I've done a lot of talking about what I think Christianity isn't, but I haven't said a whole lot on the subject of what it actually looks like in practice. I go back and look at the spiritual masters of the Church, but most of them were monks, either living in communities or solitary, and, as my wife points out, most of them were men which makes it tough for women to relate to what they're saying. My wife and I talk a lot about this, but the discussion never seems to end with any finality. Most of the discussion centers around this passage found in 1 John 2:15-17:
"Don’t love the world, neither the things that are in the world. If anyone loves the world, the Father’s love isn’t in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, isn’t the Father’s, but is the world’s. The world is passing away with its lusts, but he who does God’s will remains forever." (WEB)
A lot of what the earlier saints wrote about was freeing yourself from any and all attachments and distractions which would impede your relationship with God. Those monks out in the desert literally gave away everything they had, ate only what the body needed to live, broke off most if not all of their family relationships, and spent large amounts of time in prayer and meditation when they weren't busying themselves with working just enough to be able to feed themselves or give their wages away.
For one's spiritual health these are probably the ideal conditions of living because they discipline the body, and encourage the person to devote their attention solely to God. Today, often churches will hold retreats which often resemble miniature weekend monasteries which involve few possessions brought of one's own, personal prayer times, and intense communal sessions devoted to prayer and worship. The outside world is shut out so that one can focus on the Lord free of distractions. But then what happens when one must return to "the real world"?
"The Real World" is full of possessions, movies, music, television programs, books, and relationships with people. In the real world you are constantly bombarded with things which demand your attention and take it away from God so that the most important relationship professed in your life only gets five to ten minutes a day at best. In "the real world" you have to own several sets of clothing. In "the real world" you have to bring in at least a few thousand a month just to be able to eat, have shelter, and be "normal". And in order to reach out to other people in "the real world", you have to be able to relate to them somehow.
Yes, it is possible to pitch the dvds, books, tv, etc. Yes, it is possible to give away all but the most basic of clothing. Yes, it is theoretically possible to live in this day and age completely isolated from the rest of the world. Some people do. But what about those obligations like spouses, and children, and people you care about and who depend on you, and what about our obligation to "disciple the nations"? How do we do this in isolation?
I have thrown away my books before (believe it or not). It seems I always acquire new ones. I have given away all of my clothes except for my clerics before. I seem to acquire more of those too. We got rid of most of our furniture and belongings in order to follow where the Lord leads, and both times we received more "stuff" again. What do you do when it doesn't seem like you can even get rid of the "stuff"?
I don't have all the answers, I wish I did. I have a funny feeling that this may look similar yet different for everybody as God works with everyone a little differently, personalizing His treatment plan for each of us, so to speak.
There are a few things however which I think we can learn from those monks out in the desert and apply to our lives having to live in the middle of the world. The first follows from the passage I quoted above, and they centered in on these three things: the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. These are labeled in the writings of those spiritual fathers as gluttony, avarice or greed, and self-esteem.
In short, they write that these three demons (as they call them) are the forward assault for all other demons to come in and wreak havoc with us. They fasted and ate only what the body needed in order to keep the body under control and thus keep gluttony at bay. They gave away everything they had and refused to acquire anything more as their own property in order to control their desire to own anything. Self-Esteem was the hardest one to keep at bay because it could creep up even, and some times especially, when a person was fasting and praying, and could only be combated with tears and the remembrance of our own sins, and the certainty of death.
To allow any of these free reign opens the door to a downward spiritual spiral. Gluttony, for example, may seem rather benign, but by allowing our body's appetite for food control us, instead of us controlling it, we then set the precedent for ourselves to obey what the body wants to satisfy it, and this in turn opens the door for other things like misplaced sexual desires, for example. Simply wanting, for example, a new dress or a nice pair of shoes seems pretty benign if it doesn't hurt anyone and you can afford it. But it can again open the door to justifying having still more. Self-Esteem is often preached from the roof-tops and from the pulpits, but the truth is that Jesus taught that we are to crucify ourselves for His sake, and it doesn't take much before we start believing that we "deserve better".
The second thing is how we approach our relationships with other people. Jesus taught that if we loved anyone, and I mean anyone, more than Him, we were not worthy of the Kingdom of God. Does this mean that we don't care about anyone else? Far from it, but what it does mean is that we have to be aware of our own attachments to other people. Do I depend on my relationship with this person to be happy? Does my self worth depend on how this person sees me? Do I have an attachment to this person which will interfere with my relationship with God? Am I spending more time being aware of my relationship with this person (positively or negatively) than I am being aware of my relationship with God? If the answer is yes to any of these questions, we need to reevaluate that relationship. All of our relationships with other people must be viewed through our relationship with God, and not vice versa. For example, I love my wife and children dearly. But I also know that there will come a time when we will all have to say our good byes and those relationships will end in this life, one way or the other. The loss of those relationships should never be able to damage my relationship with Him. My relationship with God will continue permanently. Just as I must place my relationship with my family as more important than my relationships with co-workers, so must I also place my relationship with God as more important that those with the members of my family.
The third thing I want to address is simply spending time with God and focusing on Him. No relationship can develop unless the two or more parties spend time with each other and get to know each other. The more time spent, the better the two know each other. The less time spent, the less of a chance the relationship has. Be aware of your choices on how you spend your time in this matter.
Finally, we must simply be aware of the choices we make and the consequences thereof. We must always keep in mind that we were born naked, and we will die with less than that. And when we die, we will have only our relationship with God, or lack thereof. Everything else in this life is either a hindrance to that relationship, or a help depending on how it's used. If you can live in this world with possessions, family, friends, etc. and be free from distractions and attachments which impede your relationship with God, more power to you. If you need to give everything away and live as a hermit in the desert in order to draw closer to Him, then do it. Most of us will probably fall somewhere in between, but we need to be aware of when we believe we can't do without something of this world, or if it seems more important than Him. That's the time to give it up completely.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Sunday, October 10, 2010
A Ramble About Change and Perception
It is a stated fact that God Himself doesn't change. Some theologians or would be theologians would probably debate this, but He doesn't. He says as much within Sacred Scripture "I am the Lord, I do not change, therefore you are not consumed O sons of Jacob."
Think about what this means for a minute. God Himself is static. He doesn't move. Change happens around Him, within Him, and through Him. But He Himself remains motionless, still, and we and the flow of time move and change along His quiet surface like the ripples over a pond. God doesn't move through time. Time moves through God. God doesn't move through space, space moves through Him. This is the virtue and consequence of true omnipresence. All places, all times, all dimensions, everywhere there is a where when and how simultaneously.
He doesn't present one version of Himself to one group of people, and another version to a different group of people. But the funny thing about people, is that while God Himself doesn't change, they do. People are constantly in flux, never the exact same person from one minute to the next. With every new experience, change occurs. With every new thought, new idea, new choice the person dies and is reborn remembering everything, or much of everything, which happened before but with a new, or at least altered, understanding of how to interpret it, no matter how small the change may be.
So, God Himself doesn't change, but people do; and different people interpret their experiences of life, other people, and even God differently depending on their perception. Some people perceive God as harsh and judgmental; others perceive Him as gentle and loving. God Himself remains motionless.
God Himself remains motionless, but we project motion onto Him. We perceive motion in Him because we ourselves are moving. Just as we perceive motion in the Sun when it rises and sets, but in reality it is the earth which is, and consequently ourselves who are, in motion around the Sun which, relative to us, remains stationery.
