Thanks, Flannery

Ah! Such wonderful interaction so far. I am quite pleased with your suggestions, Brennon and John---let's see how I do at offering some more commentary:

"We are but a child in need of our mother's heartbeat"

This story came about in a rather peculiar fashion. Have you ever written something in a half-asleep-half-awake state? Haha. Well, it was summertime and I was reflecting on the whole subjective/objective truth debate, and thinking seriously about whether the two were actually separate entities (JSP if you're reading, your "truth" troubles are welcome here, this is a safe space . . . haha). Often, when I'm thinking about abstract concepts I start to dream in stories. And so, what you have read is what I was imagining as I pondered this supposed battle between objectivity and subjectivity. Now, I am no philosophy major (that's for sure), so, I found it much easier to articulate my conclusions, or at least my struggle, through a story rather than a logical, well developed argument. Yet, perhaps a good story is a "well developed argument" in drag (i.e. disturbing---enough to put you off from discovering the meaning of the story right away, yet colourful---enough to capture your imagination, even if only for a little while). :)

When it came time to preach in my homiletics class, I knew I wanted to share this story. But, I had no idea how it fit with the Scriptures. I was reading through the Psalms and came across the corporate lament in Psalm 80. I wish the illustration had been born out of my reading of the text (this would have made for a much more "legit" sermon). Instead, I found that my illustration (indeed, my story) found deep roots in this corporate lament. Here was Israel, calling out to God, proclaiming his many good works and character. I.e. Israel's God is 'the one who . . .', there is no other initiator; there is no other one who is "just . . . faithful" (c.f. stout modernist's/sticky notes). This call was not far from the "stout modernist" who anxiously spurts the traits he knows to be "objectively" true of his God.

At first I thought there was little hope in finding a "leggy postmodernist" in the Psalms. However, it wasn't long (maybe a couple readings) before I started to see the "leggy postmodernist" in Israel's telling, and retelling of their experience of their God. I.e. Their God "brought them out of Egypt" and "fed them with the bread of tears," etc. The "leggy postmodernist" is captured by her experience of her God, but struggles to equate lament with God's presence (i.e. the experience of his faithful, just, righteous character).

Together, my hope was for these portraits to echo the message of corporate lament in the Psalms; namely, of our God's character, what we are able to label we are only able to label because our knowledge has been born out of our experience of his character. That is, we know God to be who he is only because the story of his interaction with his people has been told and retold in the Scriptures, and most profoundly in the life of the Church (that one's for you Jottens;)).

Of course there's all sorts of theological symbolism in the main plot line, too. I think I'll need another post to go there, but, in the meantime perhaps I can offer some thought provoking questions:
Where is the Church represented? In what kinds of ways is lament portrayed? How is God's character evident in unexpected and transformational ways? When and how does the guest experience a crisis of worldview?

There is no doubt that Flannery O'Connor's short stories inspired the style of this story. Thanks, O'Connor. :)

-Helen
p.s. Just for kicks---try saying "able to label" ten times really fast. Can you do it?