16 Divine Forms 2 - The Divine in Nature

 

16 Divine Forms 2 - The Divine in Nature

From Shakespeare's Hamlet:

”Suit the action to the word, the word to the action, with this special observance, that you o'erstep not the modesty of nature:
for any thing so o'erdone is from the purpose of playing, whose end, both at the first and now, was and is, to hold as 'twere the mirror up to nature: to show virtue her feature, scorn her own image, and the very age and body of the time his form and pressure.”

Last week's presentation, Divine Forms 1, contemplated the relationship of articulate manifestations to the mind of God. We concluded that every artistic expression is a refinement of the Christ Consciousness into a form (emphasis on "form") which humans can appreciate. Today we will go deeper into the appearance of divine forms as they dominate our landscape not only in natural forms, but also in man-made forms: in social structures, in art, in religion, even (or especially) in science. We will further discover that many of the expressions of divine forms have been translated (or transposed) into religious doctrine and mythology--expressions whose idiom changes from one geographic location to another, but whose essence remains the same.

We will also offer various descriptions of HOW divine forms manifest in the physical. A basic premise, common to all these various descriptions, is that there is a progression, or a continuum, of forms as they morph from the spiritual dimension into the physical dimension, and then disappear again out the back door. The idea of PROGRESSION will play a big part in this presentation.

When I started this lecture on divine imitation of nature, I had forgotten that there is a whole division of philosophical conceptualization devoted to the idea of imitating nature: it is called “mimesis”. Here is an excerpt from a Wikipedia article on the subject:

Mimesis
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

“Mimesis (/maɪˈmiːsəs/; Ancient Greek: μίμησις (mīmēsis), from μιμεῖσθαι (mīmeisthai), "to imitate," from μῖμος (mimos), "imitator, actor") is a critical and philosophical term that carries a wide range of meanings, which include imitation, representation, mimicry, imitatio, receptivity, nonsensuous similarity, the act of resembling, the act of expression, and the presentation of the self.

In ancient Greece, mimesis was an idea that governed the creation of works of art, in particular, with correspondence to the physical world understood as a model for beauty, truth, and the good. Plato contrasted mimesis, or imitation, with diegesis, or narrative. After Plato, the meaning of mimesis eventually shifted toward a specifically literary function in ancient Greek society, and its use has changed and been reinterpreted many times since then.

In art history, "mimesis", "realism" and "naturalism" are used, often interchangeably, as terms for the accurate, even "illusionistic", representation of the visual appearance of things.

The Frankfurt school critical theorist T. W. Adorno made use of mimesis as a central philosophical term, interpreting it as a way in which works of art embodied a form of reason that was non-repressive and non-violent.

Classical definitions
Plato
Both Plato and Aristotle saw in mimesis the representation of nature. Plato wrote about mimesis in both Ion and The Republic (Books II, III, and X). In Ion, he states that poetry is the art of divine madness, or inspiration. Because the poet is subject to this divine madness, instead of possessing "art" or "knowledge" (techne) of the subject, the poet does not speak truth (as characterized by Plato's account of the Forms). As Plato has it, only truth is the concern of the philosopher. As culture in those days did not consist in the solitary reading of books, but in the listening to performances, the recitals of orators (and poets), or the acting out by classical actors of tragedy, Plato maintained in his critique that theatre was not sufficient in conveying the truth. He was concerned that actors or orators were thus able to persuade an audience by rhetoric rather than by telling the truth.

In Book II of The Republic, Plato describes Socrates' dialogue with his pupils. Socrates warns we should not seriously regard poetry as being capable of attaining the truth and that we who listen to poetry should be on our guard against its seductions, since the poet has no place in our idea of God.

In developing this in Book X, Plato told of Socrates' metaphor of the three beds: one bed exists as an idea made by God (the Platonic ideal); one is made by the carpenter, in imitation of God's idea; one is made by the artist in imitation of the carpenter's.
 
So the artist's bed is twice removed from the truth. The copiers only touch on a small part of things as they really are, where a bed may appear differently from various points of view, looked at obliquely or directly, or differently again in a mirror. So painters or poets, though they may paint or describe a carpenter or any other maker of things, know nothing of the carpenter's (the craftsman's) art, and though the better painters or poets they are, the more faithfully their works of art will resemble the reality of the carpenter making a bed, nonetheless the imitators will still not attain the truth (of God's creation).

