I See That Hand

Praying Hands Durer

We imagine Thomas even doubted himself.

When the other disciples said Christ had risen, this earnest empiricist first said, “unless I see” … then he realized it wasn’t enough. So he demanded to “thrust my hands into His side.”

For Thomas, seeing wasn’t believing.

But touch … that he had hopes for.

*

Seeing isn’t believing. Christians, for instance, know “believing is seeing” better expresses our faith — in fact, faith itself. We find tremendous depth in being people of the book, as it were. And one of the reasons is how close Jesus was to the people He was with. People touched him all the time. It remains something we cannot do.

Yet we still want to touch, in some way. But more than that, we are people of The Word, as He was.

And it’s true in much of life, in most ways, maybe in all: we want to touch.

• Consider our grandmothers, for whom it is never enough simply to see her children’s children. To see is the start of her oohs and tears, but quickly she will reach out to hold us. We love her for it.

Though we buy many things online, we draw the virtual line somewhere. Books yes, and clothing perhaps (with a strong chance of return); food, not so much, and true love, never. Well we hope.

Speaking of books, even electronic and unreal words must — they can’t escape it — involve touch. I’m typing these words by touch. You are reading them the same way.

It is the same in our faith, and why should it not be? We need to see and taste and hear and smell. And we want to. Why should we not want to touch?

Believing is seeing expresses our faith.

Yet faith without works, touch, is dead.

*

But aha! You’ve seen the flaw in my ointment, to misuse the idiom (detectable by seeing it in print).

By seeing it, you see.

Seeing is believing, we say. It happens all the time.

The Hollywood Reporter writes how radical shifts in our views of homosexual relationships — perceptions both pro and con — change because of seeing them on television.

Story itself, as told in TV images, in films, and even on billboard advertising as we whiz bang by at 75 miles per hour depends on powerful visual images that we the people believe.

Despite the unreliability of memory, it persists as a main mode of explaining our world; what we see may be dear or deadening but either way we believe it. And it’s admissible in court.

Yes, images our powerful.

Seeing is believing works pretty well.

And yet those images, that seeing, still depends at some point on touch. Someone has to write the story or hold the camera or appear in person, and shake hands, to really connote the commitment claimed by your 30-second political ad.

The eyewitness must still appear in court, place hand on Bible, and be — if not actually touched by a jury or the attorney … at least touchable.

And consider this.

The Pixar magic, which we’d no doubt cite, laud, as the killer app example of the triumph of the visual, begins on paper. From “The Incredibles” (21,081) to “Ratatouille” (72,000) these movies start with the humble storyboard: the numbers cited refer to how many 3½-inch by 8-inch sheets of paper their artists hand-drew to first envision what we ultimately saw on-screen.

*

We know the phrase “I see that hand” as something a pastor will say when he calls for prayer, or when he calls for the altar. Here seeing and believing are linked different, and touch is not required.

Unless you want to actually pursue that decision you’ve just made. That’s going to involve touching some things — a Bible, say — and not touching others — a rather longer list, at least when we first set out. And have you ever lain hands on someone without touching them.

See (pardon the pun) we know better. We know simply to see something isn’t enough. We must touch it.

*

But to touch it lightly, the Church doesn’t know what to do with its hands. We know how to see (preachers at lecterns, videos on-screen), hear (same preaching, teaching, music), taste (communion, potlucks) and smell (incense, or at least a few candles). But touch … freaks us out. Occasionally we’ll greet each other (this is sometimes necessary to command, as an actual part of the service), and nearly all of us get baptized at one time or another. But touch … let’s not.

But this is changing. Christians have embraced the proximal, the physical. We’ve sought the nearly.

From books on the body published in the last few years, to the wider acceptance of spiritual formation — with its emphasis on the personal and corporeal, as well as corporate, practices — we are seeing a greater emphasis on, engagement with, what we actually do.

But what do we do it with?

Fingers and toes, skin and tongue — we touch a split second before we taste, as it happens. We often take Holy Communion in our hands before we taste it into our mouths. We feel the burn of the dying match … and then we smell the incense or candle. A drummer must drum, a strummer strum, first — and only then can we hear the sound or feel the beat.

The Word became flesh before He dwelt among us.

Before he lived, died, rose again, ascended.

In fact, before He did anything here.

He had to.

 

 

My thanks to Rachelle W. Chang
for spurring these thoughts.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent

And Did Dostoevsky Say ‘Beauty Will Save’

Short answer: he did not. Neither did Prince Myshkin, that we know of. Likely both believed it. Beauty — in the person of Christ — will do so. And clearly D wrote of M in The Idiot to explore art and beauty and ugliness and salvation. But did he say it, and did he believe that

Read More »

What I Recalled Watching Netflix

[Television is educational.]   One Saying the same stuff over and over looks like you have different things to say. Two If you’re ever in a below-average film or streaming series, and you beat the tar out of a guy, in a house, and you gaze down in both some shock as also a certain

Read More »

Seeking the King

A line everywhere misattributed to Chesterton reads thus: The young man who rings the bell at the brothel is unconsciously looking for God. This line is not from the great [several senses of the word] man who recently celebrated his 150th birthday, but the mid-century most unmodern novelist Bruce Marshall. The words — which do

Read More »

He’s the Guy

Those social media posts of ‘this moment in this famous film was totally unscripted!!!’ as if that by itself makes it better miss the point. Moat unscripted material, like most ideas, inventions, ideas, notions, &c … fails — such is the nature of creativity: the best stuff, it is devoutly to be wished, sticks around;

Read More »

Random

What Are The Stories

“What are the stars?” No, not “big balls of gas” — that’s just their form. Just as people aren’t blood and guts so are stars not big balls of gas. What then are the stories?  I started with two divergent thoughts — There is only one plot: things are not what they seem. Jim Thompson and With a

Read More »

Is Not That Special?

From a review of a book on founding Britain’s Special Air Service in World War II, what was required of recruits — Courage Fitness Determination Discipline Skill Intelligence Training and another review noted, quoting the book — “Recruits tended to be unusual to the point of eccentricity … people who did not fit easily into the

Read More »

Trouble and Strife

Septic tank is Cockney rhyming slang for “Yank” which may suggest what trouble and strife is slang for. But it’s not fair of course, and good men, and most men some of the time, know she’s not only that. Upon noting once how, yes, “children are a bother,” Dallas Willard made the important philosophical distinction

Read More »

Related

Saving Grace

Don’t ask me for grace. Not because I don’t want you to have it, for I certainly do. But I can’t give it to you. Only God can give you grace, of this I’m becoming certain. Grace is God’s action in our lives to accomplish what we could never do on our own. Dallas Willard which

Read More »

Inglorious Bastards

This is a post borne of a recent article in Leadership Journal, by a guy who’s been meeting with Ted Haggard. I don’t usually write on stuff like that — it is cheeseball to even appear to piggyback for one’s own benefit on somebody else’s popular post, or to try and capitalize on an au

Read More »

The Amazing Amazingness of Amazing Stuff

Amazing. Did it creep up on you as well? This overuse of the word “amazing” just sort of … appeared. Amazing. Here I was just a moment ago trying to read about the Dodgers, and Don Mattingly wanting more instant replay — they’d lost recently to the Brewers on a questionable call to end the

Read More »