I've recently been going around the 'net to various Fourth Way sites and forums and reading bits here and there. It causes unique reactions for me. I mean feelings, thoughts. Much of what I find on the 'net doing this comes across as helter skelter, almost hellish in a sense. And you find the usual forum nonsense. The control, banning (not me, I havn't been participating, but of people who are not conforming to the moderator's program, all that). The usual nonsense.
The usual scent of cult activity and personalities not far away, if not directly present (though that seems rare on the internet).
It also makes me question my own relationship with the Work. I saw one comment that referred to "B Influence junkies" and wondered if I'd fallen and rested comfortably a bit into that characterization.
But more deeply questions of connection come to the fore; that vertical connection that was once so real.
It seems that when I was in that connection I didn't realize how I was viewed by the world (and really didn't care). But I know now.
I think what my parents must have thought (but strangely I seemed to in some way have brought them along with it, evidence being my father's talking of recurrence on his death bed). In their old age they were kind of living in a timeless realm anyway at that point. Their past life, and eras of their lives were pretty far away at that point, and they were static, in the same house at the end for years, same chairs, same routine.
The fact is, you're going to effect your entire family when you truly change internally and develop to some real degree. Without realizing it of course because that is not part of your motive or anything you are aware of at the time.
I think prayer to the Holy Spirit for guidance here is in order. At this stage. We rarely think of praying directly to God the Holy Spirit, yet He it is that guides us in our sanctification after regenerating us and after our conversion.
That's really what is going on, perhaps. A larger stage (as in theatre) is reached. (I always seem to want to spell theatre the English way when I use the word like that.)
Just as in the past when I had a real connection I wasn't aware of it being real spiritual warfare, at least not directly, yet then that aspect comes to the fore in a big way. A bigger stage. Less innocence.
Before I didn't have the armor of God, let alone the full armor of God. Now I am conscious of needing the full armor of God.
The Holy Spirit doesn't abandon us, yet graduation seems real regarding stages of the Work. That can't be denied.
I can walk down the same roads, metaphorically speaking, as I did back then, doing the Work, yet the difference I have to recognize is the spiritual warfare nature of it. I've sort of recognized that in the last several years, yet I've not been walking those old roads like of old. I've just been recognizing spiritual warfare in everyday life experiences, including more rare experiences.
Two things: prayer for guidance to the Holy Spirit, and also a recognizing of that hardcore Work practice of being present for duration, depth, and frequency. Both are needed. The latter doesn't become beneath us. It is what leads to true change and true new realms. The former, all of the faith, is the foundation and guidance and everything too. But that true effort of self-remembering, non-identifying for real duration, uncomfortable, and then dealing with the backlash, and everything else, is what makes your connection real or not.
5.25.2010
Big perspective post (dead on a gurney II)
With my uncharming 'dead on a gurney' post I was trying to do something I'll try again here.
It is necessary to look at humankind and history and individual lives and ask what is the most important thing that could happen with an individual in an individual life?
Making millions? No. Being famous, even for impressive reasons like discovering or inventing something? No, again. Obviously those are good things and worthwhile, but they are not the most rare, unique things that can happen within an individual in an individual life.
Developing Magnetic Center, regeneration by the Word and the Spirit, true awakening, getting out from under the tyranny of vanity and worldly pride and self-will, becoming God centered rather than man-centered, having saving faith, these and similar things are the rare and unique things that can happen to an individual in an individual life.
They involve higher influences (B and C influence), they involve the Word of God and the call that becomes effectual internally, they involve painful separation from the world (the General Law, the world of sex, all that) including the pain of being forced to see our own nothingness, and in that they involve the breaking down of personality and the developing of essence.
The Work language gives us understanding of these ultimate things. Biblical language and doctrine does as well in a different way.
Roles are played in life, in history, influences are created, God's providence puts all beings in their place, where they need to be. I say this to say we can't put down the world or make null all parts and forces and directions of life in the world. Yet when we look at individual lives, in history, we can see what is most unusual and rare and unique.
