Repeat of an earlier post . . .
The primary message of Jesus of Nazareth was the kingdom of God. It lies right at the heart of what his life and his message were about, according to the gospels. As his public ministry was launched he said, “The time has come. The kingdom of God has come near. Repent and believe the good news!” Many of the stories he told were introduced with these words: “The kingdom of God is like . . . .”
Those words undoubtedly got the attention of his listeners. Most of the Jewish sects were eagerly awaiting the kingdom of God, though they were conceiving of it in very different ways. They anticipated the day when God would break in, defeat the hated Romans, and restore the land to his people.
The framework for this teaching goes back to the Old Testament, of course. There we learn that God is the King of the universe.
For the Lord Most High is awesome,
the great King over all the earth. . . .
God is the King of all the earth;
sing to him a psalm of praise.
(Psalm 47:2, 7)
For the Lord is the great God,
the great King above all gods.
In his hand are the depths of the earth,
and the mountain peaks belong to him.
The sea is his, for he made it,
and his hands formed the dry land.
Come, let us bow down in worship,
let us kneel before the Lord our Maker.
(Psalm 95:3-6)
The Lord has established his throne in heaven,
and his kingdom rules over all.
(Psalm 103:19)
This God who created everything is the King of kings. No wonder so many of the prophetic visions anticipate a day when his rule will extend throughout the world. (See, e.g., Isaiah 11:6-9; Micah 4:1-4; Isaiah 65:17-25; and Daniel 7:13-14.)
What hope! A day is coming when the wolf and lamb will feed together, when infants will not die, when weeping and crying will be heard no more. The Shalom of God in its fulness!
Then John the Baptist comes announcing the nearness of the kingdom (Matthew 3:2 - “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.”). And Jesus builds his teaching around that conviction.
The kingdom, we learn, isn’t what many of the Jews thought. It isn’t a political kingdom (John 18:36). Rather, it is the dynamic presence of God in Jesus Christ. “Kingdom” refers to the rule of God, to his sovereign reign in this world.
And in Jesus this kingdom was (is) present. He healed the sick, saved the lost, gave sight to the blind, and invited the poor. The reign of God was breaking in. The future had arrived to reverse the curse and to set the world right as God had intended it through the life and ministry of Jesus.
His stories and teaching pointed to a very different kind of kingdom than most of the Jews expected — a kingdom that was inverted, where the poor are blessed, the sinners are received, the dead are made alive, and the last will be first.
They shouldn’t look for armies and thrones and political borders, he told them. “The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is in your midst” (Luke 17:21).
He came reversing the curse and taking the world back to the way God intended in creation. That’s the kingdom, or rule of God. So he taught his disciples to live with the perspective of the kingdom. That’s what the Sermon on the Mount is: living in light of the inbreaking reign of God. Living in harmony with God and with others and with the world God created and blessed.
He taught them (and us) to pray: “Thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” It’s been widely recognized that these are parallel requests. He’s praying for the kingdom to come — or in other words, for God’s will to be done in this realm called earth just as it is in God’s realm called heaven. We’re praying for the rule of God to come more and more and, in essence, we’re reporting for duty to be a part of this. We’re offering our lives in confession, repentence, faith, and mission.
Some have thought we should no longer pray the Lord’s Prayer because the church has been established. But to reduce the dynamic concept of kingdom to the church is a serious mistake. The church enters the kingdom of God; the church receives the kingdom of God; and the church announces the kingdom of God. But the church doesn’t exhaust the kingdom of God! So we continue praying as Jesus taught us for the kingdom to come, for God’s will to be done on earth as it is in heaven. As long as there is evidence of the curse, as long as the wolf and lamb aren’t feeding together, as long as infants are still dying, as long as there is weeping and crying, as long as there is war, as long as there is hatred, bitterness, and resentment — it’s still safe to pray this prayer.
The future reign of God has broken in through the presence of Jesus. And yet . . . it hasn’t arrived in its fullness. We are living “between the times” — between the incarnation/death/resurrection of Jesus and the coming consummation that we await.
