COSMIC CHRIST
“You have to begin somewhere and send down deep roots from that place. We have to go the whole way with Christ, and only then will we meet the cosmic Christ. Then we will no longer need to defend our frontiers so stubbornly, and we can see that truth can be found in the other great world religions too. I know that many people are not ready for this yet, and I have to admit that I myself took a very long time to get to this point. But why else would Jesus say so often: Don’t be afraid, don’t be afraid! A large percentage of Christians are still afraid, as if God needed us to defend Gods’ work. I believe that in reality we don’t all love the Christ who is the Alpha and Omega of history; instead we love the little Jesus whom we can stick in our pockets.”
Fr. Richard Rohr, O.F.M. Simplicity: The Freedom of Letting Go. 1991.
COMMENT
Religion is dangerous in its concrete particulars. A world filled with people defending their boundaries rather than seeking their centers makes inevitable all manner of conflict. Every belief system, theistic or otherwise, has its own counterpart to the pocket-sized Jesus.
CS
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Friday, February 9, 2007
I can't tell you but I know it's mine
MYSTERY
“The feeling of [mysterium termendum] may at times come sweeping like a gentle tide, pervading the mind with a tranquil mood of deepest worship. It may pass over into a more set and lasting attitude of the soul, continuing, as it were, thrillingly vibrant and resonant, until at last it dies away and the soul resumes its ‘profane’, non-religious mood of everyday experience. It may burst in sudden eruption up from the depths of the soul with spasms and convulsions, or lead to the strangest excitement, to intoxicated frenzy, to transport, and to ecstasy. It has its wild and demonic forms and can sink to an almost grisly horror and shuddering. It has its crude, barbaric antecedents and early manifestations, and again it may be developed into something beautiful and pure and glorious. It may become the hushed, trembling, and speechless humility of the creature in the presence of—whom or what? In the presence of that which is a mystery inexpressible and above all creatures.”
Rudolf Otto. The Idea of the Holy. 1923.
COMMENT
The conjunction of the rational and non-rational completes a context. The rational side of religion, the theological system, provides the framework upon which to hang the non-rational Holy (or is it the other way around?). Further along in the text, Otto provides a musical analogy for this essential interrelationship. A poem, in this case the lyrics, represents the rational expression of some emotion while the music, more abstract by definition, evokes a mood that defies explication. Together they form something closer to a whole, but the extent to which that whole is apprehended and the relative weights of the two elements—rational and non-rational—differ with each person depend directly upon the individual’s progress along the path toward full maturity—spiritual maturity? philosophical maturity? The path, in any case, cannot be defined by authority whose own growth is arrested at the stage of pre-adolescent literalism.
CS
“The feeling of [mysterium termendum] may at times come sweeping like a gentle tide, pervading the mind with a tranquil mood of deepest worship. It may pass over into a more set and lasting attitude of the soul, continuing, as it were, thrillingly vibrant and resonant, until at last it dies away and the soul resumes its ‘profane’, non-religious mood of everyday experience. It may burst in sudden eruption up from the depths of the soul with spasms and convulsions, or lead to the strangest excitement, to intoxicated frenzy, to transport, and to ecstasy. It has its wild and demonic forms and can sink to an almost grisly horror and shuddering. It has its crude, barbaric antecedents and early manifestations, and again it may be developed into something beautiful and pure and glorious. It may become the hushed, trembling, and speechless humility of the creature in the presence of—whom or what? In the presence of that which is a mystery inexpressible and above all creatures.”
Rudolf Otto. The Idea of the Holy. 1923.
COMMENT
The conjunction of the rational and non-rational completes a context. The rational side of religion, the theological system, provides the framework upon which to hang the non-rational Holy (or is it the other way around?). Further along in the text, Otto provides a musical analogy for this essential interrelationship. A poem, in this case the lyrics, represents the rational expression of some emotion while the music, more abstract by definition, evokes a mood that defies explication. Together they form something closer to a whole, but the extent to which that whole is apprehended and the relative weights of the two elements—rational and non-rational—differ with each person depend directly upon the individual’s progress along the path toward full maturity—spiritual maturity? philosophical maturity? The path, in any case, cannot be defined by authority whose own growth is arrested at the stage of pre-adolescent literalism.
CS
Thursday, February 8, 2007
Morality from Within
A PRAGMATIC IDEA OF SAINTLINESS
“The collective name for the ripe fruits of religion in a character is Saintliness. The saintly character is the character for which spiritual emotions are the habitual centre of the personal energy; and there is a certain composite photograph of universal saintliness, the same in all religions, of which the feature can easily be traced.
