The eccentric but poignant comedian and provocateur George Carlin once observed that “Meow” means “woof” in cat. The concept of language can be interpreted mechanically as a kind of tyrannical tool to beat up the opponent, and as Carlin observed, it can also be easily misinterpreted. However, it’s important to remember that the hearer plays a crucial role in this process. What seems to be words of comfort can be absorbed as threats, highlighting the subjectivity of language interpretation in our time. But the Bible seems to be quite concise and objective about it. Thus, if we are not willing to listen to what is said, we will hear what isn’t.
One of my favorite poets wrote,
“For last year’s words belong to last year’s language
And next year’s words await another voice.”
Words can easily be lost in time but resurface when someone least expects it. Language can be forgotten, but whoever utters the next words can be the actor of perpetual remembrance. St. James noted that the tongue is like fire. So, if you are, as Eliot notes, next year’s voice, be the voice that sets fire in the right environment with the right tone and the right target.
We should not take the name of the Lord in vain, which is to say, we should not carry language or God to any environment where it would constitute a vain cause. Language is to be used Coram Deo. Wherever language is uttered, God is. He was there when Ezekiel referred to the sexual organs of the enemies and he was there when Elijah comforted the widow.
For this reason, the Bible offers language for all times and all seasons. The language that some will view as tyrannical is actually comforting. The language that is meant to be comforting is actually manipulative. Everything in its season. This includes language.
But the art of using language, especially hard prophetic language, is an art that needs to be properly exercised. On the same token, soft and tender language also needs to be used discerningly. We cannot make judgments that condemn one and not the other.
In this lengthy essay (3,500 words), I have attempted to defend hard language. Soft language may have ten thousand defenders, but hard language may have dozens. I want to be in both camps, and those who think that hard language is unacceptable will have to deal with a plethora of biblical and classical traditions that articulate language that will make our 21st-century sensibilities say “meow.”
Some may interpret my “meows” as “woofs,” which is fine. Misunderstanding is part of the game. However, I have attempted to make misunderstandings fewer by offering some paradigms to consider in this conversation.
I hope it bears some good fruit.
~Pastor Uriesou Brito
