This document summarizes the agreements and disagreements between Anglicans and Roman Catholics as outlined in reports from the International Anglican-Roman Catholic Commission for Unity and Mission from 2007. There are many areas of agreement around core theological issues like the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, baptism, scripture, Mary, and moral reasoning. However, there are also still divergences around questions of papal authority, the validity of Anglican ordinations, the ordination of women, eucharistic sharing, confession, divorce and remarriage, and specific issues like birth control and homosexuality. The document provides many excerpted examples of the agreed and disagreed upon theological statements to illustrate the ongoing dialogue between the two traditions.

1. Christian Nonduality
Anglican - Roman Dialogue
NEW: Cathlimergent
Internet Forum
The Christian
Nonduality Blog
Home
Radical Emergence -
Nonduality & the
Emerging Church
Emergence Happens
When:
To Avow & Dis-avow
an Axiological
Vision of the Whole
Montmarte,
Colorado Springs &
the Kingdom
Wanted: Women
Warriors
Maiden, Mother,
Crone & Queen:
archetypes &
transformation
East Meets West
Discipline, Doctrine & Dogma – Roman & Anglican
Ki, Qi, Chi, Prana &
Kundalini Dialogue
No-Self & Nirvana
elucidated by I once strongly considered converting from Roman to Anglican
Dumoulin Catholic, likely agonizing as much as
One: Essential
Writings in Newman, who converted in the opposite direction. How many times
Nonduality - a review have progressive Roman Catholics
Simone Weil
been sarcastically urged to go ahead and convert by various
John of the Cross
fundamentalistic traditionalists since our
Thomas Merton
The True Self
beliefs were "not in keeping with the faith?"
The Passion After all, while there has never been an infallible papal pronouncement
Hermeneutical to which I could not give my
Eclecticism &
Interreligious wholehearted assent, I otherwise do adamantly disagree with many
Dialogue
hierarchical positions such as regarding
The Spirit
a married priesthood, women priests, obligatory confession,
Christian Nonduality
eucharistic sharing, divorce and remarriage,
more on Nonduality
The Contemplative artificial contraception, various so-called grave & intrinsic moral
Stance disorders of human sexuality or any
Hesychasm
indubitable and a priori definitions employed vis a vis human
Mysticism - properly
considered
personhood and theological anthropology.
Karl Rahner At times, I truly have wondered if I belonged to Rome or Canterbury,
Wounded Innocence and I suspect many of you have, too,
Rogation Days and, perhaps, still do? My short answer is: You're already home; take a
Radical Orthodoxy look around ...

2. Presuppositionalism
vs Nihilism? In other words, for example, take a look, below, at some excerpts from
Science
the September 2007 report of the
Epistemic Virtue International Anglican - Roman Catholic Commission for Unity and
Pan-semio- Mission: Growing Together in Unity
entheism: a
pneumatological and Mission: Building on 40 years of Anglican - Roman Catholic
theology of nature
Dialogue.
Architectonic
Does anyone see any differences in essential dogma? Are some of you
Anglican - Roman
Dialogue not rather surprised at the extent of
The Ethos of Eros
agreement, especially given the nature of same?
Musings on Peirce
Are our differences not rather located in such accidentals as matters of
Eskimo Kiss Waltz
church discipline or in such moral
the Light Side of
Dark Comedy teachings where Catholics can exercise legitimate choices in their
Blog Visits moral decision-making? (To be sure,
Other Online
Resources
there
Are YOU Going to has been a creeping infallibility in such differences but there have
Scarborough Fair?
never been infallible pronouncements
Suggested Reading
regarding same.)
Tim King's Post
Christian Blog
"As we shall see, reputable theologians defend positions on moral
The Dylan Mass
issues contrary to the official teaching of
If You Are In
Distress, Spiritual or the Roman magisterium. If Catholics have the right to follow such
Otherwise
options, they must have the right to
pending
know that the options exist. It is wrong to attempt to conceal such
The Great Tradition
properly conceived knowledge from Catholics. It is wrong to
Postmodern present the official teachings, in Rahner's words, as though there were
Conservative
Catholic Pentecostal no doubt whatever about their
definitive correctness and as though further discussion about the
matter by Catholic theologians would be
inappropriate....To deprive Catholics of the knowledge of legitimate
choices in their moral decisionmaking,
to insist that moral issues are closed when actually they are still open,
is itself immoral." See:
“Probabilism: The Right to Know of Moral Options”, which is the third
chapter of __Why You Can
Disagree and Remain a Faithful Catholic__ and available online at
http://www.saintjohnsabbey.org/kaufman/chapter3.html
For those who have neither the time nor inclination for a long post,
you can safely consider the above as an
executive summary. My conclusion is that we belong neither to Rome
nor Canterbury, but to the Perfector
and Finisher of our faith. And I'm going to submit to
ever-ongoing finishing by blooming where I was planted among my
family, friends and co-religionists,
enjoying the very special communion between our Anglican, Roman
and Orthodox traditions, the special
fellowship of all my Christian sisters and brothers, and the general
fellowship of all persons of goodwill.

3. I gathered these excerpts together to highlight and summarize the
report but recognize these affirmations
should not be taken out of context. So, I made this url where the entire
document can be accessed:
http://tinyurl.com/35p69h
to foster the wide study of these agreed statements.
Below is my heavily redacted summary.
In reflecting on our faith together it is vital that all bishops ensure that
the Agreed Statements of ARCIC are
widely studied in both Communions.
The constitutive elements of ecclesial communion include: one faith,
one baptism, the one Eucharist,
acceptance of basic moral values, a ministry of oversight entrusted to
the episcopate with collegial and
primatial dimensions, and the episcopal ministry of a universal primate
as the visible focus of unity.
God desires the visible unity of all Christian people and that such unity
is itself part of our witness.
Through this theological dialogue over forty years Anglicans and
Roman Catholics have grown closer
together and have come to see that what they hold in common is far
greater than those things in which they
differ.
In liturgical celebrations, we regularly make the same trinitarian
profession of faith in the form of the
Apostles’ Creed or the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed.
In approaching Scripture, the Christian faithful draw upon the rich
diversity of methods of reading and
interpretation used throughout the Church’s history (e.g. historical-
critical, exegetical, typological,
spiritual, sociological, canonical). These methods, which all have
value, have been developed in many different contexts of the Church’s
life, which need to be recalled and
respected.
The Anglican Communion and the Catholic Church recognise the
baptism each confers.
Anglicans and Catholics agree that the full participation in the
Eucharist, together with Baptism and
Confirmation, completes the sacramental process of Christian
initiation.
We agree that the Eucharist is the memorial (anamnesis) of the
crucified and risen Christ, of the entire work
of reconciliation God has accomplished in him.
Anglicans and Catholics believe in the real presence of Christ in the
Eucharist.

4. While Christ is present and active in a variety of ways in the entire
eucharistic celebration, so that his
presence is not limited to the consecrated elements, the bread and wine
are not empty signs: Christ’s body
and blood become really present and are really given in these
elements.
We agree that the Eucharist is the “meal of the Kingdom”, in which the
Church gives thanks for all the
signs of the coming Kingdom.
We agree that those who are ordained have responsibility for the
ministry of Word and Sacrament.
Roman Catholics and Anglicans share this agreement concerning the
ministry of the whole people of God,
the distinctive ministry of the ordained, the threefold ordering of the
ministry, its apostolic origins,
character and succession, and the ministry of oversight.
Anglicans and Roman Catholics agree that councils can be recognised
as authoritative when they express
the common faith and mind of the Church, consonant with Scripture
and the Apostolic Tradition.
Primacy and collegiality are complementary dimensions of episcope,
exercised within the life of the whole
Church. (Anglicans recognise the ministry of the Archbishop of
Canterbury in precisely this way.)
The Roman Catholic Church teaches that the ministry of the Bishop of
Rome as universal primate is in
accordance with Christ’s will for the Church and an essential element
for maintaining it in unity and truth.
Anglicans rejected the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome as universal
primate in the sixteenth century.
Today, however, some Anglicans are beginning to see the potential
value of a ministry of universal
primacy, which would be exercised by the Bishop of Rome, as a sign
and focus of unity within a re-united
Church.
Anglicans and Roman Catholics both believe in the indefectibility of
the Church, that the Holy Spirit leads
the Church into all truth.
Both Anglicans and Catholics acknowledge that private confession
before a priest is a means of grace and
an effective declaration of the forgiveness of Christ in response to
repentance.
Throughout its history the Church has sought to be faithful in
following Christ’s command to heal, and this
has inspired countless acts of ministry in medical and hospital care.
Alongside this physical ministry, both

5. traditions have continued to exercise the sacramental ministry of
anointing.
Anglicans and Roman Catholics share similar ways of moral reasoning.
Both Communions speak of marriage as a covenant and a vocation to
holiness and see it in the order of
creation as both sign and reality of God’s faithful love.
All generations of Anglicans and Roman Catholics have called the
Virgin Mary ‘blessed’.
Anglicans and Roman Catholics agree that it is impossible to be faithful
to Scripture without giving due
attention to the person of Mary.
Genuine faith is more than assent: it is expressed in action.
Given our mutual recognition of one another’s baptism, a number of
practical initiatives are possible. Local
churches may consider developing joint programmes for the formation
of families when they present
children for baptism, as well as preparing common catechetical
resources for use in baptismal and
confirmation preparation and in Sunday Schools.
Given the significant extent of our common understanding of the
Eucharist, and the central importance of
the Eucharist to our faith, we encourage attendance at each other’s
Eucharists, respecting the different
disciplines of our churches.
We also encourage more frequent joint non-eucharistic worship,
including celebrations of faith,
pilgrimages, processions of witness (e.g. on Good Friday), and shared
public liturgies on significant
occasions. We encourage those who pray the daily office to explore
how celebrating daily prayer together
can reinforce their common mission.
We welcome the growing Anglican custom of including in the prayers
of the faithful a prayer for the Pope,
and we invite Roman Catholics to pray regularly in public for the
Archbishop of Canterbury and the leaders
of the Anglican Communion.
We note the close similarities of Anglican and Roman Catholic
lectionaries which make it possible to foster
joint bible study groups based upon the Sunday lectionary.
There are numerous theological resources that can be shared,
including professional staff, libraries, and
formation and study programmes for clergy and laity.
Wherever possible, ordained and lay observers can be invited to attend
each other’s synodical and collegial
gatherings and conferences.

6. Anglicans and Roman Catholics share a rich heritage regarding the
place of religious orders in ecclesial
life. There are religious communities in both of our Communions that
trace their origins to the same
founders (e.g. Benedictines and Franciscans). We encourage the
continuation and strengthening of relations between Anglican and
Catholic religious orders, and
acknowledge the particular witness of monastic communities with an
ecumenical vocation.
There are many areas where pastoral and spiritual care can be shared.
We acknowledge the benefit derived
from many instances of spiritual direction given and received by
Anglicans to Catholics and Catholics to
Anglicans.
We recommend joint training where possible for lay ministries (e.g.
catechists, lectors, readers, teachers,
evangelists). We commend the sharing of the talents and resources of
lay ministers, particularly between
local Anglican and Roman Catholic parishes. We note the
potential for music ministries to enrich our relations and to strengthen
the Church’s outreach to the wider
society, especially young people.
We encourage joint participation in evangelism, developing specific
strategies to engage with those who
have yet to hear and respond to the Gospel.
We invite our churches to consider the development of joint
Anglican/Roman Catholic church schools,
shared teacher training programmes and contemporary religious
education curricula for use in our schools.
END OF EXCERPTS regarding stated agreements
Below are excerpts recognizing DIVERGENCES regarding: 1) papal and
teaching authority 2) the
recognition and validity of Anglican Orders and ministries 3)
ordination of women 4) eucharistic sharing 5)
obligatory confession 6) divorce and remarriage 7) the precise moment
a human person is formed 8)
methods of birth control 9) homosexual activity and 10) human
sexuality.
Thanks,
JB
BEGIN EXCERPTS regarding stated disagreements:
While already we can affirm together that universal primacy, as a
visible focus of unity, is “a gift to be
shared”, able to be “offered and received even before our Churches are
in full communion”, nevertheless

7. serious questions remain for Anglicans regarding the nature and
jurisdictional consequences of universal primacy.
There are further divergences in the way in which teaching authority in
the life of the Church is exercised
and the authentic tradition is discerned.
In his Apostolic Letter on Anglican Orders, Apostolicae Curae (1896),
Pope Leo XIII ruled against the
validity of Anglican Orders. The question of validity remains a
fundamental obstacle to the recognition of
Anglican ministries by the Catholic Church. In the light of the
agreements on the Eucharist and ministry set out both in the ARCIC
statements and in the official
responses of both Communions, there is evidence that we have a
common intention in ordination and in the
celebration of the Eucharist. This awareness would have to be part of
any fresh evaluation of Anglican
Orders.
Anglicans and Roman Catholics hold that there is an inextricable link
between Eucharist and Ministry.
Without recognition and reconciliation of ministries, therefore, it is not
possible to realise the full impact of
our common understanding of the Eucharist.
The twentieth century saw much discussion across the whole Christian
family on the question of the
ordination of women. The Roman Catholic Church points to the
unbroken tradition of the Church in not
ordaining women. Indeed, Pope John Paul II expressed the conviction
that “the Church has no authority
whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women”. After careful
reflection and debate, a growing number
of Anglican Churches have
proceeded to ordain women to the presbyterate and some also to the
episcopate.
Churches of the Anglican Communion and the Roman Catholic
Church therefore have different disciplines
for eucharistic sharing. The Catholic Church does not permit the
Catholic faithful to receive the Eucharist
from, nor Catholic clergy to concelebrate with, those whose
ministry has not been officially recognised by the Catholic Church.
Anglican provinces regularly admit to
communion baptised believers who are communicant members from
other Christian communities.
Despite our common moral foundations, serious disagreements on
specific issues exist, some of which have
emerged in the long period of our separation.

8. Anglicans and Catholics have a different practice in respect of private
confession. “The Reformers’
emphasis on the direct access of the sinner to the forgiving and
sustaining Word of God led Anglicans to
reject the view that private confession before a priest was obligatory,
although they continued to maintain
that it was a wholesome means of grace, and made provision for it in
the Book of Common Prayer for those
with an unquiet and sorely troubled conscience.” Anglicans express
this discipline in the short formula ‘all
may, none must, some should’.
Whilst both Communions recognise that marriage is for life, both have
also had to recognise the failure of
many marriages in reality. For Roman Catholics, it is not possible
however to dissolve the marriage bond
once sacramentally constituted because of its indissoluble
character, as it signifies the covenantal relationship of Christ with the
Church. On certain grounds,
however, the Catholic Church recognises that a true marriage was
never contracted and a declaration of
nullity may be granted by the proper authorities. Anglicans have been
willing to recognise divorce
following the breakdown of a marriage, and in recent years, some
Anglican Churches have set forth
circumstances in which they are prepared to allow
partners from an earlier marriage to enter into another marriage.
Anglicans and Roman Catholics share the same fundamental teaching
concerning the mystery of human
life and the sanctity of the human person, but they differ in the way in
which they develop and apply this
fundamental moral teaching. Anglicans have no agreed teaching
concerning the precise moment from
which the new human life developing in the womb is to be given the
full protection due to a human person.
Roman Catholic teaching is that the human embryo must be treated as
a human person from the moment of
conception and rejects all direct abortion.
Anglicans and Roman Catholics agree that there are situations when a
couple would be morally justified in
avoiding bringing children into being. They are not agreed on the
method by which the responsibility of
parents is exercised.
Catholic teaching holds that homosexual activity is intrinsically
disordered and always objectively wrong.
Strong tensions have surfaced within the Anglican Communion
because of serious challenges from within

9. some Provinces to the traditional teaching on human
sexuality which was expressed in Resolution 1.10 of the 1998 Lambeth
Conference.
In the discussions on human sexuality within the Anglican
Communion, and between it and the Catholic
Church, stand anthropological and biblical hermeneutical questions
which need to be addressed.
END OF EXCERPTS regarding stated disagreements, some of which
seem rather incoherent once
considering certain of the agreements (for example, not recognizing
Anglican Orders and ministries!
Gimme a break!!!).
Discipline, Doctrine or Dogma? the Roman-Anglican CATHOLIC
Dialogue
I like to think of liberal and conservative, progressive and traditionalist,
in terms of
charisms, something analogous to pilgrims and settlers. And there is
room for the via
media, the middle path, something analogous to bridge-builders,
which might be the
loneliest and most difficult for, as Richard Rohr observes, they get
walked on by folks
coming from both directions.
Unfortunately, too much of what we see is nowadays is better
described in terms of maximalism,
minimalism and a/historicism. I'll unpack those terms below. Too
many so-called progressives consider
essential and core teachings as accidental and peripheral; too many so-
called traditionalists consider
accidental and peripheral teachings as essential and core. In essentials,
unity; in accidentals, diversity; in all
things, charity. (attributed to Augustine)
Ormond Rush writes, in Determining Catholic Orthodoxy: Monologue
or Dialogue (PACIFICA 12 (JUNE
1999): "The patristic scholar Rowan Williams speaks of 'orthodoxy as
always lying in the future'".
(see http://tinyurl.com/2p5q7w for the article)
Rush continues: Mathematicians talk of an asymptotic line that
continually approaches a given curve but
does not meet it at a finite distance. Somewhat like those two lines,
ressourcement and aggiornamento
never meet; the meeting point always lies ahead of the church as it
moves forward in history. Orthodoxy, in
that sense, lies always in the future. Christian truth is eschatological
truth. The church must continually
wait on the Holy Spirit to lead it to the fullness of truth.

10. Ressourcement and aggiornamento will only finally meet at that point
when history ends at the fullness of
time. "For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to
face. Now I know only in part; then I
will know fully, even as I have been fully known." (1 Cor 13:12)
To unpack this meaning further, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ressourcement
In that Pacifica article, Rush draws distinctions between: 1) revelation
as propositional, where faith is
primarily assent and revelation as personalist, where faith is the
response of the whole person in loving
self-surrender to God; 2) verbal orthodoxy and lived orthopraxy; 3) the
Christological and
pneumatological; 4) hierarchical ecclesiology and communio
ecclesiology; and 5) monologic notion of
authority evoking passive obedience and dialogic notion of authority
evoking active obedience.
Rush then describes the extremes of on one hand,
1) dogmatic maximalism, where all beliefs are given equal weight;
2) magisterial maximalism, where the ecclesial magisterium, alone, has
access to the Holy Spirit;
3) dogmatic ahistoricism, where God's meaning and will are fixed and
clear to be seen;
and, on the other hand,
1) dogmatic minimalism, where all dogmatic statements are equally
unimportant;
2) magisterial minimalism, where communal guidance in
interpretation is superfluous;
3) dogmatic historicism, with an unmitigated relativist position
regarding human knowledge.
Rush finally describes and commends a VIA MEDIA between the
positions.
He notes that the church does not call the faithful that we may believe
in dogma, doctrine and disciplines
but, rather, to belief in God.
He describes how statements vary in relationship to the foundation of
faith vis a vis a Hierarchy of Truth
and thus have different weight:
to be believed as divinely revealed;
to be held as definitively proposed;
or as nondefinitively taught and requiring obsequium religiosum (see
discussion below re: obsequium).
The faithful reception of revelation requires interplay between the
different "witnesses" of revelation:
scripture, tradition, magisterium, sensus fidelium, theological

11. scholarship, including reason (philosophy)
and experience (biological & behavioral sciences, personal testimonies,
etc).
Rush thus asks: "How does the Holy Spirit guarantee orthodox
traditioning of the Gospel? According to
Dei Verbum, 'the help of the Holy Spirit' is manifested in the activity of
three distinguishable yet
overlapping groups of witnesses to the Gospel: the magisterium, the
whole people of God, and theologians.
The Holy Spirit guides each group of witnesses in different ways and to
different degrees; but no one alone
has possession of the Spirit of Truth."
Rush further asks: "The determination of orthodoxy needs to address
questions concerning the issue of
consensus in each of these three authorities. What constitutes a
consensus among theologians and how is it
to be ascertained? What constitutes a consensus among the one billion
Catholics throughout the world and
how is it to be ascertained? What constitutes a collegial consensus
among the bishops of the world with the
pope, and how is that consensus to be ascertained?"
As for obsequium religiosum, from
http://www.womenpriests.org/teaching/orsy3_2.asp
where it is written:
"Accordingly, the duty to offer obsequium may bind to respect, or to
submission-or to any other attitude
between the two."
"When the council spoke of religious obsequium it meant an attitude
toward the church which is rooted in
the virtue of religion, the love of God and the love of his church. This
attitude in every concrete case will
be in need of further specification, which could be 'respect', or could be
'submission,' depending on the
progress the church has made in clarifying its own beliefs. ... [W]e can
speak of obsequium fidei (one with
the believing church holding firm to a doctrine) ... [or] an obsequium
religiosum (one with the searching
church, working for clarification)."
Thus, on matters of dogma, I give obsequium fidei, and unqualified
assent (or submission); this includes
the creeds, the sacraments, the approach to scripture. On matters of
moral doctrine and church discipline, I
give my deference (or respect), even as I dissent, out of loyalty, on
many issues: married priests, women's
ordination, eucharistic sharing, obligatory confession, various moral
teachings re: so-called gravely,

12. intrinsic disorders of human sexuality; artificial contraception, etc.
Christian Nonduality
http://twitter.com/johnssylvest
Bird Photos by David Joseph Sylvest
johnboy@christiannonduality.com

13. Christian Nonduality
Maiden, Mother, Crone & Queen: archetypes & transformation
NEW: Cathlimergent
Internet Forum
The Christian
Nonduality Blog
Home
Radical Emergence -
Nonduality & the
Emerging Church
Emergence Happens
When:
To Avow & Dis-avow
an Axiological
Vision of the Whole
Montmarte,
Colorado Springs &
the Kingdom
Wanted: Women
Warriors
Maiden, Mother,
Crone & Queen:
archetypes &
transformation
East Meets West
Ki, Qi, Chi, Prana & There are rather clear archetypal themes playing out in our
Kundalini cosmologies and axiologies, likely related to brain development and
No-Self & Nirvana individuation processes.
elucidated by
Dumoulin A cosmology engages mostly our left-brain (thinking function of the
One: Essential left frontal cortex & sensing function of the left posterior convexity) as
Writings in
Nonduality - a review the normative and descriptive aspects of value-realization alternately
Simone Weil
establish and defend boundaries; we encounter the King-Queen and
Warrior-Maiden with their light and dark (shadow) attributes as
John of the Cross
expressed in the journeys of the spirit and the body, primarily through
Thomas Merton
a language of ascent.
The True Self
The Passion An axiology engages mostly our right-brain (intuiting function of the
Hermeneutical
right frontal cortex & feeling function of the right posterior convexity)
Eclecticism & as the interpretive and evaluative aspects of value-realization
Interreligious
Dialogue
alternately negotiate (e.g. reconciliation of opposites, harnessing the
power of paradox) and transcend boundaries; we encounter the Crone-
The Spirit
Magician and Mother-Lover with their light and dark attributes as
Christian Nonduality
expressed in the journeys of the soul and the other (Thou), primarily
more on Nonduality
through a language of descent.
The Contemplative
Stance
Hesychasm
Mysticism - properly
considered
Karl Rahner
Wounded Innocence
Rogation Days
Radical Orthodoxy

14. Presuppositionalism
vs Nihilism?
Science
Epistemic Virtue
Pan-semio-
entheism: a
pneumatological
theology of nature
Architectonic
Anglican - Roman
Dialogue
The Ethos of Eros
Musings on Peirce
Eskimo Kiss Waltz
the Light Side of
Dark Comedy Our propositional cosmologies and participatory axiologies seem to
Blog Visits best foster transformation when, beyond our passive reception of them
Other Online as stories about others, we actively engage the archetypal energies of
Resources their mythic dimensions for ourselves, with a contemplation ordered
Are YOU Going to toward action, and further, when, in addition to our rather selfish
Scarborough Fair?
inclinations and puerile expectations, they also include:
Suggested Reading
Tim King's Post
1) a priestly voice that sings of the intrinsic beauty to be celebrated in
Christian Blog seemingly repugnant realities
The Dylan Mass
2) a prophetic voice that is robustly self-critical when speaking the
If You Are In
truth
Distress, Spiritual or
Otherwise
3) a kingly voice that articulates a bias for the bottom, expressing both
pending
a privileging of the marginalized and a principle of subsidiarity when
The Great Tradition preserving goodness
properly conceived
Postmodern 4) a motherly voice that, seeing and calling all as her children, draws
Conservative every person into her circle of compassion and mercy with no trace of
Catholic Pentecostal
exclusion, only a vision of unity.
The Judaeo-Christian Mythos thus articulates a Way of the Cross,
where the Magician, Warrior, King & Lover are further initiated as
Priest, Prophet, King & Mother. The virtues and vices, health and
dysfunctions, light and shadow, of each archetype play out in terms of
boundary negotiation, defense, establishment and transcendence,
which have both authentic and counterfeit expressions. Such are the
dynamics explored in spiritual direction, enneagram work, personality
& adjustment psychology, individuation processes and the manifold
stage theories for intellectual, affective, moral, socio-political and faith
development of humans along the purgative, illuminative and unitive
ways. Such are the themes, then, that run through the dynamics of
addiction psychology and codependency, the false self and true self,
sexual exploitation versus intimacy, socialization versus
transformation, ego defense mechanisms and the persona, inordinate
attachments and disordered appetites, idolatry and kenosis, as they all
involve healthy and unhealthy, loving and sinful, boundary realities.
http://twitter.com/johnssylvest

15.
Christian Nonduality
http://twitter.com/johnssylvest
Bird Photos by David Joseph Sylvest
johnboy@christiannonduality.com

16. Christian Nonduality
Architectonic
NEW: Cathlimergent
Internet Forum
The Christian
Nonduality Blog
Home
Radical Emergence -
Nonduality & the
Emerging Church
Emergence Happens
When:
To Avow & Dis-avow
an Axiological
Vision of the Whole
Montmarte,
Colorado Springs &
the Kingdom
Wanted: Women
Warriors
Maiden, Mother,
Crone & Queen:
archetypes &
transformation
East Meets West
NOTES ON DEVISING AN ARCHITECTONIC-ORGANON
Ki, Qi, Chi, Prana &
Kundalini OF HUMAN KNOWLEDGE
No-Self & Nirvana
elucidated by 1) To describe Reality, devise an Architectonic/Organon of Human
Dumoulin Knowledge of
One: Essential
Writings in Environing Realities, which would include ourselves.
Nonduality - a review
2) To describe ourselves, devise such an account as would include the
Simone Weil
Human
John of the Cross
Thomas Merton Knowledge Manifold as an Environed Reality, which would include
both evaluative and
The True Self
The Passion rational continuua.
Hermeneutical 3) When devising a model of epistemic virtue (values), avoid the usual
Eclecticism &
Interreligious (and many)
Dialogue
overworked distinctions and employ the very real but often under-
The Spirit
appreciated
Christian Nonduality
more on Nonduality dichotomies.
The Contemplative 4) In our modal arguments for this or that reality, we must rigorously
Stance
define and
Hesychasm
Mysticism - properly
disambiguate our terms. Employ such criteria that, if met, will
considered guarantee the conceptual
Karl Rahner
compatibility of any attributes we employ in our conceptualizations of
Wounded Innocence
this or that reality.

