The Pursuit of God

(My review is also posted on Carrie's blog, but I include it here to find more easily later.)

A.W. Tozer wrote The Pursuit of God in one night while riding a Pullman train on his way from Chicago to speak in Texas.  He sequestered himself in his roomette, refused all food but some toast and tea, and "wrote all night long, this thing coming as fast to his heart as he could write, and when they pulled into the station, about 7:30 the next morning, at McAllen, Texas, that book was finished and all he had in front of him was just the Bible. . .Beginning with publication in 1948 and continuing for well over a half century, this book has inspired and encouraged pastors and missionaries, as well as a wide range of devout men and women with hearts after God" (A Passion for God, Dorsett, 120).

In the introduction Dr. Samuel M. Zwemer, an author, evangelist, and leader in the Reformed Church of America, describes the book as "theology not of the head but of the heart" (7).  Zwemer also described the book as "a masterly study of the inner life by a heart thirsting after God, eager to grasp at least the outskirts of His ways, the abyss of His love for sinners, and the height of His unapproachable majesty" (6).

Biographer Lyle Dorsett described The Pursuit of God as "one of the most striking manifestations of the truth that if a man will concern himself with the depth of his ministry, the Holy Spirit will take care of the breadth" (121) which certainly seems true as I consider the wide-spread, interdenominational, and enduring fame this admittedly deep book has achieved.

I have heard many references to The Pursuit of God, have always wanted to read it, and can now finally say I have read it.  That may be about all I can claim, however, as I'm not sure I can speak intelligently about it after only one reading.  I didn't enjoy the book as much as I had hoped to.  I found it difficult to read as I wasn't always sure what point he was trying to make. After plowing through several pages, I would finally think "Oh!  That's where he was going", which was frustrating.  As a busy homeschooling mom with a baby (read: sleep-deprived!), however, I'm willing to concede that might have been my problem and not his.

I find it an interesting parallel that I actually enjoyed Dorsett's biography of Tozer more than I enjoyed Tozer's writings.  Just as Tozer himself longed to more fully know God the more he read God's Word, so I also found myself more curious about Tozer as I read his writing.

There were many very good lessons in his writing, of course, but I'll try to limit myself to highlighting only three of them.  One of my favorites was his assertion that individual personal growth toward Christ is more unifying than people purposing to compromise for the sake of unity.

"Has it ever occurred to you that one hundred pianos all tuned to the same fork are automatically tuned to each other?  They are of one accord by being tuned, not to each other, but to another standard to which each one must individually bow.  So one hundred worshippers met together, each one looking away to Christ, are in heart nearer to each other than they could possibly be were they to become 'unity' conscious and turn their eyes away from God to strive for closer fellowship.  Social religion is perfected when private religion is purified.  The body becomes stronger as its members become healthier.  The whole Church of God gains when the members that compose it begin to seek a better and a higher life" (53).

I also really appreciated his chapter  about meekness leading to rest based on Matthew 11:28-29.  Coming to Jesus, giving Him our burdens of pride, pretense, and artificiality, frees us from worrying about ourselves all the time--what people think of us and where we stand in relation to others.  "Jesus calls us to His rest, and meekness is His method.  The meek man cares not at all who is greater than he, for he has long ago decided that the esteem of the world is not worth the effort. . .he has stopped being fooled about himself.  He has accepted God's estimate of his own life" (61).  "Apart from sin we have nothing of which to be ashamed.  Only an evil desire to shine makes us want to appear other than we are. . .The rest he offers is the rest of meekness, the blessed relief which comes when we accept ourselves for what we are and cease to pretend" (63).  That is profound insight, in my opinion, and a different application from those verses than I've ever heard or considered before.



Finally, I found this the scariest passage in his book: "Current evangelicalism has laid the altar and divided the sacrifice into parts, but now seems satisfied to count the stones and rearrange the pieces with never a care that THERE IS NOT A SIGN OF FIRE upon the top of lofty Carmel. But God be thanked that there are a few who care. They are those who, while they love the altar and delight in the sacrifice, are yet unable to reconcile themselves to the continued absense of fire. They desire God above all" (8). (emphasis mine).


