the personal relevance of truth

8/14/2019 The Personal Relevance of Truth

1/22

PENDLE HILL PAMPHLET 81

The Personal Relevance Of Truth

Thomas S. Brown

PENDLE HILL PUBLICATIONS

WALLINGFORD, PENNSYLVANIA


2/22

THOMAS S. BROWN


2

ABOUT THEAUTHOR Th oma s Sh ipley Brown was b orn in

19 12 in Philad elph ia into a fam ily of n oted Qu ak er teach ers

an d cam pers; edu cated at Westtown , Haverford an d Harvard.

Dur ing 1949-1953 h e was a m ember of the depar tm ent of

re l igion a t Ear lham Col lege and is now an ins t ructor of

En glish , Lat in , the Bible an d Qu ak erism at Westt own Sch ool,

Pennsylvania . He is married and has f ive chi ldren.

Th e su bs tan ce of th is pa m ph let was firs t given a s th e

William Penn Lectu re for 195 4 a n d is pu blish ed in th e Pen dleHill pa m ph let Series by special a rra n gem en t with th e You n g

Friends Movement of the Philadelphia Yearly Meetings.

Pu blish ed 1 95 5 by Pen dle Hill

Repu blish ed electron ically 20 04 by Pen dle Hill

h t tp: / / www.pen dlehill.org/ pen dle_h ill_pa m ph lets .ht m


3/22

THOMAS S. BROWN


3

O LORD, my Mak er an d Protector, who h as t

graciously sent me into this world, to work out

m y own sa lva tion , ena ble m e to drive from m e all

s uch unqu ie t and pe rp l ex ing t hough t s a s may

mis lead or h inder me in the prac t i ce of those

du t ies which th ou h as t required. Wh en I behold

th e works of th y h an ds a n d con s ider th e cours e of

th y pr oviden ce, give m e Grace a lways to rem em ber

tha t thy thoughts a re not my thoughts , nor thy

ways my ways. And while i t shall please Thee to

cont inue me in this world where much is to be

don e an d l it t le to be kn own , teach m e by thy Holy

Spirit to with dra w my m in d from u n profitab le an d

d a n g e r o u s i n q u i r i e s , f r o m d i f f i c u l t i e s v a i n l y

cu riou s, a n d d ou bts im poss ible to be solved. Let

m e rejoice in t h e light which th ou h as t im pa rted,

let me serve thee with act ive zeal , and humble

confiden ce, an d wait with pa tien t expectat ion for

th e t im e in which th e sou l which Th ou receivest ,

shal l be sat isf ied with knowledge. Grant this , O

Lord, for J esu s Ch ris ts sa ke. Am en.

Samue l J ohns on

Th is world where m u ch is to be d one a n d lit t le to be

kn own . How ap tly tha t d escribes ou r l ivin g day by da y an d

the world in which each of us finds himself. We have to

make a s teady s tream of decis ions for which we have in

most cases l i t t le pert inent information and whose resul ts

ar e far -reach in g, both for ou rs elves a n d for oth ers. An d even

in our bes t cons t ructed plans unpredic table coincidence

b r i n g s a w e l t e r o f c o n f u s i o n s o t h a t t h e a p p a r e n t l y

in sign ifican t su dd en ly explodes in to mom en tou s t r agedy or

creat ivi ty.

Neverth eless over a gain st th is power of fat e, th is Dar k


4/22

THOMAS S. BROWN


4

Necessity, stands the equally evident power of our minds

to grapple wi th our environment and to change i t to our

will, cons ist en tly an d pr edicta bly. Th in k of th e m as tery over

th e world repres ent ed b y a loaf of brea d, or a watch , or a jet

plan e, or the factories where th ese are m ad e!

We live in a twilight zon e between th e tota l da rk n ess of

pu re cha n ce and th e br igh t ligh t of t ru th . Every m omen t of

ou r l ives h as an u rgen cy, often only th in ly veiled, becau se

we know deep down th at th is m oment m ay be our las t , tha t

death i s an ins tant poss ibi l i ty and an eventual cer ta inty .

We kn ow a great deal ab out d yin g, an d th at d is tu rbs u s ; we

kn ow n oth in g abou t dea th , an d tha t d is tu rbs u s .

Fu r th ermore , a t m oments wh en we are m ost a lone, we

becom e acu tely aware of a pr esen ce th at ca n on ly be th ou gh t

of a s Th e Oth er, powerfu l an d fu ll of awe, a n d to wh om we

feel responsible for what we have done, and for what we

are. I t is also clear at such moments that The Other is

directly related t o th e fact of ou r exist en ce. Rela tedn ess to

The Other seems to have become a matter of l i fe and

death , and our s earch for that re la tedn ess is ou r search for

life itself. Wrapped up with this experience of The Other

is not only our feel ing of awe and relatedness , but also a

sense of the incomple teness and the inadequacy of our

efforts , and a rest lessness even in the face of success .

A powerfu l factor in ou r u n certainty an d rest lessn ess

is th e fact th at for a lon g gen erat ion in th is cou n try it h as

been th e fas h ion to den y the validi ty of Abs olu te Tru th an d

consequently to reject any clear-cut s tandards of act ion.

