|
Assignments
Address by Lars-Erik Wiberg
for Sunday, February 25, 2001
Scripture: (OT) Proverbs 16: 1-20 (NT) Acts 9: 1-15
It is rather difficult to face a blank sheet of paper and write about a
subject which you can not get out of your head, but which you never thought
you might be qualified to address. But this was precisely my frame of mind
as I approached the objective of making sense out of today's address,
titled "Assignments."
Since my dear wife Betty and I visited England in mid-October last, this
subject has persistently settled just beneath my consciousness. It has
seemed that whenever I would let my mind relax, there it was. But there
has been no special hint of wisdom to accompany it. I felt intensely that
I was supposed to write about it, to speak about it - - presumably so as to
fulfill an assignment. Hence the following:
When we think of assignments, we are likely to hark back to specific
instructions. We may think of the chores that we had to do as youngsters.
"Time to clean your room." "Would you rake the lawn?" "Please take out the
rubbish." Often the assignment was somewhat peremptory, and especially so
when it had to be given more than once. Home-work assignments soon
followed (while the chores never seemed to diminish), and these became an
ineluctable part of school life. We all relate to these inevitable
scholastic requirements and to the time we took, and sometimes frittered
away, figuring out how to get the most results from the least effort.
Then we found ourselves in jobs in which the descriptions of our positions
were complete with statements of responsibilities which we were required to
fulfill, sort of an overall litany of assignments. And beyond this, as a
result of the nature of the jobs themselves, there would arise special
conditions that required just as special remedies in the form of special
assignments. These days we say "ad hoc" as if some Latin would make them
more palatable if not easier to achieve.
I review this background which we have all had, or are having, so as to
emphasize one crucial dimension of all these assignments. That
characteristic is simply that they all come from someone who is obviously
outside of us. We don't encourage them in any way other, perhaps, than
through someone's idea that we may be able to perform them. They are given
to us. And they are handed to us in a way over which we have
no control for the simple reason that those doing the handing have every
right. They are our parents, our teachers, our bosses. And you know
something else? They also have every right to tell us the difference
between a good and a poor piece of work. These authority figures know not
only what we should do, but also how well we do it!
Looking back at these assignments, I have the notion that one of the things
that I'm supposed to say about them is that they taught us to differentiate
between good and poor work. From the simplest beginnings, irrespective of
the specifics that we may have learned, we at least found out the
difference between a good and a poor job. And we also learned that trying
hard made a difference too. We may have tried and come up short, but we
did find out that, if we kept trying, we came up short less often.
So with this backdrop of experience with assignments that are given is - -
that come to us from the outside - - we are prepared to address those
assignments that are also given us that seem to come from the inside. Yes,
we do have assignments, and significant ones too, that would appear to have
no exterior origin whatsoever, but which move us with great influence, just
as my assignment is moving me today.
Let me shift gears for a moment and explain, in case you are not a
Swedenborgian and thus unaware of it, that one of the first things we
Swedenborgians do when faced with a question or a problem is to consider
what Emanuel Swedenborg may have had to say on the matter. If we don't
know what he says, we look it up. There are two reasons we do this. One
is that we accept his doctrinal leadership; the other is that he usually
has something to tell us. Thus a quest for guidance is generally rewarded.
But at first glimpse this habit doesn't seem to work when it comes to the
subject of "assignments." Here Swedenborg seems to be silent. But surely
in regard to something as vital as our subject there must be a way to sort
it out and examine it, and sure enough there is. We call it, and can feel
comfortable in referring to it by inference, as the "doctrine of use."
I won't be so presumptuous as to examine this uniquely Swedenborgian
emphasis on being useful in much detail today because it embraces a concept
of such enormous scope. But I believe that we can sense how our fulfilling
an assignment amounts to making ourselves useful in some way. As far as
external assignments go, we may be making ourselves useful by learning or
by helping out here and there. But let's move
from that perspective and address assignments that come from within, toward
which we are moved by tenacious pressure to do something, an itch, as it
were, that has to be scratched that involves getting on with certain work
that seems especially significant to us. Nobody has instructed us as to
how we must do it. Notwithstanding, we feel urged to get on with the job.
How can this be? Let's consult Emanuel Swedenborg.
Swedenborg writes in his book, Divine Love and Wisdom, ¶ 213, "Love is the end, wisdom the instrumental cause, and use the effect; and use is the
complex, containant, and basis of love and wisdom; and use is such a
complex and such a containant that all things of love and all things of
wisdom are actually in it." Is it any wonder we are moved? Use as
Swedenborg defines it, is not only an expression, but also a container of
divine love and wisdom. He continues further along in Divine Love and
Wisdom, ¶ 220, . . . "in uses, and according to them, is the all of
charity and faith . . ." Is it any wonder that these assignments, these
impulses to be useful, that give us the impression that they come to us
from an internal source have such vitality?
Lest you feel that I may be leaping too quickly from the notion of
assignment to that of use, let me propose an intermediate step from the one
to the other. This step involves the addition of time. The internal
assignment is by no means instantaneous; it takes us some amount of time -
- often a lot - - to express the use for which we appear to have
volunteered ourselves. Or what is the same, we feel an urge to provide
effort that will require us to be useful in some certain way for some time,
thus achieving our internally generated assignment. Parenthood is an
example of such an assignment. As so many of us know, it is a powerful
stimulus that takes a lot of time and effort for its successful
fulfillment. It is also without question marvelously useful.