While I understand the concerns some have expressed about how we shouldn't "attack" the church, I also remember God sending prophets of old to His people with stern warnings (far more scathing than Tozer's) in order to bring them back to Him. I never got the impression that Tozer feared the church would fizzle out or become unusable, but rather that he was calling us to a higher level, to desiring God above all else and not contenting ourselves with the prescribed procedures of church services. While not all congregations of the Lord's people have this challenge, I have seen some for whom I would share Tozer's concern that they might be religiously "straining at gnats" with "never a care that there is not a sign of fire". Unfortunately, we humans are quick to become complacent or to substitute rules for God's presence, and thankfully God equips people, through His Word and Spirit, to bring us back to Him.


I'm out of space (and likely your indulgence!) to linger in his chapter about the "blessed poor no longer being slaves to the tyranny of things" as they have "rooted from their hearts all sense of possessing" (17), although I would love to discuss it more.


So I will end with the hope Tozer also expressed, that we each will "get still to wait on God. . .alone, preferably with our Bible outspread before us" (45). I would also invite you to read the biography Dorsett wrote about Tozer. I thoroughly enjoyed it. He had the respect and admiration of the leaders of his day, particularly in the Christian and Missionary Alliance denomination of which he was a part. They identified him as a transparent and meek man who "loved the Bible and unflinchingly preached what he believed people needed to hear, regardless of what they wanted" (Dorsett, 17), and a man who "truly knew Jesus Christ rather than just knew what the Bible recorded about Him" (103). While some might criticize him for being self-educated, I personally am an admirer of lifelong learners and believe that seminary is far from necessary for one to adequately share God's Word which is all we need to learn "all things that pertain to life and godliness" (2 Peter 1:3). Like John Wesley, he was a "man of One Book, but the student of many", and his biography details many books he read. He was an imperfect instrument, of course, and I found it very sad to read of his wife's and children's hurts as they were pushed to the background in his quest for deeper intimacy with God yet "he had no inkling that his zeal for God's house was undermining his own" (109). I think this is yet another lesson we can learn from his life, in addition to the lessons he voiced.


While I didn't agree with every word in this book, I would like to read it again for I think it's a book to be carefully mined and not casually read. This is the first book I have read by Tozer, and I hope to someday read another. What would you recommend?

Number the Stars

I had read Number the Stars by Lois Lowry before, but read it again for Carrie's book club.

Three themes stood out to me in this reading of a young girl's encounter with Germany's oppression of the Jews.

1) Courage.  We don't know how brave we are until we are called on to act.  Like Annemarie, many of us admire the courage of others and doubt we would be able to exercise it similarly in the same situation.  Many of us are secretly "glad to be an ordinary person who would never be called upon for courage" (26).

Yet I think we would do better to prepare ourselves.  Jesus warns us not to be surprised if the world hates us (I John 3:13) and again in I Peter 4:12-19 we're cautioned not to be surprised when we go through fiery trials of suffering.  As Christians, I think we should prepare ourselves for life not to be easy and for the world to not understand or approve of the way we live and believe.  Christians have been called to be imprisoned or die for their faith before, and I daresay we will be again.  We still will never know how brave we are until we're called to act, but we can purpose to stand up for what we believe and do what we need to do when the time comes.

Bravery is doing what you need to do without focusing on the dangers. (paraphrased from page 123)

2) Sheltering.  Annemarie's papa wished he could protect his daughter from the knowledge that the Germans were coming to gather up all the Jews.  Sometimes we parents would like to be able to shelter our children from certain knowledge, but the realities of life often force us to expose them to things so they will be prepared to face and overcome those realities.

3) Pride.  It's not always a bad thing.  Pride in who we are, in our value as a human being, can help us stand up to face uncertain realities when we are stripped of all the external markers of who we are.

Annemarie's Jewish friends had taken pride in maintaining their home and religious ceremonies, in working as a teacher, in acting in plays. Yet when they were running for their lives in borrowed clothing, dependent on strangers for food and safety, "their shoulders were as straight as they had been in the past: in the classroom, on the stage, at the Sabbath table.  So there were other sources, too, of pride, and they had not left everything behind" (94).

