https://youtubetranscript.com/?v=-drj1aF9lWM
And the idea is you as reader get to be, to kind of step inside this practice, just as medieval Christians used that practice, and we have pictures of them doing this in their books of ours, to step inside into the sacred space with Mary by way of their service to her and praising her through this office. Yeah, what’s interesting about what you’re saying is that in your own methodology, you’re reproducing the feminine symbolism in this invitation, because that’s a strong part of the feminine symbolism is this idea of inviting, like you said, inviting the believer to step in and to participate. And so it’s like that’s exactly that frame. You know, the invitation is the frame that leads you in, let’s say, to the service. So I don’t know if you did that on purpose, but… Well, now I can think I did, but now you just did to me what I used to keep doing to Milo. It’s like, did you realize that this is what you were doing? And you go, oh, my gosh, you’re right. Yes, that makes utter sense. Yeah, but I think, you know, one of the things that I’m realizing, and I think that it’s actually obvious is one of the problem of the age right now, one of the problems of the ages is a proper engagement and a proper understanding of the feminine. It’s like the fight that’s happening is over what is the feminine. And one of the problems about that is that the feminine is… How can I say this? The feminine is a question. Like, the feminine is that invitation. It’s that question. And so it’s actually very difficult to answer the what. Like, if you say, what is the feminine? It’s really hard. It’s hard to do it precisely because it’s the feminine asking the what. Like, it’s the feminine asking for, let’s say, identity to manifest itself. It’s the feminine that’s like… It’s the feminine that is, let’s say, is that opening for something to happen. And so it’s like, it’s very difficult. I’ve been wrestling with this myself when I talk about feminine symbolism. It’s like, I’ve been really wrestling with how much do you say? How much do you imply? Like, how much do you suggest? It’s like sometimes there’s some things that if you say too explicitly, you make them false, let’s say. I don’t know how… Yes. Well, yes, that sometimes, I mean, that you and I both appreciate the deep power of metaphor. And I think the things that you say, you articulate to metonymically or descriptively to use Northrop Fry’s language, since we’re thinking about Jordan’s reading too, they kind of lose life, right? And that is a problem. The truths that are embedded in the stories, it’s like the more you unpack the stories, there’s this moment of understanding, but then it needs to still be in the story. It needs to still be something that you can live or act through for it to continue to be alive. Otherwise, it turns into this dead thing that you kind of write long academic books about with lots of footnotes, but it doesn’t activate anybody’s understanding anymore.