I've become convinced that there is a story in and behind everything. People become who they are through their experiences in life, and experiences are just stories. Books are written because a story that changed someone so much that they just had to write about it. I guess you could say that's why I'm writing this blog, and why Henri Nouwen wrote "Returning to the Prodigal Son."
I recently finished this book. I planned on reading it throughout this Lent season, because it was a book about homecoming. I figured it was fitting. But I honestly just couldn't wait all Lent season to finish this book. I finished it within a week. The book takes the story of the prodigal son, a parable that Jesus told when questioned on why he associated with the sinners and tax collectors, and the magnificent illustration of this parable that Rembrandt painted, and fleshes it out into three main points: the prodigal son, the elder son, and the father. I hope to be able to concisely explain what he had to say while adding some of my own input into this book. This blog is probably more for me than any reader, but I hope you can get something out of it too.
First, Nouwen delves into what the youngest son represents in the parable. The youngest son represents all those who leave home to find worth, value, and satisfaction outside of need for God. We all have done this in one way or the other, and some have done it more blatantly than others. For instance, we've all heard of those family members or friends who, at one point, were alcoholics or drug abusers or murderers or put in jail for some other reason that is so highly looked down upon. This is essentially what the youngest son in the story did. However, after wasting his life away for so long, he realized that it only brought upon pain and sorrow (when he goes to work at a pig farm). Suddenly, the son realizes that if he could go back home and simply be considered a servant, he would be better off than he was at present. Many people who fall so far away from God realize their need for it in an extremely pure sense and run back to God wholeheartedly, hoping for some kind of second chance. As the story finishes, the father not only accepts the son, but he accepts him back as a son and does so with great festivities, giving the son so much more than he could ever dream of deserving.
The younger son is considered to be the center of the story, and the eldest son is commonly looked over. However, there are many elder sons in this world. The elder son stays home and technically does all of the right things. But here in lies the mystery. Somehow it seems to be harder to accept the Love of God when you stay home. You continually do the right thing, and then when the ones who haven't done the right things return, they get so much more at once than you think you have ever received, and you fill yourself with resentment. Toward the end of this parable, the father says to the eldest son, "Everything I have is yours." This is a promise that Christians receive, and have trouble accepting. We can take full advantage of this opportunity and so often deny it because we feel that God is calling us to live a good life without His help. This is simply not true. If we realize that we are just as broken as the prodigal sons, we will realize that we have no chance of living the right life without letting God take full control of our lives. See, the issue is not loving God, but letting God love you. At the end of the story, the son is asked to come in and join the party, and it is never revealed whether or not he does. This, I believe, is because that decision is left up to us in life. Our stories coincide with this story more than we can imagine.
But the true main character is the father. The only reason this story is so capturing, so intriguing, so whole is because the father has an unreal love. A supernatural love. He puts up with so much frustration and rejection from both of his sons, and never lashes back. This father is clearly the God figure of the story. God always accepts, always redeems, always puts on parties that are bigger than the subject of the party deserves. In the story, Jesus tells of how the father ran out to the prodigal son when he came home and how when the eldest son wouldn't come inside he went out to attempt to convince the eldest to come in and join the party. Not only does God love us unconditionally, but he WANTS to love us unconditionally. So badly, in fact, that he runs to us, pleads with us, begs us to accept what He offers. He doesn't have to, but he does. This love, like I said earlier, is harder than we think to accept. Think about it, no one else in the world can even come close to loving you that much. It's so different and so outside of us that we literally have to lose control of ourselves to accept that kind of love. We have to be willing to give up our sins, our way of life, and stop desiring for simply a servanthood under God, and accept the full dignity of a sonship under God. This is what the Father offers us, and we have to work towards accepting it.
Although these three points can define our position and God's position in the story of life, there is still one more issue to be discussed. It is simply what our calling as God's people is to be. If you didn't know, sons have fathers. A fathers job is to train up his child. Specifically, his father is to set an example to the son of how to be a father. God has given us an example through the Word (Jesus, the Bible, the Holy Spirit), in order for us to become fathers as well. We need to both accept God's love as well as give God's love. Of course, this is not possible without the help of God, but it's something that we should always be working towards. In my opinion, this should be our number one goal in life. We don't have to have all the answers to the philosophical questions, or the theological questions, or the political or sociological or apologetic or any other question that could be asked. The answers to those are irrelevant without the Love of God. If our focus is not to accept God's love and to give God's love, than we've lost sight of who God is. God is love. And we're called to become fathers after realizing that we are sons.
In short, I really suggest that you go and read the story of the prodigal son, then find an image of Rembrandt's "The Return of the Prodigal Son", and finally go find a copy of Henri Nouwen's "Returning to the Prodigal Son". Realize that God's love is for everyone, and to overtake everyone.
I hope your day is going great!
