Acceptance
Once more round the Spiral…
Jesus said, Whoever is not with me is against me. Whoever does not gather with me, scatters. He also said, Whoever is not against you is for you.
These two sayings, taken together, are one of the koans of the Bible: for how can they both be true? The world-view of Holy Willie:
Oh Thou who in the Heavens dost dwell
Who, as it pleases best Thysel’
Sends ane to Heaven and ten to Hell
A’ for Thy Glory
does not fit reality. People do our best under difficult circumstances. There is no obvious line between the Remnant and the Damned, and those who think of themselves as the Remnant generally do harm. They have too much need to Convert others. And there are good unbelievers, and poor believers.
From that, I decided that Morality is addressed to me, and me alone. Compton Mackenzie had a character who read the Bible assiduously to learn her rights and others’ duties. My view was the opposite: I had no right to consider the morality of others’ being or doing, only my own. Judge not, that ye be not judged.
So, this put me on the way to accepting the World as it is. Unfortunately, having little self-respect, I did not do the work of self-acceptance. I had to be other than I am. I had to make a man of myself. I had to be rational, intellectual, thinking things through. Even changing from presenting male to expressing myself female did not let me accept myself, or what I want, or accept what makes me happy. That is the work I do now. That is what I need to do to survive in this world. I am a good person, not for what I do but for who I am, under the shell, under the masks, my authentic self.
————————————————————————————————————–
I am so politically correct, that I am a wheen chary of the phrase “her heart’s in the right place” in case anyone is dextrocardiac. Political correctness which is worth anything at all is respect and courtesy. Any infelicity of language can be improved: “fire person”? No, “fire officer”. “Non-sexist language” becomes ”inclusive language”, more obviously an improvement.
This is excellent practice for a writer, and also for any human being seeking to use language to understand the World. Of course language cannot let us understand the world, but it can take us to those jumping-off points beyond language; and it can continually push the boundaries of understanding.
So, why talk of being “vulnerable”? That sounds frightening and dangerous. Talk instead of being “authentic” or “real”, which sounds liberating and empowering. Talk not of being undefended, but of ceasing to be defensive. I have my defences if needed, but they are needed surprisingly rarely.
Brava, Clare! This post reads like a declaration of freedom. Where do I sign?? xxx
Freedom from shame is a useful freedom. I think you have it.
I liked your post Clare. I’ve been thinking lately about similar things, like my morality being my own. Seeing people trying to impose their morality on me and others is a good reminder of my own need to not judge, but to accept. Not just others, but myself. But it’s not as easy as it sounds. Sometimes I wonder if it’s even more difficult because I came from a very fundamental remnant-like background where I was taught, among other things, that there was nothing good in me. God was the only good, I was inherently evil and bad. I was actually scribbling notes to myself just last night. It does sorta make self-love and self-acceptance a bit challenging… especially for those of us who don’t quite fit the “acceptable” norm. Anyway, it’s nice to read about a fellow traveler on the road to self-acceptance, and everyone-else-acceptance. Thanks!
Indeed it is not easy. And it is essential for freedom. Old habits die hard, and new habits can bed in if you give them time. And the Bible is less clear than some might think on our inherent evil: “you knitted me together in my mother’s womb, your works are wonderful and I know it well”. God so loved the World that he gave his only son, Jesus Christ. The love is freely given, but given to someone inherently loveable. Us. Rock on.
Your self-insights are truly Kierkegaardian, therefore here is a Buddhist question: Is it an illusion that you do not accept yourself?
serch a heddwch,
olwen
If I knew the answer to that, it would not be an illusion.
Love and peace,
Clare.
Clare, you just captured the essence of what many of us feel but struggle to put into words. It’s interesting that I got your post as I was sitting at a coffee shop, waiting out a power outage, and wondering why I am not comfortable being myself and talking about the things that really matter to me even with my own friends. Heck, I won’t even use my real identity on my blog. And for some reason, C.S. Lewis’ book “Till We Have Faces” comes to mind. It’s one of my favorites… truly beautiful, and your writing took me back there. Thank you for sharing.
Queen Orual, the most wise, just, fortunate, valiant and merciful- never thought she was good enough, did she?
Welcome, and thank you. More of it tomorrow.
You have such a talent to take words and weave them into beautiful thoughts, this one is no different.
What I love about Buddhism appears to be what you love about Christianity it seems, the search for authenticity of self and the true blessing of the universe, to honour the true beauty of ourselves beyond moral judgments. Well, at least that is what I learned from your post.
Thanks for sharing and making me think.
The religions some use to call us different and wrong, we can use to honour our beauty, in moral appreciation rather than judgment. Yes. Thank you.