Love like Christ

What caught my attention was when the priest was dragged around the city as the people mocked him. Endo says, "what grieved him most was his inability to love these people as Christ had loved them". We often times preach to love others as Christ does, but we do not see how difficult it can be. The priest came to this country to help them, but the people do not want it. He came to share Christ's love, but they push it away. Should we still pour out His love when it is not wanted? Of course, but that does not mean it is easy. The priest says, "and yet in the crowd there may be some who are praying in the silence of their hearts". He holds onto the faith that there are still faithful Christians.

I commented on Caleb's post.

Silence

In finishing this book I was not surprised that in the end Rodrigues apostatizes but I was a little disappointed because I do not think it was justified. I don't think there is ever real justification for renouncing ones faith. Yes, his conscious was clearer and he did save the lives of the other Japanese being persecuted, but if he hadn't apostatized, the torture the peasants would've gone through wouldn't really have been his fault. If it comes to that or renouncing your faith, the blame is on God. and God knows that. If the peasants were really sold out for their faith, they would have encouraged Rodrigues to stay true to his faith, with the everlasting promise that there will be no more suffering once they are off this Earth, there is never a time where denying ones faith is right. I realize this is easy for me to say as a mere reader, perfectly safe behind my book. I also realize that a situation like that would be an extremely hard one especially for a believer because they would have more compassion and love for the people they felt as if they were causing to be hurt. However, as believers, we're called to encourage each other through suffering because of our steadfast loyalty and hope found in the Lord. Which brings me back to my original opinion: that there is never a time where renouncing ones faith is justifiable.

I commented on Caleb's

Silence

I have no earthly clue what to do with myself after reading this book.I really liked getting to see Christianity exposed in a different light like this. I enjoyed that some of it was told from the perspective of the sufferer himself so that we could get an idea of what it is like to be persecuted for our faith. In the end, I don't think any of us will really know what it is like until we are faced with it ourselves. I'm still not sure what we are supposed to take away from this book. Is it just supposed to make our faith stronger or are we now questioning our faith and why God can be so silent in times of great suffering?

I commented on Sierra Dillenschneider's.

Point

I'll start off on a random note. I adored Roodrigues' comment that Ferreira had committed blasphemy against the people. As if people are in possession of their own kind of holiness. It was beautiful. 

But I'm really stuck. If it's true that a culture can be encountered where there is literally no concept of divinity beyond human existence, what then is the missionary supposed to do? Is it ok for the Japanese to think of God as the Great Sun? If that is the highest though they have, is that not good enough for the Lord? Or....are we called to go in and completely override the culture and create a totally new thought for an entire people? That really sobers me since I myself feel called to missions work in the Far East. How do I help lead a man to a God his intellect has no idea how to communicate with? I really don't know what to do with that thought. 

— Sierra has my comment. 

Obedience and Sacrifice

When reading the end of silence, I couldn't stop thinking about what the role of the Christian is when it comes to the suffering of others. We keep talking about how it was the priests that caused the peoples' suffering by not apostatizing. However, isn't it really the fault of those actually doing the persecuting? Yes, the priests are in a way the cause of the tormentors response, but they are not actually choosing to torture the Christians.

When Rod began to see his choice to save the people as the ultimate sacrifice, I started to wonder what he thought about the actual act of apostatizing. Did he see it as disobedience? Because I'm pretty sure there is a verse in 1st Samuel talking about how obedience is better than sacrifice. Still, I'm not saying what Rod did was wrong. That's something I don't think one would really know until they are in the experience. Yes, it's horrible to cause someone pain, but he wasn't choosing to cause someone pain directly. His obedience to God was causing others to cause pain. I really don't know. I would probably have done what he did, but I still can't help but wonder how far we as Christians should go to alleviate or prevent suffering.

Hannah's

Silence

This was a very difficult book for me to read because it really just honed in on all of the suffering associated with Christianity. From the beginning of Rodrigues' journey, there was suffering and pain. Neither hope nor joy was expressed during this book, and if it was, it was kind of just glossed over. I honestly cannot figure out how I feel about this book just yet - it was so dark, but such a good read. Part of me really does not want to believe that the pain and suffering remained more constant and frequent than the joy and hope, but that's how I perceived in Rodrigues' journeys! I understand that we are to suffer sometimes for the glory of the Lord, and that the world hates the Lord, and therefore Christ-followers, but I do not even know what to do with myself after reading this. It is so shocking and heartbreaking to read the intensity of the persecution of the Christians and priests in Japan. I am interested to see how we will wrap up the discussion.

