The Come and Go Sunday School
Lesson with Dr. Herb Prince and Dr. Frank Carver at San Diego, California,
United States First Church of the Nazarene ‘To Listen Is ‘To Dwell’” [Words with single quote
marks in the title and subtitles are terms derived from Martin Heidegger’s vocabulary.] for Sunday, 24 January 2016
Isaiah 50: 4 Adonai Elohim has given me
the ability to speak as a man
well taught,
so that I, with my words,
know how to sustain the
weary.
Each morning he awakens my
ear
to hear like those who are
taught.
5 Adonai Elohim has opened my
ear,
and I neither rebelled nor
turned away.
6 I offered my back to those
who struck me,
my cheeks to those who
plucked out my beard;
I did not hide my face
from insult and spitting.
7 For Adonai Elohim will
help.
This is why no insult can
wound me.
This is why I have set my
face like flint,
knowing I will not be put to
shame.
8 My vindicator is close by;
let whoever dares to accuse
me
appear with me in court!
Let whoever has a case against
me step forward!
9 Look, if Adonai Elohim
helps me,
who will dare to condemn me?
Here, they are all falling
apart
like old, moth-eaten clothes.[Complete Jewish Bible]
“. . . to listen as those who are taught.” (Isaiah 50:4b).
Everyday language is a forgotten and therefore used-up poem, from which
there hardly resounds a call any longer.[ Martin Heidegger, “Language,” Poetry, Language, Thought, trans. Albert
Hofstadter (Harper Colophon Books,
1975), 208. ]
Introduction
According to
the International Listening Association (ILA) listening is “the process of
receiving, constructing meaning from, and responding to spoken and/or nonverbal
messages.” Unlike what the ILA web site
states, the present inquiry is decidedly more modest and limited in its scope. This modesty claim fits in certain respects
with the attempt in two lessons on Isaiah to return to ‘yesteryear.’ Last Sunday the lesson used several thoughts
from the work of the German theologian, Paul Tillich (1886-1965). This morning the focus draws on aspects of
the thought of Martin Heidegger (1889-1976), one of the most original and important philosophers of the 20th
century.
Basically, we
are being exposed to the suggestive ideas of two significant persons both of
whom were influenced by the Danish writer, Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1855). For these individuals listening to what is
being said and how it is said are fundamental aspects of their thought. Where all three men agree is in looking upon
listening as at first a hearing, then as an important indicator of either a
mode of thinking, an insight into the human condition or as an overlooked
factor replete with life-changing possibilities. Suggestive is the thought that
listening is above all a response. The
initiative comes from elsewhere than one’s self.
Obviously a
focus on listening is not new. Was it
not a school child’s words to take up and read heard by Augustine that figured
prominently in his conversion, as related in his Confessions (Book 8). Perhaps the most famous citation from the
works of John Wesley is his journal entry for May 24, 1738 of how his heart was
“strangely warmed” while listening to Luther’s “Preface to the Book of Romans”
being read. Was it not Kierkegaard who wrote that one of the most important
days in his life occurred while he was listening to a grandfather speak to his
grandson on the loss of the child’s parent.] How the grandfather expressed
himself was as important if not more important than what was expressed.
See Kierkegaard’s Concluding Unscientific
Postscript to Philosophical Fragments, edited and translated by Howard V.
Hong and Edna H. Hong, Kierkegaard’s Writings, XII.1 (Princeton University
Press, 1992), 237-238.]
‘Being’ Willing to Listen
Listening is a demanding assignment.
For one thing, control rests with the one who initiates discourse. The
listener adjusts to accommodate, to get into what it is that is being asked or
addressed or discussed. The
situation that the listener encounters has not come about by accident. Western culture has long favored speaking
over listening. Consider the term first
used by the Greeks to depict the uniqueness of the human. The word is logos, known to most of us
as ‘word,’ or ‘reason’ or ‘speech.’ For the Greeks, “to have a word” (logos)
was what distinguished human beings from other creatures. First formally employed by Heraclitus in a
generalized sense over two thousand years ago, the subsequent employment of the
term by Greek philosophers and its increasing use since then has had an enormous
influence on western thought and practice.
A familiar
refrain is to hear that we live in a ‘logocentric’ world. Just consider all the terms and disciplines
that end in --logy, as in theology, biology, psychology, sociology and
so on. One could well say that we have
been conditioned to speak and not to listen.
Corradi Gemma Fiumara observes,[ Corradi Gemma
Fiumara, The Other Side of Language: A
Philosophy of Listening (Routledge, 1990), 29. ]
The illusion that we can speak to others without being able to listen
is, perhaps, one that we all share....
In the dizzy affirmation of our logos there is hardly any
‘logical’ space left for the ‘hidden’ but essential tradition of listening.
