hemispheres
*note: this is all i could salvage from a blog response that crashed during publishing... hope it makes a little bit of sense
in 'taken hostage' we were talking about being social thongs…
well, we weren't actually talking about that, but our conversation took my imagination there...being stuck between two virtually identical, yet perfectly symmetrical and therefore completely opposite hemispheres. the thong does not divide nor bind together, it simply fits best in the middle because of its design.
well, there are parables and then there are just really bad analogies.
anyway, i left off with “if synergy is spiritual and God is receiving less worship from human beings who know him and each other personally, then it is as though hell holds our relationships hostage. all this with the a powerfully imminent and evident change in the holy weather on the horizon… sounds exactly like what i would do if i wanted to be God and had to settle for eternal damnation instead- nowattamean?”
and Sushi said
I've been thinking about this for a while now, thanks for putting it into words. Now how do we avoid it happening in our fellowship with others and in our relationship with God?
it’s not that, for awhile now, sushi has been thinking of buying some racy underwear (or avoiding buying it, for that matter- who’s to say?) it is that she has found herself, once or twice, in between two halves of the same bum. we’ve all experienced this and it drives many of us crazy.
relational triads exist as yet another example of the wisdom contained in solomon's reflection found in ecclesiastes: ‘nothing new to see here… move along.’ however, we can’t just indiscriminately apply solomon’s sword solution to any dispute in question, giving each plaintiff half of the conflict situation as their settlement any more than solomon could.
(I kings 3.16-28)
i guess what i mean here is that we can’t avoid this stuff- it is part of our free will complex- and so God equips us with what we need to acknowledge it and then address it accordingly. for me it all breaks down when i start attending to the wrong voices.
i’m sitting with two people who don’t want to be there. i’m thongboy- the ‘mutual friend.’ as much as i want to be a neutral party that facilitates a healthy resolution to the conflict, i have brought something of my own to the table that can blow the whole process to bits: i’m not actually neutral.
i try to be. i love both of my friends as equally as i can, and recognize that both own parts of this conflict that they need to sign off on. that’s fine. the problem is that i value the relationships i have with both friends respectively and so i am in danger of compromising in favour of my own self interest. fear and insecurity start to sneak in and i start wondering which person is going to leave mad at me or who is going to leave the church or whatever.
solomon’s sword starts looking really appealing.
but i’m attending to the wrong dialogue- allowing the inner one that no one but i can hear to shape the outer one to which i’ve been called as a friend and fellow. the relationships that have been entrusted to me which involve these other two friends are now being held hostage by my own interpersonal issues. the circle grows bigger... pretty soon we’ll have our own twisted anti-support group where we all bring our stuff and start working it out on each other.
a lot of churches unwittingly operate in this manner, i imagine.
so what are we to do? invite someone else in now to mediate this relational tree?
yep.
God is eager to step into that role. sure it's a problem that he chooses to use regular people as his instruments, but there is hope in the fact that the intrapersonal (self-concept, insecurity, fear) issues of regular people are internal and between us and he who created us. the Holy Spirit mediates here, clearing our heads enough, silencing our own internal dialogue enough that we can hear others speak and can focus on what he wants to do with all of the interpersonal relationships in the room.
is it insightful or prophetic to be able to step outside of oneself long enough to see things as they are, rather than as they appear to an emotionally volatile creature?
i don't know. i mean, somedays, worship leaps from us, other days it seeps from us. the song of a soul set free is the song of God, but there are many different types of freedom and life is, among a million other things, a process of self-discovery. the way we see things is based on who what where when and how we are today.
i think a really good way to avoid relational hijackings is to recognize how vulnerable we are to them. oswald chambers speaks of unguarded strengths, and how the great heroes of faith often fell in the area of their prowess. a person in ministry is already about people, which means that people are probably going to be the greatest manipulatives used by hell to thwart anything God wants to do through them.
it's amazing that hell does the same things the same ways and we still fail to recognize them when we are stuck in the middle.