Much love,
Sam
Friday, March 2, 2012
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Folk Music
These days there are three major genres of music: Classical, Pop... and the least famous- Folk. All three of these music genres have their pros and cons. I'll take a second to explain:
Classical music does this thing to people where they go into a different world. It's literally meditation music. It does great things and it's been proven to breed smarter people if you listen to it. Funny how that happens. Classical is an extremely individualistic genre of music. The composers didn't focus so much on their situations as they did their actual emotions. Their compositions weren't written based on their situation but more the emotion that evolved out of the situation itself. Which is one of the main reasons why, in my opinion, Classical music has withstood so much time. Unfortunately, the fact that it's so individualistic and intellectual means that it sometimes creates an unhealthy egotism within the "classical stiffs" community. Nevertheless, I still highly advocate for listening to Classical music.
Secondly, there is the infamous Pop music. This style is more straightforward than all three of them. Most people point out the cliche cons of this music. It's shallow lyrically, musically, stylistically, and emotionally. Sure, those may apply. However, there's some good to it. Let's face it, pop music today will be what defines our culture tomorrow. That in itself may not be a good thing, but I do believe having such a defined style of music to describe a culture is a good thing. We look back on the 60s and 70s and their pop music talked about peace a lot. Funny how the Hippy movement came out of that time period. Pop music is naked. It isn't hiding anything. It's open and honest about the ideals of a culture. I hope that gives you incentive to make steps toward changing the ideals of our culture. But enough of my agenda ;)
Lastly, there is the genre of Folk music. This could be categorized under pop as well, but there are differences that make Folk and Pop two different genres. I'll be honest, I favor this genre over the other two. Folk music began long long ago when people would gather around a campfire and sing songs about the hardships and the joy that they were experiencing as a group. Keyword: Group. This music is not individualistic. It expresses ideals of a group, society, or culture. Sounds like Pop, right? The difference is- Folk music has a way of bringing people together that Pop music can't accomplish. I guess I haven't necessarily figured that distinction out yet, but it's a trend that I've noticed. Which is why Folk music has existed for such a long time and Pop music hasn't. Of course, Folk music has it's flaws as well. It's musicality is not always the most complex, it doesn't always provide the imagery that Classical music can provide, and so on. There are pros and cons alike in this genre as well.
So why do I favor Folk over all the other genres? It really all brings me back to one of my favorite things about music. Experiencing it with people. As a musician, the best feeling in the world is playing music for people. No, it's experiencing it with them. I'm just on a different end of the experience. Folk music has the mystery of pulling people together. It always appeals to the young and old and doesn't stop until it's made a mark in everyones' spirit.
This explanation of these three genres is brief and incomplete for two reasons, 1. A proper explanation would be extremely long and more importantly 2. I haven't experienced, thought out, or heard enough music to give the proper explanation. These are my thoughts, they're all I really have at this point. Keep listening.
Classical music does this thing to people where they go into a different world. It's literally meditation music. It does great things and it's been proven to breed smarter people if you listen to it. Funny how that happens. Classical is an extremely individualistic genre of music. The composers didn't focus so much on their situations as they did their actual emotions. Their compositions weren't written based on their situation but more the emotion that evolved out of the situation itself. Which is one of the main reasons why, in my opinion, Classical music has withstood so much time. Unfortunately, the fact that it's so individualistic and intellectual means that it sometimes creates an unhealthy egotism within the "classical stiffs" community. Nevertheless, I still highly advocate for listening to Classical music.
Secondly, there is the infamous Pop music. This style is more straightforward than all three of them. Most people point out the cliche cons of this music. It's shallow lyrically, musically, stylistically, and emotionally. Sure, those may apply. However, there's some good to it. Let's face it, pop music today will be what defines our culture tomorrow. That in itself may not be a good thing, but I do believe having such a defined style of music to describe a culture is a good thing. We look back on the 60s and 70s and their pop music talked about peace a lot. Funny how the Hippy movement came out of that time period. Pop music is naked. It isn't hiding anything. It's open and honest about the ideals of a culture. I hope that gives you incentive to make steps toward changing the ideals of our culture. But enough of my agenda ;)
Lastly, there is the genre of Folk music. This could be categorized under pop as well, but there are differences that make Folk and Pop two different genres. I'll be honest, I favor this genre over the other two. Folk music began long long ago when people would gather around a campfire and sing songs about the hardships and the joy that they were experiencing as a group. Keyword: Group. This music is not individualistic. It expresses ideals of a group, society, or culture. Sounds like Pop, right? The difference is- Folk music has a way of bringing people together that Pop music can't accomplish. I guess I haven't necessarily figured that distinction out yet, but it's a trend that I've noticed. Which is why Folk music has existed for such a long time and Pop music hasn't. Of course, Folk music has it's flaws as well. It's musicality is not always the most complex, it doesn't always provide the imagery that Classical music can provide, and so on. There are pros and cons alike in this genre as well.
So why do I favor Folk over all the other genres? It really all brings me back to one of my favorite things about music. Experiencing it with people. As a musician, the best feeling in the world is playing music for people. No, it's experiencing it with them. I'm just on a different end of the experience. Folk music has the mystery of pulling people together. It always appeals to the young and old and doesn't stop until it's made a mark in everyones' spirit.
This explanation of these three genres is brief and incomplete for two reasons, 1. A proper explanation would be extremely long and more importantly 2. I haven't experienced, thought out, or heard enough music to give the proper explanation. These are my thoughts, they're all I really have at this point. Keep listening.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)