So, God remains stationary, but we perceive Him in motion. We project our own expectations, good or bad, fair or unfair, onto Him. We project our figures of authority, figures of abuse, father figures, mother figures, friendly and enemy figures onto Him depending on what is in the forefront of our minds, or buried deep in our subconscious. We get angry when He doesn't act on what we want, but then ignore Him when He permits events to give us what we need and more often than we want to admit, we curse Him for it.
In our life we often project our idea of what He is supposed to be onto Him, and rarely bother to slow down enough to know Him as He is. Often, as with other people, we don't really care about who He is and what He is like, we only care about what we think about Him and what our perception of Him is. We do this often without thinking just because it is how we interact with everybody. Often our perception of a person is formed by who they appeared to be in the past, and has little to do with who they actually are right now, which is always going to be at least slightly different from who they were five minutes ago.
Our biggest problem when knowing God is that He doesn't change, but we do. Our perceptions of Him change and so we perceive that He is changing when in fact it is we who are changing through the motion and experience of life. So one day we may perceive Him as judgmental and harsh, and another we perceive Him as loving and kind. He has not changed, but our understanding and perception of Him has.
The first rule of getting to know someone is to not form any preconceptions, or to lose one's preconceptions, and then to go and spend time with them and learn from them who they are. This applies also to God. We move through time, and as we move through time we encounter Him through every point in time in His stillness which we perceive as motion because we are in motion. Therefore in order to truly know Him as He is we ourselves must slow down as be still as He is still. As we move through Him He reveals Himself if only we will pay attention.
God is love in everything He is and does, but we will only experience this if we drop our own perceptions, be still, and get to know Him. He is not harsh and judgmental one minute and kind and loving the next, we are. He does not wish some saved and some damned, we do. He does not send some to heaven and some to hell. We ourselves dwell in either place right now by our own choices, and only through our motion through Him responding to His Grace do we move from hell to heaven here and now, and later on.
Jesus said that "the one who saves his psyche will destroy it, the one who destroys his psyche for My sake will save it," (literally what the Greek says). In order to know God, which is our salvation here and now, we must put aside our own projections, perceptions, thoughts, and ideas and just spend time with Him on His terms. Otherwise we attempt to worship only those same ideas, thoughts, and perceptions of what He is like, and not He Himself. This is little different from the idolatry which was so condemned by Him in the Old Testament. He doesn't want us to speculate about Him, he wants us to know Him. He doesn't want us bowing down to a concept we have of Him, He wants us to spend time with Him as He truly is. Idols don't have to be made of wood or stone, they are far more often made of feelings, images, and memories amalgamated together into something that we call God and either love or fear, revere or mock. But such idols are still not Him, and like the Israelites in the Old Testament, He commands that they be torn down and we know Him as He is.
God remains stationary as we move through Him. Are we paying attention to where we are along the way?
Think about what this means for a minute. God Himself is static. He doesn't move. Change happens around Him, within Him, and through Him. But He Himself remains motionless, still, and we and the flow of time move and change along His quiet surface like the ripples over a pond. God doesn't move through time. Time moves through God. God doesn't move through space, space moves through Him. This is the virtue and consequence of true omnipresence. All places, all times, all dimensions, everywhere there is a where when and how simultaneously.
He doesn't present one version of Himself to one group of people, and another version to a different group of people. But the funny thing about people, is that while God Himself doesn't change, they do. People are constantly in flux, never the exact same person from one minute to the next. With every new experience, change occurs. With every new thought, new idea, new choice the person dies and is reborn remembering everything, or much of everything, which happened before but with a new, or at least altered, understanding of how to interpret it, no matter how small the change may be.
So, God Himself doesn't change, but people do; and different people interpret their experiences of life, other people, and even God differently depending on their perception. Some people perceive God as harsh and judgmental; others perceive Him as gentle and loving. God Himself remains motionless.
God Himself remains motionless, but we project motion onto Him. We perceive motion in Him because we ourselves are moving. Just as we perceive motion in the Sun when it rises and sets, but in reality it is the earth which is, and consequently ourselves who are, in motion around the Sun which, relative to us, remains stationery.
So, God remains stationary, but we perceive Him in motion. We project our own expectations, good or bad, fair or unfair, onto Him. We project our figures of authority, figures of abuse, father figures, mother figures, friendly and enemy figures onto Him depending on what is in the forefront of our minds, or buried deep in our subconscious. We get angry when He doesn't act on what we want, but then ignore Him when He permits events to give us what we need and more often than we want to admit, we curse Him for it.
In our life we often project our idea of what He is supposed to be onto Him, and rarely bother to slow down enough to know Him as He is. Often, as with other people, we don't really care about who He is and what He is like, we only care about what we think about Him and what our perception of Him is. We do this often without thinking just because it is how we interact with everybody. Often our perception of a person is formed by who they appeared to be in the past, and has little to do with who they actually are right now, which is always going to be at least slightly different from who they were five minutes ago.
Our biggest problem when knowing God is that He doesn't change, but we do. Our perceptions of Him change and so we perceive that He is changing when in fact it is we who are changing through the motion and experience of life. So one day we may perceive Him as judgmental and harsh, and another we perceive Him as loving and kind. He has not changed, but our understanding and perception of Him has.
The first rule of getting to know someone is to not form any preconceptions, or to lose one's preconceptions, and then to go and spend time with them and learn from them who they are. This applies also to God. We move through time, and as we move through time we encounter Him through every point in time in His stillness which we perceive as motion because we are in motion. Therefore in order to truly know Him as He is we ourselves must slow down as be still as He is still. As we move through Him He reveals Himself if only we will pay attention.
God is love in everything He is and does, but we will only experience this if we drop our own perceptions, be still, and get to know Him. He is not harsh and judgmental one minute and kind and loving the next, we are. He does not wish some saved and some damned, we do. He does not send some to heaven and some to hell. We ourselves dwell in either place right now by our own choices, and only through our motion through Him responding to His Grace do we move from hell to heaven here and now, and later on.
Jesus said that "the one who saves his psyche will destroy it, the one who destroys his psyche for My sake will save it," (literally what the Greek says). In order to know God, which is our salvation here and now, we must put aside our own projections, perceptions, thoughts, and ideas and just spend time with Him on His terms. Otherwise we attempt to worship only those same ideas, thoughts, and perceptions of what He is like, and not He Himself. This is little different from the idolatry which was so condemned by Him in the Old Testament. He doesn't want us to speculate about Him, he wants us to know Him. He doesn't want us bowing down to a concept we have of Him, He wants us to spend time with Him as He truly is. Idols don't have to be made of wood or stone, they are far more often made of feelings, images, and memories amalgamated together into something that we call God and either love or fear, revere or mock. But such idols are still not Him, and like the Israelites in the Old Testament, He commands that they be torn down and we know Him as He is.
God remains stationary as we move through Him. Are we paying attention to where we are along the way?