Yet it is a lso t ru e th at m ore an d m ore the p rice we h ave to

pay for the re jec t ion of Tru th as rea l and knowable i s

becomin g app ar en t . Alth ou gh th e tossing ou t of righ t an d

wrong may be temporar i ly pleasant , and a l though the

awa ren ess of u glin ess a n d bea u ty m a y be for th e mom en t

con cealed by fad s in a rt , an d a lth ou gh we ma y even swallow


5/22

THOMAS S. BROWN


5

t h e s u g g e s t i o n t h a t j u s t i c e a n d i n j u s t i c e a r e n o t

fundamentally different (until , of course, we become the

victims of injustice, when the illusions swiftly vanish); yet

when we are su dd enly faced with th e fact th at reject ion of

Tru th m ean s also th e den ial of an y real difference b etween

l i fe and death, and that our l iv ing is therefore wi thout

m ean in g or rea lity, then our pain b ecomes a cu te , an d we

s q u i r m c e a s e l e s s l y i n t h e p r e s e n c e o f E m p t i n e s s ,

Mean in gless n ess , Nothingn ess .

Th is lon g gen era tion in its rejection of Tru th began a s

t h e a g e o f i n t e n s e i n d i v i d u a l i s m ; t h e n m e n b e c o m i n g

f r i g h t e n e d o f t h e i r a l o n e n e s s t r e m u l o u s l y r u s h e d f o r

com pan y un der th e sh elter of m an -in - the-mas s . In ad dit ion

it h a s b een a n age of m ar ked m a terialism , of swift divorce,

an d person al t reach ery, an d n at iona l t reason . It is th e age

of writhing (for writhing relieves pain); an age of alcohol,

dope, peyote am ong th e irres pon sible; am ong th e respon sible

it is th e age of m am m oth r elief agencies a n d a sp ectacu lar

f l o w e r i n g o f h e a l i n g d r u g s a n d a n e s t h e t i c s . S u c h

deve lopments a re inevi tab le in an age tha t suf fe rs and

through the media of swi f t and ce r ta in communica t ion

kn ows th e su fferin g of th e world.

Th e very powers wh ich h a ve ma de it pos sible for u s to

know of this suffering more swift ly and sharply are the

powers which make i t possible for us to infl ict horrible

su fferin g u n iversa lly; an d th ese p owers likewise p resen t u s

with th e mean s to alleviate a n d perh ap s even rem ove hu n ger,

an d exposu re , an d d iseas e as th e cau ses of su ffer in g. We

kn ow, moreover, tha t th e t ru e solida rity of m an kind is n ot

h is sk eletal, organ ic, an im al kin sh ip, im portan t th ough th at

be . We men s tand as one because we suffer , because we

can be hur t in ways and to depths not known among the

other creatures of this ear th .

Since this is an age predominantly material is t ic , in


6/22

THOMAS S. BROWN


6

the face of suffering we package dried milk and vitamins

an d pen ic illin an d sen d th em ra cin g out b y plan e an d sh ip,

only too often in pathetic driblets, soon lost in the thirsty

s a n d s o f h u m a n n e e d . I n a n e a r l i e r a g e , o n e t h a t i s

somet imes thought of as more sp i r i tua l than th i s , men

entered monas ter ies , or col lec ted holy re l ics , or bought

indulgences for relat ives they gratui tously assumed were

in Purgatory, or wandered about as preaching fr iars . As

solutions to suffering these efforts have provided at best

du biou s an swers .

For m en s u ffer most a cute ly an d m ost often b ecau se

th ey h ave th e power to love, an d even d eeper th an m an s

solida rity in su fferin g is m a n s solida rity in th e power to

love. At th is point we see m ost clearly ou r com m on origin ,

an d ou r com m on d estin y: beca u se we love, we su ffer, livin g

as we do in a world of im per fection an d lim ita tion s. Where

th e b eloved is th e s elf, th ere follows in evita bly the an gu ish

aris in g ou t of th e fru str at ion s a n d bru ises im posed by oth er

oppos in g se lves . Su ch con flic t an d s u ch an gu ish are b oth

end less an d m ean in gless . Th ey ar e th erefore t ru ly hellish ,

for suffering without meaning or purpose is Hell . Where

the be loved i s another , the re i s more hope of c rea t ive

resu lts a n d freedom from Hell. Bu t we n eed a n ew ph ilosoph y

of su fferin g qu ite as desp erately as we need n ew sour ces of

food a n d sh elter a n d m edicin es. Well-fed, well-h ou sed selves

can s t i l l be wounded, and poin t les s suf fe r ing can s t i l l

su bm erge th e world.

Th is is an age wh ich, in its reject ion of Tru th , h as seen

a l so the swi f t d i sappearance of pass iona te in te l l ec tua l

curiosi ty and del ight in search for the Truth for i ts own

sake. Miltons Areopagitica reads almost l ike a subversive

pa m ph let : A m an m ay be a h eret ic in Th e Tru th ; an d if h e

be l ieve th ings only because h i s Pas tor says so , o r the

Ass em bly so determ in es, with ou t kn owin g an y other rea son ,


7/22

THOMAS S. BROWN


7

t hough h i s be l i e f be t rue , ye t t he ve ry t ru th he ho lds

becom es h is h eres y. An d J . S. Mills On Liberty s eems

nearly treasonable: Not the violent conflict between the

pa rts of t ru th , bu t th e qu iet su pp ress ion of h alf of it , is th e

form ida ble evil: th ere is always h ope wh en people ar e forced

to lis ten to both s ides .

And I regularly meet a more insidious form of this

h eresy am ong you n g people wh o in sist th at th e search itself,

i n a n d o f i t s e l f , i s t h e g o o d l i f e ; a s e a r c h t o w h i c h ,

apparent ly , the f ind ing of t ru th i s i r re levant , and even

unfor tunate . Such a search is a vic ious kind of spi r i tual

di let tant ism. Similar to this is the worship of method as

m eth od, wh eth er it be in edu cat ion , or s cien ce, or worsh ip.

The result is often the loss of responsibili ty to the Truth.

The moral implicat ions of the resul ts of the method are

lost s ight of, an d t h e bits of fact discovered a re n ever h eld

u p to th e Tru th itself.

