Tension of the In Between

The In Between is a notion (following Plato) created by the twentieth century mystic philosopher Eric Voegelin to describe where Being becomes luminous to itself. So what does that mean? It means, quite simply, that human beings exist in an "In Between," as Voegelin put it,

"if anything is constant in the history of mankind it is the language of tension between life and death, immortality and mortality, perfection and imperfection, time and timelessness, between order and disorder, truth and untruth, sense and senselessness of existence; between amor Dei and amor sui, l'ame ouverte and l'ame close; between the virtues of openness toward the ground of being such as faith, love and hope, and the vices of infolding closure such as hybris and revolt; between the moods of joy and despair; and alienation in its double meaning of alienation from the world and alienation from God"

The important doublet for this meditation is that of "between the virtues of openness toward the ground of being such as faith, love and hope, and the vices of infolding closure such as hybris and revolt." The attempts to alleviate the tension between these virtues and these vices is the cause of much of the human suffering on the planet. Faith, love and hope exist in a reality where nothing is absolutely certain. One does not have faith (anymore) in the notion that the world is round; it is simply accepted as a fact. When it was not possible to know whether the world was round or not, it was an act of faith to attempt to circumnavigate it. Hybris is displayed by those who reduce reality to their little island within it and claim that this is the whole and then seek to stuff the whole of reality through the lens of their little island. Since Easter is just over I wanted to talk about a passage from the gospel of Mark that illuminates the difference.

Mark's account of the last week of Jesus is precise and detailed when compared to the other gospels. (See Crossan and Borg's "Last Week"). On Tuesday of Holy Week (using our day names of course) Mark tells a story of how Jesus was quesitoned by a "scribe" who was not hostile to him as were the "high priests, elders and scribes" mentioned by Mark throughout this week's encounters. This scribe asks a straight forward question about what is the greatest commandment. Jesus answers by quoting Deuteronomy and Leviticus. Here's how Mark puts it.

The first is "Hear O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one; you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength." The second is this, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." There is no other commandment greater than these."

The scribe says that this is so true. It's more important that all the burnt offerings and sacrifices made in the temple. Jesus then replies that this guy is close to the kingdom of God. Close but not in.

Questions about the greatest commandment were commonplace with Judaism. For a society that discovered the fact that God was a god of justice and righteousness and not a god of feritlity and reproduction, what other idea could be more important that the greatest of god's commandments? Jesus answers by quoting the passage in Deuteronomy that was so important to his religion that it was a prayer said twice daily by every devout Jew, and was even put in mezuzot andd tefillin. As Crossan and Borg point out, this phrase from Jesus has become so commonplace to Christians that it is a cliche muttered without understanding the historical context of it, and therefore not understanding the radical nature of the claim that god (YHWH) is God and that God is one. If god is God then all creation belongs to God. If god is God then God demands all of us, our heart, soul, mind and strength. God is contested by the gods of this earth, namely Caesar. If god is God, Caesar, (and no other lord of this world then and now) is not.

The second part of Jesus's answer, "to love your neighbor as yourself," is a corollary. If this is God's earth and not the earth of any succession of earthly lords, then it is a sacred duty to act against, and never accept, those divisions created by the "normalcy of civilization" (to use Crossan's and Borg's term), divisions between the haves and have nots, the respected and the unclean, sinners and self styled saints, between friends and enemies, between Us and Them. We are all Us to God. If one can't get with that program, one is not with, but against, God.

What does all this have to do with the In Between of our existence? Just this. What Eric Voegelin called the vices of infolding closure to reality is the creation of gods attempting to run this earth in opposition to the God of creation. Those who would create a false definition of god (or Jesus as god) in their own image and then worship that idol are exhibiting the closing off of Being through hubris. Christian Reconstructionsim in particular and the Christian Right in America in general are the most contemporary examples of this closure and revolt against YHWH.

There will be more.