So, as I said I have started my journey of walking through a journey of reading, and thus I began reading the Sacred Journey by Charles Foster. As I am typing these words I currently sit at page 142 of 212, but I have already had so many ideas about blogs that I decided I will start now, as opposed to after I officially finish the book, which, given my current pace should be early next week. [Reading with an 8 month old is harder than I would have originally guessed]
I would like to begin where Mr. Foster begins in his preface, with three questions.
1. How did anyone ever think that a journey, such as a journey made by a barn swallow, had any religious significance?
2. Were they right?
3. If they were, what should we do with the insight?
Throughout his book Mr. Foster attempts to answer these questions, and today I will share a little of how he answers them, but mostly I will share how I do.
To begin with, how did anyone ever think that a journey had religious significance? Let me begin by asking you a question, have you ever taken a walk? And if you have, did you feel better or worse afterwards? My guess is that your answer to the first question would be, yes; and that your answer to the first would be, better, or at worst, both. That right there tells me why someone might think that there could be some sort of significance with taking a journey. When I go for a hike with Henry strapped to my chest I am often exhausted at the end, but my soul is so much lighter than it was when I began.
And if the journey has some significance why wouldn't it be religious? As Rob Bell made the case some years ago, EVERYTHING IS SPIRITUAL, we make distinctions between what God is and is not concerned about, but if we believe that God loves us, why should we not think that God is concerned with all matters of our lives, not just those we deem to be 'spiritual'? Is it not a spiritual experience to sit and watch the trees sway in the breeze? Is it not spiritual to open yourself to new people and experiences? I say, yes. And if that is the case than all significance is at base spiritual, and if all significance is at base spiritual than it should also be religious.
[perhaps the problem we run into is that religion has become encased in a bad rap of being institutional and hypocritical, it's not, it's adherents may be, but at base, religion is simply a communities attempt to understand something bigger together]
Secondly, were they right? As you may have guessed I strongly believe that they were. I, like Mr. Foster, believe that God is a God of the traveler, a God of those on the margins, a God of those who are in need. As Mr. Foster points out, God originally dwelt among his people in a movable ark (along with a pillar of fire and a column of clouds for that matter). And it was only with some convincing that God relented to the creation of a temple. Which makes me wonder if us in the church have done a grave disservice to God by calling the church the "House of God" isn't God bigger than our buildings? Isn't God's house all of creation? And even more so?
Abraham left, the Israelites wandered, David ran, Jesus set his face for Jerusalem, Paul traveled around the known world, I think that gives a slight edge to the fact that journeys matter to God, and if they matter to God, we should be interested in taking them as well.
[I am a Christian, and a Pastor, so my context is the Old Testament and the New Testament and the church tradition that followed. At the same time I am not without the understanding that most other religions also have a clear understanding of pilgrimage, many more deeply than my own (especially Protestantism, thanks Martin Luther)]
Which brings me to the final question, if they were right (I say yes), what should we do with this insight? I have decided that for me, my 'do' is to one day walk the Camino. I don't do this because Saint James is supposedly buried there, nor do I do this because I am looking for some convenient miracle or struggle. I plan on doing this because after learning of it's existence something inside me morphed.
As I alluded to, during the Protestant reformation Martin Luther put an end to all pilgrimages, partly due to the fact that he believed that the Catholic Church used them to exploit people. To that end pilgrimage has never been a part of my particular church tradition [though it may be able to be argued, quite successfully, that in my Church of God tradition, the journey to Camp Meeting in Anderson may itself be a pilgrimage]. So I grew up in the church, first Lutheran, then Church of God with no thought to pilgrimage. I first encountered the idea of pilgrimage in college when I began to read the Idiot's Guide to the World's Religions, but it still did not capture my attention.
I learned more about pilgrimages in my classes on religion and then in seminary and again and again I learned about it and it failed to affect me. Which goes to show you that Emilio Estevez may be a better motivator than a seminary textbook, because once I watched the Way I was hooked on the idea. Now, these many months later I am still hooked on the idea of walking 500 miles. That is proof enough for me that there is a significance in the journey, a significance great enough that I will one day walk the Camino.
I suppose that is a good enough place to stop as any.
Again, thanks for showing up.
As always, Buen Camino,
Pastor K
No comments:
Post a Comment