Wikio - Top Blogs - Religion and belief
Showing posts with label balance. Show all posts
Showing posts with label balance. Show all posts

Saturday, 29 July 2023

Parish Quiet Day: Balance in our lives

 


























We had a wonderful day at the Diocesan Retreat House in Pleasley today enjoying the stillness there during our annual Parish Quiet Day for the Wickford and Runwell Team Ministry. We were reflecting on Martha, Mary and Lazarus, Companions of Our Lord and, although I was the one reflecting on Lazarus, I was also reminded of an earlier reflection that I prepared about Martha and Mary - see here.

Our theme for the day was balance in our lives. This is what I shared regarding Lazarus (which is adapted from David Eiffert):

Fyodor Dostoevsky was a famous and talented author who was born in 1821 in St. Petersburg, Russia, and died in 1881. At 27, he became involved in a group of authors who got together regularly to discuss ideas. The ideas they discussed were considered treason. They were all arrested and imprisoned.

At Peter and Paul Fortress, Dostoevsky and his book club were sentenced to execution by firing squad. This was actually a mock execution but they didn’t know that. They were brought out, told they were going to be executed, taken to the spot, blindfolded, their crimes read out, the command was given, and the rifles were raised. Then, at the last moment, the execution was stopped and their sentence changed to four years hard labour in prison in Siberia and then four years in exile. Dostoyevsky writes a lot about this; how life was given back to him, how he had thought he was seconds away from being executed.

He was put in chains, put in a sleigh, as it was winter, and travelled to Siberia. He suffered with severe frostbite and for the rest of his life would have scars from the chains. As he was going into the prison, he was given a little New Testament. So, the only thing he had to read for four years was this New Testament. He read it over and over, especially the gospel of John, especially the story of Lazarus.

He came to believe in Jesus and, in his writings, he compares himself to Lazarus having a chance to live again. All his novels after that contain in some form, his Christian faith. Richard Harries notes that “He wrote that his faith had come ‘through a furnace of doubt’ and was focused on a deep attraction to the person of Jesus Christ.” “He entered deeply into the atheism of his age” so that, as Malcolm Jones has written, “in reading Dostoevskii we are in the presence of a genius wrestling with the problems of rethinking Christianity in the modern age.” 

His most famous novel is ‘Crime and Punishment’, a novel written in 1866. People say that ‘Crime and Punishment’ is a poor translation and that the title would be better translated ‘Crime and Consequences’.

The novel centres around the main character – a young man – named Raskolnikov who is a young intelligent, college student, very poor, and living in St. Petersburg. He is an atheist who believes that ‘exceptional men’ are beyond good and evil. Normal laws of morality do not apply to such men. He gives the example of Napoleon; a man who killed hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, but is regarded a great man because he’s exceptional. Ordinary laws of morality didn’t apply to him. Raskolnikov believes he is an exceptional man and, to prove it, murders two old woman who are sisters. Obviously, he is a very lost young man.

Most of the novel is spent inside his head, as he is “locked up in a mental prison”. Ultimately, though, it’s a book about redemption. In the end, Raskolnikov - the murderer, the atheist, the man who convinced himself that he was beyond good and evil – finds redemption. He finds redemption in a young woman named Sonya, who has been forced into prostitution through poverty and to provide for two orphaned children. She is like Mary Magdalene, having found redemption and meaning in Christ.

In one of the most moving scenes, which is actually “the turning point in the book”, the two are together. Raskolnikov has not confessed his crime to Sonya, but will later. She has a bible laying on her table. Raskolnikov picks up the bible and asks, “Where is the part about Lazarus?” She flips to it and reads him the story of the raising of Lazarus, tears streaming down her face as she reads. Afterwards, he says “Do you believe this?” She replies, “With all my heart.” He’s not asking if she believes in the story, what he’s really asking is: “Do you believe there’s redemption for someone like me, a murderer?”

The closing sentence of this scene reads as follows:

Sonya says “That’s all about the raising of Lazarus.” she whispered. The candle was flickering out and the battered candlestick casting a dim light in this destitute room upon the murderer and the harlot strangely come together over the reading of the eternal book.

They are two lost souls on the road to redemption reading about the raising of Lazarus.

Eventually, Raskolnikov confesses his crime to Sonya; that he’s murdered the two older women. One of these women was Sonya’s close friend, Lizaveta. In fact, it was Lizaveta who gave the bible to Sonya. Sonya’s response to Raskolnikov is, “What have you done to yourself?” and she cries. She gives him her cross, which was also given her by Lizaveta, and urges him to confess in public and give himself up for arrest and punishment. Eventually, he wears her cross, goes to the police and confesses. He is convicted and sent to Siberia to prison. Sonya travels with him, to be near him and to visit him in prison. She is a picture of Christ, who doesn’t forsake him.

The closing paragraphs of the book read as follows:

Under his pillow lay the New Testament. He took the book out. It belonged to Sonya, it was the same one from which she had read to him about the raising of Lazarus. At the beginning, he had thought she would hound him with religion, forever talking about the Gospels and forcing books on him. But to his great amazement, she never once spoke of it, never once even offered him the New Testament. He had to ask her for it himself.