In a culture
saturated with innumerable messages intent on formulating codes, priorities and
conditioned responses the need for listening remains a priority. To surrender to benumbing trends is a danger
that can result in a world of competing monologues and to indifference. As Fiumara says, “We seem to be moving in a
culture in which we are all somewhat in debt to benumbment” (100). Benumbment means to render senseless or inactive, as from shock or boredom, as in, “The dull skit benumbed the audience.” The term also carries the notion of giving
in to the excess of words, of being content with simply what is said, of feeling
overwhelmed with information, data and interpretations. That is why vigilance is called for, with
silence often recommended as a means of putting order back into one’s life even
when dialogue takes place. It is also
instructive to recall that in the so-called postmodern thinkers, harsh
criticism of speaking takes place with a strong appreciation for listening. This is especially the case in the “later
Heidegger.”[
Prior to the 1980s it was common to distinguish between the ‘early’ and the ‘later’
Heidegger. The early Heidegger was
associated with his very influential Being
and Time volume, published in 1927. In a later letter he made reference to a “reversal’
in his thought, later calling it ‘a
turning.’ This was seen by others as a
new direction and so his writings thereafter came to be known as being from the
‘later Heidegger.’ Heidegger himself rejected
the distinction since he continued to focus on “being” as his primary concern. However it is clear that a different tone and
direction were at work. ]
Martin Heidegger
writes,[
Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, trans. John Macquarrie and Edward
Robinson (Harper & Row, 1962), 208. ]
In talking with one another, the person who keeps silent can ‘make one
understood’ (that is, he can develop an understanding), and he can do so more
authentically than the person who is never short of words. Speaking at length about something does not
offer the slightest guarantee that thereby understanding is advanced. On the contrary, talking extensively about
something covers it up and brings what is understood to sham clarity–the
intelligibility of the trivial.
But to keep silent does not mean to be dumb. On the contrary, if a man is dumb, he still
has a tendency to ‘speak.’ Such a person
has not proved that he can keep silent, indeed he entirely lacks the
possibility of proving anything of the sort.
And the person who is accustomed by nature to speak little is no better
able to show that he is keeping silent or that he is the sort of person who can
do so. He who never says anything cannot
keep silent at any given moment. Keeping silent authentically is possible only
in genuine discoursing.
By genuine
discourse is meant those instances where listening and understanding are
actually taking place. In this morning’s biblical text we have an example of
one who listens. In this case the one
who listens to the LORD finds strength and assurance in doing so even when
others are or have been against him. He remains
faithful to the task set before him, to sustain the weary with a meaningful word.
‘Clearing’ to Listen: Isaiah 50:
4“The LORD God has given me
the tongue of a teacher,
that I may know how to sustain
the weary with a word.
Morning by morning he
wakens–
wakens my ear
to listen as those who are
taught.
5The LORD God has opened my ear,
and I was not rebellious,
I did not turn backward.
6I gave my back to those who
struck me,
and my cheeks to those who
pulled out my beard;
I did not hide my face
from insult and spitting.
7The LORD God helps me;
therefore I have not been
disgraced;
therefore I have set my face like
flint,
and I know that I shall not be
put to shame;
8he who vindicates me is near.
Who will contend with me?
Let us stand up together.
Who are my adversaries?
Let them confront me.
9It is the LORD God who helps me;
who will declare me guilty?
All of them will wear out like a
garment;
the moth will eat them up.
This biblical text
is the third of four instances in Isaiah dealing with what scholars call the
Servant Songs (42:1-4; 49:1-6; 50:4-9; 52:13-53:12). Of the four Songs Isaiah 50:4-9 is the most
direct and clearest. It is possible to
ascertain the provenance of all its component parts. [Because the Song
is the most direct of the Servant Songs in Isaiah it also means that there are
several dimensions that could be explored but we will stay with the listening
motif] The text opens with the Servant identifying
with teaching as his province. [It should be noted that the third Song
is the only one of the four that does not mention the term “Servant.” It was
Bernhard Duhm over a hundred years ago who first argued that the four Songs
constitute a group. Scholarship since
then has largely agreed with him so references to Servant appear in the lesson.] Not that he is a teacher but
that the LORD provides him with the tongue of a teacher so he can sustain or
speak meaningfully to those who are weary.
Listening was not done just once but
“Morning by morning... [the LORD]
wakens–wakens my ear
to listen as those who are
taught.”
Openness to what is told him is
indicative of the Servant’s willingness to learn; yea, to listen in silence as
those who are taught!
The silent person is not taciturn.
People are taciturn because of sadness, temperament, illness; they are
silent in order to pay attention or concentrate...; silence always reveals a
level of profundity.... One can say
nothing without being silent, without listening in silence. Silence is...waiting for something.[Observation by M. F. Sciacca, as quoted by Fiumara, 101]
And something
is what the Servant receives. He
receives help from the Lord! This help
is what sustains him while he sustains others by what he shares with them. He has been set upon. Grievous assaults have been his lot,
similar to what Jeremiah suffered under comparable circumstances (cf. Isa 50:4//Jer 15:16; Isa 50:5b//Jer
20:9; Isa 50:6b//Jer 20:8; Isa 50:9b//Jer 20:11). Yet, the Servant does not turn back from
his task of coming forth with the word of the LORD for whom it was
designed.
