Recently, a friend was sharing how Richard Rohr was a spiritual friend or anamchara to Mark Townshend. Here were some of my meditations on some of the changes in consciousness I have been experiencing.
It's a small world isn't it? lol. I've also enjoyed some of Rohr's books and lecture's. Its cool to know he was Townshend's mentor as well. One of the things I like about Rohr, Keating, and McColman, etc., is their ability to hold the tensions of working from within the historic and traditional streams of Christianity and yet moving into deeper and spiritually progressive waters.
However, I think you will find me much further to the Right than Townshend. I grew up in the fundamentalist/evangelical/pentecostal camp. I am sure that I still carry much of that old baggage but I do find myself on a journey of transformation and change in consciousness and heart in how I am learning to hold things in tension and balance. I am a work in progress at best. lol.
I believe its important when one has chosen a particular spiritual or religious path to be faithful to that path and mine the depths of the esoteric dimensions beneath the merely exoteric dimensions; while simultaneously, (at least after one has come to a certain place of discipleship and spiritual growth in their respective path), to be open to learning, discussing, sharing and integrating from other wisdom traditions, knowing the points in common (such as the Snowmass Points of Agreement), while also understanding the differences and remaining faithful to one's own spiritual path.
Part of the problem within Christianity, at least for me personally, are the two polarities of the exoteric traditional/ conservative/ institutional side of Christianity which holds (at least one version) of historic Christianity with rigidity and arrogance. While, many of the more progressive and liberal tendencies have gone to the other extreme and compromised the integrity of the historic path. For myself, I feel inspired to learn how to hold to the traditional Christian spiritual path; while at the same time, going beneath the merely exoteric dimension to the esoteric aspect of this tradition, largely found in the writing of mystical Mothers & Fathers of the Church; and being open to entering into inter-religious/inter-spiritual dialogue, learning, sharing and integrating from these other wisdom traditions.
As part of this journey, I have also intentionally entered into friendships with people who may hold diametrically opposite views from my own. It is partly through these relationships that I am experiencing the tensions, the stretching and expanding of my spiritual life. At times this is difficult and painful. One of the things I liked about the Snowmass conferences, as recorded in the "Common Heart" book, was that they didn't pretend or ignore their differences. Sometimes, they had heated arguments about these differences; but they continued to meet with each other, to discuss and share times of sitting in silent meditation together, practicing meditation according to their own traditions; and many of them became great life-long friends, even though they might be diametrically opposed to each other's views. Sometimes, through these tensions, we can learn, grow, and experience transformation and changes in consciousness. I know from my own experience, that although I hold to and practice my faith and spiritual work predominantly through traditional Christian systems of belief, ritual, values, and spirituality, that I know longer hold to these things with quite the same consciounsess, attitude or heart.
One person recently shared with me regarding such things,
"it betokens a movement of the church beyond camps and factions, as something in your being hungers for the good that is accentuated (but not possessed) in any of these camps: from the evangelicals, emotional intimacy with the holy; from the classic (though often rigid) Anglican liturgical tradition: dignity and reverence before the Mystery. How to put the two together? And I agree with you that the fundamentalists of the left are as narrow as the fundamentalists of the right: full of judgment and self-righteousness...
...The old divisions and camps are breaking up, and a new, Imaginal mind is emerging, which is able to hold Mystery lightly (rather than rigidly), because the Mystery is founded in intimate presence, held from a different kind of consciousness...I think it's a sign that what you're seeking has already found you and begun to bushwhack the path, from the inside out."
Well, these were just some random thoughts running amok in my mind after reading your comments about Rohr's role of spiritual friendship in the life of Townshend. How wonderful and exciting. I am but a work in progress and have not yet come into the full flower or balance in these things; but it is my hope, as my journey continues, to learn to "hold Mystery lightly (rather than rigidly), because the Mystery is founded in intimate presence, held from a different kind of consciousness."
Blessings for now,
Aidan+
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Panikkar & Conditioned baggage that prevents the Christophanic Experience...
Conditioned baggage that prevents the Christophanic Experience...
Intellectually, I find it hard at times to wrap my mind or heart around the shades of meaning in some of Panikkar's statements, such as, "I am not saying that Christ is the fullness of life but that this fullness, effective since the beginning, is one that the Christian tradition calls Jesus the Christ," to a seeming contradictory quote, "“For in him the whole fullness of divinity dwells bodily” (Colossians 2:9);" and his note: "[3] It is sadly significant that the phrase “the body of Christ” (Col 2:17) has disappeared in numerous translations", etc. There are these tensions in Panikkar between not rejecting traditional christology to what seems to be a rejection of it.
Perhaps, its incorrect to say it's an intellectual struggle. It's more of an emotional twinge, pain or knot stemming from the challenge "against" my own rootedness in traditional Christianity; and the stretching I feel as Panikkar is trying to tease, coax, or even at times aggressively expand my boundaries and vision. His challenge is:
"it is the task of the third Christian millennium to transcend abrahamic monotheism without damaging the legitimacy and validity of monotheistic religions. This task, initiated at the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15:1:22), entails not a denial of the divine but an opening to the great intuition of the Trinity—the meeting point of human traditions."
Perhaps if we, if I, can separate the cultural, ecclesiastical or otherwise conditioned baggage by which I philosophically interpret "Christ" from the "desire for fullness and life, for happiness and the infinite, for truth and beauty that goes beyond religious and cultural contingencies,' then can discover that more important christophanic experience of Christ. As Panikkar says,
"What remains is Christ: real symbol of divinization—that is the Fullness of Man. (Some would prefer that I say “symbol of human Fullness,” but this would not be correct; the fullness of Man is more than a human fullness. The complete Man is Man divinized; that unique being, athirst for the infinite, is not himself until he reaches his destiny.) Man is more than his “human” nature."
As St Paul Prays in Ephesians:
that we may be filled with the "utter fullness of God" (3.19) and
that we may "all reach the unity in faith...and form the perfect man, fully mature with the fullness of Christ himself" (4.13).
Intellectually, I find it hard at times to wrap my mind or heart around the shades of meaning in some of Panikkar's statements, such as, "I am not saying that Christ is the fullness of life but that this fullness, effective since the beginning, is one that the Christian tradition calls Jesus the Christ," to a seeming contradictory quote, "“For in him the whole fullness of divinity dwells bodily” (Colossians 2:9);" and his note: "[3] It is sadly significant that the phrase “the body of Christ” (Col 2:17) has disappeared in numerous translations", etc. There are these tensions in Panikkar between not rejecting traditional christology to what seems to be a rejection of it.
Perhaps, its incorrect to say it's an intellectual struggle. It's more of an emotional twinge, pain or knot stemming from the challenge "against" my own rootedness in traditional Christianity; and the stretching I feel as Panikkar is trying to tease, coax, or even at times aggressively expand my boundaries and vision. His challenge is:
"it is the task of the third Christian millennium to transcend abrahamic monotheism without damaging the legitimacy and validity of monotheistic religions. This task, initiated at the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15:1:22), entails not a denial of the divine but an opening to the great intuition of the Trinity—the meeting point of human traditions."
Perhaps if we, if I, can separate the cultural, ecclesiastical or otherwise conditioned baggage by which I philosophically interpret "Christ" from the "desire for fullness and life, for happiness and the infinite, for truth and beauty that goes beyond religious and cultural contingencies,' then can discover that more important christophanic experience of Christ. As Panikkar says,
"What remains is Christ: real symbol of divinization—that is the Fullness of Man. (Some would prefer that I say “symbol of human Fullness,” but this would not be correct; the fullness of Man is more than a human fullness. The complete Man is Man divinized; that unique being, athirst for the infinite, is not himself until he reaches his destiny.) Man is more than his “human” nature."
As St Paul Prays in Ephesians:
that we may be filled with the "utter fullness of God" (3.19) and
that we may "all reach the unity in faith...and form the perfect man, fully mature with the fullness of Christ himself" (4.13).
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
The Deepening Experience of Christophany and the Native American Flute
In the process of being challenged and stretched by Panikkar's christophanic vision, I take some comfort in his statement that he proposes "a deepening of classical christology." It's not a rejection of 2,000 years of Christian experience or thought but a "deepening." Rather than condensing Christ into dogmatic statements carved in stone, it is the spirit of the law- of experiencing Christ that deepens us.
It seems, in my mind, to be similar to the difference between Biblical and Hermeneutical study and Lectio Divina. The former is important, providing grammatical, historical, cultural context and theological reflection. Lectio, however, fleshes out the bare skeleton, gives breath and comes to life. One enters into the experience not just read about it. It is in this "deepening" that I feel "the yearning for the fullness of life."
Panikkar has mentioned "The Fullness" several times so far and again here. It was a gnostic term used to refer to the spiritual beings or forces believed to intervene between humanity and God; and Paul uses this term in several places to refer to the "fullness of God" dwelling bodily in Christ.
Recently, after many years since falling in love with the sound of the Native American Indian flute, I ordered one for myself and started learning to play. Primitive and tribal flutes, like this one, are not played according to western musical theory, reading music, or learning notes and scales. It's a harmonic experience of playing according to what one feels. Although there is pentatonic, Diatonic and Chromatic scales, primitive cultures did not have a way to record music, so each song, though perhaps similar, is individualistic and new. The length of the flute determines the key. There are a few basic techniques of fingering, vibrato and breath control but once these are learned, anyone can begin to play with the sounds and play what one's likes or feels. And the Native American flute has a block and a groove cut into it to channel the air over the fipple hole where the air stream is split creating sound, so it splits the sound for you, unlike western style flutes which require you to learn difficult techniques of splitting sound with your lips and a reed. There is no real right or wrong way to play, except learning these few basic techniques. Just play what you feel. It's a kind of spiritual experience. Of course, I am still screeching alot but having lots of fun with it.
This seems akin to Christophany versus Christology. They both have their own special characteristics. But christology, like western music theory, requires years of study and practice; whereas, christophany, like the Native American Flute can be experienced, perhaps after learning some simple basic practices, like Centering Prayer. and the "deepening" naturally progresses as you play. It also seems that these two different approaches to music (western or harmonic) and spirituality (theological or christophanic) can be complimentary and deepen the experience of the other.
All I know is, I've tried to learn to play multiple instruments in my life (drums, guitar, bass guitar, piano, etc) but for many reasons I did not stick with it; and as I became more focused on ministry and the academic preparation for ordination, the less time I had for anything else. I missed out on time with my wife and children. Each diploma I worked so hard for, seemed empty after receiving it.
But in contemplative prayer, though sometimes it is difficult to make myself take the one seat of meditation and become my own monastery, I am experiencing a "deepening;" though sometimes, it only comes after a season of being painfully stretched beyond my comfort zones. and with all my screeching and missing notes, I am for the first time, loving my experience of learning to play an instrument. Of course, once in awhile, I hit a note a little too wrong, and my dog tries to bite the flute!
It seems, in my mind, to be similar to the difference between Biblical and Hermeneutical study and Lectio Divina. The former is important, providing grammatical, historical, cultural context and theological reflection. Lectio, however, fleshes out the bare skeleton, gives breath and comes to life. One enters into the experience not just read about it. It is in this "deepening" that I feel "the yearning for the fullness of life."
Panikkar has mentioned "The Fullness" several times so far and again here. It was a gnostic term used to refer to the spiritual beings or forces believed to intervene between humanity and God; and Paul uses this term in several places to refer to the "fullness of God" dwelling bodily in Christ.