Monday, October 4, 2010
A Ramble About Buddha's Choice
Around twenty six hundred years ago there was a prince in India named Gautama Siddharta. His father gave him everything anyone could ever want, and was careful to keep anyone who appeared old or sick away from him, so as to keep the knowledge of sickness and death a secret from him. He was married, wealthy, and powerful. And then within a very short amount of time it all fell apart as he met someone old, someone sick, and finally saw a dead body. He then had to come to grips with the fundamental truth of humanity which his father had tried so hard to keep from him: suffering. Gautama then wrestled with the problem and felt compassion, not only for himself, but for everyone else who had to experience suffering. It drove him to the point where he could no longer stay in the palace, but because he wanted to find the solution so desperately for everyone, he left. He left his wealth, his power, his father, and his young wife and newborn son, the latter doing so in tears, but still he left because he knew they would experience suffering too.
There is another account in "The Gospel of Buddha" which talks about a choice which Gautama Siddharta made when he reached enlightenment and became the "Buddha". The tempter, Mara (for all intents Satan in Hindu theology), came to him and said, "thou hast attained the highest bliss and it is time for thee to enter the final Nirvana." After this, Brahma (for all intents the equivalent of God in Hindu theology), also spoke to him and implored him not to enter Nirvana yet, but to go and preach his dharma to as many as will listen to bring them enlightenment and salvation as well. Out of compassion for everyone else, Gautama spent the next fifty or sixty years preaching and living his dharma until he died in his eighties. The philosophy and the religion he founded survives to this day, some twenty-six hundred years later.
The Buddha's choice was to place other people above himself even at the risk of his own salvation and enlightenment. In both instances he could have chosen his own personal comfort and safety. He could have stayed safe and secure, or he could have gone on to the final Nirvana and have chosen to avoid the suffering which naturally comes with life and interaction with other people. He could have, but he didn't. He saw that other people were suffering in their ignorance and fear, sickness and sorrow, and knowing that he had an answer to raise them above it he chose to work for their best interests instead of his own.
The Buddha's choice is one which we are all faced with. Do we look out for our own interests, or do we sacrifice our own interests and even run the risk of sacrificing our own salvation and enlightenment so that others can be saved and enlightened?
Jesus Christ gave us, as those who profess to follow Him, the example to follow. There were so many times when He could have remained safe, and He chose not to. He didn't have to heal people on the sabbath, but compassion drove Him to do so. He didn't have to go to the cross, but compassion drove Him to do so. In everything He did He placed what was best for others above Himself, even if it wasn't what they thought was best for themselves. The people of Judea wanted to make Him a king by force one time, He got out of there in a hurry because it wasn't what was best.
Sacred Scripture teaches that we are to deny ourselves, dying to ourselves daily. That we are to love one another as Christ loved us. This means even to the point where we would give not only our physical lives for the other person, but if necessary our own hearts, minds, and souls because this is what Jesus Christ did for us just by incarnating into a human being and emptying Himself. He poured Himself out as a sacrifice long before He ever went to the cross physically.
There is a tendency among Christians which runs contrary to the teaching and practice of Jesus Christ. We tend to want to close ourselves off from those having problems, especially if those same problems are difficult or ongoing. We get to a point where we feel like we're doing ok spiritually and we don't want to be dragged down by someone else's suffering. So we distance ourselves from that person so that we don't have to suffer with them. We want to remain spiritually in tune and don't want someone else's negativity interrupting that.
What we fail to see when this happens is that when we turn our back on each other, we are no longer spiritually in tune. We are following some other path and not the path of Jesus Christ. It is some other voice telling us, "don't worry about those other people, you've made it, you've done it, now it's time to rest and go on to your final Nirvana." This voice has nothing to do with God, who pleads with us in Jesus Christ to go out and preach the gospel (using words if necessary as St. Francis of Assisi said). He tells us to go and "disciple the nations", bring everyone the teaching of enlightenment in Jesus Christ, and when a brother is suffering to "bear and share one another's burdens and so fulfill the law of Christ."
The practice and teaching of Jesus Christ is compassion, and where this is no longer present, neither is He.
Twenty six hundred years ago, a Hindu prince who had no understanding of the God of Israel made a choice to have compassion and give up his own immediate salvation for the sake of all those who were suffering. Six hundred years later the God of Israel walked the earth as man and gave up everything for the sake of all mankind who was suffering. Are we, who profess to follow the latter, going to then ignore the suffering of our brothers and sisters; or are we going to take the hard road, follow the path of Jesus Christ and make the Buddha's choice?
There is another account in "The Gospel of Buddha" which talks about a choice which Gautama Siddharta made when he reached enlightenment and became the "Buddha". The tempter, Mara (for all intents Satan in Hindu theology), came to him and said, "thou hast attained the highest bliss and it is time for thee to enter the final Nirvana." After this, Brahma (for all intents the equivalent of God in Hindu theology), also spoke to him and implored him not to enter Nirvana yet, but to go and preach his dharma to as many as will listen to bring them enlightenment and salvation as well. Out of compassion for everyone else, Gautama spent the next fifty or sixty years preaching and living his dharma until he died in his eighties. The philosophy and the religion he founded survives to this day, some twenty-six hundred years later.
The Buddha's choice was to place other people above himself even at the risk of his own salvation and enlightenment. In both instances he could have chosen his own personal comfort and safety. He could have stayed safe and secure, or he could have gone on to the final Nirvana and have chosen to avoid the suffering which naturally comes with life and interaction with other people. He could have, but he didn't. He saw that other people were suffering in their ignorance and fear, sickness and sorrow, and knowing that he had an answer to raise them above it he chose to work for their best interests instead of his own.
The Buddha's choice is one which we are all faced with. Do we look out for our own interests, or do we sacrifice our own interests and even run the risk of sacrificing our own salvation and enlightenment so that others can be saved and enlightened?
Jesus Christ gave us, as those who profess to follow Him, the example to follow. There were so many times when He could have remained safe, and He chose not to. He didn't have to heal people on the sabbath, but compassion drove Him to do so. He didn't have to go to the cross, but compassion drove Him to do so. In everything He did He placed what was best for others above Himself, even if it wasn't what they thought was best for themselves. The people of Judea wanted to make Him a king by force one time, He got out of there in a hurry because it wasn't what was best.
Sacred Scripture teaches that we are to deny ourselves, dying to ourselves daily. That we are to love one another as Christ loved us. This means even to the point where we would give not only our physical lives for the other person, but if necessary our own hearts, minds, and souls because this is what Jesus Christ did for us just by incarnating into a human being and emptying Himself. He poured Himself out as a sacrifice long before He ever went to the cross physically.
There is a tendency among Christians which runs contrary to the teaching and practice of Jesus Christ. We tend to want to close ourselves off from those having problems, especially if those same problems are difficult or ongoing. We get to a point where we feel like we're doing ok spiritually and we don't want to be dragged down by someone else's suffering. So we distance ourselves from that person so that we don't have to suffer with them. We want to remain spiritually in tune and don't want someone else's negativity interrupting that.
What we fail to see when this happens is that when we turn our back on each other, we are no longer spiritually in tune. We are following some other path and not the path of Jesus Christ. It is some other voice telling us, "don't worry about those other people, you've made it, you've done it, now it's time to rest and go on to your final Nirvana." This voice has nothing to do with God, who pleads with us in Jesus Christ to go out and preach the gospel (using words if necessary as St. Francis of Assisi said). He tells us to go and "disciple the nations", bring everyone the teaching of enlightenment in Jesus Christ, and when a brother is suffering to "bear and share one another's burdens and so fulfill the law of Christ."
The practice and teaching of Jesus Christ is compassion, and where this is no longer present, neither is He.
