Not practical, nor pragmatic, just blind faith

I believe most of us are very practical in our thinking. Practical thinking is assessing if something that we plan to do is doable. For example, Bungee jumping. The observation that so many people have done it, and they are doing it makes me think that I can do it also. So, I do it. That is practical thinking.

However, though we often confuse practical thinking with pragmatic thinking they are different. In simpler terms the pragmatic decision also asks another question—though it is achievable, will it lead to some useful results? Bungee jumping is again the example. I can plunge into the ravine with one end a rope tied to my ankle and the other end firmly tied to a post, with all life-saving systems on stand-by. But what am I going to get out of it? In real terms, nothing useful is going to come out of it. So, though it is practical it is not pragmatic. But if I am descending to the ravine to save a person fallen into it, that Bungee jumping is not useless; the decision to do that is certainly pragmatic.
 

Ruth’s (the Biblical character) decision to follow Naomi was not pragmatic. Her sister Orpah weighed the pros and cons of following the mother-in-law to the homeland and decided that it is not pragmatic, so she returned home. However, Ruth was also equally persuaded by the mother-in-law to return; she also might have found out that it is not pragmatic to follow the frail old woman who cannot promise a better life. But she still followed her.
 

However, the rest of the story tells us that, though Ruth’s decision was not a well-considered pragmatic decision, it turned out to be the best for her and her mother-in-law. Orpah who was extremely pragmatic vanished from the story as she took the first step back home.
 

Ruth flourished, she found a husband who happened to be rich, kind, and righteous in his dealings. She became the grandmother of the great king of Israel, David, and also the ancestor of the promised Messiah. Her name is mentioned in the sacred books of two major ancient religions—Judaism and Christianity.
 

What turned Ruth’s decision a very pragmatic decision? It is the invisible mover who is behind the story of the Book of Ruth. The book got its name after the main character, Ruth. However, a closer look reveals that Ruth is not the main character, nor even Naomi. The name Ruth is mentioned 12 times in the Book excluding the pronouns referring to her. However, God is mentioned 19 times excluding pronouns! So, in the author’s mind, the crucial character is God rather than Ruth. Though he is not center stage, he moves the pieces, to bring what otherwise ended tragically to a happy ending—and they lived happily ever after.
God is the divine orchestrator, the invisible mover. He prompts Ruth to follow Naomi back to her homeland. He leads her to Boaz’s field during harvest season. He brings Boaz to the field when Ruth was there. He makes Naomi advise Ruth to go to Boaz’s threshing field to ask Boaz to marry her and protect her. The same invisible mover makes the marriage happen and a son born to the once destitute Ruth.

Though pragmatic thinking has its due place, the success of life is not all in the best pragmatic reasoning. It is God, the invisible mover behind each individual’s story decides the outcome of our life. Ruth decided to make Naomi’s God, her God. When she decided to follow the God of the Bible, God shadowed her wherever she went. 

(Photo courtesy: Arun Mathew)

Overstating miseries, overlooking divine possiblities

 

Sometimes we overstate our miseries. That is what Naomi did also.

It is true that he had become a widow, and she lost her sons as well. She is too to old get married again and have a husband or children. She had two words to describe her misery. She says to the townspeople who had come to welcome her back to Bethlehem: “I went away full, and the LORD has brought me back empty. Why call me Naomi, when the LORD has testified against me and the Almighty has brought calamity upon me?” (Ruth 1:21).

A victim of self-pity, she calls herself empty. However, she is not empty; she had Ruth with her. In addition to her company and care Ruth later fills Naomi’s life with joy, security and happiness. Naomi failed to see that life will flourish again with that young woman who has left her kindred to follow her. In her distress she over stated her misery.

Another word that she used to describe her also shows how she overstated the pain of her life. When the women of her village called her Naomi (which in Hebrew means “sweet” or “pleasant”) she retorted that she is no more sweet but bitter (Hebrew, “mara”). She even changed her name! She is not saying that she is bitter towards anyone, but her life has no joy, it is a bundle of bitter experiences.

She thought that three tragedies has wiped out all joy from her. I can sympathize with her. One small discomfort could suck dry all our happiness. How much more three deaths in a row? She is justified in some sense. But she seems to have ignored the truth that sorrow is not there to stay forever. God being on her side, every mourning will turn into dancing. The psalmist puts it this way: “For his anger is but for a moment, and his favor is for a lifetime. Weeping may tarry for the night, but joy comes with the morning” (Psa 30:5, ESV).

However, we have no excuse to whine as Naomi did. Because God has assured us through his apostle that, “No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it” (1 Corinthians 10:13, ESV). When there is no one in sight, the invisible God is there. He fills our cup until it overflows, leaves none of us empty and dry.

In times of extreme suffering the promises of God strengthens the believer: “Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him” (James 1:12, ESV).

To overstate our troubles, we need to close our eyes toward the God of possibilities.

(Photo courtesy: First Presbyterian Church, La Grange)

Taking decisions

 

Naomi was a passive victim of a wrong decision that heaped tragedies upon tragedies upon her family. They decided to migrate to Moab when famine struck their town, Bethlehem, which rather ironically means "house of bread." There in Moab they had food in plenty, I suppose, but she lost all the male members of the family. Her husband first, her sons next, in that order. All that was left was two young widows and she.

It was indeed a wrong decision. They should not have left the Bethlehem. The Book of Ruth tells us that all the residents of that town did not leave their homes and fields for Moab during the famine. They stayed back and fought the famine. 

However, Naomi was not probably responsible for that wrong decision. In a patriarchal society like hers, the husband and the adult male members took the decisions on behalf of the rest of the family. The women just followed since they didn't have a say in what was decided. Probably, the decision to go to Moab was her husband's decision not even of her sons' since they were probably young.

However, what is important is what Naomi did when the authority to take decisions in the family fell on her. In the absence of her husband and sons, she had to take decisions. She took the right decision: to return back to the homeland. That was the right decision in the right direction. 

It led to blessings in her life. She had security in her life as Boaz walked in as the husband and redeemer of Ruth. There was immense joy when Obed was born who later became the grandfather of David the great king of Israel. Then centuries later, the Jesus Christ the savior of the world was born in her family. 

One right decision, in the right direction is all that you have to take to walk the path of God's blessings and joy.

[Photo courtesy: Engin Akyurt]