***
"if i were a good man i'd understand the spaces between friends"
(roger waters, from the 1970 pink floyd album 'atom heart mother')
in 'taken hostage' we were talking about being social thongs…
well, we weren't actually talking about that, but our conversation took my imagination there...being stuck between two virtually identical, yet perfectly symmetrical and therefore completely opposite hemispheres. the thong does not divide nor bind together, it simply fits best in the middle because of its design.
well, there are parables and then there are just really bad analogies.
anyway, i left off with “if synergy is spiritual and God is receiving less worship from human beings who know him and each other personally, then it is as though hell holds our relationships hostage. all this with the a powerfully imminent and evident change in the holy weather on the horizon… sounds exactly like what i would do if i wanted to be God and had to settle for eternal damnation instead- nowattamean?”
and Sushi said
I've been thinking about this for a while now, thanks for putting it into words. Now how do we avoid it happening in our fellowship with others and in our relationship with God?
it’s not that, for awhile now, sushi has been thinking of buying some racy underwear (or avoiding buying it, for that matter- who’s to say?) it is that she has found herself, once or twice, in between two halves of the same bum. we’ve all experienced this and it drives many of us crazy.
relational triads exist as yet another example of the wisdom contained in solomon's reflection found in ecclesiastes: ‘nothing new to see here… move along.’ however, we can’t just indiscriminately apply solomon’s sword solution to any dispute in question, giving each plaintiff half of the conflict situation as their settlement any more than solomon could.
(I kings 3.16-28)
i guess what i mean here is that we can’t avoid this stuff- it is part of our free will complex- and so God equips us with what we need to acknowledge it and then address it accordingly. for me it all breaks down when i start attending to the wrong voices.
i’m sitting with two people who don’t want to be there. i’m thongboy- the ‘mutual friend.’ as much as i want to be a neutral party that facilitates a healthy resolution to the conflict, i have brought something of my own to the table that can blow the whole process to bits: i’m not actually neutral.
i try to be. i love both of my friends as equally as i can, and recognize that both own parts of this conflict that they need to sign off on. that’s fine. the problem is that i value the relationships i have with both friends respectively and so i am in danger of compromising in favour of my own self interest. fear and insecurity start to sneak in and i start wondering which person is going to leave mad at me or who is going to leave the church or whatever.
solomon’s sword starts looking really appealing.
but i’m attending to the wrong dialogue- allowing the inner one that no one but i can hear to shape the outer one to which i’ve been called as a friend and fellow. the relationships that have been entrusted to me which involve these other two friends are now being held hostage by my own interpersonal issues. the circle grows bigger... pretty soon we’ll have our own twisted anti-support group where we all bring our stuff and start working it out on each other.
a lot of churches unwittingly operate in this manner, i imagine.
so what are we to do? invite someone else in now to mediate this relational tree?
yep.
God is eager to step into that role. sure it's a problem that he chooses to use regular people as his instruments, but there is hope in the fact that the intrapersonal (self-concept, insecurity, fear) issues of regular people are internal and between us and he who created us. the Holy Spirit mediates here, clearing our heads enough, silencing our own internal dialogue enough that we can hear others speak and can focus on what he wants to do with all of the interpersonal relationships in the room.
is it insightful or prophetic to be able to step outside of oneself long enough to see things as they are, rather than as they appear to an emotionally volatile creature?
i don't know. i mean, somedays, worship leaps from us, other days it seeps from us. the song of a soul set free is the song of God, but there are many different types of freedom and life is, among a million other things, a process of self-discovery. the way we see things is based on who what where when and how we are today.
i think a really good way to avoid relational hijackings is to recognize how vulnerable we are to them. oswald chambers speaks of unguarded strengths, and how the great heroes of faith often fell in the area of their prowess. a person in ministry is already about people, which means that people are probably going to be the greatest manipulatives used by hell to thwart anything God wants to do through them.
it's amazing that hell does the same things the same ways and we still fail to recognize them when we are stuck in the middle.