Twenty six hundred years ago, a Hindu prince who had no understanding of the God of Israel made a choice to have compassion and give up his own immediate salvation for the sake of all those who were suffering. Six hundred years later the God of Israel walked the earth as man and gave up everything for the sake of all mankind who was suffering. Are we, who profess to follow the latter, going to then ignore the suffering of our brothers and sisters; or are we going to take the hard road, follow the path of Jesus Christ and make the Buddha's choice?
Sunday, September 26, 2010
A Ramble About "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."
I've been watching a certain news program at night on my iPod. It's by no means a conservative news program, but I appreciate the honesty, candor, and humor the host, Rachel Maddow, brings to the realm of politics, and the light she tries to shed on the otherwise intentionally muddied subject of politics. I don't always agree with her point of view, but I appreciate it and it has opened my own eyes to things I would have otherwise not been aware of had I stuck only to watching shows which purport to reflect views more closely associated with my own.
One of the topics she has covered recently are the debates and court rulings over the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law. This is the policy of the United States military that, if you are a homosexual, practicing or otherwise, employed by the US military, officer or enlisted, you are obliged to neither reveal this information yourself, and they are obliged to not ask you outright. If somehow this information falls into the hands of the military then they will discharge you, honorably or dishonorably as the case may be.
Whatever other arguments may be held against it's repeal, there seems to be one overriding argument in favor of removing it. It violates the United States Constitution and the basic principle of equality and civil rights which is enshrined therein. There is no solid evidence that a person who is homosexual is any less capable of serving in the US military than a person who is heterosexual, and from my (admittedly limited) understanding, there is a great deal of evidence that persons who have been discharged under this law were extremely capable personnel, and the removal of them from service has been a terrible disservice to the operation of the US military.
So, why are so many people, especially professing Christian people, in the US government, and the US at large against having homosexual people serving openly in the US military? I believe the answer is that it is a result of misunderstanding and misteaching about the practice and application of the Christian faith and the teachings regarding not only homosexuality, but any sexual practice whether it is popularly considered deviant or not.
What is the ideal "sexual state" of the practicing Christian as found in both Holy Scripture and Sacred Tradition?
Chastity.
Let me say this again. The ideal sexual relationship in Christian practice according to the writings of Holy Scripture and the writings of the Church Fathers and Leaders for the last two thousand years is, and has always been, no sexual relationship at all. So if we were all to live according to the Biblical ideal, none of us who profess and practice Jesus Christ would be married or have children.
Why is chastity the ideal sexual relationship? Because the practice of Christianity is the denial of one's self, and the discipline and denial of one's own bodily appetites, bringing them under the control of Grace. It is the letting go of one's possessions, relationships (both friendships and family relationships), attachments, desires, and the emptying of one's entire being to pursue the one and only relationship which truly matters: one's relationship with God through and in Jesus Christ. He gave up His life for us, and so the practice of Christianity is to respond in kind. If something draws our attention away from Him it is to be cut off and let go of, otherwise it becomes a trap.
This was the teaching of both Jesus Christ and St. Paul:
Matthew 10:32-39 (WEB)
Everyone therefore who confesses me before men, him I will also confess before my Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies me before men, him I will also deny before my Father who is in heaven.Don’t think that I came to send peace on the earth. I didn’t come to send peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man at odds against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.A man’s foes will be those of his own household.He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me isn’t worthy of me.He who doesn’t take his cross and follow after me, isn’t worthy of me.He who seeks his life will lose it; and he who loses his life for my sake will find it.
Matthew 10:44-45 (WEB)
“Again, the Kingdom of Heaven is like a treasure hidden in the field, which a man found, and hid. In his joy, he goes and sells all that he has, and buys that field.Again, the Kingdom of Heaven is like a man who is a merchant seeking fine pearls,who having found one pearl of great price, he went and sold all that he had, and bought it.
Matthew 19:4-12(WEB)
He answered, "“Haven’t you read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall join to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh?’So that they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, don’t let man tear apart.”"They asked him, “Why then did Moses command us to give her a bill of divorce, and divorce her?”He said to them, "“Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it has not been so.I tell you that whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and he who marries her when she is divorced commits adultery.”"His disciples said to him, “If this is the case of the man with his wife, it is not expedient to marry.”But he said to them, "“Not all men can receive this saying, but those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother’s womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven’s sake. He who is able to receive it, let him receive it.”
1 Corinthians 7:1-8, 27-28, 32-35(WEB)
Now concerning the things about which you wrote to me: it is good for a man not to touch a woman. But, because of sexual immoralities, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband. Let the husband render to his wife the affection owed her, and likewise also the wife to her husband. The wife doesn’t have authority over her own body, but the husband. Likewise also the husband doesn’t have authority over his own body, but the wife. Don’t deprive one another, unless it is by consent for a season, that you may give yourselves to fasting and prayer, and may be together again, that Satan doesn’t tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6 But this I say by way of concession, not of commandment. Yet I wish that all men were like me. However each man has his own gift from God, one of this kind, and another of that kind. But I say to the unmarried and to widows, it is good for them if they remain even as I am. But if they don’t have self-control, let them marry. For it’s better to marry than to burn. ... Are you bound to a wife? Don’t seek to be freed. Are you free from a wife? Don’t seek a wife. But if you marry, you have not sinned. If a virgin marries, she has not sinned. Yet such will have oppression in the flesh, and I want to spare you. ... But I desire to have you to be free from cares. He who is unmarried is concerned for the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord; but he who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife. There is also a difference between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman cares about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit. But she who is married cares about the things of the world—how she may please her husband. This I say for your own profit; not that I may ensnare you, but for that which is appropriate, and that you may attend to the Lord without distraction.
Philippians 3:7-14
However, what things were gain to me, these have I counted loss for Christ. Yes most certainly, and I count all things to be loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus, my Lord, for whom I suffered the loss of all things, and count them nothing but refuse, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own, that which is of the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith; that I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, becoming conformed to his death; if by any means I may attain to the resurrection from the dead. Not that I have already obtained, or am already made perfect; but I press on, if it is so that I may take hold of that for which also I was taken hold of by Christ Jesus. Brothers, I don’t regard myself as yet having taken hold, but one thing I do. Forgetting the things which are behind, and stretching forward to the things which are before, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.
The Sacrament of Marriage was given as a compromise or a concession for those of us who want to follow Jesus Christ, and devote ourselves to Him, but for whom also certain passions overwhelm us. Jesus Christ Himself was celibate by all trustworthy records. So was St. Paul. To my knowledge, many of His Apostles were not. Certainly not St. Peter of whom even Holy Scripture says He was married and mentions both his wife and his mother-in-law.
Within the Church, marriage is the only permissible actively sexual relationship because it was the only one sanctioned by Jesus Christ and His Apostles and their successors the Patriarchs, Bishops, and Fathers of the Church.
Now, how then do we respond to actively practicing homosexuals? According to Jesus Christ, with love, compassion, and understanding; the same way He responds to us. As He taught: "how can you see well enough to take the splinter out of your brother's eye when you have a log in your own eye?" And also "love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, and pray for those who mistrust you and abuse you." (See the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5-7, and the Sermon on the Plains in Luke 6). In other words, we respond to homosexuals the same way we are taught and avowed to respond to everyone irregardless of who they are or what they do to us or anyone else. We are to care about them, love them, and help them in any way we can.
