I've come to some conclusions and started asking other questions in my quest. For those who may not know me, these comment come from someone who was very involved in institutional Christianity and has chosen to compare the religion I was raised with to others in an open-minded fashion. These are the semi-scientific, horrifically random thoughts and experiences, nothing more.... It's okay to not agree.
Can you say you are free when things, or people make you angry, miserable, or irritated?
Can you say you are free when situations make you depressed?
Can you say you are free when you crave, desire and obsess about what you do not have?
I spent a large part of my adult life being told Jesus had set me free. Yet, in institutional religion I experienced very little actual freedom. I wonder if institutional religion has a right definition of freedom (that could be debated), but it's ecclesiastical structures (Catholic or Protestant), and it's practical theology, cause their attendees to substitute rules, obligations and trust in hierarchy for true freedom?
True freedom is in the mind. As long as we are a slave to our anxieties and fears, as long as we allow ourselves to be manipulated by people and objects of power, as long as we are afraid in any way to question the structures and people we give authority to, as long as we are unaware that these subtle and not-so-subtle manipulations take place, we are a slave.
Jesus said, "The thief does not come except to steal and to kill and to destroy. I have come so that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly." Joh 10:10
May I just say, that I have found VERY FEW EXAMPLES of anyone in institutional Christianity that I would consider a good example of this verse.
For all of the crusades and preaching, for all of the Sacraments partaken, for all of the hymns sung, for all of the money spent, Christians, as a whole, do not seem to be morally or spiritually superior to adherents of any other religion, or people of no religion at all. In fact, they appear to be far less spiritually advanced then adherents to other religions depending on the criteria (Buddhism or Jainism comes to mind). I have to ask myself why?
Why is it that the people that have accepted the freedom of Christ choose to live in such small ideological boxes? Why is that any criticism of a denomination, or a particular religion is met with such hateful resistance from people that should be full of peace, joy and love? If, after all, they have a benefit that Non-Christians don't have: the One True God living inside of them.
I have to conclude that:
1. Either the forms of Western Christianity that I've been exposed to simply are inadequate to help people live in true freedom.
2. The concept of "Christ within" is simply false. After all if Christ really lived within His people, should not at least a majority of the members live freely, with joy, peace and love?
3. Perhaps Western Christianity has completely misunderstood what Jesus was talking about and has evolved into something it was never intended to be.
4. All of the above?
5. Other reasons I have mentioned. Feel free to enlighten me....
Paul said, "Christ has set us free so that we may enjoy the benefits of freedom. So keep on standing firm in it, and stop attaching yourselves to the yoke of slavery again." Gal 5:1
What are the benefits? What does it mean to stand firm in freedom? What is the yoke of slavery that people are ATTACHING themselves to? I can say that this verse means something entirely different to me now then it did when I was immersed in institutional Christianity.
Why would people who have been granted FREEDOM by God allow themselves to be slaves to religious concepts, hierarchies and habits? In my personal experience it is a multifaceted answer. I was ignorant. I was lazy. I was deluded. I lacked a concept of personal responsibility for my own spiritual life. I wanted the easy way out. I was willing to let the pastor, priest, tradition, community tell me what was best for me spiritually, whether or not it actually worked for me. I put all my eggs in my tradition's "spiritual basket" and then defended it to the hilt when someone questions it. When I was confronted by the kind of people like me, who ask the hard questions, I either got angry, or blew them off as people who were lost, or did not understand. I did these things because I had self-identified myself with that particular tradition. I was a slave to a concept that existed only in my mind.
So, what is true freedom and are there beliefs or practices that help us attain it? Or, do we already have it and are deluded into thinking we are not free? Is freedom in the mind or external? I don't know....maybe I'll post more later....
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
51 comments:
Just curious, if you would not mind my asking, which particular tradition/denomination within Christianity does your background come from?
I have scanned through your points and certainly see validity in most of them. As I have an engagement, I am going to come back later when I can give it a more faithful reading and respectfully address some of your points, with your permission of course.
If you read through my blog, you will see that I am just as quick, probably more so, to criticize those supposedly adhering to my particular faith than nonbeliever and those of other faiths. I think we definitely can find some common ground.
Great post Roger. It amazes me that I've lived with you all these years and have experienced a lot of life with you that you are so on target at explaining what you've learned. Thank you.
