Skip to main content

Again in Gilead

I just finished reading this for the second time last week, thanks to the forever book group of Grace. It was equally as lovely the second time around, and while reading it, I wrote down a dozen more quotes from the incomparable Ames, who is both too beautiful a man to be real and too beautiful a man not to be real. (I'm grateful and amazed to know a few like him.)

"It has been my experience that guilt can burst through the smallest breach and cover the landscape, and abide in it in pools and danknesses, just as native as water." (p.82)

I have found this to be remarkably true. I see it in myself, and in many others as well.

"I believe there are visions that come to us only in memory, in retrospect." (p.91)

This seems to be about the only way I experience visions, but because memory is a rickety thing, I tend not to trust them much. Which makes me a poor prophet.

"I know, too, that my own experience of the church has been, in many senses, sheltered and parochial. In every sense, unless it really is a universal and transcendent life, unless the bread is the bread and the cup is the cup everywhere, in all circumstances, and it is a time with the Lord in Gethsemane that comes for everyone, as I deeply believe." (p.114)

My experience of the church has been neither sheltered nor parochial, and I find myself often observing the bread and the cup, before approaching and afterwards, and wondering with something close to despair if this could be true. But I suspect we're speaking of it with slightly different concerns. Regardless, fictional minister though he may be, I will rely on John Ames's faith in the matter where mine fails. This is a great comfort to me.

"I have always liked the phrase "nursing a grudge," because many people are tender of their resentments, as of the thing nearest their hearts." (p.117)

I couldn't help but see faces rise to mind when I read this line. Which always worries me, as it can be a quick cover for avoiding one's own face. 

"There is never just one transgression. There is a wound in the flesh of human life that scars when it heals and often enough seems never to heal at all." (p.122)

The reason we collect these lines when we read Gilead is that they are persistently true, perhaps none more so than this. "There is never just one transgression." And not simply because we sin more than once, but because every singular sin is manifold in its trespasses. The scar is slow to form as the trespasses unfold.

"At the root of real honor is always the sense of the sacredness of the person who is its object." (p.139)

Replace the word "honor" here with "love" and you realize how interchangeable the two ideas actually are.

"So to be forgiven is only half the gift. The other half is that we also can forgive, restore, and liberate, and therefore we can feel the will of God enacted through us, which is the great restoration of ourselves to ourselves." (p.161)

Tucked within this sentence is a decent definition of humanity. That is, not simply that we are agents of the will of God, but then in enacting God's character (which is an interesting concept in itself) we realize our identity.

"Nothing true can be said about God from a posture of defense." (p.177)

And yet how often people try.

"There is no justice in love, no proportion in it, and there need not be, because in any specific instance it is only a glimpse or parable of an embracing, incomprehensible reality. It makes no sense at all because it is the eternal breaking in on our temporal." (p.238)

Let us imagine that in experiencing love, it is as though we are looking through a magnifying glass at something resembling a bee or a shell. But on the other side of the magnifying glass, where we cannot travel, the bee or the shell is actually a universe, vast and exuberant. "The eternal breaking in on our temporal" suggests a suddenness to the act of love. But the "embracing, incomprehensible reality" is really the wide way of things. And our inability to see it except in "glimpse or parable" is because we are smaller on the inside than we were ever meant to be.

"There are a thousand thousand reasons to live this life, every one of them sufficient." (p.243)

I am grateful to know exactly what he means by this.

"Wherever you turn your eyes the world can shine like transfiguration. You don't have to bring a thing to it except a little willingness to see. Only, who could have the courage to see it?" (p.245)

Amen.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Can someone please explain why my Quicktime isn't working? Anyone with prophetic awareness of my little Atlas, none so old but recently behaving so?
because you were all wondering what I'm writing my dissertation on, here's a brief synopsis of my 'research context': When James Macpherson published his Fragments of Ancient Poetry in 1760, he went to great lengths to make the Fragments appear to be authentic remains of an ancient, heroic oral tradition. His reasons for this were largely political, and as such, influenced the content of the epics themselves. As an attempt to establish a particularly Scottish identity, the poems were quite effective. However, to do so required both a simplification and a manipulation of traditional mythology. Stripped of anagogical significance, the Ossian epics more or less represented an Enlightenment version of history, tradition, and mythic heritage. The stories themselves were changed by their very purpose and in turn changed the manner of representing myth in future narratives. Moreover, the emphasis on the Ossian epics as authentic tales from the past, as ‘fragments,’ served...
Kathryn, do NOT be jealous of me going to the opera. It was weird. They were wearing these bulky animal costumes and clonking boots which might have been okay except that their footsteps drowned out the sound of the orchestra (Oh look! A band!). The plot was supposed to be about the circle of life or something deep, but it really seemed to be more about animals getting it on. It was an opera, though, so plot really shouldn't matter as long as the music is good. It wasn't. I mean, it wasn't BAD - but most of the singing was monotonous, the orchestration was unremarkable, and I hope to heaven no one from the production reads this. It would be so disheartening! They were all skillful - I just wasn't interested in the piece itself. But then, I have only ever seen very classical sorts of pieces. The Marriage of Figaro. Samson and Delilah. And I was listening to Puccini before leaving the house! What do you do? But then again, I was distracted by my seating companion. Five so...