Cru de, pra gm atic com m on sen se su ggests th at we h ave

pa id t oo high a pr ice for th e rejection of th e va lidity of Tru th ,

tha t wha t we a re reaping in the mora l and in te l l ec tua l

d e g e n e r a t i o n a m o n g u s i s t h e i n e v i t a b l e r e w a r d o f

s e p a r a t i o n f r o m T r u t h . M o s t a p p a l l i n g o f a l l i s t h e

realization that this doctrine of the Relativity of Truth has

been fed to a wh ole gen erat ion of teach ers a s th e out growth

of th e a pp licat ion of J oh n Deweys ph ilosoph y to th e field of

e d u c a t i o n . T h i s r e l a t i v i t y h a s i n t u r n b e e n f e d t o a n

u n im agin able nu m ber of you n gs ters ent ru s ted to th eir care .

Par t a n d p arcel of th is p rocess h as been th e dilu t ion of th e

word Truth in to a descr ip t ion of changing sc ien t i f i c

s t a t emen t s , (wh ich a re s ub j ec t a lways t o r ev i s ion and

d i s c a r d ) a b o u t c o m p a r a t i v e l y i m p e r f e c t l y o b s e r v e d

rela t ionsh ips in th e n atu ra l world .

In m y own search for Tru th , a m ajor s tep cam e du r in g


8/22

THOMAS S. BROWN


8

the years 1952-53. This s tep consis ted in a release from

the belief that Truth had to be certain; rational, logical,

s e l f - s us t a in ing , s e l f - ev iden t , pub l i c ly demons t r ab l e . I

su ddenly came to see tha t wh enever I ma de su ch dem an ds

I in evita bly discovered on ly m yself: I was walled in by m yself,

limited to myself, for I was the one who was being logical,

being rat ional , s tanding as judge over the Truth. I t is a

sm all world on th ose term s.

Along with th at real izat ion cam e its com pa n ion: th at it

is im pos sible for m e to with dr aw from th e pr ocess of livin g

while I m a ke u p m y m in d h ow to live. Wh ile I try to d ecide

whether this is the proper t rain for me to take, the doors

close, the tra in m oves on , an d I am left on a vaca n t platform .

Drop a m an in th e pou n din g su rf: h e does n ot ha ve t im e to

con du ct an elab orate s u rvey of win ds , t ides , wave-motions ;

he has to swim as bes t he can. And we are in the surf ,

sp i r i tua l ly speaking . I t became c lea r to me tha t un im-

pas sioned detach m ent on m atters of death or life , wh at some

philosophers call the existential issues of l ife, is nonsense

an d imm ora l.

Out of this flow of experience has come a series of

pers onal con victions or t ools of th ou ght wh ich it will be u sefu l

at th is poin t to m ak e clear . In th e firs t place I am con vin ced

by m y experien ce th at ou r rea lity is d erivat ive from a p rim ar y

Reality, ou r Person al existen ce from an u n derlyin g Existen ce,

our being from an original Being. This primary Reality is

that principle or power from which all existence springs,

t h e e s s e n c e u p o n w h i c h a l l c r e a t i o n d e p e n d s f o r i t s

con t in u at ion. Fu r th ermore out of m y exper ience h as com e

the convict ion that Truth is a l i fe-giving relat ionship to

Reali ty; Truth, to put the matter another way, is Real i ty

ap pea ring in t ime a n d s pa ce; it is Reality right ly perceived

an d comm u nica ted among men .

Therefore my sense of responsibili ty to The Other


9/22

THOMAS S. BROWN


9

whose presence I fee l i s an awareness that there are rea l

con sequ ences for real disobedience an d th at s epar ation from

Reality is d eat h . Ma n s s ear ch for Tru th is h is s ear ch for

life i tself. Hence its immediate, personal relevance.

Gra n ted th a t I can n ot com pel a n yon e by force of logic

to comprehend the val idi ty of Truth, any more than I can

by force comp el a n yon e to love m u sic or h is fam ily, I can ,

and indeed I must , s tand as a wi tness to the convic t ion

th at th e con tin u at ion of life is imp ossible ap ar t from Tru th .

Truth and Real i ty are one, and there can be no l i fe , no

exis tence wi thout Tru th . There i s no l iv ing wate r in a

mirage, however lovely, and however thirs ty a man may

be: n othin g can sa ve h im bu t th at wh ich gives h im water .

In the field of human biology it is clear that unless I

eat, I cannot live; or if I eat some chemicals like lye, my

bod y will be d es tr oyed. In t h e rea lm of ph ysics, if I wis h to

remain as an in tegra ted mechanism, I mus t s t ay out of

th e pa th of ra pidly movin g bodies l ike a u tomobiles or sm all

boys . And love, such as that between two persons , can

su rvive only with in th e fra m ework of Tru th . Loya lty to Tru th

is the key to survival.

As to th e na tu re of su rvival, I th in k we sh ou ld a ll agree

tha t under some c i rcums tances a man mus t g ive up a l l

thought of physical survival i f he is to survive as a man,

an d a m an m ay not u se ju s t a ny mean s h e will to ga in h is

ends. Remember the Macbeth of Act I , brave, generous,

sen si t ive, wh o yields to h is pa ss ion for th e th ron e, wad in g

deeper and deeper through blood to reach i t , unt i l in the

last Act , he has moved so far that when he hears of Lady

Macbeth s death , he can s ay in u t ter ha rdn ess of h ear t ,

She should have died hereafter. And Macbeth dies in a

f lurry of abus ive language, f renzied bragging, of bruta l

s lau gh ter an d a n im al vigor . Macbeth is b u t th e arch etype

of a ll of u s wh o try to soa r on win gs of trea ch ery. Bu t wh a t


10/22

THOMAS S. BROWN


10

su rvived of Macbeth ju s t pr ior to his death an d wh at was

lost becau se h e died? Alm ost n oth in g.

