19 March 2009

Psalm 89:14,

"Righteousness and justice are the foundation of your throne;
steadfast love and faithfulness go before you."

Today I was walking around San Born Lake. The woods are beginning to bud and flower so that the late afternoon sunshine made silver halos around all the trees. Cardinals were singing everywhere, it seemed, crimson trilling against the pale green and white of the woods.

I was meditating on this verse from Psalm 89, just the "steadfast love" part. When I was younger, I used to pray over and over again, thanking God for this place because I was afraid that if I didn't thank him enough for it, he would take it away.

Despite the grave misunderstanding of his character implicit in that prayer (which, of course, continues on many levels), he graciously answers it. The peace and prosperity, the stability of this place resemble his steadfast love.

Continuous, no matter where I have been, no matter what I have done or said, no matter where I come from or where I am going, no matter what I am thinking. I cannot do anything to shake it or change it, nothing to break it.

This is not just God's kindness and goodness: those are key ingredients of love, of course, the will to do what is best for someone and the actual performance of that best thing. But also His delight in and enjoyment of His people in Christ, a truth I don't think about much. Whenever I do encounter it, my mind glances off of it--so wonderful that I don't want it. A dangerously potent joy, too heady for this mind.

They are blessed "who walk, O Lord, in the light of your face." (vs. 15)

1 comment:

  1. It continues to baffle me, that there are things we refuse to believe because they seem too good to be true. So often we forget about the "steadfast" part of God's love because--let's face it--such love doesn't exist, at least as far as our mundane experience is concerned. In other words, it's easier to believe that God would love like one of us. Even though I can't fully wrap my head around it, I'm glad that God's love is in fact something else entirely.

    ReplyDelete