I love this: "Why would people who have been granted FREEDOM by God allow themselves to be slaves to religious concepts, hierarchies and habits? " That is the best question I've heard in a long time. Freedom looks wonderful on you...
Love ya!
That's funny, Trish. I agree that Roger has the ability to articulate where he is on his journey pretty well and the exact same statement stuck out to me...but I think for a different reason.
"Why would people who have been granted FREEDOM by God allow themselves to be slaves to religious concepts, hierarchies and habits? "
First of all, this is a loaded question in that it is more of an opinion (with pre-conceptions built-in) that is stated in the form of a question. You aren't asking to acquire new information about religious concepts, hierarchies and habits, you are condemning those as choosing slavery over freedom.
Before I comment, would you say that's a fair assessment?
"cause their attendees to substitute rules, obligations and trust in hierarchy for true freedom?"
I would not say that all ecclesiastical structures cause this to occur, rather I find that people who are already insecure in their own belief overemphasize structures and doctrines and apply them in a legalistic way. I would agree with you, though, that many religious institutions espouse a legalistic sort of faith whether it is with regards to the Bible (which is supposed to be a work of literature) or whatnot.
"In fact, they appear to be far less spiritually advanced then adherents to other religions..."
I would attribute this to Western culture having become spiritually lethargic in wake of the Enlightenment. Like I said, being a Christian does not imply perceived perfection. If Christians seem less spiritually advanced, it is because they are failing to implement the spiritual principles of the faith. There are plenty of Christians throughout history who have experienced great spiritual advancement, like John Paul II, Theresa of Avila, John of the Cross, Ignatius Loyola, Mother Theresa, John of the Cross, Thomas Merton, and Faustina Kowalska, among many others, for example.
"they have a benefit that Non-Christians don't have: the One True God living inside of them."
Not true. The whole of the human family has "the One True God" living within. I can see Christ within a Buddhist, for example, just as much as I can see him inside of a Christian.
"After all if Christ really lived within His people, should not at least a majority of the members live freely, with joy, peace and love?"
Only if they actually followed his teachings faithfully. Sadly, this is usually not the case and as I have said above, we believe Christ to live within any non-Christian just as much as within any Christian.
"What does it mean to stand firm in freedom?"
The definition of freedom, from a Catholic perspective, is having the ability to choose what is right, true, and just (i.e. choosing love).
"I was a slave to a concept that existed only in my mind."
That is the problem with many so-called believers. The concept exists only in the mind. Unless it exists also in the heart, it is useless.
"So, what is true freedom and are there beliefs or practices that help us attain it? Or, do we already have it and are deluded into thinking we are not free?"
We are all free in that we have the ability to choose love. Freedom implies responsibility. Unfortunately, many people fail to recognize this responsibility. That which enslaves us is that which keeps us from living a life full of love and inner peace. Viewing religion in a legalistic way (fundamentalism) usually does inhibit true freedom, yet one can adhere to an institutional religion and not interpret things so literally and legalistically. All religion needs to be open to adaptation and change in the way it perceives itself and the world around it. The religion I adhere to declares that the "Truth will set you free." How do you define truth? I know we believe truth to be present in just about every religion or spirituality. So, that search for truth and inner peace can take one anywhere from organized religion to unorganized religion to Islam to Buddhism to Hinduism to wherever.
Pax.
May I say that I am guilty of picking other people's statements apart as mine are being done. I tend to think this is similar to what we've done to the Bible: systematically pick apart a text in minute detail, not totally understanding the context, and forgetting about the big picture. But that's another post...
Bob,
All of my rantings are my opinions with preconceptions built in, how can it be otherwise?
No, I don't need any more information about information about religious concepts, hierarchies and habits. ;-) No, I am not "condemning" anyone. Just stating what I see, and have experienced. I am asking myself that question as much as anyone else.
Do you take it as condemnation?
Bill,
So many of your comments I'd like to take deeper, I just don't have time at the moment. Maybe later...
If the definition of freedom is "having the ability to choose what is right, true, and just (i.e. choosing love)" what is it that keeps us from choosing love?
I won't compete with Bill here. He seems to have a lot of questions. But perhaps condemning is the wrong word. Just seems like there is a false dichotomy set up here. One that sets freedom against religious hierarchies, habits, and concepts.
