Pride, self-deprecation and humility

Those who are indifferent to praise or blame have great tranquility of heart. (Thomas a Kempis)

Truly, I say to you, unless you repent and become like a child, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever humbles himself like a child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 18:3-4)

Self-deprecation in any for whatsoever is a cancer. You must fight it with all your strength. How do you know if you are doing it? This is where pride comes in. Self-deprecation is usually generously peppered with feelings of shame, guilt and anxiety when we are faced with calls to "curb out pride".

This behavior has nothing to do with humility! My definition of humility is someone who has no pride and thus feels no shame, guilt.

Humility has to do with realism. To be truly humble is to have a clear view of our reality. If you are a good pianist, for example, and have been gifted with musical talents, it would be a grave fault to deny those talents with a self-deprecatory remark (this would be hiding your talent in a hole in the ground). If the reality is that you are a talented musician, then give God the glory and say "I am a good musician, thanks be to God!" that is not arrogance, that is humility.

But, if you have acknowledged your sin (and don't we all do so daily, at least at Compline? If not more often!?); if you have committed yourself to pursuing holiness (and all Christians have done so), then do not fall into the trap of shame and guilt (and therefore pride) when your sin is revealed (either privately in your prayers, or publicly).

No one is called a Christian because they are holy (well maybe one or two of you). We are Christians because Christ has opened a way for us to be truly holy and perfect, and we have heeded his call, dropped our nets and followed him.

Here's the question in my meditations: since Christ did all the work, how can we be concerned with our worth? The prideful are slaves to their audience, but we are slaves of Christ. Who is your audience? The prideful are shamed when they do not live up to their audience's expectation, we want only to hear the Master say "You good and faithful servant." Who do you live up to? The prideful need others to see them in an idealized way, and go to many lengths to make sure their public image is spotless, we repeat constantly to ourselves: "Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you." (Matt 5.11-12) How polished is your public image?

Humility heals our broken selves, and releases tremendous amounts of energy. I mean physical energy. The humble is like it says in the psalms:

It is God who arms me with strength and keeps my way secure.
He makes my feet like the feet of a deer;
he causes me to stand on the heights.
He trains my hands for battle;
my arms can bend a bow of bronze.
You make your saving help my shield, and your right hand sustains me;
your help has made me great.
You provide a broad path for my feet,
so that my ankles do not give way. (Psalm 18:32-36)

Praise the LORD, my soul;
all my inmost being, praise his holy name.
Praise the LORD, my soul, and forget not all his benefits.
Who forgives all your sins and heals all your diseases,
Who redeems your life from the pit and crowns you with love and compassion,
Who satisfies your desires with good things
so that your youth is renewed like the eagle’s. (Ps. 103: 1-5)

It is palpable to anyone you meet. The way of humility is the way of liberation. The humble is the only person capable of helping their neighbor remove the speck from their eyes.

So if you feel guilty, if you are denying your gifts from a sense of false modesty, remember this is pride. Throw yourself at the mercy of the Love of God. Confess your pride, "repent and become like a child", and enter the kingdom of heaven!

Sit

This chair is all chairs
This is the Throne of Heaven
This, the throne of Hell
Sitting here, sitting at the heavenly choir
Sitting on the bus, on the toilet,
Sitting still as I drive, sitting
As I work away

My life is one, punctuated by
Getting up to sit somewhere else,
Moving to sit, hurrying to sit

All the leather chairs will fade away
All the hard wooden benches will
Break, all folding chairs, all
Church pews, fade and fail

When I an dead
I will sit on the earth
It too will fade away
Only my sitting will remain

Having a real enemy

Without a doubt this is one of the more controversial aspects of spiritual life. I would say, though, that for the contemplative solitary having an enemy is a, well, god-send. At a fundamental level enemies keep us real, keep us in reality - rather like a wall keeps you in reality when you drive straight into it.

When I think about "enemy" I tend to think of those (people, things) that make me fearful of suffering (digest this for a moment). If I feel particularly archetypal I may think of my enemies things like disease and death. But Benedict says that we should always have our death in the forefront of our thinking. So either this is a case of "keep your enemies closer" or Benedict wants the monk to get over their fear of death. My guess is that Benedict wants us to think of death not as an enemy, but rather a wise advisor. Wise because death is not swayed by the petty ego, and thus is able to provide us with a perspective - a final perspective as it were.

But how about people? I have met too many Christians who take Jesus' injunction to turn the other cheek, as a way to refuse to accept the existence of personal enemies. "I love everyone" is their motto. I am sorry to say but this is frequently an anemic form of faith, closer to a moldy dark abandoned basement than a virile and ensolared power which brings light to the world.

My own self-analysis (for what is worth) leads me to believe that this is a particularly pernicious form of egotism. No one loves everyone that way. Jesus did not love everyone that way. He is LOVE, and so was quite capable of calling people "vipers", and Peter "satan"...

Benedict suggests that the purpose of the cenobitic life is to prepare someone (heal the petty ego, strengthen the good ego) to become a solitary and go out to do battle with the devil by themselves. The devil is everyone's real and final enemy, but there are other things to hold as enemies: the prophets did battle with the injustices of society, and they frequently called the king to the carpet, by name! (In this vein, have you ever wondered why the Bible frequently calls nations by personal names, like Ham for Egypt or Israel for the Hebrew people?)

Idea: instead of blaming an amorphous conglomerate like BP for the spill, we should pray at the CEO. Yes, "pray at"! : )

I propose to you that if you are not able to concretely identify at least one real enemy (yes a person, even if he or she is a figurehead), then you are not doing your job of solitary very well.

My challenge to us is this: how aware are you of your enemies? How many enemies can you list? Are there any real people in your enemy list? Can you change the list so that you have actual names (and perhaps even faces - Google them)? How are you doing battle with your enemy? What concrete steps are you taking? Daily? Weekly?

As you walk up to your prie-dieu realize that you are marching up to the front lines. As you pick up your breviary or settle into your prayer word, you are firing a shot at all that keeps people starving, afraid, suffering. All those headlines you see on TV, the newspapers and the internet. Be angry at it. Then look at your enemies and pray at them. Pray with all your might. Do not falter, not for one moment - you are redeeming the world one name at a time, one prayer at a time.

If it helps, think of this exercise as the shadow version of "love your neighbor". If you cannot name three or four of your actual neighbors, then I would say you are simply loving (and living) a fantasy.

 

 

At some point attraction stops being a choice.

Those who are attractive are the people who spend time, regularly spend time figuring out who they are and where they are. Not so much plotting the future, but rather deepening their stance in the present. Making sure their presence is a present for others by, strangely, being deeply present to them.

When you stand before a beautiful work of art - the beauty makes you speechless, perhaps for a second perhaps for days.

When I stood before Monet's Water Lillies in the museum in London, or Rodin's the Lovers, eternally kissing and embracing in marble, oh I was lost. There was never enough to look at! I can close my eyes and see it, in detail, it is not as if there are new brushstrokes or chisel cuts, but it is so profoundly itself that it is mesmerizing. Or when I read:

Every Angel is terror. And yet,
ah, knowing you, I invoke you, almost deadly
birds of the soul.

What would I not give to write those lines!? Or when I was in a very stressful job, riding the commuter train into London on one of those dark and cold and damp days which only the English know how to create. And around me were other malcontented commuters all dressed in their proper greys and blacks and browns. And then I read:

I believe in you my soul, the other I am must not abase itself to you,
And you must not be abased to the other.

