The “Problem” of Anxiety and Freedom: Soren Kierkegaard, Arcade Fire, and the “Promise” of “Creature Comfort”

 

anxiety

 

It goes on and on, I don’t know what I want,

on and on, I don’t know if I want it.

On and on I don’t know what I want,

on and on, I don’t know if I want it…

From “Creature Comfort” by Arcade Fire, “Everything Now”

A chorus from Arcade Fire that is “dizzying” in both “merry go round” style – “on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on” – and actually also in content, which this post will explore. Soren Kierkegaard wrote that “anxiety is the dizziness of freedom.” Does that mean that “Creature Comfort” for the anxious is the ultimate thing we should seek? Is our anxiety itself one of the “Signs of Life” that as a “Manifest Propensity” empirically shows that we were created for more than simply consuming (and being consumed by?) the creature comforts marketed to us constantly?

Arcade Fire’s petition to God about the “problem of freedom” is “just make it painless” with painlessness coming through the “Creature Comfort” supposedly promised and provided for through the technological consumerism of “Everything Now.”  Arcade Fire raises one of the most perennial questions of human beings regarding God. Can God, if we consider God as the One that is the creator of human life, able to make that life “painless” for a being that is created with a measure of freedom? It seems that Soren Kierkegaard thought that freedom inevitably produces a measure of anxiety for creatures endowed with that gift.

If that is true, then question becomes, what do we do with this “birthright” of anxiety? Do we try to manufacture “comfort” for the “creature,” the solution that Arcade Fire sees as the “anxiety fix” currently on offer for any and all of us willing to buy into that solution? The manufacturers of such “creature comfort” constantly bombard us with the assurance that we ought to “Put your money on me?” In fact, we all tend to buy into that solution simply because it is the given of our existence now. In a sense we have already paid for it, simply as the price of admission to the modern world.

Infinite Content.

Infinite Content.

We’re infinitely content.

All your money is already spent on it.

All you money is already spent.

On Infinite Content.

From “Infinite Content” by Arcade Fire, “Everything Now”

With nearly biblical poetical genius Arcade Fire reveals the pseudo-religious character of this captivating sales pitch which captures precisely because it tends to exhaust all our resources so that we can’t afford anything else. All our money is already spent! We’re overly invested. But that’s alright because we’re so “infinitely content!” Many or most of us will probably admit how trapped we feel in this situation. But lurking within is the anxiety of dizziness caused by our struggle between wanting and not wanting to remain sellouts to the consumerist solution of “Creature Comfort.”

Soren Kierkegaard defined anxiety as “a sympathetic antipathy and an antipathetic sympathy.” Mark A. Tietjen explains that “It occurs when one is attracted to and repulsed by the same thing.” We seem to be attracted to the comforts offered, but repulsed by the loss of freedom we pay for them.

A short alternative answer from Kierkegaard was that we shouldn’t evade our birthright of anxiety, for the sake of a false “comfort,” but rather embrace it. For in that path lies becoming the self we were created to be.

“To venture causes anxiety, but not to venture is to lose one’s self…. And to venture in the highest is precisely to be conscious of one’s self.”
Søren Kierkegaard

I think it is highly possible that Arcade Fires’s song “Put Your Money On Me” contains a double entendre regarding two different voices pleading for us to put our money on them. The first, which we all know all too well, has already been considered. The other is the anti-type of the former. Arcade Fire’s song “We Don’t Deserve Love” explicitly evokes Jesus Christ with the plea to a “Mary” to “roll away the stone” and the mention of the “Christ-types” which leave Mary (us) alone and inevitably don’t provide what we need (love) so that we are always “waiting on” them. I believe that point is that the “Christ-types” can’t give us love. The more sinister underlying narrative of the false savior consumer culture is that we are merely “consumers” and as such are less than human beings. In other words “We Don’t Deserve Love.”