So when we make contact with such things...realize it! *Continually.*
We have to continually get perspective.
Much of all this development requires unusual *self-motivation* (or inwardly motivated action) or internal (conscious) shocks rather than the usual external shocks mechanical life is excited and controlled by. It's unusual for us. We're use to things just 'happening.' We have to formulate aims. Engage in active reasoning. Live from the Work rather than from life.
It is necessary to look at humankind and history and individual lives and ask what is the most important thing that could happen with an individual in an individual life?
Making millions? No. Being famous, even for impressive reasons like discovering or inventing something? No, again. Obviously those are good things and worthwhile, but they are not the most rare, unique things that can happen within an individual in an individual life.
Developing Magnetic Center, regeneration by the Word and the Spirit, true awakening, getting out from under the tyranny of vanity and worldly pride and self-will, becoming God centered rather than man-centered, having saving faith, these and similar things are the rare and unique things that can happen to an individual in an individual life.
They involve higher influences (B and C influence), they involve the Word of God and the call that becomes effectual internally, they involve painful separation from the world (the General Law, the world of sex, all that) including the pain of being forced to see our own nothingness, and in that they involve the breaking down of personality and the developing of essence.
The Work language gives us understanding of these ultimate things. Biblical language and doctrine does as well in a different way.
Roles are played in life, in history, influences are created, God's providence puts all beings in their place, where they need to be. I say this to say we can't put down the world or make null all parts and forces and directions of life in the world. Yet when we look at individual lives, in history, we can see what is most unusual and rare and unique.
So when we make contact with such things...realize it! *Continually.*
We have to continually get perspective.
Much of all this development requires unusual *self-motivation* (or inwardly motivated action) or internal (conscious) shocks rather than the usual external shocks mechanical life is excited and controlled by. It's unusual for us. We're use to things just 'happening.' We have to formulate aims. Engage in active reasoning. Live from the Work rather than from life.
5.23.2010
Pool reading
Ignore the title of this post. It's just free association for now.
I've always been on to the need to have a basic list of books that are balanced and ultimate influences for you. Yet I've never really married to that the advantage (or necessity and need) to re-read certain influences to really make them our own. Not all books (influences) are worth re-reading, or need to be re-read, of course, but a handful are worth it.
Along the lines of Luther's (and many other peoples') comment that it's better to know a handful of books well than to know many books to a shallow degree.
When you come to a point where you've read basically everything (every level and category or genre of book) you are always wondering what to read now. Rarely do you think of going back and re-reading a great influence.
So beyond a rock like list of basic books one needs also to engage in pool reading. By that I mean having a basic pool of influences that one gets to know really well. The notion of pool here means not just the particular books that make up your definitive list itself, but all secondary works on the subject of those books, or critical essays on each one, or similar works in their category, if that applies, etc.
For the Bible and Federal Theology this is obvious.
Wealth of Nations and On War less so, though it applies.
I guess the main point is to get to know a handful of influences really well. When we begin with influences we can't know what are worthwhile in this sense, but as we get understanding of the entire field, so to speak, and can discern the handful worth knowing really well, then all this applies.
I don't know if I'd ever get much from reading a work of fiction more than once. Perhaps so in some cases, if a lot of time has elapsed, just to see how one's understanding has developed over time. Liker reading an old journal or diary.
Homer definitely. Very little worthwhile secondary literature on Homer though. You have to write your own. Which I have. Here and there.
Shakespeare is most likely a main candidate. The first time we course through Shakespeare we are a bit fazed by it all. And wondering if it's really as great as it's reputation. So to struggle with that (and assuming it is, since it's hard to go up against a vetter like Time) we have to go at it multiple times over time. A worthwhile influence for that.
I just know I've been delinquent in re-reading great influences, other than the Bible and Homer and Reformed Theology and the Work. You shouldn't really just read Herodotus *once*, for instance. Or Thucydides. Works might suffer upon second readings, but so what. You learn something.
