For some time now I’ve been uncomfortable with the work of Rick Warren, author of books about the Purpose-Driven Life. I may be in the minority with my discomfort, as everyone from small-town clerics and teachers to Presidents of the United States seem to be drawn to him and his premise. It may seem inconsistent for me, having written an article some time ago when I championed the plumb line (seen in the graphic to the right) which establishes a standard by which persons or organizations conduct their lives. In many ways it is the same principle.
But there is something “off” about Warren’s premise that God establishes a purpose for an individual or a body of people and it is our task to search out what that purpose is and live our lives by it. I’ve never been a fan of “quick fix” theology, and Warren’s formula tends toward that.
The topic came up when reading David Brooks’ op-ed piece in the New York Times yesterday. His topic was “The Summoned Self,” and in it he referred to a graduation speech given by economist Clayton Christensen, and reported in The Harvard Business Review, which differentiated between discovering “a clear purpose for your life” and following it and what he calls “the Summoned Life.” Brooks says of the latter:
“This mode of thinking starts from an entirely different perspective. Life isn’t a project to be completed; it is an unknowable landscape to be explored.”
In his piece Brooks makes the bold, questionable statement that the former is “more American” and the latter “is more common elsewhere.” I’m not sure what information Brooks is basing that conclusion upon, but it strikes me as one of those Weasel Words* which I wrote about a couple of days ago. It gives credibility to a concept without sufficient data. But my purpose is not to argue his data. I just find the comment to be questionable.
My sense is that people in America today (particularly younger generations) are much more inclined to be focused upon the present, in which they are confronted by all kinds of possibilities. Their openness to experimentation with a job, an idea for an entrepreneurial enterprise, or even a life away from a paying job is based…not upon a pre-determined purpose or standard…but upon a possibility. Sometimes that possibility is vague and even shallow. But there is a germ of magnetism within it that cannot be ignored. It drives parents crazy, and it doesn’t always lead to stability or self-sufficiency. But I’m not sure it qualifies as “non-American.” In fact, when you pay attention to the inspiration of those who left stable lives in Europe and other parts of the world to come to America, it may have been the standard.
Don’t get me wrong about this. I’m not disputing the quality of having a clear vision and following it. I’m just saying that I’m not sure that’s more “American” than what Brooks describes as “the lone free agent who creates new worlds.”
Photo Credit: elizabethharperneeld.com
*See post for August 1, 2010.