So to return to the double entendre of “Put Your Money On Me” – it is actually present through the song as a complex counter-narrative wherein there is an “either/or” (Kierkegaard) regarding the identity of the one speaking throughout the song. Is it the false Christ offering us “creature comfort” through loss of our own true self or the real Christ offering us love through the gain of true self-hood?  I believe that the “counter-narrative” of the real Christ is actually stronger because of a few of the lyrics, but I still call it the counter-narrative because of Arcade Fire’s “Money + Love” video in which the speaker is obviously the false one. The section of the song that I believe most explicitly can apply to Christ, and can’t really apply to “consumerism” is this:

My mother was crying on the day of our wedding.

Trumpets of angels call for my head.

But I fight through the ether and I’ll quit when I’m dead.

If you wanna know who’ll be there in the end,

When you bury me, baby, I’ll still be your friend.

It is also important to note that the basic premise of the song is the difficult and anxiety producing struggle for freedom by the one being spoken to throughout. The song closes before the epic track “We Don’t Deserve Love” with the words, “I know it’s not easy to put your money on me, all your money on me.”

It is also interesting to think about the scenario of “venturing” for the freedom of true self, as Kierkegaard calls it, in light of the fact of the seeming unfreedom inherent in the fact all our money “is already spent.” Is it possible Arcade Fire’s narrative/ counter-narrative interplay in which money is required for everything leads one to the biblical invitation to freedom for those in bondage that does not require the soul destroying commodities the world trades in? In other words, was Win Butler who majored in Bible and Philosophy at McGill and has explicitly given credit to the Bible and Kierkegaard as constantly forming the way he approaches everything, thinking about the only commodity God “trades in” with humans, namely our anxiety producing gift of freedom of choice?

Isaiah 55 Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price.

Wherefore do ye spend money for that which is not bread? and your labour for that which satisfieth not? hearken diligently unto me, and eat ye that which is good, and let your soul delight itself in fatness. (King James Version)

 

Kierkegaard saw how humans deal with anxiety as bound up with the problem of despair. His thought on that problem is more than can be dealt with at the end of this meditation. So I’ll merely add this quote in which he shows that despair can be overcome through the proper reaction to anxiety which is possible through “resting transparently” in God.

“The formula that describes the state of the self when despair is completely rooted out is this: in relating itself to itself and in willing to be oneself, the self rests transparently in the power that established it.” (Soren Kierkegaard, Sickness Unto Death)

I apologize for not taking time to add links to Arcade Fire’s songs, but I assume that for most of us, being adept with navigating “infinite content,” they are easy to find!

Thanks so much for reading!

Original Content © Bryan M. Christman and Manifest Propensity, 2018. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Bryan M. Christman and Manifest Propensity with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Is There Any Solution in Arcade Fire’s “Everything Now?”

Many professional record critics have complained about “Everything Now” on the basis that the album is all “problem” with no “solution.” I think that is because the “problem” is fairly obvious not only throughout the songs, but also in our lives. And more pointedly, perhaps the songs hit too close to where we all live, and in lieu of any obvious of solution (that is the supposed accusation) we are left with an album that exists mainly for our listening depression.

But do they not offer any solution? My critique of the critics is that they have completely missed it and that is why they think the album is only about our big problem of “Everything Now.” (And I would agree that nobody only wants to hear about our big problem.)

So what is the solution? Well first let me make a point. What do you think could be the solution to our entire society’s problem? See, most of us don’t have an answer and therefore we don’t even know what to look for and can’t see it when it is offered. In other words, we miss the solution because we don’t even know what it looks like.

I believe their solution is in the transition in their narrative from songs about the problems of consumerism of everything, including our wanting even God to be another commodity (“God in heaven, could you please me?“) to songs about relationship. Peter Pan, Chemistry, Put Your Money on Me, We Don’t Deserve Love are all relational. But a relationship with who?

