tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post8149599228090255141..comments2024-02-19T10:15:55.380+00:00Comments on CAUTE — Making Footprints Not Blueprints: God as citizen and the kingdom of Heaven made a Republic - A New Year MeditationAndrew James Brownhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02693417061963197121noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-74180058056570917032012-01-06T17:55:51.553+00:002012-01-06T17:55:51.553+00:00My problem with much of the contemporary Unitarian...<em>My problem with much of the contemporary Unitarian movement (whether of the pluralist type or Christian) is that because there is nearly always involved a defence (sometimes open but mostly covert) of the reality of there being an underlying unity it really cannot cope with radical difference and consequently remains profoundly frightened about it </em><br /><br />Ha. Yes, it's taken me three or four years, but I have reached the same conclusion. If one says "articulate a Unitarian theology", no-one wants to do that for fear of excluding others. But by not discussing it, everyone assumes that they are occupying the middle ground of Unitarianism (whether they are Christian or pluralist) and they don't want to give up that position to the other lot. I have come across pluralists who felt threatened by Christians, and vice versa. <br /><br />I like the paradoxical view of interfaith dialogue that says that neither party should seek to convert the other, but each should be open to being coverted to the other person's point of view. I think our dialogues have something of that character, and we each respect the other person's perspective and experience.Yewtreehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02028699564003381058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-18649657894479843592012-01-06T17:14:29.826+00:002012-01-06T17:14:29.826+00:00Amen, Sister. And I think we can have this kind of...Amen, Sister. And I think we can have this kind of conversation here - and I miss them too - because we're recognising that we are not the same in so many ways - not least of all in terms of practice and so also in how the world shows up to us. But this recognition and possibility for helpful healing conversation between us doesn't admit of being described as (or reduced to) showing there is an underlying shared reality that can be called "Unitarianism" or any other kind of "-ism". My problem with much of the contemporary Unitarian movement (whether of the pluralist type or Christian) is that because there is nearly always involved a defence (sometimes open but mostly covert) of the reality of there being an underlying unity it really cannot cope with radical difference and consequently remains profoundly frightened about it - I'm sure that's why within it (especially within individual congregations) the arguments are so often very unpleasant indeed. However, the paradox is that if "it" could articulate the above then it would make no sense to call it "Unitarianism" any more.<br /><br />This is why I think religious liberals of all kinds have to stop thinking about being involved in (so-called) unifying structures (theological, philosophical, denominational) and need to concentrate instead on work which encourages the development of a secular society in which everyone learns better and better how to deal with difference and disagreement. Until the God of the philosophers (metaphysics) is well and truly said farewell to, I fear the splendid and healthy conversations such as the one we having will remain rare as hens' teeth.Andrew James Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02693417061963197121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-51397732757230799842012-01-06T16:09:09.237+00:002012-01-06T16:09:09.237+00:00it is more fruitful for me radically to reinterpre...<em>it is more fruitful for me radically to reinterpret the Christian tradition ... because I am myself a Christian who has been called into discipleship and ministry - that's the material I have to work with whether I like that or not.</em><br /><br />Of course :) And it wouldn't work for me as a spiritual practice because I am a witch and a priestess of the moon, and that is my calling. But your radical reinterpretation of Christianity is very healing for me, as mentioned before.Yewtreehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02028699564003381058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-74540271877432767902012-01-06T16:01:06.429+00:002012-01-06T16:01:06.429+00:00I really like your way of reinterpreting the Chris...I really like your way of reinterpreting the Christian tradition but it would not have worked for me, given my starting point. I had to leave Christianity alone for 25 years before I could open the box marked "toxic, do not open" which was buried at the bottom of my psyche.<br /><br />So I embarked on the project (started by others, of course) of luring back the gods (and not just the Homeric ones but others too). I agree there was a tendency towards monotheism (which is also apparent in Hinduism) though whether it's a syncretistic impulse in response to the emergence of monotheisms, or an impulse in polytheistic traditions, I don't know.<br /><br />For me, when a deity is invoked, something happens that is beyond the personalities of the invoker and invokee. What its precise metaphysical nature is, I couldn't say, but it is a profound experience.<br /><br />There's also a genuine experience of spirit of place to be had, which you have hinted at in previous posts, and whose particular character results, I think, from the social and spiritual interaction of people and landscape.<br /><br />(I missed having these conversations!)Yewtreehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02028699564003381058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-47236064608117287652012-01-06T15:52:02.889+00:002012-01-06T15:52:02.889+00:00I realise need to add an important point to my las...I realise need to add an important point to my last comment which is to admit that it is more fruitful for me radically to reinterpret the Christian tradition (rather than using Moby Dick or the pre-Homeric and Homeric gods) because I am myself a Christian who has been called into discipleship and ministry - that's the material I have to work with whether I like that or not.Andrew James Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02693417061963197121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-32569671101770235692012-01-06T15:29:27.622+00:002012-01-06T15:29:27.622+00:00Thanks for your extra comments.
