“My own words take me by surprise and teach me what I think.”

I have found this to be true, yet we have choices in what we write. I originally thought about writing about trauma, but then I thought I would be doing self-psychoanalysis and that would be dwelling in a state of dysfunction, deconstructing pain and our reaction to it. I’m sure that has its time and place, and I’ve certainly done it before – considered pain. I don’t think the remembrance of painful things should be stifled, and I consider it very therapeutic to verbally, which includes literally, remember what happened at least once, remember that is, and maybe let someone else read it so that you’re not alone with it any more. But I’m wanting to move away from conflict right now at least, so I picked up Writing and Difference and came across the above quote by Merleau-Ponty (p.11). Jacques goes on to say,

It is because writing is inaugural, in the fresh sense of the word, that it is dangerous and anguishing. It does not know where it is going, no knowledge can keep it from the essential precipitation toward the meaning that it constitutes and that is, primarily, its future. [I am a let it happen type writer so I relate to this, but some people have a set plan like Rowling did so I don't know how this would be applied to them, unless writing can be equated with planning, and I do believe she was surprised when Harry fell from the sky.] However, it is capricious only through cowardice. There is thus no insurance against the risk of writing. Writing is an initial and graceless recourse for the writer, even if he is not an atheist, but, rather, a writer. Did Saint John Chrysostom speak of the writer? “It were indeed meet for us not at all to require the aid of the written Word, but to exhibit a life so pure, that the grace of the spirit should be instead of books to our souls, and that as these are inscribed with ink, even so should our hearts be with the Spirit. But, since we have utterly put away from us this grace, come let us at any rate embrace the second best course.” But, all faith or theological assurance aside, is not the experience of secondarity tied to the strange redoubling by means of which constituted-written-meaning presents itself as prerequisitely and simultaneously read: and does not meaning present itself as such at the point at which the other is found, the other who maintains both the vigil and the back-and-forth motion, the work, that comes between writing and reading, making this work irreducible? Meaning is neither before or after the act. Is not that which is called God, that which imprints every human course and recourse with its secondarity, the passageway of deferred reciprocity between reading and writing? or the absolute witness to the dialogue in which what one sets out to write has already been read, and what one sets out to say is already a response, the third party as the transparency of meaning? Simultaneously part of creation and the Father of Logos. The circularity and traditionality of Logos. The strange labor of conversion and adventure in which grace can only be that which is missing.

No wonder the Evangelicals and Fundamentalist Protestants (which I was one in various denominations and non-denominations but an official member of none) don’t respect the Emergent Church. The former’s Sola Scriptura, anti-tradition beliefs equate the written word with grace as a primary source. However, the Emergent Church (Jacques is mentioned in that Wikipedia link) questions the fact that different people can come up with different meanings in the same Scripture passages.

Self-proclaimed emergent author Marcus Borg, for example, notes that individuals who have read the same Bible “literally” may have radically different accounts of the message of Christianity, which are often mutually exclusive. For example, one Christian may look to the Bible literally and see a strong case for the immorality of slavery or segregation, while another may look to the Bible literally and find strong literal support for the belief that slavery and segregation should be morally allowed to exist^{[citation needed]}. Borg notes that many aspects of people’s lives, including their political beliefs and their surrounding culture can provide a “lens” that can distort the Bible and influence which parts of the Bible they take literally, and which parts they may ignore. Critics claim that the postmodern lens through which emergents view Christianity has influenced their radical relativism. Emergent Christians tend to acknowledge that there are diverse valid perspectives within “Christianity” that are valuable for consideration in order for humanity to progress toward truth as they define it and a better resulting relationship with God as they define him. They believe this non-dogmatism coupled with their liberal social agenda will facilitate harmony with the rest of ‘His creation’ (other people and the rest of the universe).

Words are evidence of a lack of grace in humans. If we had grace we would have no need to speak or hear, words indicate lack, either the speakers or the necessity of word to the hearers. But aren’t words a means to meaning and grace? Father Braga said in the passage I quoted a few posts back that in prison he had no books, no paper, and no one to talk to and that’s when he found grace. But then he writes a book about it and we read it and learn how to find grace, not everyone does in prison. He also said that suffering brings maturity, and I would say ultimate consolation like Lazarus found in the Bosom of Abraham while the rich, comfortable (on earth) guy ultimately didn’t. Writing and remembering suffering is important, which is how we have the lives of the Saints and why I watch Cold Case Files sometimes. We need to know how people suffered, and this comforts them, it brings them grace. Words and Suffering are evidence that we don’t have grace, but this is a fact, so merely being quiet does not change it. By letting ourselves suffer and write, as opposed to numbing ourselves with medications, means of comfort, and living in denial, we confess that we are graceless and then maybe we will obtain some. But words as evidence of lack of grace explains why much of the O.T. and the Gospels were written so much later than the events occurred, and indeed why Paul had to write his letters to dam the grace leak in the newly established churches. The grace, or the memory of it, which infused the experiences when they occurred was wearing off. This is why we have the Councils, heretics were perverting the truth and traditional words had to be written down. We have faulty memories, so meaning needs to be rehearsed or it wears off. And it’s why Sola Scriptura is a crippling doctrine. It lacks the inherited, rehearsed, mature, effective, unifying, non-relativistic interpretation of the Bible. The Emergent Church recognizes the problem with over-assuming meaning in the Bible alone, and they even intuit effective means, as some employ traditional things like candles, icons and Liturgy. This is why I think they, like Father Guilquist and his colleagues did, not that they were formally emergent, may eventually find the Orthodox Church.

This is not to say that primary means, prayer, is incapable of bringing grace, in fact don’t all words point to the need for prayer? We can know all mysteries and all knowledge through proper prayer, and unless one has a pure heart, we need to be taught by word and example how to pray properly.

So when I’m silent, is it because I am pure, or because I’m hiding that I’m not, or because I’m shielding you from how impure I am. But does that work? Being silent about impurity doesn’t erase it or cause it to not damage the Body of Christ. Hidden sin has us captive, and in a solidarity with humanity sort of way, holds all of us captive so that we can’t fully experience grace. My expressed words reveal my graceless heart, even to myself. But I’ll not despair.

p.s. I’m not promoting tell-all, let it all hang out, self-expression. May we seek authentic grace, graciousness, and gracefulness, with all our hearts “or we shan’t live happy lives” (Emma Thompson/Margaret Schlegel/E.M.Forster in Howard’s End).