is new and man-made. And we somehow think they were primitive. What are we? Diminutive.
We are so small we cannot hold the old. Chesterton put it this way:
The moderns say that they are leaving the past because it is exhausted; but they lie. They are escaping from the past because it is so strong (Ahlquist, p. 98).
Now, I am by no means advocating idolatry of any kind. I am simply making the point that the fact that the idolatry is newer doesn’t make it superior. It’s still idolatry, and in some ways it’s more silly. There’s a better way (for both):
- Thus says the Lord:
“Stand by the roads, and look,
and ask for the ancient paths,
where the good way is; and walk in it,
and find rest for your souls.
But they said, ‘We will not walk in it’ (Jer. 6:16).
- Isaac reopened the wells that had been dug in the time of his father Abraham, which the Philistines had stopped up after Abraham died, and he gave them the same names his father had given them (Gen. 26:18).
I think Jeremiah 6:16 is the verse used by J.C. Ryle for his book entitled Old Paths. It is a very good book.
Thanks for the reminder, that we need the old paths of God, not the new junk of men. Another way to look at this same idolatry is to call it “change.” The culture around us worships change, even though much of the change that takes place is something very old indeed: the exaltation of the self as god.
I read a C.S. Lewis essay years ago that makes the point that change doesn’t equal progress. People just can’t seem to get that straight.
I am reminded of Augustine’s famous quote from his Confessions: “Thou movest us to delight in praising Thee; for Thou hast formed us for Thyself, and our hearts are restless till they find rest in Thee?” We were made to praise God, which means we were meant to be contented by God. This stands in direct opposition to the restless “change” that men insatiably lust after.
Following God could mean maintaining where we are, or seeking old paths, or seeking the change of new paths, but all these possibilities will be put in order when our hearts “rest in Thee.” We must change our affections in order to change our goals and methods of achievement.
Agreed.
Please let me know if there’s anything in particular you’d like to discuss from Gospel Mystery. I think I’m only going to do one or two more posts otherwise, but I’d be happy to discuss anything that piqued your interest.
I also wanted to let you know that I order the ‘Surprised by Laughter’ book (it came in the mail yesterday). I haven’t decided what I’m reading after I finish my Van Til book, so I may read it soon. Let me know in the future if you want me to read any books with you or discuss other ones and I’d be happy to do it.
Please let me know what you think, should you plunge into “Surprised by Laughter.”
I would appreciate your thoughts on the very end of Chapter 12 in “The Gospel Mystery…”, which begins with “We have another instance of God’s indulgence, more full to our present purpose…” and reaches to the end. There is alot going on there concerning the gentleness of God in sanctification, and he makes some large statements like “Overdoing commonly proves undoing.”
I’m reading Lewis’s “Till We Have Faces” at the moment, the last novel he ever wrote. I try to keep a decently balanced diet of fiction and non-ficiton at all times. I’ve got two chapters to go with “Gospel Mystery,” and I’ve been chewing through Marva J Dawn’s book “Sexual Character”… I do not recommend Mrs.Dawn’s book, as her better insights appear to all come via direct quotations from other authors (like Jacque Ellul,) and (to borrow from PG Wodehouse), her tone may not be disgruntled, but it is consistently far from being gruntled…
All that being said, what of fiction? Anything in that realm interest you for reading in the near future? I’ve been casting a side-long glance at Russia lately, wondering if I should take a closer look. They tell me “Death of Ivan Illych” and “Brothers Karamazov” promise great yields, though I’ve not promised myself to them just yet.
1. I’ll re-read that section of Gospel Mystery before bed and try to post on it tomorrow.
2. I started reading Notes from Underground a few weeks ago and just couldn’t get motivated enough to get very far in. I’ve always wanted to read Dostoevsky and haven’t had the gumption.I’ve heard others say it’s hard to get into the Russians.I haven’t read Tolstoy either. I’d be glad to give either one a shot. I don’t really have anything (fiction-wise) on my immediate radar outside of reading with my kids; but I’m always game for some good fiction.
3. Till We Have Faces is interesting. Strangely the biggest lasting takeaway I’ve had from it is that I give my daughters a ‘Greek kiss’ every night (somewhere it says that the Fox would kiss both eyes and the forehead).
4. It’s funny that you used the word ‘gruntled.’ Myself and a co-worker have a running joke about that word. We talk about being disgruntled and gruntled all the time.
I think “Brothers Karamazov” tempts me most. If not, then I submit “Bleak House” by Dickens, as well as “Faust” by Goeth… Faust would certainly go along with alot of your thinking on scientism, me thinks.
Or Spencer’s “Fairey Queen”!
I’m fine with any and all of them. Pick it and I’ll try to read it with you. You don’t have to hurry. Just let me know when you’re ready.
Thanks for the suggestions; they’ll keep me motivated.
That is why old liberals are so grumpy! They fool themselves into thinking that change will bring them happiness, and when it doesn’t, they just more and more cynical.