Well, for the sake of keeping this fairly short I’ll just mention several key points of who I think this mystery person might be. In “Chemistry” we learn that we haven’t yet “met” them. In “Put Your Money On Me” we learn that their “race for our heart” began “before we were born” and that they win that race for it when they “wake” following their death. Also their “mother” was “crying on the day of our wedding” alluding to the sorrow of Mary the mother of Jesus at the crucifixion of her son Jesus, which event was also the sealing through the blood of the New Covenant of Jesus/God with his people. In “We Don’t Deserve Love” we learn that we are like a biblical “Mary” Magdalene who has been repeatedly left by her previous lovers, the “Christ types” that always “leave you alone.” But the singer pleads with “Mary” (us) to “roll away the stone” behind which is not the imposter “Christ types” but I think the real Christ.

Now if anyone has any other ideas of some other person that can do fit in all of these descriptions, I’d love to hear it. I also realize that the biblical illiteracy in our culture is nearly complete, so it doesn’t surprise me in the least that most of these allusions go completely over the heads of the professional critics and masses of fans of Arcade Fire.
So this answer to the problem of “Everything Now” – that relationship to God is the solution, certainly raises many other questions – mainly “how can a relationship with God save me from “Everything Now?”

Well that question is more than I can tackle at this point, but listening to the entire album more with this “solution” in mind might help. For now I’m contented to post this excerpt from the biblical scholar Walter Brueggemann:

“Nevertheless I am continually with you; You hold my right hand. (Psalm 73:23)
This is no casual hand-holding. This is a life-or-death grip that does not let go. “No-Sabbath” existence imagines getting through on our own, surrounded by commodities to accumulate and before which to bow down. But a commodity cannot hold one’s hand. Only late does the psalmist come to know otherwise. Only late may we also come to know. We may know, but likely not without Sabbath, a rest rooted in God’s own restfulness and extended to our neighbors who also must rest. We, with our hurts, fears, and exhaustion, are left restless until then.” (From “Sabbath as Resistance – Saying No to the Culture of Now.”)

Comments, questions, outrage, are welcome. Thanks for reading!

Original Content © Bryan M. Christman and Manifest Propensity, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Bryan M. Christman and Manifest Propensity with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

Arcade Fire’s Critique of “The Reflective Age” and their Call to a Counter-narrative

Since Arcade Fire has arrived I’ve been intrigued not only by their music but by the fact that they call their hearers to the task of being reflectors (critical thinkers) in relation to our modern culture. I tentatively believe that they present the concept of “reflektor” as the antithesis of being a reflector, wherein a reflektor does not reflect on the real world and reality, but rather only mistakenly finds in those realities reflections of the self. So how do we break free from the mirror/mold of the “reflective age” to the freedom of finding real reality? I believe that their method at least partly includes looking through the lens of biblical revelation.

Their song “Neon Bible” critiques a distortion of authentic biblical revelation as is unfortunately found promulgated by some brands of Christianity. Yet the word “Neon” signals that this is a distortion while also pointing to the fact that the true “Bible” nevertheless remains intact.

All these comments of mine are for the purpose of saying that I believe that Arcade Fire’s songs attempt to present a corpus of reflective narratives on our culture mediated to them (and us) partly through the Biblical revelatory texts. In other words, I think that Arcade Fire’s work at times amounts to a sort of “Bible Study” in which they seek to interpret our culture through the biblical lens and thereby offer counter-narratives to the dominant narratives of our culture.

So to return to where I started, I seriously think that Arcade Fire’s works present a call to us to join them in reflecting on the narratives of our culture in light of the counter-narrative of scripture. To “respond” to this “call” I started a facebook discussion group called “Arcade Fire Neon Bible Study” wherein listeners can compare thoughts and theories about that while also simply appreciating the broad scope of their literary/artistic/musical work.

I don’t view Arcade Fire as something like biblical prophets as though infallible in their cultural critiques, nor that they have fully or accurately presented the biblical counter-narratives. But I believe they are at least to some extent sincerely trying to do so, and if anything their observations, questions, critiques, and answers provide much “food for thought” for those seeking to truly “reflect” on things in “the reflective age.”