I commented on Darby's post!

Silence

I continue to sympathize with Ferreira because of his honesty. He continues to speak what I would do in some of the same situations as they are persecuted. And with his statement that Christ would have apostatized for them, I cannot help but the connection as well. We are called to suffer for Christ, to pick up our crosses and endure them for the world to see just as Christ did for us. He was tortured and beaten the same as these people and He did id for His children. The least I can do is strive to have the faith that can carry His yoke even if His burden is light.

Christ wouldn't have Apostatize

This statement that Ferreria makes " Christ would have apostatized for them." defiantly took me back and evaluated would He have really? Of course ,  one has to look back at the basis of Christian faith which is the crusifiction and resurrection of Jesus Christ and what it stood for. Jesus died for every person's sin on the cross and took immense sufferening so that we could live eternally. The Bible also goes on to state that we , as Christians, will have endure pain, persucution, and heartache while on this earth just like the ones in the pit are having to go through. Our sufferring is a test of our faith for God and if we truly believe that He can heal us in the end. Christ wouldn't renounce his own divinity not even when the Pharasises were scrutinizing Him and beating Him would He let go.  So I believe that Ferreria is definatly wrong with this statement as though it is hard to hear people suffering and their cries of pain it is also a sign of how far one is willing to go on this earth to rejoice in Heaven and reaffirms Christ's place on the throne. 

End To Silence

I can't say I condemn Rodriguez of apostatizing in the end. I feel like I would do the same if I had been in his position. It was a difficult choice, to either remain resolved in your faith and allow people to suffer, or to renounce your faith to save them. I do believe that Rodriguez made the best decision he could have in his situation. In fact, I say it was the Christian thing to do in such dire circumstances. And even though he is no longer welcome in his own Church, he was not abandoned by God nor did he truly give up his faith. I think the Japanese, while cruel and knew what effect this would have to the Christian population of Japan, had a point about the trampling being a "formality." He kept his faith, despite trampling the icons. To the public he is an apostate, but they allow him to keep his personal faith just that-personal. They didn't mind the priests having a different faith then their own, but when they began spreading that faith it became an issue. I am not saying I agree with them, but I see where they may be coming from. All in all, I don't think this story could have ended any other way than this. Rodriguez would have either apostatized or the death and torture would have continued because of him. And in that, there was no other Christian option.

I commented on Jeremy's post.

Slience

I am disappointed that Rodrigues ended up apostatizing. I know he did it for a reason to save the people and he felt like he was being called too but at the same time I was rooting for him to be the priest who didn't apostatize. I was very depressed with this book while it was very good and interesting to read I found myself questioning everything by the end of it. This book gave me a new perspective and overall I really did enjoy it.

P.S. I commented on Darby Callicutt's Post.

Last Silence

He wasn't writing a book against his faith (it was a ploy; he fooled the Japanese, and he who wrote the account).

Rod's acceptance of a name not his own, and from a man he didn't know, has great metaphorical implications.  I argue that he had done this beforehand, both in name (as a representative of the Society of Jesus) and in the comparisons of his face to that of whom he loved most dear.  He didn't know the real man in either case (this is his claim, not my own).

And what an honest ending!  Maybe it's not as easy as saying definitively he was right or wrong.  Maybe either way was right for him (each had its own benefits).  Indeed, he came to know his God better for his apostasy, in a way he never would have had he not trampled.

Nathan's

Silence

In the end, I don't think that I am all that shocked that Rodrigues apostatizes. I think his spiritual journey all the way to that moment, in a way, shaped him into the action. I think the silence he heard from God and finally realizing that trampling on the fumie was what God wanted him to do, made his faith even stronger. Even when Ferreira wanted him to apostatize, wanted him to actually renounce his faith, Rodrigues didn't waver. He thought about what would happen if he actually lost his faith but he never did. His faith is strong, and his grief is a little less in knowing that he saved the peasants.


I commented on Nathanael Carroll's!

