October 8 / March 23
Dear Gary,
Thank you for getting together with me this past week. You have a deep knowledge of Frank Laubach's history as a missionary and a teacher. I wasn't aware he initiated a system for teaching English as a Second Language that is still in use today.
Knowing more about him encourages me to keep following the pattern I've been using. Bernard of Clairvaux is cited next by Richard Foster in Devotional Classics. We find that the thinking of believers like Laubach and Clairvaux, mystics or not, intersects. Clairvaux is concerned with the question “Why should God be loved?” He categorizes love in four degrees: love of ourselves, love of God for self’s sake, love of God for God’s sake, and love of self for God’s sake. It isn’t as circuitous as it sounds. Each is founded on Clairvaux’ contention that all love comes from God, and as we grow spiritually we begin to love God because God loves us. Religious leaders who teach that we worship God for our own sake are in the same camp as the prosperity gospel preachers. Little wonder that Clairvaux relegates them to the lowest level of loving God.
Thank you for getting together with me this past week. You have a deep knowledge of Frank Laubach's history as a missionary and a teacher. I wasn't aware he initiated a system for teaching English as a Second Language that is still in use today.
Knowing more about him encourages me to keep following the pattern I've been using. Bernard of Clairvaux is cited next by Richard Foster in Devotional Classics. We find that the thinking of believers like Laubach and Clairvaux, mystics or not, intersects. Clairvaux is concerned with the question “Why should God be loved?” He categorizes love in four degrees: love of ourselves, love of God for self’s sake, love of God for God’s sake, and love of self for God’s sake. It isn’t as circuitous as it sounds. Each is founded on Clairvaux’ contention that all love comes from God, and as we grow spiritually we begin to love God because God loves us. Religious leaders who teach that we worship God for our own sake are in the same camp as the prosperity gospel preachers. Little wonder that Clairvaux relegates them to the lowest level of loving God.
The fourth degree of love finds commonality with Laubach. For Clairvaux it is being completely subsumed in God with total focus. “This perfect love of God with our heart, soul, mind, and strength will not happen until we are no longer compelled to think about ourselves … Only then can the soul attend to God completely."
Laubach sees the challenge this way: “One question now to be put to the test is this: Can we have that contact with God all the time? All the time awake, fall asleep in His arms, and awaken in His presence, can we attain that? Can we do His will all the time? Can we think His thoughts all the time?” Both conclude, “Probably not.” And while Laubach insists on attempting this act of dual consciousness he says it is more attainable to look “toward God (for one) entire hour, waiting for his leadership all through the hour and trying hard to do every tiny thing exactly as God wishes it done, as perfectly as possible.”
While I don’t come close to focusing on God for an entire hour, let alone continually, I have become more aware of times when I have prayed for the answer to a problem or guidance in a dilemma and perceived an answer before I’ve completed the sentence. My response varies. Sometimes it is, “Why didn’t I think of that?” Or, “I believe I can do that.” Or, “Think of another solution. That isn’t at all what I had in mind; in fact it’s just the opposite.” When I respond that way I don’t hear God scolding or bugging me. In fact I don’t hear much of anything on the subject unless I bring it up again.