Recently, after many years since falling in love with the sound of the Native American Indian flute, I ordered one for myself and started learning to play. Primitive and tribal flutes, like this one, are not played according to western musical theory, reading music, or learning notes and scales. It's a harmonic experience of playing according to what one feels. Although there is pentatonic, Diatonic and Chromatic scales, primitive cultures did not have a way to record music, so each song, though perhaps similar, is individualistic and new. The length of the flute determines the key. There are a few basic techniques of fingering, vibrato and breath control but once these are learned, anyone can begin to play with the sounds and play what one's likes or feels. And the Native American flute has a block and a groove cut into it to channel the air over the fipple hole where the air stream is split creating sound, so it splits the sound for you, unlike western style flutes which require you to learn difficult techniques of splitting sound with your lips and a reed. There is no real right or wrong way to play, except learning these few basic techniques. Just play what you feel. It's a kind of spiritual experience. Of course, I am still screeching alot but having lots of fun with it.
This seems akin to Christophany versus Christology. They both have their own special characteristics. But christology, like western music theory, requires years of study and practice; whereas, christophany, like the Native American Flute can be experienced, perhaps after learning some simple basic practices, like Centering Prayer. and the "deepening" naturally progresses as you play. It also seems that these two different approaches to music (western or harmonic) and spirituality (theological or christophanic) can be complimentary and deepen the experience of the other.
All I know is, I've tried to learn to play multiple instruments in my life (drums, guitar, bass guitar, piano, etc) but for many reasons I did not stick with it; and as I became more focused on ministry and the academic preparation for ordination, the less time I had for anything else. I missed out on time with my wife and children. Each diploma I worked so hard for, seemed empty after receiving it.
But in contemplative prayer, though sometimes it is difficult to make myself take the one seat of meditation and become my own monastery, I am experiencing a "deepening;" though sometimes, it only comes after a season of being painfully stretched beyond my comfort zones. and with all my screeching and missing notes, I am for the first time, loving my experience of learning to play an instrument. Of course, once in awhile, I hit a note a little too wrong, and my dog tries to bite the flute!
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Panikkar- Christ, My Istadevata
Most of the excerpt from Panikkar on the "I" and "Thou" is metaphysically esoteric, difficult to intellectually grasp; and the subtle mystical experience of transformative awareness or sapiential awakening I have been experiencing through CP of Paul's experience "when he confesses, “It is no longer I who live now, but Christ who lives in me!” (Gal 2:20)" is difficult to express in words. But I was deeply touched by Panikkar's statement,
“Yet, in moments of difficulty, suffering, and testing in my life, I was led spontaneously to invoke You, Father, Divinity – and even more frequently, Christ, my istadevata.”
I also found the glossary definition of "istadevata" in the back of the book helpful-
"Icon of the divine which best corresponds to every person's culture, idiosyncrasies, and circumstances; the concrete symbol through which we experience the ultimate mystery that many call "God."
And his footnote- "An istadevata is the most human way of carrying us close to this experience. We need to find the divine icon with which we can communicate."
Jesus The Christ is my istadevata; but I am discovering that The Christ and the experience of Christ within me (and others) is much bigger than the little portrait I have known.
"The you that I am (and not the me) is Christ’s dwelling in the deepest center of my being."
-Aidan+
“Yet, in moments of difficulty, suffering, and testing in my life, I was led spontaneously to invoke You, Father, Divinity – and even more frequently, Christ, my istadevata.”
I also found the glossary definition of "istadevata" in the back of the book helpful-
"Icon of the divine which best corresponds to every person's culture, idiosyncrasies, and circumstances; the concrete symbol through which we experience the ultimate mystery that many call "God."
And his footnote- "An istadevata is the most human way of carrying us close to this experience. We need to find the divine icon with which we can communicate."
Jesus The Christ is my istadevata; but I am discovering that The Christ and the experience of Christ within me (and others) is much bigger than the little portrait I have known.
"The you that I am (and not the me) is Christ’s dwelling in the deepest center of my being."
-Aidan+
Saturday, October 16, 2010
Panikkar- Phenomenological Tensions and Tangents
Pannikar's phenomenological tension between "having and being", advaitic relationship, where he cannot identify himself with either his body or his mind, leads to a profound realization of the truth of the experience of contingency wherein we can “discover the tangential touch between immanence and transcendence, where “I am the point of the tangent in which those two poles [World and God] meet: I stand in between,” is a lot to chew on.
According to the traditional Biblical story of the creation of humanity in the image and likeness of God; and our subsequent fall from that relationship, is the issue of sin (hamartia) and the need for repentance (metanoia). This of course has been convoluted through the centuries from Augustine's idea of Original Sin and Calvin's concept of Total Depravity; and has caused much pain and suffering in the Western tradition of Christianity, catholic or protestant. I think the Eastern Orthodox understanding is much closer to what Panikkar is trying to get at or at least my take on it.
According to Kyriakos C. Markides' book, "Gifts of the Desert: The Forgotten Path of Christian Spirituality", can be summarized as the Threefold Way (or three identifiable stages) of the soul's journey toward union with God. I'll try to summarize from my notes from this book:
Hamatria or sin (which means to “miss the mark” or to be off your mark) does not mean the violation of some moral injunction as it is often taught in the west but means a life cut off from God. The Fall of Man in Adam does not mean that we’ve become totally depraved but that we’ve been wounded and broken and cut off from God. We've lost sight of God or our consciousness of direct union with God. This ignorance or forgetfulness is our fundamental “illness of the heart”. We were created in the Image and Likeness of God. We never lost that. All men, even though due to the "Adamic fall", have lost our consciousness of God, still have the very image of God within us. We all have "the Christ" within our very nature but because of the fall, we have been separated from conscious union with God.
Metanioa. Eventually/hopefully, the prodigal son realized his separation from His Father and decides to return, trusting in his Fathers compassion and forgiveness. This is when the soul goes through metanoia or repentance which is a radical transformation of the heart and mind. It doesn’t just mean to feel sorry for our sins (the loss of conscious union with the divine) and say a sinners prayer (which isn’t in the Bible anyway. lol). “To repent is to awaken from the deep sleep of ignorance (or unconsciousness), to rediscover the soul, to gain the meaning and purpose of our lives by responding to the incomparable love of the One who is not of this world.”
Catharsis- the systematic struggle to purify their hearts to make them vessels of the Holy Spirit. “Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God”- Jesus. For as long as our hearts are hostage to worldly passions and desires we cannot really experience the fullness of divine grace. This Grace resides deep within us but in our blindness we are unaware of its presence.
Askesis is the methodology of purifying the heart so that it may begin to become aware of God’s presence deep within us. Askesis is a set of spiritual exercises or disciplines for overcoming egotism; and acquiring the grace of the Holy Spirit. (To buffet the body- St Paul). These methods of askesis includes- fastings, confession, holy communion, self-observation, alignment of thoughts and actions with Christ’s commandments, study, ceaseless prayer, meditation, etc, etc.
Also, this is the only level we can do anything about. We must work out our salvation with fear and trembling for God works in us. The following two stages are purely the work of Grace. This one is too but we are actively involved in it. The next two is strictly a work of grace.
[KENOSIS- However, I would insert here that Panikkar and Cynthia Bourgeault and Jesus Christ himself promote a different approach. Not askesis but Kenosis- the radical emptying of ourselves through non-concentrative methods like Centering Prayer].
Fotisis- means illumination. It’s the enlightenment of the soul, the awakening to what we truly are. One of the things Christ came to do was to mirror for us who we truly are. To experience the Uncreated Light of Tabor, i.e., The Taboric Light.
Theosis or Deification- the ultimate attainment of the human soul- the original split between the self and God is overcome and the soul experiences Divine Union with God- a return to the primordial state of man. Salvation is not so much about getting our ticket to heaven. Its about a restored consciousness of our oneness with God:
"In Christian spirituality, the soul upon deification maintains its autonomy within the oneness of God. The self does not get diluted into the All. What is annihilated is the sum total of egotistical passions and desires, not our uniqueness as persons created in the image of God for eternity." -Bishop Maximos (Anastasios) of Cyprus.
Anyway, this seems a much more holistic understanding of story of the creation of humanity in the image and likeness of the divine, our fall from consciousness of this divine union, and our restoration or re-awakening to consciousness of our union with God. Its already present but we've lost consciousness of it; but through such practices like Centering Prayer we are gradually led to a place of re-awakening to what we are by nature, or as Panikkar puts it, to discover" the tangential touch between immanence and transcendence, where “I am the point of the tangent in which those two poles [World and God] meet: I stand in between...”
Well, anyway, this has been my meditation on this passage from Pannikar. It seems much truer to my own experience of God, at least since began the contemplative journey under the teachings of Fr. Thomas keating. Before this, I grew up under the cloud of total depravity and the saved-lost-saved-lost concept or Arminius. I was damned by Calvin and was perpetually in fear of losing my salvation because of Arminius! I must have been"saved" a billion times during my childhood. But understanding that "salvation" in Christ is about awakening to the realization and consciousness of union with God, "I am the point of the tangent in which those two poles [World and God] meet: I stand in between" gives me great hope and liberation from the tyranny of fear and shame I once knew.
According to the traditional Biblical story of the creation of humanity in the image and likeness of God; and our subsequent fall from that relationship, is the issue of sin (hamartia) and the need for repentance (metanoia). This of course has been convoluted through the centuries from Augustine's idea of Original Sin and Calvin's concept of Total Depravity; and has caused much pain and suffering in the Western tradition of Christianity, catholic or protestant. I think the Eastern Orthodox understanding is much closer to what Panikkar is trying to get at or at least my take on it.
According to Kyriakos C. Markides' book, "Gifts of the Desert: The Forgotten Path of Christian Spirituality", can be summarized as the Threefold Way (or three identifiable stages) of the soul's journey toward union with God. I'll try to summarize from my notes from this book:
Hamatria or sin (which means to “miss the mark” or to be off your mark) does not mean the violation of some moral injunction as it is often taught in the west but means a life cut off from God. The Fall of Man in Adam does not mean that we’ve become totally depraved but that we’ve been wounded and broken and cut off from God. We've lost sight of God or our consciousness of direct union with God. This ignorance or forgetfulness is our fundamental “illness of the heart”. We were created in the Image and Likeness of God. We never lost that. All men, even though due to the "Adamic fall", have lost our consciousness of God, still have the very image of God within us. We all have "the Christ" within our very nature but because of the fall, we have been separated from conscious union with God.
Metanioa. Eventually/hopefully, the prodigal son realized his separation from His Father and decides to return, trusting in his Fathers compassion and forgiveness. This is when the soul goes through metanoia or repentance which is a radical transformation of the heart and mind. It doesn’t just mean to feel sorry for our sins (the loss of conscious union with the divine) and say a sinners prayer (which isn’t in the Bible anyway. lol). “To repent is to awaken from the deep sleep of ignorance (or unconsciousness), to rediscover the soul, to gain the meaning and purpose of our lives by responding to the incomparable love of the One who is not of this world.”
Catharsis- the systematic struggle to purify their hearts to make them vessels of the Holy Spirit. “Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God”- Jesus. For as long as our hearts are hostage to worldly passions and desires we cannot really experience the fullness of divine grace. This Grace resides deep within us but in our blindness we are unaware of its presence.
Askesis is the methodology of purifying the heart so that it may begin to become aware of God’s presence deep within us. Askesis is a set of spiritual exercises or disciplines for overcoming egotism; and acquiring the grace of the Holy Spirit. (To buffet the body- St Paul). These methods of askesis includes- fastings, confession, holy communion, self-observation, alignment of thoughts and actions with Christ’s commandments, study, ceaseless prayer, meditation, etc, etc.
Also, this is the only level we can do anything about. We must work out our salvation with fear and trembling for God works in us. The following two stages are purely the work of Grace. This one is too but we are actively involved in it. The next two is strictly a work of grace.