I guess I've found elements of those hierarchies, habits, and concepts that are helpful for day-to-day practice and growth. For guidance in "the ability to choose what is right, true, and just". And in the "constraint" of their forms is great freedom.
(A parallel--marriage being a "constraint" of relationship within which we find greater or deeper freedom than can be experienced in "unconstrained" relationships.)
Don't worry, Roger. I understand the time constraints. Fact is, I spend way too much time on Blogger when I should be doing other things.
I am sorry if you feel as though I am picking apart your post. If you feel as though I am taking anything out of context, I beg you to please let me know as that is the last thing I want to do.
I agree with you on the Bible thing. Not only is it important to understand the textual context, but the culture and historical contexts as well.
"what is it that keeps us from choosing love?"
Our narcissistic tendencies. Also, our misguided attempts at filling what I call the "void of longing". Instead of further lengthening this comment to explain this concept, I will just direct you to read a post I wrote by that name if it at all interests you.
Pax.
Bob, I may have set up a false dichotomy. I'm no logician.
If you believe that the "constraints" you submit yourself to help you be a loving, peaceful person, who am I to argue? I am not sure that, as a whole, I could say that those constraints we are speaking of seem to produce more loving, peaceful people though. I've been in to many church leadership meetings...
I am not saying that no "constraint" can be beneficial. Not all spiritual practices are created equal, not all religions are created equal for that matter, and not all people are the same.
You said that you found "elements" of the constraints helpful. If I was in your religion, which elements are helpful and which are not? Who chooses if they become "required" elements or "optional" elements? And, what happens if I disagree with that the "element" is helpful?
The question for me is: Does that practice or constraint cause people to be more loving, aware, conscious, patient etc.(ie free)? I know what my experience is, and I've posted some of what I see to support it. Ultimately, each individual will have to answer that for themself.
I've found that if a person identifies themself with a particular religion, it puts them in a position to defend that religion, because if someone criticizes the religion, it feels like the person is being criticized. While that is not the case. So that person is, more or less a slave to a concept that they have attached their identity to. Hope that makes sense...
By the way, I've read through posts from throughout the history of your blog. Let me just say, given your prior religious background and experiences, I can completely understand your current disdain for organized religion.
Also, I would not necessarily say that a person attaches a concept of religion to their identity. I am Catholic, not by choice, but because, to me, it offers the best answers the the mysteries of the universe and the problem of human suffering. A past mystical experience also is reason for my Catholicism. I do not care if people do not see the same truth in Catholicism as I see it. Not everyone is meant to a Christian. Because Catholicism speaks to my experience as a human being, an attack on it is equivalent to an attack and invalidation of my own experience as a human being.
I am going to hold off on the comments for now as I do not want to overwhelm you. Haha.
Pax.
Bill, I appreciate you taking interest. Hopefully you have some context in which to place these comments and they don't see totally random. Although I can be just as random as as the next person....
You said: "Because Catholicism speaks to my experience as a human being, an attack on it is equivalent to an attack and invalidation of my own experience as a human being."
Wouldn't it be the case then, that you attached your identity (your concept of self) to Catholicism or you would not take a critique of the institution personally? It's alright if that is what you've done, so long as you aware of it. I would venture to guess there are lots of other attachments we have of which we are not aware...all I am saying is that once you are aware, you have a choice.
Could it also be the case that you have limited future possible mystical experiences to the realm of Catholicism? And perhaps even greater mystical experiences could be found in other religions and practices?
I know that we would disagree with the role of the Bible but I Think that you are not understadning what the Bible's definition of freedom is.
Simply it is the forgiveness of sins. There are no promises of anything else except by partial and incomplete readings of passages.
For example Romans 8 is often used by evangelicals to mean the if you are in Christ you will be free from SINNING. And that seems to be the expectation that you have.
I am not free from sinning. Rather because of the Righteous Life of Christ and then the Work of Christ on the Cross I am free from the consequences my daily sins.
The is true freedom and leads to true peace which MAY (not "for sure") help me be a better, nicer, person. But even if I am better I still am woefully short and dependent upon being covered by Christ's Life as my protection from the wrath of God agains all ungodliness.
You are FREE from God's Wrath only because of the Work of Christ.
