[Lee]

…(John Main)…realised that this practice is essential in the daily spiritual life of the laity, not just as a monastic tradition. The World Community for Christian Meditation follows this tradition. James has addressed them on several occasions and will again in France this coming March.

Thank you for the reply Sheelah. Is there any material on-line from James’ previous correspondence with WCCM? I will keep my eyes open for info related to the event in March. Thank you.

[Lee]

“James explains that awareness of sin is derived from undergoing the process of forgiveness. In other words, forgiveness comes first and understanding of sin follows from that.”

Prior to the sacrifice on the cross didn’t Jesus recognize sin? “Go and sin no more”, etc.

[Lee]

“Does it make a difference to how you feel about that discovery (stories we tell about ourselves might be less than truthful) if you discover it as a result of being given a richer, more realistic, more truthful story?”

I am struggling with this concept a bit. Is it that Jesus is the protagonist, I am part of His story and he is giving me the gift of faith in a God that loves me and forgives me? What’s the benefit of discovering that I have been less than truthful in my story?

[Lee]

“Describe the ways you like others to think about you in order to garner praise or acceptance. What story do you tell and how do you present yourself to get a good reaction?”

James mentions on page 220 that those who teach in religious spaces have a strong temptation to “get it right.” I regularly give talks on spiritual topics, virtues, etc. It is difficult sometimes to give a talk to other men on a particular virtue that I myself feel I am sorely lacking in.

James goes on, “When we see someone who is obviously undergoing something that is not part of them, part of the truthfulness which is coming upon them is their ability to sit relatively peacefully with themselves as liars. This seems odd, but is very important for those of us who are asked to give witness in some way or other. I’m not advocating being dishonest, I’m advocating relaxing and not being too disturbed as we discover how dishonest we are.”

I’m not sure of the value in this. I see myself as a liar (or at least not proficient in the ideas presented) … do I just live with the knowledge that I’m dishonest or do I strive to improve or un-lie? No one likes dishonesty, in themselves or others.

[Lee]

“Have you gone through periods of doubt as well as faith in your life? Please describe your experiences.”

As James stated in the essay, I am one of the many that looked at faith as something that was on me. I needed to make the moonshot on a regular basis. Or as he says elsewhere, “Faith was an imperious demand that I should try to believe seventeen impossible things before breakfast.” It has helped me looking at faith as something that is on God and as I read scripture I get a better sense of God leading me that way. The analogies of relationship with Aunt Mildred and a parent teaching a infant to walk help make this point.

[Lee]

Thank you for the reply Sheelah. Please, do start a discussion on contemplation. I would like to hear your take on; what is it? what is it not? is it something we do in a particular way/method? There are numerous methods espoused by many but it seems that so many of the great thinkers/writers on contemplation never specify a method, i.e., Merton, Haggerty, Cloud of Unknowing, etc…

[Lee]

Hi Rich

Glad to see that we have another voice in our conversation.

Thank you for your comments on our being “time-laden”. As a working man with a family, I often think, “so much to do with so little time” which relates so much with your comment “we’ve fallen in love with the clock rather than being in time.” You’re right…thinking about our time-laden being does help me to slow down. Thank you for helping me understand that it’s moments that are passing by not seconds, minutes, hours, days,…

[Lee]

I understand that God is not in rivalry with his creation. And I understand that we also want to desire as the Other other desires not as the Social other. Sheelah, as you said in a previous post…our neighbor is all of the peoples in the world. I believe it was in book four that James said that WE ARE to be neighbor as the good Samaritan was neighbor. Perfect, I understand, its beautiful, challenging but I know it is right and will lead to peace. With Islamic extremists in the news again (Paris) I am struggling with trying to be non-rivalistic and a neighbor to the terrorists. First of all, in the past, I would have simply joined the multitudes and crucified (not literally of course, but with hate, name-calling, death wishes, etc) the terrorists. Clearly the terrorists do not wish to see all of mankind as their neighbor and rivalry is what keeps their numbers rising. We can’t just let the terrorists have their way as we wave our love and peace banners, can we?

