Thank you for sharing this. Your words warmed my heart and helped give this somewhat overly-protesting Protestant permission to be more open to the mystery and beauty of our faith…I did weep during our communion service yesterday and now I understand why a bit better…
As I noted, Protestants also have moments when the spiritual and physical meet: moments of intense divine mystery. But it is easy to become so familiarized that we we forget this. Sometimes seeing thing presented in a slightly different way can reawaken us to the mystery.
This is fascinating and beautifully written! I love the image of the young mother with her children. I know all too well how difficult it is to take very young children anywhere, and how we must really, really desire something in order to make that sacrifice.
One line that really captured my attention while I know it wasn’t the central point-was about head coverings! Fascinating – I would never have suspected you to be a cover-er.
I personally am someone who no one would expect to cover, but have also felt more led to cover over the past year. I’ve been doing it intermittently . Sometimes to avoid talking about it it’s just wearing a baseball cap at my very relaxed “non-denom”. I’m also from a cultural background where a cute head wrap doesn’t raise eyebrows either.
But as someone who certainly tends to, even after much reflection and prayer, believe that a lot of things St. Paul said about women and their role in the life of the church were simply context dependent—I’ve been fascinated by the fact that the Spirit has been nudging me to consider that maybe this one wasn’t.
Again, I know not your central point but just wanted to share.
Thanks again for this beautiful writing. Hope you found some increased peace during the holiday season.
So nice to hear from you Rebecca! My choice to wear a head covering during corporate worship services is largely for two reasons. First, because that was what women in the Church did pretty much universally prior to the twentieth century, and I’m a historically inclined gal. Second, I spent years hearing people from different denominations and backgrounds all tell me that the passage in 1 Corinthians doesn’t mean what it seems to on the surface and using various arguments in an attempt to prove that. I never found any of them entirely convincing. Then one day, I was visiting a church where the pastor preached on that passage and gave a justification for not using head coverings that I realized was exactly - and I do mean exactly - the kind of argument used to justify the righteousness of homosexual relationships now. And as I sat there, I thought, “How can I sit here and agree with this yet expect my brothers and sisters who are same sex attracted to remain celibate?” And for whatever reason, it really hit me in the gut at that moment, and I decided I was just going to wear some kind of head covering in corporate worship from then on. Of course, I do fear that people will think I’m part of some kind of uberpatriarchal cult. But I think anyone who knows me well will realize that I just want to honor God as I feel led by the Spirit. I’m not seeking to cast judgment on anyone else, and I believe Paul gave the head covering directive because he assumed women would be active in the life of the church, even praying and prophesying in the service.
I grew up Protestant, several years in a Pentecostal Church before moving into a more traditional protestant denomination, and then eventually becoming Catholic. Maybe it was the Pentecostal experience, but relics weren't really a big obstacle to me. While "charged objects" or "magic" isn't how I would describe it, I do think the Biblical case for God working through mundane things is there. Granted, faith is an important component in instances such as the woman touching the hem of Christ's garment or people bringing handkerchiefs to apostles. Still, there are instances where no faith is implied, and the power of God still works. The classic example being the man that came back to life after touching Elisha's bones.
Thanks for sharing! The Pentecostal tradition actually shares some tendencies with Roman Catholicism that many Protestant denominations do not, so it doesn’t surprise me that you would make that transition a bit more easily. Here I think of the way that different denominations understand divine revelation and the working of the Spirit in our present age.
On the concept of 'charged' objects: I saw such with such charged objects in the global south. Everyone within the tradition wore charms. I not only witnessed the effects of some of these charms, but also heard eyewitness testimony as to the effects. Those who wore the charms informed me that there was a continual danger, if the wearer was overcome by strong emotion, that the spiritual power attached to the charm could overpower the wearer. I was told this in the context of having witnessed just such an overpowering due to strong emotion. Certain actions could be taken to appease the spiritual power. Objects within nature, such as trees, were also said to be so charged - axes and saws would always break or get stuck in such trees, unless an appeasement ceremony was performed. In the Western search for re-enchantment, caution may be required.
You are correct that objects meant to ward off evil influence are far more common in the global South. Taylor's work largely focuses on the state of things in North America, Europe, and those parts of the world most highly influenced by them. There are certainly areas where Western secularism is not fully triumphant, even within the West.
