Tag Archives: trinity

Into Culture: Pursuing Mystery

It’s strange to feel the weight of a question before it is even asked. As I logged into the video call for my PhD interview, I knew what was coming first: they had helpfully told me the questions beforehand. Yet, despite that, the moment still had force.

What motivates you to study this topic?

It was not asked brusquely or with pressure. The tone was kind, the invitation sincere but I felt the air shift slightly. This was not just opening pleasantries for me: this was the moment when scholarship would meet selfhood, when the scaffolding of ideas would be tested for depth, for purpose, for real roots. I had wanted to answer the question ‘correctly’ but, as I looked at my notes in front of me, they merely offered the usual rationale: theological relevance, ecclesiological urgency, intellectual continuity with my MA. All of that was true but none of them quite hit the mark.

The truth is, my proposal (exploring unity in difference through Augustine and Hugh of St Victor and their respective understandings of the Triune God and the outworking of that into the Church) is not simply academic. It feels personal. It’s visceral. It is, in a real way, autobiographical.

I have come to realise that what really motivates me to return again and again to ‘unity in difference’ is paradox. I cannot escape a deep longing for unity, yet I experience the world as difference. I feel deeply connected to the Church, yet I am constantly aware of my divergence from its norms. I seek the coherence of truth, yet find that coherence not in simplicity but in complexity.

The inhabiting of paradox, more than any footnote or formal learning, is what has led me, and continues, again and again, to return me to the Trinity.

When I began to realise that I might be on the autistic spectrum as an adult, many things began to make more sense. I had always known that I saw and processed the world differently, but now I had a language for it. Patterns, structures, systems, these were not just useful to me; they were compelling. I do not let go of questions easily. I turn them over and over. I have a t-shirt that reads, ‘Hold on. Let me overthink this.’ I feel a gravitational pull towards that which seemingly cannot be resolved. If I encounter a paradox, I do not walk around it, accept it as mystery and brush it off: I live in it.

This cognitive style has been widely recognised in research as autistic reasoning. In one important study, Morsanyi et al. argue that individuals on the autistic spectrum are less inclined to accept intuitive, but logically misleading, responses. Instead, they show a strong preference for deliberative, analytical approaches. What appears to many as a tangle of contradiction becomes, for us, an invitation to go deeper. The study concludes that autistic people “may be less susceptible to intuitive but misleading reasoning responses and instead rely more on deliberative, logical approaches.” (Morsanyi, Kinga, et al. “Reasoning on the Autism Spectrum: A Dual Process Theory Account.” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 46, no. 6 (2016): 2120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-016-2742-2). We are wired for coherence, but we find it not by simplifying the data but by persisting with the difficult bits until a deeper pattern emerges.

This is echoed in visual perception studies, such as Sheppard et al.’s paper entitled, “Perceiving the Impossible: How Individuals with Autism Copy Paradoxical Figures.” on the reproduction of paradoxical figures. When presented with drawings that defied spatial logic named ‘impossible shapes’, autistic participants were not confused or blocked by them. They simply copied what was there, detail for detail, without needing to make it fit into a pre-existing spatial framework. The paradox did not need to be resolved before it could be engaged with. It was engaged with as it was.

This struck me, when I read the research, as a deeply theological posture.

The Christian faith is full of paradoxes. The incarnation, the cross, the Kingdom that is here and not yet and, most centrally and foundationally, the Trinity. One God but three Persons. Not modalism, not tritheism but a unity that holds difference within itself, eternally.

Many theologians acknowledge that the Trinity is not merely an intellectual puzzle but a revelation that resists flattening. To understand it is not to tame it. And yet, for me, that complexity is not a barrier to faith; it is a pathway. It draws me closer, because it reflects something I already know in my bones: that truth is not the absence of tension, but the holding of it.

The Trinity, then, is not an object of my study but, in some way, it is an icon. It reveals and affirms a mode of existence that is deeply familiar to me but remains strangely unspeakable. It offers a way of thinking about unity that does not demand uniformity. And this is where the theology becomes not only personal, but ecclesial.

