Passage Six: part two

I love, in this state, O my Lord, to beg of Thee all that is with Thee, that I may demonstrate my poverty, and magnify Thy bounty and Thy riches, and may declare my powerlessness, and manifest Thy power and Thy might.


Here we have that expression from the previous passage: that which is with Thee, appearing once again in its ambiguity regarding everything except its relationship to God. Once again, we'll postulate that it refers to the divine attributes, especially those most suited to humans: love, wisdom, patience, creativity......

In this passage the performer confesses to love, not so much the divine attributes themselves, but rather the very act of begging for them from God. The result of this is an increased awareness of the contrast between Creator and creation, namely that in the former there is a fullness where in the latter there is a lack. This opens up an interesting theological quandary, which will undoubtedly require more research and meditation.

The distinction between God and humanity in this context is one of degree. One is wealthy the other is poor. This assumes a consistant entity that can ebb and flow between particular circumstances while remaining essentially the same in both. In other words, there is some thing in which God is rich and humans are poor. This may potentially run up against any doctrine of God's transcendence. In that model there would be no consistant medium between Creator and creation because they are two essentially different figures. One way of dealing with this tension is to think of God as an absentee landlord. God's would posess those attributes in fullness. but it would be at a distance. The attributes would be in creation and thus created, while God's ownership of them is from the perspective of the Creator. It could be said that the divine attributes are only created effects in creation of the Creator's will. In this way they are not God, but they still pertain to God inasmuch as they help articulate a human conception of His action in creation. In this way God's wealth , in those things that humans are poor is in creation, not in his position as Creator. In this case this would be with regard to the divine attributes.

But enough already!

What's important in understanding the spirituality of this passage is that the sharp contrast between Creator and creation is in some way inspirational for the creation. The joy is in the performer's very poverty in relation to God. For some people this might be an instance of despair or helplessness. But in this instance it rejuvenates and excites the soul.

I might say more regarding this passage, but it is to a large extent beyond me. I can disect what it means conceptually. But I have not been granted the gift of understanding's its spiritual import. In other words, I can say what it means to me. But I cannot say what it means for me.

Or it may just mean I'm tired. We'll see tommorow.