And Grace Always Gives Far More than We Have “Earned.”

Traveling is almost like talking with people of other centuries. There are strings in the human heart that had better not be vibrated. Things turn out best for the people who make the best out of the way things turn out! Our great weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is always to try just one more time. It is quite noticeable that our clients tend in the direction of permitting each member of the family to have one’s own feelings and to be a separate person. This may seem like a strange statement, but it is actually a most radical step. Many of us are perhaps unaware of the tremendous pressure we tend to put on our wives, our husbands, our children, to have the same feelings we do. It is often as we said, “If you want me to love you, then you must have the same feelings I do. If I feel your behavior is bad, you must feel so too. If I feel a certain goal is desirable, you must feel so too.” Now the tendency which we see in our clients is the opposite of this. There is a willingness for the other person to have different feelings, different values, differ goals. In short, there is a willingness for one to be a separate person. It is my belief that this tendency develops as the person discovers that one can trust one’s own feelings and reactions—that one’s own deep impulses are not destructive or catastrophic, and that one need not be guarded, but can meet life on a real basis. #RandolphHarris 1 of 21

As one learns that one can trust oneself, with one’s own uniqueness, one becomes more able to trust one’s wife, or one’s child, and to accept the unique feelings and values which exist in this other person. One woman wrote a letter explaining something she had experienced in her family. “I realized that I had not sown my 14-year-old son Phil any real love in a long time, because I was so resentful of standards that I have always thought were important. Since I have stopped taking most of the responsibility for his goals, and responded to him as a person, as I always have to Sarah, for instance, it is surprising what changes have appeared in his attitudes. Not Earth-shaking—but a heartwarming beginning. We no longer heckle him about his school work, and the other day he volunteered that he had gotten an S—satisfactory grade on Mrs. Swanson’s trigonometry exam the first time this year.” A few months later I heard from her husband. “You would not recognize Phil….While he is hardly garrulous, he is not nearly the sphinx that he was, and he is doing much better in school, although we do not expect him to be graduated cum laude. You should take a great deal of credit for his improvement, because he began to blossom when I finally began to trust him to be himself, and ceased trying to mold him into the glorified image of his father at a similar age. Oh to undo our past errors!” #RandolphHarris 2 of 21

This concept of trusting the individual to be oneself has some to have a great deal of meaning to me. I sometimes fantasy about what it would mean if a child were treated in this fashion from the first. Suppose a child were permitted to have one’s own unique feelings—supposed one never had to disown one’s feelings in order to be loved. Suppose one’s parents were free to have and express their own unique feelings, which often would be different from one’s, and often would be different between themselves. I like to think of all the meanings that such an experience would have. It would mean that a child would grow up respect oneself as a unique person. It would mean that even when one’s behavior had to be thwarted, one could remain open “ownership” of one’s feelings. It would mean that one’s behavior would be a realistic balance, taking into account one’s own feelings and the known and open feelings of others. One would, I believe, be a responsible and self-directing individual, who would never need to conceal one’s feelings from oneself, who would never need to live behind a façade. One would be relatively free of the maladjustments which cripple so many of us. If I have been able correctly to discern the trends in the experience of our clients, then client-centered therapy seems to have a number of implications for family life. Let me attempt to restate these in somewhat more general form. #RandolphHarris 3 of 21

It appears that an individual finds it satisfying in the long run to express any strong or persistent emotional attitudes in the situation in which they arise, to the person with whom they are concerned, and to the depth to which they exist. This is more satisfying than refusing to admit that such feelings exist, or permitting them to pile up to an explosive degree, or directing them toward some situation other than the one in which they arose. It seems that the individual discovers that it is more satisfying in the long run to live a given family relationship on the basis of the real interpersonal feelings which exist, rather than living the relationship on the basis of pretense. A part of this discovery is that the fear that the relationship will be destroyed if the true feelings are admitted, is usually unfounded, particularly when the feelings are expressed as belonging to oneself, not as stating something about the other person. Our clients find that as they express themselves more freely, as the surface character of the relationship matches more closely the fluctuating attitudes which underlie it, they can lay aside dome of their defenses and truly listen to the other person. Often for the first time they begin to understand how the other person feels, and why one feels that way. Thus mutual understanding begins to pervade the interpersonal interactions. #RandolphHarris 4 of 21