We have much to learn from each other and the way we see God and his wonders. I enjoyed the way you reflected on how God met you in that space that was unusual for you. He does that from time to time doesn’t he?
And I also hope that you are recovering from what sounds like an exhausting, dry spell in your spiritual relationship with the one who calls to us each day and says: “come all you who are weary and heavy laden, and I will give you rest”.
I wouldn’t call it a charged object. This was the relic of a saint. We really believe in the Resurrection. We really believe in the communion of the saints. We really believe saints pray for us and intercede for us and somehow are involved in miracles. There are too many verified accounts to ignore. We really believe God breathes life into dry bones. We know God’s creation is mysterious and transcendent and involves much more than can be weighed or measured or sensed with our limited capabilities.
I haven’t read his book. Charged to me says carries some kind of occult energy. Saint’s relics are part of their bodily presence in this world that connects us to them despite the fact that they are in the next world.
As far as I understand him, that is not what Taylor means by “charged.” It has to do with the ability of the spiritual world to penetrate our material world. He argues that one aspect of our current secular age is that we assume material objects can hold no spiritual power: that we are essentially buffered from anything supernatural affecting us. He is not saying that these are all occult objects, though his definition is broad enough to include such things. And Taylor is a Catholic, so he’s definitely not arguing that relics are occult objects.
I appreciated reading your thoughts here, Amy! Maybe this is too picky, but I will say that calling relics "charged objects" with the word "magic" tied to them misses the mark, as miracles are from the divine, while magic is associated with evil. Like I said, maybe a little picky and isn't what you meant, but I felt the need to say something. :)
I've recently written a post that goes into Biblical & historical support of relics! It all maybe be old news to you, but I wanted to share since it's related to what you've written here.
"Charged object" is Taylor's terminology. I was engaging with his thoughts in his book "A Secular Age." His references to magic were largely about things other than relics. It was an anthropological analysis, not a theological one.
Thank you for sharing this. Your words warmed my heart and helped give this somewhat overly-protesting Protestant permission to be more open to the mystery and beauty of our faith…I did weep during our communion service yesterday and now I understand why a bit better…
As I noted, Protestants also have moments when the spiritual and physical meet: moments of intense divine mystery. But it is easy to become so familiarized that we we forget this. Sometimes seeing thing presented in a slightly different way can reawaken us to the mystery.
This is fascinating and beautifully written! I love the image of the young mother with her children. I know all too well how difficult it is to take very young children anywhere, and how we must really, really desire something in order to make that sacrifice.
One line that really captured my attention while I know it wasn’t the central point-was about head coverings! Fascinating – I would never have suspected you to be a cover-er.
I personally am someone who no one would expect to cover, but have also felt more led to cover over the past year. I’ve been doing it intermittently . Sometimes to avoid talking about it it’s just wearing a baseball cap at my very relaxed “non-denom”. I’m also from a cultural background where a cute head wrap doesn’t raise eyebrows either.
But as someone who certainly tends to, even after much reflection and prayer, believe that a lot of things St. Paul said about women and their role in the life of the church were simply context dependent—I’ve been fascinated by the fact that the Spirit has been nudging me to consider that maybe this one wasn’t.
Again, I know not your central point but just wanted to share.
Thanks again for this beautiful writing. Hope you found some increased peace during the holiday season.
Blessed epiphany!!
So nice to hear from you Rebecca! My choice to wear a head covering during corporate worship services is largely for two reasons. First, because that was what women in the Church did pretty much universally prior to the twentieth century, and I’m a historically inclined gal. Second, I spent years hearing people from different denominations and backgrounds all tell me that the passage in 1 Corinthians doesn’t mean what it seems to on the surface and using various arguments in an attempt to prove that. I never found any of them entirely convincing. Then one day, I was visiting a church where the pastor preached on that passage and gave a justification for not using head coverings that I realized was exactly - and I do mean exactly - the kind of argument used to justify the righteousness of homosexual relationships now. And as I sat there, I thought, “How can I sit here and agree with this yet expect my brothers and sisters who are same sex attracted to remain celibate?” And for whatever reason, it really hit me in the gut at that moment, and I decided I was just going to wear some kind of head covering in corporate worship from then on. Of course, I do fear that people will think I’m part of some kind of uberpatriarchal cult. But I think anyone who knows me well will realize that I just want to honor God as I feel led by the Spirit. I’m not seeking to cast judgment on anyone else, and I believe Paul gave the head covering directive because he assumed women would be active in the life of the church, even praying and prophesying in the service.