If it is a homosexual person who stands outside the Church, who are we, and what right do we have to judge them or look down on them? Weren't, and often aren't, we in the same position at one time or another? Blind and incapable of seeing our own Disorder and Malfunction for what it truly is? Didn't God have to break through our blindness with His light and doesn't He continuously still have to do so?
If it is a homosexual who stands inside the Church, who are we to beat up on our brother or sister who is struggling with desires and attachments? We are to love and care about them and when they reach out for help we are to gently guide them back to the path. We cannot abandon the Sacred Tradition and teaching of Holy Scripture just because it is the popular thing to do in any age whether it is in sanctioning practicing homosexual activity within the Church, or in bashing and persecuting practicing homosexuals. Both are forbidden. Ours is the path of Love Himself: The Path of Jesus Christ. And it is only in the practice of this path wherein any of us find our salvation in Him, and deviation from it is to step off into darkness and our own personal Gehenna from which it is very hard to recover in this life, and impossible in the next.
God desires that none, I repeat none, should perish but that all should come to repentance and know Him. It is our job to help people out of hell, not to gleefully condemn them to it, irregardless of what they've done, because we have the exact same Problem and would be there ourselves if someone had not intervened in our lives, and if God Himself did not constantly intervene.
Don't ask? Don't tell? It shouldn't matter if they do. Our response should always be the same no matter what. His is with us.
One of the topics she has covered recently are the debates and court rulings over the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law. This is the policy of the United States military that, if you are a homosexual, practicing or otherwise, employed by the US military, officer or enlisted, you are obliged to neither reveal this information yourself, and they are obliged to not ask you outright. If somehow this information falls into the hands of the military then they will discharge you, honorably or dishonorably as the case may be.
Whatever other arguments may be held against it's repeal, there seems to be one overriding argument in favor of removing it. It violates the United States Constitution and the basic principle of equality and civil rights which is enshrined therein. There is no solid evidence that a person who is homosexual is any less capable of serving in the US military than a person who is heterosexual, and from my (admittedly limited) understanding, there is a great deal of evidence that persons who have been discharged under this law were extremely capable personnel, and the removal of them from service has been a terrible disservice to the operation of the US military.
So, why are so many people, especially professing Christian people, in the US government, and the US at large against having homosexual people serving openly in the US military? I believe the answer is that it is a result of misunderstanding and misteaching about the practice and application of the Christian faith and the teachings regarding not only homosexuality, but any sexual practice whether it is popularly considered deviant or not.
What is the ideal "sexual state" of the practicing Christian as found in both Holy Scripture and Sacred Tradition?
Chastity.
Let me say this again. The ideal sexual relationship in Christian practice according to the writings of Holy Scripture and the writings of the Church Fathers and Leaders for the last two thousand years is, and has always been, no sexual relationship at all. So if we were all to live according to the Biblical ideal, none of us who profess and practice Jesus Christ would be married or have children.
Why is chastity the ideal sexual relationship? Because the practice of Christianity is the denial of one's self, and the discipline and denial of one's own bodily appetites, bringing them under the control of Grace. It is the letting go of one's possessions, relationships (both friendships and family relationships), attachments, desires, and the emptying of one's entire being to pursue the one and only relationship which truly matters: one's relationship with God through and in Jesus Christ. He gave up His life for us, and so the practice of Christianity is to respond in kind. If something draws our attention away from Him it is to be cut off and let go of, otherwise it becomes a trap.
This was the teaching of both Jesus Christ and St. Paul:
Matthew 10:32-39 (WEB)
Everyone therefore who confesses me before men, him I will also confess before my Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies me before men, him I will also deny before my Father who is in heaven.Don’t think that I came to send peace on the earth. I didn’t come to send peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man at odds against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.A man’s foes will be those of his own household.He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me isn’t worthy of me.He who doesn’t take his cross and follow after me, isn’t worthy of me.He who seeks his life will lose it; and he who loses his life for my sake will find it.
Matthew 10:44-45 (WEB)
“Again, the Kingdom of Heaven is like a treasure hidden in the field, which a man found, and hid. In his joy, he goes and sells all that he has, and buys that field.Again, the Kingdom of Heaven is like a man who is a merchant seeking fine pearls,who having found one pearl of great price, he went and sold all that he had, and bought it.
Matthew 19:4-12(WEB)
He answered, "“Haven’t you read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall join to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh?’So that they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, don’t let man tear apart.”"They asked him, “Why then did Moses command us to give her a bill of divorce, and divorce her?”He said to them, "“Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it has not been so.I tell you that whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and he who marries her when she is divorced commits adultery.”"His disciples said to him, “If this is the case of the man with his wife, it is not expedient to marry.”But he said to them, "“Not all men can receive this saying, but those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother’s womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven’s sake. He who is able to receive it, let him receive it.”
1 Corinthians 7:1-8, 27-28, 32-35(WEB)
Now concerning the things about which you wrote to me: it is good for a man not to touch a woman. But, because of sexual immoralities, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband. Let the husband render to his wife the affection owed her, and likewise also the wife to her husband. The wife doesn’t have authority over her own body, but the husband. Likewise also the husband doesn’t have authority over his own body, but the wife. Don’t deprive one another, unless it is by consent for a season, that you may give yourselves to fasting and prayer, and may be together again, that Satan doesn’t tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6 But this I say by way of concession, not of commandment. Yet I wish that all men were like me. However each man has his own gift from God, one of this kind, and another of that kind. But I say to the unmarried and to widows, it is good for them if they remain even as I am. But if they don’t have self-control, let them marry. For it’s better to marry than to burn. ... Are you bound to a wife? Don’t seek to be freed. Are you free from a wife? Don’t seek a wife. But if you marry, you have not sinned. If a virgin marries, she has not sinned. Yet such will have oppression in the flesh, and I want to spare you. ... But I desire to have you to be free from cares. He who is unmarried is concerned for the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord; but he who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife. There is also a difference between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman cares about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit. But she who is married cares about the things of the world—how she may please her husband. This I say for your own profit; not that I may ensnare you, but for that which is appropriate, and that you may attend to the Lord without distraction.
Philippians 3:7-14
However, what things were gain to me, these have I counted loss for Christ. Yes most certainly, and I count all things to be loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus, my Lord, for whom I suffered the loss of all things, and count them nothing but refuse, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own, that which is of the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith; that I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, becoming conformed to his death; if by any means I may attain to the resurrection from the dead. Not that I have already obtained, or am already made perfect; but I press on, if it is so that I may take hold of that for which also I was taken hold of by Christ Jesus. Brothers, I don’t regard myself as yet having taken hold, but one thing I do. Forgetting the things which are behind, and stretching forward to the things which are before, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.
The Sacrament of Marriage was given as a compromise or a concession for those of us who want to follow Jesus Christ, and devote ourselves to Him, but for whom also certain passions overwhelm us. Jesus Christ Himself was celibate by all trustworthy records. So was St. Paul. To my knowledge, many of His Apostles were not. Certainly not St. Peter of whom even Holy Scripture says He was married and mentions both his wife and his mother-in-law.
Within the Church, marriage is the only permissible actively sexual relationship because it was the only one sanctioned by Jesus Christ and His Apostles and their successors the Patriarchs, Bishops, and Fathers of the Church.