The poets, beginning with Homer, far from improving and educating humanity, do not possess the knowledge of craftsmen and are mere imitators who copy again and again images of virtue and rhapsodize about them, but never reach the truth in the way the superior philosophers do.”

[Sidebar: This is important. Of course, we take exception with Plato’s conclusion that only philosophy can convey truth—indeed, our major premise is that art, imbued with spiritual resonance, BECOMES philosophy. Nevertheless, we must accept, as absolute, the idea that the imitation of God is Truth, but imitation of man must somehow be compromised, watered down truth, which is therefore false. It is like the Xerox copy idea: that each successive copy has a lower and lower resolution, so the copy is less and less faithful to the original. On the other hand, if we look to our source, and see the face of the infinite Creator in even the lowest level on the infinite continuum, we may see beyond the limits of corporeal knowability, and experience the Divine even in the false representation of WORDS. We must alway remember that the created thing must mirror its creator, and that the outer form must conform, essentially, to the inner form.

Back to Wikipedia:]

Aristotle
“Similar to Plato's writings about mimesis, Aristotle also defined mimesis as the perfection and imitation of nature. Art is not only imitation but also the use of mathematical ideas and symmetry in the search for the perfect, the timeless, and contrasting being with becoming. Nature is full of change, decay, and cycles, but art can also search for what is everlasting and the first causes of natural phenomena.” 

[Sidebar: This is also important, because, as we will see, below, there are mathematical sequences behind natural forms which provide those forms with an abstract intelligibility.

Back to Wikipedia:]

“Aristotle wrote about the idea of four causes in nature. 

The first formal cause is like a blueprint, or an immortal idea.

The second cause is the material, or what a thing is made out of. 

The third cause is the process and the agent, in which the artist or creator makes the thing. 

The fourth cause is the good, or the purpose and end of a thing, known as telos.

Aristotle's Poetics is often referred to as the counterpart to this Platonic conception of poetry. Poetics is his treatise on the subject of mimesis. Aristotle was not against literature as such; he stated that human beings are mimetic beings, feeling an urge to create texts (art) that reflect and represent reality.

Aristotle considered it important that there be a certain distance between the work of art on the one hand and life on the other; we draw knowledge and consolation from tragedies only because they do not happen to us. Without this distance, tragedy could not give rise to catharsis. However, it is equally important that the text causes the audience to identify with the characters and the events in the text, and unless this identification occurs, it does not touch us as an audience. Aristotle holds that it is through "simulated representation", mimesis, that we respond to the acting on the stage which is conveying to us what the characters feel, so that we may empathise with them in this way through the mimetic form of dramatic roleplay. It is the task of the dramatist to produce the tragic enactment in order to accomplish this empathy by means of what is taking place on stage.

In short, catharsis can only be achieved if we see something that is both recognisable and distant. Aristotle argued that literature is more interesting as a means of learning than history, because history deals with specific facts that have happened, and which are contingent, whereas literature, although sometimes based on history, deals with events that could have taken place or ought to have taken place."

[Sidebar: The ideas that, “we draw knowledge and consolation from tragedies only because they do not happen to us”, and that, “catharsis can only be achieved if we see something that is both recognizable and distant”, summarize the idea of “artifice”. We experience ARTIFICIAL LIFE differently from REAL LIFE. It is the tension between the real and the unreal in art that gives us the objectivity to draw philosophical conclusions from it, conclusions of higher mind; i.e. people can learn a great deal from observing somebody else’s tragedy, because the objective perspective is grounded in the abstract, whereas there is a completely different set of lessons to be learned from our own tragedies—that is to say, that the abstract reality of ideas worked out in imitation of nature apply to higher life more than the subjective difficulties of carnal life.

The following is a well-known image: two speakers facing each other, or is it vase? You can see one or the other, but not both at the same time.

                                

Again: it is the tension between of the real and the unreal in art that gives us the objectivity to draw philosophical conclusions from it, conclusions of higher mind. To be sure, some people claim to be able to see both the faces and the vase at the same time, a feat which I know is possible in an altered higher vibrational mind state; in point of fact the role of ART may be said to be precisely that: to generate altered mind states, a consciousness shift proceeding from the rational to the spiritual, exactly like prayer or meditation. But the means of alteration must include something familiar in opposition to something unfamiliar, something real in opposition to something unreal.