Ultimately, I think, a better descriptor than pride is a confidence in who we are in Christ--and a confidence in our God--which will equip us to stand strong.  Like the three Hebrew children of old, we can confidently say "we do not need to defend ourselves before you in this matter.  If we are thrown into the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to deliver us from it, and he will deliver us from Your Majesty's hand. But even if he does not, we want you to know that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold you have set up." (Daniel 3:16-18)

Because I'm Smart Like That

I'm participating in Carrie's bookclub at Reading to Know again this year.  When she asked last fall which month and which classic I would pick, I said The Brothers Karamazov in August.  She asked me to write a little blurb to introduce the book and this is what I wrote:

Why, oh why, oh why did I choose the almost-800-page classic The Brothers Karamazov?  And for August, the month before school starts, of all months?!

Admittedly, I was at the time unaware that we would be adopting a baby in April, so I might have thought I would have more time than I in fact do.

Nevertheless, I am cautiously excited to read this one.  My first exposure to Dostoevsky, which occurred within just the last five years, was Crime and Punishment and I was pleasantly surprised at how much I enjoyed it.  True, it wasn't an easy read, but it was fascinating and thought-provoking and I had a blast discussing it (and learning more about nihilism) with two good friends.  I told myself then that I wanted to read another of his works, but I have just never gotten around to it.  When Carrie asked me to choose a classic for the Reading to Know Bookclub in 2014, I jumped at the chance to read and discuss another Dostoevsky novel.

I chose The Brothers Karamazov because I keep hearing about it.  I've seen it on a couple of lists of "books every christian should read".  I understand it to spend a great deal of time examining the questions of whether God exists, and why there is so much evil and suffering in the world.  Some people use it to speak against Christianity while others use it to introduce Christianity.  Up to this point, I cannot speak intelligently about this great work because I have never read it.

Thankfully, I consider myself a lifelong learner and I believe it's never too late to read a classic for the first time.  Thanks to Carrie for organizing this reading group and to each of you who are committing to read along with me.  I look forward to reading each of your thoughts.

The Hundred and One Dalmations

The Hundred and One Dalmatians by Dodie Smith

This book was an absolute delight.  As usual, the book is ever so much better than the movie!  I am so glad Amy chose this one for the Reading to Know Classics Bookclub in July (we read it in July, I am just behind in writing posts!)



I read this aloud to my children and even my 18-year-old and 16-year-old kept wandering in to curl up and listen to a chapter.  We all just loved the rich writing and characterization and especially the use of language.  How can one not delight in phrasing such as these:

"Mr. Dearly was particularly good at arithmetic.  Many people called him a wizard of finance--which is not the same thing as a wizard of magic, though sometimes fairly similar" (4).  (hee, hee)
"She patted Pongo, who was looking particularly intelligent, and said anyone would think he understood.  And indeed he did.  For though he had very little Latin beyond "cave canem," he had, as a young dog, devoured Shakespeare (in a tasty leather binding)" (27).  (giggle)
"You have not failed,' said Misis.  'No one could say the fire was an act of dog'" (146).  (tee, hee)

I got a huge kick out of the characterization of and relationship between Pongo and Missis (his wife in the book, not Perdita as in the Disney movie).  Pongo was portrayed as intelligent and brave, terribly proud of his beautiful-but-not-so-bright wife, and rather like human men, in need of occasionally having his ego stroked.

 "You are a beautiful dog, Missis,' said Pongo.  'I am very proud of you.'  At this, Missis looked even more beautiful and Pongo felt even prouder of her.  After a minute or so, he said, 'Do you think I'm looking pretty fit?'  Misses told him he looked magnificent, and wished she had said so without being asked.  He was not a vain dog, but every husband likes to know that his wife admires him" (66).

It was also quite interesting how clearly the contrast between good and evil was portrayed in the book.  There were many references to Cruella de Vil (and her ancestors) as the devil complete with existence of a long tail, living in Hell Hall, blue forked lightning shooting out from the body, and fiendishly rejoicing at fire's destruction. "Cruella de Vil, standing right up on the roof of the car, where she had climbed so as to get a good view of the fire.  Her white face and absolutely simple white mink coat no longer looked white.  From head to foot she was bathed in the red-gold flicker of the flames.  And as they leaped higher and higher she clapped her hands in delight" (148).  This was contrasted with the "peaceful and welcoming" (142) refuge the dogs and pups found while resting near a nativity scene in a church building.

One last message I appreciated in this book, which perhaps stood out to me as an adoptive parent, was the nurturing instinct both Pongo and Missis had toward the pups who needed a family.

