Repentance

by Narkissos 19 Replies latest jw friends

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos

    This is an oft-forgotten, ill-loved item of Judeo-Christian tradition.

    Regularly waved by threatening Bible-thumpers, which doesn't help.

    Luther's slogan semper simul peccator et justus (always, at the same time, sinner and righteous) is remembered, but the third term of the equation (et penitens, "and repentant") is seldom mentioned.

    Modernity made it coward (e.g. Gide, in the sense of not assuming one's life and being) or shortsighted (e.g. Nietzsche, to change anything would mean to change everything).

    What does repentance mean to you -- if anything?

    When I was a 13-year old sitting for baptism, the speaker brought it up as it was part of the official questions: "Did you repent from your sins?" I remember wondering: "Did I?" What sins should I have repented from? At some point he went on to say: "If anything we should repent from having lived just for ourselves." That at least made sense to me.

    Is repentance called for specific "sins"? They are constitutive of whatever we are, just as supposed "good works". Or is it a generic attitude embracing all of our lives and beings?

    In an xJW context, the question might imply: do we specifically repent from having been JWs? -- choosing it for some, remaining in for some time, for all? Or do we consider it as an unseparable part of our lives -- nothing to be especially proud nor ashamed of?

    More importantly, do you think an overall attitude of repentance for everything is somewhat helpful (making us more thoughtful, less arrogant, less anxious too)? Do you think it is compatible with responsibility? Or perhaps an integral part of responsibility?

    Kierkegaard -- an atypical Lutheran -- contributed many deep pages to this issue. Here is one of them:

    Providence watches over each one of us as we journey through life providing us with two guides: repentance and remorse. The one calls us forward. The other calls us back. Yet they do not contradict each other, these two guides, nor do they leave the traveler in doubt or confusion. Rather, these two guides eternally understand each other. For the one calls forward to the Good, the other back from the evil. This is precisely why there are two of them, because in order to make our journey secure we must look ahead as well as look back.

    When a long procession is about to start, there is first a call from the person who is in the lead, but everyone waits until the last one has answered. The two guides call to a person early and late, and if he pays attention to their calls he finds the road and can know where he is. Likewise, Eternity’s two guides call out to us early and late, and when we listen to their call, we know where we are and where we are going. Of these two, the call of remorse is perhaps the better. For the eager traveler who travels casually and quickly along the way does not get to know it as well as does the traveler with his burden. The eager traveler hurries forward to something new, away from experience, but the remorseful one, the one who comes along afterward, laboriously gathers up the experience.

    These two guides call to us early and late. And yet, no, when remorse calls out it is always late. The call to find the road again by seeking God in the confession of sins is always at the eleventh hour. When remorse awakens guilt, whether it be in one’s youth, or in the twilight of one’s life, it does so always at the eleventh hour. It does not have much time at its disposal. It is not deceived by a false notion of a long life. For in the eleventh hour one understands life in a wholly different way than in the days of youth or in the busy time of adulthood or in the final days of old age. If we repent at any other hour of the day we fool ourselves – we fortify ourselves by a false and hasty conception of the insignificance of our guilt.

    True repentance does not belong to a certain period of life, as fun and games belong to childhood, or as the excitement of romantic love belongs to youth. It does not come and disappear as a whim or as a surprise. No, no. There is a sense of reverence, a holy fear, a humility, a pure sincerity which insures that repentance does not become vain and overhasty.

    From the point of view of the eternal, repentance must come “all at once,” where in one’s grief there is not even time to utter words. But the grieving of repentance and the heartfelt anxiety that floods the soul must not be confused with impatience or the momentary feeling of contrition. Experience teaches us that the right moment to repent is not always the one that is immediately present. Repentance can too easily be confused with a tormenting agonizing or with a worldly sorrow; with a desperate feeling of grief in itself. But by itself, sorrow never becomes repentance, no matter how long it continues to rage. However clouded the mind becomes, the sobs of contrition, no matter how violent they are, never become tears of repentance. They are like empty clouds that bear no water, or like convulsive puffs of wind. This kind of repentance is selfish. It is sensually powerful for the moment, excited in expression – and, for this very reason, is no real repentance at all. Sudden, quick repentance wants only to drink down the bitterness of sorrow in a single draught and then hurry on. It wants to get away from guilt, away from every reminder of it, and fortify itself by imagining that it does not want to be held back in the pursuit of the Good. What a delusion!