I read an article in Psychology Today, many years ago, about an experiment they did with babies. Very young infants, lying on their backs, had mobiles hung over their cribs for them to look at. Psychologists discovered that the babies would not look at things that were familiar, because they were bored with them; but they also would not look at anything that was too weird, because it freaked them out. The only way to hold the baby's attention was to show him something familiar with something slightly skewed about it. Variety-within-Unity seems to be the absolute definition of the psychic parameters which create consciousness.

Back to Wikipedia:

Contrast to diegesis
“It was also Plato and Aristotle who contrasted mimesis with diegesis (Greek διήγησις). Mimesis shows, rather than tells, by means of directly represented action that is enacted. Diegesis, however, is the telling of the story by a narrator; the author narrates action indirectly and describes what is in the characters' minds and emotions. The narrator may speak as a particular character or may be the "invisible narrator" or even the "all-knowing narrator" who speaks from above in the form of commenting on the action or the characters.”

Once again we encounter a duality: "showing" versus "telling". Does "showing" (through symbolic representation) come closer to the truth than telling (through verbal referents), or is the the telling a foray into the abstract world of ideas? De Charms would say no to the latter, because words are incapable of conveying the essence. 

We now turn to a theosophical work by Andreas Freher, NOTES AND MATERIALS OF THE DIVINE LAW. This excerpt revisits the subject of  "the knowing, which sense is not penetrable by human reason but only by the divine Spirit in man". It also discusses the conversion of Human Will into Divine Will in progressive stages--Natural Forms into Divine Forms.

"There is a mystical and magical sense of the Revelations of St John, as well as a literal and ecclesiastical sense. It is called mystical as it relates to the hidden mystery of God in the soul, and it is called magical as it relates to the knowing, which sense is not penetrable by human reason but only by the divine Spirit in man. This divine Spirit is universal and subsists in every man, but is, in many, not only obstructed but even perfectly hidden.

The cause of obstruction and hiding is the aversion of the will of man from the will of God; and the removal thereof is THEREFORE the conversion of that will into His. The conversion of the will of man into the will of God is not instantaneous but by a gradual process. This process is made through all the forms of nature and through all the divine spirits or divine forms.  

In every human soul or quarternary esta, centre is to be found as standing in the midst betwixt the two principles of darkness and light; and from thence begins the manifestation of the Spirit in light. . . .

The soul's perfection is in the full manifestation of the divine Spirit in every form and property thereof, through real formation and generation of Christ Within. . . .

The regenerated spirit draws after it the soul, and that also draws the body, without which it cannot be perfected-- and so the soul is clothed with the heavenly body of the inward Christ."
 

You could not find a more perfect analog to the idea that  "the soul is clothed with the heavenly body of the inward Christ", than the idea that an artwork is the product of invisible impulses from the Father, that generate artificial expressions, matter-form composites; as C.S. Lewis says,

"The Infinite, rejecting a myriad possibilities, throws out of Himself the positive elected invention."

The following excerpt traces the development of natural forms from spiritual essence:

THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURE HER DIVINE REVELATIONS, AND A VOICE TO MANKIND.
By ANDREW JACKSON DAVIS
 
“Then form is the only external mode by which all essences exist, and is the state which they assume in reference to all the material things. A plant puts forth its delicate tendrils, its finely interwoven fibers and substances, only by virtue of the essence which DEVELOPS itself from the inner to the outer world in that form.  And the rose with all its beauty delicacy and fragrance is a perfect representative of the inner essence. All such forms developed, however complicated and varied in appearance, that they may manifest only the essential qualities of their own creation. The outer soul, in every instance, is a perfect type image and correspondent of the inner from which it proceeded.

The most delicate animal's form is also a representation of its inner living essence, and actuating principle; and the MOST gigantic beast form, is only a higher degree of development, and a higher representative of corresponding qualities which are its soul and creator.

Yet, the whole animal, vegetable, and mineral worlds, are as one form to the body of Man, for they only POSSESS, collectively, what is the human organization individually Composed of. Thus it is that the human form is the perfection of all forms. And as this is established, it is made clear equally that its soul, or essence, is a corresponding structure of which the outside is the manifest mode of Being and the exact representative.

