Faith

[poliphilo]

I used the word "faith" in my last post. "Faith in what?" you might well ask. Faith in, erm, well, just faith- if you see what I mean.

Words degrade. That's one good reason why language is always changing. We need new words, new phrases- because the old ones are no longer up to snuff.

Newscasts (this is a detour) are composed almost entirely in degraded language. Here's an example: something bad happens to a child and the anchor person tells us that it's "every parent's worst nightmare". These dead-alive cliches attack the quiddity of things,  grind down the edges of experience and reduce this fearsome, remarkable world to so much undifferentiated rubble.

Religious language is very badly degraded. Why, when we live in a democracy, do we address the Divine personages of our choice by  the titles of a feudal society? Why use the word "Lord" when our actual experience of Lords is Peter Mandelson or the Marquess of Bath?

So, "faith". It's a tired old word. I sort through the trinket box for alternatives and they're all equally tarnished. They've been used too often- and frequently in ignorance or in order to manipulate- so I'll let "faith" stand. It may be worn-out, but at least it's not modish.

And what do I mean by it? I mean engagement with a world which however badly it may seem to be wrong is essentially right. I mean sensing the rightness through the wrongness.  I mean knowing that there is a reality beyond the reality we call reality.  I mean knowing that every dusty thing I brush against contains brightness beyond brightness beyond brightness.

Comments

[ideealisme.livejournal.com]

I now see Peter Mandelson sitting on a big cloud dispensing divine wotsits. Of course he is Jewish so he will be laughing at all the Christians.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I like that image.

[ideealisme.livejournal.com]

My mother thinks he's hot.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

There's no accounting for taste. :)

[sunfell.livejournal.com]

You've hit upon one of the 'degradations' that has helped me steer clear of organized religion- and stay clear of it- the moniker 'Lord'.

I've studied medieval history and culture. I am not a peasant, serf, or vassal. I swear fealty to no one- especially if they're non-corporeal. And I certainly do not want a return to such a culture- as so many of my religious contemporaries- especially those who take the Bible literally- seem to want. "Every knee will bow!" they shout, loudly and often.

Um, not mine.

[haikujaguar.livejournal.com]

I like this post, as you probably imagine I would.

[sovay]

I mean knowing that every dusty thing I brush against contains brightness beyond brightness beyond brightness.

I like that.

words

[seraphimsigrist.livejournal.com]

It is a commonplace to say that a word like
'lord' is used up .this does not make it untrue
but contrariwise it doesnt make it true either...
or rather ,and this is how it seems to me, in a sense
all words are used up and new and fresh both and it
depends on the user and maybe the moment also.
say any word a number of times and it seems strange
and useless ,at least for a moment, doesn't it?
let it be spaghetti or train or any word. strange
when turned over and about
but it is what it is...a word.
well there are all kinds of areas of philosophy here
which neither my brain nor the space available allows
us to trouble about, but what is true in the usage of
Lord remains I should think, and discloses itself as
surely as any deep inner truth of things, any image
or symbol etc...

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

The image of heaven as a pre-modern court, with everyone prostrating themselves before an absolute ruler, is really rather ghastly.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Yup.

And it makes me happy.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Thanks.

[sunfell.livejournal.com]

It is, and when I try to explain why to certain people, they just don't get it.

:shrug: I do. I'm starting to get a better picture of my own past lives, courtesy of some interesting meditation techniques, and that era was simply awful. I can speak from actual experience- but that's hard to explain to the twice-born. So, I don't even try.

Sigh...

Re: words

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Maybe the ruler or king is a Jungian archetype that won't be denied but will keep on asserting itself- but I'm not convinced of this.

I've been thinking of the passage from East Coker, where Eliot speaks of "trying to learn to use words"... and how

"Each venture
Is a new beginning, a raid on the inarticulate
With shabby equipment always deteriorating..."

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Interesting meditation techniques? I'm interested. Can you be more specific?

[seraphimsigrist.livejournal.com]

well as to that of course
completely agreed...
what I would feel sure of is that
there is a personal God who will
assert as it were, but also who may
disclose or be approached through a
range of words, indeed the whole range
no doubt, but that this personal quality
of encounter is what will be irrepressible
I should think that as in any relation
with a person ,certain names or words
can vary from case to case and each
relation will be unique. but I am doubtful
that Lord is more used up in iteself than
any other of our words...

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

All our language falls short of what we wish to express. And that is especially true of our relationship with God.

I am suddenly reminded of Cordelia's advice to herself when crazy old Lear asks her to say the unsayable- "love and be silent."

[zoe-1418.livejournal.com]

Your last paragraph brings tears to my eyes (now there's a cliche, but I mean it exactly! ;-) and I'm going to copy it down in my journal... I wholeheartedly agree with and identify with your statement/definition, and for me it is the essence of the spiritual, religious, yes even Christian, faith that I subscribe to.

Thanks for posting this.

[seraphimsigrist.livejournal.com]

...

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I'm so pleased you like it.

[oakmouse]

And what do I mean by it? I mean engagement with a world which however badly it may seem to be wrong is essentially right. I mean sensing the rightness through the wrongness. I mean knowing that there is a reality beyond the reality we call reality. I mean knowing that every dusty thing I brush against contains brightness beyond brightness beyond brightness.

This is brilliant --- spot on. One of the best ways of phrasing it that I've ever seen. Thank you.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Thank you. :)