1. A feeling of being in a wider life than that of this world’s selfish little interests; and a conviction, not merely intellectual, but as it were sensible, of the existence of an Ideal Power. . . .
2. A sense of the friendly continuity of the ideal power with our own life, and a willing self-surrender to this control.
3. An immense elation and freedom, as the outline of the confining selfhood melt down.
4. A shifting of the emotional centre toward loving and harmonious affections, towards ‘yes, yes,’ and away from ‘no,’ where the claims of the non-ego are concerns.”
William James. The Varieties of Religious Experience. 1902.
OBSERVATION
James goes on to note the practical indistinguishability of the lives of saints, whether they go under the banner of stoic, Christian, Buddhist or, presumably, Jewish, Sufi, Hindu, Jain, animist, etc. He lists certain characteristics that set saints apart: asceticism, strength of soul, purity, and charity. Obviously, James is pointing us toward some universal here--not a prescribed life for all to follow, but a universal in the sense that the most tuned-in among us appear to embrace strikingly similar ways of living. Though all but a few fall well short of the holy state James describes, a lesson is clear for the masses as well: it’s how you live your life, not the liturgy or incantations your mouth, and how you live your life is the truest manifestation of your character and spiritual development.
CS
“The collective name for the ripe fruits of religion in a character is Saintliness. The saintly character is the character for which spiritual emotions are the habitual centre of the personal energy; and there is a certain composite photograph of universal saintliness, the same in all religions, of which the feature can easily be traced.
1. A feeling of being in a wider life than that of this world’s selfish little interests; and a conviction, not merely intellectual, but as it were sensible, of the existence of an Ideal Power. . . .
2. A sense of the friendly continuity of the ideal power with our own life, and a willing self-surrender to this control.
3. An immense elation and freedom, as the outline of the confining selfhood melt down.
4. A shifting of the emotional centre toward loving and harmonious affections, towards ‘yes, yes,’ and away from ‘no,’ where the claims of the non-ego are concerns.”
William James. The Varieties of Religious Experience. 1902.
OBSERVATION
James goes on to note the practical indistinguishability of the lives of saints, whether they go under the banner of stoic, Christian, Buddhist or, presumably, Jewish, Sufi, Hindu, Jain, animist, etc. He lists certain characteristics that set saints apart: asceticism, strength of soul, purity, and charity. Obviously, James is pointing us toward some universal here--not a prescribed life for all to follow, but a universal in the sense that the most tuned-in among us appear to embrace strikingly similar ways of living. Though all but a few fall well short of the holy state James describes, a lesson is clear for the masses as well: it’s how you live your life, not the liturgy or incantations your mouth, and how you live your life is the truest manifestation of your character and spiritual development.
CS
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
DEMOCRACY IS NOT THE ENEMY OF FAITH
CRYPTO-FASCISTS (CHRISTO-FASCISTS) AMONG US
“Democracy is not, as the Christo-fascists claim, the enemy of faith. Democracy keeps religious faith in the private sphere, ensuring that all believers have an equal measure of protection and practice mutual tolerance. Democracy sets no religious ideal. It simply ensures coexistence. It permits the individual to avoid simply being subsumed by the crowd—the chief goal of totalitarianism, which seeks to tell all citizens what to believe, how to behave and how to speak. The call to obliterate the public and the private wall that keeps faith the prerogative of the individual means the obliteration of democracy.”
Chris Hedges. American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America. 2006.
COMMENT
Where is the virtue in blind obedience to authority or adherence to any law that mandates religious or political orthodoxy? Where is the virtue and, finally, what is the point? If the Far Right ever manages to persuade the nation to ratify a constitutional amendment outlawing disrespect for the flag, the sense of virtue we feel when we stand and place our hands over our hearts will be nullified; when the flag passes, we will merely be complying with the law. We will no longer act out of genuine patriotism. Similarly, required adherence to a narrow range of religious and moral behavior would give rise to a culture in which outward conformity masks the truth of private thought. As the ultimate disintegration of the 20th Century’s totalitarian states shows, such a system is inherently unstable.
CS
“Democracy is not, as the Christo-fascists claim, the enemy of faith. Democracy keeps religious faith in the private sphere, ensuring that all believers have an equal measure of protection and practice mutual tolerance. Democracy sets no religious ideal. It simply ensures coexistence. It permits the individual to avoid simply being subsumed by the crowd—the chief goal of totalitarianism, which seeks to tell all citizens what to believe, how to behave and how to speak. The call to obliterate the public and the private wall that keeps faith the prerogative of the individual means the obliteration of democracy.”