***
"if i were a good man i'd understand the spaces between friends"
(roger waters, from the 1970 pink floyd album 'atom heart mother')
Labels: conflict, love, relationship
posted by jollybeggar at
4:04 PM
7 Comments:
Jolly Beggar said: i was never allowed to say 'farookh' without getting my mouth washed out.
marcy said back: Yes, it's a shame how you get into trouble for dabbling in Latin after you've become a fallen Catholic turned Protestant or whatever..........marcythewhore
marcythewhore says: I hate it when God steps in to rearrange the natural order of things. When God doesn't have anything better to do than worry about what me and my neighbor are bickering about then its like the universe is a lot smaller than God realizes. God needs to quit getting panties all wadded up on the minutia.
Look, you want to know what's bugging your neighbor than you either need to become a psychic or just accept the fact that everybody doesn't think the same.
Okay, okay. You are going to mimick some kind of argument that if neighbors don't spend a lot more time learning how to think the same then wars are just going to keep on a'coming.
Fine. You and your neighbor go ahead and agree that you two are going to think the same...then you two are going to have a war over which way you are going to think the same...your way or your neighbor's way.
There's no such thing as a good war and a bad war. Wars are wars and they are simply balances in a small backwater planet's attempt to get along in a vast universe with a doppelganger of a unimaginably microscopically small subatomic universe.
Let's be realistic, earth is sandwiched in by two extremes that Oprah doesn't have a clue how to explain to her vastly large audience.
Remeber this, next time you go to asking God to step in between you and your neighbor, God don't want to get all involved in trivial mind pursuits.
If you and your neighbor can't figure out how to solve your meager little differences than the two of you just aren't using the brains that God gave you.
As for those of you ancient Egyptian reincarnates who think that there is no such thing as free will and that brains are simply things to keep you skull blown up into some kind of proportion to please your hair stylist, yes, brains are what God gave you to figure things out on your own.
Just like your momma one day says go on, get out of the house and go figure things out for yourself, God is telling you that moving back home ain't a good idea...........marcythewhore
marcythewhore says: I hate it when God steps in to rearrange the natural order of things. When God doesn't have anything better to do than worry about what me and my neighbor are bickering about then its like the universe is a lot smaller than God realizes. God needs to quit getting panties all wadded up on the minutia.
Look, you want to know what's bugging your neighbor than you either need to become a psychic or just accept the fact that everybody doesn't think the same.
Okay, okay. You are going to mimick some kind of argument that if neighbors don't spend a lot more time learning how to think the same then wars are just going to keep on a'coming.
Fine. You and your neighbor go ahead and agree that you two are going to think the same...then you two are going to have a war over which way you are going to think the same...your way or your neighbor's way.
There's no such thing as a good war and a bad war. Wars are wars and they are simply balances in a small backwater planet's attempt to get along in a vast universe with a doppelganger of a unimaginably microscopically small subatomic universe.
Let's be realistic, earth is sandwiched in by two extremes that Oprah doesn't have a clue how to explain to her vastly large audience.
Remeber this, next time you go to asking God to step in between you and your neighbor, God don't want to get all involved in trivial mind pursuits.
If you and your neighbor can't figure out how to solve your meager little differences than the two of you just aren't using the brains that God gave you.
As for those of you ancient Egyptian reincarnates who think that there is no such thing as free will and that brains are simply things to keep you skull blown up into some kind of proportion to please your hair stylist, yes, brains are what God gave you to figure things out on your own.
Just like your momma one day says go on, get out of the house and go figure things out for yourself, God is telling you that moving back home ain't a good idea...........marcythewhore
marcythewhore says: Is there an echo in this comment department?
that's what happens when you shout!
LOL
LOL (see what i mean?)
anyway, i think you might have missed what i was saying in all this talk about holy mediation...
the idea is that God cares about individuals and is eager to help individuals get to what it is he created them for in the first place. the mediation of the Holy Spirit takes place between creator and created. that's the song of freedom of which i spoke.