I was not the same. As when I heard for the first time:

And if the elevator tries to bring you down
Go crazy - punch a higher floor

And I got it, I truly got it! I got it why rock and roll is so dangerous and why every dictator in the world wants to ban it! And probably why Plato banished poets from his Republic. And why the arts get little funding, or funding with strings attached from presidents and kings. And when I try to explain it all these half-asleep people nod benignly at me. They do not hear my roar, my bellowing roar deep in the pit of my heart, that furnace! Do you hear it?

And that moment comes, those moments come, you come to a standstill and can stop pretending, attempting, reaching. You can just be yourself because the beautiful presence before you is just being.

All of this is even more electrifying when it is another person, and not an object. Oh, objects can stare back, and when we notice the object looking at us it is a scary thing. Nietzsche said "When you stare at the abyss, the abyss stares back at you." He was right that old, crazy fraud.

But when someone stares back it is at that point that attraction stops being a choice.

And by stare I do not mean the hard-and-frowny stare, unblinking until tears roll down your face. It is not a game of chicken. Rather it is an encounter, subtle and gentle. More like the slow removal of a veil from the virgin's face - where she is expecting, trembling her first ever kiss.

Ever been in that place? Can you feel it now, as (perhaps) a warmth in your heart? How things which seem difficult and things which seem painful, don't quite disappear, but are transformed into scenery, into backdrop. Sometimes these moments when, soul-to-soul, you surrender (in spite of yourself) into an intimacy which a lifetime together may never ever reveal. And we seek it, oh how we seek it! We are all born to be known. To be revealed to each other in a nakedness of heart which is simultaneously intoxicating and devastating. Because we are fundamentally known at our deepest center.

And so I have no choice. I simply have no choice. Before you.

Leaves

Leaves (for N.) by Leo Campos (10/20/10)

Autumn rain scribbles at my window
"Write this to her"

Dry yellow leaves
Across the parking lot
Scratching their way to winter

Better to finish as ashes of a fire
Than dust. Even when dead
The memory of the desire
(Which burned) can become the next flame's bed

The leaf whispers of love
To a sun-loving tree
As the wind takes it away

What are bodies for?

A good blog (if you don’t read it). Today’s post is especially good: http://experimentaltheology.blogspot.com/2010/09/nfl-players-porn-stars-and-body-of.html

But we don’t even need to go as far as these extremes. Last night I was talking with a friend about the mistrust/fear/paranoia involved in sex. I went off in my usual attack on Americans and their very unhealthy relationship to their own sexuality, implying all along (of course) that the Brazilian approach is healthier and better.

But today’s post brings “body” to a higher level. How about sports? How about fashion? How about diet? How about medicine? All things that directly affect (or use) a body will both influence and be influenced by it. A large person may wish to be thin but it may be simply genetically impossible. A highly strung person may wish to be calm, but their body fidgets. And so on.

We have a certain amount of plasticity in our bodies. There is much we can add or remove from it without necessarily destroying its basic functions. In fact we can destroy many of its basic functions without dying. With advancements in technology we can change size, shape and gender. It is not unfeasible to think that we will be soon enough able to modify ourselves down to the genetic level.

With all this freedom to manipulate our own bodies the question posed in the article are very pertinent: “Aren't the bodies of porn stars similar to the bodies of NFL players, and even the bodies of high school football players? That might sound extreme, but I'm throwing it out there for reflection. How are bodies sacrificed for our entertainment? And do we even care as long as we get our orgasm or that state championship? Two thousand years ago humans brutalized the body of God. And one wonders, has anything changed?”

The answer is that nothing has changed because we are still the same race. Perhaps in the future we will become more hospitable to bodies, our own and others, and also more generous and charitable.

For now I would be ecstatic to meet someone who could simply stand and be right there where they are standing.

 

 

Being present

When you sit to pray make sure you are sitting there! Make sure you are actually present. "Be sober" means to not be delusional, to not be asleep or intoxicated. Full intoxication is not an issue with me. The danger is the partial intoxication(s). they come from many sources but I trying to narrow it down to the issues that pertain to prayer.

Main issues:

• Faith in the wrong thing, or in a thing, full stop. Instead of a Person, The Person.
• Focus, or lack thereof.
• Patience, or lack thereof
• Hospitality, especially to myself by inviting myself to the prayer time

Wrong faith: in this case what do I trust? Do I trust my feelings - and so I respond to them with such priority? Do I trust my thoughts, and follow them around in many many circles? Do I trust my nervous system and spent a long time worrying about pain or discomfort? Do I trust my memories? Do I trust my knowledge of the "right" way of doing things? And so on? 

I spend most of my time dealing with issues of faith in everything but God and Jesus Christ. 

Wrong focus: I tend to focus on what I trust, and ignore what is untrustworthy. This is natural and probably healthy. If a caveman knows for a fact that a rustling in the bush is a saber-tooth tiger and take appropriate evasive action, they more likely survived and eventually these survivors begat me! 

On the opposite end, if I am certain that these sounds in the back pew of the church are NOT ghostly presences, I do not get nervous and simply ignore them as "wood creaking" noises.

So I focus on what I trust, and I trust that which I have high (blind?) faith in. 

Wrong patience: it amazes me how patient I am with my favorite sins. As my friend once told me, "The only sins you keep are those you enjoy." The word "enjoy" here is used in the slightly ironic sense of unhealthy enjoyment. I obviously try to curb my avarice, gluttony. I blush at my lust. I haughtily ignore my pride. I am saddened by my sadness. I fight my anger. I am certain I couldn't care less about my acedia, since I am constantly sharing with others how far along I am in the path of self-discovery - and now am far above vainglory.

Wrong hospitality: instead of welcoming in the Holy Spirit and Jesus into my prayer, I spend a lot of time inviting tax collectors and sinners. I wish I could say I invited these characters of my own soul for the sake of their edification and healing. the ugly truth is that I invite them because I enjoy they taudry gaudiness. I enjoy their songs of lust and leisure more than I enjoy the psalter. So I throw a party and invite the murderer, the adulterer, the thief. hardly ever do I invite the Holy Spirit.

What is the solution? 

 

Judging again

Can I be a reasonable judge, in the old sense of the word "reasonable"? As in "And here we offer and present unto thee, O Lord, our selves, our souls and bodies, to be a reasonable, holy and living sacrifice unto thee."

When I first heard that sentence I thought it meant reasonable as in "appropriate" or "sensible" (i.e. not everything)! But my guess is that it does not mean that but it probably means something more like "intelligent" or "sound."

To be a reasonable judge of others means that I use my intellectual faculties to their fullest, both the analytical as well as intuitive and emotional sides, to grasp the full complexity that is a person - soul and body.

But to judge anyone I must begin with some prejudices (pre-judgments). These are critical. As a would-be judge must spend time working through my biases and predilections, not to necessarily purge out every vice (since that would be both impractical and impossible) but rather to know myself, to know where I am weak and where I need to be extra careful. I must spend time whittling down the log in my eyes so as to be able to help others with their specks.

I also must have some understanding of truth and reality. I must believe there is such as thing as perfect vision (20/20) and that it is objectively quantifiable (in a spiritual way).

