I read the following somewhere, though I cannot recall where or when:
"The most valuable part of a cup is the empty space in the center."
That got me thinking, and I wrote the following:
With what part of ourselves do we perceive nature?
Where do we hear God?
Where do our friends live?
The empty space in the center.
And what is there beyond nature, God, and friendship? There is nothing beyond these three. When I say this, I am thinking of friendship in its most expansive meaning, including the friendship that is the relationship between man and wife, between parent and child, friendship -- the connection between the souls of two people.
I'm writing this as we approach the nativity, as we wait in anticipation of the presense of God once again. Now, as you all know so well, is the time to cultivate emptiness so that we may see, so that we may hear, so that we may perceive.
I would love to hear all of your thoughts on this topic.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Thursday, June 19, 2008
What advice would you give?
A young friend of mine (and theo-fan's) is graduating from high school. This got me thinking and reflecting on life, as most of us approach the midway point. Looking back, and looking at where we are and how we've come to be where we are, what advice would you offer a high school graduate about to venture out into the world?
If your son or daughter came to you and said, 'Mom, Dad, what should I do with my life? What should I pursue? How important is financial security? How important is it to pursue my passions?', what advice?
If your son or daughter came to you and said, 'Mom, Dad, what should I do with my life? What should I pursue? How important is financial security? How important is it to pursue my passions?', what advice?
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Adventure
How important is adventure to the human spirit? Do we need adventure? I've been thinking about childhood adventure, and about books like Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn. Is a childhood without adventure a stunted childhood?
What about adults? Our lives often seem so safe, so controlled, so dictated by necessities. Does this mean that we have traded in passion for security?
To me, adventure conjures up images of vitality, both of body and spirit. We are most alive when we are in the midst of adventure. I suppose I most readily associate adventure with surfing, whitewater kayaking, rafting, backpacking, and things of that nature. To me, this sort of adventure not only makes me feel alive, but it also makes me feel connected -- I feel like I intimately belong to this world in which I live. This feeling is paramount to the well-being of my soul.
So, how 'bout y'all? How do you define adventure? How important is it to the human experience?
What about adults? Our lives often seem so safe, so controlled, so dictated by necessities. Does this mean that we have traded in passion for security?
To me, adventure conjures up images of vitality, both of body and spirit. We are most alive when we are in the midst of adventure. I suppose I most readily associate adventure with surfing, whitewater kayaking, rafting, backpacking, and things of that nature. To me, this sort of adventure not only makes me feel alive, but it also makes me feel connected -- I feel like I intimately belong to this world in which I live. This feeling is paramount to the well-being of my soul.
So, how 'bout y'all? How do you define adventure? How important is it to the human experience?
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
yin and yang
I've been thinking about yin and yang, the complementary actors in relationships. I suppose we live in a culture that values yang above yin, the assertive above the receptive, but I am coming to understand the value, indeed the necessity of both yin and yang to form something complete.
So what are yin and yang? They are, by definition relational -- we don't talk about yin and yang as balancing parts of an individual, but rather as the dynamics of different entities relating to each other.
Yin is to yang as flesh and blood is to bones.
Yin is to yang as poetry is to haiku.
The latter I learned from Wendell Berry in an essay defending the value of forms and structures. Essentially, he said that there is something to be said for the forms of poetry such as sonnets or haikus that give shape and boundaries to the art of the poem.
I would suggest that we could say the same about relationships between people: often, one partner supplies the forms, the structures, the parameters of shared living while the other partner supplies a more intangible element that I will call art. Art without structure is as vital as flesh and blood without a skeleton to give it shape; structure without art is as useful as a skeleton without flesh and blood.
Yin is to yang as water is to rock -- river.
These are thoughts off the top of my head, coming out without being completely formed (ironic, eh?). Let me know what you think.
So what are yin and yang? They are, by definition relational -- we don't talk about yin and yang as balancing parts of an individual, but rather as the dynamics of different entities relating to each other.
Yin is to yang as flesh and blood is to bones.
Yin is to yang as poetry is to haiku.
The latter I learned from Wendell Berry in an essay defending the value of forms and structures. Essentially, he said that there is something to be said for the forms of poetry such as sonnets or haikus that give shape and boundaries to the art of the poem.
I would suggest that we could say the same about relationships between people: often, one partner supplies the forms, the structures, the parameters of shared living while the other partner supplies a more intangible element that I will call art. Art without structure is as vital as flesh and blood without a skeleton to give it shape; structure without art is as useful as a skeleton without flesh and blood.
Yin is to yang as water is to rock -- river.
These are thoughts off the top of my head, coming out without being completely formed (ironic, eh?). Let me know what you think.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Sunday, February 17, 2008
"Wives, submit to your husbands. . . ."