    There is a story about a man who by his misdeeds deserved to be punished according to the law. After he had served his sentence he went back into ordinary society, reformed. He went to a foreign country, where he was unknown and where he became known for his upright conduct. All was forgotten. Then one day a fugitive appeared who recognized him from the past. The reformed man was terrified. A deathlike fear shook him each time the fugitive passed. Though silent, his fear shouted with a loud voice, until it became vocal in that dastardly fugitive’s voice. Despair suddenly seized him and it seized him just because he had forgotten his repentance. His self-improvement had never led him to surrender to God so that in the humility of repentance he might remember what he had once been.

    Yes, in the temporal and social sense, repentance may come and go. But in the eternal sense, it is a quiet daily commitment before God. In the light of eternity, one’s guilt is never changed, even if a century passes by. To think anything of this sort is to confuse the eternal with what it is least like – human forgetfulness. One can tell the age of a tree by looking at its bark. One can also tell a person’s age in the Good by the intensity and inwardness of his repentance. It may be said of a dancer that her time is past when her youth is gone, but not so with a penitent. Repentance, if it is forgotten, is nothing but immaturity. The longer and the more deeply one treasures it, however, the better it becomes.

    Repentance must not only have its time, but also its time of preparation. And herein lies the need of confession, the holy act that ought to be preceded by preparation. Just as a person changes his clothes for a celebration, so a person preparing for confession is inwardly changed. But if in the hour of confession one has not truly made up his mind he is still only distracted. He sees his sin with only half an eye. When he speaks, it is just talk – not true confession.

    We mustn’t forget that the One who is present in confession is omniscient. God knows everything, remembers everything, all that we have ever confided to him, or what we have ever kept from his confidence. He is the One “who sees in secret,” with whom we speak even in silence. No one can venture to deceive him either by talk or by silence. When we confess to God, therefore, we are not like a servant that gives account to his master for the administration entrusted to him because his master could not manage everything or be everywhere at once. Nor when we confess are we like one who confides in a friend to whom sooner or later he reveals things that his friend did not previously know. No, much of what you are able to keep hidden in darkness you only first get to know by revealing it to the all-knowing One. The all-knowing One does not get to know something about those who confess, rather those who confess find out something about themselves.

  • Gretchen956
    Gretchen956

    Repentence is another way of saying, are you sorry you did something wrong. I think that is inherent in sentient beings, its our conscience. Those born without that are sociopaths and are a minority. In judeo/christian teaching it revolves around the concept of original sin and makes the allusion that without a higher diety you would have no morals or conscience. I reject all of that.

    Sherry

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    Narkissos...That was quite a thought-provoking discussion by Kierkegaard. I especially like the point about "forgetting one's repentance". It made me think of an analogy, though he does not make it, between repentance and an alcoholic's striving to stay away from alcohol. The alcoholic has to face temptations, if not every day, at least often and repeatedly, and overcome them to stay sober. Maybe it's too facile to liken this to sin, but I think of repentance of a continual successful striving to avoid the sins that one has repented from. It is the pattern of successes over time that gives texture and coherence to this active struggle and the implicit stativity in repentance. The more time one has been successful, the more of an established pattern one has. Thus, repentence is not a once-for-all event because falling-of-the-wagon is still possible if one gives in. At the same time, it is hard to construe repentance as blanketed for all sins, since from a human point of view (and assuming a divine point of view), it is impossible for the human to know at all times exactly which actions are sins or not (indeterminancy). Conceivably, however divine forgiveness can be blanketed for all sins since its directionality assumes divine knowledge and standards. But for a command to "sin no more", what does that mean? Does sinning necessarily include as a component a consciousness of its constitutive acts as exceeding some divine standard? Because we can only repent from what we are concious of.

  • crazyblondeb
    crazyblondeb

    Personally, I think repentenance is over-rated. But then I still get flashbacks from Bible-thumping elders that had their own skeletons.

    shelley

  • gumby
    gumby

    I was raised 'in the truth'....so when it came time for baptism and the question was asked concerning repentence to me.....it had no relevence to me and only had relevence to those who were 'wordly' at one time and became witnesses.