Paul’s writings carry that important tension concerning the rule of God. Sometimes when he refers to the kingdom he’s talking about a present reality (Romans 14:17; 1 Corinthians 4:20), while at other times he’s referring to a future hope (1 Thessalonians 2:12; 2 Thessalonians 1:5; 1 Corinthians 15:24, 50).
Meanwhile, we continue to yield our lives to the reign of God. We seek to be used by him as lights in the world. We wait, hope, long, groan, pray, and work. We keep one eye on the task before us, knowing that the reign of God is present in Jesus Christ, and we keep one eye peeled for the future act of God when the dead will be raised, all tears will be wiped away, and God himself will be in our midst (Revelation 21-22).
Finally, these words from William Willimon and Stanley Hauerwas’s book Lord Teach Us: The Lord’s Prayer & the Christian Life
The kingdom of God that is coming, here, not here, present, not fully present, is a banquet, a great party thrown for outsiders who, before Jesus, had no place in the promises of God to Israel. By an amazing act of generosity, Jesus has made possible a party to which even Gentiles like us have been invited. The kingdom of God is a party to which all of the good people refused the invitation so the host went out and invited all of the bad people. The kingdom of God is a party for a bunch of people with whom we wouldn’t be caught dead spending a Saturday night, had we not also been invited.
This is one of the reasons why being in the church can be a real pain, considering the sort of reprobates Jesus has invited to the party, the party that is called kingdom of God.
We are able to live hopefully in a fallen-yet-being-redeemed world because of the One who has taught us to pray “this way.” As Christians, to us has been given the grace to know that we live between the times, having seen the fullness of God in Jesus Christ, yet also knowing that all the world is not yet fulfilled as God’s world. That tension, stretched as we are between what is ours now in Christ and that which is yet promised, is our role as God’s people. We, you and I, are living, breathing evidence that God has not abandoned the world. We are able continually and fervently to pray that God’s kingdom come because we know that God’s will has been done. We are able to be honest about all the ways in which this world is not the kingdom of God in its fullness and to hope for more because we know that God’s will has yet to be done, God’s kingdom has yet to come. We are able to live without despair in the world’s present situation because, even in us, God has claimed a bit of enemy territory, has wrestled something from the forces of evil and death. That reclaimed, renovated territory is us.
Mike,
That all sounds good and even very hopeful, but it also sounds like a defense of the almighty in a world where his\her presence is not felt.
Leland,
When I’m attentive, I feel his presence… both in pain and in good times. When I’m not attentive… well, that’s when I’m not attentive. I know that’s very subjective, but so is the love I feel for my wife and daughters. Love and relationship are very subjective things… but my response, that should be objective action. I the case of my family it’s taking care of them and doing for them and being available and caring for them. In the case of God, it should be living out the Kingdom… incarnating the son in the presence of an inattentive world.
I don’t lay blame on the world for being inattentive. The darkness is filled with so much static it’s nearly impossible sometimes to hear God without some help from someone who recognizes his voice.
In the darker, more opaque moments of life I, too, have wondered if we’re just contriving excuses for a God who has checked out - assuming he had checked in to begin with. It is the dark night of the soul, and it is always lurking, especially when injustice reigns or when prayer for direction yields…nothing. This hymn has been helpful in recentering me.
When my love to Christ grows weak
When for deeper faith I seek
Then in thought I go to thee
Garden of Gethsemane…
When I need a place to start in reconstructing my faith in God (and it happens more often than I’d like to admit), starting anywhere but the cross and the tomb yields disillusionment and confusion. His Kingdom centers on self-sacrifice and a future hope of redemption, and most of the rest of it is just commentary to help us in the day-to-day.
qb
BTW, Kathy, I think the Rockies have redeemed themselves nicely on behalf of the Padres. As of this moment, the Rockies are beginning eight days’ rest before their first World Series game.
qb
I have felt the presence of God in experiences like short-mission trips to Brazil, baptizing someone who just confessed Jesus Christ, etc…
Though more difficult to recognize, I have also experiences the kingdom presence of God in both the death of my son and the death of my younger brother. But yes… in both experiences Satan was doing his best to try and convince me that God had checked out of life.