So here’s the address, check it out and I hope you’ll join the “Neon Bible Study.” https://www.facebook.com/groups/442967742576071/

BMC @ Manifest Propensity, 2015

“God Put a Smile Upon Your Face” – Coldplay’s Critique of Our Society’s Utilitarian God

This has always been a personal favorite Coldplay song. Past familiarity, and recently discovering the video have served to catalyze my thoughts about what they might be getting at in the song. So I have tentatively come up with the following “interpretation”:

I think there are three main factors of consideration in the song:

1) “God.”

2) What this “God” does for us.

3) Whether this “God” is the real God.

So the main “concern” of the song is whether the “God” of the song is the real God, and inasmuch as this “God” is the God of our real lives, whether or not our “God” is the real God. Furthermore, the main point is more explicitly an expose on what might be called “the utilitarian God,” or the God our society has created to serve the “needs” we deem as valuable and necessary. The utilitarian God is therefore the God we grant existence to, who is justified thereto by our knowledge of what we need for our “society.”

So again, let’s consider the three factors while looking at some of the lyrics:

The “God” in the song, the “God” our society posits, is under scrutiny as to “God’s” reality.

What this “God” does for us is three fold: putting “a smile on our face”; giving us “style”; and giving us “grace”. I think the song, especially as portrayed in the video, strongly implies that this “God” has actually failed in doing these three things. More significant is the fact that the two first things “God” does are quite frivolous and typically American, while the giving of “grace” only gains significance in connection with the how it is qualified by the more specific values of both “a smile” and “style.” The opening lines show what appears to be simple reality to the narrator.

Where do we go nobody knows?

I’ve gotta say I’m on my way down

They show that the “God” who is in question has not provided even these frivolous “needs” that have been deemed essential by his evangelists. So the first verses open by contrasting simple reality with the “religion of society” (of the masses).

The repeated lines about “drawing the line” and “falling from grace” seem to be expressions of doubt from the narrator concerning the problem of the alignment of this “societal God” with actual reality. The repeated lines about “working it out” show a “religious system” exists and thereby show that the narrator is thought to have “fallen from grace” by society and in particular by a certain person (“honey, honey”) so that the narrator has “wasted all their time.” In light of “the system” the doubting narrator is “worse than you” because they “wanted to” (fall short of “society”). So the song sets up a scenario in which the narrator is being judged by someone who has bought into this false socio/religious system, but the narrator has rejected the system due to it’s failure to align with reality.

The video seems to support this interpretation of the song, so that the narrator is the character in the video that has no smile, no societal “success” or even fellowship, and ultimately loses his societal existence within this “religious system” that was interposed upon them by society.

What is interesting is that the narrator basically is presenting a theological view of God that is known as “apophatic theology,” which is a theology based on what God is not, rather than on what God is (cataphatic theology). I say this because the narrator cannot positively say more about God than that “your guess is as good as mine.” But it seems to me that because the narrator has used apophatic theology they believe they are at least correct to reject this societal, utilitarian “God,” while at the same time their accuser judges him by this “God” to be wrong. So there is an odd sort of logic at play in the song, in which an apophatic “drawing of the line” is correct but the cataphatic line is not which makes “your guess is as good as mine” to mean that “he” is right concerning “God,” while “honey” is wrong, even though he is still agnostic regarding any true God that actually aligns with reality.

So if this interpretation is on target, what is the point of the song? I would say it probably at least might include these ideas:

  • The “God” of our society is utilitarian, meaning that we have created “God” based on what is expedient for our perceived societal needs. God “puts a smile on our face” and gives us “style” and “grace” to succeed in our religious system.
  • Our society, both the segment that might claim to believe in and follow God, and the segment that does not, is idolatrous inasmuch as our “God” is created by us and “utilitarian” for our success. Some have called humans “religious animals” because we are inherently religious whether we actually are religious, or irreligious.
  • Human society is inherently judgmental, and the more we have a “social” unification of the masses the more we may also have a totalitarian style religion that sees non-practicioners as “wasted” from the point of view of the dominant society.
  • So the very disconcerting lesson is to beware, when our society tells us how it’s “God” will “put a smile on our face.”