I have come to describe my approach to intercultural practice as one of ‘inclusive othering’. It is an attempt to name a way of holding difference within a framework of unity, without dissolving the importance of either. In the life of the Church, we often fall into one of two traps: either we preserve purity by excluding the ‘other’, or we flatten difference in the name of peace; but the Trinity models a different way. The Persons of the Trinity are not interchangeable. The Father is not the Son. The Spirit is not the Father. There is real distinction. But there is also real union. Not hierarchical, not conflicted, but harmonious and perichoretic.

Inclusive othering, then, is not about making everyone agree, or ignoring deep disagreement. It is about recognising that difference can be held within relationship, even if it is not resolved. This, I believe, is the ecclesial challenge of our age and it is also the gift that neurodivergent people can offer to the Church.

While autism often, in clinical terms, emphasises what it lacks, there is a growing recognition that it brings distinctive ways of seeing the world. One way is an ability to hold complexity, to pursue coherence without closure and to name inconsistencies others tolerate into silence. These traits, I believe, far from being flaws, are prophetic. They invite the Church to imagine a community not, primarily, as shared agreement, but as shared attention to the mystery of God and one another. Unity that can hold difference is not only a theological necessity but may also be a neurodivergent gift.

And if Augustine’s ecclesiology can be read as a struggle to hold grace and order together and if Hugh of St Victor offers a vision of community that cultivates both discipline and mutuality, then these are not merely historical artefacts; they are resources for the Church today. They resonate with the neurodivergent experience of needing structure, while longing for belonging.

So when I was asked what motivates me to study the topic of unity in difference, I could have said: “Because the Church is divided and needs healing,” or “Because doctrinal clarity matters,” or “Because I want to trace a theological thread from Augustine to Hugh that can inform contemporary ecclesiology.” All of that would be true.

But the deeper truth is this:

I study the Trinity because I need to believe that unity in difference is real, not as a concept, but as a lived possibility. I need to believe that my way of being is not a problem to be solved, but a perspective that can illuminate. I need to believe that the paradoxes I carry, between belonging and difference, between tradition and innovation, between fixed structures and fluid relationships, can find a home in God and the Church.

The philosopher Søren Kierkegaard, who also dwelled in paradox, argued that the most important decisions are not made through objective reasoning but through the leap of faith. That leap is not irrational, but it goes beyond calculation. It is the choice to act in the face of ambiguity, to commit to something that cannot be proved in advance.

In a way, my PhD project is such a leap. It is an act of trust that unity can be more than a word, that difference need not mean distance and that the Trinity is not only the object of our theology but the pattern of our life together.

What motivates me, then?

I have always felt slightly out of joint with the world. Not entirely apart, but never entirely at ease. It’s not just a matter of difference; it’s dissonance. I sense the world moving to a rhythm I can’t quite learn, speaking in a language I only half understand. The intensity of this disunity between me and others, between people and institutions, between ideals and actions, has never gone away. And yet, I have never lost the longing for communion. If anything, it only grows stronger.

This is not a purely intellectual dilemma. It is an existential ache. The question I live with is not just ‘how can we be united?’ but ‘where do I belong if unity is impossible?’

That question fuels my interest in the Trinity, not as a neat theological formula, but as a holy enigma that effects my own life. I don’t approach the doctrine of unity in difference with cool detachment. I approach it like someone trying to breathe underwater. The paradoxes of the Trinity are not obstacles for me to overcome; they are contours of a mystery I recognise in my bones. Here is a God who is one and three, eternally. Not in compromise, but in fullness. Not despite difference, but through it. If this is what God is like, then perhaps my longing for unity amid difference is not a flaw or a futile dream but, in fact, it is a call to dwell ever more deeply in the reality of God.

That doesn’t resolve the tensions I feel in the world. It doesn’t dissolve the pain of disunity or the sharp edges of misunderstanding that often meet neurodivergent people like me. I still experience difference as disruption. I still feel the pull between solitude and connection but, though the puzzle may never be resolved, it must still be tackled and pursued. It is in the process of trying to solve it that a different kind of solution emerges. Contemplating the Trinity teaches us that paradox is not a problem to be solved, but a mysterious invitation to be constantly received. That divine communion holds difference without annihilation and my discomfort with simplistic harmony is not a failure to integrate but a witness to something deeper: a call to truth that makes room for tension.