Waal, all I got t’ say is all that ther kingdom stuff don’t sound very American t’me.
I enjoy the lamb and wolf passage. But I have a question? I’ve heard some take it very literally supposing that there will be a time in which wolves and lambs actually lie together. I’ve heard or read others explain this as imagery for the peaceful existence of God’s people.
What do you all think? I mean, will animals exist after this life? Is the kingdom’s consummation the application of the Isaiah passage?
Thanks.
I love Amy Grant’s older song “The Now and the Not Yet” (from the Straight Ahead album)
“No longer what we were before,
But not all that we will be.
Tomorrow when we lock the door
On all our disbelieving…
And he appears
Our view will clear and we’ll be changed by his glory,
Wrapped up in his glory.
But I’m caught in between the now and the not yet…”
-I’ll stop here, but its worth a listen, and seems to speak to the topic at hand today.
What has happened? No hermaneutic? No exogesis? No quotation from an early 1900 commentary or a look at the different interpretations based on the original Greek writings as viewed through Hebrew customs?
Just the kingdom of God?
Thank goodness!
I tend to beat this drum a lot, but the Kingdom of God, if it is to be a substantive reply to Leland’s concerns about theodicy, needs to result in a final, universal, and ultimate victory for God. The Kingdom of God can’t be a marginal lifeboat in a vast sea of horrific damnation for all eternity.
Well, Richard, that is our hope. It’s what all creation is crying out for (Romans 8:18ff) and what we anticipate, isn’t it?
“The Kingdom of God can’t be a marginal lifeboat in a vast sea of horrific damnation for all eternity.”
Richard B,
can you elucidate
Clint, perhaps Richard B means this: “if we have hoped in Christ in this life only, we are of all men most to be pitied.” Or something like that; my recall of I Corinthians 15 is a little sketchy at the moment. qb
The essesnce of the reign of God is the total submission to the Lordship of Jesus in every aspect of the life of a disciple.The Kingdom is not a democracy, it is a theocracy where the Lord has the only word of authority. It is only when we abide in His word that we find our purpose , meaning, mission and the real freedom and happiness the world cannot even begin to understand. The deeper you plunge into the lving word and when you surrender in total committment to His will , then you will begin to know and experience His presence.
Hmmm.
Very tidy, Ray.
qb
“The deeper you plunge into the lving word and when you surrender in total committment to His will , then you will begin to know and experience His presence.”
Apparently that wasn’t the case for Mother Teresa or any other number of faithful people who have struggled to “feel” God in dark times.
God is with us in the darkest moments of life. Paul understood about His grace being sufficient even with a thorn in the flesh. Feeling God does not mean we will escape pain , suffering and persecution. It is knowing He is always with us and nothing can seperate us from His love. Sometimes like Paul , we may be perplexed but not driven to despair. It is believing He is there even when there is the most painful of hurt in your life.
Abrupt subject change:
Can you BELIEVE those Rockies, Mike?!?
So are we “perfected Jews” as Ann Coulter said?? As a Christian, she makes me ashamed.
qb: That was rude and uncalled for.
Ray: I’m sorry and wish I could have deleted it.
qb
Ray, I think maybe it does include moments of despair–maybe not necessarily questioning if God exists but what kind of God he is. I’m reminded of some passages from A Grief Observed.
One way of rephrasing my point is that we need to clarify the interface between our soteriology and our eschatology.
When stated simplistically, our traditional soteriology has been binary (In vs. Out) as has been our eschatology (In vs. Out).
But progressive thinkers (Mike among them, as am I) want to make our soteriology less a binary category and more a continuum. That is, salvation is a process, a journey, a goal. Or, in the language of this post, the “breaking in” of the Kingdom (it’s here but still on the way). Pragmatically, the hope of this reframing is that we move past in-group vs. out-group psychotheology and focus on holiness, justice, and love.
And I’m all for this and am in complete agreement with the post.