Now, how then do we respond to actively practicing homosexuals? According to Jesus Christ, with love, compassion, and understanding; the same way He responds to us. As He taught: "how can you see well enough to take the splinter out of your brother's eye when you have a log in your own eye?" And also "love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, and pray for those who mistrust you and abuse you." (See the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5-7, and the Sermon on the Plains in Luke 6). In other words, we respond to homosexuals the same way we are taught and avowed to respond to everyone irregardless of who they are or what they do to us or anyone else. We are to care about them, love them, and help them in any way we can.
If it is a homosexual person who stands outside the Church, who are we, and what right do we have to judge them or look down on them? Weren't, and often aren't, we in the same position at one time or another? Blind and incapable of seeing our own Disorder and Malfunction for what it truly is? Didn't God have to break through our blindness with His light and doesn't He continuously still have to do so?
If it is a homosexual who stands inside the Church, who are we to beat up on our brother or sister who is struggling with desires and attachments? We are to love and care about them and when they reach out for help we are to gently guide them back to the path. We cannot abandon the Sacred Tradition and teaching of Holy Scripture just because it is the popular thing to do in any age whether it is in sanctioning practicing homosexual activity within the Church, or in bashing and persecuting practicing homosexuals. Both are forbidden. Ours is the path of Love Himself: The Path of Jesus Christ. And it is only in the practice of this path wherein any of us find our salvation in Him, and deviation from it is to step off into darkness and our own personal Gehenna from which it is very hard to recover in this life, and impossible in the next.
God desires that none, I repeat none, should perish but that all should come to repentance and know Him. It is our job to help people out of hell, not to gleefully condemn them to it, irregardless of what they've done, because we have the exact same Problem and would be there ourselves if someone had not intervened in our lives, and if God Himself did not constantly intervene.
Don't ask? Don't tell? It shouldn't matter if they do. Our response should always be the same no matter what. His is with us.
Friday, September 17, 2010
A Ramble about Confessions
As a part of my job as a residential care worker, I get to participate in various "groups" held by the residents. One of the kinds of groups is where the kids get together and then admit to things which they have done which are among one or more of nine problems on a list such as a problem with authority, for example. Sometimes these problems are called up because we, as staff, have given them paperwork to fill out because we see the problem being displayed. Sometimes they see the problem themselves and address it. Sometimes their peers do, and they either call it out or say that they'll "look into it".
I have sat through many of these groups now. And there are two things that strike me most about them. The first is how much like the sacrament of confession they are in intent. The second is, like many confessions, how phony many of these admittals are. The hypocrisy is overwhelming at times. The only reason why these kids usually call them out and admit them is because they're required to or else they lose the ability to do anything fun. Ideally, the kids that have been there longer are supposed to guide the newer kids in how to explore and call out their problems. In reality, they only show them how to give the mechanical responses everyone expects.
There's no sincerity. There's no real change of heart. It's so mechanical that the kids read through the list of problems at breakneck speed so that I usually can't understand what they're saying, and many don't even bother to actually read through the list. They just read off the number or letter of the point on the outline. They get extremely annoyed when I ask them to slow down their reading. After the groups are done, they will frequently behave in such a way so as to receive more paperwork for the very same things which they just admitted they recognized as a problem and the cycle will repeat itself.
I do a lot of listening to the kids, too. Often I let them talk about more then they are supposed to be allowed in order to determine where they're really at from day to day. From these conversations it's pretty easy to see that very little has changed even after the groups. The behavior of those kids who have been there longer may have changed to conform to the standards so that they don't get into as much trouble, but the beliefs and attitudes which caused the initial behavior seem just as prevalent. They fall into line just enough to merit discharge, but intend on falling back into the same thing which precipitated the need for them to be in the facility they're in.
I can't help but think when I am at work how much like the Church this is. How often do we go to confession (whether with a priest, at Mass, or in private) go through the routine and ask forgiveness with no real intent on changing the causes within our hearts which precipitated the need for confession to begin with? We only go through the motions in order to get out of any disciplinary action, and then like the kids I work with, we are mechanically told "good job for calling your problems" by our peers.
Do we really think we're fooling God into thinking we are actually repentant? If I, as a human staff member, am able to see through the false fronts, how much more does God see into our hearts knowing what our true intent is?
The purpose of the Sacrament is to reconcile us to God and each other, to recognize the change of mind and heart and to bring us back into communion with each other, including God, in the same way that the purpose of the groups is to bring the kids back into the normal practice of the program where I work. It is to acknowledge our failures but also to reach out for real help in moving past them. Simply saying what we did wrong and expecting an absolution so that you don't have to face discipline is a misuse and abuse of the program, and of the Sacrament and is a deep misunderstanding of both.
I can't say that I am any different either because I too am equally guilty of this. How many times have I gone to the Lord mechanically only because somewhere in the back of my mind I think I will somehow escape discipline or consequences for what I have thought, said, or done; all the while not letting go of the passions, fears, or desires which were the causes of what I have thought, said, or done.
God sees all of it, and we can hide nothing from Him. He sees more about us than we do. He also knows when we're faking it just to be perceived as advancing in the program.
I have sat through many of these groups now. And there are two things that strike me most about them. The first is how much like the sacrament of confession they are in intent. The second is, like many confessions, how phony many of these admittals are. The hypocrisy is overwhelming at times. The only reason why these kids usually call them out and admit them is because they're required to or else they lose the ability to do anything fun. Ideally, the kids that have been there longer are supposed to guide the newer kids in how to explore and call out their problems. In reality, they only show them how to give the mechanical responses everyone expects.
There's no sincerity. There's no real change of heart. It's so mechanical that the kids read through the list of problems at breakneck speed so that I usually can't understand what they're saying, and many don't even bother to actually read through the list. They just read off the number or letter of the point on the outline. They get extremely annoyed when I ask them to slow down their reading. After the groups are done, they will frequently behave in such a way so as to receive more paperwork for the very same things which they just admitted they recognized as a problem and the cycle will repeat itself.
I do a lot of listening to the kids, too. Often I let them talk about more then they are supposed to be allowed in order to determine where they're really at from day to day. From these conversations it's pretty easy to see that very little has changed even after the groups. The behavior of those kids who have been there longer may have changed to conform to the standards so that they don't get into as much trouble, but the beliefs and attitudes which caused the initial behavior seem just as prevalent. They fall into line just enough to merit discharge, but intend on falling back into the same thing which precipitated the need for them to be in the facility they're in.
I can't help but think when I am at work how much like the Church this is. How often do we go to confession (whether with a priest, at Mass, or in private) go through the routine and ask forgiveness with no real intent on changing the causes within our hearts which precipitated the need for confession to begin with? We only go through the motions in order to get out of any disciplinary action, and then like the kids I work with, we are mechanically told "good job for calling your problems" by our peers.
Do we really think we're fooling God into thinking we are actually repentant? If I, as a human staff member, am able to see through the false fronts, how much more does God see into our hearts knowing what our true intent is?
The purpose of the Sacrament is to reconcile us to God and each other, to recognize the change of mind and heart and to bring us back into communion with each other, including God, in the same way that the purpose of the groups is to bring the kids back into the normal practice of the program where I work. It is to acknowledge our failures but also to reach out for real help in moving past them. Simply saying what we did wrong and expecting an absolution so that you don't have to face discipline is a misuse and abuse of the program, and of the Sacrament and is a deep misunderstanding of both.
