As I write, the winds outside my home are high and I can see the detritus of dead leaves and paper from the recycling bin that's blown open dancing across the sky. It seems to reflect well the wind that is billowing around me.
The temptation is for me to shut down and disengage. That's not a bad thing in itself: a retreat is necessary so one can take a good look at oneself when the only voices to be heard are those within you and that of God.
It is important to recognise that the voices in your head are not God's voice - at least very seldom does He speak like that. But in my experience, the Divine voice does not use a voice in my head and this makes sense. God's language is so deep and powerful. Just think! He just needs to speak a word and the thing comes into being. The Divine Word leaps down from Heaven in more than just a communication of language but in a communication of existence.
When we use words there is always a level of unintelligibility since your subjective experience is necessarily different from mine, but there is still some precision possible. You and I can use the same language to program a computer, or to do mathematics even if we disagree about the syllables and sounds.
The trick there is that there is something objective that exists independently of our senses but is communicated to us by those senses. Even if we doubt what we see, we don't doubt that we see. Even if we lack the power of sight or hearing, there is always something to sense. Scepticism can only go so far before it becomes incoherent; in many cases, it is not that far.
The rejection of the objective means the worship of the subjective. That sounds like a strong word to use but I think it justified. If there is nothing externally objective then it is the sensations in themselves that determine our value judgements, rather than what exists exterior to our sensation. To disengage fully.and permanently risks this plunge into subjective-induced scepticism and its terminus in solipsism.
St Benedict says that the best kind of monk is the cenobite - those who live in a community with a rule. The Rule is an expression of God's moral objectivity expressed through the Abbot and senior brothers, and to which every monk subscribes. Only after preparation in the monastery - a preparation against solipsism - can a monk become an anchorite or hermit.
Hermitage which raises the subjective self above what exists exterior hears the voice of God in their heads but allows the authority of this voice to become coloured by feelings. Feelings are subjective facts, not objective facts and stem from internal sources as well as external and, for this reason, cannot be an authority either for political decision making or as a means of determining God's revelation to us. The risk of offence cannot be a reason to change the law, especially when others' lives and livelihoods may be at risk. A Christianity based on the premise that feeling loved is the only sign of being loved is not a Christianity with a cross. The reality of Christianity is repentance - recognising and turning towards God - and the pain of repentance arises from accepting the objective rule of Christ over subjective experience. When the subjective loses to the objective, it plays the wounded victim unless it is given its true created worth by being sacrificed upon the cross that we each must not only bear but, further, venerate.
For me, as the wind blows ever stronger, it is the ikon that grounds me in reality. I have often said, mainly to my friends, that Anglican Catholicism done properly is what the Church of England would have been had it not only accepted the Seventh Oecumenical Council of Nicaea II but embraced it wholeheartedly. For then, the objective reality of the Incarnation would be utterly rooted in our experience of Church, colouring and informing our subjective selves. Also, the objective reality of the saints would also prevent us from being truly alone and utterly lonely which is where the solipsists invariably find themselves - sometimes eternally.
Ikons are never written to be "aesthetically pleasing" and thus trigger the tyranny of personal taste, but rather to point to true beauty, the Light of Tabor, which can only be the True God. Only God is truly transcendent, which is why His existence determines in itself what the other transcendentals are, such as Love, Goodness, Beauty, Knowledge, Power and Truth.
People ask why I write "ikon" rather than "icon". The answer is that the word "icon" is being used to describe people. We hear of "cinema icons" or an "iconic performance" and puts us in danger of the idol in which the ikon ceases to point to realities beyond itself and instead points to itself. To write ikon refers back to the eikon found in Holy Scripture and the Fathers and to the images which point to the Inage of the Invisible God - Jesus Christ Himself. This is why I cannot take seriously the objections of some Protestants that to bow the knee to an image is to worship it. If that is true then these Protestants have a very empty understanding of what worship is and the underlying sacrifice of the self that characterises the essence of worship. If the ikon points to a reality beyond it, then it is that reality to which the veneration is paid. To deny this is to deny the objective reality of the God to Whom the Apostles bear witness across the centuries. To deny the Seventh Council is to deny the Incarnation when He Who Is exterior to Creation bursts into it and human nature becomes venerable once more.
While I debate with myself whether O Cuniculi will continue after its twentieth year, central to this will be whether I can continue to speak about invisible truths in a way that is meaningful to a real audience. I pray that I can, but I do wonder whether I need to learn to write ikons rather than words.
God bless you, dear readers! I pray for every blessing upon you in 2025.
No comments:
Post a Comment