Day Thirty

If I use Wesley’s quadrilateral as the formula for improving my dynamic relationship with God, can I find a “common denominator” residing in Scripture, Tradition, Experience, and Reason? As a matter of fact, I can. From all four sources I learn that the “mechanism” which serves to improve an already existing “connection” or to reestablish a lost connection is: prayer. I find overwhelming support of this conclusion from both the Hebrew Scriptures and New Testament (as well as the scriptures of almost every world faith), from the Church’s dogma, doctrine, creed, and ritual, from my own personal experience, and from an objective and empirical analysis of the subject (just do a search of “prayer” to discover how much of the scientific community—particularly medicine—is researching this subject).

This being said, though, the common denominator is subject to diverse and varied interpretations of what constitutes genuine prayer. The Church has its point of view as does Scripture. Experience sometimes does and other times does not coincide with reason. Predictably much of the disparity is generated by different understandings of what the function and purpose of prayer is. I have referred to it as a process of making or improving the connection with the Other, but it would not be hard to find those of the opinion that the purpose of prayer is to petition God to action of some sort or another. Even within the four facets of the quadrilateral this diversity is to be found. Scripture does not present a singular definition for prayer, just as tradition, experience and reason do not either.

I really am going to need help with this one, and the Paraclete would seem just the person to provide it. But how do I get in touch with this rather vague and enigmatic presence? And how can I possibly know that anything I do perceive as the Holy Spirit is not just a figment of my imagination. Both experience and reason inform me that the human mind is powerfully capable of fabricating answers to unanswerable questions. The psychological phenomenon of closure is a proven example of how our minds fill in the gaps when there are uncomfortable “holes” disturbing our comprehension. Nonetheless, the prospect of connecting—of communing—with God, and in the process of diminishing or eliminating sinful separation seems worth an earnest quest for authenticity. I need to learn more about prayer.