This is what Luther was preaching.
good stuff Roger. keep pursuing the new places of freedom.
The Christian religion has often taken the liberating message of Jesus and locked it up in law....biblical principles, rules, moral codes etc. etc. etc. some of the very things he came to set us free from.
I'd love to get together sometime soon over a beer of coffee and chat.
Hey Roger,
Definitely agree that if one self-identifies with a certain religion or religious practice or style of worship or form of prayer or recipe for chili or whatever, they will run the risk of becoming defensive when that thing is criticized or ridiculed.
It's funny though. I told Amy that "I can't believe I'm defending the Catholic church on Roger's blog." I'm not Catholic but I am sensitive to the abuse Catholics receive at the hands of the media and general public. It is an easy target since it is so prominent. I'm not an evangelical but I find myself reveling when evangelical leaders fall. I watch myself "grab the torches and join the mob" when evangelical straw-men are being set up and burned down.
I say that to say this: over the last four years I've spent my time trying to understand various religious practices on their own terms and accept them as providing "freedom" for those who find freedom in them. I am disturbed when I encounter the root of my own bitterness that has dug deep into my heart about the IC. And I am disturbed when I see it in others.
There are true and false teachers in all traditions. Hypocritical and devoted followers in all. There is no "right" way to follow the One who pursues us.
That more than anything has caused me to be "more free to love".
Thanks for all the sharing folks, fun stuff! I love to think this stuff through with others....it's more fun to actually live it out though.
Bob, I really am not bitter at all, though I can see how it may appear so, and bitterness certainly has been part of the process. I am just thinking out loud about some of the things I'm experiencing and seeing.
I will continue to point out hypocrisy when I see it though. Whether it be in government, religion, philosophy, business etc. That is not bitterness, it is just being aware and conscious and truthful. I'm sure there are other people on a similar journey and seeing the same of the things I see, so I share it.
I have no criticism toward Catholicism that I don't have for any of the other forms of organized religion that I've encountered. However Catholicism has done enough to bring on the criticism in my opinion. If you look a few post earlier I posted when the monks decided to go MMA in the Church of the Sepulcher. I'm nothing if not an equal opportunity criticizer! ;-)
If you agree that attachment as discussed earlier can lead to defensiveness as I wrote earlier let me ask: What is it about our identity that we feel we need to defend it? What are we really defending?
Steve,
There is a lot I'd like to ask you, but I just go off work and I'm tired...
Let me just say, if that is all Christianity has to offer, I am not interested. It sounds like a "get to heaven free card" or a "don't get stomped on by God pass".
You said: "I am not free from sinning. Rather because of the Righteous Life of Christ and then the Work of Christ on the Cross I am free from the consequences my daily sins.
The is true freedom and leads to true peace which MAY (not "for sure") help me be a better, nicer, person. But even if I am better I still am woefully short and dependent upon being covered by Christ's Life as my protection from the wrath of God agains all ungodliness.
You are FREE from God's Wrath only because of the Work of Christ."
So let me get this right. Jesus lived his life, preached the Sermon on the Mount, and taught people how to live, but none of that really mattered because the only thing that really matter is our eternal salvation?
In a way you are really making my point: that organized Christianity is no better than any other belief system and in some ways maybe more damaging, in that it causes people to believe they are "sinners" with no hope of change until they die. That makes me sad for those stuck in that belief system (again, true freedom is in the mind, You are only as free as you think you are).
I don't want to get in a theological discussion, because it never ends well, and I'm am certainly no theologian. Let me just ask: How is that belief system working for you?
I see eternal life as quality not quantity.
Evangelicalism has focused mostly on quantity (that is dealing with the after-life) and that leaves people stuck just somewhat hanging on until the end thinking once they reach there they will be free. It misses the life of freedom that has been made available to us NOW...the very freedom that is the essence of the life Jesus opened up to us.
What is it about our identity that we feel we need to defend it? What are we really defending?
Ultimately our sense of self-worth.
(Our perceived self-worth.)
This sounds like a dumb questions, but, what is the "self" that you are defending?
Exactly.
Bob, with all due respect, I'm not sure you answered the question??
Not at all. I'm saying that exactly is the question.