Our hearts leap to the words of Socrates before the

jury who had condemned him: And I would rather die,

h avin g spoken a fter my fas h ion, tha n speak in your m an n er

an d live ... Th e difficu lty, m y friends , is n ot in avoidin g dea th ,

bu t in avoidin g u n r igh teou sn ess , for that ru n s fas ter tha n

death. Who has survived, Socrates , or his judges? Even

th e oldest a n d h ar diest of th e ju dges is d ead . Bu t who will

sa y th at Socra tes h as n ot su rvived?

Th ese exam ples m ak e it c lear t h at su rvival , wh atever

it s na tu re , cann ot depend u pon ou r hu ma n ju dgmen t . Only

th e ju dge of all th e earth can kn ow. But t h is is su re: wher e

th ere is su rvival , it d epen ds for its exis ten ce u pon a close

re la t ionship wi th Rea l i ty , for by def in i t ion , Tru th and

su rviva l ar e closely lin ked . Tru th -fu ll m en an d a ction s fu ll

of Truth are in the Life and will survive. Thus it is that

c i t izens engaged in the pass ionate search for Truth are

th eir n at ions h igh est p atr iots an d m ost valu ab le cit izens ,

for it is th ey wh o br in g th e life-givin g cont a ct with Reality.

Th e life of in dividu a l citizen s is closely allied to t h e s u rviva l

of a n at ion , for a n at ion can n ot exis t with ou t cit izen s; an d

if th e n at ion warps , twis ts , regim ents th e m in ds an d spi r it s

of its cit izens , th e n at ion th at was is n o longer th ere. How

long is ou r b eloved cou n try to su rvive? Sh e can be des troyed

by in n er u n tru th far m ore swift ly th an by an y other force.

I have jus t sa id that Truth i s essent ia l to survival .

Th e ba sic problem How sh al l I kn ow the Tru th ? rem ains .

I f t h e T r u t h f o r w h i c h w e s e a r c h i s , a s I h a v e

suggested, of the same nature as Real i ty, then whateverTru th th ere is to be foun d is bas ica lly on e Tru th . J u s t a s

there cannot be two sources of existence, two Realit ies, so

th ere can n ot be , in an y im portan t sen se , differen t kinds of


11/22

THOMAS S. BROWN


11

Tru th . But h ow can one expla in th e Un ity of Tru th in terms

com m on to scien ce, ph ilosoph y, an d religion? Or m u st we

su bordin ate two of th ese to the th ird?

Dr . Paul T i l l i ch in h i s l ec tures on Church His tory

opened m y eyes to a very in teres t in g pa ss age in J u s t in

Mar tyr, a Ch ris t ian Apologis t of th e second centu ry. J u st in

M a r t y r , a n e d u c a t e d , h i g h - m i n d e d p a g a n , h a d b e e n

sea rch in g for th at u n iversa l ph ilosoph y which wou ld m eet

t h r e e c o n d i t i o n s . H e w a n t e d a p h i l o s o p h y t h a t w a s

intellectually respectable, that genuinely molded his daily

life , an d th at m ad e h im a p ar t of a com m u n ity of fin ders of

Tru th . He fou n d th at u n iversa l ph ilosoph y in Chr is t ian ity;

i t was for him not s imply a corner of sectarian Truth, but

r a t h e r , t h e a l l - e m b r a c i n g T r u t h a b o u t t h e m e a n i n g o f

ex i s t ence .

I n h i s e x p e r i e n c e h e f o u n d t h a t w h e r e v e r T r u t h

appears , i t i s Chr i s t i an Tru th . This does not mean tha t

any Chris t ians have al l the Truth, which, as i t were, they

i n v e n t e d b y t h e s t u r d y p o w e r s o f t h e i r i n t e l l e c t s o r

discovered th rou gh rigid inn er disciplin e, for Chr ist ia n s d o

not discover or invent the Truth; they are s imply granted

an in sigh t in to Reality. Fu rth erm ore, sa id J u st in, all th ose

who h ave lived accordin g to the Tru th ar e Chris t ian s , an d

he mentions specifically Socrates, Heraclitus, and Elijah,

th ou gh t h ey lived lon g before th e t im e of Ch rist .

Now please n ote tha t J u st in is n ot com pa rin g religions :

h e is m ak in g a s t atem ent a bou t Reality an d ou r relat ion sh ip

to i t . By Chris t iani ty he does not mean denominational

Chris t ian ity or th e in s t itu t ion of th e Chu rch as it a ppears

among us. He is not talking about rel igions; he is talking

ab ou t Tru th . Ch ris t ian ity is n ot a religion am ong religions ;

Chr is t ian ity is n ot r igh t a n d oth ers wron g; it is th e n egat ion

of re l ig ions as a p lura l noun; i t i s the a l l - inc lus ive

interpretat ion of Real i ty, the universal phi losophy. This


12/22

THOMAS S. BROWN


12

m ean s , of cou rse , th a t wherever Tru th is foun d, regard less

of its im m ediat e sou rce, it m u st be a ccepta ble in principle

to Ch ristian ity. No Tru th , wh eth er s cien tific, ps ych ological,

h ist orical, or religiou s , is b y its n a tu re foreign to Ch ristian ity,

for Ch ris t ian ity is b as ed u pon Tru th app ear in g in t im e an d

space .

Th e s t ren gth of J u s t in s a rgu m ent m ay be expla in ed

by an an alogy. Each of u s is a s elf, an d th ou gh th at s elf is

very hard to explain or describe, impossible to weigh or

measure or photograph, i t does exis t . Self-consciousness

is l ikewise complex and mysterious, but very well known.