Apostasy and Love

   I hate to say this, but... Good job, Rodrigues. Though he apostatizes in the end, I find it extremely revealing as to his character that his love for the people leads him to this.
   I may have more to say about his apostasy if I were Roman Catholic, but from my point of view, his treading on the "fumie," though disrespectful in a normal circumstance does not necessarily invoke a feeling of blasphemy or turning from God. His love for people led him to apostatize.
   This situation that he was in was terrible. Human judgment is not meant to make that kind of choice. Either way he went, his choice could have been justified. I am glad simply that he followed what he felt was God's way in saving lives. Am I saying that rejecting God to save others' lives is something I would do if given a situation similar? No, I honestly do not know what I would do, but Rodrigues's thought process at least leads him in truth and love.
   I do not feel that his writing against the faith is justifiable, though. That seems to take the entire thing a little too far. But then, isn't that the feeling this book emits? How far is too far when considering faithfulness and truth? (just as a side-note).

   All in all, I loved this book and feel better for having read it.



P.S. I commented on Brannen Uhlman's post.

...

What just happened? I internally screamed "NOOOO!!!" when Rodrigues stomped on the fumie. Then at the end he gives Kichijiro confession, and Rodrigues feels his love for God has never been realer. I just don't know... I am still processing. I want to say he disowned Jesus in front of men and Jesus said he would disown you if you if disown Him before men, but Peter disowned Jesus three times. Then again, Peter asked forgiveness then faced persecution for Christ. Rodrigues just says he never internally renounced his faith, and helps the Japanese find smuggled Christian items. But we are supposed to proclaim the Gospel. I know I am a Southern Baptist American. I cannot fully understand what Rodrigues went through when he heard the innocent suffering, but they were suffering for Christ not him. Right? Now for Garppe, him not apostatizing meant death for those who stomped on the fumie. This seems like a grey area... When I was in youth, my pastor asked me if a missionary is cornered and questioned if he is a Christian, should he be honest or lie? I said be honest. My pastor continued and asked, "What if he has a family and if he says yes, they die?" At the time I did not have an answer. I still don't.

What about right now?

A lot of the posts have been about how we would react if we were in a situation like the missionaries were in Silence. Would we still live for Christ even with the pressure of persecution looming over our heads? But I was thinking, what about right now? How are we living for Christ right now? We are not being physically persecuted to renounce our faith like those in Silence, but we do face situations every day where we have to choose how we are going to respond. I suppose this is fresh on my mind because I recently read an article on whether or not Christians have the right to be outraged about controversial topics. We definitely should be approaching everything with the grace and humility of Christ. We should be picking our battles - choosing the right time and right way to lament in anger.  

I commented on Brannen's post.

A Rocky Beginning

Silence opens with turmoil for the Christians in 16th Century Japan. Persecution and torture runs rampant, but those of the faith hold strong. The priests who hear of their brothers and sisters suffering for their faith run to their aid with no hesitation, an example many here in the United States could learn from. Even through disease and storms and lost vessels, the priests made it to their destination, and must now hide from the eyes of the Japanese government, to avoid execution. A rough start, to be sure, and I can hope that things get better from here. However, I suspect there is more troubles laying in wait for the brave priests.

 I commented on Tyler's post.

Silence

The first few chapters have little emotion and are more of a general account of what is happening with their missionary work and how they begin to adapt to the culture and gain respect. The account of finding Kichijino brings a renewal of excitement and uplifts their spirits. Its very textbook like to me and reminds me of what I learn in my Christian Ministries class. There is more detail and insight bringing the story-like aspect to it making it not a total bore like a textbook would.  I am hoping that once the Japanese begin opening up more than so will the narrators.




I commented on Travis Carr's post.

Silence

So, I'm through Chapter 4 so far, and I've really enjoyed this reading as well.  It's challenged me to think about my faith, and how we would respond if our faith were being oppressed.  Like a couple people have already brought up, most of us, despite the fact that he's criticized, would probably be Kichijiro.  Even subconsciously, we have all slightly gone against our faith, examples of this would be road rage, putting our focus on something else that goes against the will of God, or using His name in vain.