Finally, there is an increasing willingness for the other person to be oneself. As I am more willing to be myself, I find I am more ready to permit you to be yourself, with all that implies. This means that the family circle tends in the direction of becoming a number of separate and unique persons with individual goals and values, but bound together by the real feelings—beneficial and disadvantageous—which exist between them, and by the satisfying bond of mutual understandings of at least portion of each other’s private Worlds. It is in these ways, I believe, that therapy which results in the individual becoming more fully and more deeply oneself, results also in one’s finding greater satisfaction in realistic family relationships which likewise promote the same end—that of facilitating each member of the family in the process of discovering, and becoming, oneself. If we could sell our experiences for what they cost us, we would all be millionaires. Next is the discipline of communication. Recently the readers of a popular women’s magazine were asked the question, “If you could change your husband, what would you change?” The overwhelming consensus was they would like them to communicate better. They indicated that even more, they would like their husbands to listen. All that can be said is that, the two people happened to hit on the same thought—and Shakespeare made use of it first, that is all. #RandolphHarris 5 of 21

The stereotype is the husband buried in the morning newspaper at breakfast, preferring to read a news agency report of the latest scandal in a European government, the scores of yesterday’s athletic contests, and the opinions of a couple of columnists whom one will never meet rather than listen to the voice of the person who has just shared his bed, poured his coffee, and fried his eggs, even though listening to that live voice promises love and hope, emotional depth and intellectual exploration far in excess of what he can gather informationally from The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and The Christian Science Monitor put together. Men, the discipline of communication demands that you set aside regular time to talk—and that you really do talk, and that you communicate more than facts, that you communicate feelings—that you learn to talk in metaphors and similes with phrases that begin, “I feel like…” And it means that you listen. It is recommended that 65 percent of an executive’s time should be spent listening. How much more so the wise husband. The Biblical, prophetic illumination of the human soul in its lostness is empathic, starkly clear, and repeated over and over, from Moses and Samuel to Jesus, Paul, and John. The only path of spiritual transformation today is still possessed through this illumination. It must be gratefully and humbly accepted and applied, to oneself above all. #RandolphHarris 6 of 21

When the prophet Jeremiah, for example, says, “The heart is more deceitful than all these and is desperately sick: Who wan understand it?” we have to recognize from our heart that we are the ones spoken of, that, indeed, I am the one described. Only then is a foundation laid for spiritual formation into Christlikeness. The initial move toward Christlikeness cannot be toward self-esteem, because of confusion about what self-esteem means, and because, realistically, I am not okay and you are not okay. We are all in serious trouble. That must be our starting point. Self-esteem in such a situation will only breed self-deception and frustration—as is now increasingly recognized, by the way. For the realities of our soul will still be what they are and will still have the consequences for evil that they naturally do—regardless of what we or others may say to “pump ourselves up” and really, to conceal and deny who we ae. A high opinion of ourselves will only make those consequences more difficult to deal with. Denial—usually in some form of rationalization—is the primary device that humans use to deal with their own wrongness. It was the first thing out of the mouths of Adam and Eve after they sinned, and it continues up to the latest edition of the newspaper. The prophetic witness from God must throw itself against the massive weight of group and individual denial, often institutionalized and subtly built into our customary ways of speaking and interacting. #RandolphHarris 7 of 21