 "Pongo could feel great waves of love and trust rolling towards him.  And suddenly all the pups were real and living for him, not just a problem he had to face.  He felt as if he were the father of them all. And he knew that he could never desert them (107).
 "(The pups) had looked at Missis shyly, quite understanding that she must care for her own children first, but hoping she would have a little time for them later. . .She felt a pang of pity.  What mother had any of them now?  She smiled at them all--and they wrinkled their little noses in a return smile.  Then she looked beyond them, to the larger pups.  Some of the half-grown girls reminded her of herself at that age--so slim, so silly.  They knew how to wash themselves but there were many things they didn't know, many ways in which they needed a mother's advice.  And suddenly, all the puppies were her puppies; she was their mother--just as Pongo had felt he was their father.  And indeed the younger ones creeping closer and closer to her were now so mingled with her own that she could scarcely tell where her little family ended and her larger family began" (109).

We very much enjoyed this book--it's a perfect read-aloud because little children enjoy the story while older children and adults can appreciate the humor, plays on words, and characterization.

The Little White Horse

The Little White Horse by Elizabeth Goudge

Delightfully charming and fanciful.

This Carnegie Medal-winner from the mid-1900s was a fun little escape into the whimsical world of orphaned Maria Merryweather who finds her home, family, and purpose when she goes to live with her bachelor uncle.

I enjoyed the descriptive writing style and the way the author made the various characters come to life.  I especially enjoyed Marmaduke Scarlet, the dwarf and house servant whose vocabulary and general way of speaking tickled me immensely.  (Example:  "I gathered from the tone of your voice that this tea-party was to be a great occasion, and great occasions need to be greatly celebrated.  The mere suggestion of meanness, upon a great occasion, is much to be deprecated.  The bodily sustenance of the inner man as well as the aesthetic satisfaction of the outward eye should be on a lavish scale" (222).

I also thought Wrolf, the dog/lion was particularly well-done and Old Parson was simply a delight with his way of bringing the Bible to life, of knowing his parishioners to such an extent that he both commended and corrected them, and of engaging the children and creating a sense of community.

As you might expect from a children's book written in this time period, there is a good deal of moralizing by the characters discussing traits such as love, humility and courage and "having too much sense to let the spirits be dampened by minor disappointments" (135).  The language was flowing and poetic and took me both back in time and into another world where magical creatures and the resolution of a centuries-long feud by a little girl seems possible.  As a book lover, I especially enjoyed this language: 

"(The room had) no other furniture and no pictures or ornaments.  But the room did not need them because of the books, which stood there upon the shelves breathing out a friendliness that seemed to furnish and ornament the room. . .Maria had no doubt that the loving usage that had turned the books into living creatures was Old Parson's" (111).

It's been a few months since I participated in Carrie's book club, but I enjoyed this selection and likely wouldn't have read it without it being the book for March.  I'm looking forward to reading another P.G. Wodehouse, Very Good, Jeeves, for the book club in April.  Maybe I'll get to read it while in Phoenix! :)

Tale of Two Cities

The December selection for Carrie's Book Club was A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens.  I will confess that I read this with Briana and Destry earlier in the school year, and I never got around to writing a review of it.

The kids and I got so much out of this great novel set during the French Revolution (which we were studying in our history lessons) and have developed quite an appreciation for Dickens and his incredible (if long-winded) gift with language.  People simply do not write like this anymore.

Because I am behind in writing book reviews (or possibly I am just lazy, or then again, I might be doing so because I enjoyed them), I am going to share the kids' essays prompted by our reading and discussion of this novel and its setting.

Contrasting the French and American Revolutions

By Briana

            During the late 1700’s, two history-shaping revolutions took place. The first was the American Revolution and the second was the French Revolution. Though these revolutions occurred simultaneously, the outcome of each was very different. While the American Revolution gave birth to the freedom-based United States, the French Revolution resulted in The Reign of Terror and massive political upheaval in France. The fundamental similarities between these two revolutions can make it difficult to understand why they turned out so differently. Both revolutions started as a result of the people desiring to be free from the oppression of a king and his nobles. Also, both revolutions were led by men of great talent who spurred the people on. A declaration and constitution were also written for each country, outlining what each believed. Even though these revolutions had similarities, their differences led to their divergent results. The outcomes of the revolutions were dictated by their history, government, and goals.