Each self is a lonely unit , never known fully and perfectly

by any other self , but we can know something of another

self by its a cts , th rou gh its words , th rou gh its crea t ions in

ar t or m u sic or m ot ion, th rough wh at we lu m p together a s

se l f -express ion . This se l f -express ion depends for i t s

exis ten ce u pon th e self; it cou ld n ot exis t with ou t th at self;

and ye t i t i s d i f fe ren t f rom the se l f o f which i t i s the

expression and from which i t springs. At this point there

can be n o gr in with out th e ca t .

J us t i n s ugges t s t ha t t h i s may be t he na tu re o f t he

Reality with which we have to deal. The Self-hood of God

expres sed in th e creat ion of th e Un ivers e. Th is Crea tive Self-

Expr ess ion , th is Cr eat ive Prin ciple of Reason , th is p ower of

Self-Ma n ifest at ion of God n ot on ly to h im self bu t to oth ers

n ot h im self, J u st in called th e Logos, borrowin g a term long

famil iar to Greeks and more recently to Chris t ians in the

Gosp el of J ohn . Th e Logos is u t terly depend en t u pon God,

bu t it is n ot created in the way mat ter was created out of

n oth in g; it is n ot iden tical with God an y m ore th an a p erson s

self-expr ess ion is iden tical with h is in n er s elf. J u st a s Th e

Messiah is perm eated in every part by th e geniu s of Han del

an d reveals s ometh in g very profou n d a bou t Han dels n atu re,

so Creat ion reveals something very profound about the


13/22

THOMAS S. BROWN


13

Nature of God, about the kind of Real i ty from which our

exis tence draws i ts essence.

As th e Crea tive Self-Expres sion of God, th e Logos h a s

kins h ip, a s it were, with a ll th e u n ivers e, revealin g its elf in

th e world of n at u re as th e u n dergirding, in terrelat ed forces

of n atu re , th e pr in ciples an d powers th at s u s ta in our world .

Becau se th e Logos also sh in es th rou gh in th e realm of ou r

minds , our minds can comprehend the powers of na ture

an d can reach fu r th er ou t in to the rea l of th e u n n atu ra l ,

in to im agin ar y n u m bers a n d toward th e Idea of th e Good. It

is not without s ignif icance that one of the t ime-honored

maxims of phi losophy has been that the laws of thought

ar e th e laws of bein g. Becau se of ou r k in sh ip with th e Logos,

whos e crea tion s we ar e, deep, valid religiou s experien ce is

pos s ib l e , i n wh ich , t h rough the Logos , t he ve ry s e l f -

com m u n icat ion of God h im self, we com m u n icate with God.

S o i t i s i n a l l a s p e c t s o f o u r l i f e , w h e t h e r p h y s i c a l ,

intel lectual , emotional , aesthet ic , or rel igious, wherever

th ere is Tru th , th at Tru th is r ooted in th e Logos of God, th e

one God, in whom rests th e u n ity of Tru th .

So far the thinking of Just in Martyr does not seem

ra dically differen t from th a t of m a n y system s of m ysticism

and pantheism which are bui l t upon the pr inciple of the

permeat ion of the universe by the One and in which the

goal is th e ab sorpt ion of th e pa rt icu lar in to th e Universa l,

the m an y in to th e On e .

Bu t it is ju s t a t th is poin t tha t J u s t in s th ought ta kes

th e cru cia l s tep, the s am e cru cia l s tep th at every th oughtfu l

Christian m u st tak e, an d with out which Christian ity rema in s

simply one rel igion among others , one philosophy among

others , al l equ al ly open to th e sm orgas bord n ibb lin g of th e

enl ightened ec lec t i c . The razor -sharp commitment , the

bridgeless leap is this : that the Logos became the human

bein g, J esu s of Nazareth . Let m e sa y tha t m ore s lowly: the


14/22


15/22

THOMAS S. BROWN


15

Let u s t r y an other a n alogy. Sin ce we ha ve m ent ioned

the Far Eas t , l e t us tu rn to Gandhi . Suppose tha t in the

Uni ted Sta tes a professor i s making a thorough s tudy of

Gan dh i. He in terviews everyone h e can who h as m et Gan dh i,

h e collects every pu blish ed a rt icle , he p ores over m ap s an d

char t s an d s ta t is t ics , and ga in s s ome u n ders tand in g of the

con dit ions in In dia a n d th e effect th at Gan dh i h as produ ced.

Bu t th e s im plest In dian pea sa n t who lived with Gan dh i in

his ashram knows more about Gandhi f rom meet ing him

face to face, ta lkin g his n at ive lan gu a ge with h im , workin g

on th e sam e creat ive projects with h im , tha n th e professor,

h owever earn est h is s tu dy. To ma ke clear th e obviou s, th e

s im ples t Ch ris t ian kn ows m ore ab out God becau se he ha s

m et h im fa ce to fa ce in Ch rist , Ch rists fa ce in which is

th e glory of God, th an th e most ea rn est n on-Ch ris t ian . An d

th e con verse is t r u e; wherever a m an wors h ips God in s pir it

an d in t ru th , wh erever h e ha s m et God face to face, he is a

Christian, for i t is through the power of the Logos-Christ ,

th e Self-Expression of God, th at m en kn ow God t ru ly.

An d s o it is , as I sa id b efore, th at a n y Tru th ap pear in g

anywhere in the world, in any age, in any form wil l be

accepta ble in principle to Ch ris t ian ity becau se a ll Tru th is

of God, a n d t h ere is only one God. If we are to call J esu s t h e

Christ , the Logos, the Self-Expression of God made flesh

an d blood, th ere can n ot be an y Tru th in China or In dia , or

in J u da ism an d Islam , in science or ph ilosophy or m ysticism ,

which ca n n ot be received in pr in ciple by Chr ist ian ity.