[KENOSIS- However, I would insert here that Panikkar and Cynthia Bourgeault and Jesus Christ himself promote a different approach. Not askesis but Kenosis- the radical emptying of ourselves through non-concentrative methods like Centering Prayer].
Fotisis- means illumination. It’s the enlightenment of the soul, the awakening to what we truly are. One of the things Christ came to do was to mirror for us who we truly are. To experience the Uncreated Light of Tabor, i.e., The Taboric Light.
Theosis or Deification- the ultimate attainment of the human soul- the original split between the self and God is overcome and the soul experiences Divine Union with God- a return to the primordial state of man. Salvation is not so much about getting our ticket to heaven. Its about a restored consciousness of our oneness with God:
"In Christian spirituality, the soul upon deification maintains its autonomy within the oneness of God. The self does not get diluted into the All. What is annihilated is the sum total of egotistical passions and desires, not our uniqueness as persons created in the image of God for eternity." -Bishop Maximos (Anastasios) of Cyprus.
Anyway, this seems a much more holistic understanding of story of the creation of humanity in the image and likeness of the divine, our fall from consciousness of this divine union, and our restoration or re-awakening to consciousness of our union with God. Its already present but we've lost consciousness of it; but through such practices like Centering Prayer we are gradually led to a place of re-awakening to what we are by nature, or as Panikkar puts it, to discover" the tangential touch between immanence and transcendence, where “I am the point of the tangent in which those two poles [World and God] meet: I stand in between...”
Well, anyway, this has been my meditation on this passage from Pannikar. It seems much truer to my own experience of God, at least since began the contemplative journey under the teachings of Fr. Thomas keating. Before this, I grew up under the cloud of total depravity and the saved-lost-saved-lost concept or Arminius. I was damned by Calvin and was perpetually in fear of losing my salvation because of Arminius! I must have been"saved" a billion times during my childhood. But understanding that "salvation" in Christ is about awakening to the realization and consciousness of union with God, "I am the point of the tangent in which those two poles [World and God] meet: I stand in between" gives me great hope and liberation from the tyranny of fear and shame I once knew.
Friday, October 15, 2010
Panikkar- The Path, Milta-Manifestation
...it seems, just as there are so many different people and perspectives on just this little list who choose to come together on the basis of spirituality and even to encounter Christ in this myriad of different ways, is indicative of the "phania" or manifestation(s) of Christ that Pannikar is alluding to.
In the Greek/English tradition of the Bible, John 1.1, has been rendered, " In the beginning was the Word (logos), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." Somehow, as Pannikar alludes to, it is the logos or word that has taken precedence in Christianity. Logos gives the impression of a single "word" being spoken to us from God; and this word has been reduced even to a book, the Bible, as THE Word of God. The Bible for many has become an idol and in our attempts to be true to the divine call (orthodoxy), we have ignored the mysticism of Jesus Christ; and even the mystical essence of Christ.
However, in the Aramaic translations of scripture from the Peshitta texts, the word in John 1.1 is not "logos" but "milta" which gives a broader range of meaning, such as, "‘Word’, "Sound", ‘Manifestation’, ‘Instance’ or ‘Substance, (I believe I even read somewhere it may be translated as "light"), etc., which may be rendered,
"In the beginning [of creation]
there was the Manifestation (milta);
And that Manifestation was with God;
and God was [the embodiment of] that Manifestation."
This idea of phania or milta as a divine emanation, manifestation, substance, reminds me of a yoga practice (I forget the name of it just now) where you gently cover your eyes, nose, lips, and ears with your fingers and thumbs, and listen and feel the interior hum within ourselves. Its kind of like listening to the sound of the ocean through a conch shell, except more of a hum. You can hear and feel this gentle hum or what the Hindu's call the "Aum" or "Om" which is the sound of God or sound of creation. "Om Nade Ishvara Vanamah" (Praise to God's Sound of Creation. Alleluia!). When they chant the "Aum" it vibrates up and down the three resonance chambers of the body (head, chest, and abdomen), it begins and ends with "Aum", from birth to death. It's about resonance and vibration. All of energy, even light vibrates (think of waves, etc.). There is something to be said here about the Yoga of Sound or in the Christian tradition, the spirituality of sound, such a chanting. Cynthia Bourgeault alludes to this in some of her books, especially the one on chanting the psalms.
Perhap the Path of Phania is simply about this Divine Manifestation, The Christ, and our becoming in tune with the divine resonance. As Panikkar says, its about experience- Christ's Experience of th Divine, Our Experience of Christ, and Our Experience of the mystical:
"One can concentrate on the individual (historical) Jesus and come to the conclusion that “he is the Way,” or on the person of Jesus and exclaim, “You are the Truth,” or go still deeper into the adhyatmic level and discover the Christ and realize that “You are the Life.” The third is the mystical experience that we have to appropriate if we wish to experience what Jesus experienced, namely, the reality of the Christ".
In the Greek/English tradition of the Bible, John 1.1, has been rendered, " In the beginning was the Word (logos), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." Somehow, as Pannikar alludes to, it is the logos or word that has taken precedence in Christianity. Logos gives the impression of a single "word" being spoken to us from God; and this word has been reduced even to a book, the Bible, as THE Word of God. The Bible for many has become an idol and in our attempts to be true to the divine call (orthodoxy), we have ignored the mysticism of Jesus Christ; and even the mystical essence of Christ.
However, in the Aramaic translations of scripture from the Peshitta texts, the word in John 1.1 is not "logos" but "milta" which gives a broader range of meaning, such as, "‘Word’, "Sound", ‘Manifestation’, ‘Instance’ or ‘Substance, (I believe I even read somewhere it may be translated as "light"), etc., which may be rendered,
"In the beginning [of creation]
there was the Manifestation (milta);
And that Manifestation was with God;
and God was [the embodiment of] that Manifestation."
This idea of phania or milta as a divine emanation, manifestation, substance, reminds me of a yoga practice (I forget the name of it just now) where you gently cover your eyes, nose, lips, and ears with your fingers and thumbs, and listen and feel the interior hum within ourselves. Its kind of like listening to the sound of the ocean through a conch shell, except more of a hum. You can hear and feel this gentle hum or what the Hindu's call the "Aum" or "Om" which is the sound of God or sound of creation. "Om Nade Ishvara Vanamah" (Praise to God's Sound of Creation. Alleluia!). When they chant the "Aum" it vibrates up and down the three resonance chambers of the body (head, chest, and abdomen), it begins and ends with "Aum", from birth to death. It's about resonance and vibration. All of energy, even light vibrates (think of waves, etc.). There is something to be said here about the Yoga of Sound or in the Christian tradition, the spirituality of sound, such a chanting. Cynthia Bourgeault alludes to this in some of her books, especially the one on chanting the psalms.
Perhap the Path of Phania is simply about this Divine Manifestation, The Christ, and our becoming in tune with the divine resonance. As Panikkar says, its about experience- Christ's Experience of th Divine, Our Experience of Christ, and Our Experience of the mystical:
"One can concentrate on the individual (historical) Jesus and come to the conclusion that “he is the Way,” or on the person of Jesus and exclaim, “You are the Truth,” or go still deeper into the adhyatmic level and discover the Christ and realize that “You are the Life.” The third is the mystical experience that we have to appropriate if we wish to experience what Jesus experienced, namely, the reality of the Christ".
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Pannikar- Myth & Language
Anyway, as for the current reading from Pannikar, there are several thoughts going through my mind and heart, particularly with myth and mystical language.
Myth. In regard to Myth, I am reminded of C.S. Lewis' own struggle with myth and the Bible; and it seems relevant in regard to what it seems Pannikar is driving at. In a letter of October 18, 1931, Lewis writes,
"Now what Dyson and Tolkien showed me was this: that if I met the idea of sacrifice in a Pagan story I didn't mind it at all: again, that if I met the idea of a god sacrificing himself to himself . . . I like it very much and was mysteriously moved by it: again, that the idea of the dying and reviving god (Balder, Adonis, Bacchus) similarly moved me provided I met it anywhere except in the Gospels. The reason was that in Pagan stories I was prepared to feel the myth as profound and suggestive of meanings beyond my grasp even tho' I could not say in cold prose 'what it meant'.
Now the story of Christ is simply a true myth: a myth working on us in the same way as the others, but with this tremendous difference that it really happened: and one must be content to accept it in the same way, remembering that it is God's myth where the others are men's myth: i.e. the Pagan stories are God expressing Himself through the minds of poets, using such images as He found there, while Christianity is God expressing Himself through what we call 'real things'. Therefore it is true, not in the sense of being a 'description' of God (that no finite mind could take in) but in the sense of being the way in which God chooses to (or can) appear to our faculties. The 'doctrines' we get out of the true myths are of course less true: they are translations into our concepts and ideas of the wh. God has already expressed in a language more adequate, namely the actual incarnation, crucifixion, and resurrection. Does this amount to a belief in Christianity? At any rate I am now certain (a) That this Christian story is to be approached, in a sense, as I approach the other myths. (b) That it is the most important and full of meaning. I am also nearly certain that it really happened."
Thirteen years later, Lewis, in an essay called "Myth Became Fact" (1944) adds,
"The heart of Christianity is a myth which is also a fact. The old myth of the Dying God, without ceasing to be myth, comes down from the heaven of legend and imagination to the earth of history. It happens--at a particular date, in a particular place, followed by definable historical consequences. We pass from a Balder or an Osiris, dying nobody knows when or where, to a historical Person crucified (it is all in order) under Pontius Pilate. By becoming fact it does not cease to be myth: that is the miracle. I suspect that men have sometimes derived more spiritual sustenance from myths they did not believe than from the religion they professed. To be truly Christian we must both assent to the historical fact and also receive the myth (fact though it has become) with the same imaginative embrace which we accord to all myth. The one is hardly more necessary than the other."
This is something I have been struggling or working with in my own life, though in the reverse of Lewis, as I am trying to look at the mythical, archetypal and symbolic power of the Christian myth (fact though it may be). But the struggle is the same. How we approach such myths determine the lense of how we view the world and reality. "Myth for Panikkar is that through which you experience and understand and not that which you experience and understand. It is the universe of meaning in which one finds oneself; it is the horizon of one’s being and understanding." If we reduce myth, specifically the Christian myth, to mere creedal assents we often miss the transforming power of myth. Its the difference, again, between a Christology and a Christophany. However, as Pannikar later suggests, its not and either/or but a both/and. They are complemntary but alone we lose something in the process. "We must both assent to the historical fact and also receive the myth... with the same imaginative embrace which we accord to all myth. "
The Cultural Lense of Myth. Myth is the symbolic value through which we view or rather, "experience and understand" life and the world. However, it is necessary to discern "the myth that is operative in a particular culture." This is a very important point. Not only has most of the Christ event been reduced to creedal affirmations and mental assents, the mythic portrait of Christ that was fashioned in western culture has been filtered through the language and philosophical constructs of the Greco/Roman culture, society, language and ideas, especially, the Platonic and Aristotelian. However, as we try to enter into Inter-religious conversation with eastern cultures with different mythic constructs,we often run into problems. Rather, than trying to share a Christophanic experience with, say, Buddhists or Hindu's, we too often have tried to convert them, not only to a different religious perspective, but to the importation of a western cultural trappings. Western and Eastern culture and worldview are very different. It's like trying to force a square peg into a round hole. This was one of the points of Dom Bede Griffiths- that in order for us as Christian's to truly enter into Inter-religious Dialogue, the Christ myth must be shared and translated through the filter of eastern constructs not western/European civilization and Greco-Roman language and philosophy. Western thought tends toward the scientific Aristotelian categorizations which reduce an experience into all of its smallest parts. What is left is a Christology often devoid of the original exprience, instead of a Christophany that goes beyond it. And this is precisely, why Pannikar's idea of Christophany is powerful. The eastern mind is not as interested in, say, our theological constructs but would be more interested in how to experience the Christ myth themselves, if they're interested at all. Pannikar's Christophany brings both western intellect and eastern emphasis on experience together.
