Waffling in THREE dimensions.

Sunday, February 25, 2007

He wants to meet every week...

...but I really don't. I prefer to spout, or claim to, heresy rather than attend early morning meeting on the internet, the subject seems invariably tied to those meetings which I desire to shirk. The meetings feel awkward (I am grasping now), perhaps more uncomfortable? In any case, I can always easily imagine many other things, perhaps some actually more productive although it is impossible to be objective of such, I'd rather be doing. I give the answers they seek, or some semblance that appeases. I say it easily, uncomfortably so. I cannot even be certain how much of it I mean, but I intend it all. Today we, the first councilor in the bishopric who wants[on assignment from the bishop and with the love of God] to meet with me weekly and myself, discussed finding truth, building a stronger testimony, and so on. Apparently, the testimony I shared with him was insufficient, as he invoked the Lord to provide me with one. I forget the wording and am probably over analyzing things. I told him I came here knowing that regardless of the faith I had when I applied, I would have a fuller understanding, would know, if this was the right path. Or the wrong one. Or the only one.

In brief retrospect, I find it odd that he never mentioned missionary experience or preparation, usually a staple in these asides, in the quest for truth he intimated. I still (even at this moment!) find it amusing that his search began out of a desire to cease embarrassment in seminary and verification that he wasn't involved in the wrong church. Common desires, I suppose. The delivery reminded me of an episode of Boston Legal I watched last week where James Spader's character asked William Shatner's why he believed in God. The response, which I cannot recall exactly, was that there was no risk in believing and being wrong, but you were "screwed" if you didn't believe and turned out to be wrong. It's a lot less funny now that I've tried to write it down. I suppose this should remind me now of all those scriptures that say not to laugh, because it is a sin (TG Levity). The episode was titled "The Good Lawyer" if you should decide to seek it out.

Of course, in my great wisdom I went forth to journal, for this can hardly be called a blog (it has no traffic!) as I prefer the word to be understood as, these events and whatever understanding I had concerning it and the implications of it, and for it, and with it. I made the unfortunate mistake perusing Myspace, though perhaps not thoroughly enough to warrant such word choice. I happened upon Justin's page, now maintained by Courtney's postings and clippings of Justin's letters. There has been a great divergence in our two paths; this troubles me somewhat.

I feel like I'm "writing," see "journalling," in the style and meter of scripture. Perhaps that is pretentious, but in no way is my writing anywhere never such prominence. There is a pressing sort of need to address in the constant redefinement of words and topics. I hate it. I apologize to the one reader, whomever the unfortunate may be, that reads these lines that flow like wax, but worse so when they are heated.

I hope that I did not sound too confrontational in this post. I have not intended to display some animosity towards my bishopric, whom I much prefer to those I've experienced in the past. I may seem opposed to those meetings they prescribe to address shortcomings I do not recognize as such, being almost an affront to the character of my person. Perhaps I am. I can certainly think of other things I'd rather be doing. I was told to be sincere in my seekings this week, to fulfill those other promises of increased faith and such. My ability to do such is already another skepticism among many of those other more dogmatic verses. I also question my ability to be coherent on the internet.

This whole blog-thing would be better if I bothered to revise things. By the time I "finish" writing these, I am quite unsatisfied with them. Or do I quit writing them because I am unsatisfied? That, too, sounded significantly more elegant in my mind. Also, I should probably wake up Jon so we can go home-teaching. To the appointment he set for 1.30. There are a great many other things which I shall not write of at this time. Amen?

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Yeah, Justin's letters are certainly... interesting. He doesn't sound at all, not one bit, like the Justin I thought I knew, and now I can't decide if missions just do that to people or if I never knew him at all. But it's more than a little eerie.

- Mel

BeeKeeper said...

I've taken a quote from Ashley Montagu and changed it slightly to be more general. My altered version is, "Science is proof without certainty. Religion is certainty without proof."

Your Bishopric's encouragement to search for "truth" is conditioned to to the extent that they expect you to search for their "truth." They are not asking you to search for the truth of the Muslim, the truth of the Southern Baptist, the truth of the Hindu, the truth of the Transcendentalist (your favorite Thoreau ;-) ). They are not asking you to search for universal truth, even though they may believe that they are. They are asking you to search for stories, ideas, and concepts which they perceive or at least have chosen to believe or not to dis-believe as truth.

You need to search for your own truth. Arriving at a point in life when you can accept that there are very few things that are certain, in spite of the certainty proclaimed by religionists of all stripes, you are well on your way towards finding your own truth. Don't lean on your parents' truth. Don't lean on your ecclesiatical leaders' truth. Don't lean on your friends' truth. Be your own person. Sever the ties that put you in a situation where you accept another's perception of truth as your own.