I've always been on to the need to have a basic list of books that are balanced and ultimate influences for you. Yet I've never really married to that the advantage (or necessity and need) to re-read certain influences to really make them our own. Not all books (influences) are worth re-reading, or need to be re-read, of course, but a handful are worth it.
Along the lines of Luther's (and many other peoples') comment that it's better to know a handful of books well than to know many books to a shallow degree.
When you come to a point where you've read basically everything (every level and category or genre of book) you are always wondering what to read now. Rarely do you think of going back and re-reading a great influence.
So beyond a rock like list of basic books one needs also to engage in pool reading. By that I mean having a basic pool of influences that one gets to know really well. The notion of pool here means not just the particular books that make up your definitive list itself, but all secondary works on the subject of those books, or critical essays on each one, or similar works in their category, if that applies, etc.
For the Bible and Federal Theology this is obvious.
Wealth of Nations and On War less so, though it applies.
I guess the main point is to get to know a handful of influences really well. When we begin with influences we can't know what are worthwhile in this sense, but as we get understanding of the entire field, so to speak, and can discern the handful worth knowing really well, then all this applies.
I don't know if I'd ever get much from reading a work of fiction more than once. Perhaps so in some cases, if a lot of time has elapsed, just to see how one's understanding has developed over time. Liker reading an old journal or diary.
Homer definitely. Very little worthwhile secondary literature on Homer though. You have to write your own. Which I have. Here and there.
Shakespeare is most likely a main candidate. The first time we course through Shakespeare we are a bit fazed by it all. And wondering if it's really as great as it's reputation. So to struggle with that (and assuming it is, since it's hard to go up against a vetter like Time) we have to go at it multiple times over time. A worthwhile influence for that.
I just know I've been delinquent in re-reading great influences, other than the Bible and Homer and Reformed Theology and the Work. You shouldn't really just read Herodotus *once*, for instance. Or Thucydides. Works might suffer upon second readings, but so what. You learn something.
5.17.2010
Dead on a gurney
Picture yourself lying dead on a gurney. Look at your lifeless face. See others looking down on you. Professional people who see corpses often. Another dead human.
Now think of what you did in your life that had any real meaning. You read a lot of books, but did any of them produce any real change? Your effect on other people, etc.
Here is how I see the real positive change: did you awaken in a real way during your life? In the way that language such as becoming God-centered rather than man-centered suggests?
Did you really get above the dark and silent internal tyranny of your vanity and pride and become able to recognize anything higher than you? Did you recognize your Creator? That is a real development. That is real change. Looking down on that dead face on the gurney one could say something really happened for that person in their life. A real change.
Such things as recognize original sin in oneself. And active sin. The need for a mediator between yourself and God. It is not 'normal' to be able to recognize such things.
Let alone did you come to where you could discern and value the difference between self-will and Real Will (or God's will in you)?
At this point the corpse has a half smile.
Now think of what you did in your life that had any real meaning. You read a lot of books, but did any of them produce any real change? Your effect on other people, etc.
Here is how I see the real positive change: did you awaken in a real way during your life? In the way that language such as becoming God-centered rather than man-centered suggests?
Did you really get above the dark and silent internal tyranny of your vanity and pride and become able to recognize anything higher than you? Did you recognize your Creator? That is a real development. That is real change. Looking down on that dead face on the gurney one could say something really happened for that person in their life. A real change.
Such things as recognize original sin in oneself. And active sin. The need for a mediator between yourself and God. It is not 'normal' to be able to recognize such things.
Let alone did you come to where you could discern and value the difference between self-will and Real Will (or God's will in you)?
At this point the corpse has a half smile.
5.14.2010
A final word on 'sacraments'
I think the best way to understand the 'sacraments' is this: prior to being regenerated by the Word and the Spirit ritual sacraments (baptism and the Lord's Supper) provide for the currently unregenerate a visual parable to teach them and keep them drawn towards Scripture (ideally).