Perhaps a more practical way of illustrating this is the difference between Western (Roman) evangelical methods and early Celtic Christian Methods. In the Roman model, the particular portrait of the Christ myth was normally limited to proclaiming "The Gospel" within the boundaries of Roman culture and civilization; and belonging to the church community was contingent upon one's acceptance of this Gospel. It was a method of Believing before Belonging. The Celtic Church on the other hand, went beyond the boundaries of Roman culture and civilization to "pagan and barbarian" societies. They built their churches and monasteries near villages or social groups, learned their language and entered into a relationship with them. The "converts" belonged to the church before they ever believed. It was a method of Belonging before Believing.
This seems to me to be one of the power's of Pannikar's Christophany. It is sensitive to both the western mythical portrait of Christ and its subsequent Christology; but goes beyond it to the experience and sharing of that myth in a way that is Inter-religious, empowering and transformational, both personally and culturally. It realizes that the experience of Christ in larger than any single portrait; and that we can not only begin to discern the largeness of the Christ myth; but can enter into the portraits of Christ for ourself. We can experience Christ or have a Christ experience ourselves and not just read about. We can experience even the experience Christ experienced of Abba. It also helps us to be more sensitive to symbols of "emerging myth of our times."
I apologize if I have drifted too far afield from our readings. But these thoughts are symptomatic of some of my concerns for how to both experience and share the changing or enlarging portraits of Christ that I am experiencing, thru both my CP practice and the tapestry that is unfolding through the experience of being touched by the word and presence of such spiritual masters like Fr Keating and Raimon Pannikar. As the portraits change, our reasons and methods of sharing also change. If the sapiential awakening and recognization events I am and others are experiencing through them is so powerful, I can only imagine that the original experience of Christ was even more earth shattering. And these deep and overwhelming waters we are experiencing in Pannikar are there to take us beyond a mere Christology to the very experience of Christ and Abba, that we may ourselves be transformed and perhaps be mirrors ourselves of this experience for others.
Myth. In regard to Myth, I am reminded of C.S. Lewis' own struggle with myth and the Bible; and it seems relevant in regard to what it seems Pannikar is driving at. In a letter of October 18, 1931, Lewis writes,
"Now what Dyson and Tolkien showed me was this: that if I met the idea of sacrifice in a Pagan story I didn't mind it at all: again, that if I met the idea of a god sacrificing himself to himself . . . I like it very much and was mysteriously moved by it: again, that the idea of the dying and reviving god (Balder, Adonis, Bacchus) similarly moved me provided I met it anywhere except in the Gospels. The reason was that in Pagan stories I was prepared to feel the myth as profound and suggestive of meanings beyond my grasp even tho' I could not say in cold prose 'what it meant'.
Now the story of Christ is simply a true myth: a myth working on us in the same way as the others, but with this tremendous difference that it really happened: and one must be content to accept it in the same way, remembering that it is God's myth where the others are men's myth: i.e. the Pagan stories are God expressing Himself through the minds of poets, using such images as He found there, while Christianity is God expressing Himself through what we call 'real things'. Therefore it is true, not in the sense of being a 'description' of God (that no finite mind could take in) but in the sense of being the way in which God chooses to (or can) appear to our faculties. The 'doctrines' we get out of the true myths are of course less true: they are translations into our concepts and ideas of the wh. God has already expressed in a language more adequate, namely the actual incarnation, crucifixion, and resurrection. Does this amount to a belief in Christianity? At any rate I am now certain (a) That this Christian story is to be approached, in a sense, as I approach the other myths. (b) That it is the most important and full of meaning. I am also nearly certain that it really happened."
Thirteen years later, Lewis, in an essay called "Myth Became Fact" (1944) adds,
"The heart of Christianity is a myth which is also a fact. The old myth of the Dying God, without ceasing to be myth, comes down from the heaven of legend and imagination to the earth of history. It happens--at a particular date, in a particular place, followed by definable historical consequences. We pass from a Balder or an Osiris, dying nobody knows when or where, to a historical Person crucified (it is all in order) under Pontius Pilate. By becoming fact it does not cease to be myth: that is the miracle. I suspect that men have sometimes derived more spiritual sustenance from myths they did not believe than from the religion they professed. To be truly Christian we must both assent to the historical fact and also receive the myth (fact though it has become) with the same imaginative embrace which we accord to all myth. The one is hardly more necessary than the other."
This is something I have been struggling or working with in my own life, though in the reverse of Lewis, as I am trying to look at the mythical, archetypal and symbolic power of the Christian myth (fact though it may be). But the struggle is the same. How we approach such myths determine the lense of how we view the world and reality. "Myth for Panikkar is that through which you experience and understand and not that which you experience and understand. It is the universe of meaning in which one finds oneself; it is the horizon of one’s being and understanding." If we reduce myth, specifically the Christian myth, to mere creedal assents we often miss the transforming power of myth. Its the difference, again, between a Christology and a Christophany. However, as Pannikar later suggests, its not and either/or but a both/and. They are complemntary but alone we lose something in the process. "We must both assent to the historical fact and also receive the myth... with the same imaginative embrace which we accord to all myth. "
The Cultural Lense of Myth. Myth is the symbolic value through which we view or rather, "experience and understand" life and the world. However, it is necessary to discern "the myth that is operative in a particular culture." This is a very important point. Not only has most of the Christ event been reduced to creedal affirmations and mental assents, the mythic portrait of Christ that was fashioned in western culture has been filtered through the language and philosophical constructs of the Greco/Roman culture, society, language and ideas, especially, the Platonic and Aristotelian. However, as we try to enter into Inter-religious conversation with eastern cultures with different mythic constructs,we often run into problems. Rather, than trying to share a Christophanic experience with, say, Buddhists or Hindu's, we too often have tried to convert them, not only to a different religious perspective, but to the importation of a western cultural trappings. Western and Eastern culture and worldview are very different. It's like trying to force a square peg into a round hole. This was one of the points of Dom Bede Griffiths- that in order for us as Christian's to truly enter into Inter-religious Dialogue, the Christ myth must be shared and translated through the filter of eastern constructs not western/European civilization and Greco-Roman language and philosophy. Western thought tends toward the scientific Aristotelian categorizations which reduce an experience into all of its smallest parts. What is left is a Christology often devoid of the original exprience, instead of a Christophany that goes beyond it. And this is precisely, why Pannikar's idea of Christophany is powerful. The eastern mind is not as interested in, say, our theological constructs but would be more interested in how to experience the Christ myth themselves, if they're interested at all. Pannikar's Christophany brings both western intellect and eastern emphasis on experience together.
Perhaps a more practical way of illustrating this is the difference between Western (Roman) evangelical methods and early Celtic Christian Methods. In the Roman model, the particular portrait of the Christ myth was normally limited to proclaiming "The Gospel" within the boundaries of Roman culture and civilization; and belonging to the church community was contingent upon one's acceptance of this Gospel. It was a method of Believing before Belonging. The Celtic Church on the other hand, went beyond the boundaries of Roman culture and civilization to "pagan and barbarian" societies. They built their churches and monasteries near villages or social groups, learned their language and entered into a relationship with them. The "converts" belonged to the church before they ever believed. It was a method of Belonging before Believing.
This seems to me to be one of the power's of Pannikar's Christophany. It is sensitive to both the western mythical portrait of Christ and its subsequent Christology; but goes beyond it to the experience and sharing of that myth in a way that is Inter-religious, empowering and transformational, both personally and culturally. It realizes that the experience of Christ in larger than any single portrait; and that we can not only begin to discern the largeness of the Christ myth; but can enter into the portraits of Christ for ourself. We can experience Christ or have a Christ experience ourselves and not just read about. We can experience even the experience Christ experienced of Abba. It also helps us to be more sensitive to symbols of "emerging myth of our times."
I apologize if I have drifted too far afield from our readings. But these thoughts are symptomatic of some of my concerns for how to both experience and share the changing or enlarging portraits of Christ that I am experiencing, thru both my CP practice and the tapestry that is unfolding through the experience of being touched by the word and presence of such spiritual masters like Fr Keating and Raimon Pannikar. As the portraits change, our reasons and methods of sharing also change. If the sapiential awakening and recognization events I am and others are experiencing through them is so powerful, I can only imagine that the original experience of Christ was even more earth shattering. And these deep and overwhelming waters we are experiencing in Pannikar are there to take us beyond a mere Christology to the very experience of Christ and Abba, that we may ourselves be transformed and perhaps be mirrors ourselves of this experience for others.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Raimon Pannikar's- Christophany- The Fullness of Man
I have just started reading Raimon Pannikar's Christophany- The Fullness of Man, together with a group. here are my first thoughts...
We have only just begun our journey into Pannikar but already I feel we are swimming in deep waters. Awhile back I was reading a book by Dr. Craig T. Isaacs "Revelations & Possession: Distinguishing the Spiritual Experience from the Psychological", where he describes the experience many have of reading Carl Jung,
"Reading Jung has been described as diving in the ocean. Often one will read his work and believe they have understood it, only to be dragged back down deep in the ocean, struggle to breathe believing all is lost, only to surface and again find one’s bearings. So, too, Jung will be intelligible, then we will get lost, only to find a statement we can grab onto like a raft in the sea, and then hold onto it with tenacity for fear of being drowned again. For this reason Jung has often been misunderstood because his thought has only been taken in part. However, we must not take only a few statements he makes, hold on to them like life rafts and move only from them; rather, we should attempt to comprehend the whole that he is putting forth. Therefore, for both our understanding of this process of the development of consciousness, as well as to further expand upon the concept of objective spirit, it is necessary to pursue a greater understanding of spirit, especially as presented in Jung’s thought."
This quote about the experience of reading Jung seems quite appropriate here as we begin our journey into Pannikar's Christophany, perhaps even more so.
Due to many factors, in my personal life, family, marriage, ministry, and changes in polarity from my own spiritual practice of contemplative prayer and related studies, I have already been feeling this experience of having the floor of old ways of believing, belonging and being swept out from under my feet; or having the vessel of myself being wrecked against these waves of the ocean that seems to drag me down deep, only to resurface, gasping for breath and trying to find my bearings again. All the while, trying to hold onto a plank of flotsam and jetsam. Sometimes the plank I am holding onto seems to be my own spiritual practice or the writings of Keating, Griffiths, Bourgeault, etc., while at other times the experience of both my spiritual practice and reading authors of such deep thoughts seem to be the wave itself washing over me to destroy the old securities and consciousness.
Even now, in the beginning, in the Foreword to Christophany, we already meet deep waves of Pannikar's thought and can almost feel the palpable force of his being and presence as a manifestation of the very things he alludes to. He writes not only from his intellect but from his being. It pulls us down to depths, to meet him where he is. This is the difference between Christology and Christophany. The former is the making of dogmatic statements or moralizing's based on the life and sayings of Christ but usually misses the deeper meanings of Christ which lead to transformation of consciousness and being; whereas, Christophany presupposes that we cannot only experience Christ for ourselves but can also have the same experience Christ claimed to have with the mysterious being he called Abba.
Although I already feel I am being pulled down to unfamiliar depths, I also feel a kind of sapiential awakening and recognization. And I am becoming so much more grateful to have a plank such as the ---- list to hold onto as I plunge again and again into the deep ocean's of change and shifting polarities; especially now, as we are (or at least I am) entering what I already feel to be deep waters- a place where deep calls unto deep.