    I think the answer to this question will differ according to belief systems.

    For christians....upon accepting Jesus as the way......the need to continually ask for forgivness continually.... is contrary to the teachings of christianity which teaches your sins are forgiven once you accept christ. I don't rember myself begging for forgivness when I was a churchgoer after exiting the dubs.....I simply asked for help being a better person and saying I'm sorry to god out of politness.

    For the unbeliever......I think reminding yourself of your errors and saying your sorry to the 'air'.....can still have a wholesome effect on the person......................since there seems to be more than one person inside each of us to talk to.... e.g........ we 'remind ourself' to pick up some milk on the way home...............

    More later

    Gum

  • Sheepish
    Sheepish

    Very interesting and good points.

    Repentence is being sorry for what you have done, and consciously turning and going the other way (in proof of it.) It can become an ongoing thing for some things-to form the habit as was suggested.Oftentimes one is just delivered, as it were, from the power of the sin by the confession of it.

    My personal belief of what Jesus meant when he said, "Go and sin no more." Was firstly in response to the womans adultery. In reference to us, I believe it means, to consciously be aware of the choices we make, and having the choice, not to sin.

    I think when you go through life, you find yourself in all sorts of situations that can get the best of you. Becoming a JW with the hope of serving God is one. When you leave, it is necessary to repent of your sins.(You are not responsible for theirs!) Some of them may be unintentional, but the Lord understands that as well. It's about feeling & being clean, at peace,and free before your God. It helps you face, perhaps understand better, and then leave behind hurtful sorrowful things. Very healing. I recommend it.

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos

    Thanks for the comments.

    Kierkegaard's Christian sermons, I think, are to be heard in contrapunctic echo of his philosophical works where he insists on the difference between the moral and the religious stages. Repentance naturally belongs to the former but he draws it onto the latter plane, pointing to existential repentance -- something which ultimately encompasses our complete life and being.

    Not so far from samsara perhaps (although SK would probably have hated such a syncretist suggestion).

  • gumby
    gumby

    Narkster........the next time ya post......say stuff ta where I can understand ya.....k?........ya damn einstein bastard

    *goes out and buys pocket size dictionary*

    Gumilliterate

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos

    Duh. Sorry Gumby, it was really obscure.

    Kierkegaard was a complex thinker who expressed a variety of viewpoints on the same issues through the use of pseudonyms (one for the Christian, one for the pagan philosopher for instance). Considering only one text of his may lead to considerable misunderstanding. Christian readers love his religious talks but generally ignore the philosopher; existentialist philosophers like Heidegger or Sartre made little of use of his Christian production -- although everything is deeply connected. That's what I meant by "contrapunctic": you have to hear several voices or tunes responding to each other.

    Kierkegaard as a philosopher distinguished three different "stages of life": aesthetical, ethical and religious. Stepping from one stage to another implied a suspension of previous judgement. For instance, God's religious command to Abraham (sacrifice his son) was absolutely immoral from an ethical standpoint.

    That's why I think a religious discourse by the "Christian" Kierkegaard is not ultimately referring to moral repentance -- rather a deeper, sober existential assessment of one's entire character and life before eternity (another central Kierkegaardian concept).

    The Hindu concept of samsara, if I understand it correctly, refers to a global perception of the both fascinating and nauseating cycle of life and death -- something close to Qoheleth's (Ecclesiastes') "vanity" -- in which the individual and his/her destiny becomes breathtakingly insignificant.

    Hope this helps

  • tetrapod.sapien
    tetrapod.sapien

    narkissos,

    nice post. thanks for that.

    i like the idea of repentance as a way of embracing life and being, but that is basically where i stop, as i also think there are other terms for that embracement of being.

    perhaps my aversion to the concept of it is due to being such a newbie ex-JW.

    but the reductionist in me really does not think that one's repentance for anything, really registers or makes a difference to the universe at large. and therefore, i can't imagine how it would make a difference to me personally, inside, as i am part of the universe.

    then again, as you mention, perhaps my becoming an atheist, and rejecting anthropocentrism and terms like "repentance", is indeed a form of repentance in and of itself? a repentance from my life up to now, and a repentance from the arrogance of our species.

    TS

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit