Cleavage
Easy now-- this ain’t that kind of blog. But, cleavage is fascinating... linguistically speaking, of course. It means two different things; to separate and to bring together. Same word. Same spelling. Opposite meanings. Given its dual definitions it is easy to see where the vernacular usage for the term comes from, or is it just me?
Raze and Raise are opposites also, homonyms - to tear down, to build up- they are spelled differently though. So they don’t count, but I did notice them, lest you think I’m obsessed with cleavage.
In the end, I can’t think of any other word in English that works the way- ‘to cleave’ - does. Two definitions, opposites, resident within the same six letters. ‘To cleave’ is a fascinating exception, not the rule.
Language and words work this way. Words mean things- usually not opposite things at the same time- but specific things. They can’t honestly mean things they don’t mean, and almost never can they mean the opposite. Only in the most bizzaro of world’s can the meaning of words be inverted, subverted. Humpty Dumpty not withstanding.
An article in Books & Culture got me thinking about this. It was a piece W.H. Auden’s poetry. Apparently Auden was one conflicted, complicated guy. But, he wasn’t conflicted on this one thing. His duty as a poet to treat words as sacred objects, with respect- employing them with the dignity they deserved, as bricks of creation. It is, after all, with Word, that God created all that is. It is as word He comes to us. It is with word that He saves. And it is with Word that He will make all things new.
Word. Language. Things meaningful, reflective of a meaningful God.
We do ourselves no service in denigrating language and meaning, embracing an indeterminancy that does violence to the words spoken, the context given, language itself. By replacing a Hermeneutic of Faith for a Hermeneutic of Suspicion, what do we say to the God who speaks? One can almost hear the slithering shibboleth... ‘Did God really say?’
It is, I think, one of the most dangerous and terrifying and hopeless signs of our time, that we have come to question even the ability of language to convey meaning. To speak of truth. Meaning beyond what I can make of it for myself. Truth that is only meaningful, if I determine it is. Language brought everything into being that is. This is what is, is. The evil one has so corrupted the current zeitgeist, that we despair of language’s ability to carry any meaning. So we are free to make words and language mean things it doesn’t, as long as it suits our current needs, our agenda.
When it comes to Scripture- we read- we familiarize ourselves with it- we mark- we pay attention to what it is saying- we learn- background, context, history- and then we inwardly digest, as food for the soul, becoming a part of who we are. Formative. Once we’ve sliced and diced it- we step back, and again approach the text humbly, with a ‘second naivete,’ as one scholar puts it.
What I liked about Auden- from what I could understand about Auden- was his thinking that word’s are larger than we are. They hold sway over us. Language shapes and speaks us, as much as we do language.
It is before the Word we will stand. And our words will come back to judge us, on that day- as they are, not as we would have them to be.
I fear for the denomination I am a part of. I fear we have called down deep heaven on our heads, as Lewis wrote in That Hideous Strength. We diminish God’s word. We deny God’s word. And we replace God’s word. And our mucking around with language is both causal and symptomatic of this.
Cleavage is a great word. Let’s take it to heart. Let’s separate ourselves from hermeneutical postures that place more weight on our own understanding, than the light of His word. Let’s take His word seriously enough to study, to meditate on, to dig into, to come under, to embrace, to give it mastery over us. Let’s cleave to God’s word as His people.
blog 137
Thursday, 14 June 2007
