The Erotic Disposition of Homer’s Bowling Ball.

Homer Simpson

Believing there is a code to be cracked is of course much the same as believing in the existence of some Big Other: in every case what is wanted is an agent who will give structure to our chaotic social lives. – Zizek

Our attraction to figuring things out stems from the erotic drives within us all. Freud speaks of the id which part of the fundamental core within our erotic drive. What is the Id?

THE ID (‘It’): functions in the irrational and emotional part of the mind. At birth a baby’s mind is all Id – want want want. The Id is the primitive mind. It contains all the basic needs and feelings. It is the source for libido (psychic energy). And it has only one rule –; the pleasure principle: ‘I want it and I want it all now’. In transactional analysis, Id equates to “Child”.

If we see life as system, then we think we are inherently drawn to the space of tinkering with something we think is broken and something we have come to believe is merely mechanistic. Existentialism at its basic level is driven by the core of the Id. Expending ourselves over a part-object struggle is something we think we need to be committed to.

What struggle do I speak of? I am speaking into the angst of our beings, the questions that haunt us: Why am I here? Who am I? What is my purpose here? I refer to them as part-objects because they are truly things that seem to leave when we think we’ve cracked the code, but much like the Cheshire cat in Alice and wonderland they return when we least expect them to or maybe even want them to.

Maybe I can posit something here. Maybe we’ve moved beyond the ‘Why I am here?’ Phase of global identification. It does seem the world is more in tune now more than over with its purpose, but maybe now we seem to be more ontologically wired in our enquiry. What does this mean?

Ontology is the study of being.

In its simplest terms: “ontology deals with questions concerning whether entities exist or can be said to exist, and how such entities can be grouped, related within a hierarchy, and subdivided according to similarities and differences.” Ontology is enquiry into being. But I would also say isn’t much different than existentialism. ontology is less caffeinated.

Let’s get back to cracking the code.

If life is a code we’re meant to crack, then the irony is how do we know when we’ve cracked it? And when you find the code, does that mean that code should work for me to? Because if your code is meant to work for me, and one-size fits all than most likely we’re a cosmic hoax with go-go gadget insides. Let’s dig a bit deeper. The consumer promise hidden behind the one-size fits all is the reality or non-reality showcasing the differences between all of us.

safe

In its terminology, it represses the truth, which is, that we are all different and one-size truly doesn’t fit all. In fact, i’m sure this has happened to most of us at one or another where we’ve entered into the marketplace wanting to make such a purchase and then we find the one-size doesn’t fit all. The perverse intention is to make it seem we all have the same size hands, heads, and other appendages. That in our excess, what lies outside of our torso ( the limbs represent the excess) is exactly same as the person standing next to us.

But we know this isn’t true.

Yet, we purchase in the hope that the idealistic notion can be true. That one day we can all be the same. This is the obscene gesture within a lot of multiculturalism today, it tries to assume that everyone should be treated the same, but in reality by higlighting the cause of the ‘downtrodden’ we exalt their plight above everyone else’s. Although this may not be the intention, we must look at other possible alternatives rather than destroying the very objective we seek to uphold.

There is a portion of scripture in the Bible that hilights an important point about society today.

Jesus’ friends are a bit apprehensive about their encounter with some other people who seem to be talking about jesus but aren’t hanging out with him or others. Some versions call them ‘the other disciples’. The disciples are almost in childish fashion ‘tattle-tell’ on these rogue followers of Jesus.

And basically Jesus tells these trepidacious disciples to leave them alone. If there for him then that is a good thing. It seems to be in our nature to want to force a ‘one-size fits all’ on those we meet. In fact this is the ghost of the Id, this is the childish aspect of our being.

Where our fear of being alone takes over.

In this moment, it is not merely a weak selfish moment categorized by a possible fear of social abandonment, but rather it is driven by eros. the Greek word for erotic love. A tempetous self-driven kind of love that, in the end, only benefits the giver rather than the receiver.