            The American and French revolutions were greatly shaped by the background of the people who participated in them. The people of France were burdened by a history of oppression. For decades, the lower class had been little more than slaves, forced by the nobles to work and pay heavy taxes. As a result of this, the people of France were poor and starving. Americans, on the other hand, had been living in a free new land experiencing the blessings of prosperity, plenty, and self-government. The French were not only oppressed physically, but they were also uneducated. There were three estates, or classes, in France at this time: the Clergy, the Nobles, and the peasants. The peasants were largely uneducated, and spent their days struggling to survive. By contrast, there were no distinct classes in America, and education was very important to the average American. There was a very high literacy rate in the American colonies before and during the revolution. The French people’s poverty, ignorance, and oppression motivated the peasants to revolt. The American Revolution, on the other hand, was started by well-educated, prospering colonists who wanted to maintain and protect their rights from the king who was encroaching upon them. The history and education of the people involved in the revolutions made the one a desperate enterprise, and the other an enlightened desire for liberty.

            Because the two revolutions were driven by people with different backgrounds, two distinct governments were established. The French set up a democracy in which every citizen directly participated. In the reign of terror, it was the populace of Paris that influenced the judges to execute or spare prisoners, and during the massacre of the prisons, the people were the executioners. In America, however, the people were not directly involved in the new political system. America set up a republic, in which the people were represented in a legislature. Because of the indirect influence of the general public, the American system was more orderly and organized, and contained no mob rule. The democratic structure of the new French government made it possible for the general populace to rule the country, and throw moderation and responsibility to the wind, while the structure of American government insured that liberty and justice would be given to all. The people of France and America both established a government, but America designed a more responsible system to protect and manage their rights.

            The most striking difference between the two revolutions can be seen in the dominant goal each country strove to achieve with their revolution. The goal of the French people in their revolution was revenge. The populace wanted to rid France of the people who had oppressed and dehumanized them for centuries. The Americans, on the other hand, desired to secede from those who would not respect them and form a separate, but equal, nation. Because France’s goal was revenge, the revolutionaries soon took their desires too far, and carried out revenge upon thousands of innocent people. Violence and bloodshed became the true rulers of France, bringing terror and destruction upon the country. America’s goal of separation caused them to be involved in a war which cost many Americans and British their lives. This war, however, was motivated by the desire to separate from Britain, not to get revenge. The Americans were successful over the British in this war, and the new nation was recognized by the world. The history-shaping results of the French and American revolutions were determined by their different goals.

            The American and French revolutions are well-known in human history, for both had a strong impact on the world. The French Revolution horrified the world with the brutality and murder of those years. By contrast, the American Revolution is remembered as the birth of a nation that has been a shining example of liberty and self-government. Many times throughout human history revisions to countries and governments have been necessary and revolutions have taken place. In modern life, citizens of a country often feel the need for revisions in their own country’s government. When those situations arise, citizens can look to the past for guidance in handling revolutions and reformations effectively. The background, goal and new system of government must all be taken into account. A modern revolution could choose to follow the example of France, and ignorantly take revenge on wrongdoers, or it could follow in the footsteps of America and strive to separate from oppressors and form a responsible government. 

(I'll try to remember to post Destry's essay tomorrow)

Dorian Gray

Some books are so weird they stick with a person.  I think The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde is  one of those kinds of books.

Its author claims "there is no such thing as a moral or immoral book.  Books are well written, or badly written.  That is all."  At the same time, his main character encounters first an immoral man, then a book which opens his mind to a hedonistic lifestyle and it's all downhill from there.

The plot of the book centers around the beautiful, innocent-looking Dorian Gray who was the subject of a painting in his youth.  "He had uttered a mad wish that he himself might remain young, and the portrait grow old; that his own beauty might be untarnished, and the face on the canvas bear the burden of his passions and his sins; that the painted image might be seared with the lines of suffering and thought, and that he might keep all the delicate bloom and loveliness of his then just conscious boyhood" (110).  Who could imagine that his wish would come true--that his visage would remain innocent, young, and beautiful while the portrait grew ever uglier to reflect the stains on his soul as he pursued the pleasures of sin for a season.