~Commented on Briana's post

The Cost

     Missions are my passion. I love mission trips, meeting missionaries, reading about missions, etc. I have definitely been called to missions. However this book - although I am not as far as I would like to be - reminds me how badly I romanticize missions - actually I tend to romanticize life in general. But like many stories similar to Silence, there are numerous missionaries that go through so much to share the Gospel. The conviction and courage it took for Fransisco Garrpe, Juan de Santa Marta, and Sebastian Rodrigues to fight to go to Japan is mind boggling. They knew that torture awaited them; however, they desired to follow their mission. One of them - Santa Marta - even gets sick before they get to Japan, and sadly he does not even make it to their destination. This novel definitely will be dark however, this is a dark world. It is easy to forget that sometimes - especially when you're singing Disney with your best friends in your dorm. I am excited for this novel, though.  The deep, dark twists of it will be not only interesting but educational, and remind me of what so many have done to simply share Jesus. My appreciation of freedom of religion will definitely increase.
P.S. I commented on Ray's!

Silence

I have enjoyed reading Silence so far. Many of the blog posts I have read have been about how we would react, as Christians today, if we were persecuted for loving the Lord. This is something that I have never really thought about extensively. My thoughts have ventured there but never grasped what I would really do. I can not even fathom being nailed to a cross and having to stay out in the middle of an ocean for days. I can't imagine what it must have been like for these Japanese Christians to live in fear their whole lives just to praise Jesus who they know is their savior. I know this book is going to convict me in all aspects that I am living in my faith- which is probably a good thing.


I commented on Hannah's!

Could I Do It?

As I work my way through Silence and read the heart-wrenching tortured scenes, I cannot help but wonder if I could do the same. Would I cave under and reject my Lord? Or would I be able to withstand being tormented for His name? Silence is both moving and convicting as a Christian in a free country. As a Christian, I would like to say think that with Christ by my side I could go through the same but because my faith has never been challenged to that extent. These character's faith is the kind of faith that I believe we should strive to have. Complete abandonment for Christ.

Silence

As Christians, we would like to think we would do anything for Christ, but would we actually? We say we would accept any persecution no matter  the pain or agony. But would we? Would we go through the being tied to a cross for two days until we died for the name of Jesus? I would commend these men, because most Christians would not go through what they did. In this day in age, we would not go through exactly what Ichizo and Mokichi did, but Christians today are still persecuted in some manner for their beliefs. Would you go through any percussion in the name of Jesus?

No Title, which is actually still a title

the vibe this book gives off is pure oppression. It helps that it's titled Silence because the timbre of the writing in my mind feels very much like the calm before the storm. When the air is too still and the field and the beasts are way too quiet. I feel Sebastien's confusion and his questioning. Is he really processing this? Being written as journal articles, it seems so objective. Like all the emotion has been drained and all we're left with is fact. There's no feeling. It's completely numb. And maybe that's the existence Sebastien has come. Numbness. Just like the faces of the Japanese. It makes me question myself. How I'd be in his shoes. Would have any feeling toward this? Or would my desensitizing sense of duty override my emotions? I really don't know.


I commented on Travis's post.

Garrpe and Rodrigues

I think it is incredible how these two priests are so determined to preach in Japan and to find out what has happened to Father Ferreira. Garrpe is so optimistic and seems to always have a smile on his face. Whether he is lying in his hut with lice crawling all over his body or teaching the villagers. Rodrigues while maybe not being as optimistic is brave or maybe idiotic. He seems brave when he risks going out of his hut to see who the visitors are or venturing to Gotō but then again stupid for risking being discovered as a priest. In reading Silence it gives me a better look at how grateful I am to have freedom of religion and to not be persecuted for my beliefs.

P.S. I commented on Abbie Griffin's post.

Silence

Reading this book has already challenged me so much. It has brought questions to my mind such as: would I be able to withstand a persecution as severe as having boiling water poured on me, or be able to withstand being tied to a cross in the middle of the sea for days until I died for the name of Jesus? This is absolutely insane for my mind to begin to wrap around. Just like considering Jesus being crucified, I am left baffled. Considering what these Christians persevered, it leaves me challenging myself to speak boldly the name of Christ. I may never personally experience the trials that these Japanese Christians, but it also challenges me to consider the Christians all over the world who are being similarly punished for their faith in the Lord. I do not want to be a coward like Kichijiro, publicly denying his faith twice to save his own life. I hope to live a faith so bold as one displayed by Mokichi or Ichizo.

I commented on Wendy's post!

Kichijiro is me, and I am Kichijiro.