I can't say that I am any different either because I too am equally guilty of this. How many times have I gone to the Lord mechanically only because somewhere in the back of my mind I think I will somehow escape discipline or consequences for what I have thought, said, or done; all the while not letting go of the passions, fears, or desires which were the causes of what I have thought, said, or done.
God sees all of it, and we can hide nothing from Him. He sees more about us than we do. He also knows when we're faking it just to be perceived as advancing in the program.
Sunday, September 12, 2010
A Ramble About Attachment Disorders
As part of my training for work, I am having to plow through a three inch thick binder of reading materials. Most of it is a repeat of materials, laws, and regulations which I have already read or with which I have already become acquainted. But recently I read through a pamphlet in the binder on attachment disorders which caught my attention and got me thinking. It isn't the first time I had encountered material on AD or RAD, but this time rusty gears started whirring.
In short, an attachment disorder occurs when a child fails, generally through either neglect or abuse, to form a healthy nurturing attachment to their parent. This in turn leads them to be unable to form healthy attachments to other people and can cause them to either cling to a person, or to completely reject and become abusive to the person, and in many cases to become abusive to themselves. The author of the article I had read stated that such children will often try to cause their foster parents (assuming a foster care situation) to abuse them to try to get them to treat them as their abusive birth parents did. The author also states that such children engage in pathological lying, invent stories of being abused, and refuse to take responsibility for their actions blaming others; such behavior continuing into adulthood.
I have often referred to "sin" as a disorder or malfunction of the human psyche (the very word in Greek, hamartia, meaning "error, malfunction, disorder, mistake", and used frequently in Greek literature to denote the "fatal flaw" which resides within every human being). I have also often referred to it as a kind of Spiritual Autism or Spiritual Asberger's Syndrome where the person initially is unable to communicate or socialize normally with God, or the spiritual world in general. I have also described the path of Jesus Christ as a kind of treatment plan for this disorder.
Now I would like to explore these elements, add one or two more, and then try to put a bigger picture together.
Another psychologist, Abraham Maslow, described what he called a hierarchy of needs, also referred to as Maslow's pyramid. In it he describes five levels of need, each level of which must be realized and satisfied before the person can progress upwards: 1)physiological, 2)safety and security, 3)love/belonging, 4)esteem, 5)self-actualization. This scheme is debated as to which level should go where, and that it doesn't always look the same in every individual, but the basic idea is sound. It is when a need is perceived as not being met that psychological aberrations begin to occur, and the person is often unable to progress to the next level.
Another piece of the puzzle I am attempting to put together lies in the descriptions given of experiences of deep prayer and meditation and even enlightenment among the various mystical traditions. To condense a great number of such witnesses, when one draws ever closer to God to the point where there is only the individual and God, and the lines begin to blur, the general consensus is the experience of overwhelming peace, joy, love, and fulfillment in knowing Him in an intimate way.
I would posit that the human being's "natural" state was to be in intimate constant relationship with God. Such a relationship would consistently and permanently meet all that person's needs for safety, love, belonging, esteem, and self-actualization. It would not matter if everything collapsed and burned down around them(as has also been reported as being experienced), this constant relationship and awareness would continuously provide that those needs would be met. I should add here that in this kind of relationship it would be understood that the physical needs, while important, would likely be considered of secondary importance (also reported as being experienced).
The hamartia disorder (no, I don't like using the word "sin" because of it's frequent misuse and abuse) renders the human being unable to communicate or relate "normally" with God. Like a person with Asperger's or Autism, the person is often aware of God, or rather aware of the absence of "Something", but is unable to socialize normally or experience normal relationship. It is not that God is not present, but that the person in question is unable to recognize that presence without promptings from Him, and even often with promptings the person is unable to recognize and respond appropriately to Him.
The leads to the perception that somehow God, the Primary Parent, is not present or is somehow neglectful of the person whether or not that is the actual reality. This then precipitates a kind of Attachment Disorder with God, or more often because of the initial disorder, our perception of God which is all too often a misperception or a fantasy created in our mind of what we expect God to be because of our lack of direct experience or "observation". The mind creates an image which to which it then attaches the label "God" with God Himself being formless and imageless. We lie, we refuse to take responsibility, we become abusive to ourselves, to our perception of God, and to other people. We cling to our perceptions or fantasies about God, or we reject them outright hoping that He will love us while we tell Him how much we hate Him.
This also lends itself to the conclusion that it is this primary disorder, hamartia, which is the root cause of all other disorders. Without the uninterrupted relationship from birth of the psyche to God, the psyche then turns to the people around the person to fulfill those needs perceived as being unfulfilled. This then leads to a Russian roulette where the person's apparent psychological health is dependent largely on the circumstances of his birth, childhood and upraising, as well as his own choices which are highly influenced by these factors.
Even after a person is baptized, and is so joined to God through being grafted onto Christ, there is still the matter of integrating that new state. The person has developed a lifetime of behaviors which developed while unable to respond to the presence of God, and now they must integrate that new sense and ability into their pattern of behavior which takes both time and practice. Integration does not happen immediately, and it must progress and occur before the full benefits of such Treatment can be realized, at least in this life.
It stands to reason that we will relate to God in the same way that we will relate to other people. If we present a false front to other people, we will likely attempt to do so with God. If we are honest with other people and open, we are likely to do so with God. If we are capable of dysfunctional relationships with other people, then we are equally capable of it with God and are likely to treat Him thus.
In spite of all this, God is still present. He still loves us. He still wants desperately for us to work through this and to know Him, knowing the whole time the kind of fight and struggle it will be. He wants us to succeed in this and ultimately to experience deep, intimate, normal relationship with Him. The way things were supposed to be.
In short, an attachment disorder occurs when a child fails, generally through either neglect or abuse, to form a healthy nurturing attachment to their parent. This in turn leads them to be unable to form healthy attachments to other people and can cause them to either cling to a person, or to completely reject and become abusive to the person, and in many cases to become abusive to themselves. The author of the article I had read stated that such children will often try to cause their foster parents (assuming a foster care situation) to abuse them to try to get them to treat them as their abusive birth parents did. The author also states that such children engage in pathological lying, invent stories of being abused, and refuse to take responsibility for their actions blaming others; such behavior continuing into adulthood.
I have often referred to "sin" as a disorder or malfunction of the human psyche (the very word in Greek, hamartia, meaning "error, malfunction, disorder, mistake", and used frequently in Greek literature to denote the "fatal flaw" which resides within every human being). I have also often referred to it as a kind of Spiritual Autism or Spiritual Asberger's Syndrome where the person initially is unable to communicate or socialize normally with God, or the spiritual world in general. I have also described the path of Jesus Christ as a kind of treatment plan for this disorder.
Now I would like to explore these elements, add one or two more, and then try to put a bigger picture together.
Another psychologist, Abraham Maslow, described what he called a hierarchy of needs, also referred to as Maslow's pyramid. In it he describes five levels of need, each level of which must be realized and satisfied before the person can progress upwards: 1)physiological, 2)safety and security, 3)love/belonging, 4)esteem, 5)self-actualization. This scheme is debated as to which level should go where, and that it doesn't always look the same in every individual, but the basic idea is sound. It is when a need is perceived as not being met that psychological aberrations begin to occur, and the person is often unable to progress to the next level.
