And yes, it is possible that poverty and religion are wed because the poor are largely unenlightened beyond the confines of a mystical, authoritative, and often unintellectual system. But I wonder whether the marriage is not a good deal richer. For if poverty is the truth about human existence, in which all things are given, then the motions and meanings of religion are the proper, intelligible and honest response to the fact of waking up human. Surely we recognize that the universal postures of prayer are identical with those of the homeless man who begs by the gas station? Kneeling, pleading with fingers interwoven, imploring with hands folded, bowing, weeping, rocking, extending open palms — this is the dialect of the poor and the faithful, the common ground between the wealthy churchgoer and the beggar outside the door. Both are engaged in radical honesty about the nature of their existence. This is the dialect of the divine liturgy, a practice in poverty, a gift to the rich man who would be ashamed to kneel on the street, the culmination of which is a soup-kitchen called Holy Communion, where we act out that universal symbol of dependency — receiving food from another. If humans are fundamentally poor, than these religious acts are fundamentally human.This, at least, make sense to me, for I understand Christianity as the means by which I fully become myself. I go to church in a desperate attempt to be who I am. If poverty is the truth of existence, the nature of the self that I am, and Christianity is the means by which I become who I am, then of course Christianity is a bended knee and an outstretched palm. It is a becoming poor.
Posted on: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 04:04:00 +0000