Chris Hedges. American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America. 2006.
COMMENT
Where is the virtue in blind obedience to authority or adherence to any law that mandates religious or political orthodoxy? Where is the virtue and, finally, what is the point? If the Far Right ever manages to persuade the nation to ratify a constitutional amendment outlawing disrespect for the flag, the sense of virtue we feel when we stand and place our hands over our hearts will be nullified; when the flag passes, we will merely be complying with the law. We will no longer act out of genuine patriotism. Similarly, required adherence to a narrow range of religious and moral behavior would give rise to a culture in which outward conformity masks the truth of private thought. As the ultimate disintegration of the 20th Century’s totalitarian states shows, such a system is inherently unstable.
CS
Thursday, January 25, 2007
We Fall Short
HOW SHORT DO WE FALL?
“In every major city, the homeless sit hungry at the doorsteps of greatest wealth. Many of the children of privilege find their existence so unbearable that they seek self-destructive escape through drugs. We finance the maiming of children by various semisecret operatives in far-off countries in pursuit of goals no one can quite explain. Other societies in the modern world, to be sure, are just as bad, and some are a great deal worse—we should never lose sight of that. Still, measured by the standard of the gospel, we fall desperately short.”
William C. Placher. Unapologetic Theology. 1989
COMMENT
I do not do justice to Placher’s book, Unapologetic Theology: A Christian Voice in a Pluralistic Conversation, through this short quotation, which comes at the very end of a meticulously well-reasoned work of scholarship and insight. Nonetheless, his historical perspective and his prescience come through in that brief passage. Today a pluralistic conversation has become even more difficult. In this most religious of nations, why do we fail to live the message delivered by the one whose cross graces the skyline of every hamlet and metropolis? Does our inability to hold constructive conversations stem from our willful ignorance of the life and work of the Christ? Or are those still seeking to converse simply giving away the game? Both, I’d say. The intolerant consume the tolerant who, in the name of tolerance, allow intolerance to thrive.
CS
“In every major city, the homeless sit hungry at the doorsteps of greatest wealth. Many of the children of privilege find their existence so unbearable that they seek self-destructive escape through drugs. We finance the maiming of children by various semisecret operatives in far-off countries in pursuit of goals no one can quite explain. Other societies in the modern world, to be sure, are just as bad, and some are a great deal worse—we should never lose sight of that. Still, measured by the standard of the gospel, we fall desperately short.”
William C. Placher. Unapologetic Theology. 1989
COMMENT
I do not do justice to Placher’s book, Unapologetic Theology: A Christian Voice in a Pluralistic Conversation, through this short quotation, which comes at the very end of a meticulously well-reasoned work of scholarship and insight. Nonetheless, his historical perspective and his prescience come through in that brief passage. Today a pluralistic conversation has become even more difficult. In this most religious of nations, why do we fail to live the message delivered by the one whose cross graces the skyline of every hamlet and metropolis? Does our inability to hold constructive conversations stem from our willful ignorance of the life and work of the Christ? Or are those still seeking to converse simply giving away the game? Both, I’d say. The intolerant consume the tolerant who, in the name of tolerance, allow intolerance to thrive.
CS
Thursday, January 11, 2007
A Lectionary Reading and an Early Word on Religious Freedom
CANTICLE READING FOR EPIPHANY FROM THE KING JAMES VERSION OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES
Psalm 72:1-7
1 Give the king your justice, O God, and your righteousness to a king’s son.
2 May he judge your people with righteousness, and your poor with justice.
3 May the mountains yield prosperity for the people, and the hills, in righteousness.
4 May he defend the cause of the poor of the people, give deliverance to the needy, and crush the oppressor.
5 May he live while the sun endures, and as long as the moon, throughout all generations.
6 May he be like rain that falls on the mown grass, like showers that water the earth.
7 In his days may righteousness flourish and peace abound, until the moon is no more.
A BAPTIST LEADER’S PROPOSAL TO KING JAMES I OF ENGLAND
"If the King's people be obedient and true subjects, obeying all humane lawes made by the King, our Lord the King can require no more: for men’s religion to God is betwixt God and themselves; the King shall not answer for it, neither may the King be judge between God and man."