Yet through his hedonistic pursuits, he never found love, happiness or contentment.  "That curiosity about life which Lord Henry had first stirred in him, as they sat together in the garden of their friend, seemed to increase with gratification.  The more he knew, the more he desired to know.  He had mad hungers that grew more ravenous as he fed them" (151).  He corrupted women and he led his friends into destruction until "he wanted to be where no one would know who he was.  He wanted to escape from himself" (214).

The pleasures of sin for a season, indeed.  The story was hauntingly similar to the biblical book of Ecclesiastes in some senses.  Vanity, vanity, all is vanity.  "What does it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul?"  Even Lord Henry, Dorian's cynical mentor in sin's vices, grew world-weary and tired of it all.

Which brings me to Lord Henry himself.  He idolized youth and beauty, cared about nothing but himself and his pleasure, and held himself mockingly aloof from those about him.  While he was quite the horrid influence, I sometimes could relate to his cynicism and by turn either pondered or got a kick out of his pithy sayings such as the following: 

"But I can't help detesting my relations.  I suppose it comes from the fact that none of us can stand other people having the same faults as ourselves" (23).

"Young men want to be faithful, and are not; old men want to be faithless, and cannot:  that is all one can say" (45).

"To be good is to be in harmony with one's self.  Discord is to be forced to be in harmony with others.  One's own life--that is the important thing.  As for the lives of one's neighbors, if one wishes to be a prig or a Puritan, one can flaunt one's moral views about them, but they are not one's concern" (97).

"Women are wonderfully practical, much more practical than we are.  In situations of that kind we often forget to say anything about marriage, and they always remind us" (95).  (I insert here an involuntary chuckle HA!)

"Children begin by loving their parents; as they grow older they judge them; sometimes they forgive them" (85).

"When a woman marries again, it is because she detested her first husband.  When a man marries again, it is because he adored his first wife.  Women try their luck; men risk theirs."

"We can have in life but one great experience at best, and the secret of life is to reproduce that experience as often as possible. . .I have never searched for happiness.  Who wants happiness?  I have searched for pleasure" (224).

I must admit I host a cynic inside me as well and books like this waken her.  Combine the premise of this book with the book I am currently reading (The Atonement Child which tells of a young, innocent, sheltered christian girl being impregnated through rape) and I start questioning some of our parenting choices.  This world is ugly--just plain rotten--and someone, somewhere, sometime will delight in setting Pandora's box before my children and exposing them to temptations of hedonistic pleasures.  Someday they will experience heartbreak, betrayal, disappointment. . .Sometimes my cynical self wonders if it's even possible to adequately prepare or protect them so what's the point of even trying. Yet try to prepare them I must, ever pointing them to the Lord and Savior who stretched out His arms to claim our guilt and shame when we are drawn away of our own lusts and enticed.

An interesting and thought-provoking book indeed.  I find it interesting that it beautifully illustrates the vanity of a life spent in pursuit of selfish pleasure, even as I understand Oscar Wilde himself to have been an adherent of hedonism.  I'm quite glad I read it for Carrie's book club (even as I finished later than the deadline specified).

Through Gates of Splendor

I'm still a little behind, but I did finish reading Through Gates of Splendor by Elisabeth Elliot for Carrie's book club in June.  While life has been busy and my reading time has been limited lately, I do have fond memories of Destry's obsession with The End of the Spear, a movie based on this same story of five missionaries who were killed by the Waodoni of Ecuador who they were trying to reach with the gospel.

I am very glad I read this book and recommend it.  At times it's a little tedious as Elisabeth heavily quotes letters and diary entries from the five men, yet at the same time, that's part of what I most appreciated about her account.  The men's reflections on their commitment to Christ and their willingness to literally lay down their lives are both inspiring and convicting.  In a culture saturated with selfishness, covetousness, greed, materialism. . . .well, their perspective stands out.

