Christianity
In one or two posts I have referred to what I term "Jesusainity". This is not meant to have been disparaging in any essential way, although I must admit to being dismayed by those who insist upon "one way only" and who then cite the usual couple of verses from the New Testament that they consider closes the matter.
If anyone is interested - and I guess that most are not, either being non-religious in any way, or being an ardent "one wayer" convinced of their infallibility - then I would simply seek to explain.
There is Jesusainity and there is Christianity.
Relevant here is a form of debate, argumentation, discussion, more prevalent in the East than the West i.e. argument by relegation. Here opposing positions are treated not by refuting them, but by accepting them as true, but only true as a part of the full picture. Logically, it broadens the scope of discussion. Even if I am persuaded that another鈥檚 view is incorrect in some respect, it is nevertheless a real point of view and my theory of reality must be able to account for its existence. In effect the discussion involves not refuting the position of another but will be competing over which position can relegate which. And so, which is relegated? Jesusainity or Christianity?
Christianity simply says that the words (found in the most "spiritual" of the Gospels, St John) "I am the way the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father but by me" are the words of the Eternal Logos - as spoken of in the prelude to St John's Gospel.
Again, the "no other name" verse should be seen in the context of its historical proclamation, this in line with the Catholic Church's understanding of how we should approach and understand inspired scripture:-
[i]To search out the intention of the sacred writers, attention should be given, among other things, to "literary forms." For truth is set forth and expressed differently in texts which are variously historical, prophetic, poetic, or of other forms of discourse. The interpreter must investigate what meaning the sacred writer intended to express and actually expressed in particular circumstances by using contemporary literary forms in accordance with the situation of his own time and culture. For the correct understanding of what the sacred author wanted to assert, due attention must be paid to the customary and characteristic styles of feeling, speaking and narrating which prevailed at the time of the sacred writer, and to the patterns men normally employed at that period in their everyday dealings with one another[/i]. (Dei Verbum, III, 12, 2)
(Again, in this instance, as is said, "what is in a name"? "Jesus" is simply an anglicised form of the original Hebrew name)
Accepting all this, what do we have? Christianity expands beyond the theology of the Protestant Reform Tradition, which is time-conditioned, insular and in fact shut off from the whole world of our various Faith Traditions, enclosed within itself, the "only truth". Expands instead to embrace all movements of the Spirit (that "blows where it will") - which explains just why the fruits of the spirit.....
[i]The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faith, gentleness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law.[/i]
.....can be seen throughout history, in various individuals, of all Faiths, and sometimes of none. The Lord knows his own, as is said!
Thomas Merton once said that we should never presume that Christ is in our own heart if we cannot also see Him and find Him in the hearts of others most remote from ourselves. I think this is true.
I guess I am quite "remote" to some here (especially to one who has blocked me......馃榾) being a non-theistic Buddhist of the Pure Land path. But we say:-
[i]My eyes being hindered by blind passions,
I cannot perceive the light that grasps me;
Yet the great compassion, without tiring,
Illumines me always
[/i]
(Shinran, from "Hymns of the Pure Land Masters", verse 95)
Which corresponds with the words of Julian of Norwich of the theistic Christian tradition:-
[i]If there be anywhere on earth a lover of God who is always kept safe, I know nothing of it, for it was not shown to me. But this was shown: that in falling and rising again we are always kept in that same precious love.
[/i]
I appreciate that there will be some who will continue to believe and insist that the God they worship turns His face away from those who - in their own time worn phrase - have not "accepted Jesus as their own personal Savior". Yet all I am saying here is that in Christianity, just how Christ is "accepted" can take infinite forms according to the almost infinite number of individual human beings.
The spirit blows where it will.
That is all. Make of it what you will.
If anyone is interested - and I guess that most are not, either being non-religious in any way, or being an ardent "one wayer" convinced of their infallibility - then I would simply seek to explain.
There is Jesusainity and there is Christianity.
Relevant here is a form of debate, argumentation, discussion, more prevalent in the East than the West i.e. argument by relegation. Here opposing positions are treated not by refuting them, but by accepting them as true, but only true as a part of the full picture. Logically, it broadens the scope of discussion. Even if I am persuaded that another鈥檚 view is incorrect in some respect, it is nevertheless a real point of view and my theory of reality must be able to account for its existence. In effect the discussion involves not refuting the position of another but will be competing over which position can relegate which. And so, which is relegated? Jesusainity or Christianity?
Christianity simply says that the words (found in the most "spiritual" of the Gospels, St John) "I am the way the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father but by me" are the words of the Eternal Logos - as spoken of in the prelude to St John's Gospel.
Again, the "no other name" verse should be seen in the context of its historical proclamation, this in line with the Catholic Church's understanding of how we should approach and understand inspired scripture:-
[i]To search out the intention of the sacred writers, attention should be given, among other things, to "literary forms." For truth is set forth and expressed differently in texts which are variously historical, prophetic, poetic, or of other forms of discourse. The interpreter must investigate what meaning the sacred writer intended to express and actually expressed in particular circumstances by using contemporary literary forms in accordance with the situation of his own time and culture. For the correct understanding of what the sacred author wanted to assert, due attention must be paid to the customary and characteristic styles of feeling, speaking and narrating which prevailed at the time of the sacred writer, and to the patterns men normally employed at that period in their everyday dealings with one another[/i]. (Dei Verbum, III, 12, 2)
(Again, in this instance, as is said, "what is in a name"? "Jesus" is simply an anglicised form of the original Hebrew name)
Accepting all this, what do we have? Christianity expands beyond the theology of the Protestant Reform Tradition, which is time-conditioned, insular and in fact shut off from the whole world of our various Faith Traditions, enclosed within itself, the "only truth". Expands instead to embrace all movements of the Spirit (that "blows where it will") - which explains just why the fruits of the spirit.....
[i]The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faith, gentleness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law.[/i]
.....can be seen throughout history, in various individuals, of all Faiths, and sometimes of none. The Lord knows his own, as is said!
Thomas Merton once said that we should never presume that Christ is in our own heart if we cannot also see Him and find Him in the hearts of others most remote from ourselves. I think this is true.
I guess I am quite "remote" to some here (especially to one who has blocked me......馃榾) being a non-theistic Buddhist of the Pure Land path. But we say:-
[i]My eyes being hindered by blind passions,
I cannot perceive the light that grasps me;
Yet the great compassion, without tiring,
Illumines me always
[/i]
(Shinran, from "Hymns of the Pure Land Masters", verse 95)
Which corresponds with the words of Julian of Norwich of the theistic Christian tradition:-
[i]If there be anywhere on earth a lover of God who is always kept safe, I know nothing of it, for it was not shown to me. But this was shown: that in falling and rising again we are always kept in that same precious love.
[/i]
I appreciate that there will be some who will continue to believe and insist that the God they worship turns His face away from those who - in their own time worn phrase - have not "accepted Jesus as their own personal Savior". Yet all I am saying here is that in Christianity, just how Christ is "accepted" can take infinite forms according to the almost infinite number of individual human beings.
The spirit blows where it will.
That is all. Make of it what you will.