So where does that leave me?

Here, still yearning. Still wrestling. Still believing that the unsolvable puzzle of unity in difference is not a sign of failure, but a place where God is already waiting. And maybe, just maybe, it is the very shape of holiness.

Conversion

cropped-color-calgary-header-3

Suscipiendus autem in oratorio coram omnibus promittat de stabilitate sua et conversatione morum suorum et oboedientia.

Upon admission, in the oratory, before all, he is to make a promise to stability, conversion (of behaviour/morals/life) and obedience,

Conversion

I would not be a true writer on the Rule of St. Benedict if I did not begin by explaining that the latin term conversatio morum is a controversial phrase when it comes to true translation. What St. Benedict meant is lost in the dust of the original manuscript. I have decided to simply translate it as ‘conversion’ as most translations include this phrase; what changes is the object of that conversion (behaviour, morals, life, etc.) Thomas Merton famously wrote,

It is the vow to respond totally and integrally to the word of Christ, ‘Come, follow me’…It is the vow to obey the voice of God,… in order to follow the will of God in all things. (Thomas Merton, “Conversation Morum”, Cistercian Studies (1966) p. 133

Brian C. Taylor likens this vow to the repentance which is at the heart of the sacrament of baptism. This vow is a commitment to the ongoing turning away from sin and, more importantly the turning towards God.

We are regaining an increasing awareness that conversion is not a one time event. I know too many people who said ‘the prayer’ and were baptised and have since fallen away. The journey of faith starts in that first ‘yes’ to God’s call but there are many who never take many steps beyond that. Some treat the life of faith like a club; after they have paid the lifetime membership fee they find they no longer visit the club house, speak to other members. They keep the card in their wallet which they look at time to time but they do not participate in the life of the club, they do not remember the purpose of the club but their name is on the list.

The vow to conversatio morum is a life time commitment to participate in a process of change.

When you stop and think a little about St. Benedict’s concept of conversatio morum, that most mysterious of our vows, which is actually the most essential I believe, it can be interpreted as a commitment to total inner transformation of one sort or another – a commitment to become a totally new man. (Thomas Merton, The Asian Journal of Thomas Merton (New York: New Directions, 1975) p.337)

The first tension in the trinitarian of vows begins to emerge as you commit to stability and to change. A monk is pulled by seemingly opposing forces; one to remain faithful and one to move forward. Under the surface, though, these two vows hold a mysterious unity, a unity that develops as the two dialogue with each other. As you remain faithful to others you will be asked to change.

The commitment to conversion is a commitment to be open to discoveries about your failings and the sin that hinder your transformation into the likeness of Christ. We discover, as we decide to stay, particularly in painful conflict, that the only way that we can maintain stability is if there is change in our viewpoint. These two vows demand a moving through entrenched views on both sides.

There is also an important link between the vow of conversion and the vow of poverty which helps to deepen our understanding of conversatio morum.

Oscar Romero, when he was seeking unity within the archdiocese of El Salvador called all Christians to a shared understanding of conversion.

The criterion of genuine conversion was love for the poor, who represented Christ, and this love obtained forgiveness and grace from God. (Roberto Morozza Della Rocca, Oscar Romero: prophet of hope (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 2015) p.120)

Christ is seen, for Romero, amongst the poor. It was Christ who considered equality with God not something to be exploited but emptied himself (Phillippians 2:6-7). Christ became poor so that we could be rich by God’s grace. If we are called to continually be transformed into the likeness of Christ then we should seek to also empty ourselves so that others may become rich by God’s grace.

All of us, if we really want to know the meaning of conversion and of faith and confidence in another, must become poor, or at least make the cause of the poor our own inner motivation. That is when one begins to experience faith and conversion: when one has the heart of the poor, when one knows that financial capital, political influence, and power are worthless, and that without God we are nothing. (Oscar Romero, The Violence of Love (Pennsylvania: The Plough Publishing, 1988) p. 121)

As I explore these vows I realise that not only is there an awareness of the Trinitarian shape to the life of a community committed to them but I’m also reminded of the other Trinitarian frameworks which I have discovered within my own monastic call. Here, in this quote from Romero, there is a call to place ourselves in a perpetual Ash Wednesday. We are dust, nothing but the life of discipleship is to remain rooted there whilst also accepting the conversion, by God’s grace, into Christ and receiving the power and anointing to become children of God by the Holy Spirit.