Jesus addressed leaders of his day in language that may see harsh and pitiless to us, but that was the only possible way he could be of help to them, strongly self-defended as they were; and perhaps the same is true of us as well. “You Pharisees clean the outside of the dish, but your insides are full of greed and filth. How foolish of you! Is not God as interested in your insides as your outside?” reports Luke 11.39. And, “If you wash a dish well on the inside, will not the outside come clean in the process?” reports Matthew 23.26. Jesus proceeds to point out how they love and vie for public recognition of “approval” (Luke 11.43) and how in doing so they are like graves, all nice prettied up on the outside, but full of disgusting rot inside (verse 44; compare Matthew 23.27-28). They were unable to believe in Jesus because they sought to be honored by each other (John 5.44). They desired to be exalted. Spiritual transformation does not lie in this direction, for them or for us. In the financial World, an investment that doubles itself in a few years is considered an excellent investment. Yet that is only a hundred percent gain. Jesus promises us not one hundred but ten thousand percent return. Why does Jesus use such an astonishing amount as ten thousand percent? He is telling us that God’s reward is out of all proportion to our service and sacrifice. He is telling us that in the Kingdom of Heaven God’s reward system is based not on merit but on grace. And grace always gives far more than we have “earned.” #RandolphHarris 8 of 21

The generosity and the magnanimity of God are so great that he accepts nothing from us without rewarding it beyond all computation. The vast disproportion existing between our work and God’s reward of it already displays his boundless grace, to say nothing of the gift of salvation which is made before we have even begun to do any work. God calls us to service Him, not because He needs us, but because we need Him. Then His reward for our service is always for our service is always out of proportion to our efforts—as Jesus said to Peter, “a hundred times as much,” reports Matthew 19.29. The ontology of love leads to the basic assertion that love is one. This contradicts the main trend in the recent discussions of the nature of love. They were useful in so far as they directed the attention to the different qualities of love. However, they were and are misleading in so far as they consider the differences of qualities as differences of types. The error was not that one distinguished the qualities of love—on the contrary, more distinctions should have been made in what was often comprehended under the name eros. The error was that one did not start with an understanding of love as one. Such an understanding, of course, would have led to an ontological analysis. For only the relation of love to being as such can reveal its fundamental character. If love in all its forms is the drive towards the reunion of the separated, the different qualities of the one nature of love become understandable. #RandolphHarris 9 of 21

Traditionally epithymia (desire) is considered the lowest quality of love. It is identified with the desire to sensual self-fulfillment. There is a strong interest on the part of philosophical and theological moralists in establishing a complete gap between this quality and those which are supposed to be higher and essentially different. On the other hand, there is a tendency on the naturalist side to reduce all the other qualities of love to the epithymia quality. A solution of this problem is only possible in the light of the ontological interpretation of love. First of all it must be said that libido—to use the Latin word—is misunderstood if it is defined as the desire for pleasure. This hedonistic definition is, like hedonism generally, based on a wrong psychology which itself is the consequence of a wrong ontology. Humans strive to reunite themselves with that to which they belong and from which one is separated. And this is true not only of humans but of all living beings. They desire food, movement, growth, participation in group, intimacy, and so forth. The fulfilment of these desires is accompanied by pleasure. However, it is not the pleasure such which is desired, but the union with that which fulfils the desire. Certainly, fulfilled desire is pleasure, and unfulfilled desire is pain. However, if one derives from these facts the pain-pleasure principle in the sense that life essentially consists of feeling from pain and striving for pleasure, it is a distortion of the actual process of life. #RandolphHarris 10 of 21