17. Rogation Days
In order to be conceptually compatible, while, at the same time,
Radical Orthodoxy
avoiding any absurdities
Presuppositionalism
vs Nihilism? of parodied logic, attributes must not be logically impossible to
Science coinstantiate in our
Epistemic Virtue
arguments and they must also be described in terms that define a
Pan-semio-
entheism: a
reality's negative
pneumatological
theology of nature properties. For an example, see:
Architectonic http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=47897 and use
Anglican - Roman your edit/find
Dialogue
browser facility to scroll down quickly to the first occurrence of the
The Ethos of Eros
word “negativity”
Musings on Peirce
Eskimo Kiss Waltz and then also for the name of philosopher “Richard Gale”
the Light Side of 5) In defining such attributes as will describe the various aspects of this
Dark Comedy
or that
Blog Visits
Other Online reality, we must draw the proper distinctions between those aspects
Resources that are predicated a)
Are YOU Going to
Scarborough Fair? univocally b) equivocally or c) relationally vis a vis other realities.
Suggested Reading
Univocal is defined as
Tim King's Post having one meaning only. Equivocal means subject to two or more
Christian Blog
interpretations. These
The Dylan Mass
accounts necessarily utilize some terms univocally and others
If You Are In
Distress, Spiritual or equivocally. The equivocal
Otherwise
can be either simply equivocal or analogical. The analogical can be
pending
attributive (if real
The Great Tradition
properly conceived causes and effects are invoked) or proportional (if we are invoking
Postmodern similarities in the
Conservative
Catholic Pentecostal relationships between two different pairs of terms). If such an
similarity is essential to
those terms we have a proper proportionality but if it is accidental we
have an improper
proportionality, a metaphor. And we use a lot of metaphors, even in
physics, and they all
eventually collapse.
6) In our attempts to increase our descriptive accuracy of this or that
reality, we
must be clear whether we are proceeding through a) affirmation
[kataphatically, the via
positiva] b) negation [apophatically, the via negativa] or c) eminence
[unitively, neither
kataphatically nor apophatically but, rather, equivocally]. We must be
clear whether we
are proceeding a) metaphorically b) literally or c) analogically
[affirming the
metaphorical while invoking further dissimilarities].The best examples
can be found in
the book described at this url = http://www.psupress.org/books/titles/0-

18. 271-01937-9.html
, Reality and Mystical Experience by F. Samuel Brainard.
7) We must be clear regarding our use of First Principles: a)
noncontradiction b)
excluded middle c) identity d) reality's intelligibility e) human
intelligence f) the
existence of other minds and such. See Robert Lane’s discussion:
http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/lane/p-prilan.htm
8) We must be mindful of godelian (and godelian-like) constraints on
our
argumentation: a) complete accounts in formal systems are necessarily
inconsistent b)
consistent accounts in formal systems are necessarily incomplete and
c) we can model the
rules but cannot explain them within their own formal symbol system
[must reaxiomatize,
which is to say prove them in yet another system, at the same time,
suggesting we can, indeed, see the truth of certain propositions that we
cannot otherwise
prove]. We thus distinguish between local and global explanatory
attempts, models of
partial vs total reality.See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gödel's_incompleteness_theorem
9) We must employ semantical [epistemological] vagueness, such that
for
attributes a) univocally predicated, excluded middle holds and
noncontradiction folds b)
equivocally predicated, both excluded middle and noncontradiction
hold and c)
relationally predicated, noncontradiction holds and excluded middle
folds. Ergo, re: First
Principles, you got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em,
know when to
walk away, know when to run. See Robert Lane’s discussion:
http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/lane/p-prilan.htm
10) We must understand and appreciate the integral nature of the
humanknowledge
manifold (with evaluative and rational continuua) and Lonergan's
sensation, abstraction
& judgment: sensation & perception, emotion & motivation, learning &
memory,
intuition & cognition, non- & pre-inferential, abductive inference,
inductive inference,
deductive inference and deliberation.
11) We must appreciate and understand the true efficacy of: abduction,

19. fast & frugal
decision-making, ecological rationality, evolutionary rationality,
pragmatic rationality,
bounded rationality, common sense; also of both propositional and
doxastic justification,
and affective judgment: both aesthetic and prudential, the latter
including both pragmatic
and moral affective judgment. See http://www.free-
definition.com/Abduction-(logic).html
12) We must draw the distinction between peircean argument
(abduction, hypothesis
generation) and argumentation (inductive & deductive inference).See
http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Reli/ReliKess.htm
13) We must draw a distinction between partial apprehension of a
reality and total
comprehension of a reality.
14) We must employ dialectical analysis, properly discerning where our
different
accounts of this or that reality a) agree b) converge c) complement or d)
dialectically
reverse. We must distinguish between this dialectic and hegelian
synthesis and resist false
irenicism, facile syncretism and insidious indifferentism, while
exercising due care in our
attempts to map conceptualizations from one account onto another.
Also, we should
employ our scholastic distinctions: im/possible, im/plausible,
im/probable and un/certain.
15) We must distinguish between the different types of paradox
encountered in our
various attempts to describe this or that reality a) veridical b) falsidical
c) conditional and
d) antinomial. We must recognize that all metaphysics are fatally
flawed and that their
root metaphors will eventually collapse in true antinomial paradox of
a) infinite regress
b) causal disjunction or c) circular referentiality [ipse dixit - stipulated
beginning or
petitio - question begging]. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox
16) As part and parcel of the isomorphicity implied in our
epistemological
vagueness, we must employ ontological vagueness, which is to say that
we must prescind
from the necessary to the probable in our modal logic. This applies to
the dance between
chance & necessity, pattern & paradox, random & systematic, order &

20. chaos.See
http://uhavax.hartford.edu/moen/PeirceRev2.html and the distinctions
between necessary
and non-necessary reasonings and also probable deductions.
17) We must properly integrate our classical causal distinctions such
that the
axiological/teleological [instrumental & formal] mediates between the
epistemological
[formal] and cosmological/ontological [efficient/material]. These
comprise a process and
not rather discrete events.This follows the grammar that the normative
sciences mediate
between our phenomenology and our metaphysics. See
http://hosting.uaa.alaska.edu/afjjl/LinkedDocuments/LiszkaSynopsisPeirce.htm
18) We must recognize the idea of emergence is mostly a heuristic
device inasmuch
as it has some descriptive accuracy but only limited predictive, hence,
explanatory
adequacy. It predicts novelty but cannot specify its nature.
Supervenience is even more
problematical, trivial when described as weak (and usually associated
with strong
emergence), question begging re: reducibility when described as strong
(and usually
associated with weak emergence).See
http://www.molbio.ku.dk/MolBioPages/abk/PersonalPages/Jesper/SemioEmergence.htm
Seehttp://www.nu.ac.za/undphil/collier/papers/Commentary on Don
Ross.htm
See http://www.nu.ac.za/undphil/collier/papers.html
19) We must avoid all manner of dualisms, essentialism, nominalism
and a priorism
as they give rise to mutual occlusivities and mutual unintelligibilities in
our arguments
and argumentations. The analogia relata (of process-experience
approaches, such as the
peircean and neoplatonic triadic relational) that is implicit in the triadic
grammar of all of
the above-described distinctions and rubrics can mediate between the
analogia antis (of
linguistic approaches, such as the scotistic univocity of being) and the
analogia entis (of
substance approaches, such as the thomistic analogy of being). This
includes such triads
as proodos (proceeding), mone (resting) and epistrophe (return) of
neoplatonic dionysian

21. mysticism. It anticipates such distinctions as a) the peircean distinction
between objective
reality and physical reality b) the scotistic formal distinction c) the
thomistic distinction
between material and immaterial substance, all of which imply
nonphysical causation
without violating physical causal closure, all proleptical, in a sense, to
such concepts as
memes, Baldwinian evolution, biosemiotics, etc See
http://consc.net/biblio/3.html
20) We must avoid the genetic and memetic fallacies of Dawkins and
Dennett and
the computational fallacies of other cognitive scientists, all as described
by Deacon.See
http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/epc/srb/srb/10-3edit.html
21) We must denominate the "cash value" of getting our metaphysics
correct in
terms of the accuracy of our anthropologies and psychologies because
getting our
descriptive and normative accounts correct is preliminary to properly
conducting our
evaluative attempts, which will then inform the prescriptions we devise
for an ailing
humanity and cosmos, rendering such prescriptions efficacious,
inefficacious, and even
harmful. This signals the importance of the dialogues between science,
religion,
philosophy and the arts. Further regarding “cash value” and the
“pragmatic maxim” and
all it might entail, asking what difference this or that metaphysical,
epistemological or
scientific supposition might make, if it were true or not, can clarify our
thinking, such as
better enabling us to discern the circular referentiality of a tautology,
e.g. taking existence
as a predicate of being (rather than employing a concept such as
“bounded” existence).
22) We must carefully nuance the parsimony we seek from Occam's
Razor moreso
in terms of the facility and resiliency of abduction and not necessarily
in terms of
complexity, honoring what we know from evolutionary psychology
about human
abductive and preinferential process.See
http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/pscifor.
htm See http://kybele.psych.cornell.edu/~edelman/Psych-214-Fall-
2000/w7-3-

22. outline.text
23) At wits end, confronted with ineluctable paradox, in choosing the
most
compelling metaphysic, there is always the reductio ad absurdum. And
remember,
whatever is going on in analytical philosophy, semeiotics and
linguistics, you can know
thus much is true: A single, even small, thermonuclear explosion can
ruin your whole
day.
24) Regarding multiverse accounts, Polkinghorne rejects any notion
that science can
say anything about same if science is careful and scrupulous about
what science can
actually say, and this may be true, but it does seem that such an
explanatory attempt can
be indirectly determined at least consonant with what we are able to
directly observe
and/or indirectly measure (thinking of Max Tegmark's ideas). It is
plausible, for example,
insofar as it is an attempt to explain the apparent anthropic fine-
tuning.
25) Importantly, not all human knowledge is formal, which is what so
much of the
above has been about!
26) The major philosophical traditions can be described and
distinguished by their
postures toward idealism & realism, rationalism & empiricism, which
are related to their
various essentialisms and nominalisms, which can all be more
particularly described in
terms of what they do with the PEM (excluded middle) and PNC
(noncontradiction) as
they consider peircean 1ns, 2ns and 3ns, variously holding or folding
these First
Principles as they move from univocal to equivocal and relational
predications.
27) With the peircean perspective taken as normative, PEM holds for
1ns and 2ns
and PNC holds for 2ns and 3ns (hence, PNC folds for 1ns and PEM
folds for 3ns).
28) In a nominalistic perspective, PNC folds for 3ns and classical
notions of
causality and continuity are incoherent.
29) In an essentialistic perspective, PNC properly holds for 3ns but
PEM is

23. erroneously held for 3ns, suggesting that modal logic drives
algorithmically toward the
necessary and not, rather, the probable.
30) The nominalist’s objection to essentialism’s modal logic of the
necessary in 3ns
is warranted but folding PNC in 3ns is the wrong response, rendering
all notions of
causality incoherent.. The essentialist’s objection to nominalism’s
denial of any modal
logic in 3ns is warranted but holding PEM in 3ns is the wrong
response, investing reality
with an unwarranted determinacy. The peircean affirmation of PNC in
3ns and denial of
PEM in 3ns resolves such incoherency with a modal logic of probability
and draws the
proper distinctions between the univocal, equivocal and relational
predications, the
univocal folding PNC in 1ns, the equivocal folding PEM in 3ns and the
relational holding
PNC and PEM in 2ns.
31) The platonic rationalist-realist perspective is impaired by
essentialism. The
kantian rationalist-idealist perspective is impaired by both essentialism
and nominalism.
The humean empiricist idealist perspective is impaired by nominalism.
The aristotelian
empiricist realist perspective, with a nuanced hylomorphism, is not
impaired by
essentialism or nominalism but suffers from substantialism due to its
atomicity, which
impairs relationality. Finally, even a process-relational-substantial
approach must make
the scotistic/peircean formal distinction between objective reality and
physical reality.
Radically deconstructive, analytical, and even pragmatist, approaches
seize upon the
folding of PNC in 1ns and then run amok in denying PNC in 3ns and
sometimes even
2ns. Phenomenologists bracket these metaphysical considerations.
Existentialists argue
over what precedes what, existence vs essence, losing sight of their
necessary
coinstantiation in 2ns in physical reality and failing to draw the proper
distinction
between the objective reality of an attribute (its abstraction &
objectification) and the

24. physical reality where it is integrally instantiated. Neither essence nor
existence precedes
the other in physical reality; they always arrive at the scene together
and inextricably
intertwined.
32) The peircean grammar draws necessary distinctions between
univocal, equivocal
and relational predications of different aspects of reality but, in so
doing, is a heuristic
that does not otherwise predict the precise nature or degree of
univocity, equivocity or
relationality between those aspects. In that sense, it is like
emergentism, which predicts
novelty but does not describe its nature or degree. To that extent, it no
more resolves
philosophy of mind questions, in particular, than it does metaphysical
questions, in
general. What it does is help us to think more clearly about such issues
placing different
perspectives in dialogue, revealing where it is they agree, converge,
complement and
disagree. Further, it helps us better discern the nature of the paradoxes
that our different
systems encounter: veridical, falsidical, conditional and antinomial,
and why it is our
various root metaphors variously extend or collapse in describing
different aspects of
reality. It doesn’t predict or describe the precise nature of reality’s
givens in terms of
primitives, forces and axioms but does help us locate how and where
univocal, equivocal
and relational predications are to be applied to such givens by acting as
a philosophical
lingua franca between different perspectives and accounts.Where are
reality’s
continuities and discontinuities in terms of givens? The peircean
grammar speaks to how
they are related in terms of 1ns, 2ns and 3ns but not with respect to
nature or origin or to
what extent or degree (if for no other reason that not all phenomena
are equally probable,
in terms of 3ns). Is consciousness a primitive along with space, time,
mass and charge? Is
it emergent? epiphenomenal? explained by Dennett? described by
Penrose? a hard
problem as per Chalmers or Searle? an eliminated problem as per the
Churchlands? an

25. intractable problem as per William James? Each of these positions can
be described in
peircean terms and they can be compared and contrasted in a dialogue
that reveals where
they agree, disagree, converge and complement. They cannot be a
priori arbitrated by the
peircean perspective; rather, they can only be consistently articulated
and framed up
hypothetically on the same terms, which is to say, in such a manner
that hypotheticodeductive
and scientific-inductive methods can be applied to them and such that
a
posteriori experience can reveal their internal coherence/incoherence,
logical
consistency/inconsistency, external congruence/incongruence,
hypothetical
consonance/dissonance and interdisciplinary
consilience/inconsilience.
33) Do our various metaphysics collapse because of an encounter with
paradox that
is generated by a) the nature of the environing realities, which are
being explained? b) the
exigencies of the environed reality, which is explaining? or c) some
combination of
these? Is the paradox encountered veridical, falsidical, conditional or
antinomial? Did we
introduce the paradox ourselves or did an environing reality reveal its
intrinsic
paradoxical nature? We can describe reality’s categories (such as w/
CSP’s
phaneroscopy), a logic for those categories (such as CSP’s semeiotic
logic) and an
organon that relates these categories and logic (such as CSP’s
metaphysical architectonic)
and then employ such a heuristic in any given metaphysic using any
given root metaphor.
When we do, at some point, we will encounter an infinite regress, a
causal disjunction or
circular referentiality (petitio principii, ipse dixit, etc), and we might,
therefore, at some
level, have reason to suspect that those are the species of ineluctable
paradox that even
the most accurate metaphysics will inevitably encounter. If circular
referentiality is
avoidable, still, infinite regress and causal disjunction are not and our
metaphysics will

26. succumb to one or the other, possibly because these alternate accounts
present
complementary perspectives of reality and the nature of its apparent
continuities and
discontinuities (as measured in degrees of probability or as reflected in
the dissimilarities
between various givens and their natures and origins, some belonging
to this singularity,
some to another, this or another realm of reality variously pluralistic or
not).
34) What it all seems to boil down to is this: Different schools of
philosophy and
metaphysics are mostly disagreeing regarding the nature and degree,
the origin and
extent, of continuities and discontinuities in reality, some even
claiming to transcend this
debate by using a continuum of probability. The manifold and
multiform assertions
and/or denials of continuity and discontinuity in reality play out in the
different
conclusions of modal logic with respect to what is possible versus
actual versus necessary
regarding the nature of reality (usually in terms of givens, i.e.
primitives, forces and
axioms), some even claiming to transcend this modal logic by
substituting probable for
necessary. Even then, one is not so much transcending the fray as
avoiding the fray if one
does not venture to guess at the nature and degree, origin and extent,
of reality’s
probabilities, necessities, continuities and discontinuities. Sure, the
essentialists and
substantialists overemphasize discontinuities and the nominalists
overemphasize
continuities and the dualists introduce some false dichotomies, but
anyone who claims to
be above this metaphysical fray has not so much transcended these
issues with a new and
improved metaphysics as they have desisted from even doing
metaphysics, opting instead
for a meta-metaphysical heuristic device, at the same time, sacrificing
explanatory
adequacy. This is what happens with the emergentistic something
more from nothing but
and also what happens in semeiotic logic (for infinite regress is just as
fatal,
metaphysically, as causal disjunction and circular referentiality).

27. 35) Evaluating Hypotheses:Does it beg questions?Does it traffic in
trivialities? Does
it overwork analogies?Does it overwork distinctions? Does it
underwork
dichotomies?Does it eliminate infinite regress?
36) Not to worry, this is to be expected at this stage of humankind’s
journey of
knowledge. However, if the answer to any of these questions is
affirmative, then one’s
hypothesis probably doesn’t belong in a science textbook for now. At
any rate, given our
inescapable fallibility, we best proceed in a community of inquiry as we
pursue our
practical and heuristic (both normative and speculative) sciences.
37) Couching this or that debate in the philosophy of science in terms
of dis/honesty
may very well address one aspect of any given controversy. I have often
wondered
whether or not some disagreements are rooted in disparate approaches
to epistemic
values, epistemic goods, epistemic virtues, epistemic goals, epistemic
success, epistemic
competence or whatever is truly at issue. I don't know who is being
dishonest or not,
aware or unawares, but I think one can perhaps discern in/authenticity
in a variety of
ways.
38) In trying to sort through and inventory such matters, through
time, I have come
to more broadly conceive the terms of such controversies, not only
beyond the notions of
epistemic disvalue, epistemic non-virtue and epistemic incompetence,
but, beyond the
epistemic, itself. Taking a cue from Lonergan's inventory of
conversions, which include
the cognitive, affective, moral, social and religious, one might identify
manifold other
ways to frustrate the diverse (but unitively-oriented) goals of human
authenticity, whether
through disvalue, non-virtue or incompetence.
39) Our approach to and grasp of reality, through both the heuristic
sciences
(normative and theoretical) and practical sciences, in my view, is quite
often frustrated by
the overworking of certain distinctions and the underworking of
certain dichotomies, by

28. our projection of discontinuities onto continuities and vice versa. And
this goes beyond
the issue of the One and the Many, the universal and the particular, the
local and the
global, beyond the disambiguation and predication of our terms,
beyond the setting forth
of our primitives, forces and axioms, beyond the truth of our premises
and the validity of
our logic, beyond noetical, aesthetical and ethical norms, beyond our
normative/prescriptive, speculative/descriptive and
pragmatic/practical enterprises,
beyond all this to living life, itself, and to our celebration of the arts.
40) In this vein, one failure in human authenticity that seems to too
often afflict
humankind is the overworking of the otherwise valid distinctions
between our truly novel
biosemiotic capacities and those of our phylogenetic ancestry and kin,
invoking such a
human exceptionalism (x-factor) as divorces us from nature of which
we're undeniably a
part. Another (and related) failure, in my view, is the overworking of
distinctions
between the different capacities that comprise the human evaluative
continuum, denying
the integral roles played by its nonrational, prerational and rational
aspects, by its
ecological, pragmatic, inferential and deliberative rationalities, by its
abductive, inductive
and deductive inferential aspects, by its noetical, aesthetical and ethical
aspects. These
otherwise distinct aspects of human knowledge that derive from our
interfacing as an
environed reality with our total environing reality (environed vs
environing realities not
lending themselves to sharp distinctions either?) are of a piece, form a
holistic fabric of
knowledge, mirrored by reality, which is also of a piece, not lending
itself fully to any
privileged aspect of the human evaluative continuum, not lending itself
to arbitrary dices
and slices based upon any human-contrived architectonic or organon
of knowledge, for
instance, as might be reflected in our academic disciplines or curricula.
41) So, perhaps it is too facile to say religion asks certain questions and
employs
certain aspects of the human evaluative continuum, while philosophy

29. asks others, science
yet others? Maybe it is enough to maintain that science does not
attempt to halt infinite
regress because humankind has discovered, a posteriori, that such
attempts invariably
involve trafficking in question begging (ipse dixit, petitio principii,
tautologies, etc) or
trivialities or overworked analogies, often employ overworked
distinctions or
underworked dichotomies, often lack explanatory adequacy, pragmatic
cash value and/or
the authentication of orthodoxy by orthopraxis? Maybe it is enough to
maintain that
science does not attempt to halt infinite regress because humankind
now maintains, a
priori, with Godel, that complete accounts are inconsistent, consistent
accounts,
incomplete? Maybe it is enough to maintain that science traffics in
formalizable proofs
and measurable results from hypotheses that are testable within
realistic time constraints
(iow, not eschatological)?
42) Or, maybe we needn't maintain even these distinctions but can say
an hypothesis
is an hypothesis is an hypothesis, whether theological or geological,
whether eliminating
or tolerating the paradox of infinity, and that the human evaluative
continuum, if
optimally (integrally and holistically) deployed, can aspire to test these
hypotheses,
however directly or indirectly, letting reality reveal or conceal itself at
its pleasure --- but
--- those hypotheses that are intractably question begging or
tautological, that overwork
analogies and distinctions and underwork dichotomies, that lack
explanatory adequacy
and pragmatic cash value --- are, at least for now, bad science, bad
philosophy, bad
theology, bad hypotheses? They are not authentic questions? Pursue
them if you must.
Back-burner them by all means, ready to come to the fore at a more
opportune time. But
don't publish them in textbooks or foist them on the general public or
body politic; rather,
keep them in the esoteric journals with a suitable fog index to match
their explanatory

30. opacity.
43) In the above consideration, it was not my aim to resolve any
controversies in the
philosophy of science, in particular, or to arbitrate between the great
schools of
philosophy, in general. I did want to offer some criteria for more
rigorously framing up
the debates that we might avoid talking past one another. It does seem
that certain
extreme positions can be contrasted in sharper relief in terms of
alternating assertions of
radical dis/continuities, wherein some distinctions are overworked into
false dichotomies
and some real dichotomies are ignored or denied.
44) Thus it is that the different “turns” have been made in the history
of philosophy
(to experience, to the subject, linguistic, hermeneutical, pragmatic,
etc). Thus it is that
nominalism, essentialism and substantialism critique each other. Thus
it is that fact-value,
is-ought, given-normative, descriptive-prescriptive distinctions
warrant dichotomizing or
not. Thus it is that the One and the Many, the universal and particular,
the global and
local, the whole and the part invite differing perspectives or not. Thus it
is that different
aspects of the human evaluative continuum get singularly privileged
without warrant
such as in fideism and rationalism or that different aspects of the
human architectonic of
knowledge get over- or under-emphasized such as in radical
fundamentalism and
scientism.
45) Thus it is that certain of our heuristic devices get overworked
beyond their
minimalist explanatory attempts such as when emergence is described
as weakly
supervenient, which is rather question-begging, or as strongly
supervenient, which is
rather trivial. And yet one might be able to affirm some utility in
making such
distinctions as a weak deontology or weak teleology, or between the
strongly and weakly
anthropic?
46) Thus it is that idealism and realism, rationalism and empiricism,
fight a

31. hermeneutical tug of war between kantian, humean, aristotelian and
platonic
perspectives, transcended, in part, even complemented by, the
analytical,
phenomenological and pragmatic approaches. Thus it is that various
metaphysics must
remain modest in their heuristic claims of explanatory power as we
witness the ongoing
blending and nuancing of substance, process, participative and
semiotic approaches. Thus
it is that our glorious -ologies get transmuted into insidious –isms.
47) Thus it is that all of these approaches, whether broadly conceived
as theoretical,
practical and normative sciences (including natural sciences, applied
sciences, theological
sciences and the sciences of logic, aesthetics and ethics), or more
narrowly conceived as
the more strictly empirical sciences, offer their hypotheses for critique
by an authentic
community of inquiry --- neither falling prey to the soporific consensus
gentium
(bandwagon fallacy) and irrelevant argumentum ad verecundiam
(appeal to authority) nor
arrogating to one’s own hermeneutic some type of archimedean
buoyancy for all sure
knowledge, as if inescapable leaps of faith weren’t required to get past
unmitigated
nihilism and solipsism, as if excluded middle, noncontradiction and
other first principles
could be apodictically maintained or logically demonstrated, as if
knowledge and proof
were indistinct, as if all human knowledge was algorithmic and could
be formalized.
48) Miscellany: In the peircean cohort of the American pragmatist
tradition, one
would say that the normative sciences mediate between
phenomenology and
metaphysics, which could reasonably be translated into philosophy
mediates between our
scientific methodologies and our cosmologies/ontologies.So, there is a
proper distinction
to be made between our normative and theoretical sciences, both
which can be considered
heuristic sciences, and yet another distinction to be made between
them and what we
would call our practical sciences.

32. 49) I think it would be fair to say that we can bracket our [metaphysics]
and our
[cosmologies & ontologies] when doing empirical science but, at the
same time, we do
not bracket those aspects of philosophy that comprise our normative
sciences of logic,
aesthetics and ethics, which contribute integrally and holistically to all
scientific
endeavors and human knowledge pursuits. At least for my God-
concept, properly
conceived, suitably employed, sufficiently nuanced, carefully
disambiguated, precisely
defined, rigorously predicated --- to talk of empirical measurement
would be nonsensical.
50) I more broadly conceive knowledge & "knowing" and my
conceptualization
turns on the distinction between knowing and proving, the latter
consisting of formal
proofs. Since a God-concept would comprise a Theory of Everything
and we know, a
priori, from Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems, that we cannot prove
such employing any
closed formal symbol system, a "proof" of God is out of the question.
51) Charles Sanders Peirce offers another useful distinction, which
turns on his
observations regarding inferential knowledge, which includes
abduction, induction and
deduction. Abductive inference is, in a nutshell, the generation of an
hypothesis. The
peircean distinction is that between an argument and argumentation.
Peirce offers, then,
what he calls the "Neglected Argument for the Reality of God," which
amounts to an
abduction of God, distinguishing same from the myriad other attempts
to prove God's
existence, whether inductively or deductively through argumentation.
Even the scholastic
and thomistic "proofs" realize their efficacy by demonstrating only the
reasonableness of
certain beliefs, not otherwise aspiring to apodictic claims or logically
conclusive
demonstrations. Peirce made another crucial distinction between the
"reality" of God and
the "existence" of God, considering all talk of God's existence to derive
from pure
fetishism, affirming in his own way, I suppose, an analogy of being
rather than a

33. univocity.
52) Given all this, one may find it somewhat of a curiosity that Godel,
himself,
attempted his own modal ontological argument. Anselm's argument,
likely considered the
weakest of all the classical "proofs" of God, was first called the
"ontological" argument
by Kant and was more recently given impetus by Hartshorne's modal
formulation. I think
these arguments by Godel and Hartshorne would be more compelling
if the modal
category of necessary was changed to probable and if the conceptual
compatibility of
putative divine attributes was guaranteed by employing only negative
properties for such
terms. At any rate, that Godel distinguished "formal proof" from
"knowing" is instructive,
I think, and his attempt at a modal ontological argument is also
revealing, suggesting,
perhaps, that one needn't make their way through half of Whitehead
and Russell’s
Principia in order to "know" that 2 + 2 = 4, but, rather, that would be
necessary only to
"prove" same.
53) I would agree that the statement, God cannot be measured, is true
for science as
narrowly conceived as natural science. More broadly conceived, science
includes
theology as a discipline and many typologies of the science-religion
interface would, for
instance, affirm the notion of hypothetical consonance between the
disciplines. Much of
Hans Kung's work entailed an elaborate formulation of the God
hypothesis, not
empirically testable by any means, but, which uses nihilism as a foil to
proceed reductio
ad absurdum toward what Kung calls a fundamental trust in uncertain
reality that, given a
suitable and "working" God-hypothesis, is not otherwise nowhere
anchored and
paradoxical. Another focus of theology as a scientific discipline is that
of practical
theology where orthopraxis might be considered to authenticate
orthodoxy.
54) Strong cases have been made by historians of science that
sustainable scientific

34. progress was birthed in the womb of a belief in creatio ex nihilo, in
other words, a belief
in the contingent nature of reality, which, when combined with the
Greek belief in
reality's rationality, provided the cultural matrix for science's explosive
growth in the
Christian West.
55) I suppose there is an element of the aesthetic that guides one
toward such an
interpretation as Bohm's rather than Bohr's, Chalmers, Searle or
Penrose rather than
Dennett, the Churchlands or Crick, Pascal rather than Nietzsche --- but
something else is
going on, and it is not time-honored, when anyone chooses info to fit
an interpretation,
which is a different enterprise from the formulation of alternative
interpretations that are
hypothetically consonant with whatever info is available at the time.
56) To say more succinctly what I elaborate below: Approaching facts is
one matter,
rules another, and facts about rules, yet another. There's no explaining
or justifying rules
within their own systems and one hops onto an epistemological pogo
stick, incessantly
jumping to yet another system with such explanatory/justificatory
attempts (cf. Godel).
Thankfully, Popperian falsification short circuits rule justification in
our pursuit of facts
and the reductio ad absurdum (with some caveats) short circuits
formal philosophy in our
pursuit of rule justification, which is otherwise, inescapably, going to
be question
begging, rendering our metasystems, in principle, tautological. An
example of a caveat
there is that one overworks the humean dictum re: existence as a
predicate of being when
asserting that existence cannot be taken as a predicate of being --
because it certainly can.
One underappreciates the humean perspective when one forgets that
taking existence as a
predicate of being is a tautology. But so are all metaphysics, which are
all fatally flawed.
None of this is about escaping all antinomial paradox but, rather,
finding the metasystem
least susceptible to multiple births of paradox, least pregnant with
paradox --- or, finding

35. that metasystem which, however fatally flawed, is least morbid.
57) In dealing with metasystem formulations, inevitably, we must
confront the timehonored
question: random or systematic? chance or necessity? order or chaos?
pattern or
paradox? At least, for me, this seems to capture the conundrum at
issue.This conundrum
is ubiquitous and presents itself not only in metaphysics but in physics,
not only in
speculative cosmology and the quantum realm but also in speculative
cognitive science
and the realm of consciousness. This is reminiscent of the dynamic in
the TV gameshow,
Jeopardy, for these dyads --- of random, chance, chaos, paradox vis a
vis systematic,
necessity, order, pattern --- offer themselves as answers to a larger
question posed in a
bigger framework. That question might be framed as: What is it that
mediates between
the possible and the actual?
58) My brain loves that question and pondering the implications of
those dyads
seems to help keep my neurotransmitters in balance, quite often firing
off enough extra
endorphins to help me pedal my bike an extra mile or two, any given
day. That question
presents when we consider reality both locally and globally, particularly
or universally, in
part or as a whole. I have pondered such extensively as set forth here:
http://bellsouthpwp.net/p/e/per-ardua-ad-astra/epistemic.htm and
elsewhere
http://bellsouthpwp.net/p/e/per-ardua-ad-astra/merton.htm [links at
the top of this page]
and one day I may take on the task of making such musings more
accessible. For now, it
seems that I have practiced the Franciscan virtue of seeking to
understand rather than to
be understood and turned it into a vice, practicing it to a fault.
59) I will say this: Science is a human convention, an agreement
entered into by an
earnest community of inquiry. It seems to operate on a consensus
regarding 1) primitives
(space, time, mass and energy/charge) 2) forces (strong and weak,
electromagnetic and
gravity) and 3) axioms (laws of thermodynamics and so forth) and the
relationships they

36. reveal as this community proceeds via 4) popperian falsification,
which, as Popper
properly understood and many others do not, is not, itself, falsifiable.
There are no strict
lines between physics and metaphysics inasmuch as any tweaking of
these categories by
theoretical scientists is meta-physical, for instance, such as by those
who'd add
consciousness as a primitive, quantum gravity as a force and statistical
quantum law as an
axiom. The crossing-over from philosophy to science and from
metaphysics to physics by
this or that notion is not so much determined a priori as based on any
given attributes of a
particular idea regarding primitives, forces and axioms but, rather,
takes place when such
can be framed up in such a manner as it can be empirically falsified. We
know this from
the history of philosophy, science and metaphysics -- although the
pace of cross-over has
slowed a tad.
60) Framing up reality in falsifiable bits and pieces is no simple matter
to one who
agrees with Haldane that reality is not only stranger than we imagine
but stranger than we
can imagine. Still, as is born into our very nature as epistemological
optimists, we might
temper this view by taking Chesterton's counsel that we do not know
enough about
reality, yet, to say that it is unknowable. We just do not know, a priori,
either where we
will hit an explanatory wall or where we will break through same, this
notwithstanding
such as G. E. Pugh's remark to the effect that if the brain were simple
enough for us to
understand it, we would be so simple that we couldn't.
61) What we do know, a priori, are our own rules and conventions and
we can
predict whether or not an explanatory wall will either be hit or
penetrated --- but only if
we narrowly conceive of that wall as being built with the bricks of
empirical evidence
and the mortar of formal proofs. An explanatory wall thus conceived is
indeed subject to
godelian constraints, which allow us to model rules that we are
otherwise precluded from

37. explaining. In reality, though, one would commit the equivalent of an
epistemological
Maginot Line blunder if one built her explanatory wall exclusively of
such materials, for,
as we know, a large portion of human knowledge lies outside of any
such a narrowly
conceived epistemic structure. Indeed, we know far more than we can
ever prove (or
falsify)
62) Now, to be sure, we must remain well aware that we are freely
choosing our
axioms and first principles and that, consistent with godelian and
popperian constraints,
they can neither be logically demonstrated, a priori, nor scientifically
falsified, a
posteriori. We should keep an eye open, too, to the critiques of
Descartes, Hume and
Kant, insofar as they seem to have anticipated, in many ways, these
godelian and
popperian formalizations, as well as some of the dynamics explored by
the analytical
cohort. What I personally cannot countenance, however, is any
epistemological caving in
to such constraints and critiques (cartesian, kantian and humean); the
proper response, if
the normative sciences are to retain any sway whatsoever, would seem,
rather, to be a
trading in of any naive realism for a critical realism (staying mostly
aristotelian cum
neoplatonic?). So, too, the humean fact-value distinction, worth
considering, should not
be overworked into a false dichotomy?
63) If, in our inescapable fallibility, we have been dispossessed of any
apodictic
claims to necessity and logical demonstrations of our first principles,
still, we do have at
our disposal the judicious use of the reductio ad absurdum as our
backdoor philosophy.
True enough, the counterintuitive is not, in and of itself, an infallible
beacon of truth, for
science has demonstrated many counterintuitive notions to be true,
given certain axioms.
Nonetheless, absent any demonstration to the contrary and guided by
an earnest
community of inquiry, would we not do best to reject such as solipsism
and radical