In this framework the call to stability is rooted in the faithfulness of God the Father who raises us from the dust to shape and form us. The call to conversion is brought about by the Holy Spirit who blows where it likes and brings about newness of life but points us to Christ of the poor and back to the foundational view that we are nothing. The conversion is also about being brought into true communion with others as one is converted through relationship and community. This exchange from the Ash Wednesday moment to the communal Pentecost moment rotates around a third point of reference: Christ’s obedience to death on the cross.

The Philippians 2 structure is also interesting when discovering this life within the Holy Trinity: we begin with the humility and awareness of our need for God. We remind ourselves, as we do at the start of Lent, that we are nothing. Without this awareness we will not fully understand the wonders of god’s faithful love and grace.

Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus,
who, though he was in the form of God,
did not regard equality with God
as something to be exploited,
but emptied himself,
taking the form of a slave,
being born in human likeness.
And being found in human form,
he humbled himself (Philippians 2:5-8a)

As we continually remind ourselves of our status without God we become obedient to his remoulding of us, his shaping of us. We submit ourselves to his will,

and became obedient to the point of death—
even death on a cross.(Philippians 2:8b)

Submitting to God’s will will lead us to death with Christ and we painfully obey that call in the hope that we will rise to new life. It is here that the start of conversion begins. The Holy Spirit begins its work of transformation and converts us into the likeness of Christ

Therefore God also highly exalted him
and gave him the name
that is above every name,
so that at the name of Jesus
every knee should bend,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
and every tongue should confess
that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.(Philippians 2:9-11)

This conversion to ‘glory’ is not as most would imagine, an individual perfecting but the conversion is into the corporate Body of Christ who empties Himself to enrich the lost and the poor, not with material wealth but the riches of heaven. To be converted into this, therefore, is to particpate in that kenosis of God in Christ. This conversion into ‘something’ at once reminds ‘that without God we are nothing’.

Practical

So what might the call to conversion look like for the different forms of community?

Sodal
For those communities of more intentional belonging and activity the call to conversion maybe a relatively easy vow to taken on. Most of these communities are ‘new’ and part of the attraction of them is that they are fresh and different. These communities are born out of a desire for change from the mode. There is a temptation to stagnate, however, and the intial impetus fades. The response to these occasions is either to do something new or multiply. When multiplying though there may be a call to ‘not fix what isn’t broke!’ That which had embraced a call to bring about new things soon settles into a rhythm and tradition of its own. Trying to maintain both the call to stability and to conversion is a space, I think, which will bring about much fruit for sodal communities.

An ongoing question for sodal communities who adopt a vow to conversion as outlined above would be in what way are they converting and why?

For individual participants it will be about that inner conversion of opinions and behaviours. This must be done within the context of community in dialogue. This will be come into play at times of great discernment about directions or visions.

Why do I think or feel that is the right thing to do?

But the call to conversion also plays out on the communal aspects of life together too. Consider that point of stagnation into familiar, the plateauing of missional zeal and activity. How does the community continue to grow and develop whilst maintaining stability? The tension here is a creative one and will help steer discernment.

Modal
Parish churches are often parodied as the ultimate change resistors.

How many Anglicans does it take to change a light bulb?
Change? We don’t change!

This vow of conversion, the commitment to change, however, is at the heart of our baptismal liturgy. the issue is that the majority of our baptisms are to infants who are never encouraged to live out the continual conversion into Christ. This is why the baptism service must be performed within a main service in order ‘that the congregation… be put in remembrance of their own profession made to God in their baptism.’

Most change resistance within the parish church, I find, is about power. People get a status with positions of power. People connect that sense of control, prestige with what they do and so when someone challenges what is being done the individual takes it as a challenge to them. So Romero’s call to remind ourselves that financial capital, political influence and power are worthless is integral to bring about necessary change within a modal community.