After regeneration though ritual sacraments become vain matter. Regeneration itself is baptism of the Holy Spirit. What the Lord's Supper symbolizes is union with Christ which a regenerated Christian has in reality.
The unregenerate in the church (especially leadership) never want to think anybody is regenerate. So the regenerate Christians have to just silently grin and have understanding for them. While at the same time not allowing themselves to be drawn into dead ritual or an experience of the faith that is beneath them. (Intentionally chosen words there.)
Fear God, not man. Don't ever exalt man and ritual above the Word and the Spirit. (Man being cleric or scholar or anything else.) And don't succumb to those who demand that man and ritual be exalted over the Word and the Spirit. That is a point of difference that defines the battle-line in the spiritual world. A soldier of Christ - a true spiritual warrior - does not concede or play such games for *any* reason or justification or demand on the part of the currently unregenerate.
After regeneration though ritual sacraments become vain matter. Regeneration itself is baptism of the Holy Spirit. What the Lord's Supper symbolizes is union with Christ which a regenerated Christian has in reality.
The unregenerate in the church (especially leadership) never want to think anybody is regenerate. So the regenerate Christians have to just silently grin and have understanding for them. While at the same time not allowing themselves to be drawn into dead ritual or an experience of the faith that is beneath them. (Intentionally chosen words there.)
Fear God, not man. Don't ever exalt man and ritual above the Word and the Spirit. (Man being cleric or scholar or anything else.) And don't succumb to those who demand that man and ritual be exalted over the Word and the Spirit. That is a point of difference that defines the battle-line in the spiritual world. A soldier of Christ - a true spiritual warrior - does not concede or play such games for *any* reason or justification or demand on the part of the currently unregenerate.
5.12.2010
Faith, hope, charity
Came across something recently. This verse:
1Co 13:13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.
means this: faith and hope are still forward looking (or are in things still yet unseen), yet love now is the beginning of the same love that will exist beyond the veil.
1Co 13:13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.
means this: faith and hope are still forward looking (or are in things still yet unseen), yet love now is the beginning of the same love that will exist beyond the veil.
5.09.2010
Dostoevsky, interesting
It's interesting (to me, anyway) that when you write a list of Dostoevsky's major novels, novellas, and stories there aren't that many.
About a baker's dozen:
The Double
Notes from Underground
Crime and Punishment
The Gambler
The Idiot
The Eternal Husband
The Possessed
The Brothers Karamazov
White Nights
A Nasty Story (also trans. as 'A Disgraceful Affair')
Bobok
A Gentle Creature (also trans. as 'The Meek One')
The Dream of a Ridiculous Man
Dostoevsky is interesting because he portrays the psychology a person who has developed into being able to see and value the Work possesses. Experiences are similar. Alienation. Isolation. The insulted and humiliated. Embarrassment as a means and an end in development. One I love, the 'scandalous feast' or 'scandalous gathering' where the veil is lifted on the facade of societal unity and people are exposed and things get crazy. D. has these scenes in all his major novels. The love triangle (which doesn't need to involve consummated love). The figure of the 'dreamer.' The dreamer as idealist who wants to transform his squalid reality into something more noble, more lofty, more beautiful. It ends badly. Reality triumphs. Though the ideals are vindicated in various ways. Then, isolated consciousness has recognized its isolation. Love this quote from Notes from Underground: "...to tell long stories of how I defaulted on my life through moral corruption in a corner, through an insufficiency of milieu, through unaccustom to what is alive, and through vainglorious spite in the underground - is not interesting..." Another motif is the motif of the double, the lack of unity or oneness in a person. Obvious Work theme. Then, the General Law, depicted as the social nexus (the outer, collective world) that impinges upon the inner, personal world. These clash in the aforementioned 'scandalous feasts' or 'scandalous gatherings.'