All in all, I think it is an amazing song/critique of our “liberated” society by Coldplay.

Any questions, or comments are most welcome! Thanks for reading…

Original Content © Bryan M. Christman and Manifest Propensity, 2015. Excerpts, links, and reblogging may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Bryan M. Christman and Manifest Propensity with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

 

 

 

 

“Miles Away” by Fleetwood Mac – Some Thoughts On The Flight From Disillusionment While “The Groom’s Still Waiting at the Altar”

 

Fleetwood-Mac_Mystery-to-Me_rear

 

Fleetwood-Mac_Mystery-to-Me

 

Part 1: A brief autobiography: 1975-1978

In 1975 I graduated college with my AAS degree. Like many in my generation, and like many young of all generations, I was seeking for a life-meaning and a life-direction. I was disillusioned with the society I lived in and the “Christianity” I thought I had grown up with (I hadn’t actually “gotten it” and for the most part it was a “watered down” Christianity).

So, driven partly by “spiritual” experiences I thought I had, I would go to the mall bookstores and peruse their sacred shelves hoping to find the key to become attuned to whatever the ultimate truth of the universe was. One exception to my method was when a book came to me through encountering a representative of the “Hare Krishna” movement in front of the record store in the mall. The airwaves had been flooded for some time with “My Sweet Lord” by George Harrison, and this gentle soul was sure to let me know that the album he offered me (for a great price) was endorsed by George himself, and also by John Fahey. He also offered a very nice hardcover edition of “The Bhagavad Gita” so I walked away with some very ancient writings, “spiritual” music, and only $5 less cash in my pocket. In my search that often felt rather desperate, I counted the cost as insubstantial.

This began my encounter with hinduism which proved short lived, although pantheism itself became my basic worldview for a number of years. I simply made no progress in meditation, and didn’t really want to adopt vegetarianism or any other drastic lifestyle change that the Hare Krishna’s recommended.

So back to the bookstore narrative. I found and read many interesting books, but some less so for various reasons. One book though, spurred a several year quest. It was “The Teachings of Don Juan –  A Yaqui Way of Knowledge.” I was immediately fascinated and hooked, eventually reading the first five books that narrated the apprenticeship in Mexico of Carlos Castaneda under “Don Juan Matus,” a Yaqui Indian Sorcerer and “man of knowledge.” This series had begun under the auspices of Castaneda’s dissertation for anthropology at the University of California. My quest thus became to become a “man of knowledge.”

don juan

Little did I know at the time (due to the fact that Al Gore had not yet invented the internet and therefore finding news of things such as this required more attention than I exercised) the historicity of the books had been officially debunked in 1976 and had been under much scrutiny from as early as 1969. The five books I read came out from 1968 through 1977, and I read them mostly from 1976 through 1978. Some today still find value in them even as fiction, and think that perhaps Castaneda had valid reasons for his “cover up” as a sort of critique of typical anthropology studies. But for me their factuality was important and I think I believed they were historical probably until at least 1979. On the other hand it was not actually their non-historical basis that led me to abandon my quest to become a “man of knowledge” style sorcerer. The truth is that while I was in the midst of my quest, I found a different way, or perhaps more accurately it found me.

Had I known sooner, perhaps I would have given up that specific quest earlier. Alas, as early 1973 Fleetwood Mac had said that Don Juan went up “in a cloud of smoke,” but even though I was an avid early listener to the Mac, I didn’t hear “Mystery to Me” until probably 1978.

This brief autobiography is merely to provide a picture of what life was like for one, indeed for many in that era and to also provide some context for the song “Miles Away.” That song is an apt summation of how “man’s search for meaning” led many to eventually seek “flight” from the disillusionment a generation encountered in failed movements and false messiahs. The flowery optimism of the 1960’s had led to the hedonistic disillusionment of the 1970’s.