The commitment to conversion, held within the tension of the vow to stability, is about the individual continual repenting of any claims on power and influence. It dialogues with the commitment to the rest of the community as you discern the will of God together in relationship. Yes, there are somethings that should remain but often asking the questions as to why reveals ulterior motives which will always need to be challenged within the context of repentance.

Nodal
As with the call to stability, nodal communities, particularly any New Monastic Society, the vow to conversion will be worked out in dialogue. All that has been said about having an openness to be changed by another is key in the nodal model. Conversion begins with the individual but develops into the communal and this evolution must continue into the networks of communities too.

Conversion could also remind distinct communities to remain connected with others as they seek to continual revisit their own life together. To dialogue with others who share this vow to both stability and conversion will mean that fruitful discoveries will be found. Sharing good practice, supporting one another, mediating for one another and ultimately challenging one another are many practical ways in which a nodal society can enable the living out of conversion across the communities.

keno charis: ruptured for you (a liturgy for Burning Fences)

(Burning Fences is a small community based in York which is exploring how to sing a new song in the rubble of an old world. I led this as an evening exploring the Trinity for my
fellow ‘sparrows’.)

People enter a small upper room above the city. there is a low table and cushions surrounding it.

On the low table are three bowls each with a question by it and there’s a chalice and plate set up. People are invited to write on scraps of paper responses to the following questions and put them into one of three bowls:

What is your ultimate question?

What is your biggest doubt?

What is missing?

When all are settled drinks for the evening are ordered. This often individualistic action is challenged with the following, seemingly restrictive commands: Everyone is to be responsible for one drink order, it cannot be their own. They, therefore, must take responsibility for another’s order. That other person cannot be the one who is responsible for their own order; the two must find a third who then links to another group…

The evening begins when the drinks order is sent downstairs.

Three people begin by reading the following,

Person 1: In an upper room, not unlike this one, the Lord stood amongst friends and shared.

Person 2: In another upper room, not unlike this one, the Lord stood amongst friends and breathed.

Person 3: In a third upper room, not unlike this one, the Lord stood amongst friends and transformed.

Narrator: Tonight we’re going to explore a mystery through three stories of upper rooms. Three and yet one. It’s one story but three points. It’s three ideas that make up one narrative. Three parts to this one mystery…

Story 1. In a tight, cramped, claustrophobic space, in a darkened corner above the city, the prophet rabbi Jesus sat amongst friends. They would meet regularly and share stories, questions, songs. There was no pattern, no formula, no entry requirement, just a desire. It was not a shared ideology or philosophy that bound them together but a shared desire… to know what it was about this rabbi who had chosen to be with them.

Despite their doubts, despairs, disillusionment, they desired, above all, to discover. To discover a way to be free. Self help, private thoughts, individualism had led to self imprisonment and they were tired of being alone. They were like sparrows desiring a hedge to call home.

Liturgy of the Sparrows

We are the sparrows who are claiming back the hedges.

Response: We are the sparrows that will not be satisfied with twigs.

We are the sparrows that are crying out for our hedges.

Response: We are the sparrows that are weary from singing lonely songs.

In our hedge, where we feel safe again,

Response: we seek our social life back, and the sooner the better.

In our hedge, where we talk things over,

Response: we make decisions, laugh if we want to and sing.

This is our story, this is our song,

and we’ll live it till it’s our reality.

A song about home is shared.

Narrator: Story 1. In a tight, cramped, claustrophobic space, in a darkened corner above the city, the prophet rabbi Jesus showed them how to be a holy community…

The narrator gets a bowl and pours warm water into it. He invites someone to have their hands washed. The act of hand washing is a more culturally applicable version of foot washing in the near east culture of Jesus. There’s an element of cleansing and preparation for food as well as retaining the intimacy of foot washing. As the narrator washes the other’s hands he says,

You have to let me wash your hands in order for me to show you love. If you refused I would not be able to show you my care for you. Allowing me to bless you with this gift is a gift to me. You have allowed me to have a relationship with you. Thank you.

The narrator passes out bowls of water and invites others to sit and receive from one another.

