Morning Thanks

Garrison Keillor once said we'd all be better off if we all started the day by giving thanks for just one thing. I'll try.

Tuesday, May 19, 2009


It's been awhile since I thought about this so correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that in redemptive history there are two covenants--the covenant of law (the Old Testament world), and the covenant of grace (the NT world). They're distinct, but they're not distinct--which is to say that the incarnation didn't simply delete what came before in the vast history of Jehovah and his people. The OT hasn't been tossed from the canon.

Maybe this is relevant, maybe it isn't. But being in the place that calls itself "the Indian capital of the world" prompts all kinds of questions in me, questions not so much about the gospel, but about its application in our lives and the manner by which its adherents--me among them--offer its great good news.

For a time at least, the U. S. government actively sought religious denominations to play a role in the assimilation of the Indian. There must have been some collusion, but basically religious denominations were "given" various reservations for evangelism--Roman Catholics were alloted Pine Ridge in South Dakota, Episcopalians were given the Rosebud. Somehow--I don't know how exactly--the Christian Reformed Church, my own denomination, was alloted goodly chunks of the Navajo Reservation.

I really believe that the result was likely far more important than denominational authorities out east ever realized, for that "allotment" included the opportunity to catechize boarding school students who were required to attend religious instruction. Many believe that if Native people were to assimilate, they'd need to be Christianized to the point where they'd give up their own "pagan" religions.

Today, all of that sounds harsh, but that's basically the way it worked. So for a time, my own denomination "owned" the term "protestant" throughout this vast reservation. If kids weren't Catholic, they were routed to catechism and Sunday School run by CRC pastors and lay people. That's simply the way it was.

So a few days ago, an aging gentleman, himself one of those lay leaders a half century ago, told me that every last bit of Christian activity in the neighborhood where we were visiting was a result of the teaching of men and women who were from the CRC. The reservation is hardly godless, of course--it never was. But today it's not Godless either; tons of little churches abound, some of them struggling, some of them not, many of the Pentecostal, some of them very clannish, even familial, typical of Navajo culture.

So here's a story. A CRC pastor's "interpreter" accompanied the clergyman faithfully for several years, explaining the good news in thousands of "camp visits." Sadly, the interpreter didn't stop drinking, however, and his drunkenness became a problem, not simply because he drank, but because the drinking got in the way of his duties--a classic definition of alcoholism.

It went on too long, and finally the pastor had to release him from his responsibilities--or so the story goes.

The interpreter loved the bottle, but he also loved the Lord--or at least loved bringing the good news, because while he no longer worked for the CRC pastor, he didn't stop preaching. He started his own church, accumulated his own little flock of believers, and kept hammering away at the love of God.

And thus, little churches, like the ones that still exist throughout the reservation were begun.

My friend's generalization makes great sense. In a way, because the initial and solitary source for a Protestant interpretation of the gospel truth was the Christian Reformed Church, most of the Protestant religious enterprise where we visited was actually there because of the CRC.

If he's right--and I'm betting he is--it's important to understand that the phenomenon he's explaining doesn't show up on a denominational ledger sheet, where the only souls counted are the ones who fill pews in the denomination's own churches.

But there's more. I'm beginning to think that the good news of salvation wasn't all that difficult to bring to a people who knew long before the first missionary ever came how to forgive each other. This is pure speculation on my part, but it seems clear to me that one of the measures of Navajo cultural strength is loyalty and commitment, a loyalty that is thickly layered with the propensity to forgive. What I'm thinking is that teaching the covenant of grace couldn't have been too much of a problem when the students were Navajo. Their culture forgave very well before the missionaries ever arrived.

The sticking point, of course, was the other covenant, the law. The difficulty was rectitude. The problem for a Christian mission, especially a Protestant mission, was establishing definitions of "righteousness." Two wives was one too many. Alcohol wasn't part of the Christian life. Attending church was an indication of a soul's acceptance of covenant promises. Fornication was unacceptable.

It may not have been all that difficult to teach forgiveness, but it was very difficult to teach sin. Can you have one without the other?
Shall we sin then, that grace may abound? Paul asks somewhere. And the answer is no, of course not. We become slaves of righteousness, he insists elsewhere--willing slaves, a concept I always understood but still considered an oxymoron.

I won't begin to suggest I have any answers for the primary questions that arise from all this, except to say that I wonder whether somehow the efficacy of both of the covenants isn't essential. What I mean is that our understanding of God's love requires both a deep and profound sense of the reality of sin, as well as a complete assurance that those sins can be forgiven.

When I think back on where I've come from, religiously, I wonder whether I haven't become more Navajo. There's some irony there, obviously, but I'm guessing I'm not the only one. The church of my youth was far, far more legalistic than the church to which I now belong. Forgiveness today comes far more easily for me and for many of us--and that's a good thing, isn't it?

I guess we're all on a pilgrimage--red and yellow, black and white.

What an interesting world He's given us.


Joel said...

Okay, you asked, so I'll correct my understanding, there are two manifestations of a single covenant. In other words, God doesn't change his mode of operation half way through, it's all about his grace and initiative from the veyr beginning. (For example, the Covenant in Exodus 20 that we call "The Ten Commandments" is still rooted in God's initiative/saving action; they are to obey because God saved them, they don't obey to get God to save them.) At least that's how I understand it...

Del VanDenBerg said...

To put our actions in the past into today's historical context is difficult- thus to judge actions of those who have gone before us requires not a filter of today. However, God's grace does not need a filter, and both those who went before us, and will come behind us need that grace. Eppinga had it all right when he wrote-"'s all about grace." Still, there remains the fact we started something with the Native Americans and we need to finish Salt Lake Indian Christian Center, and the like; how do we assimulate the past with the present, or more importantly the "eternal;" That is the question:-)

hastiin nez-Clorox Clan said...

Let's change those heathen drunks so they can be more like us, as in Acts 2:1-40. It is not about who's got it RIGHT, it is about who's GOT IT, right ?

RickNiekLikeBikes said...

The Covenant never was about the law of God--the law came 430 years after the Covenant was established. I don't know how that fits this post really. I just say what spits through my goofy mind.

Anonymous said...

This is my first post I'd love to thank you for such a great made site!
I was sure this is a perfect way to introduce myself!

Laurence Todd
if you're ever bored check out my site!
[url=]blues clues Party Supplies[/url].

Anonymous said...

Hi I'd like to thank you for such a great quality forum!
Was thinking this would be a nice way to introduce myself!
If you want to compile property it is usually a sharp conception to begin a savings or investing game plan as soon in life as imaginable. But don't despair if you have not begun saving your money until later on in life. With the help of honest work, that is researching the best investment vehicles for your cash you can slowly but surely increase your wealth so that it amounts to a large amount by the time you want to retire. Observe all of the achievable asset classes from stocks to real estate as investments for your money. A knowledgeable and diversified portfolio of investments in various asset classes may make your money get bigger throughout the years.

-Kelly Figura
[url=]currency conversion [/url]

Anonymous said...

Hello. My wife and I bought our house about 6 months ago. It was a foreclosure and we were able to get a great deal on it. We also took advantage of the 8K tax credit so that definitely helped. We did an extensive remodeling job and now I want to refinance to cut the term to a 20 or 15 year loan. Does anyone know any good sites for mortgage information? Thanks!


Anonymous said...

top [url=]001[/url] brake the latest [url=]free casino[/url] manumitted no deposit bonus at the leading [url=]baywatch casino