Presently, one lamb neck and one lamb shank are simmering merrily on the stove in a good deal of wine, on a bed of aromatic vegetables. I have already imbibed half a six pack of the Red Menace and feel just a little guilt at the money I will drink before the night is over and we retire. Lauren's shift at the cafe ends in a little less than two hours. I have the exclusive privilege of picking her up when she is done. The simple truth that she is my wife has done more to convince me than any theology text that providence and not human will determines our lot. It is absurd to think that my human volition could ever engender beauty and pleasure that so obviously transcends the human realm. How remarkable is it that this divine blessing is so empirically enjoyed and not some spiritual vibration? Passionate, covenant marriage is incarnational. No wonder Paul used it to convey the mystery of Christ's unity with the church. Isn't it strange that Paul in Eph.5, after all that practical guidance to married couples, says, "This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church." It is as though he was not giving a session of marriage counceling, as our bible headings would have us believe. Perhaps he was developing an allegory and perhaps we are too quick to read didacticism into the passage. Indeed, we are too often prone to think that the Bible is about us and making our lives better. Not for a moment do I suggest that we should not take practical ques from this passage. Rather, I question whether or not allegory and description are separate from didacticism, teaching and counceling. I have always thought that counceling today is so distasteful because it is artless. How can people expect to learn anything, much less grow in any way without soulish inspiration? No one will change their lives for bullets on an outline, but beauty has launched a thousand ships. And what is more beautiful than sacrifice? I submit that there is nothing that pulls at the heart more than the narrative of willful sacrifice... and damn good delivery. Unfortunately, we cannot separate the two: good material and delivery. It is futile to give twig-boy Shakespeare and expect not to fall asleep, but give a Cherios box to Richard Harris and you will weep. Does this imply that the content is inefficacious? Is not the Bible good enough on its own to inspire absolute obedience? We feel as though we are comprising the worth of scripture if we even hint that art sharpens its edge. Sola scriptura means it doesn't need anything else, right? Perhaps the problem is on our end. We have stripped the art from scripture in the name of reformation theology. Refusing to acknowledge it as a text, written in numerous literary modes and subject to the vagueries common to the written word, we have impoverished its message. It has been reduced to an impotent history textbook and ten step guide. Its correlation with what we have determined is real and historical has obfuscated its transcendent authority over the "real," in our estimation. And what is authority if not the very act of defiance? And what does Eph.5 do if not defy our convenient delimitation of that passage to the category and application of marriage counceling? Perhaps it is a great poem and given the delivery worthy of its origin, it would not be some useless bible study topic that no one else in the world cares about. If your church shut down today, would the nieghborhood it is in even notice, much less suffer the loss? Eph.5 has in this way been shut down. It is irrelevant; it means nothing to your nieghborhood because ultimately, it only means to us, the Christians. We have relegated it to informative meaning, expressly limited to the abstract because we cannot fit poetry in a bulletin or a bible study outline. Speaking of the which, I must go now and pick up Lauren at the cafe. When we return, the soup she has been simmering all day and the lamb I have been braising will be our feast; his body and his blood our meat and our wine. This is intoxication. M | 
