Schlemiel, schlimazel, hasenpfeffer incorporated...

In 1976, when Laverne and Shirley locked arms and went skipping down the streets of Milwaukee, their credo seemed so noble. It was all so convincing. Taking the world by storm, facing all fears head on, words like…

We’re gonna do it! Give us any chance, we’ll take it. Give us any rule, we’ll break it…

Nothin’s gonna turn us back now. Straight ahead and on the track now…

There is nothing we won’t try. Never heard the word impossible. This time there’s no stopping us…

And we’ll do it our way, yes our way. Make all our dreams come true, for me and you.

The trouble is, dreams come and dreams go. Which dreams do you chase? Seriously. Set aside the “power of positive thinking,” the humanistic “doin’ it our way” part and what do you have? Tenacity, dedication, determination, hope… nothing wrong with that. But applied to what?

Mind you, I have always been something of a pragmatist, yet I find myself strangely intrigued, intoxicated even, by this idea of an all-consuming dream. Even so, I’m not sure I have ever sold out to this kind of vision. Have I? Should I?

There is a Seinfeld episode in which Elaine is to read and review a manuscript for a job interview at Viking Press. Only, she doesn’t know of the assignment and, through a twist of disastrous circumstances, must rely on Kramer (who, consequently, has read the book) and his thoughts on the story.

Elaine: So what's it about?

Kramer: Well it's a story about love, deception, greed, lust and... unbridled enthusiasm.

Elaine: unbridled enthusiasm...?

Kramer: Well, that's what led to Billy Mumphrey's downfall.

Elaine: Oh! boy.

Kramer: You see Elaine, Billy was a simple country boy. You might say a cockeyed optimist, who got himself mixed up in the high stakes game of world diplomacy and international intrigue.

I have a good friend who has these big dreams (or at least he used to)—I mean, wonderfully grand visions of what lay ahead for him and his life. I believe wholeheartedly that he possesses the raw talent to see these dreams come to life. Still, he lacks the tenacity, discipline and overall faith in himself to ever come close. He has had a couple of false starts and minor failed attempts at moving toward his visions, but he has never been a serious contender. Cockeyed optimist, yes. Enthusiastic, sometimes. Unbridled, not so much. I fear the viability of his “dreams” will soon time out.

I remember friends growing up who, like Billy Mumphrey, were certainly optimistic, unbridled enthusiasts, but they lacked the fundamental talent, were devoid of (or at least seriously limited on) the resources necessary to make any serious attempt.

I have another close friend who has, at points in life, possessed both the attitude and the talent, all of these things and more… personally, that is. But, the rest of his life (relationships, placement, timing) and his external resources have kept his many sincere and noble attempts from reaching any real level of measurable success.

So, given the seemingly inevitable frustration dreamers face, why would, why should one give such noble gauge to these lofty hopes?

This is not a question that can be answered with a casual Proverbs 29:18 retort. You know that whole, “Where there is no vision, the people perish” business. This is one of those cases, in my opinion, where the King James Version does a really lousy job. Literally translated the verse reads more like, “Without a vision is a people made naked, and whoever is keeping the law, O his happiness.” (YLT) The Hebrew word the KJV translates as “perish” is iphro which basically means “to loosen or become unbridled.” By implication it can also mean “to expose, dismiss, bare or uncover.”

The New Living translates the verse, “When people do not accept divine guidance, they run wild. But whoever obeys the law is joyful.” Eugene Peterson paraphrases, “If people can't see what God is doing, they stumble all over themselves; But when they attend to what he reveals, they are most blessed.” (The Message) I like that. It actually seems more true to the original language.

Furthermore, I like those definitions of a dream, a vision—“to accept divine guidance or to see what God is doing.” And I like the subsequent proper pursuit identifiers, “obedience” and “attending to what He reveals.” I love that pursuing this kind of dream in this fashion leads to words like “joy” and “blessing.”

I believe passions often come from God, especially the kind that are born deep within the soul, revealed over and over in many different forms. Still, I’m not sure all dreams, passions, visions are to be pursued—lived out to some sort of actualization. They only work, they only really make sense when they are, indeed, coupled with or steeped in or born of “divine guidance”—when they are “what God is doing.” Any other attempt to live your dreams seems like quite a long shot. On the merit of my dreams alone, I am the undisputed underdog. “What God is doing,” dream or no dream, feels like a much safer bet.

And so, the dilemma seems all too obvious. If dreams are important (and in spite of myself I believe they must be), what is God doing and do I dream it? If I am dreaming it, does that necessarily mean He’s guiding it? Is that a matter of trusting Him to “make all our dreams come true?” Or, is it in the surrender of our dreams that we find His? The tragedy of it all is that my struggles with these questions have reduced many of my would-be dreams to fleeting fantasies. I don’t know… is that even really such a tragedy? I guess it depends on “what God is doing.”