To the question we asked earlier, How shall I know

th e Tru th we ha ve yet to give a fu ll a n swer, alth ou gh I h ave

su gges ted th a t th e re is Tru th an d th a t th e Tru th pervades

ou r world, orderin g an d s u sta in in g it . Bu t h ow sh al l I know

the Truth? How shall I act Truthfully in this l ife, so that I

m ay live an d n ot die? How sh al l I detect th e t ru e s ign als in

al l th e noise an d m ot ion arou n d m e?


16/22

THOMAS S. BROWN


16

Indeed, the detection of Truth is l ike the detection of

a sign a l. Wh y do I a ccept th e tra ffic light an d t h e policem a n s

whistle as signals in the midst of city traffic? Why do I

an swer to a b ab ys cry in th e midst of a h eavy th u n derst orm?

How do I know that I have made a bad mistake in family

relat ion s with ou t ever a word bein g sp oken ? Or h ow sh al l I

kn ow beau ty, or cou ra ge, or h onor, or love?

Th e greater th e n oise, th e wider t h e var iety of sou n d,

th e brigh ter th e ligh t , th e m ore dazzlin g its m ovemen t, th e

less l ikely I am to be aware that a given sound or a given

ligh t is a n im porta n t s ign al , un less , of cou rs e, it be of th e

overpowering volume of the t rumpet in bat t le or the air-

ra id s iren . Is i t becau se we kn ow th is th at we live in su ch

a welter of sou n d a n d fu ry? Are we u n der th e illu sion th at

th e more n oise, the m ore sign als, the m ore im portan ce gained ,

or are we afra id of s ign als an d h ope to drown th em ou t? If

either is true, we live in desperate t imes.

I resp ond to the policema n s h an d a n d to th e bab ys

c r y b e c a u s e I h a v e h a d a p r e v i o u s a n d m e a n i n g f u l

relat ionship with the s ignaler or his equivalent . A chi ld

who tries to stroke a wood-pussy is likely never to forget

th e s ign als of s tr iped b ack a n d ra ised ta il.

This fact of previous relationship in signal detection

m ark s th e fu n da m enta l u rgency of th e ques t ion Wh ere do

I com e from ? Wh at h as been m y previou s r elat ions h ip with

Rea l i ty? For i t i s th i s prev ious re la t ionship tha t wi l l

determ in e wh at kind of m ean in gfu l s ign als I sh al l be a ble to

distin gu ish in th e pou n ding su rf of life, an d it will determ in e

th e meth ods n eeded to in tercept th ose s ign als . If th e s tork

brought me , I had be t te r l ea rn , l ike Dr . Dool i t t l e , the

lan gu age of th e s torks ; if a l it t le chrom osome, th en perh ap s

I c a n d i s c o v e r s o m e i m p o r t a n t w i g w a g s t h r o u g h t h e

electronic microscope. But if I come ultimately from God,

prayer and Meet ing for Worship i s the mos t impor tan t


17/22

THOMAS S. BROWN


17

bu sin ess I h ave in life, in order to h a ve life a t a ll.

Thanks be to God, I do have a previous relat ionship

with Truth; I ca n dis t inguish the t rue s igna l s f rom the

irr elevan t n oise, tru th from error, life from dea th , alth ou gh

I must qualify this to exclude any idea of my infallibility.

For I am th e creatu re of th e Logos, I am m ad e in th e im age

of God, who breathed the breath of l ife into me; God, who

gave me a m in d th at a ppa rent ly fit s th e world a roun d m e,

n ot un like a key an d it s lock, a m in d th at a ppa rent ly can ,

in pa r t a t leas t , com preh end th e t im eless , th e disem bodied,

the inf in i t e ; God who gave me the power to love and ,

therefore, to suffer , wherein man can come nearest to the

n at u re of God. Sin ce I am th e creatu re of God, I can n ever

escape re la t ionship wi th him. But i t must be noted very

clearly th at I am n ot divin e becau se of th at relat ions h ip. I

am not God, and nothing that is in me as man is God, a n y

more t han t he pa in t i ng i s t he a r t i s t ; ne i t he r pa in t no r

canvas i s human, bu t on ly the means through which the

geniu s of th e ar t is t s h in es . But , as m an , I h ave th e choice

to a ccept or r eject t h e pr offered life.

Yet I am not left to the labors of reason alone and to

th e sh a dows of in tu ition , for, if wha t I h ave ou tlin ed h ere is

i n t h e L i f e , G o d h a s p e r f o r m e d t h e u l t i m a t e a c t o f

com m u n ication : h e hims elf becam e ma n . Th e in fin ite becam e

fin ite, th e t im eless dwelt in t im e, th e form less took on form ;

the ineffable spoke in human tongue, the Lord of History

lived u n der the tens ions a n d temp tat ions of h u m an h is tory

a fu lly hu m an life, bu t in a fu lly god-like m an n er. How cou ld

com m u n icat ion b e ma de an y c learer? He becam e wh at we

ar e, th at we migh t become as h e is , n ot by acciden t or t r ial

an d error , bu t c lear ly and with directn ess .