You know how eye doctors use those eye charts with letters and numbers to test how accurate your vision is? And then they add some lenses and ask you to look again "Is it better now?" And so on. The process is very similar in spiritual life. We need to test our "normal" vision and find out how bad it is.

So the first test of "correct vision": can you see Jesus and Him only? If you can see Him clearly then your eyesight is fine. If not you need some corrective.

Second test is done in a community of believers where they are able to help you see better. Paul after the events on the road to Damascus needed that. Couldn't Christ, after blinding him and making the point, have healed his blindness? Why would he need to get Ananias (Acts 9) to do the healing? I cannot say what God was thinking but it is very fortuitous that God chose another believer to be the one who brought sight to the new convert. The fellow believer;through prayer;is able to restore my sight, to bring me back into focus. their holy life and example, their faithfulness to the call, their willingness to come to me when I am still far from the church (though, of course already saved by God), and then to pray for me, is what brings out the healing of my sight.

The third test is ongoing. I am going for regular eye checkups. Every Sunday, in fact, I gather with fellow believers and we check each other's eyes. We greet each other in the Lord's name, we gather to worship Him, we share a meal, we study His Word. This helps me make sure I am still seeing clearly.

Now that the seeing part is clearer, now that I am actively engaged in whittling away the log in my eye, now that I have people praying for my vision I am now empowered to be able to judge reasonably another.

Where does your hand go when you make a fist?

http://maverickphilosopher.typepad.com/maverick_philosopher/2010/08/fist-and-hand-statue-and-lump-the-aporetics-of-composition.html

 

Question is it hand=fist, lump of bronze=statue? Or is it hand !=fist, bronze !=statue?

1) If you say hand=fist you are wrong because: “If you say that the fist = the hand, then when you make a fist nothing new comes into existence, and when the potter makes a pot out of clay, nothing new comes into existence.  And when a mason makes a wall out of stones, nothing new comes into existence.  He started with some stones and he ended with some stones.  Given that the stones exist, and that the mason's work did not cause anything new to come into existence, must we not say that the single composite entity, the wall, does not exist?  (For if it did exist, then there would be an existent in addition to the stones.)  

But it sounds crazy to say that the wall the mason has just finished constructing does not exist.”

2) If you say hand != fist you are wrong because: “If, on the other hand, you say that the fist is not identical to the hand, then you can say that the making of a fist causes a new thing to come into existence, the fist. The same applies with the statue and the wall.  After the mason stacks n stones into a wall, he has as a result of his efforts n +1 objects, the original n stones and the wall. But this is also counterintuitive.  Consider the potter at his wheel.  As the lump of clay spins, the potter shapes the lump into a series of many (continuum-many?) intermediate shapes before he stops with one that satisfies him.  Thus we have a series of objects (proto-pots) each of which is a concrete individual numerically distinct from the clay yet (i) spatially coincident with it, and (ii) sharing with it every momentary property.”

Where does your hand go when you make a fist? You get a handful of fist? Or is it a fistful of hand? This kind of thing can be frustrating for some, but for me these questions are delightful. They work on at least two levels – one is a level of language and propositions, then other is the level of phenomenon and perception. As someone who engages the world predominantly through the intellect and others primarily through argument (the good kind, the kind that seeks the truth, not the shouting-until-I-am-hoarse kind) the first level of this puzzle helps me to remember the limits of communication and thought. But also its importance.

It does matter – at some level – whether there is a “hand”, a “fist”, or neither, or both! See in the beginning was the word, and that word was Light…or perhaps that word was “Make light”, or more imperative: “Light – be!”…at any rate there was a creation out of a Godly word. That very same Light at the beginning of Creation is shining in me: “For God, who said ‘Let there be light in the darkness’, has made this light shine in our hearts so we could know the glory of God that is seen in the face of Jesus Christ.” (2 Cor. 4:6)

The “very same Light” is shining in my heart. So: is it one light or two lights? How can the Light which started Creation be starting me, a new creation?

Here we bump into language, into the limits of intelligibility. Before I myself received the gracious enlightenment of the Spirit such wordplay was meaningless, but now I have come to see and know that there is no more apt or fitting description of the process. This words are inspired – in the sense that what they describe is fittingly, efficiently and correctly described. Further I have come to understand, to experience that that-which-is-described is protected and incorruptibly transmitted from generation to generation, from culture to culture by the Holy Spirit, who is at work even now in every person and committee which prayerfully seeks the Spirit’s guidance when translating Scripture.

I have frequently said that I believe in the inerrancy of Scripture the same way I believe in the inerrancy of a great poem: it could not be other than it is. But I have come to see this more broadly now. After all, a poem is perfect in its original language. Translation of a poem does it much harm and is inferior (no matter how good). Scripture is perfect in the prayerful reading, or receiving, of it. This means the words flooding a plowed and seeded heart lead to abundant fruitfulness.

In the meantime

In the meantime put on the mind of Christ and go where he is, do what he is doing. Christ leads always by example. Watch him, and then mimic. Imitation is the sincerest form of prayer, to twist a term. But how do we do that? There are some things that need to happen first, and then there are some other things that need to happen always.

* Happen first
To anyone who wants to become a Christian you need to first die in Christ. you need baptism, and you need resurrection as well. You need Easter and Pentecost. You need to step up, or stand up, in a crowd of hostile and indifferent people and sing a new song to Yahweh. A love song, hopefully. But a new song is what is called for here. 

You need to find that you have been found by Jesus.

* Happen always
You need to find a community of believers who want to be what you want to be. 
You need to find a group who is encouraging everyone to greater effort at going where Jesus is going and doing what He is doing. I am not too concerned by the externals, the methods and practices by which this inner practice is achieved. Some like bells & smells, others prefer happy-clappy. It is all good if it is done for God. 
Any serious group of believers will have a good grasp of where they came from and where they are going. This means a good grasp of history, of tradition, or reformation(s). 
They will magnanimous with the past and hospitable to the future. 
You will take time daily to soak in the Word of God. A nice long bath in the waters of Scripture will help melt away all troubles. Are you a morning bath or evening bath person? All times are good. Be diligent and deliberate.
You will take time daily to have a deep conversation with God. The ancient practice of "colloquy" (developed in some more detail by Ignatius) is a good place to start. Perhaps journaling. 

* Eventually as you wait
Eventually, as you wait, you bring all of life to Him. This does not mean pray for intercession in this or that event (Oh please God, oh please God, let me/get me...). Instead this typing on a keyboard, this talking with someone at work, this TV watching - is done for and with Jesus through the Holy Spirit. Life becomes a sacrament. 

Are you not clear yet on what to do? Then do nothing. If Jesus is not doing anything, or if you cannot see Jesus doing anything, then sit contentedly waiting. Waiting is the key here. It is a non-anxious but deliberate and attentive waiting. 

Choices

The serpent
Choice devours itself
Tail to mouth
Eternally
Trapped by its own
Hunger to God
Apples to apples
Choice to choice
From dust to death
If I choose now
If I choose then
I am encircled by Satan
If I choose not
If I refuse, resist
I am encircled by Satan
Ancient wise serpent
Mouth to tail
Eternity of hunger
Trapped in choice

Creativity

Steps in creative thinking:

1)      Fact-finding - divergent - broad inquiry into issues relevant to case. How? What?

2)      Problem-finding - convergent -  focus on possible solutions and design issues (too costly? too big?). Discard least likely to succeed. When? How much?

3)      Idea-finding - divergent - from the possible solutions begin finding ways to implement it.