Whenever this happens life is corrupted. Only a perverted life follows the pain-pleasure principle. Unperverted life strives for that of which it is in want, it strives for union with that which is separated from it, though it belongs to it. This analysis should remove the prejudice towards libido, and it can give criteria for the partial acceptance, partial rejection of Dr. Freud’s libido theory. In so far as Dr. Freud descries libido as the desire of the individual to get rid of his tensions, he has described the perverted form of libido. And he has acknowledged this implicitly (though not intentionally) be deriving the death-instinct from the infinite, never fulfilled libido. Dr. Freud describes human’s libido in its perverted, self-estranged stage. However, his description, in which he joins many Puritans (old and new ones who would be embarrassed by this alliance) mises the meaning of libido as the normal drive towards vital self-fulfillment. In the light of this analysis it is justified to say that epithymia is a quality which is not lacking in any love relation. To this extent the naturalists are right. However, they are wrong if they interpret libido or epithymia as the striving for pleasure for the sake of pleasure. The attempts to establish an absolute contrast between agape and eros usually presuppose an identification of eros and epithymia. Certainly, there is epithymia in every eros. However, eros transcends epithymmia. #RandolphHarris 11 of 21

Eros strives for a union with that which is a bearer of values because of the values it embodies. This refers to the beauty we find in nature, to the beautiful and the true in culture, and to the mystical union with that which is the source of the beautiful and the true. Love drives towards union with the forms of nature and culture and with the divine sources of both. This eros is untied with epithymia if epithymia is the desire for vital self-fulfillment and not for the pleasure resulting from this union. This valuation of eros is attacked from two sides. Love as eros is depreciated by those theologians who depreciate culture and by those who deny a mystical element in human’s relation to God. However, it is a rather self-defying attitude if somebody depreciates culture and does it in terms of culture, if one, for instances, uses millennia of linguistic culture in order to express one’s rejection of culture. Without eros towards truth, theology would not exist, and without the eros towards the beautiful no ritual expression would exist. Even more serious is the rejection of the eros quality of love with respect to God. The consequence of this rejection is that love towards God becomes an impossible concept to be replaced by obedience to God. However, obedience is not love. It can be the opposite of love. Without the desire of humans to be reunited with their origin, the love towards God becomes a meaningless word. #RandolphHarris 12 of 21

It is important to look at history, but at the same time look beyond history to the ultimate power and meaning and majesty of being. There are two orders of being: the human, political, historical order, and the divine, eternal order. If we know these two orders, we can speak, moving continually between the depth of human nothingness and the great height of divine creativity. The human order, the order of history, is primarily the order of growing and dying. “Surely the people is grass.” Human’s experience of melancholy, awakened by fading and perishing nature, is symbolic of their transitoriness. Generations after generations grow up, struggle, suffer, enjoy and disappear. Should we talk all this seriously? Should we take it more seriously than the growing and fading of the grass? The prophet, when one was asked to speak to one’s nations raised the questions: Why speak to them? They are grass. We could continue: Why write and work and struggle for them? They are grass. What matter, when after a few years all those for who we wrote and spoke and struggled will have vanished? They were grass, the grass withered, the flowers faded. That is the order of history. However, the other order appears at the horizon: The word of God shall stand forever! #RandolphHarris 13 of 21

Second, the order of history is an order of sin and punishment. The exile, following the destruction of Jerusalem, was, as all the prophets said, the punishment of the people for their sins. We do not like words such as sin and punishment. They seem to us archaic, barbaric, and invalid in the light of modern psychology. However, whenever I have met exiles of high moral standards and insights, I have discovered that they feel responsible for what has happened within their own countries. And very often I have met citizens of democratic countries, citizens of this country, who have expressed a feeling of guilt for the situation of the World today. They were right, and the exiles were right: they are responsible, as are you and I. Whether or not we call it sin, whether or nor we call it punishment, we are beaten by the consequences of our own failures. That is the order of history. However, at the horizon the other order appears, saying that our struggles are not in vain, that our iniquity is pardoned. There is a third element in the order of history, uniting finiteness and sin: the tragic law which controls the historical process, the law which ordains that human greatness utterly fall. There is human greatness in history. There are great and conquering nations empires; there are even nations and empress which manifest a certain righteousness. There are princes and even good princes; there are judges and even just judges. #RandolphHarris 14 of 21