Another piece of the puzzle I am attempting to put together lies in the descriptions given of experiences of deep prayer and meditation and even enlightenment among the various mystical traditions. To condense a great number of such witnesses, when one draws ever closer to God to the point where there is only the individual and God, and the lines begin to blur, the general consensus is the experience of overwhelming peace, joy, love, and fulfillment in knowing Him in an intimate way.
I would posit that the human being's "natural" state was to be in intimate constant relationship with God. Such a relationship would consistently and permanently meet all that person's needs for safety, love, belonging, esteem, and self-actualization. It would not matter if everything collapsed and burned down around them(as has also been reported as being experienced), this constant relationship and awareness would continuously provide that those needs would be met. I should add here that in this kind of relationship it would be understood that the physical needs, while important, would likely be considered of secondary importance (also reported as being experienced).
The hamartia disorder (no, I don't like using the word "sin" because of it's frequent misuse and abuse) renders the human being unable to communicate or relate "normally" with God. Like a person with Asperger's or Autism, the person is often aware of God, or rather aware of the absence of "Something", but is unable to socialize normally or experience normal relationship. It is not that God is not present, but that the person in question is unable to recognize that presence without promptings from Him, and even often with promptings the person is unable to recognize and respond appropriately to Him.
The leads to the perception that somehow God, the Primary Parent, is not present or is somehow neglectful of the person whether or not that is the actual reality. This then precipitates a kind of Attachment Disorder with God, or more often because of the initial disorder, our perception of God which is all too often a misperception or a fantasy created in our mind of what we expect God to be because of our lack of direct experience or "observation". The mind creates an image which to which it then attaches the label "God" with God Himself being formless and imageless. We lie, we refuse to take responsibility, we become abusive to ourselves, to our perception of God, and to other people. We cling to our perceptions or fantasies about God, or we reject them outright hoping that He will love us while we tell Him how much we hate Him.
This also lends itself to the conclusion that it is this primary disorder, hamartia, which is the root cause of all other disorders. Without the uninterrupted relationship from birth of the psyche to God, the psyche then turns to the people around the person to fulfill those needs perceived as being unfulfilled. This then leads to a Russian roulette where the person's apparent psychological health is dependent largely on the circumstances of his birth, childhood and upraising, as well as his own choices which are highly influenced by these factors.
Even after a person is baptized, and is so joined to God through being grafted onto Christ, there is still the matter of integrating that new state. The person has developed a lifetime of behaviors which developed while unable to respond to the presence of God, and now they must integrate that new sense and ability into their pattern of behavior which takes both time and practice. Integration does not happen immediately, and it must progress and occur before the full benefits of such Treatment can be realized, at least in this life.
It stands to reason that we will relate to God in the same way that we will relate to other people. If we present a false front to other people, we will likely attempt to do so with God. If we are honest with other people and open, we are likely to do so with God. If we are capable of dysfunctional relationships with other people, then we are equally capable of it with God and are likely to treat Him thus.
In spite of all this, God is still present. He still loves us. He still wants desperately for us to work through this and to know Him, knowing the whole time the kind of fight and struggle it will be. He wants us to succeed in this and ultimately to experience deep, intimate, normal relationship with Him. The way things were supposed to be.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
A Ramble About Burning the Qur'an
If you're a news junkie like me (yes, I have high speed news again!), and maybe if you're not, you've probably heard about the decision by a pastor down south to hold an "International Burn the Koran Day." From what I understand, in spite of repeated statements and requests by the US government, including General Petraeus who happens to be responsible for the lives of the men and women serving overseas in Afghanistan; in spite of these high level requests this church still intends to go ahead with this.
At first glance, I must admit that I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, no, I don't agree with Islam, and I don't agree with the Koran on most points, although I was surprised at how much we do agree on and what we agree on having read through part of it. That one of the feelings that comes into my mind.
But it's the other which comes into my mind more strongly. This is the feeling of, "How can you possibly call this a Christian act when it is direct contradiction to what Jesus taught?" And, by extension, "how can you call yourself a Christian?"
Jesus taught us to love our enemies, to do good to those who hate us, to bless those who persecute us, and to pray for those who abuse us. How is burning the most sacred book in the Islamic world loving them? How is performing an act of vengeance and petty spite doing good to them? In short, how does this action pass the acid test of what Jesus actually taught and lived when, as He was being nailed to a cross, prayed for the forgiveness of his tormentors? How does this give and display Jesus to the Muslim world?
Another teaching of Jesus comes into my mind, and that is "how can you see clearly enough to remove a splinter from another's eye when you have a log in your own?" And also, "don't judge so that you won't be judged; don't condemn, so that you won't be condemned; forgive and you will be forgiven."
Burning the Koran is, in some ways, an illustration of pointing out the faults and errors of everyone else around you, while being completely blind to your own. The basic practice of the Christian faith is to look deeply at your own errors and admit them. To recognize that there is something wrong with you. The primary focus must be on one's own spiritual problem, not everyone else's. Burning someone else's Koran doesn't do anything to advance one's own spiritual growth and it only drives them further away from Truth, not closer to it. You have to let them do the burning when they're ready and prompted by Grace and the Holy Spirit, otherwise they will only draw farther away.
There was a scene in the recent remake of "The Karate Kid" where Mr. Han takes his student out of the professional Kung-Fu teacher's dojo and then declares adamantly that "That is not Kung-Fu! That is a bad man teaching very bad things!"
This Pastor who plans this... "That is not Christianity! That is a misguided and ignorant man teaching very bad things!" I hope the Muslim world understands that.
At first glance, I must admit that I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, no, I don't agree with Islam, and I don't agree with the Koran on most points, although I was surprised at how much we do agree on and what we agree on having read through part of it. That one of the feelings that comes into my mind.
But it's the other which comes into my mind more strongly. This is the feeling of, "How can you possibly call this a Christian act when it is direct contradiction to what Jesus taught?" And, by extension, "how can you call yourself a Christian?"
Jesus taught us to love our enemies, to do good to those who hate us, to bless those who persecute us, and to pray for those who abuse us. How is burning the most sacred book in the Islamic world loving them? How is performing an act of vengeance and petty spite doing good to them? In short, how does this action pass the acid test of what Jesus actually taught and lived when, as He was being nailed to a cross, prayed for the forgiveness of his tormentors? How does this give and display Jesus to the Muslim world?
Another teaching of Jesus comes into my mind, and that is "how can you see clearly enough to remove a splinter from another's eye when you have a log in your own?" And also, "don't judge so that you won't be judged; don't condemn, so that you won't be condemned; forgive and you will be forgiven."
Burning the Koran is, in some ways, an illustration of pointing out the faults and errors of everyone else around you, while being completely blind to your own. The basic practice of the Christian faith is to look deeply at your own errors and admit them. To recognize that there is something wrong with you. The primary focus must be on one's own spiritual problem, not everyone else's. Burning someone else's Koran doesn't do anything to advance one's own spiritual growth and it only drives them further away from Truth, not closer to it. You have to let them do the burning when they're ready and prompted by Grace and the Holy Spirit, otherwise they will only draw farther away.
There was a scene in the recent remake of "The Karate Kid" where Mr. Han takes his student out of the professional Kung-Fu teacher's dojo and then declares adamantly that "That is not Kung-Fu! That is a bad man teaching very bad things!"
This Pastor who plans this... "That is not Christianity! That is a misguided and ignorant man teaching very bad things!" I hope the Muslim world understands that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)