Silence is proving to be an interesting read. I love hearing stories about the courage of missionaries, and their attempts in spreading the Good News of the Kingdom. When Kichijiro was discovered to be a Christian by Sebastian Rodrigues, I was incredibly motivated, despite realizing that he denied his faith to priests. Kichijiro is a relatable character because we all struggle with something. His happened to be his lack of pride in Christ. That may parallel with one's chronic lying, for example, but at the root, both the one struggling with lying and Kichijiro are Christians. It was a reminder that, after humanities' mistakes, Christ still sees us as we are, and welcomes us into the Kingdom with open arms.

I commented on Briana's post.

Silence

In chapter 4, where rodrigues for the first time really questions the existence of God, I find it interesting that one thing that troubles him is that he feels he should be able to "cast off" the thoughts and opinions of Kichijiro, but he can't. This caught my attention because Kichijiro's character is so inconsistent. He is lazy, cowardly, and a drunken old fool, yet, he's kept around because he is also helpful and a key component to the priest's surviving in Japan. Most priests or Christians in general wouldn't listen to people that are so fickle as Kichijiro is. Rodrigues is definitely one of those people. However, in the situation Rodrigues is in, the words of Kichijiro are sticking with him and playing a big role in his giving over to the doubt that he was so free from before. This just goes to show how in times of silence or extreme trial, voices of those that would have been easily drowned out in more bearable times, start to sound louder in your mind when you are going through deep struggles.

I commented on Wendy's!

Kichijiro

I think in some ways we are all like Kichijiro. He is a coward and his drunkenness in very unattractive but it's easy to sit here and criticize him when none of us have ever really faced persecution and death for our beliefs. I'm only at the second chapter but I am very interested to learn about Kichijiro's history. Why does he drink? Why is he such a coward? Are the people of Japan really as fearless and faithful as rumored?

I commented on Abbey Griffen's.

Kichijiro... What can I say?

    First off, this book is probably in my top three read for any assignment reading ever. I love it!

   Anyway, an idea/theme that has been going through my mind during this section of the book is the contrast between strength and weakness. Characters like Mokichi and Ichizo are celebrated for their strength to be subject to immense pain; whereas, Kichijiro is viewed is a sniveling coward for apostatizing in the face of persecution- not only once but twice. Yet, in light of his first act of apostasy, he was accepted and even celebrated as a leader (granted, in another area). Why? Why is he accepted as such? I have no idea, and for some reason I have tons of conspiracy theories rolling through my mind surrounding his involvement in the story.
   Personally, my mind is screaming that he is somehow being two-faced with Rodrigues. I feel that he is betraying him somehow. Granted, I am only midway through chapter five (please do not spoil anything in comments if you are ahead), but I feel Kichijiro has a larger role than that which is explicit in the book thus far. I m not sure; something just seems off in regards to his loyalty (maybe it is his double apostate character).


 I commented on Abbie George's post.

Suffering in God's Silence

I am not too fond of Kichijiro, but he makes a good point when he says, "Why has Deus Sama imposed this suffering upon us". He also looks at Rodrigues and says, "Father, what evil have we done". Kichijiro is a coward, but he pleads a good case. Why are you silent God? Rodrigues describes that it has been twenty years since the persecution against Christians broke out, so where are you God? Christians are being tortured by being boiled, hung upside down over a pit, and far worse. The people are dying as martyrs for the faith, so why is God silent through this?

 I am interested to see how this all plays out. Will Rodrigues end up denying his faith like father Ferreira? One cannot say what one would do until faced with the consequences before them. The priests have endured a lot to arrive in Japan, but will they have the faith it takes to endure endless torture until they apostatize? Would I?

I responded to Abbie George's post. 

Trust

One thing I found interesting is how little faith the monks have in the endurance of the church in Japan. They have heard all these amazing stories about the endurance of the faith of the Christians there, but yet they believe the fire of the church will die unless a monk is there. Even once they have discovered the order that the Japanese have set up for themselves they use the necessity of their presence as an excuse for not seeking out other hidden Christians. Why is it that they think the survival of the church depends on the presence of a monk? What truly are the roles of church leaders and organized religion? Are they mandatory to the survival of the church?

Commented on AbbieGeorge's

The Evolution of Rodrigues

I'm paying special attention to the language used by Rodrigues as he tells of the events that are taking place as he ministers to the Japanese villages. I think it is apparent to all of us reading that his faith is slowly being countered by doubt as he encounters various trials.