However, what I think gets overlooked is that this continuous soteriological vision (e.g., “I am being saved” versus the binary “I am saved”) interfaces in a discontinuous fashion if the eschatological system one holds is still binary (Saved vs. Damned). The failure to intentionally attend to this disjointed interface (and not to simply “hope” as in Mike’s response) means that the binary keeps seeping back into this life/world, mucking up the vision of the post. Thus my point: Unless you take up the theological task of working through the soteriological/eschatological interface you’ve only done 50% of the necessary theological work. And that unattended work is currently and will continue to interfere with the Kingdom Misson.
So, let’s do the necessary theological work.
Richard said “However, what I think gets overlooked is that this continuous soteriological vision (e.g., “I am being saved” versus the binary “I am saved”) interfaces in a discontinuous fashion if the eschatological system one holds is still binary (Saved vs. Damned). The failure to intentionally attend to this disjointed interface (and not to simply “hope” as in Mike’s response) means that the binary keeps seeping back into this life/world, mucking up the vision of the post.”
Richard, I hear you saying (may be wrong) that one view necessarily negates the other. I’m not so sure this is right. The term “kingdom” is used in at least three different ways that I can think of, and I believe all three can exist with each other in our belief system.
I agree with Mike that the Kingdom involves the breaking in to our own lives, and to the world by extension, but we disagree in that I think there will also be a literal millenial kingdom in which the lion does lay down with the lamb, and there will be a literal throne to which all the nations come for justice, here on the real terra firma. I don’t think you and Mike believe this part of it. But as far as I see it, my eschatological view does not get in the way of the other two interpretations of the kingdom concept, they just happen at different times.
Almost a year ago to the day I wrote a response to your Kingdom questions on my little blog.[barely 7500 hits as opposed to the 2M+ here. Hummmm] If interested, you can read it here:
http://beauangelkitty.blogspot.com/2006/10/thy-kingdom-come-thy-kingdom-here.html
_____________________________________________________
qb & Matt -
Yeah! How about them there Padre surrogates? They still have one huge task to fulfill before they’ve justified taking the Padres’ spot in the post season this year.
I’ve picked the Red Sox as the AL Champions, but my heart continues to be with Cleveland. A Cleveland/Rockies WS could be one of the most exciting in years, imho. They are both such young, non-jaded teams. Kind of refreshing, don’t you think?
I know I did not attend a Christian University with mandated Bible classes, so I am likely slower than other that read this blog. However, could someone please interpret for me what all of these “-ologies” mean and why it matters to people that are satisfied with the kingdom of God? Oh, and a discussion of the hermaneutic and the exogesis of the original Greek thought to a Hebrew reader doesn’t count.
MK-don’t feel bad. I went to a Christian college with mandated Bible classes and I don’t have a clue what he said. Sounded good though.
I apologize for the jargon. I know it can be off-putting. Jargon is simply a means of compression, a way of expressing something long and complicated in a single word. So, as a means to save space and not write a mini-dissertation, I tend to over-compress. That’s my bad.
For the interested:
Soteriology = Your theory of salvation
Eschatology = Your theory of the “final things” (specifically the end of the world and ultimate destiny of humanity in relation to God)
The two are related but have distinctions between them.
No need to apologize-just kidding around. Your definitions do help though-thanks.
The more I read the story of God’s creative and repdemptive history (scripture), the more I think the Biblical view of sorteriology (salvation) and eschatology (salvation brought to completion) are a continum process. In fact the ever so popular verse describing our justification (Rom 3.24) uses the present tense in the Greek to describe what GOd is doing. The point is not that we have been justified (i.e., we are saved) but are continually being justified.
Even though God’s redemptive work is continuous, I don’t see how this excludes the binary. Jesus himself said some people would be “out.” The finished eschatological vision of Rev 21.1-8 includes an “out” group. Are those located in the “out” catagory there because of God’s failure or because of their own failure? And there lies the endless debate between Reformed traditions and Free Church traditions.