An d th e record of th e life, lived a s God wou ld h a ve u s

l ive our l ives , s tands clear and f i rm before us; a record

h u m an th rough a n d th rough, su bject to a ll th e vic iss itu des


18/22

THOMAS S. BROWN


18

of human memory and l i t t leness , but wi tness ing unequi-

vocally to th e power of th e In carn at ion . For I am su re th at

God, who is will ing to suffer with us, has l ikewise taken

care to preserve the essential record of the historical even

th rou gh wh ich h is n atu re sh in es m ost c lear ly. In th e New

Testa m en t as a wh ole an d in th e Gosp els esp ecial ly sh in es

the Light of God made visible to human eyes in the l ife of

J e s u s .

God has, however, not left us to work out our own

sa lvat ion in fear a n d tr em blin g from th e record ed word a lone.

That would be most cruel , for the t imes in which Jesus

lived fa ced s ocia l, econom ic an d p olitical pr oblems ra dically

different from ours , th ough th e h u m an problem is s t ill th e

sa m e. J esu s gave n o specific an swers in h is l ife to th e

anguish ing ques t ions of a tomic energy and i t s use , b ig

b u s i n e s s a n d i t s l i m i t a t i o n s , l a b o r u n i o n s a n d t h e i r

respons ibi l i t ies , and when we make the a t tempt to apply

a l m o s t m e ch a n ic a lly t h e t ea c h in gs o f J e s u s t o t h e s e

s i tuat ions , there i s a lmost a lways some breach of Jesus

fundamental law of love. We do have the record; and we

also have the continuing and l iving presence of the very

m an whose life an d work s we read of. J esu s h im self pr omised

th at h e wou ld re tu rn , promised to be with u s a lways , even

to the end of th e age, promised th at wh en two or th ree are

gath ered togeth er in h is n am e, h e will be am ong th em. His

gu iding, com fort in g spir it of Tru th reveals to u s h ere an d

n ow th e in n er in tent of th e Scr iptu re , ju s t a s h e did on th e

road to Em ma u s when he open ed the Scr ip tu res to the two

disciples, an d th eir h earts bu rn ed with in th em. An d likewise

th ere com es th e leading of h is Spirit in t h e solu t ion of ou r

own problem s. These t h in gs we kn ow experim en tal ly. Th e

early Friend s were r igh t when th ey sa id th at Scriptu re cou ld

n ot be rea d a righ t except in th e ligh t of th at Spirit in which

they were wr i t t en . They were equa l ly r igh t when they


19/22

THOMAS S. BROWN


19

mainta ined that revela t ion was not s ta t ic and f inal , but

expa n din g, even a s th e u n iverse an d th e process of creat ion

i t se l f seem to be expanding . There i s no new Truth ,

s u p p l a n t i n g t h e o l d T r u t h , b u t t h e r e i s t h e c l e a r e r

perception of Truth and of i ts meaning for us in this age

an d u nde r t he s e c ir cu ms tan ces .

J u s t a s we h ave th e In dwellin g Ch ris t to guide u s in to

new perceptions of the Truth and i ts relevance to modern

life, so we h ave th e concrete, h ist orical record a ga in st which

to ch eck th e im pu lses th at well u p with in u s a n d which , as

we ou ght t o kn ow on ly too well, m a y be s im ply th e h on eyed

impulses of self-wil l and self-worship. Whatever act ion,

wh ether proposed or ac tu al , wh ich is foun d to be contrar y

to th e over-all in ten t a n d sp irit of th e New Testa m ent , can n ot

be regarded as in the Li fe and i s the re fore denied the

C h r i s t i a n .

Thanks to this combined experience of the his torical

an d th e e tern al , th e ma n of Pales t in e an d th e In n er Ligh t ,

th e fixed a n d t h e resp ons ive, there is n o need for u s t o fly

blin dly in th e s torm , t ru st ing only to ou r own lim ited p ower

an d vis ion .

Bu t if th is is t ru e, wh y is i t th at I do n ot see th e Tru th

in every situ at ion with in fa llible clar ity? Th at I an d oth ers

make mis takes on impor tan t mat te rs i s obvious and the

poss ibility of su ch error m u st always b e kept clearly in m in d.

Following the figure of speech of signal detection I would

su ggest , in s imp lest form, th at th e cau se of m y error is m y

m iss in g th e key s ign als . Th ere ma y be too m u ch n oise an d

con fu s ion, too m an y s igh ts an d sou n ds , too m u ch bu syn ess

of body an d sp ir it . It m ay be th e resu lt of m isinterp ret in g

sign als, like th e t im e wh en I was s h ootin g som e sm all ra pids

an d in r esp on se t o a s h ou t to PULL LEFT, m y com pa n ion

pulled right, and we went over a waterfall sideways and

bot tom -up . It m ay be tha t I beh ave as th ough a s ign al was


20/22

THOMAS S. BROWN


20

given when there real ly was none. Woolman cal led this

ou tru n n in g his guide. Or, I m ay wan t notto hear th e sign al.

The position of the adverb is deliberate. I may want not to

h ear th e s ign al. I kn ow from exper ience th at s tu den ts ca n

tra in th ems elves to tu rn off a con siderable n u m ber of alarm

clocks a n d s leep on u n dis tu rbed, becau se deep down th ey

do not want to get u p a n d face an u n pa la ta ble s itu at ion. In

th e sam e way men can t ra in th ems elves never to h ear th e

signals from Reality, (and the world we live in makes that

training fatally easy) and so they cut themselves off from

life. Ada m s h ist ory is p ers on al h ist ory. Certa in as pects of

modern l i fe can only be explained as resul t ing from some

su ch den ial of th e s ign als , a den ial ar is ing from a divided

will. For h ow can I, wh o profess to be a Ch ristian , com e to

Meetin g for Worsh ip b edr aggled, an n oyed, with n o spiritu a l

wedd in g ga rm en t? How is it t h a t I can fill m y life s o fu ll of

m otion t h at th ere is n o tim e for sti lln ess , no time for pra yer?