It isn't so much that he himself is being persecuted as of yet, but just in witnessing the persecution and death of his two friends his faith is shaken. Jeremy mentioned the theme of material realities versus spiritual realities. As Rodrigues begins to note the physical realities of loneliness, persecution, death, and ultimately the silence of God, his faith in the unseen realities is slowly diminishing.

He has not yet abandoned the spiritual truth as he is continually referencing the face of Christ, the hope in eternity, yet he is gradually referring to them less and less as his discouragement increases. Previously when faced with a discouraging circumstance, in the same breath Rodrigues would dismiss it with hope of the purpose of Christ. His strong faith at the start of the work is evolving into a great confusion, a great doubt that is being countered less and less by faith.

P.S. Commented on Jeremy's.

Will we ever see the endo silence?

Endo presents a compelling image: as Rodrigues flees, he sees a "remnant of fire" (70), left over by the man he is pursuing.  The image is a reflection of his own situation as it relates to God and faith.  The wood of the fire is still smoldering, which indicates that the man is close, or has just recently left.  It is that God has left things as an indication of his presence, like the man (who, we discover, is Kichijiro), but is altogether evasive, at least for a time.

The importance of material reality establishes itself as a forgoing theme, as we see over and over with apostasies, and particularly with Kichijiro.  Spiritual realities are of course real to the apostates, but their desire to live is much more immediate.  This paradigm of material and spiritual realities is so well represented in Silence because Endo uses the most extreme cases, with the most extreme consequences.

Fundamental Question of Metaphysics

I hate to think this, let alone put it into a blog, but I have no idea what this is talking about. For me to gleam any idea of what this work is talking about, I would need discussion in class with other people, and even then I am not sure I would understand it.

The In-Between

I think Heidegger really captures the human condition on earth very well. If you think about it, we are stuck in the in-between – the middle ground between heaven and hell, if you will. While there is death and destruction on earth, there is also still beautiful things happening here. On the third page, he conjectures that perhaps the world is now becoming completely destitute, but counteracts with perhaps it is not. But, since we still have to live with “the abyss,” Heidegger proposes that “it is necessary that there be those who reach into the abyss.” Perhaps this is where the poets come in. Perhaps they are the ones that must dig into the unknown and bring up the (scary) truth and beauty of it all.  

I commented on Sierra's!

Poets

After Heidegger digs for the purpose of poetry, he discovers it is beautiful and creative. Poets also bring peace to people. This is quite a contrast to another view we have read a few semesters ago. Plato (I know I bring him up a lot, but I am still processing his views...). Plato kicks poets out of his city because they are liars, and half truths. At first I wanted to put Heidegger and Plato in an argument against one another; however, - no matter how sad I am to admit it - I can see how their two views meet. Beauty can be deceitful. Such as a mirage in the desert, or in the Bible Babylon is called a beautiful temptress who will deceive the Jews. Creativity leads to half truths almost too easily. Also, how many people have been told lies - if they are not a Christian, their belief is a lie, or that they were good enough, etc. - as they die in order for them to feel at peace? It does not matter one's intentions. A lie is a lie, right? Lies and half truths can be beautiful, creative, and peaceful. I mean, what are Disney movies? Most take a horrific story and make it child appropriate - Hunchback of Notredome comes to mind. We all love them and appreciate them; however, does that make them not a lie? I am not sure what this all means or where is applies in life, but I am enjoying this complementation of Heidegger and Plato.
P.S. I commented on Sierra's.

What are poet's for?

I think Heidegger's point was that in destitute times, poets are able to help people come back to a more real, raw state. Sometimes I think poets just dance around what they are trying to say and I just wish they would get to the point...But really, are minds don't just get to the point. There's a lot of thinking, both conscious and subconscious that goes on before we make decisions or come to conclusions about things. In this sense, I think poets depict most honestly how people really work/think. So in times when people are lost, poets help to guide people back to a more raw state where they're not trying to filter their thoughts and feelings and not trying to figure it all out before articulating what they think. Poets help take us through the process of having all the miscellaneous and seemingly irrelevant or extraneous thoughts about things, and amidst the mess of thoughts and ideas, is a central point or a final decision or opinion. When people are in a state of destitution, sometimes they need someone to show them how to do this again. Poets can be those people.