Yeah, the non-binary soteriology sounds all generous and noble and stuff, but what of the sheep and goats? Did the gospel writer just dream up all that binary stuff? qb
qb,
That is a great point, the binary language is very much there. The question is how are we to think about it?
For example, if I want to tell a story with a clear moral I might, as a rhetorical device, resort to “There are two kinds of people in the world…” Well, of course there aren’t “two kinds of people” out there. People are complex and can’t be reduced to types. In Jesus’s parable there had to be people “in between,” people who, let’s say, occasionally visited a person in jail, even if just once. Thus, if we start to read that binary language literally we get into all kinds of legalistic nonsense that completely misses the point (e.g., How many times to I have to visit the prisoner to be counted as a sheep?).
The point is, in this instance the line Jesus is drawing is a rhetorical line because he’s telling a moral story (a parable). Again, to read it in a overly literal way, I think, misses the point (which is that we need to be clothing, feeding, and visiting).
This response doesn’t by any means address all the relevant issues. It’s just to illustrate that a concrete reading of “sheep” and “goats”, or any other biblical passage for that matter, isn’t as obvious and it first appears. To me at least.
Yes the parable of the Sheep and Goats does not necessarily need to be read as a literal reality, but there are plenty of other passages that speak of eternal judgment for those on the “out”. What are we to make of those passages?
Richard -
I too got a little bogged down in all the ologies, and I’m no Bible expert, but that aside, I believe I can answer your rhetorical question about the sheep.
“How many times to I have to visit the prisoner to be counted as a sheep?.”
No matter how many times you visit the prisoner, you won’t be counted a sheep unless you follow the Shepherd.
My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. John 10:27
Based on scripture, I believe the Gospel of Jesus Christ is a simple one: you are either a sheep or you are not a sheep. Your status as a sheep enables you to feed, clothe, and visit in the name of the One that saves.
Richard, that’s helpful, but it doesn’t address the most salient question that the sheep/goat metaphor raises. Even if there is a moral/ethical continuum between the sheep and the goats that Jesus is simply bypassing for the sake of rhetorical efficiency - I concede it as a possibility - the *destiny* of the livestock is very much a binary matter.
…or are you positing a continuum between the “Gehenna” and “paradise” metaphors, as well?
That is to say, when the righteous Judge stands to declare his verdict on a man, will there be any doubt in anyone’s mind where the man will end up? Is the “day of the Lord” a Schrodinger’s Cat affair?
Curiously,
qb
More to the piont, Richard, is the concept of judgment day just a rhetorical device to motivate the recalcitrant and satisfy the justice-lust of the righteous? qb
No doubt there is judgment or punishment. I don’t mean to deny that. I’m a big believer in hell. I personally want to experience it.
That is, if the wrath/punishment of God is the destruction of sin then I see God’s wrath as something I want to participate in and experience. God’s wrath and hellfire are expression of his love. If God is love how could they not be?
For example, yesterday I caught myself acting in a petty, jerkish kind of way. And I simply hate when I act that way. Thus, my wrath partners with God’s wrath. We both want the same thing: The eradication of sin from my life. Hell is all around us, and I welcome it with open arms. I need it.
rb, your idea of hell and mine don’t agree at all. i don’t welcome hell, the one described as “torment” by Jesus. what you are welcoming is repentance.
Or Purgatory, don Don. I’m not sure RB’s ideas are as innovative as they might sound. (They sound more like a wishful universalism qua clever sophistry to ol’ qb, but what doth qb know?)
In any case, RB, your ostensible desire to experience hell - the rather vivid sentiments of Lazarus’ wealthy oppressor notwithstanding - doesn’t answer our central question of binary thingies in scripture, it evades it. So let’s return to Schrodinger’s goat. Is he bleating from inside the well, or from outside it? And does God even know?
Amusedly,
qb
Hi Don,
No doubt we don’t agree. There is a great degree of theological heterogeneity in our tradition and in Christianity generally.
Best,
Richard
Hi qb,
Oh, my ideas are not innovative at all. I’m borrowing heavily. They trace back to Paul, Origin, Gregory of Nyssa, Julian of Norwich, George MacDonald, Karl Barth and even C.S. Lewis.