-Aidan+
We have only just begun our journey into Pannikar but already I feel we are swimming in deep waters. Awhile back I was reading a book by Dr. Craig T. Isaacs "Revelations & Possession: Distinguishing the Spiritual Experience from the Psychological", where he describes the experience many have of reading Carl Jung,
"Reading Jung has been described as diving in the ocean. Often one will read his work and believe they have understood it, only to be dragged back down deep in the ocean, struggle to breathe believing all is lost, only to surface and again find one’s bearings. So, too, Jung will be intelligible, then we will get lost, only to find a statement we can grab onto like a raft in the sea, and then hold onto it with tenacity for fear of being drowned again. For this reason Jung has often been misunderstood because his thought has only been taken in part. However, we must not take only a few statements he makes, hold on to them like life rafts and move only from them; rather, we should attempt to comprehend the whole that he is putting forth. Therefore, for both our understanding of this process of the development of consciousness, as well as to further expand upon the concept of objective spirit, it is necessary to pursue a greater understanding of spirit, especially as presented in Jung’s thought."
This quote about the experience of reading Jung seems quite appropriate here as we begin our journey into Pannikar's Christophany, perhaps even more so.
Due to many factors, in my personal life, family, marriage, ministry, and changes in polarity from my own spiritual practice of contemplative prayer and related studies, I have already been feeling this experience of having the floor of old ways of believing, belonging and being swept out from under my feet; or having the vessel of myself being wrecked against these waves of the ocean that seems to drag me down deep, only to resurface, gasping for breath and trying to find my bearings again. All the while, trying to hold onto a plank of flotsam and jetsam. Sometimes the plank I am holding onto seems to be my own spiritual practice or the writings of Keating, Griffiths, Bourgeault, etc., while at other times the experience of both my spiritual practice and reading authors of such deep thoughts seem to be the wave itself washing over me to destroy the old securities and consciousness.
Even now, in the beginning, in the Foreword to Christophany, we already meet deep waves of Pannikar's thought and can almost feel the palpable force of his being and presence as a manifestation of the very things he alludes to. He writes not only from his intellect but from his being. It pulls us down to depths, to meet him where he is. This is the difference between Christology and Christophany. The former is the making of dogmatic statements or moralizing's based on the life and sayings of Christ but usually misses the deeper meanings of Christ which lead to transformation of consciousness and being; whereas, Christophany presupposes that we cannot only experience Christ for ourselves but can also have the same experience Christ claimed to have with the mysterious being he called Abba.
Although I already feel I am being pulled down to unfamiliar depths, I also feel a kind of sapiential awakening and recognization. And I am becoming so much more grateful to have a plank such as the ---- list to hold onto as I plunge again and again into the deep ocean's of change and shifting polarities; especially now, as we are (or at least I am) entering what I already feel to be deep waters- a place where deep calls unto deep.
-Aidan+
Sunday, October 10, 2010
The Wisdom Jesus
I am currently reading The Wisdom Jesus-Transforming Heart and Mind--A New Perspective on Christ and His Message by Cynthia Bourgeault
"If you put aside what you think you know about Jesus and approach the Gospels as though for the first time, something remarkable happens: Jesus emerges as a teacher of radical wisdom and compassion, whose aim is nothing less than the transformation of human consciousness."
http://www.shambhala.com/html/catalog/items/author/856.cfm
"If you put aside what you think you know about Jesus and approach the Gospels as though for the first time, something remarkable happens: Jesus emerges as a teacher of radical wisdom and compassion, whose aim is nothing less than the transformation of human consciousness."
http://www.shambhala.com/html/catalog/items/author/856.cfm
Monday, August 30, 2010
Ancient Ancestor's Conversation
The following is from a conversation on Ancient Ancestor's on Theology, Virtue and Spirituality on a Facebook forum.
Since many, however, of those who profess to believe in Christ differ from each other, not only in small and trifling matters, but also on subjects of the highest importance, as, e.g., regarding God, or the Lord Jesus Christ, or the Holy Spirit; and not only regarding these, but also regarding others which are created existences, viz., the powers(5) and the holy virtues;(6) it seems on that account necessary first of all to fix a definite limit and to lay down an unmistakable rule regarding each one of these, and then to pass to the investigation of other points. For as we ceased to seek for truth (notwithstanding the professions of many among Greeks and Barbarians to make it known) among all who claimed it for erroneous opinions, after we had come to believe that Christ was the Son of God, and were persuaded that we must learn it from Himself; so, seeing there are many who think they hold the opinions of Christ, and yet some of these think differently from their predecessors, yet as the teaching of the Church, transmitted in orderly succession from the apostles, and remaining in the Churches to the present day, is still preserved, that alone is to be accepted as truth which differs in no respect from ecclesiastical and apostolical tradition.---Origen, De Principis
No one hath seen God at any time; the Only-begotten Son, which is in the
bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him. The Deity, therefore, is
ineffable and incomprehensible. For no one knoweth the Father, save the
Son, nor the Son, save the Father. And the Holy Spirit, too, so knows the
things of God as the spirit of the man knows the things that are in him.
Moreover, after the first and blessed nature no one, not of men only, but
even of supramundane powers, and the Cherubim, I say, and Seraphim
themselves, has ever known God, save he to whom He revealed Himself.
God, however, did not leave us in absolute ignorance. For the knowledge of
God’s existence has been implanted by Him in all by nature. This creation,
too, and its maintenance, and its government, proclaim the majesty of the
Divine nature. Moreover, by the Law and the Prophets in former times
and afterwards by His Only-begotten Son, our Lord and God and Savior
Jesus Christ, He disclosed to us the knowledge of Himself as that was
possible for us. All things, therefore, that have been delivered to us by
Law and Prophets and Apostles and Evangelists we receive, and know,
and honor, seeking for nothing beyond these. For God, being good, is the
cause of all good, subject neither to envy nor to any passion. For envy is
far removed from the Divine nature, which is both passionless and only
good. As knowing all things, therefore, and providing for what is profitable
for each, He revealed that which it was to our profit to know; but what we
were unable to bear He kept secret. With these things let us be satisfied,
and let us abide by them, not removing everlasting boundaries, nor
overpassing the divine tradition.
---- John of Damascus
Father Aidan:
Thanks Fr Jay for the quote. Forgive me if I point out part of this quote near the last few lines which alludes to a "secret" aspect to the Christian Faith. John says,
"He revealed that which it was to our profit to know; but what we were unable to bear He kept secret."
You can read my random thoughts on the subject by looking for the article I posted on the Wall of this forum or by going to my blog site at: www.fraidanhix.blogspot.com
There does appear to be a secret aspect to Christianity in the earliest years. Of course, this was obviously abused and gave way to heretical forms of gnosticism. However, in the earliest strata it seems the common message of the Gospel of Salvation in Jesus Christ was shared with all; but that there were deeper aspects of the Gospel, the meat of the word as opposed to those who could only bear the milk of the word, that were reserved for those who had matured or been called to a deeper or more committed life.
Jesus himself says in several places that he only spoke in parables to the masses but to the disciples he explained the secret of the kingdom openly or that there were things he longed to shared but that they could not contain or bear them at that time. John, at the end of the Gospel also alludes that there were many more things that Jesus did and taught than could be written down.
Anyway....just some random thoughts that there is a delineation between those who are on milk and those who ready for meat.
Fr Jay:
maybe we need some "deeper", "meat" people to comment on this. :)
the whole theme of scriptural revelation is progressive revelations.
God did not reveal to adam, yet, some aspects of His personality. moreso, He did not clearly showed Himself to the Old Testament people His Trinitarian existence. at least as comprehesible as can be. yet, i believe they are adequate revelations of His Person.
can we say these O.T. guys are still on Milk?
would that make us ready for meat?
Father Aidan:
No, I wouldn't necessarily make such a distinction between Old Testament and New Testament Revelation being a comparative issue of milk and meat. There were many OT person's that did operate at a deeper level of spiritual and transformative understanding, such as Elija, Elisha, Daniel, and other prophets; but that is not the same thing as progressive revelation.
What the scriptures seem to refer to is that all are called to the common Gospel of Salvation in Jesus Christ (and yes, even here we are dealing with some kind of revelation, insight or illumination of the Gospel that produces faith unto salvation); but that there are deeper levels of transpersonal and transrational spiritual growth, transformation, that the new convert or nominal believer would only trip over and possibly cause them to stumble. We are possibly dealing with the secrets or mysteries of inner work and spiritual practices such as those as practiced by the desert fathers or monastics of Mt. Athos (Hesychasm)- meditation techniques such as the Jesus Prayer that is done in conjunction with breathing techniques and cardiac rhythms. These things are not taught to novices who do not have the spiritual or theological formation and maturity to discern between psychic experiences and those of the Divine Energies of God.
For example, many monastic who have experienced what they thought was the Uncreated Light or Taboric Light of Christ were actually led into Prelest or delusion because what they actually experienced was only the created light of their own inner man or imagion dei (image of God). But they were deluded into idolizing their own inner light. Such things necessitate years of spiritual practice under the guidance of a spirit filled and experienced Christian Elder or Spiritual Director.
St. John of the Cross clearly stated that during times of deep mediation monks or nuns were not to become attached to anything, even if the hear voices, see angels, levitate, or have prophetic words. To all experiences in meditation or the prayer of stillness one is to say "Nada, Nada" (not this, not this) and to simply rest in the silence of God's presence trusting that God is able to accomplish the deep work of healing and transformation without our thinking about it, attaching ourselves to the experience, etc.
This is one of the problems of the pentecostal and charismatic movements where people identify their gift, calling or ministry with God and idolizing these things. There must be discernment and non-attachment to anythings, giving all experiences to God.
So, there is need for being under the guidance of an experienced Christian elder or teacher. There are simply some things that babies in Christ will not understand, are not ready for, for as Christ said, they cannot contain them now. Such teachings, practices or experiences can prove destructive to them. A baby cannot eat meat but will choke and die. A baby needs milk or baby food, to eat and digest until they grow mature enough to do so.
Seriously though, where once such mystical dimensions of the spiritual life were reserved almost exclusively to monastic and hermits, there is a growing movement of both seekers and Christian's who are single or married and living in the world who are learning and practicing the contemplative/mystical dimensions of the Gospel. It is no longer reserved for the cloister but is being repackaged and made available for secular and domestic Christians, lay and clergy.
These teachings from early Christianity, the Church Fathers and Mothers, saints and mystics are being repackaged and made available for todays Christians. Many of the who have made strides in this area are: Fathers Thomas Merton, Thomas Keating, William Menninger, John Main, Dom Bede Griffiths, and Basil Pennington, etc.
Some of the specific forms and outreach organizations are: Centering Prayer & The Contemplative Outreach; Christian Meditation and the World Communion of Christian Meditators; and Christian Insight Meditation.
Another author is Kyriakos C. Markides who has written several books on Eastern Orthodox Spiritual Traditions of Mt. Athos. His books include:
The Mountain of Silence- A Search for Orthodox Spirituality
Gifts of the Desert: The Forgotten Path of Christian Spirituality
Riding with the Lion: In Search of Mystical Christianity
Although some of these authors go beyond traditional Christianity into Inter-religious Dialogue and cross traditional spirituality, there is more books, Christian teachers, and organizations to provide a framework and guidance for ordinary Christians living in the world.