38. nihilism, and to embrace noncontradiction and excluded middle
(within the norms
suggested by both epistemological and ontological vagueness, which is
another
exhuastive consideration)?
64) So, yes, in freely choosing such axioms as we might employ in our
attempt to
answer the question --- What mediates between the possible and the
actual? --- we are
free to opt for chance or necessity, for order or chaos, for pattern or
paradox, for the
random or systematic, and we are free to apply such an option locally
and/or globally,
particularly or universally, to the whole of reality or to any part, and no
one can
dispossess us, through formal proof or with empirical evidence, of our
chosen axioms.
And, yes, once we have chosen such axioms, such meta-systems, we
must recognize that,
fundamentally, they are clearly tautological by design and in principle,
and that any
apologetic for same will be rather question begging. [Every time we
open an ontological
window, reality closes an epistemological door, I like to say.] The only
recourse we have
that seems to be at all compelling is the old reductio ad absurdum,
taking this or that set
of axioms, applying them to reality as best we have come to grasp same,
and, after
extrapolating it all to some putative logical conclusion, then testing it
all for congruence
with reality (and with whatever else happens to be in that suite of
epistemological criteria
as might comprise this or that community of inquiry's epistemic
desiderata).
65) As a relevant aside, I have found that we best modify our modal
ontological
logic of possible, actual and necessary to possible, actual and probable,
which allows one
to prescind from the dyads of chance/necessity, order/chaos,
pattern/paradox,
random/systematic --- as these more and more seem to describe
distinctions that should
not be overworked into dichotomies, not that I am an inveterate
peircean triadimaniac --
for I am, rather, a pan-entheistic tetradimaniac (seems to me to be the
least pregnant,

39. anyway).
66) What mediates between the possible and the actual? Probably, the
probable.
[And that may be the window Reality opened for Hefner's co-creators
as God shrunk
from the necessary? And that may be the future-oriented rupture
between our essential
possibilities and their existential realizations in Haught's teleological
account of original
sin?]
67) When the Beatles were with the Maharishi in India, at the end of
one session, he
offered anyone who was interested a ride back to the compound with
him on his
helicopter. John volunteered. When later queried about why he
decided to go, John
quipped: "Because I thought he'd slip me the answer." jb is going to slip
you the
answer.Ever heard of the pragmatic maxim?In my words, jb's maxim, it
translates into
What would you do differently if you had the answer? [And it doesn't
matter what the
question is or that it necessarily be THE question, whatever that is.]
Now, if Lonergan's
conversions --- cognitive, moral, affective, sociopolitical and religious -
-- were all fully
effected in a human being and that person were truly authentic in
lonerganian terms,
mostly transformed in terms of classical theosis, then how would an
authentic/transformed human answer the question: What would you
do differently if you
had the answer?S/he would answer thusly: Nothing.
68) That's what I really like most about lovers. I've seen them struggle
with all these
questions and have even seen them afflicted by these questions to an
extent, but lovers
are clearly among those for whom I know the answer to the above-
question is: Zero. Zip.
Zilch. Nada.That's the epitome of unconditional love and that's the
essence of the Imago
Dei.And that is a small comfort ... so, it's a good thing that comfort is
not what it's all
about, Alfie. Carry on. Do carry on
69) In another vein, all of philosophy seems to turn on those three big
questions of

40. Kant: What can I know? What can I hope for? What must I do?The
astute observer might
recognize that these questions correspond to truth, beauty and
goodness and have been
answered by philosophers in terms of logic, aesthetics and ethics and
by religions in
terms of creed, cult and code. They also correspond to the three
theological virtues of
faith, hope and love and to our psychological faculties of the cognitive,
affective and
moral (again, think Lonergan). At some point on my journey, I rested
and answered these
questions thusly: I don't know and I don't need to know. I don't feel
and I don't need to
feel. I love and I need to forgive.All of a sudden --- I kid ya not --- all
manner of truth,
beauty and goodness started chasing me rather than vice versa! If we
frame the issue in
terms of foci of concern, then the scientific focus will be more narrowly
defined than the
theological. The first is positivistic, the latter, philosophic.
70) The scientific focus looks at facts through the lens of popperian
falsification. It
structures its arguments formally and thus employs mathematics and
other closed,
formal symbol systems through which it can establish correspondence
between those
parts of reality we agree to call givens: primitives (space, time,
mass/charge, energy),
forces (weak, strong, electromagnetic, gravity) and axioms
(conservation,
thermodynamics). It seeks to provide descriptive accounts of these
parts of reality and
deals in proofs.
71) The philosophic focus is a wider perspective, which is to say it
embraces
additional concerns by looking through the lenses of the normative
sciences of logic,
aesthetics and ethics. It looks at rules. Its arguments are not formally
constructed but it
does try to establish coherence in its accounts of reality. It seeks to
provide evaluative
accounts of reality as a whole and deals in justifications.
72) Lonergan scholar, Daniel Helminiak, defines two additional foci of
concern,
which are progressively wider perspectives, the theistic and theotic, the

41. latter having to
do with human transformation in relation to God (and which might
represent one of many
perspectives presented at Star).
73) Broader perspectives, wider foci of concern, do not invalidate the
narrower foci,
if for no other reason, then, because they are focusing on different
aspects of reality, in
fact, additional aspects.
74) In Jeff's frontier town, out on the working edge of science, any
novel concepts
being introduced must indeed be precisely specified in the language of
science, which is
to say one must introduce a novel primitive, force or axiom, or a novel
interaction
between existing givens, into a closed, formal symbol system like
mathematics. This
novelty can then be tested for correspondence with reality, in other
words, factuality,
through popperian falisfication (which is not itself falsifiable).
75) As for unfortunate trends among scientists, philosophers and
theologians,
descriptively, in terms of blurred focus, these are manifold and varied
with no
monopolies on same? I am time-constrained, wrote this hurriedly and
must run. My next
consideration was going to be Theories of Everything and how they
should be
categorized and why? Any ideas?
76) Obviously, I could not elaborate a comprehensive
organon/architectonic of
human knowledge categories in only four paragraphs and thus did not
draw out such
distinctions as, for instance, the very living of life, itself, from the arts,
the practical
sciences, the heuristic sciences, the theoretical sciences, the normative
sciences and so
on. The particular point I was making, however, more particularly
turned on the
distinction between those matters in life which we prove versus those
which we
otherwise justify. As a retired bank chairman/president, I must say that
it would have
pleased me very much, too, to have seen the justice system derive more
of its rules from
logic. Note, also, the operative word, derive, and you'll have some

42. sense of how my
elaboration will unfold
77) Because one of the manifold criteria for good hypotheses vis a vis
the scientific
method is the making of measurable predictions in the context of
hypothetico-deductive
and inductive reasoning, we might properly talk about proof as being
more broadly
conceived, our descriptive accounts lending themselves to
measurements (and
hypothetical fecundity). Of course, induction, itself, is not formal logic,
anyway
78) Those trends that frighten me the most are the different
fundamentalisms
(including both the religious fundamentalisms and enlightenment
fundamentalism or
scientism).
79) By Theory of Everything (TOE). I mean such as M-theory,
superstrings,
quantum gravity, unified field theory, etc in the realm of theoretical
physics. I believe
there are metamathematical problems that inhere in such a TOE as set
forth in Godel's
incompleteness theorems. This is not to suggest a TOE could not be
mathematically
formulated but only to say it could not, in principle, be proven. Neither
is this to suggest
that, because it couldn't be formally demonstrated, we wouldn't
otherwise know we'd
discovered same.
80) A long time ago, my graduate research was in neuroendocrinology
Also, the
emergentist heuristic of something more from nothing but may have
implications for
some of the difficulties that remain in our understanding of
consciousness? As far as
philosophic accounts of same, my overall theological perspective
doesn't turn on whether
or not Dennett, Searle, Chalmers, Penrose, Ayn Rand or the
Churchlands are correct (vis
a vis the positivistic elements of their accounts), although, presently,
I'm leaning toward
Deacon's rather peircean biosemiotic perspective.
81) For me to have written this: "Neither is this to suggest that,
because it couldn't
be formally demonstrated, we wouldn't otherwise know we'd

43. discovered same," maybe I
was talking about both? I purposefully left the categorization of any
TOE open to tease
out different perspectives. My take, to avoid being too coy, is that a
TOE requires more
than a positivistic focus. It necessarily involves a broadening of our
scientific focus to
embrace the additional concerns of the philosophic. Some folks go
further.
82) It's my guess that Baldwinian evolution captures many
imaginations because it
employs the notion of downward causation. Furthermore, if one
frames up the problem of
consciousness biosemiotically, in some sense one recovers the classic
aristotelian notions
of material, formal and final causality. Exciting? Yes. But ...
83) However, one doesn't need to a priori dismiss cartesian dualism
and neither does
one need to a priori embrace a fully reductionistic philosophy of mind
(including the
physical causal closure of the universe) to, at the same time, recognize
that such
biosemiotic accounts do not, necessarily, violate known physical laws
or the idea of
physical causal closure. In other words, there can be strong and weak
versions of
downward causation, both being both nonphysical and nonreductive,
and the
emergentistic, biosemiotic account of evolving complexity utilizes the
weak version. This
does involve a work-around of frameworks that employ strictly
efficient causation.
84) What might some of us do with our imaginations? Well, we might
invoke
various analogies from different physical and/or semiotic accounts to
our philosophic,
metaphysical and even theological accounts. And, sometimes, we
might lose sight of how
progressively weak these analogies can become.
85) I suppose I could at least be pleased that Dawkins did not consider
mystics and
obscurantists to be a redundancy? My charitable interpretation would
be that he
recognized that the conscious and deliberate invocation of analogies by
authentic mystics,
who have their eyes open to this analogical dynamic (apophatically

44. inclined as they are!),
is valid (even if he might impute little pragmatic cash value to same),
while, for their
part, the obscurantists might even altogether deny the metaphorical
and analogical nature
of their extrapolations (not necessarily in bad faith). [The evidence in
favor of a
charitable interpretation is not being weighed here.] At any rate, the
medieval scotistic
notion of the formal distinction, the peircean distinction between
objective and physical
reality, and the semiotic notion of form realism don't invite ghosts into
machines or gods
into gaps. Metaphorically and analogically, and metaphysically,
however, different
notions of causation are ... let me say ... interesting.
86) All that said, consciousness remains way overdetermined,
scientifically
speaking, as well as, philosophically speaking, both epistemologically
and ontologically
open (as far as strongly emergent, weakly supervenient systems are
concerned, not to say
that supervenience might not be a rather trivial notion). Pugh may be
on to something: If
our brains were so simple we could understand them, we would be so
simple that we
couldn't (or something like that). I submit we have no a priori
justification for selecting a
philosophy of mind and precious little a posteriori warrant either. Gun
to my head,
however, I like Deacon (and his important nuances of the accounts of
Dennett and
Dawkins re: memetic, genetic and computational fallacies).
87) Godel's relevance to a TOE is controversial. I'd be willing to argue
both sides.
But let me agree with you by suggesting physics is formal and
physicists (and Nature and
God) are not, by drawing a distinction between proving and knowing,
by recognizing that
even if a TOE was mathematically formulated in a
positivistic/descriptive framework,
we'd have to fall back on our philosophic/evaluative framework to
justify our faith in it.
88) In reading Hawking's take on Godel's relevance to a TOE he does
seem to draw
an obvious direct metamathematical connection? But I cannot say that

45. he did so
unequivocally because almost everything else he said after that clearly
invoked Godel
analogously. So, at the very least, per Hawking, a physical theory is
going to be Godellike
(M-theory per his discussion). Hawking's lecture can be heard here:
http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/strtst/dirac/hawking/audio.ram
89) I can better wrap my positivistic mind around a weak anthropic
principle in the
same way I can accept weak versions of downward causation and weak
deontological
ethics even as I do not a priori rule out the strong versions. Heidegger's
question has been
rephrased, lately, as Why is there something and not rather something
else? and this
makes the strong anthropic principle more compelling in some
philosophic frameworks
(but understandably trivial in others). Wittgenstein's It's not how
things are but that things
are which is the mystical doesn't sway those who'd not take existence
as a predicate of
being, but what about a bounded existence, a universe in a multiverse,
in a pluralistic
reality? Maybe there is some univocity of being (Duns Scotist) and
some analogy of
being (thomism), too? [For instance, a pan-entheism is monistic,
dualistic and
pluralistic.]
90) Chesterton said that we do not know enough about reality to say
that it is
unknowable and Haldane says that reality is not only stranger than we
imagine but
stranger than we can imagine. They can both be correct. If humankind
does formulate a
TOE, it could well be something we have stumbled over and not rather
worked out
through hypothetico-deductive and inductive reasoning/imagination.
It not only takes
faith and the evaluative aspect of the human knowledge manifold to
believe a TOE might
be found. Those epistemic faculties would also necessarily be involved
in the recognition
that it had indeed been found.
91) To the extent that I may have had an agenda (transparent, I hope),
and to the
extent that agenda has been somewhat of an apologetic invoking

46. various (and sometimes
substantial)degrees of epistemological parity between the world's great,
extant
weltanschauungs, I am willing (and, in fact, pleased) to argue this point
in favor of your
conclusion. In that case, perhaps I have been concerning myself with
epistemological
strawmen or shadowboxing with the philosophical ghosts of
yesteryear, who advocated
logical positivism, radical empiricism, hyper-rationalism, scientism and
such or who
countered these with fideism, radical religious fundamentalism and
such, such advocacies
and counteradvocacies being the obverse sides of the same coin of the
realm of
epistemological hubris. As you are aware, neither do I countenance an
excessive
epistemological humility.
92) Perhaps we can say that for me to make such points on the
IRASnet or
MetaNexus would be a preaching to the choir, for the most part, and
that no discipline
has adopted that usage in a long time. In that case, I agree that I might
have drawn an
unnecessary distinction. Perhaps we can also suggest, however, that
not everyone,
perhaps even most (the un-disciplined), have been successfully
evangelized and that our
task is not done, our work is otherwise unfinished, and the distinction
for that audience
thus remains pertinent?
93) Theology (forgiving the erstwhile - I hope - extreme scholastic
realism)
employed what were known as the scholastic notations. Seminarians
were taught to place,
in the margin of their notebooks, little notes indicating whether a
proposition was: 1)
impossible 2) possible 3) improbable 4) implausible 5) uncertain 6)
plausible 7) probable
8) certain. Lately, in the modal logic of a) the possible b) the actual and
c) the necessary,
the latter has been amended to the probable, by some.
94) The distinction I'd offer here is something like Hume makes re:
skepticism and
induction. It is the distinction between the theoretical and the practical.
Even if a TOE is

47. beyond our grasp strictly theoretically speaking, all TOEs being fatally
flawed in
principle, still, from a practical perspective, I think it is fair to say that
we may be able to
justify our belief in a TOE, someday, in a universally compelling
manner. Does this
undermine my assertions re: Godel? I would say that I meant that it is
possible my
assertions could be undermined. How plausible or probable?
95) Since I am working on another project re: Criteria for Articulating a
TOE, I used
Michael's evocative query as a springboard in constructing my
epistemological preamble
to that project. Below is my original response, which I then edited and
sent along just
now as a much shorter version. I think TOE discussions are central to
the dialogue
between science and religion. However, they are notoriously difficult to
air out on listserv
forums because too much renormalization is required to translate all
hermeneutics into a
single lingua franca with logically compatible concepts and axioms.
With that caveat,
here it is for the few who may be interested.
96) To the extent that I may have had an agenda (transparent, I hope),
and to the
extent that agenda has been somewhat of an apologetic invoking
various (and sometimes
substantial) degrees of epistemological parity between the world's
great, extant
weltanschauungs, I am willing (and, in fact, pleased) to argue this point
in favor of your
conclusion. In that case, perhaps I have been concerning myself with
epistemological
strawmen or shadowboxing with the philosophical ghosts of
yesteryear, who advocated
logical positivism, radical empiricism, hyper-rationalism, scientism and
such or who
countered these with fideism, radical religious fundamentalism and
such, such advocacies
and counteradvocacies being the obverse sides of the same coin of the
realm of
epistemological hubris. As you are aware, neither do I countenance an
excessive
epistemological humility.
97) Theology (forgiving the erstwhile - I hope - extreme scholastic

48. realism)
employed what were known as the scholastic notations. Seminarians
were taught to place,
in the margin of their notebooks, little notes indicating whether a
proposition was: 1)
impossible 2) possible 3) improbable 4) implausible 5) uncertain 6)
plausible 7) probable
8) certain. Lately, in the modal logic of a) the possible b) the actual and
c) the necessary,
the latter has been amended to the probable. In semiotic logic, the
application of first
principles has been nuanced such that excluded middle and
noncontradiction hold or fold
based on modal categories under consideration (for the possible, NC
folds but EM holds;
for the actual, NC & EM hold; for the probable, NC holds but EM
folds). Such modal
logic reflects ontological vagueness. Such semiotic logic reflects
semantical or
epistemological vagueness. Alas, these are oversimplifications, but
they fit your thesis
(and mine).
98) Of course, a TOE would be, at best, consistent but incomplete. That
it would
thus not be absolute follows from any Godel-like implications
(arguably even directly
from Godel). It then follows that, having no recourse to apodictic proof,
we are thrown
back on the resources of our evaluative continuum as it works in
conjunction with the
other aspects of the human knowledge manifold (sensation,
perception, cognition,
rational continuum, etc), normatively guiding and regulating and
largely capacitating
them. It thus qualifies my godelian assertions only in the sense that
such constraints are
not overcome by JOTS (jumping outside the system, as some cavalierly
suggest) to the
extent that we are forever chasing the axioms for our axioms but are
overcome by JOTS
to the extent that we accept all attempts to justify a TOE as fatally
flawed from a
theoretical perspective but not necessarily from a practical perspective.
The godelian-like
implications, though not couched in this manner, are well-inventoried
by Suber in his The

49. Problem with Beginning.
99) So, what constitutes very persuasive? Is it not an issue of
justification? And you
have properly gathered my whole thrust regarding the epistemological
parity of many of
our extant alternate worldviews: they all fallback on justification
attempts. And this
brings us to the issue of epistemic virtue and vice and how humankind
might best define
same as a community of inquiry, whose foci of concern variously
overlap or not and do
so with great existential import and tremendous implications for the
therapies we devise
for what ails us. Finally, we can arbitrate between the worldviews once
we have
established a consensus on epistemic norms, but, if we had those in
place, even now, we
don't have enough info to apply them to everyone's complete
satisfaction. (However, let's
not forget that many are ALREADY and not, rather, Almost Persuaded,
as it is re: their
worldviews).
100) Alas, this brings us back, full circle, to the question of whether or
not it is just
too early to tell how a universally compelling TOE might unfold or
whether or not we
will ever truly unweave the rainbow and all of its antecedent causes,
theoretically or
practically. The following constitutes a longer response to an above-
question.
101) The art of epistemological nuance, as I imbibed it from Mother's
knee, albeit as
an unconscious competent, was handed down to me, not from the long
traditions of
thomism and scotism (which well articulated same), but, from the
longer tradition of
patristic theology (including dionysian mysticism and other
neoplatonic influences,
which would inform our aristotelian perspectives). My present
intuition, which I cannot
substantiate but will investigate further (some day), is that my
epistemological heritage
goes back past the early church fathers, even, to the mytho-poetic-
practical mindset of the
semitic imagination circa Hebrew Testament days. Let me elaborate.
102) As one looks at the human knowledge manifold, from sensation &

50. perception,
emotion & motivation, learning & memory, imagination & intuition,
inference &
deliberation, from instinctive to affective to cognitive, from nonrational
to prerational to
rational to suprarational, from noninferential to preinferential to
inferential to
postinferential, or any way one prefers to dice it and slice it, I suppose it
is not entirely
clear, anthropologically, how and when different peoples integrally
deployed these
different aspects. For example, suppose we assume that some of these
aspects constitute
what we might call the evaluative continuum of the human knowledge
manifold, while
others moreso represent the rational continuum (all of which is tightly
integrated).
103) Another correspondent has argued with me over whether or not
the early semitic
imagination employed any type of inference (more commonly known
as abduction,
induction, deduction & transduction). My guess was that surely it did
and that the proper
distinction between the semitic and hellenistic mindsets, let's say ca.
when the Christian
tradition was in formation, would not be the latter's employment of
inference but, rather,
the hellenistic employment of formal/abstract inference in addition to
any
informal/concrete inference. Inference, not otherwise distinguished, is
simply abduction,
induction and deduction. To say that the mytho-poetic-practical
mindset did not use
humanity's full cognitive capacities, which I do think is possible, maybe
even plausible,
is not to say that it did not engage the inferential aspects of the human
knowledge
manifold. Rather, one is suggesting that, perhaps, it did not develop
formal operational
abilities. It undoubtedly would have developed transductive, inductive
and deductive
reasoning and would even have thought abductively about such things
as coordinated
action. Still, such reasoning, if concretely operational and not formally
operational,
would not employ the hypothetico-deductive or scientific-inductive
reasoning that

51. requires both a more robust abductive facility as well as abstract
conceptual abilities.
104) Now, one might also say that many of the hellenistic mindset did
not use
humanity's full human knowledge manifold either insofar as many
overemphasized, to a
fault, the employment of the rational continuum without
acknowledging the role of the
evaluative continuum. (I have a friend who mourns the day Athens
met Jerusalem). All
that said, there was apparently a gravitation toward inductive inference
in the semitic and
deductive in the hellenistic.
105) We discussed previously that not all logic is binary, that some is
fuzzy and
contextual-relational, that we seek symmetry and patterns. The
Hebrew literature is
replete with concrete inductive and deductive inference. It gifts us with
a heightened
awareness of patterns in creation, for instance. The genius of the
mytho-poetic-practical
mind renders such inference wisdom and not merely reason. That
genius embodies
everything that gives the peircean perspective some of its advantage
(while it also has its
disadvantages) over the classical philosophical traditions insofar as it is
concrete,
dynamic, wholistic and relational over against abstract, static, dualistic
and ontological
(iow, escapes essentialism, nominalism, substantialism, dualism).
106) It is Our Story (hence the impetus behind Everybody's Story) that
unifies and
gives value to our experience, so we do not want to ignore this
indispensable unifying
element of the evaluative continuum and concrete inferences (and
faith, iow) even as we
do (and must) transcend the mythical-literal aspect. We must
proactively engage affective
judgment and imaginative-intuitive thinking integrally, holistically, in
conjunction with
inferential thinking (whether concretely or abstractly) for optimal
inferential performance
is my view. (Scientists with keen aesthetic sensibilities have an
advantage?) Abstract,
formal inferential thinking, including the hypothetico-deductive and
scientific-inductive,

52. of the formal operational stage of cognitive development, is a morally
neutral activity,
which can assist virtue or vice, which can become a fetish, but so can
any other aspect of
the human knowledge manifold (evaluative and rational continuua)
that asserts its
autonomy and denies any relationality with the other aspects.
107) There's a lot going on in philosophy that is analogous to what's
going on in math
(and metamathematics). There is a lot going on in metaphysics that is
analogous to what's
going on in theoretical physics. In a nutshell, there are a lot of different
systems with
different axioms and it requires so much careful predication, high
nuancing and
disambiguation of concepts before everyone is reading from the same
sheet of music that
most popular philosophical discussion consists of people talking past
one another.
Consider the renormalization required in physics as attempts are made
at a grand unified
theory because the natures of the alternate decriptions (quantum vs
field vs gravity and
such) are logically and mutually exclusive. Well, something like that is
required in
metaphysics as we jump back and forth between substance accounts,
process accounts,
substance-process accounts, participative accounts, semiotic accounts
and so on. Each
account attempts to eliminate the ambiguity (paradox) in the next
account and creates
new ambiguities of its own. Everytime a philosopher or metaphysician
opens a new
hermeneutical window, the axiomatic backdraft shuts another
epistemological door. Any
attempt to halt an infinite regress seems to introduce some type of
causal disjunction.
Any attempt at self-consistency introduces circular-referentiality.
Attempts to banish such
tautologies introduce stipulated beginning (ipse dixit) and question
begging (petitio)
fallacies. Our justification attempts can also fallback on the resources
of faith and
noncognitive strategies. Paradox is inescapable. There is no consistent
account that is
complete. There is no complete account that is consistent. These
accounts necessarily

53. utilize some terms univocally and others equivocally. The equivocal
can be either simply
equivocal or analogical. The analogical can be attributive (if real causes
and effects are
invoked) or proportional (if we are invoking similarities in the
relationships between two
different pairs of terms). If such an similarity is essential to those terms
we have a proper
proportinality but if it is accidental we have an improper
proportionality, a metaphor.
And we use a lot of metaphors, even if physics, and they all eventually
collapse.
108) These accounts are not Nature, so the godelian constraints and
godelian-like
constraints and attendant justification problems don't apply to Nature
per se but only to
our attempts to describe nature, which are abstractions. Maybe the
clarification we seek is
located in the distinction between a TOE as it might exist in some
platonic heaven and
one as might be abstracted by an earthly abstractor. I cannot conceive
of how the latter
would even be possible using human inferential capacities to the extent
a TOE is
predicated as a metaphysic and with all metaphysics being pregnant
with some form of
paradox (some multiple birthing and more fecund than others), all
meta-accounts being
fatally flawed (some more morbid than others). If you distinguish this
earthly-abstracted
TOE from one existing in a platonic heaven and perceivable from a
putative-God's eye
view by some being univocally predicated as a Consistent
Comprehendor, then Godel
would certainly not be lurking and neither would anyone else for who
could afford to pay
that kind of epistemological rent?
109) But for reasons we both stated before, not even much depending
on how one
predicates a TOE, I don't see it as either a theoretical or practical
concern except as might
belong to One predicated, in part, as Primal Ground. [Consistent
Comprehendor has been
one of my univocal predications of a hypothetical deity, in fact.
110) I've been giving this much thought of late, especially while reading
Merton but

54. also while contemplating "contemplation" and epistemology and such
related issues, in
general. Increasingly, I feel the need to make the following
distinction.Whether in
ascetical or mystical theology, formative spirituality or developmental
psychology, all as
integrally considered, when one employs the term "simple" or related
notions like
"simplicity," one must be clear as to whether one really means "simple
versus complex"
or, rather, "simple versus difficult".Very often, spiritual writers have
spoken of simplicity
both with respect to prayer and with respect to certain asceticisms,
disciplines and
practices that help to dispose one to prayer, cultivating solitude and
nurturing a
contemplative outlook. Increasingly, it seems to me that such
simplicity is moreso of the
"simple versus difficult" variety, which is to say that we are talking in
terms of ease and
facility [Webster's 9th definition, below] and not so much of any lack of
complexity
[Webster's 5th definition].
111) If contemplation is simple, then I would say that it is simple in the
sense that, for
the contemplative, prayer is facile, easy, readily performed. It is not
difficult for the
proficient. So it is with most any art, whether pertaining to dance or
music or athleticism.
So it is with many of life's tasks, whether riding a bike or driving a
standard automobile,
or performing one's trade as an accomplished technician.
112) The underlying deployment of the various aspects of the human
evaluative
continuum --- from awareness, sensation & perception, emotion &
motivation, learning &
memory, imagination & intuition, inference & deliberation ---
wholistically & integrally
employing our instinctive, affective and cognitive faculties, is clearly
complex and not at
all "simple" in the sense of being "uncomplicated" or "artless" or such.
113) Developmentally speaking, there are no shortcuts to such
simplicity, to such
artform, to such technical competence, to such proficiency.
Preparation through
catechesis, ongoing cultivation through liturgy and lectio divina,

55. fidelity to law and code
both obligationally and aspirationally, and commitment to community,
all contribute,
integrally, toward properly disposing one for higher gifts.
114) Now, it is true enough that the Holy Spirit gifts us with charisms
that exceed our
natural talents and with infused prayer that can be received only as gift
and that there is a
simplicity in such grace that transcends our human categories of
simple vs difficult,
simple vs complex. What I speak of, here, are all of the natural and
normal preparations
we make, no less cooperating with grace, such preparations and
practices being quite
complex when you think about them, psychologically and
epistemologically, even as they
are progressively done with great facility and simplicity, iow,
proficiency, through time
and dutiful practice.
115) In this sense, contemplation might best be equated with the total
offering
[perhaps, Webster's 8th definition] of our entire selves, the total
oblation of our entire
lives, the total disposal of our human evaluative continuum, to God.
And this offering is
wholly, holy whole.
116) And this offering is progressively easier, more facile, more simple -
-- even as it
is one of the most complex maneuvers, complicated dance steps, a
human will ever
perform. It starts off simple but gets increasingly complex. It starts off
difficult but gets
progressively simple (facile).
117) Main Entry: 1sim·ple
Pronunciation: 'sim-p&l
Function: adjective Etymology: Middle English, from Old French,
plain, uncomplicated,
artless, from Latin simplus, simplex, literally, single 5 a : SHEER,
UNMIXED <simple
honesty> b : free of secondary complications <a simple vitamin
deficiency> c (1) :
having only one main clause and no subordinate clauses <a simple
sentence> (2) of a
subject or predicate : having no modifiers, complements, or objects d :
constituting a

56. basic element : FUNDAMENTAL e : not made up of many like units <a
simple eye>`8 :
not limited or restricted : UNCONDITIONAL <a simple obligation>9 :
readily
understood or performed <simple directions> <the adjustment was
simple to
make>synonym see in addition EASY
118) Another angle. Recall the distinctions Washburn made vis a vis
Wilber and the
pre-trans fallacies.I built upon these such that, ontologically, we
distinguish between 1)
(meta)physical structures, 2) developmental stages and 3) phenomenal
states, while,
epistemologically, we distinguish between 1) our environing reality
(including ultimate
reality), 2) the environed reality (of the human evaluative continuum)
and 3) our foci of
concern (recall Helminiak).
119) In terms of simplicity, then, for the proficient on the spiritual
journey, what is
going on in one's physical structure (psychologically & spiritually,
integrally &
holistically), where one is re: developmental stages, how the environed
reality interacts
with the environing reality with ever expanded foci of concern --- all of
this is
increasingly complex. There is FAR more going on, epistemologically
and ontologically,
with the proficient than there is going on for the novice. If the
phenomenal state seems to
be rather quiet, this is only because of the smooth, proficiency and
well-practiced facility
of these advanced parts of the journey. A proficient shifting gears and
working the clutch
IS going to be QUIETER than a beginner, who is learning to drive the
spiritual motorcar.
This is due to a simplicity born of facility and not from a lack of
complexity.
120) I think it has been a failure to make this distinction that has led
folks down the
paths of error such as quietism, fideism and such, denigrating various
faculties of human
knowledge, wrongly deemphasizing various aspects of the human
knowledge manifold,
whether the evaluative and/or rational continuum.
121) The trick is not to confuse the distinctions we draw between the