So little has been written about marriage from an Orthodox Christian perspective (at least I've been frustrated with the little that I have found); yet, there is so much to be said. I'm thinking of this specifically from an Orthodox Christian perspective because I think that there is a unique understanding within this tradition that sheds some light on how to live as a married couple. I'll try to keep this short, just throw out the basics to get a conversation started:
The Church teaches that the Trinity is not only one in essence but also perfectly united in will. United in will -- this is profound. What does it mean to be perfectly united in will? None of us have experienced perfect unity in will with another human being, so the concept of three entities being completely united in will is almost incomprehensible to us. This is the great mystery of the Christian trinity -- this is how we say "Hear, oh Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One," and at the same time, "We believe in the Holy Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." It is utterly impossible have any understanding of trinity without understanding the concept of a perfectly united will.
What does this have to do with marriage? I'm trying to get there; I think I'm two steps away from the point that I'm trying to make. Any kind of close reading of the gospels reveals the united will of the Trinity: Christ makes several references to his willing submission to the Father, and to the willing submission of the Holy Spirit to the Father. The action, and maybe the essence, of the Trinity is defined by complete mutual submission. This is what it means when we say that God is love.
In the gospels, Christ prays that his followers may find this love, this union of will "that they may be one, as we are that they may all be one, as You, Father, are in me, and I in You; that they also may be one in us. I in them, and You in me, that they may be made perfect in one."
At Christian weddings, I've sensed a nearly audible cringe from non-Christian friends and family when they hear, "Wives, submit to your husbands." It's such a strong reaction, that it is difficult to hear the "husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the Church." Even if they do hear, what does it mean? The key to understanding these two verses lies in understanding the perfectly united will of the Trinity: it is all about mutual submission. As Christ acted as a servant to all, washing his disciples dirty feet, so we are to serve one another.
Marriage then is about learning mutual submission. The more that we submit our wills to one another, the closer we come to a unity of will. The closer that we come to a unity of will, the happier and more complete our marriages will be.
OK -- I'll get down from my pulpit now. So much for keeping it short.
The Church teaches that the Trinity is not only one in essence but also perfectly united in will. United in will -- this is profound. What does it mean to be perfectly united in will? None of us have experienced perfect unity in will with another human being, so the concept of three entities being completely united in will is almost incomprehensible to us. This is the great mystery of the Christian trinity -- this is how we say "Hear, oh Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One," and at the same time, "We believe in the Holy Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." It is utterly impossible have any understanding of trinity without understanding the concept of a perfectly united will.
What does this have to do with marriage? I'm trying to get there; I think I'm two steps away from the point that I'm trying to make. Any kind of close reading of the gospels reveals the united will of the Trinity: Christ makes several references to his willing submission to the Father, and to the willing submission of the Holy Spirit to the Father. The action, and maybe the essence, of the Trinity is defined by complete mutual submission. This is what it means when we say that God is love.
In the gospels, Christ prays that his followers may find this love, this union of will "that they may be one, as we are that they may all be one, as You, Father, are in me, and I in You; that they also may be one in us. I in them, and You in me, that they may be made perfect in one."
At Christian weddings, I've sensed a nearly audible cringe from non-Christian friends and family when they hear, "Wives, submit to your husbands." It's such a strong reaction, that it is difficult to hear the "husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the Church." Even if they do hear, what does it mean? The key to understanding these two verses lies in understanding the perfectly united will of the Trinity: it is all about mutual submission. As Christ acted as a servant to all, washing his disciples dirty feet, so we are to serve one another.
Marriage then is about learning mutual submission. The more that we submit our wills to one another, the closer we come to a unity of will. The closer that we come to a unity of will, the happier and more complete our marriages will be.
OK -- I'll get down from my pulpit now. So much for keeping it short.
Friday, February 1, 2008
Give it away now
How long can we keep feathering our nests while others sleep outside in the cold? I've felt this nagging sense of guilt and social conscience for a while, but I found it crystalized in an interview that I heard on our local NPR station this morning. The interview was with leading evangelical leader Brian McLaren*. who was making the case that evangelical Christians have been heading in the wrong direction for a long time.
What he said was essentially this: for decades, evangelicals have been so focused on the afterlife that they have neglected to care for the needs of people around them in this life. Interestingly, this is precisely a point that Chris made in one of our first discussions here, regarding religion and higher education. McLaren noted, using almost verbatum the language that Chris used, that there has been a juxtaposition between the evangelicals on one hand who are focused on the soul and its attainment of heaven, and liberals on the other hand who are focused on making this world better. McLaren went on to say that this is not just a false dichotomy; it is a neglect of the teachings of the gospel.
There is so much in Christian scriptures that focuses on the poor and on the importance of charity. We see it in the ancient Hebrew laws that instruct people to leave a portion of their crops in the field for those in need to gather. We see it all over the New Testament, in language so strong that it says that anyone who fails to love and care for those around them is not a true Christian at all. We see it in Saint John the baptist's statement that "I must decrease, and [Christ] must increase." On a purely literal level, John is handing his ministry over to Jesus who is the fullfilment of his message. On a deeper spiritual level, Saint John is expressing the truth that the ego man must decrease to make room for the emergence of the image of God within each of us. This second message has social ramifications: my own selfish pursuits must be laid aside in order to make room for the charity of God to act through me.