What "self" do we defend when we take offense? What "self's" sensibilities are aroused when we perceive hypocrisy? What "self" is affirmed when we hear of others who perceive the same thing? What "self" is consulted when we measure the world around us? What "self" is created out of the collection of associations, preferences, and wounds we accumulate through our lives? What "self" is identified with the religion, religious practice, theological view, etc.?
And where in that "self" is room for the "other"? And not just those who think like us.
Roger, I think I understand some of your perspective. Hope you understand that I am not wanting to seem that I don’t care about your perspective etc.
R: Let me just say, if that is all Christianity has to offer, I am not interested. It sounds like a "get to heaven free card" or a "don't get stomped on by God pass".
A:
The main point that the Bible is written for is your eternal freedom. God stomped on Jesus and the bliss you are looking for is promised eternally, forever and ever, after you are raised from the dead. God only promises to be with you in this life through thick and thin. If that brings you peace now good. If not then you get eternal peace anyway. Paul in 2 Corinthians talks about his trials. So to think that the Bible is written for “peace now” really is not accurate.
---
R: You said: "I am not free from sinning. Rather because of the Righteous Life of Christ and then the Work of Christ on the Cross I am free from the consequences my daily sins.”
The is true freedom and leads to true peace which MAY (not "for sure") help me be a better, nicer, person. But even if I am better I still am woefully short and dependent upon being covered by Christ's Life as my protection from the wrath of God against all ungodliness.
You are FREE from God's Wrath only because of the Work of Christ."
So let me get this right. Jesus lived his life, preached the Sermon on the Mount, and taught people how to live, but none of that really mattered because the only thing that really matter is our eternal salvation?
A:
The whole of His teaching is to bring mankind to God by showing the “greatest need he has”. The greatest need he has is not some “peace” in this life. Rather it is the forgiveness of sins.
If someone does not see the forgiveness of sins as their greatest need then the Bible is not the book they should be reading or preaching from.
- - -
R:In a way you are really making my point: that organized Christianity is no better than any other belief system and in some ways maybe more damaging, in that it causes people to believe they are "sinners" with no hope of change until they die. That makes me sad for those stuck in that belief system (again, true freedom is in the mind, You are only as free as you think you are).
A:
Christianity offers the Savior instead of your own works, mediations, and such things to get the greatest peace ever promised.
--
R: I don't want to get in a theological discussion, because it never ends well, and I'm am certainly no theologian. Let me just ask: How is that belief system working for you?
A:
According to the scriptures its working fine for me. Sometimes it is rough but all I have is this promise.
Steve,
"If someone does not see the forgiveness of sins as their greatest need then the Bible is not the book they should be reading or preaching from."
If it is your interpretation, then I would wholeheartedly agree! I think there are other ways to interpret the text that are more helpful and healthy.
I can tell you from experience though, that the interpretation you're using lead me to hopelessness and depression. That's not an "abundant life", and it's not how Jesus lived his life either.
"...but all I have is this promise"...
I want to honest, but not hurtful here, please forgive me if I don't word this correctly.
Steve, this world is beautiful. It is diverse. It is complex. It is ever changing and dynamic. The universe is unfathomably large, and at the same time unfathomably small (thinking quantum physics here), and God made it all. You have so much more to live for, so much more to explore, so much more to share, so much more to live than just waiting for a promise when you die. Your next action will determine your future, choose wisely bro. In love...Roger
now Roger....that last part is just down right inspiring and certainly rings so true.
But I can live in less fear about "choosing wisely" than others because I know if I don't exactly choose wisely it will be alright in the end!
Steve,
I will be straightforward here, please don't read it as harsh.
Your whole worldview is based on fear. Having a religion based on "protection from the wrath of God", is based in fear.
If your interpretation of Scripture and overall view of life are working for you, that is great.
There are other ways to think about these issues (whether you want to deal with scripture, religion or philosophy) that produce far more positive results in the present. I am living proof.
I respectfully disagree with:
"Your next action will determine your future, choose wisely bro. In love...Roger" and "Your whole worldview is based on fear.
Having a religion based on "protection from the wrath of God", is based in fear".
We all don't choose wisely 100% of the time (maybe quite a bit less ;) ) and the Work of the Savior ensures that it will work out in the end anyway.
So how does that make my whole worldview based upon fear?