57. instinctive and
the affective and the cognitive for dichotomies, which is to say that, in
order to be
authentically human, we employ all of these faculties, in some
meausre, all of the time.
There is an inauthenticity, a denial of our own humanity, in being
rationalistic (only the
head) or fideistic/pietistic (only the heart). The point is that there is no
superiority in the
sense that anyone can be an authentic human, even as we note that it
takes some doing.
Theresa, the Little Flower, is a Doctor of the Church, so certainly
underwent an
intellectual conversion in addition to any affective, moral, social and
religious
conversions. She may not have led with her intellect, let's say, the way
her fellow
Carmelite John of the Cross did, but she did not interfere with its being
transvalued by
her other conversion experiences. Wisdom results. Authenticity is an
"accomplishment"
of wholeness and intellectual conversion is not to be mistaken for
academic learning,
alone. If we first follow Lonergan's imperatives to be attent, intelligent,
reasonable and so
forth, very much matters of the will, too, it'll take care of itself in the
"simplest" of souls.
122) This is not unrelated to Occam's Razor and the Law of Parsimony,
eh? And
Charles Sanders Peirce suggests that it is the facility with which we
come up with an
hypothesis and not the lack of complexity in same that parsimony
should measure. As far
as priesthoods and power-hoarding, or clericalism, although that
happens we do not want
to commit the fallacy of misuse, which argues against something that is
otherwise good
and which should only be used properly. Arrogance can be a two way
street -- one side
arrogating and asserting it has the answers and is here to help and the
other side
arrogating and saying it has the answers and needs no help. Alas, good
storytelling
(homiletics) seems to be the best way to reach all audiences.
123) .I would agree and qualify that one can, as a proficient, afford to
just look

58. because the look-er's entire evaluative continuum has been so very
well prepared
(cultivated, disposed, trained or what have you). Every apophatic
moment contains, for
the proficient, all kataphasis, and every kataphatic moment contains all
apophasis, too, as
one encounters reality with one's entire evaluative continuum
integrally and holistically
deployed. The simplicity is real insofar as an organic whole is in
operation and is not
otherwise fractured. If the phenomenal state of the contemplative soul
resembles that of
one who has merely paused between sensation and abstraction, that is
a superficial
resemblance because the developmental stages and underlying
structures could be quite
different (formed, for instance, by catechesis, liturgy, lectio divina,
moral development,
etc a la lonerganian conversions). Of course, it does occur to me that
Maritain has already
done this work of drawing such distinctions between philosophical
contemplation,
connaturality, intuition of being, natural mysticism and mystical
contemplation, etc And,
of course, there are all of the problems about the use of the term
contemplation in the first
place, such as acquired vs infused, etc But I am just toying with what
we mean and do not
mean by simple. The non-reflective aspect is important --- whether
driving a car, playing
a guitar, dancing a ballet or praying. All proficiency seems to move
toward simplicty a la
facility and ease. I do not think I'll be playing Classical Gas tonight,
though, on my
guitar, no matter how simple it is for Mason Williams!
So, with the above caveats in mind, practically speaking, below are
some criteria I have gathered for
a fallibilistic attempt at a Theory of Everything:
1) Looking for an explanation in common sensical terms of causation is
not unreasonable.
2) Looking around at the whole of reality and wondering who, what,
when, where, how and why re:
any given part of it or re: reality as a whole is a meaningful pursuit.
3) Almost everyone comes up with an abduction of God (or per CSP, an
argument, by which he
simply means a god hypothesis) or some other-named primal cause of

59. it all.
4) Some use a substance approach, describing all of reality in those
thomistic-aristotelian terms like
form, substance, esse, essence and with nuances like analogy of being.
It doesn't have explanatory
adequacy in terms of leading to a universally compelling proof through
formal argument in tandem
with empirical experience because, by the time we have suitably
predicated a god-concept, the
dissimilarities and discontinuities between God and creature so far
outnumber the similarities that a
causal disjunction paradox is introduced. How can a Cause so
unrelated to other causes and not at all
explicable in intelligible terms vis a vis other causes really, effectively,
efficaciously truly effect
anything. Also, substance approaches are too essentialistic, as they
were classically conceived, iow,
too static. This has been addressed with substance-process approaches
but these still suffer the causal
disjunct.
5) Some describe reality dynamically interms of process and fall into
nominalism, violating our
common sense experience of reality as truly representative of real
meaning. They account for process
and dynamics but do not account for content that is communicated.
These explanations, especially if
materialist or idealist monisms also tend to fall into an infinte regress
of causes. The only way to stop
them is with some type of ontological discontinuity, which introduces
the old causal disjunct.
6) Some, seeing this conundrum, with the causal disjuncts and
essentialisms of substance approaches
and the infinite regressions and nominalism of process approaches,
and with the a prioristic context
in which they are grounded, prescind from such metaphysics or
ontologies to a semiotic approach
which then avoids nominalism by providing both a dynamic process
and content (meaning) and
which avoids essentialism by being dynamic. It also avoids a causal
disjunction since all of reality is
not framed up in terms of substance and being but rather in semiotic
and modal terms, such as sign,
interpreter, syntax, symbol, such as possible, actual, necessary and
probable. To prescind from these
other metaphysical perspectives does solve a host of problems and
does eliminate many mutual

60. occlusivities and unintelligibilities and paradoxes, but it still levaes the
question begging as to the
origin of things like chance, probability, necessity. IOW, one
inescapably must get ontological again
to satisfy the human curiosity, not wrongheaded, imo, with respect to
causal inferences that naturally
arise and which, in fact, ground our scientific method and
epistemologies. Why? Well, because causes
must be proportionate and whatever or whomever or however the
Cause of causes, of chances, of
probabilities is --- is then like the semiotic process and modal realities
we can describe in many ways
but necessarily unlike them in many more ways.
7) Still, Peirce may be right insofar as he suggests that going beyond
this simple abduction to a more
exhuastive description of the putative deity is a fetish (we can't help
ourselves), there is a great deal
of useful info (pragmatic maxim or cash-value) to be gathered from the
analogies we might then
draw from the semiotic and modal similarities that do exist. God is thus
intelligible, not to be
confused with comprehensible.
8) So, my thoughts are that we cannot get away from a) some type of
substance approach, from
ontology, from being, from esse ... if we are to address the paradox of
infinite regress b) some type of
process approach, if we are to avoid essentialism and causal
disjunctions and c) some type of semiotic
approach, if we are to avoid nominalism and account for meaning and
communicative content and d)
some type of theistic approach, if we are to avoid leaving the questions
of origin begging and if we are
going to preserve our common sensical notions of classical causality,
upon which much of our
community of inquiry depends, such as re: scientific method.
9) This does not mean we can syncretistically and facilely combine
these above approaches into some
master paradigm of semitoic-substance-process panentheism. There is
a problem of renormalization,
which is to say that they often employ mutually incompatible and
contradictory terms and
approaches, analogously speaking, sometimes using noneuclidean
geometry, sometimes base 2,
sometimes spatialized time, sometimes temporalized space, sometimes
imaginary numbers. It is
analogous to the same project that would try to combine quantum

61. mechanics with general and
special relativity to describe quantum gravity. It is not just analogous to
this renormalization in
physics required before a TOE is contrived, the normalization of
physical theories would itself be
part of the TOE we are working on!
10)What happens then is that by the time we finish renormalizing all of
our theories, predicating
and defining and nuancing and disambiguating all of our concepts, we
will have effectively generated
a novel language with its own grammar, its own terms ... and it will be
so arcane and esoteric and
inaccessible ... it would be like reading something that fellow johnboy
wrote, when he was relating his
latest interpretation of Thomas Merton as seen through a kurt-
vonnegutian hermeneutic.
11) All of the above notwithstanding, this TOE project is fun and we can
glimpse enough insight
from it to inform our theological anthropologies and formative
spiritualities.
All I have done thus far hereinabove is to get us to some metaphysical
deity. What might be Her
attributes?
See http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=2352
Christian Nonduality
http://twitter.com/johnssylvest
Bird Photos by David Joseph Sylvest
johnboy@christiannonduality.com

62. Christian Nonduality
To Avow & Dis-avow an Axiological Vision of the Whole
NEW: Cathlimergent
Internet Forum
If human value-pursuits have both cosmological and axiological
The Christian
Nonduality Blog aspects, and a cosmology includes both descriptive (scientific,
Home
positivist) and normative (philosophic) approaches, then what's
Radical Emergence -
involved in our axiological pursuits, which are interpretive and
Nonduality & the evaluative?
Emerging Church
If a cosmology articulates knowledge, an axiological vision of the whole
Emergence Happens
When: conveys understanding via an interpretation, which articulates what
To Avow & Dis-avow Charles Taylor calls a social imaginary, which he describes as much
an Axiological
like hometown know-how, this contrasted with scientific and
Vision of the Whole
philosophic knowledge, which are more like map-reading. The social
Montmarte,
Colorado Springs & imaginary engages us through stories, narratives, myths and icons.
the Kingdom Arguably, the great traditions and many native religions, in one way or
Wanted: Women another, articulate a pneumatological social imaginary, all invoking
Warriors
some image of spirit. Evaluatively, these pneumatological social
Maiden, Mother,
Crone & Queen: imaginaries address profound human aspirations, hopes, desires; the
archetypes & value pursued is love.
transformation
East Meets West Often, our axiological visions of the whole, AVOWs, lose touch with
Ki, Qi, Chi, Prana &
their spirit-filled roots and lose sight of their spirit-animated vision and
Kundalini we then pursue inordinate desires (Ignatius) with disordered appetites
No-Self & Nirvana (John of the Cross). Often, these AVOWs operate subconsciously, but
elucidated by
operate they will - for every human value-pursuit derives from the
Dumoulin
integral relating of our cosmologies and axiologies as the normative
One: Essential
Writings in mediates between the descriptive and the interpretive to effect the
Nonduality - a review
evaluative, for better or for worse. This is the basic epistemological
Simone Weil architectonic which I've employed as a heuristic when evaluating
John of the Cross human value-pursuits. It has served as a foil and has provided a
Thomas Merton critique, integrating all of the best insights I have been able to absorb
The True Self from my favorite pastor-theologians, Richard Rohr and Amos Yong,
The Passion and contemplative sojourners, Thomas Merton and Thomas Keating.
Hermeneutical Much of what Christian Nonduality has been about is exploring, cross-
Eclecticism &
Interreligious culturally and interreligiously, the role of contemplation, a nondual
Dialogue stance, 3rd Eye seeing and such on the transformative journey. More
The Spirit needs to be said about basic religious formation and how it fits into
Christian Nonduality this architectonic, theoretically. Even more needs to be said about the
more on Nonduality practicalities of religious formation. I'm very pleased to report that all
The Contemplative of this has already been said and it has been said so very well by Jamie
Stance Smith.
Hesychasm
Mysticism - properly
considered
Karl Rahner
Wounded Innocence
Rogation Days
Radical Orthodoxy

63. Presuppositionalism
vs Nihilism?
Science
Epistemic Virtue
Pan-semio-
entheism: a
pneumatological
theology of nature
Architectonic
Anglican - Roman
Dialogue
The Ethos of Eros
Musings on Peirce
Eskimo Kiss Waltz
the Light Side of
Dark Comedy
Blog Visits
Other Online
Resources
Are YOU Going to
Scarborough Fair? Desiring the Kingdom: Worship, Worldview, and Cultural
Suggested Reading Formation (Cultural Liturgies) (Paperback) by James K. A. Smith is
Tim King's Post the most stimulating and enriching book I've read this year (and
Christian Blog Rohr's latest is pre-ordered). It resonates beautifully with my own
The Dylan Mass axiological vision of the whole. It affirms the primacy of our affective,
If You Are In desiring, loving self without asserting its autonomy from our cognitive,
Distress, Spiritual or
Otherwise
propositional, thinking (and even believing) self. It recognizes that an
axiological vision of the whole operates, even if subconsciously and
pending
implicitly, in the quasi-liturgies of mall and marketplace and urges a
The Great Tradition
properly conceived conscious-competence on us all in our rituals, practices and liturgies.
Postmodern Others say this much better:
Conservative
Catholic Pentecostal
From Amazon: Desiringthe Kingdom: Worship,
Worldview, and Cultural Formation (Cultural
Liturgies) (Paperback)
Malls, stadiums, and universities are actually liturgical structures that
influence and shape our thoughts and affections. Humans--as
Augustine noted--are "desiring agents," full of longings and passions;
in brief, we are what we love. James K. A. Smith focuses on the themes
of liturgy and desire in Desiring the Kingdom, the first book in what
will be a three-volume set on the theology of culture. He redirects our
yearnings to focus on the greatest good: God. Ultimately, Smith seeks
to re-vision education through the process and practice of worship.
Students of philosophy, theology, worldview, and culture will welcome
Desiring the Kingdom, as will those involved in ministry and other
interested readers.
From the Back Cover
A Philosophical Theology of Culture
Philosopher James K. A. Smith reshapes the very project of Christian
education in Desiring the Kingdom. The first of three volumes that will
ultimately provide a comprehensive theology of culture, Desiring the
Kingdom focuses education around the themes of liturgy, formation,
and desire. Smith's ultimate purpose is to re-vision Christian education
as a formative process that redirects our desire toward God's kingdom
and its vision of flourishing. In the same way, he re-visions Christian

64. worship as a pedagogical practice that trains our love.
"James Smith shows in clear, simple, and passionate prose what
worship has to do with formation and what both have to do with
education. He argues that the God-directed, embodied love that
worship gives us is central to all three areas and that those concerned
as Christians with teaching and learning need to pay attention, first and
last, to the ordering of love. This is an important book and one whose
audience should be much broader than the merely scholarly."--Paul
J. Griffiths, Duke Divinity School
"In lucid and lively prose, Jamie Smith reaches back past Calvin to
Augustine, crafting a new and insightful Reformed vision for higher
education that focuses on the fundamental desires of the human heart
rather than on worldviews. Smith deftly describes the 'liturgies' of
contemporary life that are played out in churches--but also in shopping
malls, sports arenas, and the ad industry--and then re-imagines the
Christian university as a place where students learn to properly love
the world and not just think about it."--Douglas Jacobsen and
Rhonda Hustedt Jacobsen, Messiah College; authors of
Scholarship and Christian Faith: Enlarging the Conversation
"This is a wise, provocative, and inspiring book. It prophetically blurs
the boundaries between theory and practice, between theology and
other disciplines, between descriptive analysis and constructive
imagination. Anyone involved in Christian education should read this
book to glimpse a holistic vision of learning and formation. Anyone
involved in the worship life of Christian communities should read this
book to discover again all that is at stake in the choices we make about
our practices."--John D. Witvliet, Calvin Institute of Christian
Worship; Calvin College and Calvin Theological Seminary
The Naked Now: Learning to http://twitter.com/johnssylvest
See as the Mystics See
(Paperback)
For Christians seeking a way of thinking
outside of strict dualities, this guide explores
methods for letting go of division and living
in the present. Drawn from the Gospels,
Jesus, Paul, and the great Christian
contemplatives, this examination reveals
how many of the hidden truths of
Christianity have been misunderstood or lost
and how to read them with the eyes of the
mystics rather than interpreting them
through rational thought. Filled with
sayings, stories, quotations, and appeals to
the heart, specific methods for identifying
dualistic thinking are presented with simple
practices for stripping away ego and the fear
of dwelling in the present.

65. Christian Nonduality
http://twitter.com/johnssylvest
Bird Photos by David Joseph Sylvest
johnboy@christiannonduality.com

66. CHRISTIANNONDUALITY . COM B LOG
beyond thinking & proposing to imagining & participating
Home About
The Emerging Church is BIGGER than Christianity – how to spot
it in other traditions
JB on March 23, 2010 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
Per the Pneumatological Imagination , because there is one Spirit, Who is Holy :
1 ) In each of the great traditions, the esoteric and mystical will present in terms of:
a) some form of critical realism in their axiological epistemologies
b) a critical scriptural scholarship
c) a nondual, contemplative stance toward reality
d) social justice component in their eschatological realism
e) an eternal now awareness permeating their temporal milieu
f) an institutionally marginalized yet still efficacious voice of prophetic protest
g) a solidarity with and preferential option for the marginalized
h) a deep compassion ensuing from an awakening to a profound solidarity
i) broadly inclusivistic and ecumenical sensibility
j) emergent, novel structures that are radically egalitarian
2 ) Esoteric experimentation and mystical realization can be pragmatically cashed out in terms of a
growth in human authenticity . That is to say that they will result in conversion, growth and
development in our intellectual, affective, moral, sociopolitical and religious spheres of existence.
3 ) Counterintuitively to many, humankind ’s aspirations to inter ­religious unity would proceed
more swiftly and with less hindrance — not first by unitive strivings on the exoteric plane of religious
reality via some putative reconcilement of otherwise disparate mythic elements vis a vis our
cognitive propositions between our traditions, but rather — by better fostering greater degrees of
esoteric experimentation and mystical realization vis a vis our participatory imaginations within
our traditions. This is to suggest that, transformatively, the performative enjoys primacy over —
but not autonomy from — the informative . Good News, then, enjoys a primacy over good
knowledge .
4 ) Put differently, orthopraxy authenticates orthodoxy and is first mediated by orthopathy in
orthocommunio . Put simply, belonging precedes behaving which precedes believing .
5 ) In each of the Great Traditions and in many indigenous religions, an authentic theological
anthropology typically emerges whenever a cohort of practitioners moves beyond an exoteric
mythic spirituality to also practice an esoteric mystical spirituality . Both mythic and
mystical spiritualities are practiced in all traditions and some mystical elements are introduced at
every stage of faith development. So, the emergence of a mystical cohort then presents in varying
degrees of mystical realization and not, rather, as an either ­or binary reality. This is a profoundly
relational and participatory reality, which cashes out its value in terms of intimacy .
6 ) However one conceives different value ­realization approaches to reality, those approaches are
each methodologically ­autonomous but all axiologically ­integral . That is to simply say
that all are necessary, none sufficient, in every human value­realization. (See note below for various
approaches.)
7 ) My value ­realization conceptions are irreducibly tetradic . Each tetrad functions as a holon or
fractal unit which, in various ways, will correspond to truth | beauty | goodness | unity .
8 ) Sometimes explicitly and well formulated, at other times implicitly and inchoately, such an
axiological epistemology finds expression in Continental phenomenology and American
pragmatism, also in various strands of Islamic, Hindu and Buddhist philosophies.
9 ) An authentic axiological epistemology will necessarily extend from an evolutionary
(naturalistic) epistemology .
10 ) An authentic theological anthropology , as a theology of nature, will then necessarily
extend from both an evolutionary epistemology, scientifically , and an axiological epistemology,
philosophically .
Note: tetradic — employing categories like truth|beauty|goodness|unity and
orthodoxy|orthopathy|orthopraxy|orthocommunio and creed|cult|code|community and
descriptive|evaluative|normative|interpretive and science|culture|philosophy|religion and
theoretic|heuristic|semiotic|dogmatic and objective|subjective|intraobjective|intersubjective

67. The above is a companion piece to this post:
10 Emerging Church Questions: Discovering What You Already
Know but maybe didn’t realize you knew it (Walker Percy­ism)
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: axiological epistemology , axiologically ­integral , b e h a v i n g , believing , belonging , compassion ,
contemplative stance , critical realism , critical scriptural scholarship , ec umen i c a l , eg ali t ar i an ,
eschatolgical realism , esoteric , Esoteric experimentation , esoteric mystical spirituality , Eternal Now ,
evolutionary epistemology , exoteric mythic spirituality , fractal unit , Good News , Great Traditions ,
holon , h u m a n a u t h e n t i c i t y , inclusivistic , institutionally marginalized , inter ­religious unity ,
methodologically autonomous , m y s t i c a l , mystical realization , naturalistic epistemology , nondual ,
orthocommunio , orthodoxy , orth op ath y , o r t h o p r a x y , performative , preferential option for the poor ,
prophetic protest , social justice , solidarity , tetradic
Abortion & the Senate Healthcare Bill – a prudential judgment
JB on March 21, 2010 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
Prudential judgment is also needed in applying moral principles to specific policy
choices in areas such as the war in Iraq, housing, health care, immigration, and
others. This does not mean that all choices are equally valid, or that our guidance
and that of other Church leaders is just another political opinion or policy
preference among many others. Rather, we urge Catholics to listen carefully to the
Church’s teachers when we apply Catholic social teaching to specific proposals and
situations. The judgments and recommendations that we make as bishops on
specific issues do not carry the same moral authority as statements of universal
moral teachings.
Nevertheless, the Church ’s guidance on these matters is an essential resource for
Catholics as they determine whether their own moral judgments are consistent with
the Gospel and with Catholic teaching.
Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship: A Call to Political
Responsibility from the Catholic Bishops of the United States
Regarding the matter of abortion and the Senate Healthcare bill, the following exchanges between
contributors to First Things and Vox Nova are instructive.
In the first instance, consider the role of prudential judgment in the context of the war in Iraq:
Aphorisms, Sartre, Bishops, and Prudential Judgment by Richard John Neuhaus
(2007)
Neuhaus Annoys Again at Vox Nova (2007)
In the next, see how it plays into the debate surrounding abortion and the Senate Healthcare Bill:
The Captivity Of ‘Catholic ’ Witness by Charles J. Chaput
Chaput is Right, Chaput is Wrong at Vox Nova
An important take ­away from these types of debates is that there is an important distinction to be
drawn between moral judgments and prudential judgments. Equally significant, our Church
leaders deserve deference — not just regarding moral judgments, but — when they share their
prudential judgment. This is to affirm that their teachings and recommendations are an
indispensable resource for the faithful even regarding empirical and practical matters that are
essentially strategic and political and not otherwise solely moral in nature.
All of the above considered, then, real questions are left begging by the Archbishop of Denver,
Charles J. Chaput, as he writes :
Groups, trade associations and publications describing themselves as “Catholic ” or
“prolife ” that endorse the Senate version – whatever their intentions – are doing a
serious disservice to the nation and to the Church, undermining the witness of the
Catholic community; and ensuring the failure of genuine, ethical health­care
reform. By their public actions, they create confusion at exactly the moment
Catholics need to think clearly about the remaining issues in the health ­care debate.
They also provide the illusion of moral cover for an unethical piece of legislation.

68. How broadly or how narrowly should we conceive this referent: “the witness of the Catholic
community ”?
Does the phrase “whatever their intentions ” refer to empirical findings, practical
determinations, strategic considerations, political opinions, legislative rubrics, legal
interpretations, technical matters and policy preferences? all which can differ even among those
who otherwise agree, in every respect, regarding the moral realities?
In other words, when it comes to the “Senate version, ” are the prudential judgments and policy
recommendations of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops the sole witness of the
Catholic Community?
Why should the USCCB’s prudential judgment not be placed in dialogue with:
1 ) the Editors of Commonweal , who write: In fact, the longer one looks at the
Stupak Amendment and the Senate compromise, the less different they seem. Insofar
as there is a difference, the Stupak Amendment may be better—it’s certainly clearer
and simpler. But the difference is technical, not moral. It should not keep Catholics
who are both prolife and pro ­reform from supporting this important legislation.
2 ) the Editors of the National Catholic Reporter, who recognize: In any event,
what is being debated is not the morality of abortion but the politics of abortion,
and there is plenty of room for honest and respectful disagreement among Catholics
about politics.
3 ) Fr. Robert Imbelli , who says: It might be of help, then, if all sides were to
acknowledge the fallibility of their prudential judgment, and that it is entered upon
with a certain salutary “fear and trembling, ” since so much is at stake.
4 ) Matthew Boudway , who directs us to Timothy Stoltzfus Jost ’s dialogue
with the USCCB: Jost’s response is a model of courtesy, scruple, and analytical
sobriety. He looks at every feverish speculation advanced by prolife opponents of
the Senate bill and heads it off at the pass. He offers the economic and historical
context without which it is impossible to understand what ’s really at stake. He offers
good prolife reasons to support the Senate bill (now the only bill worth talking
about).
5 ) NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby , which released the
text of a letter to Congress supporting healthcare legislation from organizations and
communities representing tens of thousands of Catholic Sisters and asserted that the
Senate bill will not provide taxpayer funding for elective abortions.
6 ) the Catholic Health Association of the United States , which emphasizes
that the CHA has a major concern on life issues : We said there could not be any
federal funding for abortions and there had to be strong funding for maternity care,
especially for vulnerable women. The bill now being considered allows people
buying insurance through an exchange to use federal dollars in the form of tax
credits and their own dollars to buy a policy that covers their health care. If they
choose a policy with abortion coverage, then they must write a separate personal
check for the cost of that coverage.
7 ) David Gibson , who represents: A close reading of the two bills, however,
informed by analyses from a range of experts, reveals that the pro­life claims about
the Senate bill and its abortion financing provisions are, in fact, mistaken. Indeed,
the Senate bill is in some respects arguably stronger in barring abortion financing
and in promoting abortion reduction.
8 ) Retired Bishop John E. McCarthy , who told The Associated Press on
Wednesday that he is as opposed to abortion as every other bishop and that the bill
before Congress would guard against the use of taxpayer funds to pay for it.
9 ) Fr. Thomas Reese , who points out: The disagreement is not over the morality
of abortion or federal funding for abortion. The disagreement is over the meaning of
the legislative language dealing with health insurance exchanges and community
health clinics in the Senate bill. Catholic social teaching has always acknowledged
that on the application of principles, Catholics can disagree even if adherence to the

69. principles must be unbending. The area of disagreement in this case is not over
principle but over the interpretation of legal language. Neither the sisters nor the
bishops have any special charism when it comes to interpreting legislative language
or predicting how legislation will be interpreted by the courts.
10 ) Bishop of Sioux City, R. Walker Nickless, who wrote regarding healthcare:
But how to do this is not self­evident. The decisions that we must collectively make
about how to administer health care therefore fall under “prudential judgment. ”
When Archbishop Chaput suggests that people who claim to be Catholic and then publicly
undercut the teaching and leadership of their bishops spread confusion, cause grave damage to the
believing community and give the illusion of moral cover to a version of health care “reform” that
is not simply bad, but dangerous …
certainly he does not refer to those who disagree with the bishops’ conference on substantive
prudential grounds?
Certainly, he refers only to those who thoughtlessly disregard or cursorily dismiss the teachings and
recommendations of the bishops, or worse, who engage others intemperately or uncivilly or,
perhaps saddest of all, who most blatantly undercut their prudential competence, for example, like
the late Fr. John Neuhaus, who wrote : While individual bishops may be prudentially
gifted or challenged, problems are multiplied when prudential judgments issue from
the bureaucratic sausage ­grinder of the bishops ’ conference.
Fr. Neuhaus, in First Things , continued:
And, of course, the sex abuse crisis that broke open in January 2002 took its toll on
the bishops ’ credibility and self­confidence in issuing pronunciamentos on subjects
beyond their self­evident competence. Catholics and others adopted a large and
understandable measure of skepticism about what bishops had to say. If they had so
gravely bungled the tasks that are unquestionably theirs —to teach, sanctify, and
govern —why should people pay attention to what they say about matters beyond
their ostensible competence? This is not to question but, on the contrary, to
underscore episcopal competence on matters of faith and morals.
On most questions of domestic and foreign policy, it only compounds the problem to
declare that they are “moral questions ” and are therefore encompassed within
episcopal charism and competence. Such overreach only invites critics to claim,
putting it bluntly, that the bishops don ’t know what they are talking about, or at
least don ’t know any more than is known by the well ­informed citizen. Archbishop
Dolan noted that, in recent years, the bishops in the conference have learned this
lesson and have been focusing their attention ad intra rather than ad extra,
concentrating on matters clearly within their competence and authority as teachers
of the Church.
When all the political dust settles and rhetorical heat cools, there will be plenty of opportunity to
conduct a post mortem on who was undercut by whom and how and who was ineffective because of
self­defeating tactics.
The witness of the Catholic Community, broadly conceived, will remain vibrant and effective. Sure,
there will often be those isolated individuals who do disservice to nation and Church, but the overall
tone and tenor and substance of our Catholic Community’s contributions to the latest healthcare
deliberations, which are evidenced in the points and counterpoints below and the discussions
referenced hereinabove, in my view, are a reality worth celebrating. I am grateful to our bishops’
conference and to our various pro ­life Catholic groups, trade associations and publications for their
contributions in the public square.
POINT
USCCB Health Care Reform website
U.S. Bishops Provide Resources Explaining Flaws in Senate Health Care Bill
Bishops to House of Representatives: Fix Flaws or Vote No on Health Reform Bill
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Letter to House Members on Health Care
legislation
Health Care Reform and the Pro ­Life Agenda, by Richard Doerflinger
Health Care Reform and the Pro ­Life Agenda 2, by Richard Doerflinger
Issues of Life and Conscience in Health Care Reform: A Comparison of the House and
Senate Bills
COUNTERPOINT
Nuns: Vote for health bill would be ‘life­affirming ’
Prolife, Yes, & Pro­reform a Commonweal Editorial
Editorial: National Catholic Reporter backs health bill
Timothy Stoltzfus Jost of Washington and Lee law school

70. The House Health Reform Bill: An Abortion Funding Ban And Other Late Changes
WHAT ’S WRONG WITH THE SENATE HEALTH CARE BILL ON ABORTION? A response
to Professor Jost from the USCCB
Timothy Stoltzfus Jost of Washington and Lee law school – Response to Bishops
Two Catholic, pro ­life supporters back Senate bill
The Senate Bill Funds Abortions? Nope, and It ’s More Pro­Life Than the House Version
by David Gibson
Abortion Language in Health Bill Pits Catholic Against Catholic By David Gibson
Pro­life Rep. Perriello Says Abortion Concerns Eased, May Back Health Bill By David
Gibson
Bishops Oppose Health Bill, Still Claiming It Could Fund Abortions By David Gibson
The Devil in the Details by Robert P. Imbelli
“Crying Wolf” by Mollie Wilson O ’Reilly
Jost answers the USCCB’s prolife office by Matthew Boudway
Pro­life Rep. Tom Perriello backs Senate bill ’s abortion safeguards by David Gibson
The USCCB ’s ‘worst case scenarioism ’ by Grant Gallicho
The problem with last ­minute legislation by Matthew Boudway
Fear, Trembling, and Trepidation by Robert P. Imbelli
“False claims ” by Mollie Wilson O ’Reilly
Catholic Nuns Support House Passage of HCR by Eduardo Pe ñalver
Catholic Health Association Prez: ‘The Time Is Now for Health Reform. ’ by Grant
Gallicho
Does the Senate bill fund abortion? by Matthew Boudway
Below is my response to The Captivity Of ‘Catholic ’ Witness by Charles J. Chaput:
Some here have already drawn the relevant distinction between moral and
prudential judgments. And while the prudential judgments and recommendations of
a bishops ’ conference do not carry the same moral authority as their statements of
universal moral teachings, still, as a Catholic, I very seriously consider those
judgments and recommendations in my own deliberations. That is to say that I
believe that the teachings and recommendations of our bishops are an indispensable
resource for the faithful, even regarding empirical and practical matters that are
essentially strategic and political and not otherwise solely moral in nature.
Furthermore, our bishops deserve respect and deference, even on such prudential
matters, and should not be undercut by incivility and intemperate speech.
I have to agree with Archbishop Chaput that attack­ads against Congressman Bart
Stupack and E. J. Dionne’s hypothetical sanctioning of moral opprobrium against
the bishops are examples of the worst side of Catholic witness. Some might recall the
following lament regarding certain alleged past failures of the bishops to distinguish
between moral and practical matters, a conflation once described here on FT as
overreach : “While individual bishops may be prudentially gifted or
challenged, problems are multiplied when prudential judgments issue
from the bureaucratic sausage ­grinder of the bishops ’ conference. ” That
rhetorical heat, from the late Fr. John Neuhaus, was another sad example of the
worst side of Catholic witness as he, too, publicly undercut the teaching and
leadership of the bishops on prudential matters. In the same vein, other forms of ad
hominem s and innuendo (including the overuse of ‘apostrophes ’ and italics and
quotations – e.g. ‘Catholics ’ – to characterize others as so­called or quasi and any
overuse of the word alibi in characterizing others’ motives in one ’s writings) also
contribute to the worst side of Catholic witness. Who hasn ’t thus lapsed? On the
other hand, such lapses become defining moments if followed by enough reinforcing
moments as isolated excusable events become unacceptable patterns.
All that said, ad hominem s and tu quoque s aside, I don’t consider polite public
disagreement with the bishops on prudential matters to be an undercutting of their
teachings and recommendations. I’m sure Archibishop Chaput is not suggesting
THAT!
Accordingly, I respectfully disagree with the bishops’ conference regarding their
empirical and practical assessment of the Senate healthcare bill vis a vis abortion
funding. Timothy Stoltzfus Jost, a host of historically pro ­life House & Senate
members, Retired Bishop John E. McCarthy, the Catholic Health Association and
many others, in my view, make a much more compelling case regarding the
pertinent facts and interpretations of the proposed legislation than Richard
Doerflinger, just for example. No need to rehash them here.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send

71. Tags: Archbishop Dolan , Catholic Health Association , Catholic social teaching , Charles J. Chaput ,
C o m m o n w e a l , David Gibson , First Things , Fr. John Neuhaus , Fr. Robert Imbelli , Fr. Thomas Reese , Grant
Gallicho , John E. McCarthy , Matthew Boudway , Mollie Wilson O'Reilly , National Catholic Reporter ,
NETWORK , politics of abortion , prolife , Prudential judgment , R. Walker Nickless , Richard Doerflinger ,
Senate Healthcare bill , S t u p a k A m e n d m e n t , Timothy Stoltzfus Jost , Tom Perriello , United States
Conference of Catholic Bishops , Vox Nova
10 historical developments propelling Emerging Christianity ~
Richard Rohr
JB on March 13, 2010 in Practices & Experiences , Uncategorized , the interpretive ­ Religion | No
Comments »
10 historical developments propelling Emerging Christianity
Excerpted from 14 | THE TABLET | 6 February 2010 :
The emerging Christianity movement – Richard Rohr
∙ recovery of contemplative tradition (Thomas Merton)
∙ critical biblical scholarship on a broad ecumenical level
∙ new global sense of Christianity
∙ new ability to distinguish the essentials from the incidentals in church practice & teaching
∙ broad awareness that Jesus was teaching peacemaking, simplicity, love of Creation
∙ concerned with healing and transformation of persons & society on earth as it is to be in heaven
∙ charismatic movement, experiential Christianity & a more Trinitarian theology
∙ developing spirituality & theology of non ­violence
∙ new structures of community and solidarity
∙ non ­dualistic thinking : a non­oppositional, contemplative mind and heart
Join our conversation
at Cathlimergent !
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Why Brian McLaren’s Greco­Roman Narrative is NOT a caricature
JB on March 2, 2010 in Axiological , Cosmological , Methods & Approaches , Practices & Experiences ,
Provisional Closures & Systems , the descriptive ­ Science , the evaluative ­ Culture, the interpretive ­
Religion, the normative ­ Philosophy | No Comments »
Why Brian McLaren’s Greco ­Roman Narrative is NOT a caricature of modernistic aspects of our
religious traditions:
St. Bernard described a developmental trajectory for our relationship with God: 1) love of self for
sake of self 2) love of God for sake of self 3) love of God for sake of God and 4) love of self for sake of
God.
Thomas Merton described a similar trajectory in our stages of humanization, socialization and
transformation. Humanization and socialization help form what he called our False Self.
Transformation forms our True Self.
Richard Rohr draws a distinction between our problem ­solving, dualistic mindsets and our nondual,
contemplative stance toward reality.
Such distinctions describe the faith journeys of all of our great traditions with their various exoteric
and esoteric aspects.
The exoteric dimension engages reality in a more propositional way. That is to suggest that it
engages reality with empirical, rational, moral and practical methods. It establishes and defends
boundaries. When it encounters paradox, it makes an attempt to resolve, dissolve or evade it. It
provides answers to many of our most fundamental questions.
The esoteric dimension engages reality in a more participatory and imaginative way. That is to
suggest that it engages reality from a more personal, relational perspective. It negotiates and
transcends boundaries. When it encounters the paradox in life ’s deepest mysteries, as they impact
our most profound values, most cherished longings, most insistent urges and most ultimate
concerns, it exploits this paradox by nurturing its creative tensions. It abides in trust and ponders
life’s ultimate questions with awe, reverence and love.
One might say that the more exoteric aspects of our traditions provide us with the answers to the
question of why we should love God, which is to say, for the sake of self. These answers form in us an
enlightened self­interest. Early on our journey, our faith is thus more clear but tentative.