There are states and constitutions and even states and constitutions which provide a certain amount of freedom; there are social orders and even some which provide a certain amount of equality. There are creative spirits and even some which have the power of knowledge and understanding. However, just in being great and powerful and righteous they touch the divine sphere, and they become arrogant, and they are brought to nothing. They are without roots; they wither; the divine storm blows over them, and they vanish. That is the subject of Greek tragedy. That is the message of the prophet to the nations of the World. They are all subject to the law of tragic self-destruction—the bad and the good, individuals and nations, the weak and the heroic. And again the other order, the order beyond history and tragedy, appears at the horizon: He gives power to the faint and their strength is renewed, so that they shall mount up with wings as eagles. The order beyond the order of history is the divine order. And it is paradoxical: humans are like grass, but the word of God spoken to them shall stand forever. Humans stand under the law of sin and punishment, but the divine order breaks through it and brings forgiveness. Humans faint, falling from the height of their moral goodness and youthful power, and just when they have fallen and are weakest, they run without weariness and rise up with wings as eagles. #RandolphHarris 15 of 21

God acts beyond all human assumptions and valuations. He acts surprisingly, unexpectedly, paradoxically. The negative character of the historical order is the absolute order of the divine order. The weak and despairing, the sinful and tragic in the historical order are the strong and victorious in the divine order. The prophet also speaks of the paradoxical destiny of the servant, the elected nation. Described as a man of sorrows, acquainted with grief, it is despised and rejected in the human order. Who does not think, hearing these words, of the exiles not only of Israel but of all nations of the World? However, the divine order appears. The exiled nation, or (as the Christians later, historically wrong, spiritually right, interpreted it) the Man on the Cross, represents another order, an order in which the weakest is the strongest, the most humiliated, the most victorious. This historical, human order is overcome by the suffering servant, the crucified Saviour. If we doubt this paradox, if we despair about our situation, if our exile is without hope or meaning for us, the prophet should fill us with shame for the arrogance of our rationalism and the narrowness of our moralism. He points to the creation of the World, of humankind, of history. He asks, “Who has directed the Spirit of God? With whom took He counsel and who instructed Him and taught Him the path of justice?” #RandolphHarris 16 of 21

We always wish to teach God the path of justice. We tell God that He must punish the bad and reward the good, especially in relation to ourselves. However, God accepts no counsel concerning the course of history, as He took no counsel concerning the structure of the World, with all its natural destruction, cruelty, and transitoriness. The divine order cannot be judged according to the measures of the historical order, the measures of human comfort and morality, democracy and civilization. That was the answer Job received from God when he struggled with Him about the unintelligible injustice of his historical fate. God did not justify Himself in moral categories; He triumphantly pointed to the unexplorable greatness of nature which cannot be measures according to the measure of human righteousness. However, if the divine order and the historical order have nothing to do with each other, how can the divine order concern us at all? How can eternity and forgiveness and divine help concern us if we are in the other order, the historical order, standing under the law of finiteness and weakness and punishment? How can the divine order comfort us in our misery? How can we listen to the words of the prophets which tell us of the end of our warfare? There are three answers to this question. First, the divine order is not the historical order; and we should not confuse these two orders. #RandolphHarris 17 of 21

No life is able to overcome finiteness, sin, and tragedy. The illusions of our period have been that modern civilization and conquer then, and that we can achieve security in our own existence. Progress seemed to have conquered tragedy; the divine order seemed to be embodied in the progressive, historical order. However, for nearly six decades our generation has received blow after blow, destroying that illusion, and driving to despair and cynicism those who wanted to transform, and thought they could transform, the historical order into a divine order. Let us learn from the catastrophe of our time at least the fact that no life and no period are able to overcome finiteness, sin, and tragedy. The second answer is that there is another order to which we, as human beings, belong, an order which makes humans always dissatisfied with what is given to one. Humans transcend everything in the historical order, all the heights and depths of one’s own existence. They pass, as no other being is able to pass, beyond the limits of their given World. Humans participates in something infinite, in an order which is not transitory, not self-destructive, not tragic, but eternal, holy, and blessed. Therefore, when one listens to the prophetic word, when one hears of the everlasting God and of the greatness of His power and the mystery of His acts, a response is awakened in the depth of the human soul; the infinite within one is touched. #RandolphHarris 18 of 21