4)      solution-finding - convergent. Look through possible (implementable) solutions and pick the best (beauty, simplicity, efficiency, cost).

5)      Plan of action. Scale models. Negotiation. Persuasion. Alliances.

 

Divergent/convergent thinking:

·         Divergent: open-ended, broad, wide

·         Convergent: focused, narrow, deep

 

Applying to study of sacred texts:

·         Fact-finding: When was it written? Where else was this written about? What else does it reference? What type of writing is this?

·         Problem-finding: Why was this written? What is the message? What is the purpose? Who is the audience?

·         Idea-finding: What are the possible interpretations of this passage? What are the possible implications of each interpretation? What issues does it address?

·         Solution-finding: of the many ideas identified which one speaks to my current situation? What does it mean to me? Why should I care?

·         Plan of Action: Who else should hear about this? Who else can I engage in this work?

 

Of course this approach can (should?) be applied to all forms of study. Perhaps it could be stretched to include all forms of communication? The first four steps involve active listening - not only not rushing to get a plan of action/advice but also asking questions which are both divergent and convergent. Only the final step involves speaking, i.e. offering suggestions, advice, to-do items.

 

If only I could be silent during four fifths of my conversations!

Poem

It is white
               electric
And boundless - stretching in all directions
She said in the dark after we made love

I touched her curves still moist with sweat
Like a potter running his hands in wet clay

Boundaries, curves, delimitations
Uncovering and recovering hidden sacred grottoes of pleasure
Suffocating, intoxicating
                              closeness

The one word for me is embrace
No         she said         release

On intimacy

False sense of intimacy: Facebook, email, Skype. At what point do we say you are intimate even if you have no physical contact?

Tabloid culture: a recent article in Newsweek taunts, "In defense of our Brangelina-loving, Jon and Kate-hating, Tiger-taunting, tawdry tabloid culture." 

One of the hallmarks of intimacy is that I know both the good and the bad about you. We have shared enough time and words together that I know you in a more rounded way. I know you are wonderful with your kids, for example, but that you are very bossy at work. Or I know that you are incredible good listener, but that you are cold to your spouse and cheat on him. I know you have no fear in defending the poor and the orphans, esp. in other countries, but that you also drive this year's model BMW. 

This is intimacy - I come to see that you have many qualities, some good and some bad, some appropriate and some inappropriate, but I continue to have a relationship with you. I will talk with you, I will share with you, I will go to lunch with you, I will invite you over for dinner.

It seems that the foundation stone of all relationships, and certainly of the ones which claim the title "intimate" is trust. By this I mean that a relationship will be more intimate in direct proportion to the amount of trust I have in you. I have to trust that you will not attack me, turn your back on me, betray me, or share my secrets with others. The more I am certain of this the more intimate our relationship. A second critical part is respect. Even if I expected that you would not ever reveal something about me to others, there is a line of behavior that I find unacceptable (we all do). If you behave in a way I find unacceptable I will have to end the relationship. Where is your line? Adultery? Drugs? Theft? Murder? At what point would you have to say that your trust in me has been broken?

The annoying thing is that most of the conversation about intimacy tends to focus on physical intimacy, which, strangely is the least interesting and least important of all levels of intimacy. Frankly, anyone can get naked with anyone else and exchange bodily fluids. This is trivial to the point of boredom, though the porn industry seems to make a killing out of this most unintimate form of exercise. 
Becoming judges: the difficulty with intimacy is that in becoming more intimate with the case (or person) gives you fresh perspectives on the subject matter, and thus, paradoxically allows you to judge them better. Let us not kid ourselves: we all judge, and harshly, each other. From wardrobes to demeanor to word choice we are constantly judging and being judged. Around our dinner table at home at least half of the conversation with the children tend to be a subtle (and not-so-subtle) way of teaching them to police their own behavior better (sit up straight, chew with your mouth closed, don't talk with your mouth full) so that they will not be negatively judged by others - and therefore bring a bad judgment upon us parents by proxy.

The worse judges are the ones who claim not to judge, because there are only two alternatives to not judging: either you are not judging me because you have no interest in intimacy with me ("I do not care about you"), or you are simply unwilling to share the results of your judgment with me - perhaps saving it as juicy gossip (again showing your lack of respect for me). Of the first kind we see our indifference to the atrocities committed in other countries (most of the African continent for a start). But we do not care about them, so we avoid the complicate dance into intimacy with them by simply refusing to judge, to speak clearly and in love against atrocities against injustice and oppression. We also do not care about the poor, and it will be a very cold day in Hell when I stop my SUV to become intimate with a homeless person. 

Of the second kind they tend to be more personal. they are people whom we think superficially that they are open-minded or loving or good listeners. But there is judgment there. At best they agree with you (i.e. pass a positive judgment), at worse they desire the attention or the information which can fulfill some other of their needs. Those who claim to not judge others are the most profound egotists, at a level that would make even Ayn Rand blush. They are in this life for themselves and themselves only. 

So, assuming you want to avoid egoism and callous indifference, assuming you accept the reality that we are all in this together, in one planet, members of one species, responsible for the future health and well-being of all creatures in this planet. Assuming this, what does the Bible recommend us judges to do?

Born to fear

Any of our ancestors in the African savannahs that were inveterate optimists, constantly underestimating risks (predators, loss of food, aggression from others of their kind) simply and in the blunt calculus of life did not live long enough to pass on their genes.

So which ones succeeded? The pessimists, the paranoid. Perhaps Andrew Grove had it right after all: "Only the paranoid survive". Consider this: we are the many-time removed inheritors of paranoid and pessimistic grandparents. Their fear enabled us to sit comfortably in our 5 bedroom houses and 3 SUV garages watching oil spew in the Gulf on our hi-def TVs.

So, biologically we are wired with super sensitive systems in our brains which monitor our environment for threats. 24-7. Is it any wonder you are tired all the time? But our threats these days tend to be more abstract. Our hearts start racing when our self-esteem is threatened, for example, or during the (mostly) bloodless battles of boardroom and bedroom. These "threats" activate the same circuits that enabled us to successfully flee a saber-toothed tiger: hormonal overloads to activate our fight-or-flight responses.

Of course, as we all know, when we are defensive (or offensive - in more than one way) we immediately activate the same responses from our fellow workers and mates. Having evolved to live in groups it is natural that we also evolved to pick up "vibes" from others and respond appropriately.

The depressing fact is how much energy we all expend on a daily vicious circle of attack and counter-attack, grudges and gossip,  withdrawal and defensiveness. At the end of about 18 hours of such activity we crawl into bed exhausted, only to get up to the alarm clock the next morning berating us for a new day's battle.

But there is another way. It requires less energy that our accustomed way, though at first it will feel more difficult - mostly because you are trying to run your life two ways at the same time. This is similar to what happens when people begin an exercise routine. At first they are more tired, hungry than before. After a while the beneficial aspects of exercise start to percolate, and they find themselves with more energy, sleeping better, and so on. Why would we expect spiritual activity to work any differently.

So here are the 5 exercises in sobriety which, if practiced with diligence, will lead to higher levels of energy being available to be used in more noble pursuits:

1) Fear God
2) Vengeance is mine says Yahweh
3) Think of yourself as last and least
4) Be vigilant ("be sober, be watchful") to your intentions behind thoughts and actions. If these are the wrong intentions then stop and immediately smash them against the Rock, that is Christ.
5) Seek silence. First reduce your speech (spoken and unspoken), then reduce your thoughts. 