This is much like Homer Simpson who purchases for Marge a bowling ball with his name on it. The paradox,as I am sure you can see is that Homer is not driven by a selfless love, but a love that only benefits himself, and in so doing solidifies this erotic type love by insisting that Marge receive a gift that has been clearly purchased solely for his benefit.

When we assert that our code should fit everyone else’s this is the gift under the guise of a gift.

Although on the surface our intentions might be white as snow, at the core the pleasure principle is driving at the wheel, we are merely the shotgun passengers. The way to move forward is to take the shotgun we hold and kill that aspect of ourselves that drives us to purchase ‘bowling balls’ for others. When the bowling ball may not clearly be the best thing for them.

Short term mission trips or short terms overseas development tend to pride themselves in helping others. But in the end, do more damage than good. The missionaries of old were white, had money and were somehow linked up with God.

This belief was so pervasive, that those who participated in such things were almost treated like gods.

Overseas development shout from the mountaintops of sustainability and transformational momentum, yet the after-effects tend to be short-term and not what the indigenous population need. These types of trips are driven by the id. they are erotic gestures. They are a ‘bowling ball’. They do damage under the guise of help.

I think maybe we can learn from the professional bowlers, who, when their balls get old and worn out, throw that one away and get a new one. The examples are endless here. But the ideology of one-size fits all hurts people under the guise of helping them. What we can do is to foster a safe space for their discovery, a space where we don’t guide their journey, but simply enjoy it with them.

Living in a Post-Theological World: Beyond Theories of God

Underneath Paris

In philosophy, theory (from ancient Greek theoria, θεωρία, meaning “a looking at, viewing, beholding”) refers to contemplation or speculation, as opposed to action.[1] Theory is especially often contrasted to “practice” (Greek praxis, πρᾶξις) a concept that in its original Aristotelian context referred to actions done for their own sake, but can also refer to “technical” actions instrumental to some other aim, such as the making of tools or houses. “Theoria” is also a word still used in theological contexts.

“Hollie Baylor: I was still waiting for everything to start, and now it’s over” (Elizabethtown, Movie)

In terms of developing theories, why do we do it? Most likely because we want to know. In a very simple form, this is a type of gnosis. We look to information to inform us of something that lies outside of ideology. I think it also comes down to how we view God. Sometimes it does seem we use theology to prove to God who she should be. In this light, theology as a theory then becomes a tool of coercion and/or measurement. And not only towards the divine, but towards one another.

In this moment, our theories on the Divine are to prohibit people from believing or living certain ways. Yet, the hope of any religion is to make humanity better, right? Some might agree that to be better at being human is to be better at being free. So if religion has come to a place where it denies the very element it inherently claims it holds, then it has become something other than religion.

We’ve entered into an interesting era in history where people are beginning to ask if history is all we get. Not just in Christianity, but within the framework of the world. We are beginning to see things differently, and I think this is a great time for transformation. I think a good place to start is to realize that now doesn’t have the last word for what is to come.

There is more to God, more to Jesus, more to Christianity than what has previously been offered. But, I have to be honest, I don’t think this exciting new change includes theology. Let me explain. When I used the word theology I am speaking of the theory of theology. Theology as Ideology. Theology as a static entity that exists before the liminal threshold of ideological transformation.

The nation of Israel in Ezekiel 37 are represented as a metaphorical pile of bones. These bones are awaiting resurrection. Awaiting new life. These bones are lying in a deep valley. Darkness surrounds this nation of people. It is a dark time. They have systematically lived their lives to the letter of the law, and God enters the scene and promises to give them a new heart. This is the thing that sustains life, the heart. Israel has lost her heart.

To the point of no longer being human.