Miles Away 
by Fleetwood Mac
Written by Bob Welch

The swamp is getting deeper all the time
And the faces that I see don’t seem to shine
Now there’s too much warhol hanging off the wall
And the mystery that there used to be is gone

Let me go
Miles away
Let me ride
Just miles away
Don’t wanna know
I’m not gonna miss it much
Gonna be drivin’ once again

Don juan goes up in a cloud of smoke
And all those hare krishnas turned out to be a joke
And it’s restless, restless, restless all the time
Slidin’ up and down the surface of this life
Now I know that I can’t say what’s black and white
But if I could fly I think I’d try tonight

(From MetroLyrics.com)

Part 2: What follows disillusionment, endless flight?

Fleetwood Mac had proposed “flight” as an answer back in 1973. By 1977 Steve Miller’s enormous FM hit “Fly Like an Eagle” arguably confirmed “flight” as the answer for the generation. Alvin Lee’s ‘Ten Years After” had pointed the way back in 1971 saying “I’d  love to change the world, but I don’t know what to do…, so I’ll leave it up to you.” By 1977 the 60’s revolution had become flight with Miller’s “Fly Like an Eagle.”

Feed the babies
Who don’t have enough to eat
Shoe the children
With no shoes on their feet
House the people
Livin’ in the street
Oh, oh, there’s a solution

I want to fly like an eagle
To the sea
Fly like an eagle
Let my spirit carry me
I want to fly like an eagle
Till I’m free
Fly through the revolution

(From MetroLyrics.com)

The question to ask today is whether our life is now become one of endless flight. Have we become a generation that unknowingly are ironically and perversely living the ancient biblical mandate of being “strangers and pilgrims” in the earth? For the point of that biblical “lifestyle” was not that it is good to be homeless and on endless “flight”, but to be on “pilgrimage” to an “alternative city” from the city of the kingdom’s of the world. In other words, there is a reality greater than the kingdom of humanity that has invaded, and the only “escape” from the old reality is to be found in this new “invading” reality.

This is the controversial truth of Christianity, so controversial that many Christians aren’t even familiar with it, namely that rightly understood Christianity is not about escape at all! It is about people becoming part of God’s new reality here and now. In more scriptural language in about becoming part of the inaugurated “kingdom of God.” In theological language it is about people becoming part of “the presence of the future,” meaning that God’s other-dimensional “future” for the world has invaded the present.

Now admittedly this may all sound strange and perhaps even stranger than Castaneda’s second book “A Separate Reality” did to those that read it. But this is scriptural Christian doctrine, which should be evident in this simple parable told by Jesus, the person in whom God’s invasion of the world was inaugurated in potency.

Matthew 13:33 He told them another parable. “The kingdom of heaven is like leaven that a woman took and hid in three measures of flour, till it was all leavened.”

N. T. Wright, on of today’s foremost scholars of the New Testament wrote this:

We who live after Calvary and Easter know that God did indeed act suddenly and dramatically at that moment. When today we long for God to act, to put the world to rights, we must remind ourselves that he has already done so, and that what we are now awaiting is the full outworking of those events. We wait with patience, not like people in a dark room wondering if anyone will ever come with a lighted candle, but like people in early morning who know that the sun has arisen and are now waiting for the full brightness of midday. (Matthew for Everyone, Part 1, p. 170)

In short, through Christ, God’s “kingdom of heaven” has been hidden in the world to “leaven” the whole world. How this works is admittedly somewhat controversial, and not merely because at times various bodies of “the Church” have sought to facilitate this providentially “secret” process of God through questionable “public” means. This historical scenario has left fear in the minds of many that an unbridled  future movement could make the communistic attempted  “leavenings” of the world pale by comparison. But the only scripturally legitimate power of God’s kingdom must be centered in the dynamic exhibited by Jesus in his ministry. And that dynamic was diametrically opposed to the power that is operative in the kingdoms of mankind. The dynamic of Jesus was the exercise of a different sort of power, that has been notably absent in human governments and organized religions of all stripes.