I grew up Protestant, several years in a Pentecostal Church before moving into a more traditional protestant denomination, and then eventually becoming Catholic. Maybe it was the Pentecostal experience, but relics weren't really a big obstacle to me. While "charged objects" or "magic" isn't how I would describe it, I do think the Biblical case for God working through mundane things is there. Granted, faith is an important component in instances such as the woman touching the hem of Christ's garment or people bringing handkerchiefs to apostles. Still, there are instances where no faith is implied, and the power of God still works. The classic example being the man that came back to life after touching Elisha's bones.
Thanks for sharing! The Pentecostal tradition actually shares some tendencies with Roman Catholicism that many Protestant denominations do not, so it doesn’t surprise me that you would make that transition a bit more easily. Here I think of the way that different denominations understand divine revelation and the working of the Spirit in our present age.
On the concept of 'charged' objects: I saw such with such charged objects in the global south. Everyone within the tradition wore charms. I not only witnessed the effects of some of these charms, but also heard eyewitness testimony as to the effects. Those who wore the charms informed me that there was a continual danger, if the wearer was overcome by strong emotion, that the spiritual power attached to the charm could overpower the wearer. I was told this in the context of having witnessed just such an overpowering due to strong emotion. Certain actions could be taken to appease the spiritual power. Objects within nature, such as trees, were also said to be so charged - axes and saws would always break or get stuck in such trees, unless an appeasement ceremony was performed. In the Western search for re-enchantment, caution may be required.
You are correct that objects meant to ward off evil influence are far more common in the global South. Taylor's work largely focuses on the state of things in North America, Europe, and those parts of the world most highly influenced by them. There are certainly areas where Western secularism is not fully triumphant, even within the West.
There is indeed enchantment 👍. I would have gone for the same reason. Great work!
Thanks so much!
So, you got to go after all. Good for you, Amy!
I did. Many thanks to the husband for watching the small human.
Good man!
We have much to learn from each other and the way we see God and his wonders. I enjoyed the way you reflected on how God met you in that space that was unusual for you. He does that from time to time doesn’t he?
And I also hope that you are recovering from what sounds like an exhausting, dry spell in your spiritual relationship with the one who calls to us each day and says: “come all you who are weary and heavy laden, and I will give you rest”.
Thank you for sharing those words. God is good and I do enter 2025 with hope, expecting to see more examples of his goodness.
I wouldn’t call it a charged object. This was the relic of a saint. We really believe in the Resurrection. We really believe in the communion of the saints. We really believe saints pray for us and intercede for us and somehow are involved in miracles. There are too many verified accounts to ignore. We really believe God breathes life into dry bones. We know God’s creation is mysterious and transcendent and involves much more than can be weighed or measured or sensed with our limited capabilities.
Thank you for explaining
"Charged object" is Taylor's terminology. I was engaging with his thoughts in his book "A Secular Age."
I haven’t read his book. Charged to me says carries some kind of occult energy. Saint’s relics are part of their bodily presence in this world that connects us to them despite the fact that they are in the next world.
As far as I understand him, that is not what Taylor means by “charged.” It has to do with the ability of the spiritual world to penetrate our material world. He argues that one aspect of our current secular age is that we assume material objects can hold no spiritual power: that we are essentially buffered from anything supernatural affecting us. He is not saying that these are all occult objects, though his definition is broad enough to include such things. And Taylor is a Catholic, so he’s definitely not arguing that relics are occult objects.
I appreciated reading your thoughts here, Amy! Maybe this is too picky, but I will say that calling relics "charged objects" with the word "magic" tied to them misses the mark, as miracles are from the divine, while magic is associated with evil. Like I said, maybe a little picky and isn't what you meant, but I felt the need to say something. :)
I've recently written a post that goes into Biblical & historical support of relics! It all maybe be old news to you, but I wanted to share since it's related to what you've written here.
https://open.substack.com/pub/thegentlenudge/p/relics-biblical-and-historic-support?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=2k266z
"Charged object" is Taylor's terminology. I was engaging with his thoughts in his book "A Secular Age." His references to magic were largely about things other than relics. It was an anthropological analysis, not a theological one.
This was fascinating, thanks for sharing!
You’re welcome! Thanks for reading.