Back at ya... ;)
We aren't going to solve the World's problems in this little blog. While I've enjoyed this hearty discussion, it all comes back to working out our own salvation. Some of like being boxed in and told what to do, like a recipe. And others are free spirited and like the freedom to enjoy experience trying different spices and experimenting with the world around us.
Wars have started all through out time because of disagreements surrounding religion. I've learned that God is so much bigger than our disagreements and I wonder how it must be for Him to observe his children doing this to each other??? Do you not have a different relationship with your children?? Family members or friends?? (I'm speaking in individual terms here) Jesus said he did what he saw his father do. What was that?? Observe that he loved everyone, unconditionally, even the Pharisees whom he railed on for their religiosity. We can argue all day long, it won't change a thing. Gleam what you like and discard what you don't.. That's pretty much what we do with the Bible any way! We pick and choose what is right and worthy of "living." I see the Bible in a totally different perspective now. I see the love. Compassion.. I don't see all the rules and regulations any more because I believe that if Jesus said it was finished, it is. So why not enjoy the beauty and wonder that surrounds?? It's ok really. He created it just for us..... If that's the case, would he want us to be miserable? I don't think so...
"Paradigms power perception and perceptions power emotions. Most emotions are responses to perception---what you think is true about a given situation. If your perception is false, then your emotional response to it will be false too. So, check your perceptions, and beyond that check the truthfulness of your paradigms---what you believe. Just because you believe something firmly doesn't make is true. Be willing to reexamine what you believe. The more you live in the truth, the more your emotions emotions will help you see clearly." Paul Young
Steve,
Every "next action" we take determines our future. Buddhists call it karma. Good thoughts, emotions, and actions produce other good thoughts, emotions and actions in both you and others you influence. You have a CHOICE about how to believe and see the world differently. I hope you explore the alternatives, that's all that is meant.
If I were a king, and you came to me and said, " I need protection from this really powerful guy or he will kill me because I didn't, and still don't, make the right choices." I would say you were trying to get my protection based on fear. That is probably oversimplified. Luther probably says it more eloquently, but that is the essence that I get from you said so far.
You may not totally agree with that assessment, and that's okay. I won't argue the Bible with you. We see it very differently. I hope we can still discuss "general worldview".
Bob,
Sorry I didn't follow up sooner. I guess I need start a new thread. I'm getting lost...
Here is my point about the "self". The self is really an illusion. It is a sum total of all my perceptions, thoughts and feelings about myself. So, when I take offense about an attachement I've made to my "self". It is like an illusion taking offense that another illusion was criticized. (that sounds strange) The attachment has caused my "self" suffering. I'd rather be happy....
Sounds like "And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed."
Roger,
I have no problem with the banter back and forth. Kind of fun.
If you were a king... I'd be sucking up a lot more...
Actually the way I see it, and I think Luther would agree, is the man realizes that the King has already taken care of the whole problem at His own expense without needing to be asked to do it and before the man even knew there was a life threatening problem.
"Could it also be the case that you have limited future possible mystical experiences to the realm of Catholicism? And perhaps even greater mystical experiences could be found in other religions and practices?"
No. Mystical experiences in Catholicism are the same as in any other religion as I believe that all mystical experiences are reflections of the same Truth. Catholicism is not limited to just one form of mysticism, but to a plurality. Having studied Buddhism, you can see a great many parallels between Buddhist mystics and Catholic mystics. Also, I already know my own spirituality type as it is something I am constantly reevaluating. I fit in with the mold of "Theologian". As long as something continues to make sense to me and I arrive at an increased comprehension, it causes me to have a "mystical" experience involving the realization of the divine presence and splendor. That is just my personal type of mysticism, or spirituality. To be Catholic does not mean to subscribe to any particular spirituality as there are so many within that one religious tradition.
Bill,
You said, "Mystical experiences in Catholicism are the same as in any other religion as I believe that all mystical experiences are reflections of the same Truth."
Are you speaking from your experience?
I'm glad you are openminded. You are different from most Catholics that I know then. More power to ya!
Man we ought to get to 50 posts...
I'll see your pope and raise you Luther's Small Catachism...
"Are you speaking from your experience?"