My idea of hell is having to read and re-read these theological dissertations. I had not read this blog in a while. Now I remember why.
Everyone will have to face judgement. My concern is for all of us who believe , if we are centering our focus on evangelism and reaching those who are lost. If your soteriology is a conviction that there is a lost and saved state and if your eschatology includes a coming judgement then the citizens of the kingdom need to be zealous for preaching and teaching the gospel. And while we are preaching and teaching, we can also be a citizens with hearts of compassion helping people who are in the kingdom of darkness to be delivered from the darkeness into the kingdom of light and all that is involved in being in the kingdom of Jesus Christ.
Lots O “ologies” but very few apologies. Happens when everyone is right and no one is humble enough to be wrong or least the possibility of it.
One of my former teachers has shifted his understanding of hell from a place of literal eternal torment in fire to an eternal anhilation of evil. I realize that there is a big theological debate in Evangelical Christianity over what hell is. It is a subject that I have never read much on and I realize that with many of the biblical text being mentioned or alluded to in this blog that there are many exegetical issues to consider (e.g., who was the original audience?; is the passage meant to be read literally, figuratively, allegorically, etc…?). I say all that to say, I am willing to admit that there is alot I do not know. I am willing to grant that Richard B could be right and I am wrong. In fact, I have enjoyed reading his thought, dialoging with him, and thinking about some things I have not thought of before. The same goes for everyone else.
One thing I do know… what ever hell is, my goal is not simply to evade it. My goal is to live in eternal fellowship with God and God’s people. Anything less than that is to cheapen the story of God’s redemption history.
Richard B,
If I understand your position, there is no permanent separation from God only purification. If this is true what is your eschatology of evangelism and Lucifer? I am truly interested.
Rex,
I appreciate your comments. I’m a doubt-filled person and hold my beliefs on these matters very lightly.
Clint,
Again, I can’t speak for God, but many Christians mystics and some of the Church Fathers have articulated the view that the last one to be saved by God’s purifying love will be Satan himself. Julian of Norwich famously held this view (her famous articulation of this is the well-known but little understood: “…All shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of thing shall be well”).
Generally, these conclusions are partly based on a certain interpretation (that I’m sympathetic to) of 1 Corinthians 15:28: When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.
Questions to anyone who will answer : in light of passages such as Gal. 5 : 19 - 21 , Matt. 7 : 13 and 14 and 21 - 23 , 2 Thess. 1 : 5 - 10 and many other passages , what are we to teach about heaven , hell , lost , saved , etc .? Do these scriptures speak only of this life now or is there any eternity in the words ? Any kind of eternal seperation ?
Richard B,
Is evangelism relevant?
Hi Clint,
I think about that a lot and have talked a lot about this with people in missions.
As far as I can tell, per Mike’s post above, missionary work is changing its paradigm. The shift is moving away from baptism reports back to the home church and more on being salt and light in the world. Social justice is playing a bigger role. Evangelism is going to look more and more like the work of someone like Larry James. That is, evangelism and missions are more about declaring the Kingdom of God breaking in and then, crucially, making that happen! Another way of phrasing it is that missions is more about who WE are than about who THEY are. The point being, I think (I think) that this view can be reconciled with a very vibrant and passionate view of missions.
But you should note that I could be completely off my rocker. I’m wondering about all this. Thinking in through.
Richard B,
I am all for a paradigm shift. Faith expressed through love allows God to work no matter your Soteriology. And I have often wondered about Judas in context of John 18:9 “I have not lost one of those you gave me.”
Even though you blow my mind from time to time I love thinking outside the box. I think God can handle our trivial understanding of the big picture.
Missions is and should be about the good news of Jesus and the kingdom of God. Thus it should not be simply about getting people a ticket to heaven. But missions that is about the good news of Jesus and the kingdom is still an effort that calls people to baptism — not for sectarian purposes but for the purpose of particpating in the new life of Jesus.