"When God doesn't have anything better to do than worry about what me and my neighbor are bickering about then its like the universe is a lot smaller than God realizes. God needs to quit getting panties all wadded up on the minutia."
i couldn't agree with you more. God's involvement in our lives, particularly in the tidying up of our petty little squabbles may very well be limited to how willing we are to deal with our own personal neruoses and such. in other words, i'm not sure that it's God's panties that are getting all wadded up.
job one is to get to a place of restored relationship with the designer in order for our truest good to be realized through the love that characterizes this primary relationship. from there our secondary relationships improve: our words to our partners are more tender and intimate, our words to our kids are kinder, our reactions to our stupid dogs that poop on our once clean, tidy and fresh smelling carpets are more rational... everything.
in my opinion, God doesn't micromanage no matter how much we ask him to. the way to make the world more free is to restore the severed relationship between himself and myself, between himself and yourself.
i punch all of this out because this is what i hold to be true in my own life... not because i think you need to be preached at. the echo will start again if that happens! (I cor 13.1-3)
marcythewhore says: My neighbor did it again. He said to me, "What would Jesus do?"
I yelled back, "Didn't you see Mel Gibson's movie! According to Mel Gibson there's no secret what Jesus did. He said the wrong thing to the wrong people and they strung him up on a pile of wood!" That's what Jesus would do...or did.
When all that is said and done, Jesus would tell you it might be a sight better thing for you to take another route. Pull your head out of your ass and quit asking Jesus to do all your work for you and figure it out for yourself.
Now I want to talk about the Virgin Mary and salt licks under bridges in Chicago and water stains on windows that look like the Blessed Virgin and cheese sandwiches that have Mary, Mary Quite Contrary's profile emblazoned upon its surfaces.
First of all, fool, you haven't got a clue what Mary looked like. You don't even have a clue what Jesus looked like, but I can tell you that Jesus didn't look like he just stepped off a California beach carrying a surfboard. And the real Jesus didn't look anything at all like the actor in Mel Gibson's movie, or any other bad movie made about Jesus.
You see, if Jesus looked like a movie star or a surfer dude, try to imagine how far out Jesus would stand in a crowd back in the first century AD mideast. He'd look like an alien come to abduct everyone and he'd never even have made it to the age of 33.
So when you see a salt stain on a brick wall and you think it looks like the Virgin Mary, think again. That salt stain image most likely looks more like a phone sex operator than the Mother of God on cheeze whiz......marcythewhore
Bizarre and bloody fill history
Miami Herald
David Crumm
As the selection of the first pope of the new millennium nears, the church continues to distance itself from the corruption and murder that sullied some transitions.
BY DAVID CRUMM
Knight Ridder News Service
The stately nobility of the election about to unfold at the Vatican -- eagerly watched by world leaders and members of other faiths -- is all the more amazing because of the centuries of corruption, greed and murder in its past.
This first papal election of the new millennium is the crowning glory in a papal history that survived enough bizarre twists to fill a dozen sequels to Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code.
''In some past elections, people behaved very badly,'' the Rev. John O'Malley, a noted Catholic historian, said last week from his office at the Weston Jesuit School of Theology in Massachusetts. ``Right up through John Paul II, popes have been trying to tie up the loose ends of the process.''
One of the most bizarre loose ends was the ''cadaver synod'' after the election in 896 of the insanely vengeful Pope Stephen VI. He harbored so much anger at a predecessor, Pope Formosus, that he had his corpse exhumed.
Formosus' decomposing body was dressed in papal vestments, propped in a throne and put on trial for crimes against church law, including perjury. Unable to mount a defense, Formosus' ghastly remains were convicted. As punishment, the three fingers Formosus once used to bless the faithful were hacked from his right hand. His body was dragged and thrown into the Tiber River.
Piling crime upon crime like a modern suspense novel, Stephen soon was thrown into prison himself. Formosus' friends crept into his cell and strangled him.