Thomas Helwys. A Short Declaration on the Mystery of Iniquity. 1612
OBSERVATIONS
Thomas Helwys, one of the founders of the Baptist movement in England, upon returning from exile in Holland sought to persuade King James of the benefits of religious tolerance. His gift to James of his freshly publish book A Short Declaration on the Mystery of Iniquity did not amuse the Keeper of the Faith. James answered by having Helwys imprisoned at Newgate, where he died four years later. Helwys no doubt understood the risk he undertook. In April of 1612, the year of Helwys’s return from Holland, English religious Separatist Edward Wightman had been burned at the stake for heresy. Apparently his example stirred popular sympathy, putting an end to the the Crown's use of such harsh measures for dealing with religions dissent.
The King James Version or Authorized Version of the Holy Bible was first published in 1611 and remains in use as the standard biblical text among many Christians, including many Baptists.
CS
Link to Amazon:
Psalm 72:1-7
1 Give the king your justice, O God, and your righteousness to a king’s son.
2 May he judge your people with righteousness, and your poor with justice.
3 May the mountains yield prosperity for the people, and the hills, in righteousness.
4 May he defend the cause of the poor of the people, give deliverance to the needy, and crush the oppressor.
5 May he live while the sun endures, and as long as the moon, throughout all generations.
6 May he be like rain that falls on the mown grass, like showers that water the earth.
7 In his days may righteousness flourish and peace abound, until the moon is no more.
A BAPTIST LEADER’S PROPOSAL TO KING JAMES I OF ENGLAND
"If the King's people be obedient and true subjects, obeying all humane lawes made by the King, our Lord the King can require no more: for men’s religion to God is betwixt God and themselves; the King shall not answer for it, neither may the King be judge between God and man."
Thomas Helwys. A Short Declaration on the Mystery of Iniquity. 1612
OBSERVATIONS
Thomas Helwys, one of the founders of the Baptist movement in England, upon returning from exile in Holland sought to persuade King James of the benefits of religious tolerance. His gift to James of his freshly publish book A Short Declaration on the Mystery of Iniquity did not amuse the Keeper of the Faith. James answered by having Helwys imprisoned at Newgate, where he died four years later. Helwys no doubt understood the risk he undertook. In April of 1612, the year of Helwys’s return from Holland, English religious Separatist Edward Wightman had been burned at the stake for heresy. Apparently his example stirred popular sympathy, putting an end to the the Crown's use of such harsh measures for dealing with religions dissent.
The King James Version or Authorized Version of the Holy Bible was first published in 1611 and remains in use as the standard biblical text among many Christians, including many Baptists.
CS
Link to Amazon:
Friday, January 5, 2007
Science, Religion, and Democracy
A FREETHINKER’S LOGIC
“The attack on science is a prime secularist issue not because religion and science are incompatible but because particular forms of religious belief—those that claim to have found the one true answer to the origins and ultimate purpose of human life—are incompatible not only with science but with democracy. Those who rely on the perfect hand of the Almighty for political guidance, whether on biomedical research or capital punishment, are really saying that such issues can never be a matter of imperfect human opinion. If the hand of the Almighty explains and rules the workings of nature, it can hardly fail to rule the workings of the American political system.”
Susan Jacoby. Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism. 2004*
COMMENT
In the depths of reflection unburdened by self-criticism, I often wonder how the true-believers among us—and here I refer to true believers of any persuasion—can manage to miss the mark on so many issues. In fact, it seems the case that on every issue of consequence do the true believers get it wrong. Well, Jacoby gives us a hint here, doesn’t she? I would move a step beyond her focus on fundamentalist Christianity and assert that adherence to any literalist system will lead to authoritarian political views and a skewed scientific method designed to support the agenda of the state.
CS
* Link to Amazon:
“The attack on science is a prime secularist issue not because religion and science are incompatible but because particular forms of religious belief—those that claim to have found the one true answer to the origins and ultimate purpose of human life—are incompatible not only with science but with democracy. Those who rely on the perfect hand of the Almighty for political guidance, whether on biomedical research or capital punishment, are really saying that such issues can never be a matter of imperfect human opinion. If the hand of the Almighty explains and rules the workings of nature, it can hardly fail to rule the workings of the American political system.”
Susan Jacoby. Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism. 2004*
COMMENT
In the depths of reflection unburdened by self-criticism, I often wonder how the true-believers among us—and here I refer to true believers of any persuasion—can manage to miss the mark on so many issues. In fact, it seems the case that on every issue of consequence do the true believers get it wrong. Well, Jacoby gives us a hint here, doesn’t she? I would move a step beyond her focus on fundamentalist Christianity and assert that adherence to any literalist system will lead to authoritarian political views and a skewed scientific method designed to support the agenda of the state.
CS
* Link to Amazon:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)