And it is necessary that it should be well understood, and borne in mind, that form is not the creator of life or of Its attributes; but that the form, in every department of Nature, is outside the mode of every living soul's existence. But in neither of the lower kingdoms, have the organized forms an inner principle of life, individually but collectively, as they have constituting one perfect plane of form and creation. The human form has an individually organized principle, because every human organization is a congregation of all subordinate forms and substances in matter and is indestructible. . . .

Beings of one type progress from the lowest form through the successive modifications to the highest of all.

[Sidebar: As mentioned earlier, observing the progression of divine forms through their various incarnations reveals a SEQUENTIALLY graduated continuum of manifestations from lower physical reality to higher spiritual reality. Furthermore, we must remember that the outer form must conform to the inner form, a conformity discernible on every one of the infinite number of levels.

As we examine divine form in mundane manifestation, we must turn to the phenomenon of so-called “sacred sites”, but, first, here is a Wikipedia review the term "sacred": 

Sacred
“Sacred means revered due to sanctity, is in general the state of being holy (perceived by religious individuals as associated with divinity) or sacred (considered worthy of spiritual respect or devotion; or inspiring awe or reverence among believers).

From an anthropological or atheistic perspective, the religious view of the sacred is an emic perspective on a culture's collection of thoughts and practices that function as a basis for the community's social structure.

The word "sacred" descends from the Latin sacrum, which referred to the gods or anything in their power, and to sacerdos and sanctum, set apart. It was generally conceived spatially, as referring to the area around a temple."

Now on to Sacred Natural Sites:

 
Sacred Natural Sites — an Overview
“Sacred natural sites are natural features in or areas of land or water having special spiritual significance to peoples and communities.

The interest in sacred natural sites from the perspective of nature conservation lies in the components of biological diversity that they harbour, such as the species of animals and plants, the habitats and ecosystems, as well the ecological dynamics and functions that support life within and outside the places. Linked to such biological diversity is the array of distinct human cultures that care for them and hold them sacred.

Sacred natural sites consist of all types of natural features including mountains, hills, forests, groves, rivers, lakes, lagoons, caves, islands and springs. They can vary in size from the very small: an individual tree, small spring, or a single rock formation, to whole landscapes and mountain ranges. They consist of geological formations, distinct landforms, specific ecosystems and natural habitats. They are predominantly terrestrial but are also found in inshore marine areas, islands and archipelagos. They may also be the location of temples, shrines, mosques and churches, and they can incorporate other features such as pilgrimage trails. In some sites nature is itself sacred, while in others sanctity is conferred by connections with spiritual heroes, religious structures or sacred histories.

Sacred natural sites and religion
Sacred natural sites are just one of many domains where religions or belief systems interact with nature. Most if not all religions have mythology, cosmology, theology or ethics related to earth, nature and land. Contemporarily, such connections are growingly being revived or re-articulated through ethical positions expressed for example in statements that many of the mainstream faiths have produced, setting out their relationship to the natural world and their responsibility towards the planet. . . .

The vast majority of sacred natural sites were arguably founded by indigenous or folk religions and spiritualities, but many were subsequently adopted or co-opted by mainstream religions. There is consequently a considerable 'layering' and mixing of religious and other spiritual or belief systems. . . .

Sacred natural sites are thus connected to a wide range of socio-cultural systems and institutions, some more complex than others, and to different dynamics of change and cultural interaction.”

Thus, the question to ask is this: 

"Does the confluence and intensification of spiritual energies, that occur at so-called sacred sites, whether they be natural or man-made, enhance the human mind’s sensitivity to spiritual influence, or not?”. 

We would like to think, yes. When we see reminders of mythological entities appearing in the face of a mountain cliff, or in the complexities of religious architecture, do we enter the mind state of that myth and raise our consciousness above the mundane, or are we merely entertained by the mimetic play of images in literal consciousness?

The preceding quotes about sacred sites don't emphasize the fact that sacred sites tend to be places where something is happening, places where there extraneous energies are modulated and synthesized. By "places where something is happening" I mean places like a windy mountaintop, a high butte, a confluence of three rivers, a waterfall, etc.

There's a place in Idaho called Buffalo Eddy; it is a place, on the Snake River, where rocks stick way out into the stream, creating a bend in the river. The river courses violently around this promontory, generating whirlpools and a lot of complex crosstalk of the waves. Many people have drowned there. This site was chosen by the Nez Perce as a holy place where they had various tribal rituals; on the broad, flat, so-called “wedding rock”, newly-weds worked out their problems in front of the whole tribe, before they got married. The famous petroglyphs decorate one great big rock wall above the eddy.