Well, I have only had mystical experiences within the context of Catholicism, but I have read about both Christian and Buddhist mysticism. Take St. Theresa of Avila and her experience of the "divine ecstasy", for example. To me, the divine ecstasy is strikingly similar to some mystical experiences found in more "eastern" religious/spiritual traditions. In Christianity, we have contemplative monks who bear resemblance to Buddhist monks in their pursuit of enlightenment. In fact, the concept of enlightenment is very similar to the concept of union, or "intercourse", with the divine found in Christianity or the idea of Innate Knowledge found in Islam. To me, the mystical similarities present among all religious traditions is pretty clear.
Fair enough.
Here is my thought on the Christian mystics. I agree that there some similarities in the mystical experiences of religions. That is part of what started me on the this study/journey. However, my beef with the Christian mystics is that they really had to go outside of their own source (The Bible) to develop these techniques. So, I decided to go closer to the source of the techniques and looked into Buddhism. I found a philosophy that predated Christianity and contained within it a long history a wealth of knowledge using the techniques some of the Christian monks use. You have to admit, meditation and awareness are not the norm in the majority of institutional Christianity.
Bob,
I've thought it possible that the authors of Genesis decided to describe the concept of the "ego" as "sin"(the Buddhist concept, not Freud). It is interesting to me how the different religions try to address the same core human issues...
It's interesting but not surprising, eh? They all seek to answer the same questions and describe the same relationships. That's why we need to be very careful when we discount groups wholesale. Certainly there is one Truth but that doesn't render all variations and subsets of that Truth completely false. Dawn comes slowly to the land and some shadows remain longer than others. But the Light falls on all with equity, beauty and grace.
THIS IS THE POST THAT NEVER ENDS! LALA LALALALALA LALA... ;)
Actually Roger, I would have to disagree with you that mysticism is not the norm of institutional Christianity. How much Christian history have you studied? I am not trying to be insulting, just curious because in my experience, most Protestant churches completely ignore most of Christian history pre-Reformation. I mean, way back in the very early stages of the Church, you would have hermits go out alone into the desert, like St. Antony and the Desert Fathers, and have ascetic experiences. You will find that asceticism, mysticism, and monasticism developed fairly early on in Christianity. Some of it was inherited from Judaism. I would also argue that they had to go outside of their own source. You define that source to be the Bible, but prior to 1521, no Christian group regarded the Bible as the sole source of Christianity. In fact, Christian mysticism and monasticism developed way before the New Testament canon was even finalized in 393.
All that said, I would have to disagree with you that mysticism is outside the source of Christianity. Although, I am happy you have perhaps found some sort of mystic reality in Buddhism.
Bill,
"...prior to 1521, no Christian group regarded the Bible as the sole source of Christianity"
So, would I be right in saying, that if they didn't have the Bible, and the Bible itself doesn't speak to the practice anyway, the source of the practice would be extra-Biblical?
God is extra-Biblical.
I agree. Which is why I've taken this journey, and why I refuse to be stuffed in a particular denominational or religious ideology. But that statements opens a whole can of worms for those with a fundamentalist point of view...
"So, would I be right in saying, that if they didn't have the Bible, and the Bible itself doesn't speak to the practice anyway, the source of the practice would be extra-Biblical?"
Indeed, but you would be incorrect in stating that the practice lies outside the source of Christianity. Then again, mysticism might be in the Bible, but nothing I can think of off the top of my head nor anything I particularly care to look into right now.
"why I refuse to be stuffed in a particular denominational or religious ideology"
Does this mean you refuse all denominations/ideologies or that you refuse being stuffed into a single (i.e. particular) expression thereof?
There is a world of difference between these two.
Roger,
I noticed a statement you made earlier which I perhaps forgot to specifically address.
"You have to admit, meditation and awareness are not the norm in the majority of institutional Christianity."
Maybe with regards to the type of institutional Christianity you are used to, but Protestantism can not be considered a majority. Meditation and awareness are, and have been, quite present in both the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox traditions, I believe you will find. Not to mention, Judaism.
Bob,
Not sure how one could refuse all ideologies? But, I would say that I refuse to be hard-wired into any one ideology and definately not an any one sub-group of a particular religion. But, I am open to what any one has to say.
Bill,
I'm sure you know more about Catholic and Eastern Orthodox traditions than I. The few Catholic masses and one visit to an Orthodox church that I've made, never once was there any mention of meditation that resembled the practice and goal of the Buddhist tradition.
Post a Comment