In what, then, shall we ground our Lenten practice? 


Jim reflects on whether true Lenten penance is possible without a somewhat literal interpretation of the human race as fallen from grace. 

It happened almost immediately. I went to the 7:00 p.m. Ash Wednesday service at Trinity Episcopal just after completing the previous blog entry; my face turned toward the liturgy and the sermon with renewed self-reflective purpose. I listened to the Salutation and Collect, bidding us to acknowledge our wretchedness and through this acknowledgement, to new and contrite hearts. With the congregation, I read responsively with the priest the hopeful and inspiring Psalm 103. I wondered to myself, "And what is the ground of my contriteness?" "What is so sure and certain in the personal ontology of James F. Andris, that he will be inspired to fling himself on the mercy of God for his sure and certain human failings?

Certainly not Adam's original sin. That's a definite certainly not. Certainly not the belief that Jesus Christ had to die to save us. That is not certain in my ontology. Possible, but not certain. What is the analog of wretchedness and original sin in Jim's version of the Christian? Aha! That familiar feeling began to creep over me. It's like what people call goosebumps, but in me, when I am having a deep insight, it literally lifts me up from feet to head and surrounds me with shimmering energy.

I had this insight, I thought, three years ago when I wrote a series of reflections in this very blog! My analog is the almost universal human propensity to fail to see the potential for Christ-like behavior in oneself and others. In this sense, we are definitely failures. Most of the time, we, or at least I, never see, acknowledge, or encourage my own or others divine potential. When I do see it, rarely, it's "through a glass darkly," and then the light goes out again. Yes, here is something I'm so sure of, that I can throw myself on God's mercy.

I don't think I can summarize those inspiring insights of several years ago. I would especially recommend for reading the blog entries Holiness I - III. In Holiness I: The Person Behind the Meaning, I develop the idea that each and every person is a sparkling jewel of consciousness, a unique point of view with awe-inspiring potential, one of God's many versions of the Universe. In Holiness II: The Christ Behind the Person, I claim that "the second coming of Christ could be seen as the emergence of the ability to see each person as an awe-inspiring version of reality." Finally in Holiness III: The God behind the Christ, I claim that "Everyone of us is a God channeler and perceiver, we have holiness potential, and we are holy because of this potential. We are evolving to an only partially known destination. "

What traditional Christians want to claim is that only Jesus Christ saw these things clearly, and in the extreme case, in John, from the beginning and beyond time. In His glass there was no darkness, only light. And that may be true, and perhaps it's even truer that He inspired His followers to believe this was true. I have not yet been so inspired that my faith is informed by such a truth, and I dare to wonder sometimes if such a belief can be a barrier to our complete evolution as spiritual beings (sometimes seemingly implying the lack of spiritual maturity of devout followers of other faiths.)

But, as Glenda Radner used to say, "Well, never mind." I have enough self-improvement to work on without augmenting my ontology with the Divinity of Christ. 

Posted: Thu - February 26, 2009 at 09:44 AM          

©