In the above paragraph, in places, I have paraphrased Richard Pevear in his Intro to the Bantam Classics edition of The Eternal Husband.
I didn't mention one other theme because Pevear presented it as confused. The theme of separation from 'what is living' leads to violence towards what is living. What is confusing is Pevear doesn't say if 'what is living' is the isolated individual or the collective social milieu.
For us, Work types, we can see that there is an element of violence going on, and criminal behavior is always close. Perhaps a percentage of inmates of prisons are in very early stages of development (recurrence) and succumbed to violence. I always use to say: "Don't get yourself into a prison cell!" when talking about accumulating higher energy in early stages of development.
About a baker's dozen:
The Double
Notes from Underground
Crime and Punishment
The Gambler
The Idiot
The Eternal Husband
The Possessed
The Brothers Karamazov
White Nights
A Nasty Story (also trans. as 'A Disgraceful Affair')
Bobok
A Gentle Creature (also trans. as 'The Meek One')
The Dream of a Ridiculous Man
Dostoevsky is interesting because he portrays the psychology a person who has developed into being able to see and value the Work possesses. Experiences are similar. Alienation. Isolation. The insulted and humiliated. Embarrassment as a means and an end in development. One I love, the 'scandalous feast' or 'scandalous gathering' where the veil is lifted on the facade of societal unity and people are exposed and things get crazy. D. has these scenes in all his major novels. The love triangle (which doesn't need to involve consummated love). The figure of the 'dreamer.' The dreamer as idealist who wants to transform his squalid reality into something more noble, more lofty, more beautiful. It ends badly. Reality triumphs. Though the ideals are vindicated in various ways. Then, isolated consciousness has recognized its isolation. Love this quote from Notes from Underground: "...to tell long stories of how I defaulted on my life through moral corruption in a corner, through an insufficiency of milieu, through unaccustom to what is alive, and through vainglorious spite in the underground - is not interesting..." Another motif is the motif of the double, the lack of unity or oneness in a person. Obvious Work theme. Then, the General Law, depicted as the social nexus (the outer, collective world) that impinges upon the inner, personal world. These clash in the aforementioned 'scandalous feasts' or 'scandalous gatherings.'
In the above paragraph, in places, I have paraphrased Richard Pevear in his Intro to the Bantam Classics edition of The Eternal Husband.
I didn't mention one other theme because Pevear presented it as confused. The theme of separation from 'what is living' leads to violence towards what is living. What is confusing is Pevear doesn't say if 'what is living' is the isolated individual or the collective social milieu.
For us, Work types, we can see that there is an element of violence going on, and criminal behavior is always close. Perhaps a percentage of inmates of prisons are in very early stages of development (recurrence) and succumbed to violence. I always use to say: "Don't get yourself into a prison cell!" when talking about accumulating higher energy in early stages of development.
5.05.2010
A stinging recognition
While reading a discussion of the Trinity on a forum (one person who should know better was refusing to recognize the orthodox biblical teaching on the Trinity) it reminded me of a realization - a sharp, as in stinging, realization - I had recently. I recognized that I was dishonoring the Holy Spirit by neglecting the language He introduced me to and taught me (enabled me to understand).
To clear my mind on the Trinity after reading that forum discussion I read J. I. Packer's chapter on the Trinity in his Concise Theology, and at the end of that chapter he notes that part of having a biblical understanding of the Trinity - of accepting the biblical teaching - is we are reminded to honor all three Persons of the Trinity, or Godhead.
I.e. pay equal attention and give equal honor to the gracious ministries of all three Persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
To clear my mind on the Trinity after reading that forum discussion I read J. I. Packer's chapter on the Trinity in his Concise Theology, and at the end of that chapter he notes that part of having a biblical understanding of the Trinity - of accepting the biblical teaching - is we are reminded to honor all three Persons of the Trinity, or Godhead.
I.e. pay equal attention and give equal honor to the gracious ministries of all three Persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
