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

Can We Tawk?

Comedienne Joan Rivers’ catchphrase was, ‘Can we talk?’ with all that that entails — its rhetorical nature, the Jewish thing, an implication that at least one of the parties will be better off for having done so … Like God. T’other day a priest spoke of ontological remembrance, the immediate and ongoing memory of past-present-future

Read More »

Hide and See

Something lost, Dallas Willard said once, might yet be very valuable. One’s car keys for instance. He was speaking somewhat in the context of salvation, if I recall … the general point was calling something lost doesn’t mean it’s not wanted — quite the opposite. Yet it remains … until finding its way out or being found

Read More »

Greater Love Blah Blah Blah

Do we doubt locals thanked them for their service? I’m not equating the two. They were wrong; glad we crushed them. Only noting it’s likely they thought as much about such things as we do, which is to say not much. German citizens who believed their leaders, loved their country, watched their sons get on

Read More »

Dark Eyed Life

According to @CitizenScreen, doing yeoman’s* work daily on Twitter* relative to the Golden Age of film, today is the birth date of Mabel Normand, Hedy Lamarr, and Dorothy Dandridge — Normand: New York, 1892 Lamarr: Vienna, 1914 Dandridge: Cleveland, 1922 — which makes for coupla at least interesting, if not compelling or fascinating at the

Read More »

Random

Pieta

I don’t think next year will be so different from this year. Which after all was not so different from the one before. But I think you can be different from last year and I can. Which after all may be true for you as it was also for me.

Read More »

Shock And Ow

I’ve had many exchanges over the years where my statement about something was taken as surprise at the event rather than what it was — which is anger over human inaction facing it. Having worked 1.75 teenage males through the household over the last dozen years this has often been a thing one or the other has

Read More »

Pas De Duh

Is ballet a sport? The question is asinine in at least two ways. Of course it is, whether one is asking does it qualify as one or simply based on the assumptions implicit in the question itself. To put it as stupidly, would a Ferrari fit in my garage? Is Rivendell a better deal than

Read More »

Animal Planet

We’re watching Planet of the Apes. No, not the Charlton Heston one — this one. Only it’s supposed to be this one, from last year. So we’re on the middle one, the “first remake” (excluding the 17 sequels to the Charlton Heston one) and it’s by Tim Burton, with all that that entails, from Helena

Read More »

Related

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 »

Christians and Atheists

Christians create atheists when we do evil in God’s name. (props to Dennis Prager, who wrote: “Nothing creates atheism as much as evil done in God’s name.”)

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 »

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 »