As an aside, there are so many bridges here. This acknowledgement of what has always been true creates potential bridges between various Christian groups (the Catholic Church has always been a leader in its efforts to reach out to the needy in this world). There is a potential bridge between the social justice crusaders of the "liberal left" and social justice crusaders of a group that has been the "Christian right." We are not so far apart. A favorite priest of mine, Father Seraphim, said that as we draw closer to God, we necessarily draw closer to one another. May this be realized.
McLaren talked about three central issues: prosperity; equity; and spiritual deficiency. He made a very nice case arguing that our nation's success in its pursuit of prosperity has put us at odds with the natural world; we are using more resources than our planet can provide and producing more waste than our planet can contain. Subsequently, we are creating an equity gap between America and most of the other people living on this planet (I'm sure this sentiment can be brought home to the gap between rich and poor in this country as well). That was where I pulled into the driveway, so I missed the rest.
But what are we going to do about it? I've got way more than I need. Stephanie and I have decided to start going through our closets and storage space to find whatever we can to donate, as a starting point. Our possessions are weighing us down.
There's so much more to say, but this is getting very long. Please let me know your thoughts on this though. Also, if you find this interesting, this post relates very closely to some previous posts and discussions: religion and higher education; ego trip; and Christianity, abortion, and the GOP. There's just so much to talk about here.
*Author, speaker, activist and pastor Brian McLaren kicks off his 2008 nationwide "Everything Must Change" tour in Charlotte this week. The tour targets people who don't feel comfortable in a traditional church, have doubts and questions about God and Jesus, and those who have questioned their faith. McLaren, who has been named one of the country's 25 most influential evangelicals by Time Magazine
What he said was essentially this: for decades, evangelicals have been so focused on the afterlife that they have neglected to care for the needs of people around them in this life. Interestingly, this is precisely a point that Chris made in one of our first discussions here, regarding religion and higher education. McLaren noted, using almost verbatum the language that Chris used, that there has been a juxtaposition between the evangelicals on one hand who are focused on the soul and its attainment of heaven, and liberals on the other hand who are focused on making this world better. McLaren went on to say that this is not just a false dichotomy; it is a neglect of the teachings of the gospel.
There is so much in Christian scriptures that focuses on the poor and on the importance of charity. We see it in the ancient Hebrew laws that instruct people to leave a portion of their crops in the field for those in need to gather. We see it all over the New Testament, in language so strong that it says that anyone who fails to love and care for those around them is not a true Christian at all. We see it in Saint John the baptist's statement that "I must decrease, and [Christ] must increase." On a purely literal level, John is handing his ministry over to Jesus who is the fullfilment of his message. On a deeper spiritual level, Saint John is expressing the truth that the ego man must decrease to make room for the emergence of the image of God within each of us. This second message has social ramifications: my own selfish pursuits must be laid aside in order to make room for the charity of God to act through me.
As an aside, there are so many bridges here. This acknowledgement of what has always been true creates potential bridges between various Christian groups (the Catholic Church has always been a leader in its efforts to reach out to the needy in this world). There is a potential bridge between the social justice crusaders of the "liberal left" and social justice crusaders of a group that has been the "Christian right." We are not so far apart. A favorite priest of mine, Father Seraphim, said that as we draw closer to God, we necessarily draw closer to one another. May this be realized.
McLaren talked about three central issues: prosperity; equity; and spiritual deficiency. He made a very nice case arguing that our nation's success in its pursuit of prosperity has put us at odds with the natural world; we are using more resources than our planet can provide and producing more waste than our planet can contain. Subsequently, we are creating an equity gap between America and most of the other people living on this planet (I'm sure this sentiment can be brought home to the gap between rich and poor in this country as well). That was where I pulled into the driveway, so I missed the rest.
But what are we going to do about it? I've got way more than I need. Stephanie and I have decided to start going through our closets and storage space to find whatever we can to donate, as a starting point. Our possessions are weighing us down.
There's so much more to say, but this is getting very long. Please let me know your thoughts on this though. Also, if you find this interesting, this post relates very closely to some previous posts and discussions: religion and higher education; ego trip; and Christianity, abortion, and the GOP. There's just so much to talk about here.
*Author, speaker, activist and pastor Brian McLaren kicks off his 2008 nationwide "Everything Must Change" tour in Charlotte this week. The tour targets people who don't feel comfortable in a traditional church, have doubts and questions about God and Jesus, and those who have questioned their faith. McLaren, who has been named one of the country's 25 most influential evangelicals by Time Magazine
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
