The difficulty I perceive, already, is twofold:
One problem occurs when we insist on duality. Thomas, I do respect your
choice to cling to it, but I disagree that this is the fundamental nature of things. As an esoteric Christian, or an esotericist
of any background, I believe that we create more trouble than we solve by insisting on our
separation or
inferiority to God.
I will not disagree with the statement that God represents a
Higher Order (or degree) of Perfection than Man. But both emerge from the same Ultimate Ground of Being, or
Godhead. If you wish to say, ahhh, but GOD - in the Judaeo-Christian sense of that word, is a
prior emanation of the Godhead, and thus,
as this God's Creation, WE are inferior, then fine, you run with that. But now you're just splitting hairs. Besides, it's the Catholics that insist moreso on a
hierarchy of being than Protestants to begin with! You can't have it both ways.
My approach to Liberal Christianity is not different than my approach to esotericism, or to
esoteric Christianity. We
each and every one of us feel and can acknowledge a
separation from, or a
lack of God ... in our lives. But we can
also, each and every one of us,
AFFIRM the Presence of God within us - once we get past the conditioning, as well as the limitations & barriers which
life in the world just naturally places upon us.
Now on this latter point, I will stand FIRM, just as firmly as Mr. Schuon. It may well be that
you do not wish to acknowledge this Divine Presence, or that you have been taught that it does not exist. It may be that in coming to understand humility, somewhere along the lines, you have decided - with the fundamentalist - that we are the
"scum of the earth," and that our
lowly, fallen state does not allow us to make such assertions. To this, I say
hogwash.
Christ did not go around telling people they were ****. In fact, He told them JUST THE OPPOSITE. Get out from behind hangups with language and phraseology, and you will have to acknowledge this. Christ told us that
if our Heavenly Father cares so much for the humble creatures of the Earth, who do not have to beg and grovel and belittle themselves to gain God's approval & favor ... then HOW MUCH MORE God must care for us, know our needs, and provide for them.
The difficulty, in point #1, to summarize ...
is that we confuse humility with belittlement of self, and with the insistence - which I have seen time & again - that our worth is NOTHING without God. I understand the sentiment, I can even assert the
kernel of truth at the heart of this idea, by referencing Christ's statement that "It is harder for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven than for a camel to bend down and enter by that doorway yonder." But this does NOT mean that people, or the value of the individual, is
nil. This must be recognized and acknowledged.
So what do we need God for? Well, gee, maybe to
complete the very Journey He sent us on to begin with?
Maybe to show, and to teach - and to reveal - more to us about our spiritual nature,
which is not fundamentally different or other than His? If you insist on arguing this point, then might I gently suggest that you will remain better off as a Catholic, or as a Christian who prefers the
old ways?
Might I say AGAIN, that whether one embraces openly the
Mystic Path, or simply wants to open to a new (or RENEWED) understanding of Deity, that the FOCUS should be on Unity, on Togetherness, on Cooperation, and ultimately on
Oneness of Purpose, which leads us closer and closer to
Oneness of Being?
Christ was able to speak of duality, and did so often, because He
KNEW that the masses of people, the common man (and woman), would not grasp such a simple (and truthful) statement as,
At Heart, you and God are ONE. So He taught them the humility, the positivity of attitude, and the Goodwill toward others which was
necessary, and which - if practiced -
would lead them to a deepening understanding of their fundamental connectedness with each other, and with all beings. He worked with the mentality of the people as it existed, and did not ask them to see what they could not.
But when Christ instructed those who were prepared for such an understanding, He
did not hesitate to tell them, in plain terms, that "
He and God were ONE." And after instructing them in the subtleties and precise manner in which this was true, He also did not hesitate to remind them, sternly but gently, that to behold his very Presence among them (even bodily, though this was the
outermost manifestation, of course) - WAS to "see" the Father. To literalized His statement is foolish. But to say that He meant He was
LIKE the Father is equally foolish. He WAS the Father, even as
I am the Father, and also as
YOU are.
Again, one need not be a Mystic, or a philosopher, to grasp this. And it is no mind game, no sophistry, no wishful thinking. It
IS, unfortunately, still beyond the grasp of a many a man who refuses to acknowledge the underlying
Synthesis, Unity, or
ONEness of all of Creation. How, I will put to you, can you and I, who cannot yet even begin to
fathom the Mystery of Identity (and thus, of Oneness), say such a thing as,
"There are DEGREES of Oneness!" (?)
You know, I don't know, but I find it difficult to put it into words any better. NOT because I sit here, day in and day out - or even regularly - and
experience that Oneness in its deeper sense. No, I don't. I would like to, but I have known for some time that
even if I were seeking the selfish reward of a personal Nirvana, I would still be a long way from attaining it. If my goal is proceed as I think I am truly
meant to, according to God's Plan, then I will accept from early on ... that my goal is NOT to enter into a personal Nirvana, for ages upon ages, only to find myself emerging -
by Law - in some far-distant cycle, to COMPLETE the Journey which I long ago began. And so I walk a different path.
I apologize for my typical cumbersome manner of expression, as I think I've already made my point. The assertion is not that, "
We are already all God, and we don't need to do a thing." It is not,
"Because our true and essential Self is One in Being with the very Self of God, no lesser-self-improvement is required." And this is what I feel you are struggling with, Thomas. The difficulty is in trying to link an ontology to an ethics, a simple metaphysical truth ... to a resultant, or concomitant ETHICS, and it won't work.