She is the object that still persists beyond existence. Although there is no flesh in sight, God responds to Israel as if she is embodied. In this moment, there is a realization that occurs, that God’s Gaze* is actually Israel’s Gaze*. The only way God can respond to Israel as if she is embodied in this metaphor is because God is full embodiment of the disembodied divine. God’s ability to interact creates the illusion of embodiment. The reality in the parable is that Israel is de-fleshed.

Theology has become the pile of bones. It has become embodied by history, assumptions, subjective truths and alienated concepts that have been kept in tow by those before us.

If we simply believe something that has either been socially or historically accepted as truth without ever questioning the intentions of the writer or the point that is being made, than we are not believing, we are simply believing under the guise of belief. In this sense the system itself is mediating our belief. Theology has become the mediator of our belief.

It believes for us.

In a post-theological world God exists not because theology says so, but because God is pure in the Hegelian sense. He exists as Being, but also exists as non-being. This much like the character of the Cheshire Cat who’s mouth exists without his body. It is the disembodied reality that is also the embodiment of reality. Rather than one being different from the other, they are one in the same. Or like how the Matrix is something that is always spoken of but never fully realized. In a post-theological world, there is no system in place to describe God because every system does not have ability to account for a God is consistently becoming.

This is why Heresy as the New Theology must be taken seriously and not simply because it is inflammatory. When I speak of heresy, I do not just mean what is deemed as theoretically unsound by the mass majority, but as a positive deconstruction that grows through the systems we create round the Divine. It is positive in that it opens up endles possibilities for discovery. It leaves holy space for unholy moments. It invites us to see that this Being beyond being lies outside of our system of thought. This is why the mystics are so important to the general religious landscape, they remind us the inherent inadequacy of our words. We must exchange awe for literal expression.

It’s that moment where we experience the Divine to the point where we just can’t seem to fit God in our rhetoric. This is a post-theological moment. This is a moment of heresy. Heresy leads those with theories to action. God illicits darkness because that is where she belongs. God had to create light, because she exists there. This isn’t the darkness that is easily compared to evil acts, but rather the darkness that brings distinction, paradox, inconsistency.

We need this stark inconsistency to understand that we don’t understand God and that is a good thing. So what do we do with God being near, and the God who is far? They are one in the same. His immanence is her transcendance. In a Post-Theological world God resides in inconsistency because that’s where the Divine makes sense.

So, what does this world look like without ‘Theology’? What it means is that competition and apologetics are near non-existent in their current forms. That we don’t have to be right. That beyond our theories lies humanity at its best. This may sound like one idea replacing another, but it is more than that, it is the ability to see that multi-culturalism doesn’t just lie in the culture itself but is understood as something comprised of many things. So, a heretical multiculturalism seeks to open space where there was no space to be open prior to the post-theological world.

This heretical multi-culturalism asserts that truth much like Hegel’s pur God is just as becoming as the Divine itself. What does this mean then for all of us? It means we have to lace up our boots, pull out our camping gear, bring some rations because we have no idea where this might end, but we know we are moving forward…

* Lacan’s Gaze is simply defined as : “The ‘Gaze’ is a psychoanalytical term brought into popular usage by Jacques Lacan to describe a condition where the mature autonomous subject observes “the observation of himself” in a mirror.

Beatitudes: Fracturing Reality

death star self portrait

“Beatitude is a possession of all things held to be good,
from which nothing is absent that a good desire may want.
Perhaps the meaning of beatitude may become clearer to us
if it is compared with its opposite. Now the opposite of beatitude is misery.
Misery means being afflicted unwillingly with painful sufferings.” – St. Gregory of Nyssa


“Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us. We ask ourselves, Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, fabulous? Actually, who are you not to be? You are a child of God. Your playing small does not serve the world. There is nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won’t feel insecure around you. We are all meant to shine, as children do. We were born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us. It’s not just in some of us; it’s in everyone. And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others.” – Marianne Williamson

The Beatitudes were an ancient Jewish poem constructed with portions from Isaiah, Psalms, Deuteronomy. The OT verses were written to the Jewish audience. The Beatitudes were essentially attempting to make sense of their struggle and pain. And through Jesus the author says that God will make sense of their struggles.