But parenthood, although a good example, is a prevalent assignment. What
about the special ones that are somehow more unique to a given person?
What drove the English mathematician Charles Babbage over a century ago to
make a computer? His was a mechanical contraption with a primitive memory
that he kept improving throughout much of his adult life with no
identifiable objective of extracting financial gain from it. His financial
situation seems to have permitted him to indulge this inventive interest,
and he did receive some government funding which was ultimately withdrawn.
I cite Babbage because he typifies one aspect of the sort of assignment I'm
speaking of; it is that there need be no profit motive involved. The
assignment stands on its own somehow and carries within it the fruits of
its fulfillment. Putting it another way, satisfatory completion of the
assignment is its own reward. True, Babbage was never completely satisfied
with his work, but he was moderately successful, at least to the extent
that he invented the first computer. The very knowledge that something
like a computer could exist lingered in the minds of many and was extremely
useful.
What is it that appears to be a key unifying ingredient in these special
assignments that seem to have an internal origin? For whatever reason
Babbage did what he did, it certainly was not that he knew he could do it
successfully. Why did he try? Why do we try? The point is that we don't
try because we know we will be successful. To get back to the general case
of parenting, we are strongly moved toward it, but we don't really know how
successful we will be no matter how hard we try. There are just too many
variables in the mix of responsibilites that are involved in being a
parent. In the same way some of the things that we are moved to try our
hardest at carry with them no certainty that we will ever be successful in
carrying them out.
Well I'm sure you know what I'm getting at. These internally motivated
assignments really are not so internally motivated after all. They are
actually much like the ones our parents and our teachers gave us, and our
bosses still give us. They are expressions of the Lord's hopes for our
fullfillment, for our preparation of the full expression, on the one hand,
of the uniqueness that he has given us and, on the other, as a means for
our closer approach to him. He knows better than we what we are likely to
be successful at. Out of these inspired efforts - - really externally
inspired efforts now that the Lord has been properly fitted into the
picture - - come much benefit to all of us in both material and spiritual
terms, according to the varied and special knowledges and affections that
each of us can apply to our assignments.
History is loaded with instances of individuals persevering against all
odds and taking incredible risks when the outcome was far from sure. I was
recently listening to remarks on the heroism of Harriett Tubman who, as she
was leading slaves to freedom along the underground railroad, knew for
certain only one thing, other than that she was doing the right thing, and
that was, if she were caught, she would be killed. What an assignment she
fulfilled! More than 300 good and decent slaves delivered to safety!
I am reading a book titled "The Next Great Thing" that treats of one
William Beale's current efforts against enormous technical odds to perfect
the Stirling engine. Invented in the 1800s, with potential yet unrealized,
this is an external combustion engine. Think of that! Combustion power
supplied externally, from the sun no less. Heat from the sun, gathered
over a few square miles of desert would supply this country with all the
electricity it needs - - and no pollution. Beale doesn't know if he will
succeed, but here's a crucial point. If anyone can do it, it is probably
he. He senses this and perseveres.
These are just two examples among so many, known and unknown. None of them
is as dramatic as the Lord's assignment that Paul had suddenly thrust upon
him while on the road to Damascus, pursuing a dreadful purpose which he
would never fulfill or ultimately want to. And all these examples are much
more daunting than the worthy and heart-warming assignments that so many
volunteers in our society identify simply as "giving back" as they seek to
share with their neighbors some of the goodness they have received from the
society they seek now to fortify out of honest gratitude.
Swedenborg writes in Heaven and Hell, ¶ 517, ". . . there is constantly
inspired into (Spirits) the affection of truth for the sake of the uses of
life; for the Lord provides that everyone should love the uses suited to
his native character; and besides, this love is exalted by the hope that
they will be Angels. And, as all the uses of Heaven bear relation to the
general or common use, which is use for the Lord's kingdom . . . and as all
special and singular uses are excellent in proportion as they more nearly
and more fully regard this general use, it follows that all the special and
singular uses, which are innumerable, are good and heavenly; and therefore
with every person the affection for truth is conjoined with the affection
of use, insomuch as they act as a one. By this, truth is implanted in use,
so that the truths which they learn are truths of use. In this way angelic
Spirits are instructed and prepared for Heaven."
So we see that there is preparation for Heaven going on. And we also see
that the affection for truth is the motivating force behind it all. And
as we know, affection for truth signifies love of wisdom. All love and all
wisdom are from the Lord who, quite plainly now, emerges as the source of
our most challenging assignments which are our preparations for Heaven. It
is surely of the Lord's great love for us that, knowing us as he does, he
challenges us with assignments at which we have a fair chance to succeed.
I am unable to conclude this assignment of mine without commenting about
the assignment that the Cambridge Society of the New Jerusalem has embarked
upon in regard to this Chapel, its spiritual home, its proper place here on
earth. Over many years now this congregation, each of us doing his or her
part, has accepted a crucial assignment that involves our deepest resolve,
our affection for truth, to protect this consecrated space in which we
worship the Lord and through which we present ourselves and our
denomination both to Him and to our neighbors. It is a substantial
assignment for us to save this Chapel. With the Lord's unfailing love as
guidance, we have successfully pursued it so far. How could its completion
be otherwise?
Amen
Copyright 2001 by Lars-Erik Wiberg
|