I had a very interesting experience there. I was sitting out in the river on  this great rock, banging on a big deer-hide bass drum. There was a strange resonance to the sound, and the vibrations got extremely trippy, such that I started feeling  a little bit high. Suddenly this huge moose came charging over the mountainous horizon; from a distance, I watched it make its way all the way down the hill, all the way  across the snake River, and out onto the other side.

Also, Buffalo Eddy is a place where I had this wonderful vision of a blue heron, swooping down over the river, and lightly brushing the surface of the river with its wing. I know this is a technique that birds use to tempt fish up to the top, but, aside from its pragmatic connotation, it was a highly mystical event, a mythic vision in every sense of the word.

So a sacred site is a place where various natural energies come together and generate a kind of magnetic pole of the psyche. It remains to be seen if we, here, create the same complex vibratory crosstalk in our little religious rituals at Basin Bible church.

We will now get into the subject of the actual mathematical underpinnings of spiritual experience--mathematical patterns which are at the structural center of articulate natural forms.

Sacred geometry
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Sacred geometry is the geometry used in the design and construction of religious structures such as churches, temples, mosques, religious monuments, altars, tabernacles; as well as for sacred spaces such as temenoi, sacred groves, village greens and holy wells, and the creation of religious art. In sacred geometry, symbolic and sacred meanings are ascribed to certain geometric shapes and certain geometric proportions, according to Paul Calter and others:

As worldview and cosmology
The belief that God created the universe according to a geometric plan has ancient origins. Plutarch attributed the belief to Plato, writing that "Plato said God geometrizes continually" (Convivialium disputationum, liber 8,2). In modern times the mathematician Carl Friedrich Gauss adapted this quote, saying "God arithmetizes".
 
Natural forms
According to Stephen Skinner, the study of sacred geometry has its roots in the study of nature, and the mathematical principles at work therein. Many forms observed in nature can be related to geometry, for example, the chambered nautilus grows at a constant rate and so its shell forms a logarithmic spiral to accommodate that growth without changing shape. Also, honeybees construct hexagonal cells to hold their honey. These and other correspondences are sometimes interpreted in terms of sacred geometry and considered to be further proof of the natural significance of geometric forms.

Art and architecture
Geometric ratios, and geometric figures were often employed in the design of Egyptian, ancient Indian, Greek and Roman architecture. Medieval European cathedrals also incorporated symbolic geometry. Indian and Himalayan spiritual communities often constructed temples and fortifications on design plans of mandala and yantra.

Many of the sacred geometry principles of the human body and of ancient architecture have been compiled into the Vitruvian Man drawing by Leonardo da Vinci, itself based on the much older writings of the Roman architect Vitruvius.

In Hinduism
The Agamas are a collection of Sanskrit,Tamil and Grantha  scriptures chiefly constituting the methods of temple construction and creation of idols, worship means of deities, philosophical doctrines, meditative practices, attainment of sixfold desires and four kinds of yoga.

Music
Pythagoras is often credited for discovering that an oscillating string stopped halfway along its length produces an octave relative to the string's fundamental, while a ratio of 2:3 produces a perfect fifth and 3:4 produces a perfect fourth. However the Chinese culture already featured the same mathematical positions on the Guqin and the tone holes in flutes, so Pythagoras was not the first. Pythagoreans believed that these harmonic ratios gave music powers of healing which could "harmonize" an out-of-balance body."
 
Sacred architecture
Sacred architecture (also known as religious architecture) is a religious architectural practice concerned with the design and construction of places of worship and/or sacred or intentional space, such as churches, mosques, stupas, synagogues, and temples. Many cultures devoted considerable resources to their sacred architecture and places of worship. Religious and sacred spaces are amongst the most impressive and permanent monolithic buildings created by humanity. Conversely, sacred architecture as a locale for meta-intimacy may also be non-monolithic, ephemeral and intensely private, personal and non-public.