''Even professional historians shy away from this period because these things are so horrifying,'' said John-Peter Pham, a papal historian at James Madison University in Virginia and the author of the newly released Heirs of the Fisherman.
Just how horrible did it get? Well, squeamish readers should skip the next three paragraphs.
Because the papacy often was treated as a political pawn, popes sometimes found themselves at the mercy of ruthless rulers.
Consider poor John XVI, who thought he was the rightful pope, according to Roman nobles who pushed him onto the papal throne in 997. Unfortunately, another politically powerful pope, Gregory V, was alive elsewhere in Europe.
Gregory returned to Rome with an army and wasn't amused at finding a rival. He ordered John's eyes put out as well as his nose and ears sliced off. Then, to underline the point, John was excommunicated. Should he wish to object, his lips, teeth and tongue were removed next. And his mutilated body, still alive, was shipped to a monastery.
Check the official list of popes in the Vatican's Annuario Pontificio, the official Vatican fact book, and there are suspicious brackets around John XVI's name. That's a sign that he's now among several dozen men ignominiously dubbed anti-popes. This special class is reserved for the tragic losers in the often-bloody battles for church power.
CONFUSING NUMBERS
These feuds explain another curious detail that will crop up when the upcoming conclave ends. At that point, cardinals will declare someone the 265th pontiff, but they'll also note that he's the 262nd successor to St. Peter, regarded by Catholics as the first pope.
That glitch is due to the unbridled corruption in Rome in the 11th century, which placed one particularly well-connected Roman layman on the throne three times. He took the name Benedict IX, and the Vatican list credits him with three pontificates, leaving a perennially puzzling math problem.
Such corruption wasn't limited to men. Centuries-old tales of a possible Pope Joan are regarded as myths by historians, but the power-hungry life of the 10th century Roman matriarch known as Marozia is historical fact.
''The idea that women took a back seat in the Middle Ages isn't exactly true,'' said O'Malley, whose summary of the wild history of papal elections appears in the current issue of America magazine. ``For a while, Marozia was the church's pope maker.''
Her reign of terror was sparked by Pope John X, who was a bravely independent pope. That infuriated Marozia, a powerful noble who had John X imprisoned and, eventually, suffocated to death.
ALEXANDER VI
Evil influences rose and fell with the fortunes of Europe's powerful clans. A crescendo of corruption came in the 1492-1503 reign of Alexander VI, part of the notorious Borgia family.
Alexander ruled like a secular prince, fathering too many illegitimate children for historians to count. He formed a brutal partnership with his most famous son, Cesare Borgia, to murder their way across central Italy and build up the papal coffers. Cesare is famous as the purported model for Niccolo Machiavelli's cynical political essay The Prince.
Political corruption wasn't quashed until the early 20th century, O'Malley said. ``Before a conclave, leaders in some countries would instruct their cardinals that, if they saw the election was going a certain way, they were to put in a veto of that candidate.''
Emperor Franz Joseph of Austria slipped the last veto into a conclave in 1903, against an Italian he didn't like. Pope Pius X was elected instead. Even though he benefited from the veto, Pius X barred vetoes in the future, part of a long series of election reforms that continued through John Paul II.
The biggest change 20th century popes made was expanding and diversifying the College of Cardinals. As people around the world watch 115 men from dozens of countries enter the conclave on Monday, the scene will be vastly different from papal transitions even a century ago.
That's why one of the often-overlooked customs of the conclave -- the cardinals' opening pledge to obey the rules set by the previous pope -- is one of the most crucial traditions that will unfold this week.
i agree very strongly with the sentiment that seems to be behind the history lesson: people can get in the way of everything good.
and thanks for the story of pope joan- i was wondering when you were going to share it like you promised to awhile back.
here's the weird thing in all this: there are those, like your beloved lawn-mowing neighbour, who ask 'what would Jesus do?'
so in selecting a pope, what would Jesus do?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home