{"id":1533,"date":"2009-11-05T09:01:43","date_gmt":"2009-11-05T17:01:43","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/2009\/11\/05\/navigating-the-wilderness\/"},"modified":"2009-11-05T09:04:05","modified_gmt":"2009-11-05T17:04:05","slug":"navigating-the-wilderness","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/2009\/11\/05\/navigating-the-wilderness\/","title":{"rendered":"navigating the wilderness"},"content":{"rendered":"
The analogy of map and compass is a useful one for considering our navigation the \u2018wilderness of this world\u2019 and especially useful for navigating the ecclesiastical wilderness.<\/p>\n
For a good understanding of the analogy, though, one must have some understanding of how maps and compasses work. A much more full description can be found from a chapter of a book, The Backpacker’s Field Manual<\/em>, excerpted here<\/a> on the Princeton University site, but I\u2019ll attempt a bit in this post.<\/p>\n I suppose when we think of \u2018mapping\u2019 the locations on the ecclesiastical landscape, we probably envision a political map, with nation-states and their boundaries. Such maps seem fairly objective and definite in allocating the bounds of various domains, but they are of limited value for navigation.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n What political maps can\u2019t show are the alliances between nations (who can be at some distance from one another). They also cannot show disputed territories that may lie between any two nations \u2013 boundaries are not always as clearly defined as they appear on a map. In addition, political maps usually give very little idea of the topographical features of any given territory \u2013 the slopes, slippery or otherwise, the heights and the lowlands, very little sense of the direction of the watershed, and so on. Thus, there are things political maps cannot tell us.<\/p>\n For navigation purposes, topographical maps are much more useful. They tell us the relative steepness of slopes and the prominence of various geological features, giving an idea of the easiest way to traverse a particular area of land.<\/p>\n Mapping, both political and topographical, are one thing. Reading maps and compasses are another. One might think getting a compass reading is a simple matter. Look where the needle is pointing, find North on a map, orient it correctly, identify some prominent landmarks, and you\u2019re off.<\/p>\n It isn\u2019t quite that simple. There is north and there is north. That is, there is true north (pointing directly to the north pole) and there is magnetic north (pointing to the north magnetic pole). These two points on the planet are two different things and one of them is constantly changing (albeit relatively slowly). Your compass points directly to the magnetic north pole, but parallel with the lines of magnetic force at your starting point. In order to get your compass set right (and your map oriented properly), you need to know something about where you are starting from and calculate the deviation from true north in that area.<\/p>\n A diagram from the Princeton site might help describe the way the magnetic field lines distort compasses in the United States:<\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n Your compass needle will deviate from true north according to these angles. ((I was going to boast that in Canada, we tend to be more generally in line with true north, but then I noticed that red line in the middle\u2026 it appears that anyone along a line running through eastern Ontario, Wisconsin, Illinois, eastern Kentucky and Tennessee, and even the Florida panhandle (Pensacola??) have no deviation from true north with their compasses. Does that mean these areas are the most clear seeing?)) According to the Princeton site<\/a>,<\/p>\n You can see that location makes a great deal of difference in where the compass points. The angular difference between true north and magnetic north is known as the declination and is marked in degrees on your map as shown \u2026 Depending on where you are, the angle between true north and magnetic north is different. In the U.S., the angle of declination varies from about 20 degrees west in Maine to about 21 degrees east in Washington.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n In order to navigate, you have to make allowances for the angle of declination, set your compass accordingly, and then orient and read your map<\/a> to ascertain position and the next direction you will set out on.<\/p>\n Maps and guidebooks are the fundamental<\/strong> tools both for trip planning \u2026 and while you are out on the trail. [emphasis mine]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n If you really want to know more about real maps and compasses, you can read all about it at the Princeton site and other places.<\/p>\n \nVery good, Mr. Badger, now what does this have to do with navigating the ecclesiastical wilderness?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n What does this have to do with ecclesiastics and separation? That is a most vital question.<\/p>\n In this discussion, an emphasis is being made in getting biblical principles of separation down so that we can navigate. We could call this \u2018orienting our compass\u2019. In discussion elsewhere, we have been told that we also need to get our fixed points \u2013 but isn\u2019t \u2018fixed points\u2019 the language of maps? ((Perhaps we have discovered a mixed metaphor?))<\/p>\n Having oriented our compass, gotten our fixed points, what should we do next? The next step is to set one\u2019s course through the wilderness. We will need a map to identify the best route along the way. The compass is useful to help us see where we are on the map and determine the direction of travel, but that is all. A compass can do nothing else.<\/p>\n As we traverse the hills and valleys of the ecclesiastical wilderness, no doubt we will make some missteps along the way. We may experience some slips and falls. We may not always see our way clearly \u2013 our line of sight may be obscured by overhanging vegetation and obstructions along the way. We might even lose our way. If we don\u2019t have good maps, our compass will be of no use to us on the mishaps of the way.<\/p>\n