Sacred, religious and holy structures often evolved over centuries and were the largest buildings in the world, prior to the modern skyscraper. While the various styles employed in sacred architecture sometimes reflected trends in other structures, these styles also remained unique from the contemporary architecture used in other structures. With the rise of Abrahamic monotheisms (particularly Christianity and Islam), religious buildings increasingly became centres of worship, prayer and meditation.
The Western scholarly discipline of the history of architecture itself closely follows the history of religious architecture from ancient times until the Baroque period, at least. Sacred geometry, iconography and the use of sophisticated semiotics such as signs, symbols and religious motifs are endemic to sacred architecture.

Spiritual aspects of religious architecture
Sacred and/or religious architecture is sometimes called sacred space.

Architect Norman L. Koonce has suggested that the goal of sacred architecture is to make "transparent the boundary between matter and mind, flesh and the spirit." In discussing sacred architecture, Protestant minister Robert Schuller suggested that "to be psychologically healthy, human beings need to experience their natural setting—the setting we were designed for, which is the garden." 

Meanwhile, Richard Kieckhefer suggests that entering into a religious building is a metaphor for entering into spiritual relationship. Kieckhefer suggests that sacred space can be analyzed by three factors affecting spiritual process: 

longitudinal space emphasizes the procession and return of sacramental acts, 

auditorium space is suggestive of proclamation and response, 

and new forms of communal space designed for gathering and return depend to a great degree on minimized scale to enhance intimacy and participation in worship.

Ancient architecture
Sacred architecture spans a number of ancient architectural styles including Neolithic architecture, ancient Egyptian architecture and Sumerian architecture. Ancient religious buildings, particularly temples, were often viewed as the dwelling place, the temenos, of the gods and were used as the site of various kinds of sacrifice. Ancient tombs and burial structures are also examples of architectural structures reflecting religious beliefs of their various societies."

Another interesting sacred site I have visited is not natural but man-made: Lincoln's Tomb. I've been there twice, and I remember the exact same feeling both times: there is a very powerful low vibration coming off that place, and as you go down into this kind of tunnel, a sense of solemnity washes over you. It is really a holy place. It is as if the Angels were watching over him, and conveying the seriousness of this mind to those who have come to pay him homage.

 
To recapitulate the main points of this presentation, let us be reminded the following:

1. If we look to our source, and see the face of the infinite Creator in even the lowest level on the infinite continuum, we may see beyond the limits of corporeal knowability, and experience the Divine even in the false representation of WORDS. We must alway remember that the created thing must mirror its creator, and that the outer form must conform, essentially, to the inner form.

2. In sacred geometry, symbolic and sacred meanings are ascribed to certain geometric shapes and certain geometric proportions. This MUST be, because the sacred proportions give form to an underlying impulse of the Divine.

3. Sacred sites tend to be places where something is happening, places where extraneous energies are modulated and synthesized. These energies are often created by the activity of external natural forces, like the rush of water or wind, but they may also be generated by human acts: acts of praise, adoration, and fidelity.

How might we endeavor to create such a vortex of energy that this place may achieve sanctity? What do we know of such things?

Next week I will read the following:

I have long maintained that the truth of music was not the representation of things, but the miraculous manifestation of the divine in the physical. People are always trying to get me to explain to them what makes good music and what makes bad music. Over the years, I have invented a few convincing lines about the quality, time periods, unity-in-variety, etc.; or I have suggested different ways of gauging how honestly (accurately?) nature is reflected in the art, all based on somewhat rational principles. But preparing this sermon has awakened in me the realization that my response to music is not really rational at all; that the reflection of the inner divine impulse in an outer form is something that can only be sensed intuitively. We experience the timeless intuitive response, and then reflect on the experience at a later time.

As Kierkegaard says: 

"We experience forwards, we understand backwards.

From this, in conjunction with the foregoing,  we must conclude that:

1. all experience of divine forms must take place intuitively, in that space of human consciousness that is beyond time, and that 

2. we appreciate, achieve what we call "understanding" from backwards reflection. It is this backward reflection that gives form to the formless experience.

Now in the final analysis, the answer to the good-vs-bad question, is this: 

Since all creations come from the Father, and are imbued with Divine Radiance, all creations MUST be, on some level, Divine. It is the quality of our own personal REFLECTION that makes an artwork good or bad, a place sacred or profane. 

My teacher Herbert Brun always said: 

"Listen to everything a person says as if he were a human being."

Now I think I know what he meant. 

Let us pray: Thank you Jesus for the miracle of creation, the miracle of articulation, and that space in human consciousness that is beyond time. Amen.