Christian joy is born in obedience.
We must not separate faith from obedience, or obedience from salvation. In Christian terms, faith is obedience and obedience is salvation. We find this in the life and work of the man Jesus; and, as always, it is precisely because we find it in his life that we recognize it as true - for us, for the world.
In the language of St John’s Gospel, we must “remain in [his] love” (15.9). Apart from him – this is not hyperbole – we can do nothing. How do we remain in his love? In the same way he remained in his Father’s love (15.10): obedience.
If you obey my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father’s commands and remain in his love.
In his obedience, Jesus finds his identity, his meaning. So, for him, obedience, while undeniably difficult, is not burdensome. Far from it: it is his joy. Doing his Father’s will is his very life (Jn. 4.34)!
“My food,” said Jesus, “is to do the will of him who sent me and to finish his work.”
This doing of the Father’s will is Jesus’ faith; it is his un-interrupted dependence upon the Spirit and un-diverted orientation toward the Father’s will. Yet it is still faith; that is, it still is a choice Jesus makes. Jesus really obeys; it isn’t in any sense “easy” for him. There are no inevitabilities out in front to guide him. We know the way the story turns out, but it didn’t have to turn out that way. Jesus really was at risk. And it was his faith, his doing, his obedience, that led him through the temptations to the cross. And it was because of this obedience, this faith, that the Father vindicated him, raising him from the dead by the power of the Spirit. Our salvation is the Father’s response to Jesus’ obedience.
That being said, all along the difficult way, Jesus finds joy in the Father’s will. Even when it cuts against the grain – his will, after all, is not automatically identical with the Father’s – Jesus remains confident that true joy waits in the Father’s intentions for him; so he can say the defining “Nevertheless” and can “endure the shame” of the cross because of the “joy set before him” (Heb 12.2). It is that confidence in the joy that is future that makes it possible for him to take joy in the present.
As with him, so with us. We obey, joyfully, because we know by faith the Father’s will is our good, and the good of all creation. In the light of new creation, which we foretaste in the Lord’s supper and baptism, how could our obedience not be joyful? Faithfully we hope for the rest promised for us, the eternal delight of divine play, when all things shall be put right and God shall be all in all. Rejoicing, we go on our way, confident of the joy set before us in the end.
This delight in obedience is something not uncommon in Judaism. The Psalms are full of this concept: being faithful to Torah is joyful. It is not burdensome, it is not toil. Obedience is the truest source of all joy. It is a response to the relationship extended by God, not a prerequisite.
“As with him, so with us. We obey, joyfully, because we know by faith the Father’s will is our good, and the good of all creation.” I think this is a good point, because often we forget that God’s will for our lives, including his commands and leadings are not only “for us.” Our life is intimately connected with the lives around us, and even with “the good of all creation.” I think it’s worth noticing that this is not the same as “the greater good,” which is so easily twisted. The greater good tends to be the good of the majority, or the elite and educated. But the goodness spoken of here is the “good of all creation.”
Michael,
You’re right to distinguish b/w “greater good” and good for all. That is the difference b/w being motivated by fear of death and from a lack of faith and being motivated by love of God and neighbor and from a hopeful faith.
Jill,
You, too, are right to notice the Jewishness, so to speak, of Jesus’ understanding of obedience. Why, do you think, have we lost this?
I think some of it comes from misunderstandings of Paul’s “anti-law” rhetoric. I think that better ways of understanding Paul are surfacing, but retraining hundreds of years of thought isn’t going to be easy. This misunderstanding is at the root of anti-semitism. I also think that if we could regain this sense of joy in obedience we could heal some emnity between ourselves and the Jewish society. But that’s a different topic.
I’m not sure what part of the discussion I’m falling into here, or if I’m close to topic at all; I usually am not, and therefore forewarning of my misreading should by this community of bloggers be assumed. Regardless (that’s irregardless for those more accustomed to the conversational butchery of negating regard) I would agree and disagree with a point that is made, or maybe I’m not disagreeing just prepositioning myself in a new direction around the topic. Who knows what I’m doing.!. I just feel like commenting.