- Rex
Clint,
Well, I think heterodoxy is the only way some of us can configure faith to find Christianity morally and intellectually coherent. I think “Christianity” is a big tent, theologically speaking. There have been a multitude of voices within the faith, some louder, some softer. Some views are mainstream and others have the minority voice. You and I are just a part of a two millennium old chorus.
And I love to sing.
Rex,
Totally agree. I think of Acts 8:
The eunuch asked Philip, “Tell me, please, who is the prophet talking about, himself or someone else?” Then Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus.
As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water. Why shouldn’t I be baptized?”
He’d been deemed unfit for duty by the US Navy, Abilene Police Department and the FBI. All he ever wanted to do was to protect people from the evils of this world. It was rather ironic the world thought they needed protection from him. After all, he had battled psychotic depression and nobody can recover from that mental illness; they just go on shooting rampages in places like Blacksburg and Columbine.
Is mental illness a real disease or a weakness of character? He struggled with this dichotomy constantly. It was a real illness to others, but the long line of good men from which he came precluded him from accepting this fact.
He hated his vocation and wanted a calling. He wanted a calling but he traveled to heavy to get one. He just wanted peace for once and to stop wrestling the depression dragon. Alcohol would defeat it for a few hours. He would scrounge the sofa for change just to by one more beer. Valium touched it a little but never squashed it like the booze.
He met a schizophrenic man named Kenny on the way to go fishing\drinking. Kenny became an alcoholic medicating his mental illness the best a poor man could; with beer. He was eating French fries. He sat down to talk to Kenny and asked him what he wanted. Kenny wanted beer. He told Kenny he would not buy him beer, but stopped to think “that’s what he wanted too”. He bought Kenny a beer and one for himself and sat and talked to him for about 30 minutes.
Kenny was a bus ticket away or a check away from happiness. Kenny didn’t want to stop drinking and who could blame him. He had nothing to offer Kenny except a beer and to listen to him. He gave a damn about Kenny for about 30 minutes and then left. He didn’t judge Kenny because he knew Kenny’s life would be his if he didn’t die before it happened.
He knew if he had a malignant brain tumor which can dictate all the symptoms of major depression, he would be instantly viewed in a different light. So what is the difference because untreated depression results in death 15% of the time? He knew he would get a few benign prayers but no real help.
The last sentence does not reflect my world, the rest does. I spent 10 days in a psych ward in Portland, Oregon. I got at least one visitor each day I was there. I was 5 of 20 who received any visitors at all. Before I was admitted I got at least 1 phone call each day to see how I was doing. I had someone offer me financial assistance with the stipulation of it not being paid back but it being paid forward.
In one group therapy session a man who had been living on the streets was asked what the best trait he had was. He replied “I would die for anyone, for even those I do not know.” This man is valuable. This man is marginalized. This man wants a job. This man uses yarn for a belt. This man smells very bad. This man feels safer on the streets than in a shelter because of the horrible abuse he suffered as a child.
This man has something to offer. He made me look at the man on the on the corner holding the sign in a different light. If he can work, he should, but sometimes these folks suffer from real mental illness. If you stop your car, get out and talk to them you could tell if they were faking it or not. Simple solution, never done.
Why is guilt the chemotherapy of mental illness? You would not tell someone who was dieing of cancer to quit being selfish by dieing. You would not explain to them how their family would never recover from their death. Why in the hell do we treat the mentally ill any differently? If the only thing we have to offer is guilt, then we really have nothing at all.
Because in the dark recesses of people’s minds that have not had depression, it is a moral and selfish weakness whose end result of death is a selfish act. It is a selfish act instead of an attempt to alleviate the hell of suffering of a mentally ill person.
Offer real help or shut up!
This article tells a whole lot more than required to understand this subject. It is filled not with double-speak but even triple-speack, it seems to me. First you have it, then you don’t, then you have it then it’s coming sometime, then we have it but we don’t have it.
Jesus’ words about this kingdom coming in the time of his audience ca27-30AD must mean he was mistaken?
Joe Hanley
god bless you****************************************************
god bless you****************************************************