72. The more esoteric aspects of our traditions provide us with the answer to the question of why God
loves us, which is to say, because we are fashioned in His image and likeness. This answer transforms
us and puts us in touch with our True Self. Later on our journey, our faith is thus more obscure but
certain.
The later stages of Bernardian love do not negate the earlier. Our True Self does not annihilate our
False Self. Our nondual, contemplative stance goes beyond but not without our problem ­solving
dualistic mindset. The earlier stages of our journey are necessary but simply not sufficient. They are
especially insufficient when our goal is a growth in relationship, in intimacy, whether with people or
with God.
Our Greco ­Roman Narrative, in very many ways, has everything to do with our love of self for sake
of self and love of God for sake of self. It is all about our humanization and socialization. It very
much engages our problem ­solving, dualistic mindsets with their empirical, rational, moral and
practical methods. It very clearly establishes and steadfastly defends all sorts of boundaries. When it
encounters paradox, it makes every attempt to resolve, dissolve or evade it. More than anything,
this narrative makes an attempt to provide answers toward the end of comprehensively describing
and exhaustively norming our engagements with reality. This narrative largely comprises the grand
storyline of modern science, philosophy and classical liberal politics. This is a storyline with a great
many successes but no too few failures. Some of these failures were of epic proportion and were well
chronicled in the writings of Walker Percy, who keenly diagnosed our postmodern malaise.
I have already drawn parallels to McLaren and Percy. See, for example:
Everything That ’s Old is New Again – this (McLaren ’s “New” Christianity) is truly an
old time religion and also the more fleshed­out, tongue ­partly ­in­cheek version: A New Kind of
Christianity? McLaren didn ’t make this up. It ’s worse than that! .
The parallel I wish to offer here is that McLaren’s invitation simply mirrors that of St. Bernard,
Thomas Merton, Richard Rohr, Walker Percy and many others in our Christian tradition and, indeed,
that of the mystics of all of the Great Traditions. This is an invitation to engage not only the more
exoteric but also the more esoteric dimensions of our tradition. And this will have everything to do
with our love of God for sake of God and love of self for sake of God! It is all about our transformation
and True Self! It will very much engage our nondual, contemplative stance toward reality with its
robustly personal and deeply relational approach! When it encounters the paradox in life’s deepest
mysteries, it nurtures its creative tensions in abiding trust. With an open mind it negotiates all
sorts of boundaries, with an open heart transcends them and with open arms welcomes the
marginalized! This is the storyline of creation, liberation and reconciliation. THIS is our story! THIS
is our song!
Now, clearly, McLaren ’s Greco ­Roman Narrative does not describe the best our tradition has had to
offer when its exoteric and esoteric dimensions have been properly integrated. Clearly, this
integration has indeed been preserved in varying degrees and transmitted to varying extents by
manifold and diverse elements of our tradition. To deny this would indeed be a caricaturization. But
this is not what I see McLaren doing. Instead, what I take away from his critique is the same lament
that’s been heralded in our prophetic tradition since the days of old: God is offering us SO much
more! But way too many of us are settling for so much less! That is to say that we need to go deeper
and to better integrate the exoteric and esoteric dimensions of our religion.
The challenge, as I discern it, is for our institutional structures and non ­institutional vehicles to
better foster ongoing intellectual, affective, moral, sociopolitical and religious development and
conversion (cf. Lonergan & Donald Gelpi). As created co­creators, our work is to foster True Self­
realization and authentic transformation of individuals and society, liberating and reconciling all.
Yes, progress has been made.
But, if anyone imagines that the critiques of modernistic religion by such as Thomas Merton and
Walker Percy, now Richard Rohr and Brain McLaren, are mere caricatures, where MOST religious
practitioners are concerned, they are incredibly naive. (Keep in mind, no one is judging the
disposition of anyone ’s soul; this is a conversation regarding developmental stages of the journey.)
Are we robustly engaging our esoteric dimensions? Rather, do we bog down in the exoteric and
render our religion, then, moralistic, legalistic, ritualistic, rationalistic? Take a look around. Listen
to the rhetoric – not just in the pews, but – from our pulpits! What are we mostly talking about? What
best describes our predominant way of engaging our God?
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: Bernardian love , Brian McLaren , dualistic mind , esoteric religion , exoteric religion , False Self,
Great Traditions , Greco ­R o m a n n a r r a t i v e , h u m a n i z a t i o n , mystics , n o n d u a l i t y , paradox , Richard Rohr ,
socialization , St. Bernard , Thomas Merton , transformation , True Self, ultimate concern , Walker Percy
THE BOOK: Christian Nonduality – Postmodern Conservative
Catholic Pentecostal
JB on February 19, 2010 in Axiological , Cosmological , Methods & Approaches , Provisional Closures
& Systems, Uncategorized , the descriptive ­ Science , the evaluative ­ Culture, the interpretive ­
Religion, the normative ­ Philosophy | No Comments »
See my story: Christian Nonduality – Postmodern Conservative Catholic Pentecostal
John Sobert Sylvest will not be tweeting, blogging or FB peeping
this Lent but will be checking e­mail infrequently. Have a holy
time ee you at Sonrise
S
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send

73.
Tags: Catholic , catholic charismatic , conse rvati ve , pentecostal , postmodern , postmodern conservative
Thoughts re: today’s debate – Philip Clayton vs Dan Dennett
JB on February 16, 2010 in Axiological , Cosmological , Methods & Approaches , Provisional Closures
& Systems, Uncategorized , the descriptive ­ Science , the evaluative ­ Culture, the interpretive ­
Religion, the normative ­ Philosophy | 7 Comments »
Emerson said that God arrives when the half­gods depart.
Dennett has spent recent years tilting at the windmills of
half­gods and imagines himself as Don Quixote. The fact of
the matter is that I am largely in agreement with Dennett in
that ALL of the gods he’s been dispatching are not worthy of
anyone ’s belief.
To some extent, it is a matter of two ships passing in the
night. We all inhabit elaborate tautologies wherein our
syllogistic conclusions are often hidden in the very terms
we employ in our premises. So, the first problem will always
be the proper disambiguation of terms.
If we do employ the same terms, then I think believers must
concede that science, philosophy and culture, without
religion, can realize truth, beauty and goodness in
abundance, even. (At least this is a fundamental premise of
anyone who holds a radically incarnational view. Life is
good. Living a good and moral life is transparent to human
reason.) So, it is not like religion even introduces a new
horizon of concern vis a vis values. Values are already in
place. Science, then, is descriptive. Philosophy is
normative. Culture is evaluative.
Religion introduces a question re: truth, beauty and goodness. Even abundance. That question is:
Might there be more? Might there be superabundance? Then, in an effort to augment these values, it
amplifies the epistemic and existential risks we have already taken (such as in our falsifiable
science, provisional closures in philosophy) by venturing forth to further wager with faith, hope and
love . We then cash out the pragmatic value of these wagers by seeing if we have indeed fostered
human growth: intellectually, affectively, morally, socio ­politically and religiously.
There is no question that the life of religious faith, hope and love is riskier. That’s why it is called
FAITH and HOPE. No one is being intellectually dishonest, here. No one is claiming that the Object of
our worship can be empirically measured, logically demonstrated or practically proved. We are not
saying that our cosmology of descriptive science, normative philosophy or evaluative culture
differs one iota from Dennett’s such that WHAT we see when we engage reality is going to be any
different. (If someone put a gun to my head, I ’d say consciousness is an emergent phenomenon vis a
vis a nonreductive physicalism. But I wouldn ’t lose a wink of sleep if it were wholly reductive. My
bets are on a physicalist account of the soul but, if it ended up being a radically Cartesian dualism, it
wouldn ’t bother me a bit.)
We do say that HOW we see this cosmology through an axiology, or via our religious interpretive
axis, does differ when we imagine that reality has more in store than meets the eye and when we
participate together with others in this imaginative vision. While we don’t adjudicate our claims,
finally, evidentially, it doesn ’t mean there is no evidence. While we do not demonstrate them
conclusively, rationally, it doesn ’t mean that we have no good reasons.
Dennett will point out that all of this behavior has adaptive significance. Who would not disagree
with this rather trivial grasp of the obvious?
His tautology quits processing reality at this point. No problem.
Ours does not.
He might invoke Occam ’s Razor. But one can only wield that weapon when one has already achieved
explanatory adequacy and is choosing between two equally good explanations. Last time I checked,
we have no Theory of Everything and, furthermore, it has just recently dawned on Hawking what
others of us have known for decades, which is that Godel ­like constraints (incompleteness theorems)
will apply to any and all closed formal symbol systems aspiring to a TOE. It is, ergo, a stalemate.
The only enduring question where the 4 Horsemen are concerned is whether or not they are familiar
with the work of Judith Martin ?!?
There is a fundamental misunderstanding if
anyone thinks people like Phil, Jack Haught, Joe
Bracken et al are making religion look scientific or
are conflating the autonomous methodologies of
science and theology. What they are doing is what
is called a Theology of Nature which begins within
the faith. It is very much akin to St. Francis ’
hymns to nature and to the parables of nature
found in scripture even though it is employing
analogies and metaphors that are derived from
the theory of evolution, speculative cosmology
and the heuristic of emergence, for example. In
this regard, they are not only not doing science,
they are not even doing philosophy or what might
be considered a natural theology.
When these gentlemen do begin within

74. There is a fundamental misunderstanding if
anyone thinks people like Phil, Jack Haught, Joe
Bracken et al are making religion look scientific or
are conflating the autonomous methodologies of
science and theology. What they are doing is what
is called a Theology of Nature which begins within
the faith. It is very much akin to St. Francis ’
hymns to nature and to the parables of nature
found in scripture even though it is employing
analogies and metaphors that are derived from
the theory of evolution, speculative cosmology
and the heuristic of emergence, for example. In
this regard, they are not only not doing science,
they are not even doing philosophy or what might
be considered a natural theology.
When these gentlemen do begin within
philosophy, a natural philosophy or natural
theology, their excursion is brief and for the
purpose of disambiguating concepts, clarifying
categories, formulating arguments or, in other words, framing up valid questions, which we might
consider to be reality ’s “limit questions. ” They do not then aspire to answer these questions such as
through formal syllogistic reasoning as if there could be proofs for God ’s existence or final
explanations for reality. All a philosophy of nature demonstrates is the reasonableness of our limit
questions, questions which cohere with our ultimate concerns.
Contrastingly, this is precisely where Dennett et al
go astray in that they do claim to have answered
such limit questions and to have eliminated the
ultimate as a matter of concern. In doing so, it is
Dennett who has conflated the otherwise
autonomous methods of science and philosophy
in what is known as a scientism, a label Dawkins
apparently accepts but which Dennett claims is
but a caricature of his naturalism, which is not
philosophical but, rather, methodological (or so
he protested to Jack Haught, when they last
debated). This leaves a question left begging,
however, for Dennett, which is that – if he is truly
a methodological naturalist, then, – doesn ’t that
mean that, vis a vis reality ’s limit questions, he
must either remain, in principle, agnostic or otherwise transparently admit that his position, at
bottom, is essentially one of faith, which is what Phil would also admit?
The only thing that Dennett will typically counter is that he goes no further than his empirical
science and rationalist philosophy warrant, which he manifestly has!
What he must admit is that his is a type of faith, too, and that it is warranted. He might also claim that
his position has more warrant than that of a believer in God. And our counter might be that our
stance, epistemically, is indeed riskier, but that, existentially, this amplification of risks has huge
rewards in terms of augmented human values; this value­augmentation is, itself, truth ­indicative.
And we must reassert, here, that our stance does not refer to the caricatures of belief that Dennett
habitually engages as strawgods .
And thus would commence a whole other debate regarding the nature of justification and warrant.
But I doubt seriously Dennett can escape the tautology he ’s trapped in, which ironically, is the same
mindset that snares his fundamentalist counterparts. By conflating philosophy and science, both the
religious fundamentalists and Enlightenment fundamentalists are committing HUGE category errors
and, ergo, represent the obverse sides of the same epistemic coin — fideism and scientism — neither
which has a purchase on reality.
Most of all, I really feel sorry for their poor horses …
Their riders are giving horse manure a bad name.
Below is a relevant Tweet Archive :
pdclayton7
Okay, so a New Atheist and a Christian Theologian walk into a bar … thoughts on the
Tues. debate with Dan Dennett at http://ow.ly/17mNf 8:49 PM Feb 14th
@pdclayton7 Dennett told Jack Haught he ’s NOT scientistic but a methodological
naturalist. He’s agnostic, not atheistic, re: cosmic origins? 10:31 PM Feb 12th from
web in reply to pdclayton7
@pdclayton7 Wim Drees’ critique http://bit.ly/9vy00P keeps gods out of gaps,
which is fine; but doesn ’t it validate our limit questions? 11:28 PM Feb 12th from
web in reply to pdclayton7
@pdclayton7 Does Dennett lose sleep b/c Popperian falsification & solipsism are not
falsifiable or b/c logical positivism is incoherent? 11:32 PM Feb 12th from web in
reply to pdclayton7
@pdclayton7 re: God, world’s BRIGHTest philosophers tender Scottish verdict =
unproven & not dis/proved. Do Dan’s peers think he ’s bright? 11:36 PM Feb 12th
from web in reply to pdclayton7
@Cathlimergent — Thanks for the great suggestions — I’ll keep you posted! — Philip
Below is a bibliography I put together the first time I lost interest in Dan Dennett’s work. Click
below to continue >>>

75.
Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: atheism , Daniel Dennett , Emerson , E n l i g h t e n m e n t f u n d a m e n t a l i s m , fideism , f u n d a m e n t a l i s m ,
John Haught , Joseph Bracken , new atheists , Philip Clayton , Richard Dawkins , science and religion ,
scientism , theology and science
Everything That’s Old is New Again – this (McLaren’s “New”
Christianity) is truly an old time religion
JB on February 15, 2010 in the interpretive ­ Religion | 5 Comments »
This is an abridged review.
In a New Kind of Christianity, there is a thread in Brian
McLaren ’s overall thrust that might escape the notice of the casual
reader. That thread combines linguistic and semiotic approaches
that can get very technical and which are very highly nuanced. I
cannot even begin to unpack this observation in the space
provided here. But think in terms of subjects and predicates,
verbs and tenses, literal and figurative, icons and symbols,
intentions and meanings, literary genres and parts of speech. And
think about such as the senses of Scripture, literary criticism and
historical ­critical exegesis.
While McLaren well describes the impact of the history of
philosophy as it informs (forms, deforms & misinforms) our
religious beliefs and practices, also embedded in both the history
of philosophy and the history of Christianity are prominent
linguistic and semiotic themes that ask probing questions about
“how it is that we know what we know when we say we know
something ” and “what it is that we mean when we say something
now this way or now that to this audience or that. ”
To that extent, McLaren is squarely in the middle of what I like to
call Christianity ’s semiotic tradition . I will not aspire to explicate that case here but I would suggest,
for any interested in this angle, that one might explore, for example, whether casually via wikipedia
or more depthfully via books, the thoughts of the Kabbalah (Jewish) and Plotinus (Neoplatonist),
Origen and Pseudo ­Dionysius and John Scottus Eriugena , John Duns Scotus and John of St. Thomas
(Poinsot), Charles Sanders Peirce and Walker Percy . I flesh this thesis out here:
http://bit.ly/aQV2mS
McLaren is clearly not suggesting that we abandon our creeds, rituals, laws and communities! In so
many words, rather, what I hear him saying is: If we have articulated truth in creed, we take care not
to let our dogma devolve into dogmatism . If we have cultivated beauty in the celebration of cult and
liturgy, we dare not let it decay into ritualism. If we have preserved goodness in code and discipline
and law, we eschew their degeneration into legalism . If we have enjoyed fellowship in community,
we avoid at all costs any decadent institutionalism .
In my words, not McLaren ’s, his survey of philosophy and theology is an inventory of different types
of extremism. His critique is not aimed at our core beliefs but targets, instead, some peripheral
tangents. Some really tangential extremes that go too far via idle speculation , on one hand, or too
far with affective or emotional expressivism, on the other. And, he tends to the balance that needs to
be struck between our positive, metaphorical affirmations about God ( kataphatic , via positiva) and
that language which increases the accuracy of our God descriptions – ahem, or should I say, rather,
God references – through negation ( apophatic , via negativa).
What McLaren retrieves, revives and renews is a balance that has always been maintained at the
center of our tradition. That is to say, then, again in my words, that there has never been anything
inherent in our Christian religion that would, in principle, necessarily lend itself to such extremes as
rationalism (an overemphasis on the speculative and kataphatic), encratism (an overemphasis on
the speculative and apophatic), quietism (an overemphasis on the affective and apophatic) or
pietism , including an insufficiently nuanced fideism (an overemphasis on the affective and
kataphatic). Again, McLaren is square in the middle of our tradition, along with such apophatic
influences in Christianity that drew – not only from Gospel and Pauline narratives, but – from Jewish
and neoplatonic influences, then continuing through our early church fathers through Pseudo­
Dionysius and medievals like Meister Eckhart and Duns Scotus, all the way down to one of McLaren’s
favorite novelists, Walker Percy.
Finally, McLaren ’s theory of Incarnation, in my view, sits squarely in the middle of the Franciscan
tradition of Duns Scotus, which may be what one would consider a “minority report ” in my own
Roman Catholicism, but is clearly nothing that would be considered, oh my , heterodox. McLaren ’s
so­called “New ” Christianity is going to be new in the sense that, where most modernists are
concerned, it is novel vis a vis the extreme rationalism and fundamentalism “gifted” us by
modernity and which pervades our approach to ultimate reality. But, in another sense ( see how this
works?), there has been a long ­established, even if somewhat esoteric, tradition in Christianity that
has always served as a corrective and saving remnant. McLaren’s approach is, in that regard, Olde
Time Religion , which is, as they say, good enough for me!
Below are some of my redacted comments in response to various Amazon reviewers .
+++

76. The continuity lies in a shared epistemology, which has anthropological
implications. One can share another ’s seamless garment of life ethos, even share the
exact same epistemic justifications, ontological grounding and deontological
conclusions while rejecting the other ’s practical approaches and political strategies.
+++
JPD, you missed my point. I can’t even recall what McLaren ’s specific views are re:
the complex moral reality of abortion. My point was that whatever those views are
vis a vis Percy’s own views they are not dispositive of the larger issue, which was
that there is a continuity in their pericean ­derived epistemology, which is a
constructive postmodern approach. This is an approach I consider superior to
either a modernist rationalism or a radical deconstructionism, which has
everything to do with McLaren ’s critique of the misapplication of the Greco ­Roman
narrative. PERIOD. Any extrapolations beyond that are your strawmen, not mine.
In other words, your logic is flawed if you think you can always reason backwards
from one ’s practical approach to an issue, or from one ’s political strategy regarding
an issue, to what one ’s moral stance must necessarily be regarding that issue, much
less what one ’s metaphysical stance or even epistemology of choice would be. This
is to say, to make it plainer for you, that McLaren and Percy don’t have to agree on
everything else in order to share an epistemic outlook. Using that line of logic, I’m
surprised you didn’t offer an even more trivial graps of the obvious, which is that
Percy was a Catholic, while McLaren is not (although that is apparently a point of
contention for many of his fundamentalistic detractors, and, perhaps, they are not
entirely offbase).
There is much too facile an application of concepts in this thread for there to be any
meaningful discourse, e.g. liberal and postmodernist. Your unnuanced use of the
word “postmodernists ” as if it were a blanket pejorative falls into the same category
of offense (tarring too many people w/the same brush) of which you accused
McLaren re: neoconservatives.
Tu quoque.
+++
RE: Brian McLaren has put his finger on a problem –the ontotheological critique of
western Christendom by Nietzsche and others –but unfortunately he doesn ’t have
either the chops or the perspective to address it even adequately, let alone cogently.
Yes, Brian sees problems with metaphysics. And this particular response reveals
some of those problems. One can still hold to metaphysical and moral realisms
while, at the same time, recognizing that they are fallible, falsifiable hypotheses.
One practical upshot of this is that our deontologies should be considered at least as
tentative as our ontologies are speculative. A modernistic rationalism, then, “gifts”
people with a wholly unwarranted apodictic certainty that results in an untenable
epistemic hubris. It is this type of approach to reality that gets all worked up over
the notions offered in a nietzschean nihilism, a sophistic solipsism or humean
critiques of induction and common sense notions of causality. Human knowledge
doesn ’t advance solely through formal syllogistic reasoning and abstractions. We
do away with such silliness through an informal reductio ad absurdum, which is to
say that we evade such stupidity by ignoring it, for all practical purposes, and not,
rather, by formal refutation (or building another castle in the air a la Kant). At any
rate, there are constructive postmodern approaches that are superior to both the
classical foundational epistemologies with their naive realism and the radically
deconstructive forms of postmodernism. One that comes to mind is the semiotic
realism of Charles Sanders Peirce, whose work largely influenced the great Catholic
novelist, Walker Percy, who, in turn, has had a profound influence on Brian
McLaren. The above ­critique of McLaren was facile and too cursorily dismissive. His
peircean ­derived perspective is most adequate to the task and affirms both
metaphysical and moral realisms, which is to say, does not at all correspond to the
caricature other commentators have made of McLaren ’s epistemic stance by
equating it with a vulgar postmodernism. This ain’t high octane. It ’s high vitriol.
Speaking of First Things, I am pleased to see its sponsorship of a postmodern
conservatism. As for McLaren ’s discussion of the neoconservative approach, it
seems to me that he was critiquing it as a political philosophy, which is to say, as a
matter of practical judgment, which is methodologically distinct from our moral
calculus and religious beliefs. Some people mistake political ideology and religion
(and most certainly not readers of FT).
+++
This whole notion of Brian’s reinventing Christianity as if what he ’s proposing is
wholly new or even heterodox is being WAY overblown! His theory of Incarnation
very much resonates with that of Duns Scotus and the Franciscans, who believed
that Jesus ’ coming was not occasioned by any human felix culpa (oh, happy fault!)
in response to a need for a grand cosmic repair job for some ontological rupture
located in some vividly ­imagined past. Rather, the Incarnation was in the divine
cards from the cosmic get ­go as a teleological striving oriented toward the future
and we are active participants as created co ­creators. This also resonates with the
teilhardian and whiteheadian perspectives of process theology. These would be
considered “minority views ” o f atonement even in Catholicism but they are clearly
not heterodox, except, perhaps, to fundamentalistic Biblical inerrantists, who
consider a penal, substitutionary atonement as the only acceptable narrative.
+++
Bravo, Michael. And, let ’s hear it for Scripture AND Tradition AND Reason AND
Experience! Enough of this fundamentalistic sola scriptura and solum magisterium
and away with the modernistic rationalism and vulgar postmodern
deconstructionism. McLaren offers a robustly constructive postmodern critique and
not this strawman caricature ­bogeyman of epistemic and moral relativism at which
so many continue to take cheap rhetorical shots. Thankfully, at least they know not
to be fooled by relativism. Sadly, they too cursorily dismiss McLaren’s stance
because they miss the nuance and mistake it for something it is not.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send

77. Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: apophatic , Brian McLaren , Charles Sanders Peirce , encratism , fideism , John Duns Scotus , John of
St. Thomas , John Poinsot , John Scottus Eriugena , Kabbalah , kata ph ati c , Neoplatonism , New Kind of
C h r i s t i a n i t y , Origen , pietism , Plotinus , Pseudo ­Dionysius , quietism , rationalism , semiotic tradition ,
Walker Percy
A New Kind of Christianity? McLaren didn’t make this up. It’s
worse than that!
JB on February 13, 2010 in Axiological , Cosmological , Methods & Approaches , Practices &
Experiences , Provisional Closures & Systems , the descriptive ­ Science , the evaluative ­ Culture, the
interpretive ­ Religion, the normative ­ Philosophy | 11 Comments »
I will cut to the chase, folks. I ’ve read most everything Brian
McLaren ’s written. Most recently, A New Kind of Christianity .
And, while I don ’t go looking for them, it ’s hard to ignore
McLaren ’s detractors, whose chief complaint has been that, when
it comes to Christianity, he ’s not just coloring outside the lines,
he’s actually making stuff up!
Now, being very familiar with his body of work and having slowly
discerned just what this so ­called heretic has been up to, I ’m
afraid the problem with McLaren is really worse than one might
first imagine. It seems that few of his critics are even remotely
aware of a rather disturbing pattern in his writings, speeches and
blogging, a pattern that most egregiously rises to the surface in his
answering of the Ten Questions that are Transforming the Faith ,
which is the subtitle of A New Kind of Christianity .
The not so plain fact of the matter is that Brian McLaren
manifestly ain’t making all this stuff up. I say “not so plain ”
because, even when I tell you what ’s really going on, I ’m going to
have to rather carefully make my case below. The plain deal is,
gentle reader, that McLaren ain ’t fabricating a danged thang. He
stole all this stuff!
You heard me right. This ain’t McLaren’s work.
Now, I can already imagine what you Emergent loyalists are thinking and
can even empathize with how you must feel. I ’ve been there before. My
Sweet Lord! It was 1976. No, this ain ’t no exclamation invoking God in
vain. I ’m talking, rather, about the first solo Beatles single to hit number
one. George Harrison wrote My Sweet Lord in December 1969. A US
District Court judge in New York ruled in 1976 that Harrison had
subconsciously infringed on the copyright of The Chiffons, who had
recorded He’s So Fine. So, that’s all I’m saying about McLaren. While he
didn’t manufacture his version of Christianity out of thin air, as his
detractors claim, it is quite possible that he lifted a good bit of his
material, some mindfully, some inadvertently, straight out of the Judaeo ­
Christian tradition. Fortunately, for McLaren, no royalties are due
because the Holy Spirit doesn ’t go around charging folks with copyright infringements. If no one
picked up on this before, well, that’s likely due to the fact that much of the material that McLaren
has, shall we say, re­articulated , is found in the more esoteric (not to be confused with heterodox )
aspects of the tradition.
Further below, I commence a rather rigorous and technical analysis of the McLaren case . Before I
do that, let me direct you to some materials that are much more accessible and intended for a
general audience. Click on the link, below, to access 20 Good Online Resources to Help You
Understand Brian McLaren ’s new book: A New Kind of Christianity —>
Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: A New Kind of Christianity , anthropology , Apache , apophatic , arationalism , axiology , b e a u t y ,
Becky Garrison , Bernard Lonergan , Bohm interpretation , Brian McLaren , Charles Sanders Peirce , Chinese
taoists , Christianized neoplatonism , Christology , code , c o m m u n i t y , contemplative , Copenhagen
interpretation , Copernican turn , cosmic boot camp , cosmology , creed , cult , culture , descriptive , dissolve
or evade paradox , dogmatism , Doug Pagitt , dualistic mind , Duns Scotus , ecclesiology , encratism ,
eschatology , Eternal Now , e v a l u a t i v e , Everybody's Story , Evil and Original Sin , evolution , exploit
paradox , faith , fallibilist metaphysics , fideism , goodness , Greco ­R o m a n n a r r a t i v e , Greek neoplatonists ,
Hegelian dialectical synthesis , Heisenberg , henosis , heterodoxy , Hindu vedantists , hope and love ,
Humean critique , iconography , incarnation , indigenous mysticism , indigenous religions ,
institutionalism , interpretive , irrationalism , Islamic sufis , Jewish kabbalists , John Duns Scotus , John
H a u g h t , John of St. Thomas , John Poinsot , John Scottus Eriugena , Joseph Bracken , Kabbalah , Karl
Popper , k a t a pha t ic , Kester Brewin , Kevin Beck , Kierkegaard , Kuhnian paradigm shift , Lakota , legalism ,
logical positivism , Lonergan's conversions , Ludwig Wittgenstein , Meister Eckhart , Mike Morrell ,
m y s t e r i u m t r e m e n d u m e t f a s c i n a n s , m y t h , naive scholastic realism , n a r r a t i v e , N a t i v e A m e r i c a n ,

