The more time I spent alone – in solitary – the harder I find it to understand people. I think Napoleon is on-point. Maybe it is just the way my mind works? Or maybe I read too much? Or maybe I am simply weird?
Is it just me or do you find it sometimes hard to get people’s meaning?
This morning the reading at Morning Prayer was from John’s gospel. I was struck by Jesus’ attitude – something this is most unlike some modern people and most unlike what most modern people think of Jesus.
Jesus straightened up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” She said, “No one, sir.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on do not sin again.”
John 8:10-11
“Neither do I condemn you.” Love people where they are at not where you want them to be. And let God sort everything out in the end. My relationship with Jesus expresses itself in obedience but obedience is not my relationship with Jesus.
I pray you have a Jesus-filled Sunday.
I have not written about my depression as much in the last couple of weeks. I have felt more balanced. Easter was a horror show for me this year – I was so much in the darkness I could hardly get out of bed. But since then I have found some balance, some purpose, and some direction. The pressure I place on myself has lessened and I am more kind with myself. I am so thankful for the people who have stood by me when I was so sick.
So today is Saturday – the day of preparation. I am working on the Bible Study for Tuesday night and on tomorrow’s service slides and video. It is pretty much what I do most Saturdays now. I am very happy doing it, drinking tea, and listening to 80s music. I find that often the Bible Study is more about me than the people who come along. I try to listen to God, to listen with the heart, and hear what He is saying to me. I do not think I am particularly insightful, nor smart, and I often think I am simply stating the obvious. But I know I have changed by doing the online studies!
I wish I had something insightful to say but that is about it. I hope I can go for a walk this afternoon but it is very cold and wet. And, to be honest, I am a little sick of walking. But I know it is good for me and it improves my mood and my overall health. I am not going to gym!!! So walking is about the only other thing I can do without involving other people.
Hope you have a blessed day!
I have been looking for this quote for a couple of days. I knew it was in one of the seven volumes of journals. So today I looked at my physical copy and found it:
Like climbing down from a mountain or a pillar and starting all over again to behave as a human being – I need solitude for the true fulfillment which I seek – that of being ordinary.
A Search for Solitude, 27
I have always liked that Merton joins two things that are important to me: solitude and being ordinary. And I completely identify with Merton on this point. I need some space to be me, nothing special or extraordinary just simply me. In a world full of noise where everyone is trying to outdo everyone else, in which everyone is trying to be extraordinary, it is nice to just be plain simple me. And for that I need solitude – space and time without noise. Not the absence of sound but rather the detachment from this world. To transcend myself by being the person I was made to be. Nothing more, nothing less.
Every now and then someone will stand up in the media or in the church and rehash the old science vs faith debate. I often feel like the discussion is more about power than truth – the power to sway people into a certain direction of blind obedience. These discussions will use terminology like “truth” and “reason” and simply assume everyone is on the same page. Also, of course, these discussions will often assume that faith is a matter of epistemology, of knowledge without proof, rather than of a life lived before God.
So today I was thinking about the discussion (since it recently popped up in church) and what people understand by “truth”. Yes, all “truth” comes from God but followers of Jesus see truth as a Person and not an item of knowledge.
A book that I read a couple of years ago: The End of Apologetics: Christian Witness in a Postmodern Context by Myron Bradley Penner, came to mind. (BTW: I am an Amazon Associate so if you buy via the link, I will get some money to buy more books.) The book is an exceptional read – well discussed and reasoned. It points to some of the fundamental issues in relation to rationally defending the Christian faith. To be honest, while the author does a great job defining the problem, his solution (for me) is not as convincing.
So in his defining the problem, he writes:
In the modern philosophical paradigm, then, reason forms what I will call the “objective-universal-neutral complex” (OUNCE).
Myron Bradley Penner. The End of Apologetics (p. 32).
I like the acronym OUNCE. This modern philosophical paradigm wants “truth” to stay at arm’s length. Truth, when encountered, does not change me – it is altogether outside of me and completely independent of me. And it is that independence of me that makes it the truth. But is the truth really truth when it is not truth for me?
I want to explore this further. And I want to explore the connection that modern Christianity makes between objective truth and God, often making the two equivalent. It is not the truth about Jesus that brings me into a relationship with Him but the encounter and experience of the very Person of Jesus. Fundamentally I think there is a difference between knowing something to be true and experiencing that truth in my life. Maybe this quote from T.S. Eliot puts it best:
Every experience is a paradox in that it means to be absolute, and yet is relative; in that it somehow always goes beyond itself and yet never escapes itself.
I want to embrace the paradox and not run away from it. Because it is in the paradox that I meet Jesus.
Yesterday was the best day this blog has ever had! So congratulations (and thanks) to those who visited. I am celebrating by having a cup of tea. BTW: my new favourite pen!
I have been meaning to write on this topic for some time. I have written previously on Kierkegaard’s insights on sermons. Today I stumbled across this blog post, Soren Kierkegaard and Preaching…, and it reminded me that I wanted to write on the topic. But, as I reflected on preaching, it struck me that topic is much larger. Rather than preaching, it is about how to communicate the faith since it is faith in a Person.