Mark 10:42 And Jesus called them to him and said to them, “You know that those who are considered rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. 43 But it shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, 44 and whoever would be first among you must be slave of all. 45 For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

The dynamic of Jesus was even a different sort of love, one that is conspicuously absent in the intolerance in the name of “tolerance” in America today.

Matthew 5:43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? 48 You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

But in the end am I not espousing some measure of Christianity as “organized religion”? I would have to answer yes, but it would have to be a “matured” Christianity such as we have not yet seen broadly in the world. I readily admit that “organized religion” is scary, especially to “conspiracy theory” prone Americans. The reality is that some human “organization” is inevitable. The question then is what will it’s ethic be? Does even the American tradition of liberal democracy foster the ethical dynamic of Jesus? Do the disillusioned Americans that are permanently “in flight” have a dynamic that fosters the shalom of God for humanity? In the end, Bob Welch’s “Miles Away” is the only solution for postmodernism’s  no “black or white” epistemological dogma.

And it’s restless, restless, restless all the time
Slidin’ up and down the surface of this life
Now I know that I can’t say what’s black and white
But if I could fly I think I’d try tonight

The true alternative is that God has already inaugurated the solution in which the reality of God’s alternate city can “leaven” the world. Postmoderns can only confess with Alvin Lee “I don’t know what to do”?

Revelation 21:2 And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. 4 He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.”

The responsibility of all people then, is not to seek endless flight from the world, but to be part of the city that is to come. God has already prepared everything, but as Bob Dylan (who else) has pointed out, “The Groom’s Still Waiting at the Altar.”

West of the Jordan, east of the Rock of Gibraltar,
I see the burning of the stage,
Curtain risin’ on a new age,
See the groom still waitin’ at the altar.

Note that throughout the chorus Dylan has several second lines:

  • I see the burning of the page (1 x)
  • I see the burning of the stage (3x)
  • I see the burning of the cage (1x)

He also has an alternate to the third line one time where he sings:

  • Curtain rising on a new stage…

I would love to hear any thoughts you may have about my thoughts.

Original Content © Bryan M. Christman and Manifest Propensity, 2015. Excerpts, links, and reblogging may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Bryan M. Christman and Manifest Propensity with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

C. S. Lewis on Prayer as Monologue

Malcom

 

Prayer is either a sheer illusion or a personal contact between embryonic, incomplete persons (ourselves) and the utterly concrete Person.

(From “The World’s Last Night and Other Essays“, p. 8)

Poem

They tell me, Lord that when I seem
To be in speech with you,
Since you make no replies, it’s all a dream
– One talker aping two.

The are half right, but not as they
Falsely believe. For I
Seek in myself the things I meant to say,
And lo!, the well’s are dry.

Then, seeing me empty, You forsake
The listener’s part, and through
My dumb limps breathe and into utterance wake
The thoughts I never knew.

Therefore You neither need reply
Nor can; for while we seem
Two talking, Thou art one forever; and I
No dreamer, but thy dream.

– C.S. Lewis; 4 April 1934

(From “Yours Jack“, p.44)

Note on the word “limps” above: 

There are apparently different editions of this poem, with an earlier one published in 1964 reading “lips” instead of “limps.” How to resolve this I do not know, but it is interesting that in 1933 Lewis wrote:

Take not, oh Lord, our literal sense. Lord in thy great,

Unbroken speech, our limping metaphor translate.

It is also interesting that Lewis says in his letter from 1934 that he had written the poem “over a year ago.” I also note that at the time Lewis wrote the poem it was only about 2 1/2 years following his “second conversion,” to Christianity. About a year prior he experienced his “first conversion,” to theism.

Thanks for reading…

Bryan @ Manifest Propensity, 2015.