Every being knows, that in some depth of their soul that greatness of God is true. Our despair itself, our inability to escape ourselves in life and in death, witnesses to our infinity. The third answer is that the two orders, the historical and the eternal, although they can never become the same, are within each other. The historical order is not separated from the eternal order. What is new in the prophets and in Christianity, beyond all paganism, old and new, is that the eternal order reveals itself in the historical order. The suffering servant of God and the enemies because of whim one suffers, the Man on the Cross and those who fainted under the Cross, the exiled and persecuted in all periods of history, have all transformed history. The strong in history fall; the strength of each of us is take from us. However, those who seem weak in history finally shape history, because they are bound to the eternal order. We are not a lost generation because we are a suffering, destroyed generation. Each of us belongs to the eternal order, and the prophet speaks to all of us: Comfort ye, comfort yet, my people! “And they were strict to observe that there should be no iniquity among them; and whoso was found to commit iniquity, and three witnesses of the church did condemn them before the elders, and if they repented not, and confessed not, their names were blotted out, and they were not numbered among the people of Christ. However, as they oft as they repented and sought forgiveness, with real intent, they were forgiven,” report Moroni 6. 7-8. #RandolphHarris 19 of 21

The time has come that we have longed for; what greater or better work can be found than to proclaim that might of our Risen Lord? Bursting open the doors of the grave, He has displayed to us the glorious banner of His Resurrection. Through Him the sons of light are born to life eternal; the courts of the kingdom of Heaven are opened to believers; and by the law of a blessed intercourse, Earthly and Heavenly things are interchanged. For by the Cross of Christ we have all been redeemed from death, and by His Resurrection the life of us all has risen again. While He has assume our mortal nature, we acknowledge Him as the God of majesty; and in the glory of the Godhead we confess Him God and Man: Who by dying destroyed our death, and by rising again restored out life—even Jesus Christ our Lord. O Son of God and Son of Man, Thou wast incarnate, didst suffer, rise, ascend for my sake; Thy departure was not a token of separation but a pledge of return; Thy word, promises, sacraments, show thy death until thou come again. That day is no horror to me, for thy death has redeemed me, thy Spirit fills me, thy word governs me. I have trusted thee and thou hast not betrayed my trust; waited for thee, and not waited in vain. Thou wilt come to raise my body from the dust, and re-unite it to my soul, by a wonderful work of infinite power and love, greater than that which bounds the oceans’ waters, ebbs and flows the tides, keep the stars in their courses, and gives life to all creatures. #RandolphHarris 20 of 21

This corruptible shall put on incorruption, this moral, immortality, this natural body, a spiritual body, this dishonoured body, a glorious body, this weak body, a body of power. I triumph now in thy promises as I shall do in their performance, for the head cannot live if the members are dead; beyond the grace is resurrection, judgment, acquittal, domination. Every event and circumstance of my life will be dealt with—the sins of my youth, my secret sins, the sins of abusing thee, of disobeying thy words, the sins of neglecting ministers’ admonitions, the sins of violating my conscience—all will be judged; and after judgment, peace and rest, life and service, employment and enjoyment, for thine elect. O God, keep me in this faith, and ever looking for Christ’s return. I hold that if the Almighty had ever made a set of people that should do all the eating and none of the work, He would have made them with mouths only and no hands. I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free. Would that there were an award for people who come to understand the concept of enough. Good enough. Successful enough. Thin enough. Rich enough. Socially responsible enough. When you have self-respect, you have enough. You are today where your thoughts have brought you; you will be tomorrow where your thoughts take you. Anything we can conceive, through God we can achieve. #RandolphHarris 21 of 21