There seems to be a philosophical orientation here at Shalem that assumes that infants in their purity are naturally closer to God than adults after all of the acculturation, language acquition and moral categories that develop as one grows older. This has come out in a couple of ways. First, Bill D.’s explanation of Contemplative suggested that we need to gaze upon God like an infant gazes at an adult when first born; simply, without words, without judgement, just there. Second, Ginny N. this evening presented a seminar on Journaling through Art. She had examples of children’s elementary school artwork. Her explanation was that we need to get in touch with our concept of God before we developed language and then color or draw whatever that brings up from our earliest awareness of God.
The idea that cultural categories and language inherently corrupt a pure relationship with God seems at odds with the way God appears to reveal himself in Scripture. Rather than opting for some nebulous, non-specific manifestation of himself, God elected to reveal himself through human language and in human categories. Furthermore, he chose to incarnate himself, take on flesh, take on human limitations, categories, descriptions (very specific ones). It seems that God is all the more glorified because he bridged the gap into the human realm of the knowing rather than remaining transcendant and unknowable.
That being said, it seems obvious to me that sometimes we can become arrogant with our language and use it to attempt to dominate God. That is, define him and describe him in limiting detail. As if once we conclude that God is, for example, omnicient we have figured him out and are ready to move on. How ludicrous! Because of such a temptation to exhaust volumns describing God, Contemplation is a wonderful practice of letting ourselves reside in him, at peace, in oneness without the need to analyze. Yet, reverting to our infant-selves is not necessary.