 

Asceticism of the ordinary life

One of the books which I always keep promising myself I will read but somehow never do is Therese of Liseaux's Story of a Soul. I have, though, read endless commentaries and studies about her Little Way. In brief her Little Way is a surrender to God moment-by-moment. Sounds simple, and it is. In her time it was a strong critique against extra-pious medieval pietism. In our own age it is an equally strong rejoinder against our Sundays-only, 7-and-a-half-minute sermons, coffee-shop, diluted Christianism - a movement which permeates all we do.

There are now Bibles with only the words of Jesus in them. At first this is an attractive proposition: remove the "extra stuff", and you are left with the direct wisdom of Jesus Himself. But Jesus is not Buddha or Mohammed to speak in aphorisms and wisdom-teachings. Plus the Gospels are not a collection of sagely teachings. Rather they are the very heart, soul, flesh and bones amd marrow or the Church, the Body of Christ. To remove the "extra" makes as much sense as removing your eyelids so your eyes can see unimpeded.

There are few practices which are as demanding as being a Christian minute-by-minute all blessed day long! Everyone can moderately behave for an hour or so. Everyone can muster enough attention for 15 minutes or so. Everyone can be tolerant and bask in the glow of warm friendliness towards others when safely ensconsed in a back pew for 45 minutes. But how many of us can keep up the effort throughout the day? How much energy is required to be vigilant? how much sheer endurance is called for to smile and turn the other cheek at both real and imagined insults (most especially the imagined ones).

Therese seems to consider it an act of ascetic discipline to be nice to everyone all the time. I can tell from personal experience as well as from personal inclination that being nice and curteous and gentle and meek and humble and all other virtues is well nigh impossible. The quick quip, the witty put-down, the pissy growl, the angry shout, the foreboding frown - these occur often, most especially when we are dealing with others.

I have slowly changed my own perspective on the issue of spiritual discipline. First I had this idea of heroic efforts done mostly alone. Now I am beginning to see as more of a creative ensemble work - where I keep tryign to be in tune and sync with the Main Note. As I try to respond to the Note, I am playing with others who may or may not be in tune with the same Song. But through some creative playing, what at first seems like a cacophony can become something much more concerted.

Little things are not so little, since each is like a little finger pressing a key in the piano, or a finger plucking a string of the guitar. All these little acts of kindness during the day, all these regular turnings to God in the Jesus Prayer, or the renewing of intentions to be loving and kind and patient, or simply to not respond no matter how tempting, all these things add up in volume.

One of the first thigns I learned when sitting in Benedictine choirs to chant the psalms is that this work is almost the exact opposite of what we think of singing. When you are in a normal choir the choirmaster will work very hard to get you to be as clear with your voice as possible. If you listen carefully to a good choir you can hear each voice quite clearly. Together, of course, they make a joyful sound. But chanting the psalms in monastic practice does the reverse. You try really hard not to be heard. Your voice should only be loud enough so that you can still clearly hear the voices of those next to you. It feels unnatural to sing this way. But the sheer volume of low voices can be quite well voluminous.

If I take the sum total of all these small acts during my day, driving, brushing teeth, eating, office conversations, telephone calls, trips to the supermarket. All of these small acts each whispering a song. "Anger anger" says one. "Greed greed" says another. "Glutton glutton" says a third. "Lust lust" adds a chorus. This is the diabolical choir of my life which ceaselessly intones "Me mine more". But if through the day I begin here and there working in changing the song, so that instead of "anger anger" I make a concerted effort to sing "patience patience". Instead of "lust lust" I try "charity charity".

The psalmist tells us to sing a new song to Yahweh. But anyone who has tried to "change their tune" will know how nearly impossible a task this is! It requires dilligence, concerted effort and most of all a great big helping of good humor to be able to dislodge the old tunes stuck in our heads and hearts.

I still think that periods of serious practice, say 30 minutes every day in a removed place, are very beneficial. But if that is all you do it is hard to see how much progress will be made. Some, for sure, and some is better than none. But the wonderful thing about our hearts is that they are an instrument which can be practiced at all the time - everywhere. In fact I am coming to see the heart as that which only comes into existence when I deliberately practice compassion, self-emptying and justice - until I exercise those traits I do not have a living heart at all!

Sing a new song to Yahweh!

Stuck is bad

I know that most people seem to think that stuck is bad. But is it? One of the blogs I occasionally drop by to read is Trunk's Brazen Careerist. There is no value to it for myself - I am neither a careerist nor much into people who are brazen. But I do appreacite honesty and she is nothing if not honest. If you follow her posts regarding her boyfriend you will know what I mean. I am not altogether sure how I would conduct a relationship with someone who Tweets, and especially one who tweets about me - but that's another story. The point here is a quote in one of her blog entries which says "you start not being able to get out of your transition (my problem) then you are stuck. And stuck is bad. I'm stuck eating to procrastinate changing tasks because changing is hard and eating makes it easier....It's a discomfort being between things." This is an especially insightful, for me, post. The phrase "Stuck is bad" links to many things at the same time but two main things come from it: the concept of stuckiness, the implication of the alternative.

What are some forms of stuckiness? Could we say that a dark night of the soul is stuckiness? How about depression is that stuckiness? Most critically, and implied in the post, what is the opposite of stuckiness? Progress? Should we always be improving, changing, growing? This vegetable metaphor seems very popular. Is a human being called to always grow? Is there some sort of Moore's Law of self-help?

All these questions seem relatively benign until you realize that this idolatry of progress leads to some serious amount of guilt and fear and of course failure. I cannot tell how many people have told me that Christianity is too full guilt where after some soul searching questioning came to realize that it was Positivism at church which led to guilt. The Christian message, per se, in it's toe-tripping reality is the very vaccine against guilt.

Positivism is an interesting social philosophy. It first came to life at the end of the 17th century - a time when the human race unleashed the powers of rationality in a shockwave from which we are still recovering. I am not by any means an irrationalist, but I am terribly concerned with idolatry. Any philosophy which holds to a monotone theory of knowledge, be it through inspiration only or through reason only, is bound to be idolatrous. Most especially, as a Christian, any belief which rabidly defends that only natural, physical, and material approaches to knowledge are valid is bound to be found wanting when faced with the slippery nature of reality. But still the shades or shadows of Positivism linger.

Another point to keep in mind when looking at stuckiness is a distinction between people's fantasies about utopia. I first ran across this distinction when studying some Chinese philosophy. The Chinese (and many others) believed that the past was better. This BTW is also found in Christianity, especially up to and through the Middle Ages. The Rule of Benedict says: "For those monastics show themselves too lazy in the service to which they are vowed, who chant less than the Psalter with the customary canticles in the course of a week, whereas we read that our holy Fathers strenuously fulfilled that task in a single day. May we, lukewarm that we are, perform it at least in a whole week!" (Chapter 18). In fact, the idea that we are worse off than the olden days was a common belief until the Enlightenment. At that point we started, collectivelly, positing a better future, and the mem of progress firmly implanted itself in the human race, certainly in the West.