[Lee]

I like what Maginel said earlier (much earlier):
“I like the phrase “through whose eyes” do you read it because it implies that the reading can only happen within a relationship. Interpretation doesn’t happen in a vacuum ever. In his essay James writes, “We read the Scriptures eucharistically, through the eyes of Jesus our Rabbi”.”

At this point I am not sure what it truly means to read through Jesus’ eyes. Is it to read everything in the light of his forgiveness and love of us? Is it to read looking at others (neighbors) without the rivalry that causes hatred, jealousy and conflict? And will that simplistic interpretive key apply to most of scripture?

[Lee]

“We were inducted into hearing sounds”. We don’t speak until someone has spoken to us. I really like James’ comment “It is the ‘social’ other which reproduces itself in and as the body of each of us, thus BRINGING INTO BEING the subsection of the ‘we’ which is a ‘ME’. I find it difficult to go from this “me” to the ME that is forgiven and loved by Another other. Transitioning to this ‘me’ might be easy to do from the head but not so easy to do so from the heart. And from the heart would be the only way to actually “live” as this forgiven and loved me. Maybe through contemplation its possible.

[Lee]

What does James mean when he says “Curiously, then, we’re all used to an entirely fake, apparent, timelessness.” Is it because when I, as a fifty-year-old, as I watch the news I blindly interpret, judge the events without consideration of my past, my history?

[Lee]

In the Discussion Forum, share ways in which you have noticed the content, questions or insights from the previous session showing up in your lives.

After reading through so many thoughtful, intelligent posts I am afraid I don’t have much to add.

Receiving myself through a social other (people, climate, weather, country, atmosphere, etc) certainly reminds me of the false self as depicted in Merton’s and others writings.

And I thought this was what James was alluding to. But then in the next section (4. Desire according to the desire of another) he says “…I really want us free from the pop-psychology picture most of us tend to fall back on. This pop-psychology picture presupposes that somewhere, relatively independent of the accidents of the birth, background and upbringing, there is a real me. This real me is authentic and has its own desires…Well, this is nonsense. There is a real “me” but it is real as a project over time that is being brought into being through this particular body, born in this particular time and place to these particular parents. It is how this body has learned to negotiate over time with the “we” which precedes it and is around it. It is this body over time that is different from anybody else’s. The patterns of desires are what make us similar, not what makes us different.”

Sorry to quote so long of a piece. This is not what Merton would call the true self. The way I understand it Merton’s true self is before or without any influence by the social other. The self that was made for union ONLY with God. After a quick read through James’ four volumes I would say James’ idea of a real “me” is what we slowly grow into after acknowledging that we are forgiven and loved by Another other and slowly start detaching ourselves from the rivalistic social other.

Or maybe I have it completely misunderstood 🙂

[Lee]

James says that habits are what make excellence possible.

What beneficial practices have you been inducted into?
Who inducted you or how did you acquire your “stable dispositions”?
What impact might an act of communication from God have on your life?

I do understand what James was implying about habits being good. The example of the car driver and doctor made his point clear. But what about being inducted into “unstable dispositions” such as frequent anger/impatience, addictions, selfishness? (things we would normally call sins) Am I already crossing into morality?

I used to regularly pray for an “act of communication from God” because it would solidify my faith and enable me to experience a joy (assuming the act of communication wasn’t a lightning bolt or millions of gnats) that would forever light up my life.

[Lee]

I may be the only person actively going through Module 1 (no new posts since Oct 2014) but here goes anyway:

James talks about Christianity having been thought of as grasping onto a theory about what God has done for us and then acting according to a moral code. Is that what Christianity has been like for you? How or how not?

12 years ago Christianity became a life-changer (even though I am a cradle Catholic but the faith was rarely expressed in the family). So much good news, new material to read, things to do, people to meet, etc. But then I have been struggling the past few years with Where is God now? What is Jesus truly doing with and for me? It seemed that the entire responsibility of the relationship was on me. If I didn’t think/do anything then nothing happened. And that very much meant acting to a moral code; virtues to perfect, bad habits to eradicate, nightly examination of conscience (and in my reflection I rarely could accuse myself of doing anything perfectly), faithfulness to particular acts of piety, etc. I suppose this is truly the nature of the relationship but there had to be a presence outside of myself. The other way was mentally exhausting.

[Author]

Posts