He had not even opened it yet. Nor did he open it now, but a thought flashed in his mind: “Can her convictions be mine?

Here begins a new account, the account of a man’s gradual renewal, the account of his gradual regeneration, his gradual transition from one world to another. It might make the subject of a new story—but our present story is ended.

So, the “reading of the Lazarus story to Raskolnikov and the wearing of the cross bear fruit as the novel proceeds.” “Raskolnikov’s state is effectively death; and the significance of Christ’s command to Lazarus, ‘Come forth!’ is obvious.” That is what happens to Raskolnikov as the novel proceeds. “The divine words addressed to Lazarus – ‘Come forth’ – have been heard” and Raskolnikov stumbles out of the death of his mental tomb.

Dostoyevsky who became a Christian because of the New Testament, especially the story of Lazarus, then wrote a book about a murderer finding redemption through the New Testament and the story of Lazarus. Neither Dostoevsky or Raskolnikov die physically, but their experiences lead them to a place where they see themselves as having been given new life in Christ. Their old story ends and a new story begins. That is what the story of Lazarus promises; when we’re scared and feel defeated – caught up in our despair, sorrow, anger, guilt, or shame, Jesus comes and brings redemption into our stories. That is what the story of Lazarus is about and that is how we regain balance after trauma, grief, imprisonment, shame, guilt or whatever. Dostoevsky knew this in his own life and described it in depth in the story of Raskolnikov.
  • I wonder whether you have ever been locked in a mental prison and how you got free.
  • I wonder what Jesus’ words to Lazarus, ‘Come forth’, mean for you.
  • I wonder whether there is a story in your life which needs to end, so another can begin.
(Adapted from David Eiffert, ‘The God who bleeds 8: Lazarus and Dostoevsky’ - https://gospelanchor.org/the-god-who-bleeds-8-lazarus-and-dostoyevsky/; with additional quotes from Richard Harries’ ‘Haunted By Christ’ and Rowan Williams’ ‘Dostoevsky: Language, Faith and Fiction’)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Joy Oladokun - Breathe Again.

Wednesday, 26 December 2012

The Hobbit: An Unnecessary Inflation

In The Lord of the Rings films, there is a fine balance struck between the seriousness (within the context of the fictional world created) of the unfolding narrative and the particular responses and stories (often incorporating humour) of the main characters. The main focus is on a state-of-the-universe narrative but the potential portentousness of this big story is leavened and humanised by the humour and humility of the central characters and the parts they play within this meta-narrative.  

The Hobbit was originally written by J.R.R. Tolkien as a children's story complete in it's own right and it only later became a prelude to The Lord of the Rings. Having reached The Hobbit by the opposite route seems to have meant that Peter Jackson is unable to tell the earlier story in its own right and for what it is in and of itself. The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is the first of a three part series which can only tell this the slighter of Tolkien's originally published tales of Middle Earth at this length because of the decision to also tell the story as an explicit prelude to The Lord of the Rings.

This has two implications. First, that The Hobbit films will only make sense to those who already know The Lord of the Rings films as the additional material doesn't progress the story which is actually told in The Hobbit but does fit that story into the bigger story of The Lord of the Rings. Second, the balance between seriousness and humour/humanity found in The Lord of the Rings films is lost here because of the decision to tell both the story of The Hobbit and the story of The Hobbit as a prelude to The Lord of the Rings. The story told in The Hobbit is a lighter, slighter tale which is well told in this film with humour (except when Radagast's distraction of a hunting party of Orcs is turned into the equivalent of a Benny Hill-style sketch) but this is then set against the seriousness of the storyline which explains how the events of The Hobbit fit into the state-of-this-universe narrative that is The Lord of the Rings. Instead of the leavening of seriousness with humour and humanity that is found in The Lord of the Rings films here we get a jarring shuttling back and forth between these two separated styles and stories.

This results, I think, from a lack of trust on the part of the makers in the ability of the story of The Hobbit to communicate in its own right and its own form. Jackson, essentially, does not trust that the seriousness of the tale and its links to The Lord of the Rings would emerge simply by dramatising the tale as told by Tolkien. In the story, as told by Tolkien, these aspects emerges from the lighter, humourous form of the story. It is the reverse of what is achieved in The Lord of the Rings films and it is ironic that Jackson having found for himself a balance between seriousness and humour for The Lord of the Rings films (as this balance is not in the book as written by Tolkien) has then been unable to trust the reverse balance which is naturally found in the original tale as told by Tolkien.

There is much to enjoy in the film and I'll be there with the many who will see all three over the next 18 months and then will watch all three all over again on DVD but, on a first viewing at least, my view is that the story would have been better told by reflecting and respecting the lighter, slighter nature of its form instead of this attempt to inflate it with the expansiveness and seriousness of The Lord of the Rings.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Howard Shore - The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey.