Yesterday we needed to stop by the grocery store on our way home so we took an unusual route.  While waiting to make a left hand turn I noticed three women at the bus stop across the street.  It didn’t seem like they were together; two of the women were seated on the bench, as far from each other as possible; the third was standing about 8 feet away.  The three were looking back and forth at each other and laughing hysterically.

I had two reactions.  I thought to myself, “What could be so funny?”  And I began to laugh.  In the terms of the last post:  their laughter was the object of my curiosity; and their laughter was the subject (the instigator) of my laughter.  Laughter can be contagious, bypassing the machinations of our minds, as the practitioners of goat-yoga are bearing witness to.  Without any forethought, I allowed the objects of my curiosity to enter my life as subjects and to bring a little extra joy into my day.

This is a habit I am cultivating:  allowing the people I encounter to become subjects in their own right, to let them in and not keep them at an objective distance.  On a personal level, this is generally called empathy.

But I am also cultivating this habit in the arena of biblical interpretation and theology, seeking to hear God’s voice in the scriptures and to think and speak about God.  Here are two examples:

This habit first began in seminary, with biblical interpretation, in the advanced Greek class.  Professor Toews stressed the difference between a subjective genitive and an objective genitive.  The example which has stayed in my mind for is Galatians 2:20.  The end of that verse says, “… the life I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God,” or “… the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God.”  That first translation, the one of the King James Version, assumes a subjective genitive.  “Son of God” is the subject of “the faith”; it is the Son of God’s faith.  The second translation, the one of many modern translations, assumes an objective genitive.  “Son of God” is the object of “the faith”; it is my faith in the Son of God.  For grammatical as well as theological reason, I lean toward for the first translation; Jesus’ faith in his Father is much more dependable than my faith in Jesus; I live by Jesus’ faith and not my own.

My habit of allowing for the subjective along with the objective carries into my practice of thinking about God and speaking about God.  I have become comfortable talking about the “holy-making spirit” as well as the “Holy Spirit.”  The Holy Spirit is a worthy object of my worship, my praise and adoration.  And the holy-making spirit is a powerful subject of transformation in my life.  As a subject, as one who acts, the spirit of God continues to bring forth fruit in my life, love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, gentleness, generosity, and self-control, to name a few.  The subjective and the objective interpenetrate each other as the holy-making spirit becomes the object of my thanksgiving and praise, and as the Holy becomes the subject of our holiness, the Holy Spirit keeps working to make us more holy.

Our minds tend first to treat others as objects.  This is easier and safer than letting them in to our lives as subjects.  So it takes a certain amount of attention and courage and generosity of spirit to allow others into our lives as the subjects of their own lives.  I believe it is a habit worth cultivating.

What matters, of course, is that you catch the next laugh, and not that you get the last laugh.  To twist a famous saying of Jesus, “The laugh will be first.”