78. Natural Theology , Navajo , Nietzsche , nihilism , nondual mind , n o r m a t i v e , Origen , orthodoxy ,
panentheism , pantheism , p a r t i c i p a t o r y i m a g i n a t i o n , penal , Peter Rollins , philosophy , Phyllis Tickle ,
pietism , platonizing cosmology , platonizing theology , Plotinus , p n e u m a t o l o g y , Postmodern Critique ,
propositional cognition , Pseudo ­Dionysius , q u a n t u m m e c h a n i c s , quietism , radical deconstructionism ,
radical empiricism , radical orthodoxy , rationalism , resolve , Richard Rohr , ritualism , Science , scientism ,
Scott Peck , Shane Claiborne , six ­line Biblical narrative , six ­line Greco ­R o m a n n a r r a t i v e , solipsism ,
soteriology , storytelling , substitutionary atonement , theology , Theology of Nature , theosis , Thomas
Merton , Tim King , Tony Jones , t r u t h , Walker Percy , Zen Buddhists
10 Emerging Church Questions: Discovering What You Already
Know but maybe didn’t realize you knew it (Walker Percy­ism)
JB on February 11, 2010 in Axiological , Cosmological , the descriptive ­ Science , the evaluative ­
Culture, the interpretive ­ Religion, the normative ­ Philosophy | 6 Comments »
Discovering What You Already Know but maybe didn ’t realize you knew it
1 ) What about hell?
It’s a necessary theoretical construct. But it should only be used to console people who find a
relationship with God positively repugnant. We need to comfort them with the notion that God
would not coerce anyone into a relationship with Her. Otherwise, for all practical purposes, forget
about it.
2 ) What about religion? Is it necessary?
A religion is an axis of interpretation, an interpretive stance or axiology , around which our
cosmology spins. Our cosmology is necessary to realize truth, beauty and goodness and, in that
regard, it is also sufficient. Religion, then, is not necessary. One can live an abundant life without it.
One can realize truth, beauty and goodness without religion. For example, many say they are
spiritual but not religious ; they are not being disingenuous.
3 ) What do you mean by “our ” cosmology? I thought there were as many cosmologies
as there were religions?
Cosmology represents the relationship between science, culture
and philosophy. Science is a descriptive method that asks: What is
that ? Culture, an evaluative stance, asks: What is that to us?
Philosophy is a normative method that asks: How do we best
acquire or avoid that ?
Now, humankind celebrates this cosmological reality in many
diverse and beautiful ways. But this story of the cosmos and our
place in it is not really up for grabs. It’s Everybody ’s Story. We are
stardust. We are golden. But we’re not necessarily making our way
back to the garden (although that ’s a rather popular interpretive
stance). Our cosmological knowledge has advanced slowly but it
does advance inexorably. It includes both cosmic and biological
evolution, for example, and the paradigm of emergence .
4 ) How does religion fit in? If there ’s no hell (for all
practical purposes) and an abundant life of truth, beauty
and goodness already available to us, what ’s left for
religion to do?
Religion looks at cosmological reality and asks: How does all of this
tie­back together or re­ligate ? Put more simply, it looks at life’s
truth, beauty and goodness and asks: Is there, perhaps, more ?
Religion, then, is our pursuit of superabundance . To the extent that life is a journey, we aspire to
travel even more swiftly and with less hindrance toward truth, beauty and goodness. Religion seeks
to augment these value ­realizations by amplifying the risks we have already taken in science,
culture and philosophy. Religion amplifies these risks through faith, hope and love and realizes
these augmented values in creed, cult and code. In creed , we articulate truth in doctrine and dogma.
In cult , we cultivate beauty in liturgy, ritual and practices. In code , we preserve goodness in law and
disciplines. And this new law, by the way, is love . And its justice is known as mercy . And its methods
are not coercive; they ’re nonviolent . (Where nonviolence is concerned, I often think of Polanyi ’s
tacit dimension or of how in semiotic science and Baldwinian evolution there can be a downward
causation without any violation of physical causal closure. Such forms of non ­energetic or formal
causation can be ineluctably unobtrusive while, at the same time, utterly efficacious. This provides a
great analog for the gentle, yet powerful, influence of the Spirit on all of creation, always coaxing but
never coercive . If it’s any consolation to our human passions, Jesus suggests that our nonviolent
responses are experienced by our detractors like the heaping of burning coals upon their heads. )
Above all, we enjoy our unitive fellowship in community . A community ( koinonia ) of peace or grand
shalom , where we find – not perfection – but wholeness .
5 ) If everyone is, so to speak, saved vis a vis any conception of hell and all religions are
about the task of aspiring to superabundance, then why all the fuss about, for example,
an insidious indifferentism , a facile syncretism or false irenicism regarding different
religions?
Well, we are not indifferent in that we want to give God the greatest possible glory, ad majorem Dei
gloriam . So, while it is one great image to conceive of us all there together in Eternity, lighting up the
firmament to our fullest capacity, fired up by the very glory of God, it might otherwise be a
somewhat sobering thought to also imagine that many of us will have escaped as through a fire with
our little 40 watt bulbs while folks like Mother Teresa shine forth as a blazing helios . We can believe,
in my view, that every trace of human goodness, every beginning of a smile, will be eternalized. Each
moment of our lives is ripe for eternalization or will be burned off as ever to be forgotten chaff.
But, far more than any fanciful contemplation of our eternal state,
we are not indifferent because not all are equally able to enjoy and
realize life ’s truth, beauty and goodness, life ’s intrinsically good and
potentially abundant nature. And, yes, I affirm life ’s beauty and
goodness and abundance, unconditionally, very much aware of
some rather significant cosmic irony, not indifferent to the

79. But, far more than any fanciful contemplation of our eternal state,
we are not indifferent because not all are equally able to enjoy and
realize life ’s truth, beauty and goodness, life ’s intrinsically good and
potentially abundant nature. And, yes, I affirm life ’s beauty and
goodness and abundance, unconditionally, very much aware of
some rather significant cosmic irony, not indifferent to the
immensity of human pain, the enormity of human suffering. And,
while I haven ’t ignored some of those French existentialists ( Camus
and Sartre), I have paid more attention to their Russian
counterparts (Dostoevsky ).
I do believe that it is when we awaken to our solidarity that
compassion will ensue. So, it seems like we would want to aspire to
practice such a religion as would best foster human development
and growth: intellectual, affective, moral, sociopolitical and
religious. We want to get religion as right as we can in order to help
as many as possible to run life ’s race more swiftly and with less
hindrance, sharing and enjoying life ’s abundance. We seek
enlightenment for ourselves, even, out of compassion for our fellow
wo/men who would otherwise have to suffer our unenlightened
selves.
It may be too early on humankind ’s journey to successfully discern
which religions are best fostering such growth and conversion, but these are criteria about which we
should care very deeply. We need to dialogue deeply and with great humility. I will say this:
Religions that get away from Everybody ’s Story and tinker wily nilly with cosmology are indeed out
to lunch. Cosmology is not something one can just make up; it’s comprised of autonomous
methodologies, like science and philosophy.
6 ) Where, then, does the Incarnation fit in?
Well, it is about at­ONE­ment but not, in my view (or that of Scotus and
the Franciscans), a penal, substitutionary atonement. In other words, it
was not occasioned by some felix culpa (happy fault) as if in response to
some grand ontological rupture located in the past. Rather, it was in the
divine cards from the cosmic get ­go, this, God­is­with­us, Emmanuel . It
has more to do with a Teilhardian­like teleological striving oriented
toward the future. Most concretely, it ’s all about a profound intimacy with
a deeply caring Lover . It’s a dance, perichoresis .
7 ) What, then, about soteriology and eschatology?
Well, I’m with all the existentialists in recognizing that we are in a
predicament of sorts. But I ’m also with those who affirm a radically
incarnational view, which sees us as co ­creators in an unfinished universe,
hence the moaning and groaning in this grand act of giving birth. I
suppose I could join the theodicists and suggests that, surely, there
must’ve been a better way! But I ’ve finally quit beating my head against
that wall just because it felt good when I stopped and have decided to just put my shoulder to the
plow and plant a few seeds for the Kingdom.
Eternity is not something that happens before or after time. It is an atemporal and thoroughly NOW
thing! As has been said, it ’s heaven all the way to heaven, hell all the way to hell. Heavenly thoughts
that are of no earthly significance will not be realized in eternity because by not being now here
they ’ll end up being no­where . The truth of religion is found in a soteriology that measures its
success in terms of how well we are fostering an eschatological realism grounded in conversion
(Lonergan ’s) and compassion (leading to diakonia, service), NOW.
8 ) What about God­talk, metaphysics and such?
There is a type of God­talk that begins with cosmology. We could call that
philosophical or natural theology . I am a metaphysical realist, even
regarding God­concepts. Here we clarify categories, disambiguate vague
concepts, frame up questions and formulate arguments. Here we affirm
the reasonableness of our questions. This is not unimportant. But it is
woefully insufficient for a number of reasons, like the excess of meaning
we are dealing with, for example and to say the least. With Peirce,
however, after forming the argument and asking the question, we then
stop! We don’t pretend to have answered the questions and we don ’t
proceed with God ­proofs via syllogistic argumentation, which Peirce
considered a fetish (and I agree).
There is another type of God ­talk that proceeds from within the faith. We
call that a theology of nature . Here we wax metaphorical with our
analogical imaginations. All metaphors eventually collapse of course, but
it is my belief that those drawn in fidelity to our cosmology are going to
be the most resilient because our analogs will be better, our tautologies
more taut.
Of course, there are other descriptors for God ­talk, such as kataphatic and apophatic , both aspiring
to increase our descriptive accuracy of God, the former through positive affirmations and the latter
through negations. These categories apply to both natural theology and a theology of nature. Most
God­talk is going to come from our theology of nature. We can exhaust what can be known from the
perspective of natural theology in a single afternoon ’s parlor sitting. The currency of natural
theology is the affirmation: Good question! This does not mean, however, that the lingua franca of a
theology of nature is going to therefore be: Good answer! A theology of nature traffics, instead, in
iconography. It brings us to value ­realizations via a more nondual, contemplative stance toward
reality. The chief caveat emptor where icons are concerned is their elevation into idols. In this
regard, our 21st Century religion could use a huge therapeutic dose of ancient apophatic mysticism
to ensure that our icons do not become idols.
Another good distinction between natural theology and a theology of
nature is that the former is philosophical and engages our problem­
solving dualistic mindset while the latter is robustly relational and
nondual. Even some of the best theologies of nature, like Jack Haught’s
aesthetic teleology and Joe Bracken’s divine matrix , with all of their
sophisticated references to the biological and cosmological sciences, are
poetic ventures, metaphorical adventures, much more akin to St.

80. Another good distinction between natural theology and a theology of
nature is that the former is philosophical and engages our problem­
solving dualistic mindset while the latter is robustly relational and
nondual. Even some of the best theologies of nature, like Jack Haught’s
aesthetic teleology and Joe Bracken’s divine matrix , with all of their
sophisticated references to the biological and cosmological sciences, are
poetic ventures, metaphorical adventures, much more akin to St.
Francis ’ hymns to nature than, for example, G ödel’s modal ontological
argument.
9 ) What do you make of institutional religion and such
approaches as involve clerical and hierarchical models?
Well, for starters, we shouldn ’t confuse means and ends. And, once we ’ve
identified the means, we shouldn ’t so quickly insist that they are the only
means. The Spirit, it seems, is well capable of work ­arounds?
Even the hierarchical structures I ’m familiar with are conceived in a way
that gives primacy to bottom ­up dynamics. In other words, in theory, the top ­down dynamic is a
dissemination of what ’s been received from below, not a de novo fabrication emanating from above.
When a hierarchy, on occasion, loses this integral relationship or integrity, it is in a state of ex ­
communication, a reality that travels a two ­way street.
10 ) What about interreligious dialogue?
We have made progress in moving from our exclusivistic ecclesiocentrisms to a more inclusivistic
Christocentrism. I think our next good step is a pneumatological inclusivism , which needn ’t bracket
our Christology but should lead, at least, with the Spirit.
Those of us with a radically incarnational view of reality can affirm the Spirit at work in science,
philosophy and culture and can recognize the truth, beauty and goodness realized on the human
journey, which is pervasively graced. And we can recognize the value ­realizations that have been
augmented by our great religious traditions, affirming the efficacies and recognizing the inefficacies
in their attempts to foster intellectual, affective, moral, sociopolitical and religious growth,
development and conversion. We need to dialogue regarding what we ’re getting right and what we ’re
getting wrong — not preoccupied with heavenly destinations, but — in order to give God the greatest
possible glory and in order to compassionately console and help others to travel more swiftly and
with less hindrance on life ’s journey, realizing life ’s deepest values and greatest goods.
Footnote: Walker Percy spoke of Kierkegaard ’s On the Difference Between a Genius and an Apostle :
Like the readings that mean most to you, what it did was confirm
something I suspected but that it took Søren Kierkegaard to put into
words: that what the greatest geniuses in science, literature, art and
philosophy utter are sentences which convey truths sub specie
aeternitatis , that is to say, sentences which can be confirmed by
appropriate methods and by anyone, anywhere, any time. But only
the apostle can utter sentences which can be accepted on the
authority of the apostle, that is , his credentials, sobriety,
trustworthiness as a newsbearer. These sentences convey not knowledge sub
specie aeternitatis but news.
The Art of Fiction XCVII: Walker Percy by Zoltan Abadi­Nagi/1986.
This reiterates the distinction between our cosmology as knowledge sub specie aeternitatis and
our axiology as Good News .

81. Click on the Questions symbol above to meet Bill & Jacki Dahl, whom I “met” via Ron Cole !Bill &
Below are the methodological presuppositions that situate my outlook as articulated above. Click on
the following link to continue. >>> Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: ad majorem Dei gloriam , aesthetic teleology , Amos Yong , analogical imagination , apophatic ,
apophatic mysticism , axiological epistemology , axiologically ­integral , beauty and goodness , b e h a v i n g ,
believing , belonging , C a m u s , Charles Sanders Peirce , Christocentrism , clerical , co­creator , compassion ,
contemplative , cosmic irony , cosmology , creed , critical realism , critical scriptural scholarship , cult ,
culture , descriptive method , Divine Matrix , Dostoevsky , dualistic mindset , ecclesiocentrism , e c umeni c a l ,
e c u m e n i s m , ega l it arian , emergence , eschatolgical realism , eschatology , esoteric mystical spirituality ,
Eternal Now , Eternity , Everybody's Story , evolutionary epistemology , exclusivism , exoteric mythic
spirituality , faith , felix culpa , French existentialists , God ­talk , Gödel's modal ontological argument ,
h e a v e n , hell , h i e r a r c h i c a l , holon , hope and love , h u m a n a u t h e n t i c i t y , incarnation , inclusivism ,
indifferentism , institutional religion , inter ­religious unity , irenicism , ka ta pha ti c , marginalized ,
methodologically autonomous , Natural Theology , naturalistic epistemology , nondual , n o n d u a l i t y ,
n o r m a t i v e , orthocommunio , orthodoxy , orth op ath y , o r t h o p r a x y , penal , performative , perichoresis ,
philosophy , pneumatological imagination , pneumatological inclusivism , preferential option for the poor ,
prophetic protest , Russian existentialists , Sartre , Science , social justice , solidarity , soteriology , Spirit ,
substitutionary atonement , s y n c r e t i s m , theodicy , Theological Anthropology , Theology of Nature , t r u t h
hermits with an informal, occasional apostolate
JB on February 11, 2010 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
Thomas Merton in Disputed Questions writes of the thirteenth century Carmelite hermits that they
“initiated something quite original and unique: a loose ­knit community of hermits with an informal,
occasional apostolate … their life was left free and informal so that they could do anything that
conformed to their ideal of solitude and free submission to the Holy Spirit.”
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send

82. « Older Entries
Today ’s Liturgy
Translator
By N2H
Amos Yong apophatic
Axiological axiologically­
Bernard
integral
Lonergan Brian
McLaren
Charles
Sanders
Peirce
contemplative
cosmology emergence
emerging church
Enlightenment
epistemology faith False
Self fideism Hans
Kung James K. A. Smith
Jesus Creed John Duns
Scotus kataphatic Kevin
Beck Kurt Godel
Merton
metaphysics
Mike Morrell Natural
Theology nihilism
nondual nonduality
orthodoxy radical
emergence radical
orthodoxy rationalism
Richard Rohr
Science
scientism semiotic
theodicy
Theological
Anthropology
Thomas
Merton Tim King
transformation
True Self Walker Percy
WP ­C u m u l u s b y Roy Tanck
and Luke Morton requires
Flash Player 9 or better.
Cultivating the
Roots, Nurturing
the Shoots
MARCH 2010
M T W T F S S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31
« FEB
Recent Posts
The Emerging Church is BIGGER
t h a n C h r i s t i a n i t y – how to spot
it in other traditions
Abortion & the Senate
Healthcare Bill – a prudential
judgment
10 historical developments
propelling Emerging
Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
Why Brian McLaren ’s Greco ­
Roman Narrative is NOT a
caricature
THE BOOK: Christian
Nonduality – Postmodern
Conservative Catholic
Pentecostal
Recent Comments
christiannonduality.com Blog »
Blog Archive » Thoughts re:
today ’s debate – Philip Clayton
vs Dan Dennett on Intelligent

83. Design – a poorly designed
inference
christiannonduality.com Blog »
Blog Archive » Why Brian
McLaren ’s Greco ­Roman
Narrative is NOT a caricature on
A New Kind of Christianity?
McLaren didn ’t make this up. It ’s
worse than that!
christiannonduality.com Blog »
Blog Archive » Why Brian
McLaren ’s Greco ­Roman
Narrative is NOT a caricature on
E v e r y t h i n g T h a t ’s Old is New
Again – this (McLaren ’s “ New ”
Christianity) is truly an old
time religion
Kieran Conroy on A New Kind of
Christianity? McLaren didn ’t
make this up. It ’s worse than
that!
Philip Clayton on Thoughts re:
today ’s debate – Philip Clayton
vs Dan Dennett
Type, Hit Enter to Search
We Distinguish in
Order to Unite
Select Category
Blogroll
Andrew Sullivan
Beyond Blue
Brian D. McLaren
Commonweal
Crunchy Con
Cyn t hia Bo urgeault
Emergent Village
Emerging Women
First Thoughts
Fors Clavigera
Francis X. Clooney, S.J.
Joseph S. O'Leary
NCR Today – the Catholic Blog
Per Caritatem
Phyllis Tickle
Post Christian
Postmodern Conservative
Radical Emergence
Sojourners
Tall Skinny Kiwi
The Website of Unknowing
Transmillenial
Vox Nova
Weekly Standard Blog
Worship Blog
Zoecarnate
Worthwhile Sites
Amos Yong
Boulder Integral
Brother David Steindl ­Rast
Center for Action and
Contemplation
Christian Nonduality
Co nt empl a t ive Outre ac h
David Group International
Dialogue Institute
Ecumene
Franciscan Archive
Innerexplorations
Institute on Religion in an Age of
Science
Metanexus
Monastic Interreligious Dialogue
National Catholic Reporter
Radical Orthodoxy
Shalomplace
Sojourners
Thomas Merton Center
Virtual Chapel
Zygon Center for Religion and
Science
Cloud of
Unknowing
Amos Yong apophatic
Axiological axiologically­
Bernard
integral
Lonergan Brian
McLaren Charles
Sanders

84. Peirce
contemplative
cosmology emergence
emerging church
Enlightenment epistemology
faith False Self fideism
Hans Kung James K. A.
Smith Jesus Creed John
Duns Scotus kataphatic
Kevin Beck Kurt
Godel Merton
metaphysics Mike
Morrell Natural Theology
nihilism nondual
nonduality orthodoxy
radical
radical emergence
orthodoxy rationalism
Richard Rohr
Science scientism
semiotic theodicy
Theological
Anthropology
Thomas
Merton Tim King
transformation True
Self Walker Percy
Join Other
Visitors in Prayer
Light A Candle & Pray
Join Us in the
Liturgy of the
Hours
Get the Cathlimergent on
Twitter widget and many other
great free widgets at Widgetbox !
Not seeing a widget? ( More info )
Tweets
johnssylvest: Abortion & the
Senate Healthcare Bill – a
prudential judgment
http://bit.ly/aS2DwT
johnssylvest: 10 developments
propelling Emerging
Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
http://bit.ly/a4AMtg
johnssylvest: RT @pdclayton7:
"Theology After Google" opens
Wed. ­ 23 of the best speakers on
emerging religion in Google Age;
live stream at http://o ...
johnssylvest: RT @jonestony:
New Blog Post: Society for
Pentecostal Studies Paper: What
Pentecostals Have to Learn from
Emergents http://ow.ly/16KREU
johnssylvest: THE BOOK: An
Emerging Church Conversation
with a Postmodern Conservative
Catholic Pentecostal
http://bit.ly/91D570 #fb
John Sobert Sylvest
Johnboy Was Here
Feedjit Live Blog Stats

85. Feedjit Live Blog Stats
Follow this blog
Visit Cathlimergent Conversations
Visit Anglimergent
Meta
Log in
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
WordPress.org
© 2010 christiannonduality.com Blog is Proudly Powered By WordPress | Theme by The Cloisters

86. CHRISTIANNONDUALITY. C O M BL O G
beyond thinking & proposing to imagining & participating
Home About
T o d a y’ s L i t u r g y
Why I Love New Orleans: Iko Iko ah-nay Joc-a-mo-fee-no-ah-nah-
nay Joc-a-mo-fee-nah-nay
JB on February 10, 2010 in Uncategorized, the evaluative - Culture | No Comments »
It’s not WHAT you see of life when you come to N’awlins; it’s
HOW you see life! Translator
I was born here. I still live here. And I don’t leave often. Why the hell
should I? Anybody with common sense and a half a heart wishes
they lived here, too, especially after watching us on TV the past few
weeks!
By N2H
Lemme ‘xplain how we see life. Amos Yong apophatic
Axiological axiologically-
We ain’t pollyannas, mind ya, but … we’re easy like a Sunday …
Bernard
integral
Take that statue in the Cathedral. Look on dat lady-saint’s face and Lonergan Brian
McLaren
stare into it but good. Now, you told me whether that’s pain you see
dere or some type o’ really good pleasure. Ya can’t do it, no? One Charles
Sanders
moment it’s as if she’s in dem dere – what dey call ‘em? never seen it
for myself, oh, yeah – trows of orgasmic ecstasy, poo-yie-yie! But in Peirce
contemplative
the very next instant, just tilt you little head to da side a bit and, mon cosmology emergence
cher, you could swear she was at the Rock ‘n Bowl on South emerging church
Carrollton and had just dropped a bowling ball on her used-to-be- Enlightenment
good foot. epistemology faith False
Yep. One day it’s Mardi Gras. The next day it’s Lent. Dat’s N’awlins. Self fideism Hans
Jes sayin’. Kung James K. A. Smith
Jesus Creed John Duns
No one can tell us here in N’awlins ’bout famine & feast, agony & ecstasy or tragedy & Scotus kataphatic Kevin
comedy. Just read some of that highfalutin fiction by our own Walker Percy ’bout how we Beck Kurt Godel
hold it all together, both predicament & sacrament. Merton
metaphysics
Mike Morrell Natural
Ain’t nobody here gonna quote you Job. Ain’t nobody gonna take the blame on hisself. And,
fer sure, dere ain’t no fool preacher blaming life’s crap on the devil. We got our own wisdom Theology nihilism
tradition that’s hard to trace ‘xactly but our indians, blacks and creoles pretty much got it nondual nonduality
figured out dat Joc-a-mo has got something to do with it. Now, ‘gain, Joc-amo ain’t the devil orthodoxy radical
and he ain’t even necessarily your enemy. He’s just a jester is all, not one to be figured out, emergence radical
just one to be dealt with. We reckon that, if God’s got plans, dem designs are kinda whatcha orthodoxy rationalism
might call loose or easy. God, the Really Big Easy, makes a move. We make a move. Joc-a-
mo makes a move. Some moves work out, like when Elvis gets the girl. And some, like dem
Richard Rohr
Science
world class biotches, Betsy and Katrina? What can I say? Sometimes, it’s like dropping scientism semiotic
theodicy Theological
bowling balls on both yo’ feet, which is to say, it don’t work out too well, n’est pas?
Anthropology
But here in N’awlins, there ain’t no bitching and moaning. Thomas
We just sing, instead. Through the yellow fever and malaria, fire and flood, the Battle of New
Merton Tim King
transformation
Orleans, first we ask Our Lady to pray with us for prompt succoring and next we sing: True Self Walker Percy
W P-C u m u l u s b y R o y T a n c k
a n d Luke Morton requires
F l a s h P l a y e r 9 or better.
Talkin ’bout Cultivating the
Hey now, Hey now Roots, Nurturing
Iko Iko ah-nay the Shoots
Joc-a-mo-fee-no-ah-nah-nay MARCH 2010
Joc-a-mo-fee-nah-nay M T W T F S S
enòn enòn 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Aìku Aìku nde 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Jacouman Fi na ida – n – de 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Jacouman Fi na dè 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31
« FEB
And that roughly translates into: Recent Posts
God is watching
The Emerging Church is BIGGER
Jacouman causes it; we will be
t h a n C h r i s t i a n i t y – how to spot
emancipated
it in other traditions
Jacouman urges it; we will wait
Abortion & the Senate
And sometimes we wait a very long time. Healthcare Bill – a p r u d e n t i a l
judgment
It’s called patience. Look it up. It’s a virtue. 10 historical developments
propelling Emerging
And it doesn’t mean we sit on our asses. We keep working hard. Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
Why Brian McLaren’s Greco-
And when our backs are against the Superdome wall, whether for Katrina or the NFL Roman Narrative is NOT a
Playoffs, still we sing: caricature
THE BOOK: Christian
N o n d u a l i t y – Postmodern
Conservative Catholic
Good for your bod-y Pentecostal
And it’s good for your soul
I said hey, hey hey hey Recent Comments
Hey pocky-a-way christiannonduality.com Blog »
I said hey, hey hey hey Blog Archive » Thoughts re:
Tuway pakyway t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
T’ouwais bas q’ouwais vs Dan Dennett on Intelligent
Hou tendais Design – a poorly designed
inference
christiannonduality.com Blog »

87. And that roughly translates into: Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n
I’ll kill you if you don’t get out the McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
way! Narrative is NOT a caricature on
A New Kind of Christianity?
And the proper response to N’awlins McLaren didn’t make this up. It’s
would be: worse than that!
Entendez! christiannonduality.com Blog »
Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n
And that roughly translates into: McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
I hear ya! Narrative is NOT a caricature on
E v e r y t h i n g T h a t’s Old is New
Now, don’t get us wrong. We mean kill ya metaphorically, which is to say, in a nice kinda A g a i n – this (McLaren’s “ N e w”
way! Christianity) is truly an old
time religion
With red beans & rice, creole gumbo and our boys, the Saints. Bless You, Boys! K i e r a n C o n r o y on A New Kind of
Christianity? McLaren didn’t
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send make this up. It’s worse than
that!
Philip Clayton on Thoughts re:
t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
vs Dan Dennett
Type, Hit Enter to Search
We Distinguish in
Order to Unite
Tags: H e y P o c k y w a y, H u r r i c a n e K a t r i n a, Iko Iko, Jocamo, New Orleans, New Orleans Saints, Super Bowl, Select Category 6
S u p e r d o m e, t h e o d i c y, W a l k e r P e r c y
Blogroll
Andrew Sullivan
Beyond Blue
Brian D. McLaren
I’ve already got truth, beauty & goodness! Why bother with faith, Commonweal
hope & love? Crunchy Con
Cynthia Bourgeault
JB on February 3, 2010 in Axiological, Cosmological, Methods & Approaches, Practices & Emergent Village
Experiences, Provisional Closures & Systems, the descriptive - Science, the evaluative - Emerging Women
Culture, the interpretive - Religion, the normative - Philosophy | 3 Comments » First Thoughts
Fors Clavigera
This Post is a Syncroblog. Join our Syncroblogathon by blogging on the question: Francis X. Clooney, S.J.
Joseph S. O'Leary
“What does it mean to express faith, hope, and love in the 21st Century (or NCR Today – the Catholic Blog
postmodern world)?” Per Caritatem
Phyllis Tickle
And then cross-reference the following links in your post: Post Christian
Postmodern Conservative
Mike Morrell – Faith. Hope. And Love. (A Syncroblog)
Radical Emergence
Jeff Goins – Faith, Hope, and Love in the 21st Century: A Manifesto? Sojourners
Tall Skinny Kiwi
John Sylvest – I’ve Already Got Truth, Beauty, & Goodness! Why Bother with The Website of Unknowing
Faith, Hope & Love? Transmillenial
Vox Nova
Matt Snyder – Faith, Hope, and Love: Expressed in Simplicity Weekly Standard Blog
Worship Blog
To answer this most concretely — Zoecarnate
Worthwhile Sites
Amos Yong
Boulder Integral
We should amplify the risks we took when we moved
Brother David Steindl-Rast
from our exclusivistic ecclesiocentrisms to a more Center for Action and
inclusivistic Christocentricism by exploring a robust Contemplation
pneumatological inclusivism in our interreligious Christian Nonduality
dialogue. Put simply, we should take more risks in our Contemplative Outreach
faith outlook by being more open regarding where we David Group International
expect to find the Spirit at work in our world, for Dialogue Institute
example, among other peoples, in both sacred and Ecumene
secular settings, thereby augmenting the value to be Franciscan Archive
realized from a broader ecumenism. Innerexplorations
Institute on Religion in an Age of
Science
Metanexus
Monastic Interreligious Dialogue
We should amplify the risks we’ve already taken National Catholic Reporter
liturgically being more open to how it is the Spirit can Radical Orthodoxy
form our desires, recognizing that we can fruitfully Shalomplace
adopt the spiritual technology of other religions, Sojourners
such as certain asceticisms, disciplines and practices, Thomas Merton Center
without necessarily adopting their conclusions, thus Virtual Chapel
augmenting the value to be mined from desiring the Zygon Center for Religion and
Kingdom above all else and being sensitive to its less Science
visible manifestations.
Cloud of
Unknowing

88. Amos Yong apophatic
We should amplify the risks involved in our dualistic, Axiological axiologically-
problem-solving mind, with its empirical, rational, Bernard
integral
Lonergan Brian
practical and moral approach to reality to engage
reality more holistically and integrally with our McLaren Charles
nondual mind and its contemplative stance thus Sanders
Peirce
augmenting the value of relationship to God, others,
the environment and even self. contemplative
cosmology emergence
emerging church
E n l i g h t e n m e n t epistemology
faith False Self fideism
Hans Kung James K. A.
We should amplify the risks involved in our moral Smith Jesus Creed John
ventures by moving beyond our legalistic approach to Duns Scotus kataphatic
moral realities in society to a more social justice- Kevin Beck Kurt
oriented approach, striving less for a theocratic and Godel Merton
coercive moral statism and more for the establishment
of the Kingdom via our successful institutionalization
metaphysics Mike
Morrell Natural Theology
of the corporal works of mercy, thus augmenting the
value to be mined on behalf of those who’ve been
nihilism nondual
nonduality orthodoxy
marginalized. radical emergence radical
orthodoxy rationalism
Richard Rohr
Science scientism
semiotic theodicy
We should amplify the risks Theological
involved in conducting a more scientifically rigorous Anthropology
Biblical exegesis, unafraid of historical-critical Thomas
methods, literary criticism and honest Jesus
scholarship, thus augmenting the value of the Good
Merton Tim King
transformation True
News for all people of the world through enhanced Self Walker Percy
reliability, credibility and authoritativeness. Join Other
Visitors in Prayer
Light A Candle & Pray
Join Us in the
Liturgy of the
We should amplify the risks involved in ministering to the Hours
world through noninstitutional vehicles, affirming
them as partners and mining the value they create in the
ecclesiological models they afford us, egalitarian models
that are free of clericalism, paternalism, hierarchicalism,
colonialism, parochialism, sexism, institutionalism and so
on, thereby augmenting the value to be realized from a
more dutiful engagement of the Sensus Fidelium.
Be Not Afraid. Take risks for God’s sake! Get the C a t h l i m e r g e n t o n
For those interested in the theological development of the Twitter widget and many other
above-described Risk-based Approach to Value-Realization: great free widgets a t Widgetbox!
Not seeing a widget? (More info)
Faith, hope and love are adventures in that Tweets
they involve risk or what Pascal called a
wager. And it is a grand cosmic adventure in johnssylvest: Abortion & the
which we are invited to participate as we Senate Healthcare Bill – a
unconditionally assent to the proposition that prudential judgment
the pursuits of truth, beauty and goodness are http://bit.ly/aS2DwT
their own reward. This quest, itself, becomes johnssylvest: 10 developments
our grail. This journey becomes our propelling Emerging
destination. Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
http://bit.ly/a4AMtg
As we observe this 13.7 billion year old johnssylvest: RT @pdclayton7:
universe, notwithstanding humankind’s "Theology After Google" opens
cumulative advances in science, philosophy, Wed. - 23 of the best speakers on
culture and religion, questions still beg regarding the initial, boundary and limit conditions of emerging religion in Google Age;
the cosmos. There is, however, an overarching narrative that begins to address these live stream at http://o ...
questions. It is the story of Emergence. johnssylvest: RT @jonestony:
New Blog Post: Society for
Emergence gifts the universe with an Pentecostal Studies Paper: What
increasing complexity as its novel structures Pentecostals Have to Learn from
and properties present the beauty that Emergents http://ow.ly/16KREU
surrounds us. It is a complexity, however, that johnssylvest: THE BOOK: An
is willing to run the risk of disintegration. The Emerging Church Conversation
greater the number of bifurcations and with a Postmodern Conservative
permutations involved in any given system, Catholic Pentecostal
the more fragile. And, the more fragile, the http://bit.ly/91D570 #fb
more beautiful. Put most simply, an emergent
cosmos amplifies risk and thus augments John Sobert Sylvest
beauty.
These are realities we can understand without
the benefit of special divine revelation. A
descriptive human science queries reality
asking: What is that? Our evaluative human
culture inquires: What’s that to us? And our
normative human philosophy then aspires to
answer the ensuing question: How do we best
acquire or avoid that?
The answers we have derived for these
perennial questions take the form of truth,
beauty and goodness. And while each individual asks these questions everyday, as radically
social animals, these values are realized in community. Because we are radically finite, hence
needy, we form communities of value-realizers. Thus we talk about the scientific
community, philosophic community, cultural community and so on. Each such community,
in its pursuit of value, in its own way, embarks on a risk-taking adventure, amplifying risks
in order to augment our human value-realizations of truth, beauty and goodness.