Some things need to be addressed here, but not too much because I reallyw ant to go back in be stuck on stuckiness. But at least one question comes to mind: are the obvious advances in quality of life through technology the same thing as progress? One more question: does progress advance at an equal rate across all areas of knowledge? Is there an inexorable march forward, or are we more like spilt milk - parts of it running forward from where the glass fell on the floor, but others, frustratingly, retreat to the safety of the area under the oven? Are thing getting better all the time? At the same rate?

Spirituality is a wisdom of living between things, of finding oneself being in-between. Spirituality becomes an unbrella term for a set of tools which help us broker peace between ideals and realities. Further, spirituality is a stepping into, and perhaps a stubborness to leave, liminal spaces. Anyone who's had an experience of being in a sacred space will know how it is both exhilirating and infuriating at the same time. This is the nature of the in-between spaces. This is what countless churches, synagogues and mosques aim to create with their architecture. In fact, architecture itself is a constant work of framing and delineating liminal spaces.

What makes liminal spaces so energizing is also what makes them dangerous, confusing. It is not that these spaces are themselves dangerous and confusing, bu trather that the view from there is of such a different angle that thigns which were solid certaintites before become a lot less solid and much more undertain. Spending time in liminal spaces allows us the opportunity to move from the as-if world into the what-if world. A world where we are not 100% certain of intentions behind acts. The world is no longer black and white.

One more thing happens to those who frequent liminal spaces regularly: we are constantly bumping into the 'adult world' - all those large unwieldy pieces of ethical furniture which are shaped so as to always stub your toe. We have a few of those (literal) items in my house. Very frustrating. I am sure that someone with a better industrial design eye would be able to explain exactly why everyone trips on the legs of the very large coffee table in the living room. I mean it is a hulking thing. But yet sooner or later someone slams their foot against it. Why? Something about its design, I am convinced. The lines in the upper part of the body of the table suggest that the lower less visible part should be different than it really is. And that is the perfect metaphor for ethical dilemas: something in the outward shape of the situation suggests a different inner dynamic than what is there in reality.

And here we go again with the reality thing. It is funny how hard it is to avoid reality. it just keeps tripping me up. No matter how much I wish it was a different shape, it is the shape it is.

It takes much courage to look at reality long enough to see its real shape. Only then can we begin to make some meaningful changes.

Walking the way of the psalms

Lately my kids discovered passwords. Not the type we use on computers, but rather the daily shibboleths we have. For example, my 3 year old is having to learn the "Please" password. Without the password he will not gain access to whatever goods or services he needs from mother or father. His older brother has taken the password game to a whole new level.

He will say: "What's the magic word?"
The younger one will diligently say "Please."
"Wrong," the older one says. "the magic word is 'magic word'."

Round and round they go, trying to out trick each other, in the verbal equivalent of computer hacking.

The other night I was retelling the story of Ali Baba and the 40 thieves the other day to them. I think the question came up regarding "Open sesame" and what exactly is "sesame". At any rate, it was important that Ali Baba use the correct password. To say "Open bananas" would not work no matter how heartfelt, how loudly it was shouted.

One, or perhaps "the", most marked trait of monastics of any stripe are their focus on the psalms as a primary way of prayer. Be it Benedictines chanting in choir or Jesuits whispering psalms to themselves as they go about the world, psalms are part and parcel of a monastic's toolbox.

I have been asked, by those who begin to be more concerted in their spiritual efforts how to pray the psalms. The difficulties seem to come from two places: one is the need to gather more and more information; two, the repetitive lamentations of the psalms. Anyone who has actually read through the psalms more than once will quickly realize that the psalmist, and frequently those attributed to David, was constantly claiming innocence. It seems everyone around him was to blame but himself. We sophisticated moderns tend to think that this is rather spiritually and emotionally immature of him.

The conversation usually goes something like this:

"David is whining again! I do not know how I can be uplifted by his psalms!"
"Why do you think he is whining?"
"Because he keeps blaming everyone else for his problems. Does he really think he is perfect?"
"And you think this is wrong?"
"Of course it is wrong! No one is blameless. He is falling into this victim-hood trap!"
"And the way to avoid it is?"
"To accept responsibility, of course! To rely on God!"
"So in your spiritual life you live with full realization that the things that happen to you are really your fault? Or God's?"

Of course this leads to uncomfortable moments of silence. It is easy for us to blame David for blaming others. But the opposite view is equally unbalanced. We cannot blame ourselves for everything that happens either! If you do that you are going down the road of such New Age mumbo-jumbo as the Prosperity Gospel and the stuff preached on the book The Secret. And if you blame God for everything then you are falling into some sort of fatalism which denies the freedom which God has granted you.

So there has to be a balance, of course. But this work of balancing your life is not the purpose of the psalms. They are not there to balance you, but rather to expose your heart to its own imbalances.

Another very important part of the psalms is what it feeds us. We are what we eat, or to put it more generally, we will become like whatever we give our attention to. If you think and dream about money then everything you see and do is colored by money, value, profit and loss. The same thing goes to any of the eight wrong thoughts as outline by Evagrius. That is why they are "deadly". They deaden your heart and spirit. Jesus asks us to find our hearts by looking at what we treasure. This is not as complicated as it seems. What do you treasure?

There is another level of reading the psalms which is important - and this is to just read the psalms. Let me tell you what I mean. Let us take a well-known psalm such as the 23rd psalm. "The Lord is my shepherd I shall not want..." What usually happens is more like this:

The Lord (oh Lord Jesus thank you) is my shepherd (of course this means he leads me and guides me) to the still waters (which are the good places in life and sheep Jesus always calls us sheep I wonder if he was thinking of this psalm and why sheep I don't like sheep) he leads me on the paths of righteousness and my cup overflows (yes thank you God for all the blessings of this life especially for my job and my family but please do not let the boss find out about those emails I sent out)...

And on and on. This is how we usually read the psalms. And I am being generous here - usually our inner dialogue is not nearly as prayerful as that! If your mind is like mine the inner dialog tends to be absurd and profane.

To really make the psalms your way, or as the Camaldolese would say it "the way is in the psalms", you need to resist the temptation to follow any association of ideas. You just take the one psalm in front of you and it alone. You can follow the various connections to specific Old Testament passages later when you do Bible study. There will be other times for that. You can also let the psalms inspire your thinking at other times of the day, and even to let your prayer life be circumscribed by the psalms, as in the example above. This is all very good and profitable, but it is not using the psalter as a tool.

So when you read the psalms, just read the psalms. Just read the specific words before you. Of course our "monkey mind" will jump all over the place and refuse to be confined to such small cage! But do not worry about that. Ignore it. The mind will not "die" if it cannot think of 1000 different things at the same time.

Read the psalm very slowly. At first read it as if there was a comma between each word: "The, Lord, is, my, shepherd." Then do it as if there was a stop: "The. Lord. Is. My. Shepherd." But do not put any special emphasis in any of the words. Just each word at a time. With plenty of silence around them.

Of course, at this rate it will take you about 10 minutes to recite the 23rd psalm. Clearly you cannot go through the psalter with a lot of speed! You may end up spending a week or more on the longer psalms, like 119. But so what? What's the hurry? You can read through and study and cross reference the psalms during your Bible study time. But when you are using them to pray just say the psalms.

A couple of last pointers.

1) Speaking. Most of us tend to have an affected "reader's voice" when we approach the Bible. People who have really lovely voices make all these contortions when reading the Bible. Why? Somewhere they've learnt that a "Bible voice" is important to convey the seriousness of this situation. You know what I mean. The reading becomes so dramatic! While this may have some value, when you are reading the psalms for yourself try to avoid the drama. Just search for and speak with yor normal voice. Or better with the kind of voice you would use when having a quiet conversation. No special intonation. Just one word at a time in your normal voice and cadence.

