Mis-Understood or Clearly Understood?

The ravages of post-modernism upon meaning. We live in a culture and the principles operative in that culture have a profound impact on all segments of that culture. There has been an onslaught against Absolute Truth for decades in America. The issue of 'meaning' was attacked by such academics as Wittgenstein at Ohio State (Logical Positivism) and Derrida in Europe. Their thesis was and is - - there is no such thing as knowing authorial intent, what a writer or speaker intended when they wrote or spoke. Kevin Van Hoozer tackles this thorny issue in his wonderful work titled Is There a Meaning in This Text?

Recently, Van Jones resigned as the "Green Czar" in the current administration in Wash D.C. His screed upon resignation was that "he was mis-understood". Quite the contrary, the American people DID understand exactly what he was saying and more importantly, what he meant.

Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives, offered the same ludicrous claim when rebuffed for some of her rants about the participation of the populace in Town Hall Meetings around the country. She called these folks "Brown Shirts". Once again, the people understand exactly what she said and what she meant.

The Bishop of the Episcopal Denomination in the USA made the claim that (let her own words make my case):

Lane Denson reminded us recently that stewards are wardens of the styes – keepers of the pigpens. We’re beginning to notice that our global garden increasingly resembles an odorous sty. But it’s not pigs who are the problem – pigs are neat and tidy if they have enough space. The problem is with their keepers, who see the pigs only as bacon and ham producing machines, rather than part of God’s good creation and therefore deserving of appropriate respect.

The crisis of this moment has several parts, and like Episcopalians, particularly ones in Mississippi, they’re all related. The overarching connection in all of these crises has to do with the great Western heresy –that we can be saved as individuals, that any of use alone can be in right relationship with God. It’s caricatured in some quarters by insisting that salvation depends on reciting a specific verbal formula about Jesus. That individualist focus is a form of idolatry, for it puts me and my words in the place that only God can occupy, at the center of existence, as the ground of all being. That heresy is one reason for the theme of this Convention.

This post is not about Politics. This post is not about the current Episcopalian skid (their National Membership is falling like a rock). This post is about words and their relationships giving meaning to language, a meaning that any clear thinking person is capable of discerning and understanding with absolute clarity.

Go to You Tube. Search for the multiple video postings there of Van Jones. Watch and listen. Based on what he says in those postings he is correctly characterized as a Leftist, a Racist, a Socialist, a Radical, and probably an out and out Communist. He is promoting the redistribution of wealth - - taking from those who have and giving to those who do not. That is brutally clear. Mr. Jones you were not mis-understood. We understand exactly what you said and exactly what you mean.

Read the quote above. There is little or no room for nuanced meanings. She said what she meant and meant what she said. Case closed.

Application - Words and their relationships give meaning to language. God said what He meant and meant (means) what He says. The Bible is clear, unambiguous and may be read and understood by those who read it, in spite of Derrida, Wittgenstein, Jones, Pelosi and Schori.

That my good friend is Good News and that is precisely what I mean to say!!