During all of this music is played.

When all have been washed one has left and returned with food and the drinks. Each member should pay more attention for another’s drinks than their own. All are invited to eat.

Who’d like to tell a story of a time when have you felt closest to someone else?

A time of storytelling.

Story 2. In a tight, cramped, claustrophobic space, in a darkened corner of the city, the friends sat. Huddled together in fear. Bereft. Present in body only. Absent in other respect. They had lost. Lost their nerve. Lost the fight. Lost the will. Lost Him. The prophet. Their rabbi.

He had said to them, when he was in the upper room, that he would give everything he had; he would give his life for them. He would not withdraw from the consequences of his love for them. He would be taken and drained of life. He would allow it to happen. He chose to allow it to happen. He chose to allow all people to do what they desired most because he loved.

And now he’s gone. They had lost. The thing that had brought them all together; the person who had called them to each other had left. They had hoped it was forever but he had disappointed. A vacuum now existed in their midst like empty plates where once was food. An absence where once was presence.

A song about loss is shared.

Story 2. In a tight, cramped, claustrophobic space, in a darkened corner of the city, the friends sat and embraced the abyss with all their questions:

One of the bowls that contains the responses to the question ‘What is your ultimate question?’ is passed round and the answers are read out.

The friends sat and embraced the abyss with all their doubts.

The other bowl with the responses to the question ‘What is your biggest doubt?’ is passed round and the answers read out.

The friends sat and embraced the abyss with all their emptiness and lack.

People are invited to read out the responses to the question ‘What is missing?’ from the third bowl.

Story 2. In a tight, cramped, claustrophobic space, in a darkened corner above the city, the prophet rabbi Jesus appeared to his friends. That which was lost had been returned but now a paradox… the friends still felt an absence but it felt like a presence beyond all presences; richer more fuller presence. It was like the last time he was with them but there was a deeper reality to him, to them.

He had been emptied; given all of himself. He who had said that he was God. God had given all things to him and he freely gave it all away to show them how much he loved them. His generosity knew no bounds. He had given everything, even his very self. Now he was back amongst them and showed that He was, in some way, unknowable to them, mysteriously, he was God, eternal, abundant source of all things, of life itself.

“Now do you see?” he said “All that I have I give to you… and I have a lot. I want to be emptied, again and again of all I have so that you have. All that you’re missing I give to you but the real trick is to discover that life is found when you empty of ‘having’ and satisfy the other’s need.”

“God gave to me,” he said “I give to you, but I can’t stay with you in bodily form, it’s too limited. I will return to my home and send to you the key to the Divine store cupboard. He will come and grant you access to the gifts but do not hold onto them for they, like manna in the wilderness will rot if kept in your grasp. Give, give away, give until you have nothing left and your hand will be refilled.”

“This is the secret to community. Each giving until they have nothing but, of course, this dynamic generosity creates from nothing. This is how the universe was built; generous, abundant, emptying love; love that seeks to have nothing so the other will have everything. God the Father showed His love for me by giving me the whole cosmos and more besides he continues to give until there is nothing left to give, when space and time has run out and beyond that. I showed my love to him by giving all I could and I still give… And now I give to you and call you to live with us, participate.”

“You’re all interested in what makes good human community? Humans are made in the image of God and when you live as if that were true, your actions and lives sing of eternity. You’ve dreamt of a place, a way of living that feels like the home you’ve always desired? I have considered your niche needs, disjointed designs and contradictory commands of communal contentment and this is what I offer; an urban landscape sprawling out to scenes of symbiotic existence; spaces of intimacy seeming epic. Small spaces stretch out into space unimaginable.”

“In the centre of this city is a stream sourced from a singular washing space where you can willingly wash away the weeping water from your eyes; wash away all the lies which twist distort and chastise; wash away the pain of missed goodbyes, the long held hurt when a loved one dies, all that contributes to our cries, from the inexpressible silent sighs to the African skin crawling with flies, the countless millions caught in disguise to those imaginations that devise instruments of torture that lead to our demise.

This washing water has supplies for all generations to surmise, from the one who accepts to the one who denies, yes, all are asked to step in and be baptized.”