We as clergy need to educate ourselves in these teachings and practices so we can be teachers and guides for seekers and believers on the journey; and be the filters for people so they do not become confused by the confusing array of such possibilities which could lead them astray or into New Age and Eastern forms of mysticisms. But if we don't do it, this lack, this vacuum in the conventional church world, will be a stumbling block for seekers and people who feel called to these deeper mysteries of personal transformation in Christ; and they will be more likely to stumble their way into false teachings.
We need to be there filters and teachers. Which means we must educate ourselves in and about these teachings and practices; and begin practicing them ourselves from a deeply rooted in the history, experience and tradition of Christian Contemplative and Mystical traditions and teachings.
I've been on this journey for over twenty years; an have been practicing various aspects of these spiritual practices and disciplines. I would be more than happy to help anyone I can on their journey. I am certainly no spiritual master! and am still on milk myself I am sure but any help I can give I am willing to do. Besides, if we dont, then people will go elsewhere to find help, and all too often its been in the New Age and Eastern religions. We must step up and do this.
Since many, however, of those who profess to believe in Christ differ from each other, not only in small and trifling matters, but also on subjects of the highest importance, as, e.g., regarding God, or the Lord Jesus Christ, or the Holy Spirit; and not only regarding these, but also regarding others which are created existences, viz., the powers(5) and the holy virtues;(6) it seems on that account necessary first of all to fix a definite limit and to lay down an unmistakable rule regarding each one of these, and then to pass to the investigation of other points. For as we ceased to seek for truth (notwithstanding the professions of many among Greeks and Barbarians to make it known) among all who claimed it for erroneous opinions, after we had come to believe that Christ was the Son of God, and were persuaded that we must learn it from Himself; so, seeing there are many who think they hold the opinions of Christ, and yet some of these think differently from their predecessors, yet as the teaching of the Church, transmitted in orderly succession from the apostles, and remaining in the Churches to the present day, is still preserved, that alone is to be accepted as truth which differs in no respect from ecclesiastical and apostolical tradition.---Origen, De Principis
No one hath seen God at any time; the Only-begotten Son, which is in the
bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him. The Deity, therefore, is
ineffable and incomprehensible. For no one knoweth the Father, save the
Son, nor the Son, save the Father. And the Holy Spirit, too, so knows the
things of God as the spirit of the man knows the things that are in him.
Moreover, after the first and blessed nature no one, not of men only, but
even of supramundane powers, and the Cherubim, I say, and Seraphim
themselves, has ever known God, save he to whom He revealed Himself.
God, however, did not leave us in absolute ignorance. For the knowledge of
God’s existence has been implanted by Him in all by nature. This creation,
too, and its maintenance, and its government, proclaim the majesty of the
Divine nature. Moreover, by the Law and the Prophets in former times
and afterwards by His Only-begotten Son, our Lord and God and Savior
Jesus Christ, He disclosed to us the knowledge of Himself as that was
possible for us. All things, therefore, that have been delivered to us by
Law and Prophets and Apostles and Evangelists we receive, and know,
and honor, seeking for nothing beyond these. For God, being good, is the
cause of all good, subject neither to envy nor to any passion. For envy is
far removed from the Divine nature, which is both passionless and only
good. As knowing all things, therefore, and providing for what is profitable
for each, He revealed that which it was to our profit to know; but what we
were unable to bear He kept secret. With these things let us be satisfied,
and let us abide by them, not removing everlasting boundaries, nor
overpassing the divine tradition.
---- John of Damascus
Father Aidan:
Thanks Fr Jay for the quote. Forgive me if I point out part of this quote near the last few lines which alludes to a "secret" aspect to the Christian Faith. John says,
"He revealed that which it was to our profit to know; but what we were unable to bear He kept secret."
You can read my random thoughts on the subject by looking for the article I posted on the Wall of this forum or by going to my blog site at: www.fraidanhix.blogspot.com
There does appear to be a secret aspect to Christianity in the earliest years. Of course, this was obviously abused and gave way to heretical forms of gnosticism. However, in the earliest strata it seems the common message of the Gospel of Salvation in Jesus Christ was shared with all; but that there were deeper aspects of the Gospel, the meat of the word as opposed to those who could only bear the milk of the word, that were reserved for those who had matured or been called to a deeper or more committed life.
Jesus himself says in several places that he only spoke in parables to the masses but to the disciples he explained the secret of the kingdom openly or that there were things he longed to shared but that they could not contain or bear them at that time. John, at the end of the Gospel also alludes that there were many more things that Jesus did and taught than could be written down.
Anyway....just some random thoughts that there is a delineation between those who are on milk and those who ready for meat.
Fr Jay:
maybe we need some "deeper", "meat" people to comment on this. :)
the whole theme of scriptural revelation is progressive revelations.
God did not reveal to adam, yet, some aspects of His personality. moreso, He did not clearly showed Himself to the Old Testament people His Trinitarian existence. at least as comprehesible as can be. yet, i believe they are adequate revelations of His Person.
can we say these O.T. guys are still on Milk?
would that make us ready for meat?
Father Aidan:
No, I wouldn't necessarily make such a distinction between Old Testament and New Testament Revelation being a comparative issue of milk and meat. There were many OT person's that did operate at a deeper level of spiritual and transformative understanding, such as Elija, Elisha, Daniel, and other prophets; but that is not the same thing as progressive revelation.
What the scriptures seem to refer to is that all are called to the common Gospel of Salvation in Jesus Christ (and yes, even here we are dealing with some kind of revelation, insight or illumination of the Gospel that produces faith unto salvation); but that there are deeper levels of transpersonal and transrational spiritual growth, transformation, that the new convert or nominal believer would only trip over and possibly cause them to stumble. We are possibly dealing with the secrets or mysteries of inner work and spiritual practices such as those as practiced by the desert fathers or monastics of Mt. Athos (Hesychasm)- meditation techniques such as the Jesus Prayer that is done in conjunction with breathing techniques and cardiac rhythms. These things are not taught to novices who do not have the spiritual or theological formation and maturity to discern between psychic experiences and those of the Divine Energies of God.
For example, many monastic who have experienced what they thought was the Uncreated Light or Taboric Light of Christ were actually led into Prelest or delusion because what they actually experienced was only the created light of their own inner man or imagion dei (image of God). But they were deluded into idolizing their own inner light. Such things necessitate years of spiritual practice under the guidance of a spirit filled and experienced Christian Elder or Spiritual Director.
St. John of the Cross clearly stated that during times of deep mediation monks or nuns were not to become attached to anything, even if the hear voices, see angels, levitate, or have prophetic words. To all experiences in meditation or the prayer of stillness one is to say "Nada, Nada" (not this, not this) and to simply rest in the silence of God's presence trusting that God is able to accomplish the deep work of healing and transformation without our thinking about it, attaching ourselves to the experience, etc.
This is one of the problems of the pentecostal and charismatic movements where people identify their gift, calling or ministry with God and idolizing these things. There must be discernment and non-attachment to anythings, giving all experiences to God.
So, there is need for being under the guidance of an experienced Christian elder or teacher. There are simply some things that babies in Christ will not understand, are not ready for, for as Christ said, they cannot contain them now. Such teachings, practices or experiences can prove destructive to them. A baby cannot eat meat but will choke and die. A baby needs milk or baby food, to eat and digest until they grow mature enough to do so.
Seriously though, where once such mystical dimensions of the spiritual life were reserved almost exclusively to monastic and hermits, there is a growing movement of both seekers and Christian's who are single or married and living in the world who are learning and practicing the contemplative/mystical dimensions of the Gospel. It is no longer reserved for the cloister but is being repackaged and made available for secular and domestic Christians, lay and clergy.
These teachings from early Christianity, the Church Fathers and Mothers, saints and mystics are being repackaged and made available for todays Christians. Many of the who have made strides in this area are: Fathers Thomas Merton, Thomas Keating, William Menninger, John Main, Dom Bede Griffiths, and Basil Pennington, etc.
Some of the specific forms and outreach organizations are: Centering Prayer & The Contemplative Outreach; Christian Meditation and the World Communion of Christian Meditators; and Christian Insight Meditation.
Another author is Kyriakos C. Markides who has written several books on Eastern Orthodox Spiritual Traditions of Mt. Athos. His books include:
The Mountain of Silence- A Search for Orthodox Spirituality
Gifts of the Desert: The Forgotten Path of Christian Spirituality
Riding with the Lion: In Search of Mystical Christianity
Although some of these authors go beyond traditional Christianity into Inter-religious Dialogue and cross traditional spirituality, there is more books, Christian teachers, and organizations to provide a framework and guidance for ordinary Christians living in the world.
We as clergy need to educate ourselves in these teachings and practices so we can be teachers and guides for seekers and believers on the journey; and be the filters for people so they do not become confused by the confusing array of such possibilities which could lead them astray or into New Age and Eastern forms of mysticisms. But if we don't do it, this lack, this vacuum in the conventional church world, will be a stumbling block for seekers and people who feel called to these deeper mysteries of personal transformation in Christ; and they will be more likely to stumble their way into false teachings.
We need to be there filters and teachers. Which means we must educate ourselves in and about these teachings and practices; and begin practicing them ourselves from a deeply rooted in the history, experience and tradition of Christian Contemplative and Mystical traditions and teachings.
I've been on this journey for over twenty years; an have been practicing various aspects of these spiritual practices and disciplines. I would be more than happy to help anyone I can on their journey. I am certainly no spiritual master! and am still on milk myself I am sure but any help I can give I am willing to do. Besides, if we dont, then people will go elsewhere to find help, and all too often its been in the New Age and Eastern religions. We must step up and do this.
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Inner Christianity and the "Esoteric" Tradition
I've just finished reading Richard Smoley's book, "Inner Christianity- A Guide to the Esoteric Tradition."
Hmmm. A moment of pause. Smoley provides an interesting overview of esotericism and mysticism both within and outside of Christianity. It deals with the idea that there is a "Hidden or Secret" dimension to Christianity and the Gospel, that is reserved largely for those with a special vocation to higher spiritual realties that are found in conventional Christianity; and have been initiated into these mysteries. I tend to agree more with Carl McColman's view in his "Book of Christian Mysticism", where he states,
“…students of Christian mysticism lose their way when they get too caught up in quests for secret knowledge, or hidden teachings that are supposedly they key to higher realities that somehow have been lost (or suppressed) by Church Authorities. I am willing to go with the idea that many of the key principles of Christian Mysticism have been marginalized, ignored or even ignored…The Keys to Christian Mysticism have been hidden in plain sight” (page 17).
I certainly agree with that people, whether gnostics or even some modern charismatics, and anything in between, can get caught up in quests for secret or hidden knowledge. This may be one of the dangers of mysticism in general and a deficit of not having an experienced teacher or guide on the spiritual journey.
However, there does seem to be a genuine element of secrecy and hiddeness within the earliest stratas of early Christianity. I don’t have time now to cite specific chapter and verse here but would like to offer a few examples. Some of these “secrets” may include- the obscurity (intentional or unintentional) of Jesus’ childhood, Christ telling things in parables to the crowds but explaining the meaning of such parables to the disciples (“Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God, but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables”; or “With many such
parables spake He the word unto them, as they were able to hear it. But without a parable spake He not unto them; and when they were alone He expounded all things to His disciples”[please note the emphasis on "when they were alone" or "them that are without."]); Jesus tells His apostles: “I have yet many things to say to you, but ye cannot bear them now;” “Give not that which is holy to the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine”; or such terms as “The Mystery,” or “The Mysteries,” used to designate the sacred circle of the Initiates or connected with Initiation: “The Kingdom,” “The Kingdom of God,” “The Kingdom of Heaven,” “The Narrow Path,” “The Strait Gate,” “The Perfect,” “The Saved,” “Life Eternal,” “Life,” “The Second Birth,” “A Little One,” “A Little Child” ["Then said one unto Him: Lord, are there few that be saved? And He said unto them: Strive to enter in at the strait gate; for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in and shall not be able."] The list may go on.
