Feed on
Posts
Comments

Archive for February, 2007

Going Amateur

From time to time you will hear of an amateur announcing that he is “going pro.”

Money and liberty are the inducements; the amateur life is neither opulent nor accommodating. Amateurs rely on “day jobs” or the sponsorship of benefactors for their daily bread. (But in the end, so do the professionals.) Amateurs seize every opportunity to refine, even perfect their skills, but their first duty is to attend the demands of others who usually put less-glorious things ahead of the amateur’s frustrated passions.

Amateurs — the only varieties I can think of are athletes and artists — are motivated by something unaccounted for in the professional’s economy: love. The word itself — amateur — literally means “lover of.” Amateurs do what they do for the simple love of the object of their affections.

So it is that I’ve decided to reorganize myself a bit; I’m announcing that I’m consciously “going amateur” in many areas of my life and I’ll be making some changes accordingly.

For one thing, this blog is going to change. I will be taking less care of it — not that anyone will really notice; the behind-the-scenes tinkering with blogging gadgetry will be the primary casualty. It will also be updated less frequently — but hopefully more thoughtfully. I’m not happy that the substance of so much of my posting in recent months has been borrowed from other sources. As Dorothy Sayers said, “A facility for quotation covers the absence of original thought.” The irony convicts me.

I have also felt the weight of self-inflicted pressure to catch up and stay current on every single point of theology, philosophy, apologetics, and Christian thought that might be considered important. Here again, I’m consciously going amateur. I love the life of the mind. I won’t be leaving it. But from now on, I will just refuse to feel badly for not having studied as widely as I wish I could.

In all these things, I’m seeking to adjust my attitude to match the calling I’ve received. What calling? The one that is evident by the facts of my existence. Apparently, I’m called to be a follower of Christ, a husband, a father, a member of my church, and a software engineer by trade.

I can’t find evidence that I’m called to be a blogger or philosopher or bookworm in anything like the capacity those other areas command.

In short, I aim to forget about myself and get lost in the work God has set before me. Where there’s time and opportunity, I’ll read a book. I’ll write an essay on the latest ideas I’ve only half-wrestled with — and maybe I’ll post a few of those.

And this is where it is so hope-inspiring to be infected with the dangerous idea that God is, in fact, sovereign. All I have to do is what He gives me to do. What He does with those things is open to exciting possibilities.

For one thing, let’s face it: there are lots of amateurs doing God’s work in Scripture. This is the grand, unifying thread in all the stories in the Bible: the man or woman at the center of each story is just a vehicle for the display of God’s greatness.

But on a less-pious level, I’m motivated by four famous amateurs.

Bobby Jones, the only golfer to win the Grand Slam, proudly maintained his amateur status despite having two ticker-tape parades thrown in his honor.

The 1980 U.S. Olympic ice hockey team didn’t have one professional player on the roster. And they pulled off a modern-day miracle.

Third, a professor of medieval literature at Oxford found a way to inspire Christians to glorify God with their minds just by doing what he did best: writing books and telling grand stories. C.S. Lewis was no theologian. He was no philosopher in any proper sense. He called himself a “layman writing for laymen.” It is a simple fact that he approached theology and philosophy as an amateur. But what he approached as an amateur became the payload of his profession.

Finally, fourth, a last-minute addition: William Wilberforce, the man who abolished the British slave trade. As the film I saw last night, Amazing Grace, showed powerfully, Wilberforce made the choice to “go amateur” in matters of personal piety so that he might “go professional” in the noble business of changing the world.

I would love to write ten words worthy of C.S. Lewis. I would love to have a swing like Bobby Jones and I would love to put a blue-line slapshot past a Soviet goalie. None of those things is going to happen. I would love to be like Wilberforce and make the most of the spot I find myself in for the good of the world, or some part of it — and you know, that could actually happen.

But something will happen — I just don’t know what it is yet. And that’s fine. For now, all I have to do is love God and obey Him, love and lead my wife and family, pay my bills, and show up for life.

When it comes to those things, there are no amateurs.

Does Richard Dawkins Exist?

Does Richard Dawkins exist? If he does, is he just an “ostentatious, acrimonious, supercilious, pusillanimous, calumnious, censorious, vituperative, querulous, embittered, obsessive, and bombastic bully?”

This is clever, but the blog entry that inspired it is simply brilliant.

HT: Between Two Worlds: The Dawkins Delusion