By Morris Dean
We don't need the Bible to tell us we're sinners. We can know it quite well by listening to the judgments of other folks who sin in ways different from ours.
The girl you left after a few months to return to your wife thinks you're a lousy, weak-willed schmuck, and your wife persists years later to consider you untrustworthy.
The man who might consider you a friend if you could prove yourself trustworthy to watch his back in a knife fight thinks you're a slacker for thinking in the gray zone and diluting your judgment with nuance.
The man who used to let you call him friend before you got tired of his mind games and called his bluff thinks you're an insincere jerk.
The woman down the street whose cat you labeled a subsidized predator on a public forum thinks you aren't neighborly for valuing wild birds more than her presumed right to let her cat run free.
The friend whose wish that you would avoid discussing religion you ignore by frequently going out of your way to criticize and even sometimes ridicule religion thinks you're being mean.
And, if you haven't acknowledged yet that you're a lousy sinner, then ask a few of the thousand other people you've offended in some way....
Copyright © 2014 by Morris Dean
| Comment box is located below |
I'm doubtful that this part of our "heritage", i.e. Calvinist guilt, is something worth preserving. We all have things that in hindsight seem shabby or dishonorable and which, hopefully, we've learned from. But elevating them to "Biblical" proportions smacks of hubris.
ReplyDeleteQuite the contrary. Hereby was sin demoted to the subjective judgment of others.
DeleteTo receive absolution, one must ask for forgiveness.
ReplyDeleteI forgive you for posting anonymously...
DeleteI would as well absolve you for posting anonymously, but only if you first ask for My forgiveness. Does it weigh heavily on your spirit, My child?
DeleteSo you encourage your timid readers to identify themselves by ridiculing them. How's this policy working out for you?
DeleteTimid, I apologize to you for my discoureous levity. Your rebuke indicates that you may not be so timid as you make out. You sound like a reasonable person.
DeleteIf you would, please tell us more about absolution. (You said that "To receive absolution, one must ask for forgiveness.") Thank you.
Delete"Absolution" is an interesting concept. Merriam-Webster's main entry seems to ascribe Roman Catholic, theological origins: "13th century: the act of absolving ;specifically : a remission of sins pronounced by a priest (as in the sacrament of reconciliation)."
ReplyDeleteDictionary.com provides a more general sense: "1. act of absolving; a freeing from blame or guilt; release from consequences, obligations, or penalties; 2. state of being absolved," but gives the theological as well: "3. Roman Catholic Theology: a. a remission of sin or of the punishment for sin, made by a priest in the sacrament of penance on the ground of authority received from Christ; b. the formula declaring such remission."
If we haven't frightened off our visitor who described themself as timid, we might learn from them whether they intended "absolution" in the theological sense, and whether they are a member of the Church of Rome.
"Absolution" in theological terms casts church officials in the role of absolver. Absolver in a non-theological context could be a parent, a court, or a person or persons "sinned against."
I doubt whether it is possible to absolve oneself. I think of putting down a healthy, innocent dog about 25 years ago, and the best I can do is simply accept that I erred morally. I don't think I have the right to forgive myself, which would seem to compound the injury to that fellow creature.
And absolution by a church official – or even by God Himself, should Such exist – seems pointless and equally disrespectful to the dog.
Is the reason for theological absolution to escape punishment? Apparently so. Of course, it should come as no surprise to anyone familiar with my several writings that I think historical mankind's desire to be absolved in that sense is craven and immoral. And to invent a God to absolve oneself I think weak and wicked.
The extent of your overthinking is breathtaking.
ReplyDeleteOf course it's possible to absolve yourself, as Robin Williams counseled in "Good Will Hunting." Give up your belief in free will and you're out of prison!
Mankind's desire to be absolved and escape punishment is natural, logical, and in a way, lovable. Think of a little child looking up at you in fear and saying, "I'm sorry, Daddy."
The question remains whether "Anonymous" would not be better served by girding [his/her] loins and stepping into the light- owning the opinion expressed. Our esteemed leader is too much of a gentleman to call "poltroon" on this exchange of views, but being a ruder sort, I am not.
DeleteSir, you question my courage. You vilify me. You are a foul dastard and an ill-mannered varlet. Name a place, sir. I will meet you on whatever ground you like with sharpened popsicle sticks!
DeleteNot bad. I'm encouraged by your sense of humor, but I can't understand why you don't want credit where credit is due. An "anonymous" post is automatically down graded because so many are by "Trolls" who have nothing worthwhile to say. You are better than that, why not get the respect you deserve?
DeleteTom, Morris can tell you who I am. He will assure you that no credit is due. I would not have spoken up at all if I hadn't recognized myself as one of the aggrieved in Morris's post. I'll now return to my former routine of reading the blog at random times and not commenting,
DeleteOH, don't do that. You're a worthwhile addition to our cacophonous commentary, even if shrouded in mystery. It would be a black mark on our record of contentious commentary. Do ye ken that?
DeleteTimid anonymous person: Overthinking's not being in a person's ken marks the person a low-altitude dweller, prone to losing breath on ascent, comfortable with deductions that rely on lines spoken in movies. Please go troll somewhere else.
ReplyDelete