Re: your point a...Thanks for your extra comments. <br /><br />Re: your point about the "pagan" deities is important. However, I think what you suggest is only true of the conception of the gods held in the Homeric and immediate post Homeric age. Once you get to Aeschylus (especially his Oresteia) you can see the (metaphysical) pull towards an underlying unity get very strong indeed such that it becomes in the Oresteia itself quasi-monotheistic. This conception feeds, of course, into monotheism proper in the Roman period. Dreyfus and Kelly speak interestingly about this in their book "All Things Shining." They want to lure back the Homeric gods in some way (or at least lure back the experience of the world that seems to be being pointed to when the gods are invoked). I certainly concur with that - the trouble is that you can't just revive them but need to look at how something similar might be possible with the material of our own age (back to Isaiah again). Dreyfus and Kelly take as their model Melville's Moby Dick. It's a great model but it seems to me that a more fruitful way is radically to reinterpret the Christian tradition since it is so central to our Western European and North American culture - I include in this, of course, our move towards secular pluralism.Andrew James Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02693417061963197121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-29884975995061258332012-01-06T15:06:19.015+00:002012-01-06T15:06:19.015+00:00Yes, I noticed and appreciated your resistance to ...Yes, I noticed and appreciated your resistance to the idea of an essential underlying reality which religious traditions only point to. I agree that it can come across as a way of saying that only the superior detached and objective intellectuals can perceive the truth underlying all the different symbol systems. I first became aware of it as an issue when someone pointed out these problems as being inherent in Joseph Campbell's approach to mythology. I'm also very suspicious of the concept of Platonic forms, and of talk about "the Real", for similar reasons. I would prefer to derive spiritual sustenance and meaning from the world itself, and stories woven about it. I suspect there is a connection between this tendency and the tendency to desire Utopia.<br /><br />I really like your project of reinterpreting Christian mythology in the way that you do. It's immensely helpful to me, as someone who grew up with less liberal interpretations of these myths. <br /><br />I would also like to be able to find new meanings in pagan mythology, as people have creatively done over the centuries with Jewish, Christian and pagan stories. Hence my resistance to the idea that pagan deities were all totalitarian symbols.<br /><br />I think it is possible to draw parallels between, and gain illuminating insights from comparing, different religious traditions, without saying that they are the same or that there is an essential underlying truth which they both fall short of. For instance, it is fruitful to compare Christian contemplative prayer with Buddhist meditation, without saying that they are both imperfect expressions of some lost original. However, I do think that all these practices and ideas are grounded in some actual psychological experience which is common to human beings because we are finite entities in a physical world yearning for epistemological transcendence. I have tried to do something like this in <a href="http://heartofflame.blogspot.com/2011/12/coherent-authenticity.html" title="coherent authenticity" rel="nofollow">my previous blogpost</a> which was a reflection on a paragraph from your previous blogpost.<br /><br />When someone actually manages to define satisfactorily what Unitarianism is (see my previous blogposts about whether it's Christian or not), then it might be possible to discuss whether it is still based on that unifying assumption of an underlying lost ur-tradition. I suspect a lot of it is, though.Yewtreehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02028699564003381058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-355469591038077952012-01-06T13:01:54.765+00:002012-01-06T13:01:54.765+00:00Thanks, Yewtree. I will, indeed, look at your post...Thanks, Yewtree. I will, indeed, look at your post and add a comment. Happy New Year to you too. I hope it's a good one for you.<br /><br />There's perhaps one thing to say immediately which is that in the things I've been saying over the last two years in particular (and much more explicitly in the past few months) is that I am trying to resist the cultural (western European and North American) temptation to suggest that there is "behind", "underneath" or "at the back" of everything something that is the really real, the real truth, the essence of religion/philosophy etc.. This unitary idea is the problem not least of all because ultimately it is colonialist and tends towards totalitarianism. It's the single biggest problem about traditional monotheisms, scientisms and, I find myself having to say, any form of unitarianism that continues to understand itself in a metaphysical way.Andrew James Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02693417061963197121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-54675321492120046722012-01-06T12:10:45.860+00:002012-01-06T12:10:45.860+00:00I've expanded my first comment into a blogpost...I've expanded my first comment into a <a href="http://heartofflame.blogspot.com/2012/01/pagan-deities-as-expressions-of-values.html" rel="nofollow">blogpost</a>. I'd welcome your comments on it.Yewtreehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02028699564003381058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-81938645582168757192012-01-06T10:40:57.573+00:002012-01-06T10:40:57.573+00:00Another thought inspired by this: it's funny h...Another thought inspired by this: it's funny how someone's attempt to create a Utopia seems almost inevitably to create a dystopia. Tragic real-life examples include Waco and Jones-town. Examples from films and books: <em>Gattaca, Equilibrium, Fahrenheit 451, 1984</em>.<br /><br />Oh, and Happy New Year, and thanks for being thought-provoking as ever!Yewtreehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02028699564003381058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-49656255627301020232012-01-06T10:36:25.821+00:002012-01-06T10:36:25.821+00:00I very much like the idea of the Republic of Heave...I very much like the idea of the Republic of Heaven (and used it in <a href="http://heartofflame.blogspot.com/2009/08/prayer-of-yeshua.html" rel="nofollow">my rewriting of the prayer of Jesus</a>).<br /><br />I also agree that the new atheists are guilty of that yearning for a return to some imagined state of perfection - they often speak of how great the world would be if there was no religion - I shudder to think how they might achieve that goal.<br /><br />I also like your interpretation of the Nativity story as a self-emptying.<br /><br />I agree that some of the old Greek and Roman deities were expressions of "totalitarian power, dominion and violence" - however this was not true of all of them. I can't remember which theologian came up with that idea, but I think it's a lazy reading of pagan mythology, and a failure to note the many historical and cultural shifts in antiquity. The rural deities who were expressions of spirit of place, change, and process were not expressions of "totalitarian power, dominion and violence" - I'm thinking of Pan, Faunus, Pomona, Vertumnus, Picus, Silvanus, etc. Even city deities (such as Athena) may have been seen as expressions of democracy (though that is admittedly a bit of a stretch).<br /><br />Apart from that, great blogpost, and I am glad you highlighted the Alpha-et-Omega problem.Yewtreehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02028699564003381058noreply@blogger.com