Seeking the Truth

When reading Heidegger I was reminded of the heart of honors, which is seeking the truth of things in love. His portrait of the poet tracking the fugitive gods through destitution so beautifully embodies this goal. In a time where we are living in a crumbling world where everything we have held firm to as a people seems to be falling through, and all seems to be falling into destitution, it is comforting to see the ray of light that is the poet tracking the traces of the holy. I was also reminded of the honors motto, only what is won from the darkness shall stand. Heidegger mentioned that the abyss must be experienced and endured. One must encounter and walk through these times, but bravely reach into the abyss to seek the truth of things.

Commented on Madison's

What are poets for?

I'm not sure if Heidegger is speaking profoundly or is simply making no sense whatsoever when he states that "the destitute time is no longer able even to experience its own destitution." What is he trying to convey through this point?
And what is he referring to when he talks about how "there is a turn with mortals when these find the way to their own nature?" What is the "turn?"
I appreciate how Heidegger digs into the purpose behind poetry in order to reveal how beautiful and creative it is in contrast to the rather bleak world that only has necessities - where is the excitement in that?!

I commented on Abbie George's!

What are poets for

What are posts for? In this reading, I gathered that poets are to bring peace. When everything is chaos and in shambles, poets are there to be the peace. Poets lead us back to the right path. We live in a destitute world, and poets are there to find the beauty in life. Poets give us a hope for better times.




I commented on Darby's

The Tragedy of Ignorance

   "Then the destitute time is no longer able even to experience its own destitution. That inability, by which even the destitution of the destitute state is obscured, is the time's absolutely destitute character." (emphasis added)
   This entire reading is interesting- well, as far as I've gotten- yet I keep returning to this small segment at the beginning. This quote paints vividly a concept of ignorance and the way it handicaps the entirety of human thought.
   Destitute- to be lacking (in this specific portion of the passage- of a deity/ divine being). When true night (in my mind ignorance or lack of belief/knowledge) comes, then the ability to even ponder one's own state or world's state diminishes. This state of a lack of simple observation is the true tragedy. The failure to recognize the need itself is the most powerful image of destitution.
   The reason I think this sticks out so much is that it can be applied in almost any situation by producing the idea easily portrayed by this statement: The greatest tragedy in any given situation is to be ignorant of the situation itself. Throughout history this would be found true: Julius Caesar's assassination, the Holocaust, 9/11; the list goes on. The most tragic part of all of these events was not that they were painful or evil but that the party most effected was completely ignorant to the entire situation.
   Heidegger is writing not to bring out this idea, but he does describe a great example. I am glad he did because it sure is an interesting concept worth having in the back pocket.

P.S. I commented on caleb Zessin's post.

Beings

"Being of beings is the will." So if a being has a will it makes it a being? If a being does not have a will is it not a being, making it dead? "Being --- we have no idea of it other than 'living' -- How can anything dead 'be'?"  If it is dead then it is not a being. "Being is the venture pure and simple." Being is the dare to go. A being is daring and alive. It is interesting how this all relates to What are poets for?, for are the poets beings?

P.S. I commented on Francesca Garcia's post.

You Can't Live on Bread Alone

As I am making my way through the part two of Dostoevsky, I cannot help but connect it to Scripture. He begins the section talking about how he does his best to stay low and quite but to look  intelligent and like he has it all together when he actually does not. His mind is flooded with questions and doubt and insecurity while trying to maintain a stable smile. I think this is a perfect picture of what it looks like when we try to do things on our own when we know Christ is clearly there waiting to help. We become too prideful to step down from our peddle stool and let God take control. In Matthew it says, "man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God," (4:4).This relates to how we cannot do anything without Christ's help and I think that is exactly what he is trying to do; live without Christ but knows he needs more than just "bread."

P.S. I commented on Darby's

What are poets for?

What I found most interesting was the passage about the God(s).  In a world with God, or gods, as a fugitive, we live in a destitute world.  That world is chaotic, and without hope.  However, Heidegger offers the solution of what poets are for; living in destitute times, the poets are an out to the chaos.  They bring us out of the chaos, and are supposed to put us back on the right path.

~Commented on Daniel's post

The Problem, The Poet, and The Pursuit

The problem, as Heidegger puts it, is the "default of god." This default is basically an absence of the supernatural, or "god's failure to arrive." But the deeper problem is that of the the outlook of the world or culture we find ourselves in. That is, the issue that mortals can no longer "discern the default of God as default." The culture is so accustomed to darkness, evil, absence of the supernatural, that they cannot feel the gaping lack of the gods. 