St. Paul also makes similar comments, such as:
“I came to you bearing the divine testimony, not alluring you with human wisdom but with the power of the Spirit. Truly ‘we speak wisdom among them that are perfect,’ but it is no human wisdom. ‘We speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world’ began, and which none even of the princes of this world know. The things of that wisdom are beyond men’s thinking, ‘but God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit … the deep things of God,’ ‘which the Holy Ghost teacheth.’ These are spiritual things, to be discerned only by the spiritual man, in whom is the mind of Christ. ‘And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ…. Ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able. For ye are yet carnal.’ ‘As a wise master-builder I have laid the foundation,’ and ‘ye are the temple of God, and the Spirit of God dwelleth in you.’ ‘Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the Mysteries of God.’”
There are many examples fro Church history, such as St Clement of Alexandria or Origen. One quote from Clement in his Stromata, says, “”The Lord … allowed us to communicate of those divine Mysteries, and of that holy light, to those who are able to receive them. He did not certainly disclose to the many what did not belong to the many; but to the few to whom He knew that they belonged, who were capable of receiving and being moulded according to them. But secret things are entrusted to speech, not to writing, as is the case with God. And if one say that it is written, ‘There is nothing secret which shall not be revealed, nor hidden which shall not be disclosed,’ let him also hear from us, that to him who hears secretly, even what is secret shall be manifested. This is what was predicted by this oracle. And to him who is able secretly to observe what is delivered to him, that which is veiled shall be disclosed as truth; and what is hidden to the many shall appear manifest to the few…. The Mysteries are delivered mystically, that what is spoken may be in the mouth of the speaker; rather not in his voice, but in his understanding…. The writing of these memoranda of mine, I well know, is weak when compared with that spirit, full of grace, which I was privileged to hear. But it will be an image to recall the archetype to him who was struck with the Thyrsus.”
Anyway, I am not trying to make a case to justify gnosticism or secrecy but to question whether there was a genuine aspect of secrecy in the Gospel tradition- a common message of salvation in Christ for all; but also the deeper or more spiritual teachings of Christ for those who had matured in Christ from being babes feeding on the milk of the word to more mature adepts who were then given stronger meet.
If this is so I can certainly see the potential for abuse and elitism; but can also understand from personal experience the problems with sharing even the contemplative/mystical aspect of the Gospel with people who are either not there in their own journey or not yet ready for it, things which may only confuse someone who has not had the foundations in Bible, theology and spiritual formation. Even in the Cloud of Unknowing I seem to recall that the contemplative practices were reserved for monastics who had spent years being educated in these foundations of faith and in practicing the active dimensions of a life of prayer.
There is much to be said about this idea of a hidden or secret side of the Gospel. But its also the stuff heresies and cults are made of, things that can lead a person astray in the world of magic or New Age ideas. There is a need to further elaborate on this concept of a secretive tradition in early Christianity, the benefits and dangers of it, the marginaliation or suppression of such teachings being reserved for more experienced believers; and the dangers and benefits of making the mystical tradition more readily available to the masses today through such things as Centering Prayer and Christian Meditation, and various other forms of Mysticism and contemplative prayer.
Hmmm. A moment of pause. Smoley provides an interesting overview of esotericism and mysticism both within and outside of Christianity. It deals with the idea that there is a "Hidden or Secret" dimension to Christianity and the Gospel, that is reserved largely for those with a special vocation to higher spiritual realties that are found in conventional Christianity; and have been initiated into these mysteries. I tend to agree more with Carl McColman's view in his "Book of Christian Mysticism", where he states,
“…students of Christian mysticism lose their way when they get too caught up in quests for secret knowledge, or hidden teachings that are supposedly they key to higher realities that somehow have been lost (or suppressed) by Church Authorities. I am willing to go with the idea that many of the key principles of Christian Mysticism have been marginalized, ignored or even ignored…The Keys to Christian Mysticism have been hidden in plain sight” (page 17).
I certainly agree with that people, whether gnostics or even some modern charismatics, and anything in between, can get caught up in quests for secret or hidden knowledge. This may be one of the dangers of mysticism in general and a deficit of not having an experienced teacher or guide on the spiritual journey.
However, there does seem to be a genuine element of secrecy and hiddeness within the earliest stratas of early Christianity. I don’t have time now to cite specific chapter and verse here but would like to offer a few examples. Some of these “secrets” may include- the obscurity (intentional or unintentional) of Jesus’ childhood, Christ telling things in parables to the crowds but explaining the meaning of such parables to the disciples (“Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God, but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables”; or “With many such
parables spake He the word unto them, as they were able to hear it. But without a parable spake He not unto them; and when they were alone He expounded all things to His disciples”[please note the emphasis on "when they were alone" or "them that are without."]); Jesus tells His apostles: “I have yet many things to say to you, but ye cannot bear them now;” “Give not that which is holy to the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine”; or such terms as “The Mystery,” or “The Mysteries,” used to designate the sacred circle of the Initiates or connected with Initiation: “The Kingdom,” “The Kingdom of God,” “The Kingdom of Heaven,” “The Narrow Path,” “The Strait Gate,” “The Perfect,” “The Saved,” “Life Eternal,” “Life,” “The Second Birth,” “A Little One,” “A Little Child” ["Then said one unto Him: Lord, are there few that be saved? And He said unto them: Strive to enter in at the strait gate; for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in and shall not be able."] The list may go on.
St. Paul also makes similar comments, such as:
“I came to you bearing the divine testimony, not alluring you with human wisdom but with the power of the Spirit. Truly ‘we speak wisdom among them that are perfect,’ but it is no human wisdom. ‘We speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world’ began, and which none even of the princes of this world know. The things of that wisdom are beyond men’s thinking, ‘but God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit … the deep things of God,’ ‘which the Holy Ghost teacheth.’ These are spiritual things, to be discerned only by the spiritual man, in whom is the mind of Christ. ‘And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ…. Ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able. For ye are yet carnal.’ ‘As a wise master-builder I have laid the foundation,’ and ‘ye are the temple of God, and the Spirit of God dwelleth in you.’ ‘Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the Mysteries of God.’”
There are many examples fro Church history, such as St Clement of Alexandria or Origen. One quote from Clement in his Stromata, says, “”The Lord … allowed us to communicate of those divine Mysteries, and of that holy light, to those who are able to receive them. He did not certainly disclose to the many what did not belong to the many; but to the few to whom He knew that they belonged, who were capable of receiving and being moulded according to them. But secret things are entrusted to speech, not to writing, as is the case with God. And if one say that it is written, ‘There is nothing secret which shall not be revealed, nor hidden which shall not be disclosed,’ let him also hear from us, that to him who hears secretly, even what is secret shall be manifested. This is what was predicted by this oracle. And to him who is able secretly to observe what is delivered to him, that which is veiled shall be disclosed as truth; and what is hidden to the many shall appear manifest to the few…. The Mysteries are delivered mystically, that what is spoken may be in the mouth of the speaker; rather not in his voice, but in his understanding…. The writing of these memoranda of mine, I well know, is weak when compared with that spirit, full of grace, which I was privileged to hear. But it will be an image to recall the archetype to him who was struck with the Thyrsus.”
Anyway, I am not trying to make a case to justify gnosticism or secrecy but to question whether there was a genuine aspect of secrecy in the Gospel tradition- a common message of salvation in Christ for all; but also the deeper or more spiritual teachings of Christ for those who had matured in Christ from being babes feeding on the milk of the word to more mature adepts who were then given stronger meet.
If this is so I can certainly see the potential for abuse and elitism; but can also understand from personal experience the problems with sharing even the contemplative/mystical aspect of the Gospel with people who are either not there in their own journey or not yet ready for it, things which may only confuse someone who has not had the foundations in Bible, theology and spiritual formation. Even in the Cloud of Unknowing I seem to recall that the contemplative practices were reserved for monastics who had spent years being educated in these foundations of faith and in practicing the active dimensions of a life of prayer.
There is much to be said about this idea of a hidden or secret side of the Gospel. But its also the stuff heresies and cults are made of, things that can lead a person astray in the world of magic or New Age ideas. There is a need to further elaborate on this concept of a secretive tradition in early Christianity, the benefits and dangers of it, the marginaliation or suppression of such teachings being reserved for more experienced believers; and the dangers and benefits of making the mystical tradition more readily available to the masses today through such things as Centering Prayer and Christian Meditation, and various other forms of Mysticism and contemplative prayer.
Friday, August 6, 2010
Random Thought- Seeing Our Relationship to Abba
Just a Random Thought...
I have been meditating on our calling as individuals and corporately as a church to be in Union with God. Jesus' Prayer for us is that we may all be one with God, "just as you and I are one, Father (Abba)" (Jn 17.22)
This is indeed a lofty calling and seems so far removed from the possibility of those of us who lead ordinary lives to achieve.
We are conditioned by Sin (whatever it is that separates us from God), culture, and even Church to view ourselves as already separate from God. The Divine is out there somewhere, far far away; and we are here; and between us is a great chasm. We must therefore live perfect lives and offer great sacrifices before God will even hear us, let alone allow us into some kind of experience of Divine Union. Its better not to even think about it, just get on with the business of living, making money, raising a family, and building a retirement fund for our old age, and maybe buying a burial plot so we have place when we die.
Even the Disciple's who were with Jesus and witnessed His experience of God saw themselves as separate. "Teach us to pray," they asked.
But Jesus turned the world upside down; and said when you pray your are to no longer see yourselves as separate from God but begin to see yourselves as Children of God Already! So, when you pray, say, "Our Abba..." (Our Daddy). And Our Abba/Daddy God will not give you a serpent when you ask for bread nor a scorpion when you ask for an egg but will surely grant you the Divine Breath of Life (Holy Spirit) when you ask Him for He is your Abba.
Let us flip the world upside right and begin to see ourselves as already united in God with Jesus and walk in that freedom. That is when the real journey begins.
I have been meditating on our calling as individuals and corporately as a church to be in Union with God. Jesus' Prayer for us is that we may all be one with God, "just as you and I are one, Father (Abba)" (Jn 17.22)
This is indeed a lofty calling and seems so far removed from the possibility of those of us who lead ordinary lives to achieve.
We are conditioned by Sin (whatever it is that separates us from God), culture, and even Church to view ourselves as already separate from God. The Divine is out there somewhere, far far away; and we are here; and between us is a great chasm. We must therefore live perfect lives and offer great sacrifices before God will even hear us, let alone allow us into some kind of experience of Divine Union. Its better not to even think about it, just get on with the business of living, making money, raising a family, and building a retirement fund for our old age, and maybe buying a burial plot so we have place when we die.
Even the Disciple's who were with Jesus and witnessed His experience of God saw themselves as separate. "Teach us to pray," they asked.
But Jesus turned the world upside down; and said when you pray your are to no longer see yourselves as separate from God but begin to see yourselves as Children of God Already! So, when you pray, say, "Our Abba..." (Our Daddy). And Our Abba/Daddy God will not give you a serpent when you ask for bread nor a scorpion when you ask for an egg but will surely grant you the Divine Breath of Life (Holy Spirit) when you ask Him for He is your Abba.
Let us flip the world upside right and begin to see ourselves as already united in God with Jesus and walk in that freedom. That is when the real journey begins.
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
On Spiritual Direction
In modern times, Spiritual Direction has become a specific form of professional therapy by trained therapists in spiritual direction counciling by certified directors. On this note, I am not.
