Dear Friend,
Last week when I wrote to you, I reflected on who-I-was-during-the-event-of-that-writing. This time around, I’m feeling more “all up in my head”; in other words, I’m having trouble coming into my body, and thus not feeling fully present in my surroundings. This might be an indication I am tired— a state which begs for my attention— as semester number three of seminary winds to an end.
Let’s see. I am cold; Texas weather is unseasonably cool right now (I’m not complaining). I woke this morning with a “crick” in my neck…it’s finally feeling a li’l better this evening. My dogs are fast asleep, cuddled together on the couch. The hubby and the kids are visiting and hanging out— we are a family of night owls. Today I went and laid on the floor in the room my spouse was working, just to breathe the same air as him for a few minutes (his job has been all long hours and stress of late, and I haven’t gotten to see him much).
On Grammar
(Photo by Ivan Shilov on Unsplash)
Tonight, friend, I want to talk with you about grammar, specifically this rule I once learned about what you’re supposed to do with words used as words. “When you use a word as a word in MLA format,” intoned my favorite English professor in undergrad, “always enclose it in quotation marks.” This was one of many grammar lessons which has stuck with me since my college days, and now, looking back, I realize it’s because it was so profoundly philosophical— thinking about a word being used as a WORD is just this wonderful, juicy, endlessly fascinating concept.
“Lizard” is one way we classify reptiles.
What does “friend” mean?
They call this salsa “pico de gallo.”
Words used as words. This of course begs the question, "What differentiates word from word?” Also, “What differentiates one word from another?” and “How do you decide when a word is just a word or a word is being used as a word?”
Because I love to think about this, I smiled this semester when I learned that the philosopher I’ve been studying, Jacques Derrida, was a fan of the put-quotation-marks-around-words-used-as-words thing, but not because “that’s a grammar rule;” instead, Derrida put quotation marks around words as a way to signify that he was using that particular word in a particular way. It was, as he said, to demonstrate how “…it [the word] can break with every given context, and engender infinitely new contexts in an absolutely nonsaturable fashion.”
Using Derridean logic and “words used as words” as my inspiration, therefore, I might rewrite my lizard sentence this way: “Lizard” is one way “we” classify “reptiles”. This allows you (and me) to ask questions about what is “lizard,” who named the creature “lizard,” what it means to call something “lizard,” “who ‘we’ is,” what a “reptile” is, who named it that, why, and what the word “reptile” engenders, especially in terms of the power we bestow on ourselves when we name things.
I hope you’re like me and this just makes you happy to think about, but even if it doesn’t, I promise it connects to “church” and “does ‘church’ need to die?” in a manner that might help those of us who sometimes use the label “Christian” think about “church” differently.
“Church”
(Photo by Cosmic Timetraveler on Unsplash)
“Church”: a word used as a word. A label. A name of something. A name for something. A term wielded by someone; an invitation to something, which may— or may not— bring life. What one person means by “church” may be quite different from what another person means by “church.”
“Church”: A Western construction, from Greek kyrios (lord/master). A “Christian” construct. Constructed in lands colonized by the West. Built. Buildable. A building or a body of “Christians,” another word used as a word.
“Christian”: A human. A human who follows “jesus christ.” Everyone who uses the term means something a little different. A label. A label to which other labels are compared. A label sometimes used to centralize, to colonize. An identity. A way of living. A way of working out our humanity? A question— what do I love when I love my god?
“Church”: A place which lets people in and also keeps people out; owned. An image that comes to mind. A feeling: rejection, acceptance, both. A means to salvation?
“Church”: Something Jesus talked about? Wait. Was Jesus a “Christian”? It was formed after Jesus’ death. Why? What was “church” when it formed? How did the New Testament writers define it? What was “church” constructed in response to? What would Jesus say about “church” today as you think of it? How about as someone different from you thinks about it?
“Church”: What else comes to mind for you? Take a moment to jot your thoughts down.
Questions Worth Asking
(Photo by Eunice Lituañas on Unsplash)
Pondering this leads me to ask more questions, like, “What is ‘church’ to me?” “Should this ‘church-to-me’ die?” “Is there a concept of ‘church’ which would bring life vs. death?” “What is my concept of ‘church’ constructed in response to?” “Is this response the same as the early church’s?” “What might the purpose(s) of ‘church’ be?” “Did ‘Jesus’ ever say or do anything which indicated what he might value ‘church’?” “Is there anything inherent to the concept of ‘church’ he would value? How about is there anything he would judge or condemn?”
In my next letter, I will explore some of my thoughts in response to these questions (they may be quite different from yours). For now, I think we can all agree “church” is worth our scrutiny, and there are some versions of it or elements within it which we might want to go ahead and let die.
Death is never the end, you see. There is always “hope,” and that “hope” is sometimes in a “transforming future,” as philosopher/theologian John Caputo says.
“The name of God is the name of the chance for something absolutely new, for a new birth, for the expectation, the hope, the hope against hope (Rom. 4:18) in a transforming future. Without it we are left without hope and are absorbed by rational management techniques.”
― John D. Caputo, On Religion
But first we need to take the time to ask questions and to think. The evil (that-which-is-against-life) history of “Christianity,” “Christians,” and the “Church” at the very least calls on us “Christians” to do some critical, open-handed, open-minded critiques.
Until next time,
Carissa