2) Chanting. I love chanting the psalms. I love chanting the psalms by myself. I have a terrible singing voice, but even I can chant. Part of what makes chanting good is that it forces you to drop the drama out of reading. You have to accentuate different places in the psalms and this forces you out of your emotional readings. Another thing that chanting will give you is pace. The regular, non-hurried and non-slack pace of chanting forces you to keep moving. This prevents some of the monkey mind tricks because if you follow the word associations you will lose your place in the chant.

Penalizing yourself: one way to try to tame the monkey mind is to state (to yourself) quite clearly that if you get distracted in saying a psalm you will go back to the beginning and say it over until you can say it without interruptions. In a monastic setting monks in the choir are required to make some sort of public confession of error when reciting the psalms. Some version of bowing to the choir in apology is the most frequent form. This public humiliation is quite appropriate. But when you are doing it by yourself it is harder to enforce. So I recommend a rule of going back to the beginning.

Now it is possible that some days you will just not be able to bring your "A game" to the recitation. That is ok as well. If you take the psalms as a vital part of your spiritual life, in the course of decades, days where things did not go so well will not matter. The sheer volume of the work will carry you through. So you set yourself a target of say 15 or 20 minutes to recite. You pick one or two psalms. And you stick with it. When the time is up the time is up. You may have barely finished one psalm! But that is ok. Later today or tomorrow you can do it again. Take it up from where you left off. As St. Francis de Sales says, "Even if you did nothing during the whole of your hour but bring your mind back and place it again in our Lord’s presence, though it went away every time you brought it back, your hour would be very well employed."

Here we come to the culmination of monastic spiritual wisdom. The words of the psalms themselves are the way to God. As you read the psalm once or twice. try to memorize it - the smaller ones are easier. Be very careful with the words. Do not paraphrase, because that's another mind-trick. Just the plain words. Just the psalm. Do not try to "improve" upon the psalms or change them in any way. I know many monastic communities, and indeed our weekly lectionary, which skips over the more deprecatory stanzas of the psalter - perhaps in fear of offending the hearers. This is a great tragedy. I wish people would be more offended on Sundays! Spiritual offense (as opposed to being bullied from the pulpit) is very healthy for our souls, as it tends to deflate the ego. But the psalms, just as they stand, with their smashing babies and prayers for the suffering of enemies, embody about 3,000 years of spiritual wisdom. You cannot access this treasure trove of wisdom if you do not have the right password. Meditate on the psalms as they are, and you will find that your very life will begin to resonate with the spirit of humility and love that empower the words.

Be changed by walking the way of the psalms.

Walking on water by 2045

"He will again have compassion upon us; He will suppress our iniquities. And Thou will cast all their sins in the depths of the sea." (Micah 7:19)

If Jesus had no sin then this would explain why the sea did not swallow him up - the swallowing image is a common one referring to how weighty our transgressions are. So he can walk on water simply based on the fact that he is not weighed down by his sins. Eventually, after his resurrection he could even fly!

What does this say about our future bodies? It almost sounds like science fiction, but the idea that we can live at a much higher level is one that is explored by many writers, most of which are not writing in terms of the Christian apocalypse.

One of my favorite contemporary sci-fi writers is Rudy Rucker. I was first introduced to his work when reading a non-fiction book of his on higher dimensions. It is a mathematical exploration of higher dimensions.

Since then he has gone on to write novels which deal with the Singularity. This is a concept which comes from the halls of Artificial Intelligence, and since then has been adopted by science fiction writers. The term itself was coined by another of my favorite writers, Vernor Vinge, in the early Nineties.

Since then it has been adopted by a variety of authors, the most notable of which is Ray Kurzweil.

As Kurzweil understands it "The Singularity is an era in which our intelligence will become increasingly non biological and trillions of times more powerful than it is today - the dawning of a new civilization that will enable us to transcend our biological limitations and amplify our creativity."

The other day I was talking with someone about illness and the breakdown of our bodies. Among many nuggets of information this person described the experience they had taking a new form of anesthetic which is not based on the traditional opiates. This anesthetic leaves you wide-awake during surgery, which has many beneficial uses.

But most interesting to me were the post-op side effects. Apparently this drug heightens your sense of pleasure. Not being a doctor or a chemist I cannot quite understand how the drug works, but I figure that it must suppress the pain areas of the brain (thus making it an anesthetic). but because it does not knock you out, it leaves you with the nearly-unbearable feeling of pleasure at almost everything you do.

The person described how they were given some crackers and a glass of orange juice after the surgery, and that when they tasted it those were the most delicious things they had ever eaten! Just plain hospital-grade crackers. Yet they tasted like manna from heaven, or perhaps one should say ambrosia. At any rate - with the pain mechanism removed it appears that the pleasure mechanism went on overdrive.

We then wondered whether this is just a glimpse of what our resurrected bodies will be like. The removal of the "stain" of Original Sin would leave us able to levels of pleasure which we can only dream about now. A state of living where seeing a flower, or drinking a glass of water would be immensely pleasurable. A state of such joy and freedom (think for a moment of existence without a bad back, or even the possibility of a bad back!) which brings the thoughts of "they neither marry nor are given in marriage" a whole new level of possibility.

For a moment I imagine worship in a church in 2045 (this date is given by Kurzweil as the probable date of the Singularity). Our existence is at this point transformed into the weightlessness of purity. Certainly for anyone looking in from the early 21st century it would seem to have entered a church populated with angels. Pure joy emanating from the congregation - palpable and even visual perhaps. There would be no pews, I believe - who wants to sit down anyway (and there is no bad back or bad knees to worry about)? When I think of exciting sporting events, in my case many images of World Cup soccer come to mind, I do not think sitting was one of the actions: there was much pacing, much shouting (of course) and much celebration which is always done standing up, high-fiving, hugs and kisses all around.

It is very likely that in such a state we would be intimately united, knowing each other's hearts. Again from this end of the 21st century this is a threatening idea! But then it is the norm. There would be much praising, and much deep unitive silence, especially during the Eucharist. The elements would be transformed into Body and Blood because the congregation would not be seeing it with eyes of flesh, but rather with open eyes of the spirit.

I think there would be much music. Perhaps even something which might look like the church in Acts - perhaps speaking in tongues? Certainly a palpable WHOOSH of energy going through all participants.

This is probably the worship going on in Heaven right now. Constant singing of Hallelujah! Constant praise.

Of course, for those encumbered by their selfishness, by their sin, by their unacceptable of the Good News, then all this hootin' and hollerin' is not "heavenly" at all! It is rather punishment - like being permanently condemned to live in an apartment with very noisy neighbors to both sides and above you!

How else will our worship be changed in 2045? And how much of it will be a wiser return to our origins? I say wiser return, because I see our progress, where there is any, as part of spiral (not circular) - thus at every loop and lap we go over the same points, same historical patterns, same social-economic challenges, but with a newer appreciation for these issues gained by experience, tempered by wisdom.

This leads me to another view of the 2045 church - the role of the elders. From the beginning the local church was to be wisely and charitably overseen by elders - in fact the words presbyter and bishop, are synonyms for elders. We will, by 2045, regain this understanding of wisdom and will also return to Biblical patterns which will prove to be far from outmoded. In fact they will be seen as prophetic!

