I find quiet while I’m driving. Last Lent I made a practice of turning off my radio when I drove to work, and it was really good for me to get myself focused and ready for the day ahead. (I need to start doing that again.)

First of all, Peter and Jerry are quite right, some serious calming down is in order. Second I’m not sure what all the anger is about. I never knew that the meaning of the word solitude could be such a source of tension! Anyway, I’d like to try to resolve the semantic problem here and get at the real question:

There is a state of isolation, that we call solitude. I’ve got to agree with David here that there is no reason to use the word otherwise. Using solitude differently, however, is not so much dangerous or postmodern as confusing. Solitude means isolation. I do not think, however, there is any reason to understand the term solitude to exclude the presence of God. I think we can all agree that God being present when we are “alone” doesn’t make us any less alone and doesn’t prevent us from talking about what we do when no one but God is around. But to understand solitude to mean time with other people is simply confusing and unnecessary. One might well find peace and rest with other people, much as some people seek to find peace and rest in solitude, but solitude is not peace and rest. Joey’s point is perhaps better stated this way:

there is no place for complete solitude in the Christian life. The closest thing to solitude we should have is time with the people closest to us. This is the real place we can find the peace we often seek in solitude (feel free to correct me if I’m wrong about what the substance of your claim is here)

Now, setting aside semantic matters, I’ve got some concerns with the substance of Joey’s point, which does not hinge on the meaning of the word solitude:

I do not see why contemplation, or for that matter sitting alone and playing guitar, or sitting alone and reading a good book, or whatever, is a problem. I’m going to guess you typed your responses to this post alone, and you’ve clearly spent some time thinking about these matters. I do agree that often the greatest peace we have comes in times with other people. I am rarely at such peace as when praying with others. At the same time, sometimes we need a break from people and need time just to spend alone with God. And other times we’re not even looking so much for spiritual peace in solitude. Sometimes we’re just looking to get rid of all the external crap and take a moment not to be filled with all the lies and filth we see when we look around us. Sometimes we’re just playing. Sometimes when I play guitar alone, when I’m writing something new, it’s a process somewhere between prayer and thought. Other times I’m just stepping away from my life and just playing something, anything, just to get something less destructive in my head than the crap on tv or anger from bad traffic or whatever. Other times I’m just messing around having fun. And I don’t see how any of these things is wrong.

But maybe you’re not saying such things are wrong. Maybe you’re just saying that sometimes we run away from other people and hide alone to try to deal with problems, when what we really need is a supportive community. And I couldn’t agree with you more about that. Sometimes when we think we need to get away to have peace, it’s really the last thing we need. As far as that goes, you’re right on. I’m just not so sure there’s never a time to be seek peace in being alone.

it’s only a conversation. let’s all take a deep breath and see each other as human beings created in the image of Almighty God.

what you are talking about has nothing at all to do with andy’s question. that is my problem with your response. you are trying to completely redefine something, and although words do change meaning, they do so slowly, not at the whim of some guy on the internet. your point about democrat and republican have no bearing here, because those are abstract definitions of ever-evolving groups of people. solitude, in its entire history, has never meant anything else:

solitude
c.1374, from O.Fr. solitude “loneliness,” from L. solitudinem (nom. solitudo) “loneliness,” from solus “alone” (see sole (adj.)). “Not in common use in English until the 17th c.” [OED]

800 years, and all of a sudden you have a better idea of what it means? who are you?

second, i never said the church, or humanity, was not communal. but that fact has nothing to do with you trying to redefine solitude.

“Solitude is that place of peace. But contrary to what many suggest, solitude is not about “alone time.” It is best found in a genuine relation with another person, for it is there that we forget about ourselves. Solitude is not about being alone”

you are being post-modern in that you are assigning your own meaning to a word. you are even admitting that you are doing that; you’re trying to redefine something which ought not be redefined.

and i’m done. i can’t waste my time or my mind trying to defend reality to you.

Words are historically determined because we are historically determined and we use words. Thus the meanings the have are contingent and not set in stone. This does not negate the fact that they are meaningful. It just shows that they can be modified. If we had decided to use “apple” to convey the same meaning as we do “love” then it would be perfectly fine. If you’re interested read Ludwig Wittgenstein’s book “Philosophical Investigations.” Our words have meaning only insofar as we agree to said meaning. We are obviously not agreeing. But this is because I’m trying to shift the meaning. Purposefully. I know very well that we usually intend “solitude” to mean what you have posted. This is how words get their meaning, debating over them.

Furthermore, the meaning of words can be uprooted and redefined. For instance, we use “republican” and “democrat” in ways that were not used during the Reconstruction period. Or have you forgotten your history. Lincoln was a Republican, of whom saw the necessity of a central government. Democrats were southern white plantation owners, or “Dixiecrats.” Obviously the way we use these terms today have changed dramatically. Our words are culturally determined. Our dictionaries actually reflect this change. We just recently added “ain’t” to the dictionary as a modified form of “isn’t.”

I don’t think that we are ever truly alone, especially as Christians. Christian solitude is to be with God. But if we are with God, we are not really alone. This is classic Christianity from Augustine, to Calvin, through Jonathan Edwards.

The fact that you think that my argument is mind-boggling does not invalidate it. How can we have a relationship PRIOR to communication? Understand that I’m saying its logically prior, not temporally prior. The fact that you and I are conversing already assumes that we are in some form of relation. There must already be some sort of connection for communication to even be possible.

You belligerence and derision towards me actually tells me that you are unable to carry on a reasonable conversation without personally attacking me and/or when someone does say something you don’t like.

I’ve managed to carry on a cordial response without tearing you down. Calling me a dumbass only makes you look the fool.

from a DICTIONARY (the leading authority on the meaning of words):

solitude – noun

1. the state of being or living alone; seclusion: to enjoy one’s solitude.
2. remoteness from habitations, as of a place; absence of human activity: the solitude of the mountains.
3. a lonely, unfrequented place: a solitude in the mountains.

where does it say anything about being at peace? it doesn’t exclude peace from the definition, but it is by no means a necessary qualification. have you ever heard of solitary confinement in prison?

what part of andy’s question prompted you to try and redefine the word solitude? i mean seriously, did you even read back to yourself what you wrote? because i have read it several times, and what it says…is nothing. because what you are attempting to do is CLASSIC post-modernism. namely, redefining a word/question/statement to mean what YOU want it to mean, and you could give a damn what any one else thinks, and that includes jesus. meanwhile you hide behind this mantra of intelligence, which is a total farce in your case.

jesus used certain words because words have meaning. words HAVE to have meaning in order for communication, and relationship, to work. i wouldn’t tell my hypothetical wife that i apple her, when i actually mean that i love her, even though she should know what i mean, right? because, since we’re in such a great relationship, she should be able to see past the word and understand my feeling towards apples, which is that i love them, and likewise apply those feelings to my ludicrous statement towards her. that would never happen, except in an unapologetically post-modern mind like yours.

being human does (almost) always necessitate being in relationship, but the logic you use to reach your end conclusion that solitude should be redefined is mind-boggling. for one thing, how can you have a relationship PRIOR to communication. if that doesn’t not make sense to you, then i’m not even going to go into it, because i’m already stressed-out today, and i’m tired.

I think the words are cool too. But why do you think they mean nothing? They’re words we use in everyday language whether we admit it or not. I have not used any technical terminology.