Jim Elliot's perspective on life--or its thorns that choke the seed:
"The Lord has given me a hunger for righteousness and piety that can alone be of Himself.  Such hungering He alone can satisfy, yet Satan would delude and cast up all sorts of other baubles, social life, a name renowned, a position of importance, scholastic attainment.  What are these but the objects of the 'desire of the Gentiles' whose cravings are warped and perverted.  Surely they can mean nothing to the soul who has seen the beauty of Jesus Christ. . .No doubt you will hear of my receiving preliminary honors at school.  They carry the same brand and will lie not long hence in the basement in a battered trunk beside the special gold 'B' pin, with the ruby in it for which I studied four years at Benson.  All is vanity below the sun and a 'striving after wind'.  Life is not here, but hid above with Christ in God, and therein I rejoice and sing as I think on such exaltation" (17).

"He makes His ministers a flame of fire.  Am I ignitable?  God deliver me from the dread asbestos of 'other things.'  Saturate me with the oil of the Spirit that I may be a flame.  But flame is transient, often short-lived.  Canst thou bear this, my soul--short life?" (18)

His ruminations were so good and reminded me, yet again, that my desire is to "set my affections on things above, not on things on the earth"--and to share that vision with my children.

Commentary on the American church:
"What if the well-filled church in the homeland (America) needs stirring?  They have the Scriptures, Moses and the prophets, and a whole lot more.  Their condemnation is written on their bank books and in the dust on their Bible covers" (20).

Distraction of day-to-day life.  Even on the "mission field":
"It's hard to stay on top of it all, hard to keep rejoicing, hard to love these ungrateful Indians.  It's hard to keep our primary purpose in view when we get so swamped with secondary things" (56)

I found this quote regarding Ed McCully's discouragement interesting.  I think it's easy for us to think a life serving God will be more exciting, more fulfilling, more meaningful "somewhere else."  But the daily tedium of life can distract us from our mission wherever we are serving, whether it's in our homes with our husbands and children, in our local community, or in some faraway land and culture.

Reactions to the men's murder (applicable to other times of suffering):
"I want to be free of self-pity.  It is a tool of Satan to rot away a life" (236).  (spoken by one of the wives--now a widow.  Isn't that so true?)

"(The massacre) was interpreted according to the measure of one's faith or faithlessness--full of meaning or empty.  A triumph or a tragedy" (270).

I consider how we interpret the events of our lives.  Do we view them through a lens of faith?  Or the lens of our own selfishness?

The way the Lord uses our interests and passions:
I've heard elsewhere that the very things that our children drive us crazy doing give us clues as to their giftings and what they will do with their lives.  Consequently, I couldn't help but grin as Nate Saint served the missionaries by fixing up broken planes just "as he used to rig model planes as a child" (70).  I can't wait to see what my children end up doing in their service to the Lord and how I will reflect on the foreshadowing I was privy to in their early years.

Island of the Blue Dolphins

Carrie's book club this month was assigned the children's classic, Island of the Blue Dolphins by Scott O'Dell.  I've read many "survival" books of a similar theme, so I'm not sure if this book seemed familiar because of the genre or because I had read it previously as a child myself, but I enjoyed revisiting it.

I personally think it's wonderful for children to read books about survival because they highlight and reward great character traits like perseverance, hard work, resourcefulness, and independence.  I honestly don't think I could survive alone for years and years (EIGHTEEN YEARS!  She lived there alone for eighteen years!).  I don't know that I would have the will to survive, and I'm pretty sure I don't have the survival skills needed to provide food, shelter, and weapons for myself, so I especially admire people who can survive such situations.  I think Alan would be more than capable of survival. . .so if I'm ever stranded on an island or some other wilderness, I insist that he come with me.

Overall, I think I enjoyed another children's survival classic Call It Courage more, but what is most fascinating to me about this story of a young woman surviving alone for several years on a Pacific Island is that it's based on a true story.  They even think they might have found her cave!

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/oct/29/local/la-me-lone-woman-cave-20121027

Since both Briana and Destry had previously read this book, we really had fun learning about the original woman (who was older than the girl depicted in the book) and the archeological discoveries they have made regarding her tribe.

The Scarlet Letter

I'm posting my review of The Scarlet Letter that I wrote for the book club discussion over at Reading to Know so I don't lose it! :)  We're having fun discussing over there and people are sharing some great points.  Go check it out!

Nathaniel Hawthorne's classic novel, The Scarlet Letter, provided a great deal of fodder for discussion with my two teenagers recently.  We spent so much time discussing it and writing essays inspired by this book that I simply can't imagine how I'm going to condense my thoughts into a blog post for Carrie's book club.