Once more, when people enter a church, they will be astounded at how much we love each other, how deep is our communion, and how believers are empowered by peace to go and server their Lord in their local communities.

Sermon notes 08/02/2009

(2 Sam. 11.26-12.13 - Ps 51 - Eph 4.1-16 - Jn 6.24-35)

So my beloved and long-suffering wife said she had a lot to do today so she said I had to keep this short...so it will be short!

But...there are a few things we need to talk about today's readings which I think will be profitable to us all.

First let's see - David and Bathsheba. Wow didn't that whole story sound like something you would watch on late night cable?

More importantly to what I want to talk about today is the end of the story - how the prophet Samuel brings David to repentance and a change of ways.

David, the great King David, root of the lineage which will eventually bring in the Messiah, Jesus - does not so well in this episode. It is a pivotal episode in the reign of David, and when you read the rest of David's story it is worth keeping this event in mind. David deliberately breaks several of the 10 Commandments in this episode. He had plenty of opportunities to stop! I guess glimpsing Bathsheba skinny-dipping was not really his fault. But certainly coming down and finding out who she was, and then summoning her, and then sleeping with her, and then ordering the murder of her husband - are you telling me who could not stop at any one of these points?

Eventually through the prophet Samuel he is brought face-to-face with the error of his actions and their terrible consequences. David's heart breaks. There is only one thing more terrible than finding out you are sinner, and that is finding out just how much of a sinner you are! So Psalm 51 records how David goes about asking for and trusting in God's mercy through his confession, petition for mercy, a vow to praise God on being absolved and finally a prayer for prosperity - not just prosperity of wealth, but more importantly moral prosperity - because the righteous and true worship he describes at the end of the psalm can only happen from someone who is deeply moral.

And this brings me to the meat of our conversation here today. There is a theological concept called the ordo salutis, the order of salvation. This concept outlines for us the process of salvation from beginning to end. It goes like this:

1. Election - by God's sovereign choice
2. Gospel/calling - hearing the Good News proclaimed or feeling called by God
3. Regeneration - that is being "born again"
4. Conversion - which means belief in Jesus Christ as your Savior coupled with repentance from your previous life
5. Justification - where we are made right in God's eyes through the merits of Jesus
6. Adoption - at which point we become counted as Christ's own forever
7. Sanctification - which basically mean right living
8. Perseverance - which means remaining a Christian through the rest of your life
9. Death - going to rest in the Lord
10. Glorification - which is when we receive perfected bodies upon Jesus' Second Coming


The first step is clearly all God's doing - election. But the next steps through adoption are what we would call "becoming a Christian" Somewhere in there is the stage of baptism or confirmation (depending on age). The two steps of sanctification and perseverance are what we would call "Christian living" - which is what we all should be doing now.

Ok so hold on to this process and ideas as we go through the rest of the readings.

Let me touch briefly on the Gospel. I want to highlight only a couple of things which are pertinent to what I am trying to talk with you today. Did you notice how the Jews wanted to know from Jesus what works of sanctification, what things, what formulas, what sacrifices, they needed to do to be saved?

Jesus corrects them by pointing out to them that the process of sanctification, of right living, begins at a much deeper and earlier stage. The deeper levels of the ordo salutis need to be completed before you can move on the the next one. First you have to be chosen by God. This is totally out of your control. God will choose you when it pleases God to choose you. No options. Then regeneration through faith which leads to conversion, justification and adoption.

Only then can a meaningful conversation begin about sanctification.

If you notice, the Jews had a "seeing is believing" approach. Show me signs. Show me something. The work of God is to belief without sight! 'Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."' (v. 29)

So now let's see what this means in practice. In Ephesians Paul deals with issues of belief. First he lists 3 foundations for true belief.

1) Humility: in Greek culture humility was something expected of slaves. Humility was seen as a vice for leaders and masters. But for Paul, who is concerned about unity of the Church, pride is very dangerous because it promotes disunity.

2) Gentleness/meekness: what Paul means by gentleness is really about having your emotions under control. It is the dynamic balance between being angry all the time and never being angry, for example. The godly person, the one who is a slave of God, or in Paul's phrasing "a prisoner of the Lord", such a person is angry at the right time and never angry at the wrong time.

3) Patience: in this case it means having a spirit that never quits but endures to the end, even in adversity. It is also the capacity to hold back (or hold off) from retaliation.

Assuming we master these foundational skills of being a disciple, then we will be able to reap the rewards of a healthy community. Paul lists 7 elements which are centered on the Trinity:

1. One body of believers
2. One spirit - the Holy Spirit which energizes the one body
3. One hope in Heaven
4. One Lord, Jesus Christ
5. One faith - not the Creeds, but more the inner faith, the faith of the heart and mind. Instead of one faith we could say "one mind" - we Christians are of one mind.
6. One baptism
7. One God and Father of all believers


The Church, this body of believers, us, is energized by one Holy Spirit, so that we all have one and the same hope. We are then united to our one Lord Christ through each individual's act of faith. This is symbolized by the one baptism which we together with Christians from the time of Christ to when He returns, undergo.

All of this is under one God, the Father who is Supreme Ruler over all believers, who acts through all believers when they are humble, gentle and patient, and who lives in all of us. So the Church is one and it is united.

Within this unity, each believer, each of us, is given a talent, a gift. So while the church is one it is also plural, diverse.

The way to understand this is that we are gifted believers - we are a gift to the church!

So your particular talents, music, or teaching, or organizing, or (the one I find most important) the gift of showing up ready to help, you are all gifts from God to the church.

We are gifted believers, gifted by God to the Church, just as the Church is one Body gifted by God to the world.

So here it is my friends - take this Psalm 51. Memorize it. Use it. The frequent recollection of a psalm, especially this one, will help bring you back to patience, humility and gentleness. Take this prayer by David, who had fallen from lofty heights, and use it to remind yourselves of the work of sanctification and perseverance which you have to do - toil at it until the time when God calls you home to rest and wait with him the glorification in the last days.

But do not be like those who came to Jesus asking for signs, asking for things to see before they believed. Understand that you need to be born again, be converted from your old ways (which may be only as old as one minute ago). In the wisdom of the monastic tradition, humility is seen as the best and most efficient way to clear out the way for God to shine through you. Over and over there is an emphasis on humility as superior to any and every form of asceticism, of works, of service even. A humble and contrite heart is very pleasing to the Lord. So what is humility?

An old man was asked, "What is humility?" and he said in reply, "Humility is a great work, and a work of God. The way of humility is to undertake bodily labour and believe yourself a sinner and make yourself subject to all." Then a brother said, "What does it mean, to be subject to all?" The old man answered, "To be subject to all is not to give your attention to the sins of others but always to give your attention to your own sins and to pray without ceasing to God."

Abba Macarius was returning to his cell from the marsh carrying palm-leaves, the devil met him with a sharp sickle and would have struck him but he could not. He cried out, "Great is the violence I suffer from you, Macarius, for when I want to hurt you, I cannot. But whatever you do, I do and more also. You fast now and then, but I am never refreshed by any food; you often keep vigil, but I never fall asleep. Only in one thing are you better than I am and I acknowledge that." Macarius said to him, "What is that?" and he replied, "It is because of your humility alone that I cannot overcome you."

You pray about that. Amen!