5The LORD God has opened my ear,
and
I was not rebellious,
I
did not turn backward.
6I
gave my back to those who
struck
me,
and my cheeks to those who
pulled out my beard;
I
did not hide my face
from
insult and spitting.
While not only in the history of Israel, but in the ancient world in
general, because in terms of that world’s thought what the Servant here says of
himself, that he allowed himself to be smitten, means that he regards attacks,
blows and insults as justified, and so concedes that God is on the side of his
opponents. Any other way of taking the
Servant’s behavior as expressed in v. 6
was quite impossible for the times. To
see this one only needs to recall Jeremiah’s laments. [Claus
Westermann, Isaiah 40-66: A Commentary, The Old Testament Library (The
Westminster Press, 1969), 230.]
While it may
appear that we have here a psalm of lament it more accurately resembles a psalm
of confidence in certain respects. In
the words of Claus Westermann,
Some radical change has come about, and a new factor entered into
God’s dealings with his chosen people–the lament of the mediator who is
attacked and defamed because of his task here develops, for the first time,
into assent to and acceptance of this suffering.
Westermann sees
verse 6 as revolutionary in its
importance.
The Servant
acknowledges God’s help in seeing what the situation is, giving him strength
and resolve so he can set his face with resolve.
7The LORD God helps me;
therefore I have not been
disgraced;
therefore I have set my face like
flint,
and I know that I shall not be
put to shame;
8he who vindicates me is near.
Who will contend with me?
Let us stand up together.
Who are my adversaries?
Let them confront me.
God has willed
the Servant’s suffering and its acceptance.
God brings past (v. 6) and
present (v. 7) acts of hostility into constructive relations with the Servant’s
justification. They are accepted because
they are God’s will for his life. It is
the complete acceptance that makes possible the set of his face as like flint. God is for him! So, to paraphrase someone more recent,
“Bring it on!” Let his adversaries do
what they may, confronting him on every turn. “It is the LORD God who helps
me.”
The LORD ‘Hovers’
In his essay on
“What is an Author?” Michel Foucault develops his theme from a line from Samuel
Beckett:
“What does it matter who is speaking,” someone said, “what does it
matter who is speaking.”
At the end of
his essay, Foucault says that it does not make much difference as to who the
speaker is. In fact, he calls it a
“stirring of the indifference.” In this
morning’s text, it makes all the difference for the Servant as to who it is
that speaks and the type of listening that takes place. It bears noting the
importance that the author gives (in Hebrew) to the divine name, LORD! Four times the statement is made that the
LORD is at work for him in the past and in the present (50:4, 5, 7, 9).
4The LORD God has given me . . .
5The LORD God has opened my ear . . .
7The LORD God helps me . . .
9It is the LORD God who helps me . . .
This gives a
personal feel to the account that God has “taught him, prepared him and helped
him” (Christopher Seitz). The LORD hovers over the Servant, a
necessary reminder that grace abounds in good times and bad times, in clear
instances and darker days.
For our own day
and times there is no lack of information in the land. Something else, however, may be lacking, and
this is a something, as Kierkegaard put it, which the one cannot directly
communicate to the other. People believe
that they know the Gospel but rally around statements at times that prove that
they do not! Kierkegaard wrote: “It is
easier to become a Christian when I am not a Christian than to become a
Christian when I am one.” The statement was penned for 19th century
Denmark but fits today’s 21st century America!
The communication of the Gospel is dependent upon the Gospel being rightly
heard.
With emphasis
Fred Craddock reminds us that the Christian tradition “came to us from those
who heard it, and we hear it and pass it on to other hearers.”
[Fred
Craddock, Overhearing the Gospel (Abingdon,
1978), 121. The emphases are his. ] This fits right in with what the Apostle Paul
had to say to a Roman audience, in Romans.
10:14-15,
But how are they to call on
one in whom they have not believed? And
how are they to believe in one of whom they have not heard? And how are they to hear without someone to
proclaim him? And how are they to
proclaim him unless they are sent? As it
is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!”
Hearing is more
than simply ‘hearing’ with the physical ear.
What is heard needs to be internalized, affirmed, dwelled upon, acted
upon. In brief, listening is
imperative. Hearing can be passive;
listening is meant to be active. Similar
to the Servant, Augustine, Wesley, Kierkegaard,
Tillich, and Heidegger listened. Their
seeking provided openness and they acted. What was heard differed between them and
as individuals they moved in different directions as they applied what was
needed for their respective times.
Today is our
day, our time. The call remains: “to
listen as those who are taught.”
In our cultural
milieu what do we hear when we listen?
What differences are being made in our lives and the lives of others by
what is heard?
No comments:
Post a Comment