89. The scientist, for her part, ventures forth with hypotheses that are inherently falsifiable by
design. The philosopher, for his part, articulates a provisional closure, which is represented as
Johnboy Was Here
this school or that. Human culture has been a veritable laboratory, wherein our falsifiable Feedjit Live Blog Stats
sciences and provisional philosophies have played out as anthropological explorations, as we Feedjit Live Blog Stats
know, sometimes to humankind’s utmost benefit but, all to often, to humanity’s everlasting
dismay.
Before we introduce competing meta-narratives, or axes of interpretation of reality, we
already observe our communities of value-realization in pursuit of the intrinsically rewarding Follow this blog
values of truth, beauty and goodness. And we observe science, philosophy and culture
harvesting these values in abundance in what is an inherently spiritual quest. Before our
interpretive narratives (religions) are introduced, our descriptive, evaluative and normative
narratives are in place, as a cosmology, amplifying risks and thereby augmenting our value-
realizations. In this regard, they might very well be considered both necessary and sufficient.
Still, as the ultimate value-realizer, our species might naturally wonder: Is there, perhaps,
more?
In our distinctly human way, most of us not only wonder but
also pursue more truth, more beauty and more goodness,
than is already realizable by science, culture and philosophy. In
so doing, we ask: How does all of that tie-together? And this re-
ligation query is a distinctly religious question. It is, then, our
axiology.
Now, if science, culture and philosophy, each in their own way,
comprise a risk-venture in pursuit of truth, beauty and goodness,
amplifying our epistemic, normative and evaluative risks toward
the end of augmenting these intrinsically rewarding values, then
what inheres in the very fabric of the religious quest is a further
amplification of risks. These amplified risks are nothing less, then,
than faith, hope and love.
It is no accident, then, that the world’s literature has ubiquitously employed the journey, the
quest, the adventure as its root metaphor for the religious quest and that its preferred Visit Cathlimergent Conversations
allegory has been an erotic love that risks all for the sake of all.
Visit Anglimergent
We’ve come a long way in this presentation without addressing the postmodern influence on Meta
our 21st Century expressions of faith, hope and love. And if you’ve hung in here with me thus
Log in
far, know that we’re now on the threshold of describing the postmodern prescription for what
Entries R S S
has ailed our modernistic religious quest.
Comments R S S
The chief problem with the modernistic approach to the religious quest is that it lost touch WordPress.org
with the essential risk-taking nature of faith, hope and love. Perhaps due to our natural
human anxiety to banish all mystery, perhaps due to our rather feeble ability to tolerate
ambiguity, and perhaps due to our insatiable need to either resolve, dissolve or evade all
paradox, humanity has largely surrendered to a neurotically-induced hubris that imagines
that all mystery has thus been comprehended, all ambiguity has thus been eliminated and all
paradox is subject to either synthetic resolution, perspectival dissolution or practical evasion.
The practical upshot of such hubris is that we begin to imagine that there are no risks to
undertake, much less amplify, no further values to pursue, much less augment, no quests to
launch, no journeys on which to embark. Life, then, is no longer an adventure.
The chief malady of such a malaise is that an insidious ennui settles over us. It’s not so much
that we think we have all the right answers, which is bad enough, but that we imagine that
we even have all the right questions. Our science devolves into scientism. Our culture caves
into a practical nihilism. Our philosophies decay into a sterile rationalism. The only thing
that remains to be seen is whether our planet will go out with a silent ecological whimper or
a fiery nuclear holocaust. Our religion, for its part, gets hyper-eschatological with heavenly
notions that are of little earthly use. A once enchanted world becomes inhabited with terribly
disenchanted denizens.
Modernism, in its pretense, bottled up the elixir of risk and offered us instead a vile concoction
that it mistook for some type of truth serum, a formula with all the answers, which diluted
any risk. It’s ingredients included a fideism, which walled itself in to a house of language
game mirrors claiming immunity for religion to cultural critique. It also mixed in an
inordinate amount of theological nonrealism due to a hyper-active dialectical imagination
that approached God as not only wholly incomprehensible (which He is), but as not even
partly intelligible (which She is). It suggested that no reasons could be given for religious
belief as if all reasons necessarily derived from empirical and rational argumentation with
their informative propositions and epistemic warrants, when, so much of human reasoning,
instead, is prudential and moral with performative significance and normative justification.
Put much more simply, modernism overemphasized reasons of the head and relegated
reasons of the heart to history’s propositional dustbin.
A radically deconstructive postmodernism, in one of philosophy’s most tragic ironies, ends up
being nothing more than a hypermodernistic outlook, with great hubris putting a priori
limits on human knowledge … except, well, for one singular exception, which would be the
limits they refuse to place on their own anthropology. In their caricature of all human
communication as language games, the Wittgensteinian fideists misappropriate Wittgenstein
as they saw off the epistemological limbs wherein their own ontological eggs are nested. In
their anxiety to annihilate metaphysics, both the social construction theorists and the
scientistic cabal do away with the very analogia that fuel both highly theoretical science and
speculative cosmology. This is just as insidious as the tautologies that were inhabited by those
who bought into Feuerbach, Marx, Freud, Nietzsche and others, whose anthropological
conclusions were buried in their reductionistic premises and hidden in their cynical
definitions.
None of this is to deny that we do not all inhabit elaborate tautologies with their various
circular references, causal disjunctions, infinite regressions and question begging. It is to
suggest that not all tautologies are equally taut and that we can and should attempt to
adjudicate between them based on such anthropological metrics as provided by Lonergan’s
conversions (expanded by Gelpi): intellectual, affective, moral, sociopolitical and religious.
And this is not to claim that such sociologic metrics are readily available or easily
interpretable but, come on folks, some religious cohorts are rather transparently
dysfunctional, wouldn’t ya say? And judging different approaches to faith by employing such
pragmatic criteria is admittedly not robustly truth-conducive but it is certainly reasonable to
imagine that it is truth-indicative. Our inability to finally discriminate between all religious
approaches, some which end up being quite equiplausible, even if not equiprobable, does not
make our approach moot; rather, it makes it problematical. It does not mean that we do not
have reasons (and very good reasons, at that) to embrace one faith approach and to eschew
another; it only means that those reasons will not be universally compelling.

90. Faith, hope and love in the 21st Century will look like an
adventure. It will look like a risk-filled adventure where
believers run the cosmic risk of disintegration in self-
emptying kenotic love. Like Pip in Great Expectations, we
will embark on a search for our Benefactor. Like Mark
Twain’s Huckleberry Finn, we will be a people of hope,
always looking in expectant anticipation for what’s
around the river’s bend. Like the cosmos, itself, and with
the grand Cosmic Adventurer, we will actively
participate, not without some moaning and groaning, in
the great act of giving birth.
Faith, hope and love in the 21st Century will look a lot
more like that time of enchantment in the early days of
Christianity, when the apostles and disciples and closest
confidants of Jesus, Himself, took great risks in following
Him. It will look a lot less like that self-righteous certitude
of fundamentalistic religion, scientistic philosophy or
even, ironically, a social constructionist nonrealism.
These are, in the end, very pessimistic anthropologies
whether gnostic or agnostic. We simply cannot a priori
know how knowable or unknowable reality will turn out
to be. In makes a lot more sense to believe that, as we progressively enhance our modeling
power of reality, albeit in a very fallibilist way, our concepts and constructs and categories are
making some of our tautologies much more taut vis a vis reality writ large. And this includes
our God-concepts, which, in-principle, must be inherently vague. If there is a grand telic
design and we actively participate in same, there is every good reason to hypothesize that the
inexorable advance of human knowledge gifts us with a more coherent outlook on both
proximate and ultimate reality. To the extent we understand reality better, the analogs we
apply to ultimate reality will improve.
This is not to deny that such analogs will
invoke an infinite number of dissimilarities
over against the similarities they will reveal. It
is to affirm that those similarities, however
meager, have profound existential import
because they pertain to a VERY BIG reality,
indeed. Over against any radically positive
theology (kataphasis) of the gnostics,
fundamentalists and rationalists, and over
against any radically negative theology
(apophasis) of the agnostics, nonrealists and
fideists, a postmodern theology eschews both
an epistemic hubris and an excessive
epistemic humility in favor of a Goldilocks
approach that is just right, an epistemic holism with an integral approach to reality.
In our postmodern milieu, science, culture, philosophy and religion are intertwined. When
one advances, they all advance. When one regresses, they all regress. This is not to say that
they are not otherwise autonomous methodologies. A postmodern theology recognizes and
affirms this autonomy. It is to say that these approaches to reality are integrally-related in
every human value-realization. They are, then, methodologically-autonomous but
axiologically-integral. Enhanced modeling power of reality, whether in science, culture,
philosophy or religion, translates into an enhanced modeling power of reality writ large. We
best not set these value-pursuits over against or in competition.
A modernist rationalism is a failed risk-management technique, attempting to domesticate
this risk and ameliorate its adventuresome nature. A modernist fideism is a failed risk-
elimination technique, attempting to immunize faith from critique by reducing it to mere
expression. Only a constructive postmodern approach can successfully retrieve, revive
and renew our sense of adventure, enchantment and risk-taking, inviting us anew to journey
on a quest for a grail worthy of our ineradicable human aspirations for more, a LOT more!
Thus we amplify our risk in our pursuit of
truth into a faith, often articulated in creed;
in our pursuit of beauty into a hope, often
celebrated in the cultivation of liturgy and
ritual; in our pursuit of goodness in love,
often preserved in our codes and laws; in our
pursuit of community, often enjoyed in our
fellowship and unity of believers. Thus
humankind augments truth, beauty,
goodness and unity in creed, cult, code and
community. Thus we participate in the
grand cosmic adventure, amplifying risks and
thereby augmenting values, courageously
running the risk of disintegration as God’s
fragile, but beautiful creatures.
Footnote: A Relevant Ping-Back from Mike
Morrell’s Zoecarnate: ‘All Will Be Well’ –
Polyanna Platitude or Responsible
Mystical Theodicy?
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: aesthetic teleology, a n a l o g i a, axes of interpretation, a x i o l o g i c a l l y-i n t e g r a l, b r o a d e r e c u m e n i s m,
c l e r i c a l i s m, colonialism, c o m p l e x i t y, c o m p l e x i t y t h e o r y, constructive postmodern approach,
constructive postmodernism, c o n t e m p l a t i v e s t a n c e, corporal works of mercy, C o s m i c A d v e n t u r e,
cosmology, deconstructive postmodernism, descriptive science, d i a l e c t i c a l i m a g i n a t i o n, e m e r g e n c e,
epistemic holism, e p i s t e m i c w a r r a n t, e v a l u a t i v e c u l t u r e, f a i t h, fideism, grail quest, Great Expectations,
h i e r a r c h i c a l i s m, hope, hope and love, H u c k l e b e r r y F i n n, informative propositions, i n s t i t u t i o n a l i s m,
i n t e g r a l a p p r o a c h, interreligious dialogue, Jesus scholarship, kenotic love, l a n g u a g e g a m e s, Lonergan's
conversions, l o v e, m e t a-n a r r a t i v e, methodologically autonomous, modeling power, m o r a l s t a t i s m,

91. n i h i l i s m, n o n d u a l m i n d, noninstitutional vehicles, n o r m a t i v e j u s t i f i c a t i o n, n o r m a t i v e p h i l o s o p h y,
p a r o c h i a l i s m, Pascal, Pascal's wager, p a t e r n a l i s m, p n e u m a t o l o g i c a l i n c l u s i v i s m, Popperian falsification,
postmodern, p r a g m a t i c c r i t e r i a, r a t i o n a l i s m, religious quest, risk of disintegration, r i s k-e l i m i n a t i o n,
r i s k-m a n a g e m e n t, root metaphor, s c i e n t i f i c c o m m u n i t y, scientism, sensus fidelium, s e x i s m, social
justice-oriented, special divine revelation, spiritual quest, spiritual technology, Theological
A n t h r o p o l o g y, theological nonrealism, t r u t h-c o n d u c i v e, t r u t h-i n d i c a t i v e, v a l u e-realization,
Wittgensteinian Fideism
We Are Church: Our local community is 200 years old but its
foundation is 2000 years old
JB on January 30, 2010 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
We are the people of God of East St. James Parish.
We are the Houmas, Chetimacha,
Quenipessa, Bayougoula and Choctaw. We
lived and moved and had our being here along
the Mississippi River’s banks in the roosting
place of the wild ducks, Cabahanoce. During
the summer when the kernels of the corn crop
filled out and could be roasted and eaten we
had our most important religious celebration,
the Green Corn festival, which was a
ceremony of thanksgiving and self-
purification. It was followed by two days of
fast, a reconciliation of social conflicts
fostering forgiveness and then concluded with
a fire ritual.
We are the Acadians
who arrived in two
waves after deportation from Canada to settle on the Acadian Coast
of the Mississippi River and who were joined by other settlers from
France and elsewhere. We, too, were a Eucharistic community,
celebrating thanksgiving and reconciliation. And we have our fire
rituals, too – of Easter liturgy and Christmas levee.
We are the French and Spanish Capuchins who traveled the Great
River Road and ministered to its earliest settlers.
We are the founders and members of St. Michael the Archangel
Parish in Convent.
We are the local slaves who manufactured the red bricks for the first major building to be
constructed in St. James Parish, a temple to God the Most High under the patronage of St.
Michael the Archangel, which also houses the Lourdes Grotto, constructed only 18 years after
the apparition of the Blessed Virgin to Bernadette Soubirous. Some of us were baptized and
catechized. Most of us integrated Catholic rituals into our expressions of spirituality.
We are the Religious of the Sacred Heart, who established an academy for girls near St.
Michael’s Church. Many families moved into the area to be part of the vitality we brought to
the community.
We are the survivors of cholera, yellow fever and floods, of the Battle of New Orleans and a
terrible Civil War.
We are the Society of Mary, who opened St. Mary’s Jefferson College, and the Society of
Jesus, who oversaw the establishment of two chapels, St. Mary of the River for the
community of Union, which hosted several railroad lines, and St. Joseph’s in Longview
(Paulina).
We are the students and teachers of St. Joseph’s School for African-Americans, the first
parochial school for African-Americans in the South. We are the beneficiaries of St. Katerine
Drexel, founder of the Sisters of the Blessed Sacrament, who assisted the Sacred Heart sisters
spiritually and finanically in St. Joseph’s administration and in ministry to the African-
American field workers.
We are the students and teachers of St.
Michael Parochial School, built from materials
of the school buildings of Jefferson College,
which were torn down.
We are the members of St. Vincent de Paul
Society, who minister to the poor and needy.
We are the people of Grand Point, who have
worshiped at our own St. Vincent de Paul
Chapel, which, when rebuilt after a hurricane,
was renamed for St. Philomena, whose statue
was found intact amidst the storm
destruction. St. Mary’s and St. Joseph’s were
eventually outgrown and replaced as our
communities of faith grew.
We are the members of St. Joseph Parish in Paulina, established at the turn of the 20th
Century. We are the builders of Our Lady of Prompt Succor Chapel in Lutcher.
We are the religious orders of men and women who would serve the Church in East. St.
James for its first 200 years.
We are the Knights of Columbus, Gramercy Council 1817, who helped establish the Sacred
Heart Chapel in Gramercy and have provided spiritual and social nourishment of our
community through many service projects.
We are the Kinghts of St. Peter Claver Council 65 and Ladies Auxiliary, sponsoring service
projects in our community and encouraging ministries in our parishes.
We are the Catholic Daughters of the Americas, chartered in all three parishes of the River
Road, doing works of charity and service for Church and community, providing fellowship
for the important celebrations of our parish lives.

92. We are the students of the St. Joseph Parochial school and the Dominican sisters who formed
them. We are the students of St. Peter Chanel.
We are the members of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus Parish in Gramercy, originally part of
the New Orleans Archdiocese, now part of the Diocese of Baton Rouge.
We are the Men of Manresa and hosts of the
Manresa House of Retreats, established on the
property of the St. Mary’s Jefferson College,
serving Louisiana and surrounding states and
staffed with retreat masters from the Society
of Jesus.
We are mothers and fathers, sons and
daughters, grandparents and cousins, lots of
cousins. We are the survivors of fires and
floods and hurricanes. We are the growers of
sugarcane and the builders of bonfires on the
levee. We are homemakers and cooks
extraordinaire. We are ministers, ordained and lay. We are religious, secular and regular. We
make a living in business and commerce, in farming and industry, in government and public
services. We are proud members of the US Armed Forces: veterans, guardsmen, active duty
and reservists. We are professionals, medical and legal. We are
teachers and principals, students and coaches, scholars and athletes.
We are volunteer firemen, law enforcers and civil defense workers.
We are grocers and pharmacists and news reporters. We are hosts
and hostesses to tourists and travelers. We celebrate festivals and
fundraisers. Do we celebrate! And we are proud members of the Who
Dat Nation. We are a refuge for evacuees. Yes, our Eucharistic
community gives thanks and forgives 24/7 and 365.
We minister to one another in sacrament and song and celebration,
to young and old, married and single, in every kind of ministry:
liturgical, spiritual, financial, administrative, social, catechetical and
community life. We worship together and celebrate the sacraments together. We gather in
groups, large and small, and are commited adorers, alone, in our Adoration Chapel. We assist
one another through bereavement and reach out to the hospitalized and shut-ins. We have
baptized 32,524 new Christians and prepared and married 7,517 new couples. Together, we
have articulated a vision grounded in a beautiful tradition. A tradition that is 200 years old.
We are Stones Beside a River … of bricks,
mortar and stucco … Living Stones of a people
of faith and love. Our local community is 200
years old but its foundation is 2000 years old,
apostles and prophets of Christ Jesus, who is
our capstone.
We have a story to tell. Each event above has
a year attached to it and evokes images. More
importantly, it has the names of our families
and our pastors. Wouldn’t you like to know
those dates, see those faces, once again, and
learn those names?
Fr. Frank Uter, who pastored us through a
transition to the Church of East. St. James
Parish, through another labor of love, now
leads us through this story of two centuries in poem and prose, in picture and narrative, in his
new book: Stones Beside a River: A History of the Catholic Church on the East
Bank of St. James Parish, 1809-2009. Each generation of each family will want this
treasure in their home to consult again and again, to evoke wonderful memories, to reflect on
a tradition and remember how important it is to pass it on with a vision to our precious
future, our children and grandchildren. What more could we possibly give them?
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Emerging Church & Pentecostalism: a creative tension
JB on January 30, 2010 in Axiological, Practices & Experiences, Provisional Closures &
Systems, the evaluative - Culture, the interpretive - Religion | No Comments »
Below are my archived responses to Tony Jones’ question: “What Do Emergence and
Pentecostalism Have to Learn from One Another?”. I encourage all to visit that thread
on his blog.
It has been said that those who’ve done the
best at evangelizing have not always done
as well at catechizing and vice versa. While
there is danger in overgeneralization, there
is often some insight we can gain. To the
extent catechesis fosters re-cognition,
evangelization fosters real-ization. The first
movement is propositional, evidential,
rational, presuppositional, moral and
practical and the next is existential,
experiential and robustly relational. The
distinction is between seeing the path and
walking it, between conceptual map-
making and participatory imagination.

93. Both the emerging church conversation
and pentecostalism do seem, in my view,
responses to a modernist rationalism.
Interestingly, my own reflections on these
matters have not so much dealt with the
emergent and pentecostal as recent
phenomena via a vis the postmodern
critique, but have employed a postmodern (postfoundational) approach to bring together
emergence as a useful heuristic device as has been appropriated in the hard and human
sciences, in general, and a pentecostal perspective as gathered from the Biblical narrative re:
the implications of the Incarnation & Pentecost. So, there are two contexts that interest me,
one being an overarching narrative and the other a specific historical event.
Regarding the recent phenomena, to some extent, pentecostalism has better instilled first
fervor and a fully realized first naivete. Emergence has perhaps better served as a vehicle for
2nd naivete. This works much like the Zen formulation of first, there is a mountain (pre-
critically), then there is no mountain (critically), then there is (post-critical). It might be
rendered: first there is a premodernist essentialism (naive realism & enchantment), then
there is a modernist nominalism (nonrealism & disenchantment), then there is a constructive
postmodernism (critical realism & re-enchantment).
Emergent and pentecostal perspectives, held together in a creative tension, provide an answer
to modernist excesses that have led to a/theological nonrealism, moral relativism and
practical nihilism, as well as sterile scholastic rationalisms and Wittgensteinian fideisms.
Taken together, we get a more holistic theological anthropology that mines all of the value to
be realized from our pre-modern, modern and postmodern experiences without the need to
cut out and invalidate large swaths of our Christian tradition.
We do not want to lose our “First, there is a mountain”-
encounter of Pentecost and the fire of first fervor gifted by
our participatory, analogical imagination, nor do we want to
lose the “Then there is no mountain-recognition” provided by
our conceptual map-making and dialectical imagination, as
we move into the reappropriation of “Then there is” and we
realize through our 2nd naivete and pneumatological
imagination that everything that’s old is new again, as we see
the original realities come alive in inculturated forms that
reveal that the Good News is as fresh and vibrant and
relevant to humankind as it was in the beginning, is now and
ever shall be.
I have seen some in their Pentecostal experience get rather
stuck in a pre-critical first naivete. I have encountered some
who, from an Emergent stance, have gotten stuck in a
radically deconstructive nonrealism, what some have called
Evangellyfish, washed up on postmodern shores, unable to
get fully back into the swim. Those who severely critique both
movements are generally describing these elements of
Pentecostalism and emergence, which are mere caricatures
of what these movements are and can become as they exploit
the creative tension that they offer each other in ongoing and ever-fruitful mutual critique.
We have enjoyed the fruits, in interreligious dialogue, as our rather exclusivistic
ecclesiocentrisms have slowly yielded on the ecumenical front to a more inclusivistic
Christocentrism. Without forsaking our own Christocentric stances, we might foster an even
more fruitful interreligious dialogue by opening same with a pneumatological inclusivism.
Pentecostals & Charismatics have led the way on such mutual understanding within
Christianity, sharing our experience of Spirit. This may be the model for advancing dialogue
and understanding between the Great Traditions, too? Pentecostals might have some
suggestions for a way forward.
Pentecostals also have something to offer regarding emergence, human anthropology,
epistemology and the science and religion dialogue. Counterintuitive on the surface? Scroll
down to this list of articles in the Dec 2008 Zygon: Pentecostal Voices in the Theology-
Science Conversation .
Finally, I’m sure most have at least heard of the distinction between our dialectical and
analogical imaginations. Amos Yong has made some proposals regarding the
pneumatological imagination and the difference it can make in one’s approach to reality. My
own panSEMIOentheism, what I call a radical emergence, is grounded in my experience in
the Charismatic Renewal in the 70’s.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: A m o s Y o n g, a n a l o g i c a l i m a g i n a t i o n, catechesis, C h a r i s m a t i c R e n e w a l, c o n s t r u c t i v e
postmodernism, c r i t i c a l r e a l i s m, d i a l e c t i c a l i m a g i n a t i o n, e m e r g e n c e, e m e r g i n g c h u r c h, epistemology,
essentialism, e v a n g e l i z a t i o n, E v a n g e l l y f i s h, exclusivistic ecclesiocentrism, first fervor, f i r s t n a i v e t e,
inclusivistic Christocentrism, interreligious dialogue, modernist rationalism, m o r a l r e l a t i v i s m, n a i v e
r e a l i s m, n o m i n a l i s m, n o n r e a l i s m, panSEMIOentheism, p a r t i c i p a t o r y i m a g i n a t i o n, Pentecostalism,
p n e u m a t o l o g i c a l i m a g i n a t i o n, p n e u m a t o l o g i c a l i n c l u s i v i s m, postfoundationa, Postmodern Critique,
p r a c t i c a l n i h i l i s m, r a d i c a l e m e r g e n c e, science and religion dialogue, second naivete, Theological
A n t h r o p o l o g y, theological nonrealism, Tony Jones, Wittgensteinian Fideism, Z e n
Emerging Church: What’s This About Nurturing the Creative
Tension of Paradox?
JB on January 27, 2010 in Axiological, Cosmological, Methods & Approaches, Practices &
Experiences, Provisional Closures & Systems, Uncategorized, the descriptive - Science, the
evaluative - Culture, the interpretive - Religion, the normative - Philosophy | No Comments
»

94. The dialectical imagination (think Barth and apophasis) and analogical imagination (think
catholic and kataphasis) are best held in a creative tension where neither drowns the other.
Wittgenstein correctly affirmed the methodological autonomy of science, philosophy and
religion, but a Wittgensteinian fideism fails to recognize that these different horizons of
human concern are axiologically integral, which is to suggest that they mutually influence
each other.
Whether we employ a language game paradigm or an ontology with a chosen root
metaphor, these human endeavors, while not logically-related, are very much intellectually-
related. And this is to further suggest that religion is not merely expressive but also
interpretive and to further recognize that it is not immune to cultural criticism employing
prudential, pragmatic and practical criteria, which in themselves are at least weakly
inferential or truth-indicative even if not robustly inferential and truth-conducive.
The dialectical imagination enjoys a certain primacy in God-talk and it critiques the
analogical imagination in that, where God is concerned, we employ the weakest of analogies
in metaphor, which express dissimilarities that differ infinitely vis a vis any similarities they
may otherwise invoke.
The analogical imagination critiques the dialectical insofar as the exclusively dialectical
would so distance God in a radical apophaticism as would render all God-talk
incomprehensible and suggests that, however meager our metaphorical knowledge, it is
precisely because we are grappling with a reality on the order of an infinitude that such
knowledge becomes increasingly significant to us who, as radically finite creatures, greet such
knowledge recognizing that it has profound existential import to us in our human condition.
This is to say, then, while our dialectical approach properly invokes God’s utter
incomprehensibility, our analogical approach affirms His infinite intelligibility. God dwells in
ineluctable mystery and it would drown us if we tried to drink it all in, but we can taste and
see His goodness in drops because He is not wholly unintelligible. It is a false dichotomy,
indeed, that juxtaposes a choice between incomprehensibility and a final theory of
everything. Rather, we move slowly but inexorably in our partial apprehensions and with our
fallibilist provisional closures regarding ultimate reality, closures that do not aspire to the
level of robust theory but, instead, to the presentation of a rather vague heuristic.
A radical apophaticism and hyper-active dialectical imagination quickly devolve into such a
theological nonrealism as will cut large swaths out of our Christian tradition, leading finally
to insidious metaphysical and moral nonrealisms, too, which support nothing, in the end, but
a practical nihilism and sad cynicism. This is existentialism, to be sure, but not of the
Christian variety. It is Sartre and Camus and not Dostoevsky and Kierkegaard.
In science and philosophy, we evaluate
paradox and attempt to resolve it dialectically
in synthesis, or to dissolve it perspectivally via
paradigm shift, or to even evade it practically,
such as by ignoring it. When it comes to life’s
most ultimate concerns and deepest mysteries,
any attempts to resolve, dissolve or evade
paradox are futile. What we do rather, such as
where God-talk is involved, is we exploit
paradox, transformatively, nurturing the
creative tensions that present in the mutual
critique, for example, between our dialectical
and analogical imaginations.
While it is certainly true that our existential
move into faith involves an unconditional
assent, quite often it will be pragmatic
arguments that lead us to the ocean’s edge and
prudential criteria that will inspire our leap,
where we discover the buoyancy of faith. And we will be thus tempted by the psalmist to taste
and see the goodness of the Lord. And sometimes our human predicament will make us feel
as if we’re about to drown. But when Jesus knew for certain, only drowning men could see
Him, he said all men shall be sailors, then, until the sea shall free them (Leonard Cohen). So,
our life of faith will very much require us to many times praise the Lord, anyway.
And so we believe with a certain resiliency despite life’s tragedies. And we nurture God’s
analogical goodness in a creative tension with His infinitely dissimilar dialectical goodness,
exploiting the paradox transformatively, neither banishing the mystery with our ill-conceived
aspirations to an exhaustive theodicy nor refraining from our frail theodicies, which, in the
end, must properly retain the element of mystery.
Love is not a syllogism. God is not an argument. But incomprehensibility and unintelligibility
are two radically different semiotic realities. A deeply compassionate pastoral sensitivity will
help us to hold our God-analogs loosely without letting go of our apophatic dialectic and to
nurture the creative tension in the paradox presented by natural evil in a world created by,
yes, a good God, as we suffer with God and transform our suffering co-creatively.
Only a puerile iconoclasm inspired by a seriously misguided theological nonrealism would try
to snatch these consoling God-analogs, however simplistic, out of a suffering world’s hands.
Cajoling people with the distinctions of theo-esoterica in an attempt to dispossess them of the
exoteric apprehensions of their God is at best an exercise in pedantry and at worst may leave
others feeling not edified but bullied. Finally, it’s just plain philosophically indefensible to
resolve such paradox in a wholly dialectical manner.
Note: In applying scholastic notations like possible, plausible, probable, certain, uncertain,
improbable, implausible and impossible to arguments and propositions regarding our
ultimate concerns, while it may be true that we are at most dealing with equiplausible or
equiprobable propositions and while it may also be true that the lex dubia non obligat axiom
applies, meaning one has no obligation in conscience, it is manifestly not true that one can
find no reasons to assent to one proposition rather than another, especially employing
pragmatic criteria and prudential & relational (trust) arguments, which also happen to have
normative epistemic force as truth-indicative criteria. Such existential moves might be
transrational or suprarational or super-reasonable, but they need not be irrational or
arational or without reason.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send