But in more ancient times, spiritual direction was about soul-mending done within a relationship between a pastor (whether Abbot, spiritiual Elder, saint or other types of minister). As Henry Nouwen says,
"Making one's own wounds a source of healing...does not call for a superficial sharing of personal pains but for a constant willingness to see one's own pain and suffering as rising from the depth of the human condition which all men share."
It is a healing relationship of being a wounded healer, of being a Soul-friend to others and aiding them on the spiritual journey. It is a spirituality of imperfection and brokenness. It's a relationship of a spiritual coach who walks on the journey alongside another.
It is in this since that I am involved in spiritual direction; as well as sharing about various spiritual disciplines and practices which may be beneficial to the seeker on the journey.
But in more ancient times, spiritual direction was about soul-mending done within a relationship between a pastor (whether Abbot, spiritiual Elder, saint or other types of minister). As Henry Nouwen says,
"Making one's own wounds a source of healing...does not call for a superficial sharing of personal pains but for a constant willingness to see one's own pain and suffering as rising from the depth of the human condition which all men share."
It is a healing relationship of being a wounded healer, of being a Soul-friend to others and aiding them on the spiritual journey. It is a spirituality of imperfection and brokenness. It's a relationship of a spiritual coach who walks on the journey alongside another.
It is in this since that I am involved in spiritual direction; as well as sharing about various spiritual disciplines and practices which may be beneficial to the seeker on the journey.
Sunday, July 25, 2010
Collision of Opposite's
I've been reading "The Naked Now-Learning to See as The Mystics See" by Fr Richard Rohr.
One place I connected with was Rohr's comments on "collision of opposites" and being "a values conservative and a process liberal;" and a correspondent's comment of having "more in common with my buddhist friends than childhood friends who have converted into the christian traditions."
I grew up as a fourth generation pentecostal and evangelical/fundamentalist. I really tried to fit into the more ecstatic/shamanistic approach to God in this way but never really made the connection, though I did have at times more subtle religious experiences within that context. Even as a child I was drawn to the spirituality exemplified in David Carradine's portrayal of Qui Chang Kang, the Shaolin Buddhist Monk in the TV classic Kung Fu. I started reading Brue Lee's Tao of Jeet Kun Do and Lao Tzo's tao Te Ching, etc., and began intuitively integrating those teaching into my Christian framework and spirituality. Later I was drawn to the catholic/liturgical/sacramental view of transcendence, mystery, and transformation, especially in Eastern Orthodox writings, saints, and mysticism, such as praying the Jesus Prayer both as a perpetual mantra and contemplatively according to the breath or heart beat.
I'd already immersed myself in the writings of Eastern Orthodoxy and western mystics like St. John of the Cross to Thomas Merton. Yet, even though deeply drawn to ancient Christian mystical tradition, these experiences seemed so far removed from my own experience, reserved only for Saints who had already been divinized. Even the "how to" manuals of the philokalia seemd just too difficult and lofty to be within my reach.
That began to change about ten years ago when I stumbled onto the writings of Father's Basil Pennington and Thomas Keating and John Main. These men presented me with a gift, a simple paradigm for understanding and experiencing for myself, little by little, what all those sages, saints and mystics had been writing about. I started to get it. A light went on and I began to awaken to the reality that I could begin, even now, to enter into those experiences of the saints, that they weren't so far removed after all.
Together with this new understanding, my own practise of Centering Prayer, and the teaching of such other mystics like Dom Bede Griffiths and Brother Wayne Teasdale (and now I think Richard Rohr) my world view of Christ (the Cosmic Christ), the world and spirituality, etc., has been expanding, pushing the old boundary markers further and further out. Levels of intellectual and experiential awarness and states and stages of consciousness growing in expanding concentric circles of growth and understanding.
Its been rather frightening at times. There's been subtle and not so subtle shifts of consciousness, awareness, and spiritual polarity. I've found myself having more in common with practioners of Buddha or Yoga (not in regard to theology but in regard to technique, method, psychology of dealing with the inner life, and at the level of the journey of experience) than most of my Christian friends who don't seem as interested in the contemplative expression of Christ and the Gospel, etc.
Although I hold to traditional Christian beliefs and values, I find that my reasons for it now have more to do with a holistic approach to life and integration and transformation as found in the Teachings of Jesus; and although I might hold to certain values along with "conservatives" my reasons, awareness and attitudes are no longer the same, or at least they are changing. I am growing more uncomfortable with the underlying attitudes of certain conservative stances of criticism, judgementalism, hatred, separation and exclusivity and finding that even if I am in opposition to certain more liberal views, I am closer to being on the same footing spiritually, at the level of the heart with some who would identify as liberals! (Again, this is not in regard to doctrines but on the level of a genuine Christian inclusivity as taught by Jesus. This doesn't mean an abandoning of traditional values but a change of heart in how those values and beliefs are experienced and expressed in our relationships with people). Terrifying stuff! A Collision of Opposites!
I'm not certain of what it all means. I know there are boundaries that I'm not willing to cross or go beyond. But the more I study the Church Fathers, Saints and Mystics; together with my own spiritual practise of prayer and meditation, the more I realize the boundaries of what Christ accomplished has much greater horizons than I ever realized. I am experiencing a change of heart and awareness through my practise, a letting go of things and expansion of heart and consciousness. I may still struggle with certain areas of my life, my vices, but there is at the same time all of these changes. Its scary (to let go of things or simpy awaken to the realization that my heart has changed without any conscious decision), yet is also exciting.
Well, I suppose I could ramble on and on. (My sons swear I could preach spontaneously for over an hour about anything, even something as random as a potatoe chip! lol.) But I'll sign off with these few thoughts.
Blessings,
Fr Aidan+
One place I connected with was Rohr's comments on "collision of opposites" and being "a values conservative and a process liberal;" and a correspondent's comment of having "more in common with my buddhist friends than childhood friends who have converted into the christian traditions."
I grew up as a fourth generation pentecostal and evangelical/fundamentalist. I really tried to fit into the more ecstatic/shamanistic approach to God in this way but never really made the connection, though I did have at times more subtle religious experiences within that context. Even as a child I was drawn to the spirituality exemplified in David Carradine's portrayal of Qui Chang Kang, the Shaolin Buddhist Monk in the TV classic Kung Fu. I started reading Brue Lee's Tao of Jeet Kun Do and Lao Tzo's tao Te Ching, etc., and began intuitively integrating those teaching into my Christian framework and spirituality. Later I was drawn to the catholic/liturgical/sacramental view of transcendence, mystery, and transformation, especially in Eastern Orthodox writings, saints, and mysticism, such as praying the Jesus Prayer both as a perpetual mantra and contemplatively according to the breath or heart beat.
I'd already immersed myself in the writings of Eastern Orthodoxy and western mystics like St. John of the Cross to Thomas Merton. Yet, even though deeply drawn to ancient Christian mystical tradition, these experiences seemed so far removed from my own experience, reserved only for Saints who had already been divinized. Even the "how to" manuals of the philokalia seemd just too difficult and lofty to be within my reach.
That began to change about ten years ago when I stumbled onto the writings of Father's Basil Pennington and Thomas Keating and John Main. These men presented me with a gift, a simple paradigm for understanding and experiencing for myself, little by little, what all those sages, saints and mystics had been writing about. I started to get it. A light went on and I began to awaken to the reality that I could begin, even now, to enter into those experiences of the saints, that they weren't so far removed after all.
Together with this new understanding, my own practise of Centering Prayer, and the teaching of such other mystics like Dom Bede Griffiths and Brother Wayne Teasdale (and now I think Richard Rohr) my world view of Christ (the Cosmic Christ), the world and spirituality, etc., has been expanding, pushing the old boundary markers further and further out. Levels of intellectual and experiential awarness and states and stages of consciousness growing in expanding concentric circles of growth and understanding.
Its been rather frightening at times. There's been subtle and not so subtle shifts of consciousness, awareness, and spiritual polarity. I've found myself having more in common with practioners of Buddha or Yoga (not in regard to theology but in regard to technique, method, psychology of dealing with the inner life, and at the level of the journey of experience) than most of my Christian friends who don't seem as interested in the contemplative expression of Christ and the Gospel, etc.
Although I hold to traditional Christian beliefs and values, I find that my reasons for it now have more to do with a holistic approach to life and integration and transformation as found in the Teachings of Jesus; and although I might hold to certain values along with "conservatives" my reasons, awareness and attitudes are no longer the same, or at least they are changing. I am growing more uncomfortable with the underlying attitudes of certain conservative stances of criticism, judgementalism, hatred, separation and exclusivity and finding that even if I am in opposition to certain more liberal views, I am closer to being on the same footing spiritually, at the level of the heart with some who would identify as liberals! (Again, this is not in regard to doctrines but on the level of a genuine Christian inclusivity as taught by Jesus. This doesn't mean an abandoning of traditional values but a change of heart in how those values and beliefs are experienced and expressed in our relationships with people). Terrifying stuff! A Collision of Opposites!
I'm not certain of what it all means. I know there are boundaries that I'm not willing to cross or go beyond. But the more I study the Church Fathers, Saints and Mystics; together with my own spiritual practise of prayer and meditation, the more I realize the boundaries of what Christ accomplished has much greater horizons than I ever realized. I am experiencing a change of heart and awareness through my practise, a letting go of things and expansion of heart and consciousness. I may still struggle with certain areas of my life, my vices, but there is at the same time all of these changes. Its scary (to let go of things or simpy awaken to the realization that my heart has changed without any conscious decision), yet is also exciting.
Well, I suppose I could ramble on and on. (My sons swear I could preach spontaneously for over an hour about anything, even something as random as a potatoe chip! lol.) But I'll sign off with these few thoughts.
Blessings,
Fr Aidan+
Thursday, July 8, 2010
A Path With Heart by Jack Kornfield
Just finished reading "A Path With Heart: A Guide Through the Perils and Promises of Spiritual Life" by Jack Kornfield (a former Buddhist Monk, Meditation Master, and Psychologist).
Its one of the best books I have ever read on the spiritual life- dealing with our inner demons and all that arises within, transformation and... extending grace to all areas of life. A must read for anyone serious about the spiritual life, regardless of your religious perspective. As St Thomas Aquinas once said, all truth comes from God. Although I am a Christian, I felt deeply enriched by this book on many levels. It opened up my awareness of different approaches to, well, "Awareness" of the many things which Arise within all of us- fears, attachments and aversions, etc., and on learning to Let Go of these things and find peace and joy extending to all areas of our life.
Sometimes it also helps to see our own faith from a different perspective; to look at things from a different lense. It helped me understand better many of this things from the mystical and esoteric teachings from Scripture and the Church Fathers, Mystics and Saints that I had not really understood before.
http://www.amazon.com/Path-Heart-Through-Promises-Spiritual/dp/0553372114/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1278588047&sr=8-1
Its one of the best books I have ever read on the spiritual life- dealing with our inner demons and all that arises within, transformation and... extending grace to all areas of life. A must read for anyone serious about the spiritual life, regardless of your religious perspective. As St Thomas Aquinas once said, all truth comes from God. Although I am a Christian, I felt deeply enriched by this book on many levels. It opened up my awareness of different approaches to, well, "Awareness" of the many things which Arise within all of us- fears, attachments and aversions, etc., and on learning to Let Go of these things and find peace and joy extending to all areas of our life.
Sometimes it also helps to see our own faith from a different perspective; to look at things from a different lense. It helped me understand better many of this things from the mystical and esoteric teachings from Scripture and the Church Fathers, Mystics and Saints that I had not really understood before.
http://www.amazon.com/Path-Heart-Through-Promises-Spiritual/dp/0553372114/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1278588047&sr=8-1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