Of
course it won't work, and that's my 2nd point. IF we choose, as Liberal Christians - or as people who are more comfortable with that label than
conventional Christians - to assert the Universal Presence of God, and of the Christ Consciousness, then we are (or at least
I am, in this case) simply saying that YES, even a ROCK has the Christ Potential. Some may not agree, but where they WILL most likely meet me face to face, heart to heart, and thought to thought, is with the assertion that
each and every one of my Brothers upon this Planet (and some will extend that to all of Cosmos) - ALL OF THEM have the same potential to follow the spiritual Path,
AND to attain the Goal that has been set before all of us.
Now there are folks who aren't fully comfortable saying,
"I will become a Christ," but I would say that many who find an appeal in
Liberal Christianity are at least comfortable with the notion,
"I DO wish to become Christlike, and in THAT sense, yes - to become the VERY Christ Who showed Himself to Humanity 2000 years ago." Such a statement
does not mean that one wishes to become Jesus of Nazareth, for at best, we might become LIKE him. But insomuch as Jesus unquestionably
demonstrated to and for us, the LOVE of God in
perfect action, I cannot fathom the reasoning of the person (Christian or otherwise) who would desire to similarly come to know, feel, understand, embrace,
and demonstrate this same LOVE -
OH, but EXCEPT that we must always "keep our place" and never actually let go of the distinction between self and the Divine.
So - a compromise. Some people may see the point you have made, and they may agree with the semantics - and on one level, that's all I feel it is. Or, they may be quite content to toss out
vicarious atonement, and such notions as
original sin, but they will shy away from the statement,
"I am a Divine Being, a Son of God as was Christ Jesus ... and the Purpose of my life here is to manifest God's Plan, in my own being, in the world, and for the benefit of others around me." This is messy, but it comes close to capturing what I'm getting at. It
does not work for some, but for others, it does. To a Catholic, perhaps there are difficulties. And that's why I think some people
are just better off as Catholics, because that's what resonates more.
I haven't really been able to phrase my 2nd point, but it kind of boils down to a feeling that you're straw-man-ing Wil's point about our relationship with Deity. And this, I've already said. To assert, or
affirm, our Oneness or Unity with God, with Christ, and with the Spirit that pervades all of manifestation (in its Higher Aspects), is NOT to even
suggest that
we don't have our work cut out for us, to use a popular expression. And Thomas, that's what I feel you're trying to make this sound like!
You make it sound like, if God already forgives us, then we are somehow justified in sin, or in transgressing the Law! That's absurd! The point is, there's no one sitting there saying, tsk task, nor is Santa Claus wearing a great big frown, or scowl, because we nicked the chewing gum in the grocery store. The child who does that,
is facing the very real Presence of
his own conscience. And for some, that conscience is a
living Presence - it is the God within.
Let us allow a person to understand or interpret that situation as they will, but can we at least get away from the notion that
God sits there day in and day out, just LOOKING for negative human behavior to disapprove of, so He can insist on a prayer for forgiveness, after which we will of course be required to say five Hail Marys and twelve Our Fathers?
I think that many a liberal Christian will be quite ready to abandon the Satan Claus, oops, I mean Santa Claus God, and turn, instead, to embrace the idea of a Being
who is not limited to corporeal form -
even to that which comes about through our very Creative imaginations!
I have said it, and I will say it again, the Aaronic Blessing, if we will study its words and meaning carefully, will tell us
volumes about the true `Face' of the Lord our God -
in whose image we were all Created. Moses Himself, did not even SEE or behold this God,
for He was not at that time ready, or able. And so he saw - a burning bush!
We concretize, we literalize, and we have created a monster, a tyrant. That beast, who rules by terror and by fear, insists that we bow down, and he
makes no apology for the insistence
that we worship him!!!
That is not God, THAT is not God.
But IF we believe in Christ, and in Christ Jesus, and in the God of Love Whom and which He taught, then yes, I agree -
certain things will gradually, eventually, though inevitably, follow. And this has to do with our actions, but unfortunately, it will also have to do with those who can
recognize our belief, who can reason out what this will come to mean, and who will (only naturally) find a way to exploit it. With these latter types, I wish to have no dealing. And I only do, because it is my karma, this is the world, and here is where I find myself. If I could snap my fingers, and free all people from this tyranny, I would
like to think ... that I would do so. But then, what would they learn? What would we gain?
Motive counts, but it does not excuse tyranny. Karma is inexorable,
none of us can bypass responsibility. We can only pretend we don't see. Karma sees. And this has
nothing to do with the
misconception of a god that punishes, Karma-Nemesis. Such a being has no place in Christianity, or at least, not if Christianity makes itself out to be a religion of Love. Let it ALSO be a religion of responsibility, including a genuine concern for one's Brother, and an
interest in his welfare. Perhaps it's time to stop worrying about the state of each other's "immortal soul" - and think more about the well-being of the
mortal frame.
If we are drawn to the idea of a Liberal Christianity, might it not be the thought of the Christian Agape, the Love of Christ,
liberally given, which matters most. Surely nothing could be more important.
Namaskar,
andrew