Pursue love and strive for the spiritual gifts, and especially that you may prophesy. For those who speak in a tongue do not speak to other people but to God; for nobody understands them, since they are speaking mysteries in the Spirit. On the other hand, those who prophesy speak to other people for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation. Those who speak in a tongue build up themselves, but those who prophesy build up the church. Now I would like all of you to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy. One who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be built up.
1 Corinthians 14:1-5
Paul writes that those who “prophesy speak to other people for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation“. The older Prayer Books used to call it “edification”. Kierkegaard would maybe call it indirect communication.
The aim of prophesying or preaching is not supplying of information but rather the upbuilding (towards God) of those who are listening. It is done to encourage the listener to do what they believe. And to find consolation when things do not work out in Jesus. Modern sermons are too often academic discourses that speak little to individuals. And all too often do not require a response from the individual in their daily life.
Preaching is an impossible task because it is a Person who is experienced that is the aim and end. This Person is not an absent past reality but a present person in the community. And this Person calls me to communion with Him. He calls me to intimacy now. And He speaks a very simple command, “Follow Me”.
I want to keep this topic open as I think it is very important for me to thinking aloud.
Is there anyone who could and would send me an invite to Clubhouse? I think it sounds amazing and would be something for me. (But I am not going to purchase an invite!) I have set up an account (@singleind) but have to wait for an invite. Contact me, please!!!!
I just wanted to share an article I read online: Inhuman communication: Søren Kierkegaard versus the internet by Patrick Stokes.
Just the last paragraph:
Equally, the fact that we are human beings dealing with other human beings is essential for maintaining the integrity of communication if we’re going to use this disproportionate talking tube. Indeed, a great deal of the abuse we encounter online ― though by no means all or even a majority of it ― seems to be a function of just this sort of abstraction from interpersonal communication, losing sight of the face behind the avatar, so to speak. Kierkegaard knew what it was to be attacked from all sides. But he also knew how to take responsibility, and how to engage with his neighbour even amidst the tumult.
All of this is another example of levelling. And the internet is very much the abstraction that kills the individual. But Stokes points out that the internet can become very impersonal – forgetting that there are people behind the keyboard. Impersonal communication is not only reserved for the internet. I think we live in a world of impersonal communication and religious communities are not immune. A “personal relationship” cannot be separate from personal interaction – some large communities can become extremely impersonal.
I think the article has many things to ponder. I do not think we need to abandon the internet (and technology) and live in the woods like Ted Kaczynski. (Yes, I have watched the Unabomber series on Netflix’s.) I think the internet can be redeemed by me being me and by me allowing people to be people and not seeing them as another product. The internet can be extremely impersonal, yes, and it can make individuals just another object. But in the end, Kierkegaard challenges me in my behaviour – to not allow abstractions to rule people, not to make individuals into objects, into hits or downloads. Kierkegaard encourages me to see people as people: people with stories, with experiences, with feelings. And for me to be a person online and reflect on the way I interact with others.
Towards the end of his life, Kierkegaard had a shaky relationship with Christendom – for him that meant the official Lutheran Church of Denmark. He did not receive Communion on his deathbed and refused visits from clergy, even his own brother. He turned his back on the institution, stayed away from public worship, and wrote at length about the dangers of Christendom. But did he have a shaky relationship with God?
I have always found Kierkegaard’s gravestone very inspiring. The inscription finishes with “And unceasingly / Speak with my Jesus.” For me, it separates the institution from the Person – the church from Jesus. Yes, Jesus speaks through His Church – in His Word and through the Sacraments – but the institution is not Jesus. I do not have faith in the church but only in the Absolute Paradox that brings life and embodies love. I like community and I am not anti-people but the community of faithful needs to lead me to communion with Jesus – He is the end of the journey!
So today I thought about a quote from the end of Kierkegaard’s life in the midst of his struggle with the official church:
I do not dare to call myself a Christian; but I want honesty, and to that end I will venture.
“XII. What do I want?”, The Moment, Hong 46
I guess, in modern speak, we would call that authenticity. For Kierkegaard, this honesty is connected to risk and faith. And the honesty he is speaking about is honesty about my relationship with God – honest before God. Being on a parish roll is not the same as being in the book of life.
It is human nature to try to find security in this world – finding certainty. For a lot of people, science offers that certainty – a truth that is imminent. Sometimes we use the terminology objective or absolute truth – a truth outside of me that is indepentant of me. Unfortunately, some people use that terminology about God. Kierkegaard’s point is that people finding that absolute truth in the institution is not the same as a personal relationship with Jesus. The fundamental movement of faith is to leap into uncertainty and that leap changes me.
So honesty has to do with risk before God. Risk that God will change me. Honesty is also about uncertainty – I do not have all the answers within myself. I am not complete without transcendence. I am not complete without the God who has reached out to me in love in the Absolute Paradox. And I can not surrender that honesty to another person – no one leaps for me into uncertainty.
My mental health struggles have taught me that I must live each day on its own merits. I must live now. Without any certainty about tomorrow. And that requires of me a certain amount of honesty about me and about my relationship with others and ultimately with God. I try (with God’s grace) to live for Him today.
a fool and his prayer book 