The Beatitudes are an example of what all humans try to do, to make sense of their pain.

In the movie ‘Youth In Revolt’ the main character played by actor Michael Cera tries to find ways to get a girl he likes to like him in return, but he is so unsure of himself that he is convinced he must create an alter-ego. Someone else to be him, but not him.

In this moment, his reality is fractured.

This is what the Beatitudes do, they fracture reality. They peer into the situation at hand and see a better world. An idealised version of itself. This is what happens to the character in the movie, he creates the ultimate ideal to achieve what he thinks he needs to to make himself happy.

The Beatitudes inherently assume that the world we live in could be less self-referential, less ego-driven, and that society could be the antithesis to oppressive behaviour. They seem to assert a new reality where beliefs take a back seat to relationship ethics. It seems the Rabbi who might have spoke such words was defending the possibility of a new kind of world that occur now, not one-day when. To do so, this old era must end of living for ourselves must end.

An End Times must happen in that moment.

The second we make a decision to change the way we treat one another is the second that we deny that the relationships prior to that moment should have happened. The Beatitudes are the belief in something beyond belief. Are the belief in humanity. If I were to use the words of another to help better encapsulate the message of the Beatitudes I would borrow the whole of Marianne Williamson’s quote above which seems to be nothing more than a modernised version of the spirit of the Beatitudes.

The act of creating an alter ego is the inability to confess that the real life person doesn’t have what it takes. Most of our lives we live in a world full of alter-ego’s, we spend our energy projecting ourselves as the world thinks we should be. Our society encourages us that reality is never better than the dream state. Movies with happy endings. Erotically-charged romance novels. All the while in the midst of falsely empowering ourselves we are denying our own existence.

By not being who we are, we displace our very being.

Jesus steps in on the scene and offers a space for everyone to be themselves. In the middle of a narrative infused by Roman oppression, the Jewish people are imparted with a message of existential hope. In the midst of their national angst, the beatitudes become a moment of identification. In these words are the hope that all their pain would one day make sense.

In the midst of their national frustration, Jesus offers a new way to see each other, and doesn’t necessarily deal with all of their struggles head on, but challenges them to relinquish their alter-ego’s. To give up the idea that they need to be someone else. That the way society was wasn’t who they really were; that there was a better society inside of them all waiting to get out, and it was hidden in these words. It’s something more than a collection of poems, in this moment, when these words enter into the Jewish narrative, they become a theme song for a Jewish people who have known oppression first-hand.

The Beatitudes are about accepting the outsider as an insider. Accepting those that religion have marginalized and bring them to the center; the gay; the ethnic minority; the woman;the poor; the child; Its becoming racist to all of those things that create racism. Its becoming divisive towards the very thing that create division. Its become the very antithesis of a society that looks out for itself under the guise of holy rhetoric. The beatitudes are a manifesto on how to live in a society that accepts all people, no matter who they are as equals.

The word for blessed in Hebrew is Asheri. Now, let’s examine the other word for “blessed”-asheri. This is a word a person would never use to bestow upon YHWH. It’s a word by humans for humans
only. One person can issue an asheri blessing upon another person. You can receive the asheri blessing from another person. It’s one human being blessing another. Other times, I say, “The LORD bless you.” When I say this I can mean only barak-something I cannot nor ever be able to do for you. I cannot give you a barak blessing. Only God does this.”

The Beatitudes are an incredibly powerful opus, they are the belief that humanity has been given the ability to live better.

That hierarchy doesn’t have the last word. That empire will never last. That poverty can disappear. That answers aren’t the last response to our ontological development.

The Beatitudes in and of themselves speak directly to every aspect of the human condition. To hunger. To need. To emotions. To society. Most importantly, to each other. The beatitudes are the belief that we can be better humans if we want to be.