How is i t that I spend so li t t le t ime, really, in the study of

th e Scriptu res? Or given th e livin g words of J esu s in t h e

Sermon on the Mou n t , how can I ma ke s ta tements , a s some

of u s h a ve don e, with th e word s Wa r is cont ra ry to th e will

of God, BUT. Sh ou ld n ot th a t las t word be Th erefore? If

th e discr im in atory t rea tm ent of m en is kn own to be s ta rkly

c o n t r a r y t o t h e w h o l e s p i r i t a n d t e a c h i n g o f t h e N e w

Testa m en t , su rely wh en I pra ct ice thes e th in gs d elibera tely

I have cut myself off from the Truth that gives Life. How

can I lu s t , an d gu zzle , an d ch eat , an d l ie , and swagger , an d

quarre l , and goss ip , unless I want not to accept Jesus as

the Living Truth?

Like t h e m ovin g fin ger on Belsh a zza rs wall, a per son a l

le t t e r has ca rved these words on my consc ience : The

in sen si t ive an d r igh teous glory with which Ch ris t ian s s eem

able to bask in th e mess age of J esu s with out a n y n eed of

commitment or sacrif ice.

To kn ow th e Tru th is n ot to accept i t by an act of th e


21/22

THOMAS S. BROWN


21

in te llect , as a m an m ay kn ow th e Greek a lph ab et , or as a

man may know his neighbor across the s t ree t . To know

the Truth is , rather, l ike the way in which man and wife

know each other, a l i fe of wholly shared commitment , of

u t t e r t rus t , o f f r eedom f rom fea r . Indeed , t he re i s no

knowledge of the Tru th where there i s no commitment

which resu l t s in s ign i f i cant ac t ion , for the l iv ing root

produces l iv ing f ru i t a f t e r i t s own k ind . We know the

presence of love, not by s ighs and s impers , nor even by

des i re , but by i t s power to l i f t men and women outs ide

th em selves a n d to live beyon d th em selves. Honor is kn own

by hon orable actions . Beau ty is k n own by its creation am ong

us . Tru th i s no t a group of in te l l ec tua l concepts to be

manipula ted a t wi l l l ike the symbols in mathemat ics or

th e n otes in m u sic: Tru th is l ivin g an d life-givin g, a n d th ose

who have welcomed the Truth have life.This is crucial: i t is not that we discover the Truth

an d m ake it our own for ou r own pu rposes a s m en m igh t

harness a mounta in s t ream to l igh t the i r houses or run

their machines. We are, rather, discovered by the Truth,

an d a re given power by th e Tru th to ligh t ou r sou ls . We are

bes ieged by the Truth, who s tands knocking a t the door ,

th e Hou n d of Heaven, ou r Im periou s Lover an d Tyra n n ical

Servan t, wh o wou ld give u s ou r h ear ts des ire if we wou ld

only th row ou r s elfish desires a way, an d who longs to r eleas e

u s from th e folly of th e freed om of ch oice we seem to th in k

so im porta n t even on m att ers of life an d d eath .

Th is is t h e Good News: we ca n kn ow an d be kn own by

th e Tru th ; we can live according to th e Tru th , here an d n ow,

fo r t he T ru th i s bo th p r inc ip l e and power , mas t e r and

servan t . In th e Tru th we can overcom e the cru sh in g sen se

of in a dequ a cy an d gu ilt th rou gh th e kn owledge of Gods

forgiveness and new life; this is the given power to lead

changed, explosive lives, not for our own glory, but that


22/22

THOMAS S. BROWN


22

m en m ay see our good works a n d glorify ou r Fat h er who is

in heaven. And this is the given power in which suffering

is t ran sformed.

I f s u f f e r i n g w e r e i n a n d o f i t s e l f m a l i g n a n t a n d

powerful, i t could have no place in the very heart of God

with ou t des troyin g th at h ear t or being its elf des troyed. Yet

th e Cross is t h e etern a l sym bol of Gods s u fferin g for u s,

and not only has suffering not been destroyed, i t remains

instead as the recurring cris is out of which new l i fe can

sp rin g, if th e su fferin g is comp reh en ded in th e ligh t of Tru th .

G r a n t e d t h a t t h e f r u i t s o f s u f f e r i n g m a y b e t e r r i b l e :

b i t t e rness , se l f -cente redness , demonic ha t red . We a l so

know, however , tha t great gains are made only a t great

risk, and if we are to grow into a richer l ife through the

Tru th , th e s i tua t ion ou t of which th e growth is t o com e will

be one in wh ich th ere is a n equa l an d oppos ite opportu n ity

for des t ruc t ion and darkness through the denia l o f the

Truth .

Therefore i t is just possible that a frant ic effort to

remove suffering may not be the most loving act . Parents

do th eir ch ildr en n o lovin g-kind n ess by overpr otectin g them

from th e as sa u lts of th e world th ey live in . Su ch p rotection

in its extrem e form m ay be th e den ial of th e opp ortu n ity to

grow in s tature and compassion, in sol idari ty with other

m en , in self-u n ders ta n ding, an d in th e kn owledge of God.

And we who t ry to evade suffer ing a t any cos t may be

re jec t ing the Truth knocking a t our door , asking that we

su p with h im an d h e with u s , in clu ding most s ign ifican t ly,

th e drin king of h is cu p. Th e Good News is t h at su fferin g is

not in i tself al ien and terr ible, or host i le to the nature of

God, but that suffer ing is tha t pecul iar environment in

which t h e love an d p ower of God can sh in e m ost clear ly, for

i t was God who suffered for us , who suffers with us , and

shares our t ravai l .

La s t u p d a t e: 2 / 0 2 / 0 4

the personal relevance of truth

Documents