theology of disability, spirituality of disability, panentheism, nondual, nonduality, intersubjective intimacy, intraobjective identity, interobjective indeterminacy, intrasubjective integrity, thomas keating, unitary being, unitive consciousness, ultimate consciousness, unity consciousness

1. check out the 2 articles on disability at the bottom of these notes (url below) for a
more thorough consideration of why we do not devalue any part of the spectrum
of our human engagement of God!
http://www.scribd.com/doc/88636182/All-Stages-of-Human-Development-Are-
Absolutely-Valuable
In terms of knowledge and love, Christians are nondualists. Ontologically,
though, neither dual nor nondual models are conceptually coherent; it seems we
invoke the former to stop infinite regressions and the latter to avoid causal
disjunctions, while neither escapes tautological question-begging. It seems to me
that, dualistically, we experience a robustly relational intersubjective intimacy
even as, nondualistically, we enjoy a sort of intraobjective identity vis a vis
God, what some panentheists describe as an immersion in a divine matrix, all
which leaves us as quasi-autonomous creatures, while beyond both of those
putative realities there lies what would be an interobjective indeterminacy to
which we can refer but not describe. These may roughly correspond to our
(manifold and mulitform & varying in degree) experiences of 1) unitive, 2)
unitary (or unity) and 3) ultimate reality, which, in my view, respectively
convey, albeit inchoately, 1) how, 2) how much and 3) how very much beyond
our ability to imagine — we are loved. I appreciate that some dualistic
paradigms imagine that we enjoy varying degrees of beatitude both per some
sort of spiritual meritocracy as well as per various types of growth paradigms but
… having been loved just as I am …
1