Having said that I submit that though joyful obedience is connected with Torah and Torah with joyful obedience, and for that matter “Good” in all its multifaceted dimensioning: cause and effect, experience and expectancy, (in)counter and (en)counter is welded to that end(i.e. Moses’ “chose this day whom you will serve…”) I’m not sure burdenedlessness is connected in such a way. In fact, I would say it is our imagining joy absent and in contrast to that qualitative experience of sorrowing that is at root level in our misunderstanding or (mis)expectancy of what it means to obey. The experience of joy sought after is one nearer bliss and mania than it is joy, and the (en)cultured association(s) attached to the word do more to conjure fleeting and momentary rapture than a grounded and cultivating soil. All this said I do not think our experience in regards to this phenomena (the separation of joy from obedience) unique to us alone. I think however we are more out of shape and the fatty children we are can only associate the “joy” of the exercise as a terrible requirement.
Jill,
You’re right that Paul’s “anti-law” rhetoric has been misunderstood and that the emerging new ways (Hurrah! for N.T. Wright and James Dunn, et. al.) of reading Paul are proving v. helpful not only for Jewish-Xian dialogue but also for Xian self-understanding in general.
I don’t mean to quibble, but I don’t think the misreading of Paul is the root of anti-Semitism, though. First, because an evil like that has many roots, and second because anti Jewish sentiment gives rise to as well as results from misreadings of Paul and John, et. al.
Teal,
You, my friend, consistently produce what quite possibly is the most opaque and multivalent prose ever written! And for that we who people this “community of bloggers” are rightly thankful, to be sure.
Now, if I understood you – and I’m confident I did
– you were saying that obedience is not easy, even though it is joyful. Quite right. It is obedience after all. In Bonhoeffer’s terms, it is grace only because it is costly and it is costly precisely because it is grace. (And in spite of what some might think, that isn’t just semantic gymnastics.)
My imagination spills over the prosaic edge and I’m too lazy to damn the spill way. You read rightly the point I was making, and your reference to Dietrich was aptly applied, and once again you say in a sentence what took me two paragraphs.
I’m going to start responding in Haiku.
The idea was good.
It could have been most useful.
But now it is gone.
That took entirely too long to think about.!.
Haiku, I had thought,
subsists in but seventeen
syllaba, my friend.
Or
“Idea” makes three,
not two, syllabic movements.
But then you knew that.
Forgive me. By the way, you do DAMN the spillway, precisely because you do not DAM it.
don’t phonic me wrong
carolina i be
“idea” makes two
On our next meeting I shall make you euphemism for all sort of cruel intention.
Too clever by half!
But Carolinian math
has failed you anew.
Chris,
I don’t mean to quible either, but I said it is at the root, not the root. semantics, yes. I didn’t want to boil it down to the only reason but I think it is one of the problems
Jill
Perhaps we do want to quibble! You did name “the root” which anti-Semitism could be at. So my problem remains. I’m insisting there is no single root or this problem.
and I guess I agree. it’s like those trees in hawaii which have several roots. what are they called? so how’s this: it’s at a root of anti-semitism.
Seeking concision,
prosaic or poetic
should serve you both well.
rare in form you be
ridiculous your reply
i will hit you hard
Mark,
I’ve tried. Honestly I’ve tried. It proves to be an allusive capture.
Mark,
Ouch!.
Offense, please take none.
Verbosity you two share!
Endearing for sure.
Silly though it seem
Entertained I am for sure
Haiku my new form
(rolling eyes…) Hey don’t look at me. I suck at poetry….hey that rhymed!
Garrulous we are;
thin-skinned, – you should be thankful –
however, we aren’t.
~~~
We two, Teal and I,
choose our words so carefully.
Only I can spell.
seriously wrote
my aforementioned Haiku
I WILL hit you hard
Aside:
Silly though it be
Entertained I am for sure
Haiku my new form
Birthing our teacher
stinging joyful sorrowing
our Obedience
Haikus in a blog?
I do not understand men
Thank God I’m single
Ridiculous stuff!
The point is now long since lost;
This blog unending.