As the friends looked at the Great Designer’s two dimensional doodles depicting detailed designs for districts of dreams; they were transported from 2D to 3D and they stood at the heart of this great project, this divine concept of collaborated dreams of home. As they scanned the scene with their senses searing with celestial resplendence, they saw it was their terrestrial city with its burnt out building bordered up, barren, broken, brittle skeletons, shells of second rate, suppressed statements of habitations, empty, abandoned, bereft of life. This vacuous void is all they’d envisioned, their vital improvements to the divine construction.

“All these buildings won’t be obstructions.” the rabbi said as He pointed to the destruction. “All of you will be part of this production; we’ll need some more. Can you get introductions? It won’t work if we resort to abductions but paint a portrait of perpetual seduction; Lilting lullabies of love. Meandering melodies of mercy. Holistic harmonies of hope. This is how we will win people to our cause. Sing to them simply of the Son who was sent to your city to speak out against injustice, racist hostility and stubborn statuses. “Sacrifice self” He said. Die to all you think defines, distinguishes, differentiate and divides. Die to all that makes you think ‘me’. That’s not how you are to be, its ‘we’, you see, us constantly, lovingly, eternally relating looking out celebratorily at creation, the manifestation of Our imagination which speaks of salvation. Stand against temptation. Participate in incarnation. Join Our nation.”

They were still in that upper room but now it seemed foreign. The rabbi was gone and they were free. They felt… called, with all creation, to participate in a Divine dance, dwelling with Him, deliberately drawing and deliberating over the debilitated definitions of themselves.

This divine creativity is now innate and it is to participate in a state where every breath is to create because the truth is we, humans can do nothing, we are pathetic, we are fragile, fragmented, foolish and frail. If it was down to us failure would frame our every fumbled attempts at life. But God doesn’t limit His giving of good gifts generously gathering His grace getting offspring and giving, blessing them with boundless benefaction and the ability to beautify the broken, black globe we abide in.

Creativity is the choice to catch the vision of His passionate parade of perpetual pleasure as He paints pictures in the palette of the sky and proclaims praises powerfully in proud oaks. Problem solving, parenthood, pottery, plumbing, all is creative in Papa’s production.

Do we care too much on product and not on process? Capitalism capturing our capability in creation. Yes, creativity is innate, equally distributed, designated, dished out. If we decide to delegate in this divine dynamism we decide to die for it is participation with His soul saving Spirit that gives life. Creativity is cooperating with our curiosity in creation, creating collaborations in community, making mutual memories made in mirth and misery shared. Stories singing through souls, sewing us, sculpting us, shaping us, scripting us into the narrative of the non-conforming Nazarene whose never-ending life and love lulls us into lucid lovers and alighting a light in our hearts, little wisps of wonder wilting the winter inside. All of us part of the process to paint the playground, perform the eternal play and promote partnership in people un-praised but packed with potential.

A song of hope and community is shared.

Story 3. In a tight, cramped, claustrophobic space, in a darkened corner above the city, Simon, who they called ‘Peter’, one of the group was stood amongst outcasts. This foreign group had not been a part of the original group of sparrows in that first upper room. They had gathered from elsewhere but he saw in them that sparrow song. He stood amongst them and remembered the night he had sat with the prophet rabbi Jesus and he had showed them God, divine community, love unadulterated and emptying of gift. Peter stood and spoke, he modelled love as he had known it, pure, from the heart of God Himself. The group were sparrows in a hedge; just for a moment. They sang, they laughed, they shared, they lived the life of communal God right in front of him.

I have shared my stories. I share them till I am empty, bereft.

Keno Charis means ‘emptying of gift’. It is the mystery at the heart of the Trinity; God in community, Father, Son and Holy Spirit; each one giving to the other attempting to be empty of all they possess in order that the other has more but in some mysterious way this creates more. God, the source of all things trying pass on all of it is the secret to life. When we live and participate in this activity we are caught in the basis of life itself and we experience God. Trinity. The Communal heart of creation from the Creator.

Liturgy of the empty and healed

Person 1: I have my music,

I give it to you,

I give it till I’m empty.