Nevertheless, I'm going to try.  Most people likely already know the storyline of The Scarlet Letter from plowing through it in high school (like I did).  Now twenty years later my thoughts have been more piqued by Hawthorne's crafting--although I can't really say I *enjoyed* reading it much more than I did the first time.

• PRIDE:  I was struck by the pride each of the characters demonstrated, likely because of my own pride issues.  From nursing a wounded ego by a faithless wife to fearing the community opinion to proudly rejecting discipline and hating reproof the three main characters demonstrate the follies--and subsequent consequences--of pride.  I wonder what would have happened had Dimmesdale been transparent in confessing and repenting of his sin.  What would have been most helpful and edifying to the rest of the church?  It seems to me that hiding sin leads to denying sin and takes away accountability in the church.
• REBELLION, REPENTANCE, PENITENCE, and PENANCE:  I've never read a fiction novel that made me think so much about various responses to sin.  Repentance, of course, is precipitated by godly sorrow but too often I think people stop with regret or penitence rather than allowing their sorrow to lead to a change of mind and behavior.   On the other hand, the Dimmesdales of our christian culture try to pay for their sin on their own and that, my friend, is simply not possible. This was an especially beneficial discussion with my teenagers as one of them is tempted to feel a need to "pay back" for what the Lord has done on our behalf and I think reading and discussing this book opened some eyes a bit.
• EXPECTATIONS:  I couldn't help but ponder the varying expectations placed on people dependent upon their status in the community or church (clergy vs. laity distinctions).  While those in leadership positions certainly have more responsibility, I'm not sure we are right in our human tendency to put leaders on a pedestal and then apply more stringent expectations on them than ourselves.  Leaders are still humans and as such they will fall--and as such they are still recipients of the Lord's mercy and grace.  When we put them on such high pedestals I fear we are creating the same climate that led to Dimmesdale's secrecy rather than encouraging an atmosphere of confession, repentance, and forgiveness.  I could dwell on this, but I'm choosing to step off this soapbox.  (Although don't think I'm condoning the practice of sin in anyone, it just seems to me that biblical standards apply to all of us equally.  I hope that's clear.)
• SELF-JUSTIFICATION:  Was anyone else particularly pricked by Hawthorne's vivid portrayal of our inclination to continue farther from God once you have stepped onto the path away from Him?  Dimmesdale seemed willing to take the leap from a brief, impulsive affair (at least that was my interpretation) to purposefully choosing the wilder path across the ocean where they would be free to indulge their desires without any accountability.
• PURITANISM, ROMANTICISM, and TRANSCENDENTALISM:  I won't take time to go into this one here, but I truly found it fascinating the way Hawthorne personified these belief systems in Dimmesdale, Hester, and Pearl regardless of whether I agree with his portrayals.
• CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT:  Finally, I can't help but marvel at Hawthorne's talent in painting his characters.  The way he uses different perspectives (such as from the townspeople, Hester, and Pearl in particular) to flesh out the characters is almost worth reading the book yet again.  Maybe in another twenty years.

I know I've said it before, but I'll say it again.  Reading the classics challenges me so much more than reading much of the drivel written more recently.  I just love pondering these timeless issues and discussing them with fellow book-lovers.  I look forward to benefiting from thoughts others gleaned from this classic.

The Assignment

Carrie from Reading to Know invited me to participate in her book club again this year and the theme is classics.  Since I had already planned to read Nathaniel Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter with my teenagers this school year, I chose it for the February selection.

Would you like to read along with us this month?

It's a great book and will give you lots to think about.  Here is the brief introduction to the book:

Until I read The Scarlet Letter with my teenagers last year, I hadn't read it since high school twenty years ago. I got a lot more out of it this time through and am looking forward to reading everyone's thoughts of this great classic. Expect to see themes such as repentance (godly sorrow vs. sorrow of the world) and penance vs. penitence as well as pride and "presenting an image". I also especially enjoyed learning about philosophies such as puritanism, romanticism and transcendentalism in conjunction with reading the book and considering the time period in which Hawthorne wrote it. Read along with us and you won't soon forget Hester and Pearl, Chillingworth and Dimmesdale. If you examine yourself, you'll likely even see bits of their characters in your own.  

I hope you'll be back for the discussion on Carrie's blog in four weeks!