So this gaping problem in turn creates an "abyss" over time and history. This abyss is a lack of traction, sure-footing, a lack of truth in society which appeals to something beyond. The only way to find this solid ground again is by reaching into the abyss. (Heidegger seems to be implying that God is waiting for mankind to take this action of reaching into the unknown so that He can act? I'm unsure if I am correct on this.)

Either way, the poets are the ones who must reach into the abyss. But it is not just reaching that solves this problem. The poets are meant to help their fellow mortals in an attempt to reach into the abyss in hopes of pointing out traces of the supernatural, these traces being the "holy." Each poet reaches as far into the holy as they are able. 

What stood out to me was a small remark made by the writer about scholars and philosophers who consider this dialogue with poetry, this search for the supernatural, to be an "unscientific violation of what such scholarship takes to be the facts. Philosophers consider the dialogue to be a helpless aberration into fantasy. But destiny pursues its course untroubled by all that."

I found this to be so undeniably true. There is an essence of humanity and of the supernatural that philosophy and science simply cannot speak to. It is more than mere emotion or fantasy, it is something beyond human words that only poetry can convey. As Heidegger beautifully explains, poetry helps us mortals to "come to learn that what is unspoken." I truly feel that the pursuit of poetry is to convey the unspeakable truth which comes from the unknowable holy within the footprints of the supernatural upon this dark earth. 

P.S. Commented on Wendy's.

Destitute

Hidegger was defiantly confusing yet it was intriguing at the same time. I enjoyed his word choices and the beginning discussion of the different gods. The one thing that stood out to me the most was how he described time as destitute in the passage. I , not knowing the meaning, found that there are two definitions:
1. penniless , poor , impoverished
2. devoid of, deprived of
Both of the theses could be used quite well in to convey his meaning yet I wonder which specific one it could be. If he was to use the first meaning and then associate it with the opening question of " and what are poets for in a destitute time?", it may mean that the era itself is poor in enlightment or in art. That is why the poets are there to enrich them with their words and many underlying meanings.
Secondly, if Hidegger was to use the second meaning it could infer poets are there to gift the regular people with poetry that they have been deprived of for so long.
Either way both fit perfectly in his thoughts but are slightly different.

I commented on Daniel Stephens.

What Are Poets For?

I think this reading dives deep into the meaning of a true poet. Into the heart and mind and depth of poetry. In destitute times, everyone is lost. No direction. I think the reason for the poets is to bring people back to who they truly are and to look at the world and see it as what it really is.






I commented on Wendy's.

What are Poets For?

This passage presents an interesting idea about God(s). That is, when the God or Gods, depending on what culture is being ask the question, leave and the world falls into a darkness so deep that it cannot tell it is in the dark, who can bring those holy beings back? The answer is the poets. Poets have a unique quality to them, which allows them to touch the very soul with their words. It is these poets who can reach out with their sonnets and grasp at the coattails of the fleeting ethereal realm, coming far closer than any other humans to catching even a particle of the God(s) holy light.

I commented on Wendy Bagwell's post.

What are poets for?

What are poets for in a destitute time? What good do they bring when everything else is broken and all hope is lost? Heidegger talks gods and an abyss. It all gets confusing really, but they are "fugitive gods". My question is, what does this have to do with what poets are for? I think it is about destitution. What are poets for in a destitute time? "The heavenly powers cannot do all things. It is the mortals who reach sooner into the abyss". The mortals are the poets who can reach into the abyss and drag us out of this destitute time. They can bring back order and hope.

I commented on Caleb's post.

What. The Heck. Like literally bruh.

As I'm reading Heidegger I constantly go back and forth trying to decide if I'm supposed to follow all his details into the essences behind his thoughts, or if I'm supposed to keep my mind focused on his original thought of determining poets's purpose in destitute times. I eventually decided it's much better to just follow his train of thought. He circles around the original topic ceaselessly, allowing himself to delve into the depths and nuances as he pleases. But aside from the title topic, there's another core to this discussion that he keeps coming back to: communication. That is continually pinpointed as the important thing to remember. Communication. Dionysus with man. Man with the abyss. And poets with the beyond. Communication is the hinge.