95. Tags: a n a l o g i c a l i m a g i n a t i o n, a p o p h a t i c, C a m u s, creative tension, c u l t u r a l c r i t i c i s m, dialectical
i m a g i n a t i o n, Dostoevsky, existential, existentialism, f a i t h, fallibilism, God-a n a l o g, God-t a l k, h u m a n
condition, iconoclasm, k a t a p h a t i c, K i e r k e g a a r d, l a n g u a g e g a m e, m e t a p h o r, m e t a p h y s i c a l n o n r e a l i s m,
m o r a l n o n r e a l i s m, n a t u r a l e v i l, o n t o l o g y, p a r a d i g m s h i f t, p a r a d o x, pastoral sensitivity, p r a c t i c a l
n i h i l i s m, p r a g m a t i c a r g u m e n t, provisional closure, p r u d e n t i a l c r i t e r i a, radical apophaticism, religion,
root metaphor, S a r t r e, theological nonrealism, u l t i m a t e c o n c e r n, u l t i m a t e r e a l i t y, unconditional assent,
W i t t g e n s t e i n, Wittgensteinian Fideism
What’s all this fuss about nondual awareness?
JB on January 27, 2010 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
The following is a response I provided to a correspondent on the first day of our new year
2010. The question was: “What’s all this fuss about nondual awareness?”
EVERYBODY has contemplative, nondual moments.
The only reason for the fuss is that too often we
squander them or allow them to be taken from us.
A nondual stance toward a reality is that moment of
pure raw awareness prior to any problem-solving
processing. If that reality is another person, for
example, if our encounter of that person places us
immediately in a problem-solving mode, whether from
our perspective or their’s, whether of a moral or a
practical nature, then we are using our dualistic mind,
which is empirical (measuring), rational (logical),
practical (making use or meeting a need of either
person) or moral (evaluating right and wrong, good
and evil) and so on.
Sometimes this functional mode is absolutely what is
called for.
On the other hand, if our encounter of that other
person is sheer enjoyment of presence and wholly
relational and involving verbs like trust, love, forgive
and such, and if we are engaging in what is more like
pure play and growing intimacy and self-forgetful ecstasy, then we are using our nondual
mode.
One can think in terms of paradox, too. In our problem-solving mode, we can resolve
paradox (dialectical synthesis), dissolve paradox (thru paradigm and perspectival shifts) or
evade paradox, practically (for example by ignoring it).
Life’s biggest paradoxes, its cosmic ironies and deepest mysteries (like theodicy questions), it
seems, do not lend themselves very readily to problem-solving resolutions, dissolutions or
evasions but require, instead, what I like to call exploitation, whereby we take a tension and
exploit it transformatively by maintaining the tension as a creative tension.
In a nutshell, if you read the Old Testament and make a list of all of the complaints issued by
the Psalmists and questions raised in Job, or even look in the New Testament, you notice that
the age-old time-honored philosophical questions regarding life’s deepest mysteries like
1) what about creation, how and when did that take place
2) suffering and why THAT? and
3) other questions put directly to Jesus —
are not answered in philosophical or scientific or empirical or rational terms.
God did not answer our night terrors from our beds with explanations and ideas.
He answered by showing up, hugging us, telling us everything will be alright. He answered in
a relational way but not a problem-solving way.
He doesn’t deconstruct our boogeymans.
He holds us and sings us a lullaby. And we forget how scared and lonely we were.
The nondual is robustly RELATIONAL.
The problem is that people think religion is mostly about what is right and wrong, morally, or
what we can do to earn God’s love; or religion is about how to have our practical needs met,
our pocketbooks and health and prosperity Gospel garbage; or that religion answers our
empirical questions about creation; or that religion shows us how to think logically to solve
philosophical puzzles.
If you listen to fundamentalistic evangelists, whether Protestant or Catholic, if they are
preoccupied with empirical, rational, practical and moral questions, which are NOT
unimportant or irrelevant, but spend very little time on RELATIONAL questions, like
growing in trust, intimacy, forgiveness and love, then they are reinforcing the dualistic
mindset and human socialization processes but neglecting the nondual stance and human
transformational processes.
We do not need special divine revelation to know what is true empirically, logically,
rationally, practically or morally for that is all transparent to human reason (general
revelation).
The value-added aspect of special divine revelation is the GOOD NEWS of Jesus that God is
not the deistic watchmaker but the lover, the Daddy. That’s where the emphasis needs to be
placed — on the Good News and less on the old news that anyone could figure out (like how
to be good), even without Jesus.

96. Nondual awareness is what one does when they are being loved, being love, beloved one.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: c o n t e m p l a t i v e, creative tension, n o n d u a l, p a r a d o x
Sartre, Camus, Huckleberry Finn & Jesus
JB on January 25, 2010 in Axiological, the evaluative - Culture, the interpretive - Religion | 1
Comment »
We can back up and look at the overall thrust of Jesus’ life, and that of other traditions even,
from a more vague perspective, and we can reasonably come away with the idea that the
saints and mystics and authentic practitioners of these traditions are testifying to profound
experiences of a reality that is ultimately unitive and love-filled, that awakens us to solidarity
and inspires in us compassion, and that inspires a trust-relationship with and toward reality,
itself.
This, then, is a rather universal testimony to the idea THAT reality is, at bottom, friendly,
even as we might be left to wonder exactly HOW this may be so, because the evidence, of
course, is ambiguous.
Once we situate Christianity and its specific message in the
context of the other great traditions, its specific hopes – that
all may be well – do not appear wholly unreasonable. I think
the novelist Walker Percy was very faithful in his articulation
of the human predicament, as informed by his appreciation
of the French existentialists and folks like Dostoevsky and
Kierkegaard. Sartre and Camus et al and their perspectives on
the human condition are not to be facilely engaged and then
casually dismissed. Tillich was spot on in recognizing that
faith was a polar reality with doubt an indispensable element,
a state of being ultimately concerned and not, rather,
propositionally certain.
Walker said: “I suppose my typical protagonist or
hero or anti-hero is a fellow to whom a great deal has
happened, who sees all the dark things that we are
talking about, who’s more or less dislocated like a
Sartrean or a Camus character, but who,
nevertheless, despite everything, sees a certain
hopefulness, but has a certain resilience and reserve,
and a feeling that there is something around the bend, like Huckleberry Finn.”
Now, that Walker quote strikes me as a distinctly
axiological take on reality. It interprets and evaluates
reality and speaks to the forming of our desires and the
nurturance of our hopes. It’s an interpretive-evaluative
posit that has neither denied nor ignored the
ambiguous and often brutal cosmological evidence. It’s
a practical existential response that goes beyond but
not without the evidential and rational perspectives.
To some extent, until we move beyond the extrinsic
reward and punishment paradigm — driven by the
what’s in it for me approach of our early moral and
affective development — in order to enjoy the intrinsic
rewards of the pursuit of truth, beauty, goodness and
unity for their own sakes, an approach associated with
a more advanced affective and moral development,
our religion has only socialized us and not really
transformed us.
Transformed folks have stared into the abyss, in one
way or another, and not unflinchingly, and have
nevertheless said: “Let’s see what’s around the bend!”
and then go on loving, creating beauty and searching
for truth.
The journey becomes their destination.
The quest becomes their grail.
Our questions and concerns, hopes and desires, unite us far more than any metaphysical
propositions and theological answers ever will.

97. Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: C a m u s, Dostoevsky, faith and doubt, French existentialists, g r a i l, H u c k l e b e r r y F i n n, K i e r k e g a a r d,
m e t a p h y s i c a l, S a r t r e, theological answers, T i l l i c h, u l t i m a t e c o n c e r n, W a l k e r P e r c y
Affirming an Ancient-Future Impulse – but what about Norah
Jones?
JB on January 19, 2010 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
My good friend, Kevin Beck, writes: The Protestant impulse to embrace an “ancient-future”
faith (to use Robert Webber’s phrase) seems like it could be a welcome attempt to bridge the
ages. However, I’m a bit pessimistic about the endeavor for various reasons.
I encourage all to take a look at Kevin’s reasons.
In my view, Kevin is really onto something. We do not
want to too narrowly conceive when and where it is that
value is to be mined, and not just liturgically speaking,
but broadly speaking, philosophically, culturally,
scientifically and religiously.
The primary value to be realized from an Ancient-Future
approach, as I conceive it, is the retrieval, revival and
renewal of a harmony that existed between science,
culture, philosophy and religion.
This is not to ignore the fact that each of these human
endeavors was being conducted at a much earlier stage of
development than the stage we enjoy now. However, it is
to suggest that the relationship between these human
values was more holistic and integral. This is to recognize
and affirm that theology must always be contextual,
which is to say, related to our concrete lived experiences,
where we can recognize how the Gospel speaks to the
problems we encounter, here and now. A contextual
approach requires, then, an inculturated theology, which
involves much more than worship forms.
To the extent our outlook is radically incarnational and
robustly pneumatological, we will be on the lookout for
the treasures of different cultures, whether across time or
geography, because the Spirit has helped place them
there. And we will want to preserve their diversity, form,
expression and integrity. Such cultural realities not only
include song, dance, meditative practices, story-telling
and worship forms. They also include social realities like
conceptions of marriage and family life, community
interactions, pastoral approaches, philosophical norms
and scientific-technological adaptations. Such cultural
values are to be integrated into Christianity, which in
turn is to be inserted into each culture.
Ancient-Future covers only a temporal dimension, which
needs to be complemented by a geographic dimension,
North-South and East-West, vis a vis inculturation. We
do not have to choose between the old and new or East &
West; we get to have it all! We especially don’t want to
cloak the Gospel in exclusively European garments for
others to put on. We risk not only the renewal of an
authoritarian approach but a terribly parochialistic,
colonialistic, paternalistic and hierarchicalistic approach.
The most salient issue is making the Gospel relevant in this place, in this time, to this person,
to these people. And we are called to pay attention to that truth, beauty, goodness and unity
that have already emerged within a given culture, because the forms those values have taken
are gifts from created co-creators, who’ve responded to the same Spirit.
The harmony to be rediscovered, retrieved, revived and renewed is the holistic, integral
relationship between the distinct value-endeavors of science, philosophy, culture & religion,
whereby our descriptive, normative, evaluative and interpretive methodologies are affirmed
as methodologically-autonomous but axiologically-integral.
This DOES seem to more so characterize our
premodern situation, wherein we affirmed
approaches to reality that were robustly
participatory and common sensical. It is a
harmony that can heal the Cartesian split of
modernism and bridge the nihilistic abyss of a
radically deconstructive postmodernism.
It is nothing less than an affirmation of the
mind, spirit, heart and soul in proper
relationship to one another within each person
and each people. We don’t want to too
narrowly conceive how this harmony can be
nurtured and sustained, not temporally, not
geographically.
These are cute lyrics:

98. Call me a relic call me what you will
Say I’m old fashioned say I’m over the hill
Today’s music don’t have the same soul
Just give me old time rock and roll
But the fact of the matter is that today’s music DOES have soul, just like yesterday’s. And
African drums and Indian sitars do, also. Who wants a world without Ravi Shankar and the
cultural intermingling he fostered in more ways than one? We’d have no Norwegian Wood!
Worse yet, we’d have no Norah Jones! I shudder to think about it.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Response to: The Earthquake in Haiti, God, and the Arbitrariness
of Life
JB on January 15, 2010 in Uncategorized, the interpretive - Religion | 4 Comments »
The following musing is in response to The Earthquake in Haiti, God, and the
Arbitrariness of Life, which provides a video and reads:
In a recent review of Life.Support.Music., I referenced the question, “Is God
as Arbitrary as Life?,” that was posed to the theologians at the
Transforming Theology conference last spring.
The response with which I most resonated
was that of Tom Reynolds of the University of
Toronto. In my words, he well captured both
“the now” & “the future” aspects of the
Kingdom. There are fruits we enjoy now even
as we orient to a more complete realization in
the future.
The question of God being arbitrary involves
all of the philosophical issues surrounding
how we apply predicates to God via
kataphasis, where we attempt an increase in
our descriptive accuracy of a reality by employing positive affirmations via analogy and
metaphor, and apophasis, where we increase such accuracy through negative descriptions of
what God is not (literally) or is not like (metaphorically). For example, God is true, good and
beautiful. God is like a parent. God is not indifferent. God is not uninvolved.
So, one might go back and notice how each theologian must first deal with the
disambiguation of the concept, arbitrary, and then must grapple with its application as a
divine attribute through alternating kataphatic and apophatic descriptions. On the surface,
one may come away with the initial impression that there has been some disagreement
between these theologians. Upon further review, this is not really the case, whatsoever,
because not everyone, when disambiguating and clarifying the concept, defined it & then
employed it in the same way.
Some were more so kataphatic in tenor, others more apophatic. Some were grappling via a
propositional approach to the question, metaphysically. Others addressed the question in a
more relational way, de-emphasizing conceptual map-making and more so engaging our
participatory imaginations and how they engage God nonpropositionally via our existential &
trans-rational orientations with their evaluative posits and affective dispositions. Put another
way, we can answer that question with our mind, our spirit, our heart or our soul, but best
answer it, holistically, with Ignatius engaging and then surrendering, our memory,
understanding, our entire will, seeking only love.
This is not unrelated to our postmodern giftedness, whereby our ontological modal categories
changed from the possible, actual and necessary, to the possible, actual and probable. No
longer is ours a philosophical or existential tug of war between pattern or
paradox, order or chaos, chance or necessity, symmetry or asymmetry, or the
random or systematic. These are false dichotomies, just like arbitrary or nonarbitrary.
Reality is, instead, probabilistic. On one hand, it appears to have initial, boundary and limit
conditions, while, on the other hand, it seems to be coaxing us forward toward a somewhat
open future.
I suppose we might suggest that Einstein was wrong in that it does look very much like God
does indeed play dice; but the nihilists are manifestly wrong insofar as those dice very clearly
appear to be loaded. Everywhere in reality, especially in mathematics and logic, the modal
category of the necessary seems to suggest itself. But nowhere in reality have we ever
encountered its physical instantiation!
God may very well be the Ens Necessarium, but this doesn’t leave us with a choice between
determinism and indeterminism, ontologically. Instead, it leaves us in a fallible position,
epistemologically, where our takes on reality are variously over- and under-determined.
I suppose my final answer (Is this your final answer?), is that if we take the word arbitrary
as a mathematical conception related to chance and necessity, then it cannot be predicated of
God, metaphorically, because nowhere in reality can we find their physical analog, for reality
is, instead, probabilistic.

99. If we take the word arbitrary as an interpersonal reality related to the whimsical, then we are
dealing with an affective disposition and I would find it very difficult to suggest that reality,
from a human perspective, does not appear somewhat ambiguous for me and clearly
ambivalent toward me. What I choose to imagine is that, should reality be less ambiguous
for me and ambivalent toward me, it would somehow limit my freedom and coerce my
relationship to God, Who, in spite of the apparent ambiguity and ambivalence, already seems
true enough, beautiful enough and good enough to encourage my trust, inspire my awe and
abide with my doubt and fear. But even when I cannot even imagine that inchoate theodicy,
I believe, anyway, hope, anyway, love, anyway and trust, anyway. To Whom else can we
go?
As Hans Kung notes, we all have a fundamental trust in uncertain
reality. For some, this trust is paradoxical and nowhere anchored.
Others anchor this trust in God. Anchor is too strong an analogy to
describe my trust. A sailing metaphor would seem more apt. I’ve seen
so many of my sisters and brothers throughout history, time and time
again, who catch the winds of both incredible fortune and outrageous
misfortune, alike, in the fragile but resilient sails of their human spirits.
And then I’ve watched them courageously tack and jibe their way back
to the shores of faith, hope and love. I want to be like them. We can
trust these winds, and use them, even when we cannot predict or
understand their variable nature. And even when they are headwinds
and not rather tailwinds.
Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: apophasis, d i v i n e a t t r i b u t e, Ens Necessarium, f u n d a m e n t a l t r u s t i n u n c e r t a i n r e a l i t y, H a i t i
e a r t h q u a k e, H a n s K u n g, k a t a p h a s i s, t h e o d i c y
What Does p2p Networking have to do with Epiphany?
JB on January 14, 2010 in Practices & Experiences, Uncategorized, the interpretive - Religion
| No Comments »
The following essay was evoked by Mike Morrell’s blog post: Ministry without Hierarchy.
When Reuther uses the phrase “intrinsic aspect of the mission of the church,” I sense in that
a subversion of some of the logic employed by many in her (our) church’s teaching office.
There is an old, sterile scholasticism that employs a substance metaphysic as an ontology
from which a deontology then issues forth with all manner of descriptions that specify the
intrinsic nature of this reality or that. Where sex and gender issues are involved, such an
approach is sterile because it is too rationalistic, a prioristic, biologistic and physicalistic and
therefore divorced from the concrete lived experience of the faithful. (My memory of things
taught by Richard McBrien, Charles Curran & Richard McCormick). It’s all abstractions, like
the sentences above, which leave us scratching our heads and asking: say what?
Put differently, such an approach takes too
narrow a view of the way things are
(ontology) and then reasons to how things
ought to be (deontology) from their very
nature (intrinsically). A male is created like
this and a female like that, therefore a male
must do this and a female must do that and
neither must do otherwise because that would
go against one’s intrinsic nature. This then
pervades one’s views of church polity, moral
doctrine, sacramental theology and church
disciplines.

100. Now, I’m all for deontology- is it right?
(complemented by consequentialist- is it
helpful?, contractarian- is it fair? and aretaic-
is it virtuous?, approaches), but it is premised
on starting with a good ontology, which,
when we’re talking about people, means a
good anthropology. We can ask the question, what if we as created co-creators, rather than
being passive observers and characters playing out an author’s script, have been gifted with a
participatory role in creation such that we have something to contribute to how things are
supposed to unfold (teleologically)?
What if this whole notion of original sin as some ontological rupture rooted in the past is
bass-ackwards and our experience of a most radical finitude is due, instead, to Somebody’s
unfinished business, which we experience as a teleological striving oriented toward the
future? (Recalling Jack Haught’s aesthetic teleology.) In that case, we as created co-creators,
while still partially determined and bounded (by our genetic inheritance & environmental
parameters), would also be autopoietic (self-organizing) and free (quasi-autonomous in the
divine matrix). (cf. Phil Hefner’s theological anthropology and Joe Bracken’s Divine Matrix)
From an axiological (value-oriented) perspective, as semiotic (meaning-making) animals, we
would not just discover meaning and values, but, without in any way disvaluing those we
have discovered, or violating them, we would create new meanings and new values, which is
to say that they would be novel, emergent realities. (Combining Robert C. Neville’s axiology
and Charles Sanders Peirce’s triadic semeiotic)
If we thus change our perspective on the nature of our finitude, then we must change our
understanding of the nature of atonement. This is to say that, if we change our assessment
on what we think is wrong with reality (original sin and the Fall), this changes our view of
how reality is to be fixed (soteriologically), which changes our view of the incarnation, itself
(why God became man and why the Spirit so profusely permeates our reality,
panentheistically). This would suggest that the incarnation, rather than being some grand
cosmic repair job of some ontological rupture located in the past (“the” Fall), was a grand
telic design built into the plan from the cosmic get-go, teleologically (think Teilhard and
Scotus & Jack Haught’s Cosmic Adventure).
This would all then change our perspective on 1) where things might be headed in the future
(eschatologically, HT Transmillenial) 2) Who the Cosmic Christ is (Christologically), and 3)
how the Spirit empowers us (pneumatologically), all which then bear directly on 4) how we
will experience one another in community (ecclesiologically).
And I think the answers to these questions will have to take into account a radically
incarnational and profusely pneumatological reality, which is then “intrinsically”
participatory, profoundly inclusive and wonderfully universalist in its indelible catholicity.
(Hat Tip to Amos Yong) This need not, in the least, call into question the salvific efficacy of
the incarnation and its indispensable role in effecting our at-one-ment. Rather, it broadens
our conception of how deep is the love of the Trinity for creation and how we are called to a
relationship of unspeakable intimacy in response to this divine eros, which then impels our
agape’ toward self, toward other, toward our cosmos and toward our God, all in right-
relationship, shall we say, intrinsically. (cf. Thomas Merton re: these 4 vectors of love)
A servant-leader’s role becomes that of a host,
patterned after this grand cosmic hospitality
that I just described. (I think of Chad
Crawford & Tripp Fuller’s Homebrewed
Christianity & Philip Clayton’s Transforming
Theology) As such, this role more so
resembles that of a scribe or note-taker, asking
each Participant where they’ve been, what
they’ve been up to and where they’ve
witnessed the Spirit at work and inviting each
to give voice in hymn, psalm, story-telling,
ritual-sharing and fellowship-enjoying
community, as they say, lex orandi lex
credendi, our worship birthing our creeds.
There is nothing exclusively top-down about
this. It’s all peer to peer (p2p), in essence.
Do we institutionalize sacrament? Sure we do, as the radically social animals we are. Is there
a clerical role? Sure there is, but we needn’t be clericalistic. Neither do we need to be
institutionalistic, over-identifying the Mystical Body with one aspect of an institution or
another, denying the salvific efficacies of other traditions, institutions or even what are,
ostensibly, noninstitutional vehicles (Hat Tip Tim King & Kevin Beck).
We might ask what the role of a hierarchy is in a p2p environment and whether that need be
an intrinsic feature of its architecture. Emergence, itself, is intrinsically hierarchical, which is
to recognize that a system’s novel emergent properties can indeed effect a top-down
causation. But we must also recognize that it is also in the nature of this causation to not
violate the structures and properties from which it emerged. Complex emergence is a rich
reality with both bottom-up and top-down causations. The essential element of the systems
approach is that the value added to the system comes from the relationships between the
parts and not from the parts per se, which is to suggest that the hierarchy doesn’t impart
value per se but that the value derives from the feedback loop as the hierarchy channels the
information it has received from other system structures and processes, all for the good of the
system as a whole. Anything else devolves into a degenerate hierarchicalism.
In robustly semiotic systems, we must also pay heed to Walker Percy’s distinction between
information and news, or what Benedict XVI calls the informative and performative, the
latter which can be of profound existential import and eminently actionable. We might call
such: Good News. (Yes, Brian McLaren opened and read the Message in a Bottle)
What the hierarchy is to pass along, then, for example,
is only that information first heralded by a shepherd
who asked: Do you see what I see? Do you hear what I
hear? Do you know what I know?
It is only then that the king has any authority to say:
Listen to what I say!
That’s what an epiphany is per dictionary.com: a
sudden, intuitive perception of or insight into the reality
or essential meaning of something, usually initiated by
some simple, homely, or commonplace occurrence or
experience.

101. If it isn’t simple, homely or commonplace in origin, well
… my advice is to leave it alone.
David Foster Wallace said it well:
It is about the real value of a real education,
which has almost nothing to do with knowledge, and everything to do with
simple awareness; awareness of what is so real and essential, so hidden in plain
sight all around us, all the time, that we have to keep reminding ourselves over
and over:
“This is water.”
“This is water.”
One might want to see: DAVID FOSTER WALLACE, IN HIS OWN WORDS. He says stuff
way better than me. (Big HT Chris Frederic)
The following essay is in response to: Philip Clayton talks with Spencer Burke about
Theology After Google
Charles Sanders Peirce drew a helpful distinction between the theoretic and the practical,
suggesting that we should speculate boldly in our theoretical endeavors but move more
tentatively in our practical affairs. One way of interpreting his approach might be to say that
we should employ a progressive bias in our academic, propositional disciplines and a
conservative or traditionalist bias in our practical and pastoral approaches. This strikes me as
right-headed in that, while in the first instance, we are dealing with relationships between
ideas, in the latter case we are dealing with relationships between people.
This aphorism seems easy enough to apply when we are drawing a distinction such as
between our theoretic sciences and our practical politics. It gets more complicated, however,
when we adopt the view that theology, itself, is very much more a practical science, not so
much a theoretical endeavor. What are the implications?
For starters, this means that theology advances as a science much more inductively via
empirical observation than deductively via rational considerations (ahem, or at least it
should). It also means that when theology gets descriptive and normative, what it describes
and norms are interpretive and evaluative realities, like religions and cultures, and not
physical, metaphysical, practical and moral realities, like sciences and philosophies. More
concretely, then, theology does not gift us with cosmological insights, such as taking positions
on the philosophies of mind, the origins of species or the putative reconciliations of gravity &
quantum mechanics. Theology gifts us with axiological insights, observing and reporting how
it is that humankind interprets cosmological realities and what it is about these realities that
humans value most.
One needn’t be a distinctly Christian theologian to recognize that humankind, by and large,
has interpreted reality pneumatologically, which is to say that it interprets reality with Spirit
as a rather basic and universal category, and also participatively, which is to recognize that
we all have co-creative roles. As we move from the vague to the more specific, our
interpretations begin to diverge. Where we enjoy the strongest convergence, though, is
evaluatively vis a vis what it is we most treasure or desire and, by and large, humankind
desires the Kingdom of a God, Who is love. Again, as we move from the vague to the specific,
there’s some divergence in value-realization strategies, what we call spiritual practices and
disciplines, but, increasingly, we are eagerly exploring and profitably exchanging them.
If human religious realities are pretty much universally conceived, then, as thoroughly
pneumatological, robustly participatory and profitably pluralistic, then theology as a
discipline, it would seem, is going to be incredibly open-sourced. Those whose gifts include
teaching and leadership charisms will exercise those roles, primarily by hosting, listening and
observing those who are participating and profiting from manifold and multiform
interpretations and practices and then exchanging that information with the rest of us.
This is how Scripture itself came about, as a collation of hymns, psalmody, prayers,
meditative practices, myths, parables, wisdom sayings, narratives, stories, rituals and other
traditions. This is how my own tradition’s magisterium is conceived as listening to and
observing the faithful and then promulgating these hearings and observations to all via the
articulation of truth in dogma, celebration of beauty in the cultivation of ritual & liturgy,
preservation of goodness in code & law and enjoyment of fellowship in community. This is to
say that what we promulgate is the sensus fidelium or sense of the faithful, which is an
inherently bottom-up, grass roots activity and not a trickle-down reality, whatsoever.
And no hierarchy goes around wily nilly making changes based on ivory tower theological
abstractions and constructions. Instead, it involves an indispensable active listening and
observing process. Caveat: Note I said that this is how the magisterium is conceived and did
not represent that this is how it always works in practice. (Good grief!)
What’s the practical upshot of all of this? Well, as our communication vehicles become
increasingly peer to peer (p2p), the exchange of interpretations and practices will accelerate
and will less and less require institutional channels.
What is so very curious about all of this open-sourcing is that, perhaps counterintuitively,
from a practical and pastoral perspective, rather than anarchically and indiscriminately
jettisoning the old and embracing the wholly novel, what seems to be emerging is, instead, a
radical orthodoxy, a returning to our roots, a retrieval, revival and renewal of our ancient
interpretations and practices, an ardent appreciation for all that has been true in our creeds,
beautiful in our cults, good in our codes and unitive in our communities. If joy is the infallible
sign of the presence of God (Madeline L’Engle), then truth, beauty, goodness and unity are
assuredly an indelible sign of the presence of the Spirit.
Although humankind has often lacked much in the way of cosmological knowledge, it has
more than compensated for this deficit with an abundance of axiological wisdom. That we
move forward rather tentatively in our practical (most vital) affairs suggests that Peirce was
more so making an observation rather than a suggestion. That’s why this open-source
theology doesn’t scare me at all. If all the academic tongues were still, the noise would still
continue; we rocks and stones, ourselves, will start to sing: Hosanna, heysanna, sanna,
sanna, ho, sanny he, sanny ho, sanna!
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send

102. Tags: aesthetic teleology, A m o s Y o n g, a t o n e m e n t, autopoietic, Axiological, Benedict XVI, Brian McLaren,
C h a d C r a w f o r d, C h a r l e s C u r r a n, Charles Sanders Peirce, Chris Frederic, C h r i s t o l o g y, c l e r i c a l i s m, Cosmic
A d v e n t u r e, created co-c r e a t o r, David Foster Wallace, deontology, Divine Matrix, Do you hear what I
h e a r ?, ecclesiology, e m e r g e n c e, e p i p h a n y, h i e r a r c h i c a l i s m, h i e r a r c h y, H o m e b r e w e d C h r i s t i a n i t y,
h o s p i t a l i t y, i n s t i t u t i o n a l i s m, i n t r i n s i c n a t u r e, John Duns Scotus, J o h n H a u g h t, Joseph Bracken, K e v i n
Beck, lex orandi lex credendi, Message in a Bottle, Mike Morrell, original sin, p 2 p, p a n e n t h e i s m, peer to
p e e r, p e r f o r m a t i v e, Phil Hefner, Philip Clayton, p n e u m a t o l o g y, Richard McBrien, Richard McCormick,
Robert C. Neville, Rosemary Radford Reuther, semiotic, soteriology, Teilhard de Chardin, Theological
A n t h r o p o l o g y, Thomas Merton, T i m K i n g, top-down causation, T r a n s f o r m i n g T h e o l o g y, T r a n s m i l l e n i a l,
triadic semeiotic, Tripp Fuller, W a l k e r P e r c y
« Older Entries Newer Entries »
© 2010 christiannonduality.com Blog is Proudly Powered By WordPress | Theme by The Cloisters

103. CHRISTIANNONDUALITY. C O M BL O G
beyond thinking & proposing to imagining & participating
Home About
T o d a y’ s L i t u r g y
The “Dead” Emerging Church – an Elvis sighting!
JB on January 9, 2010 in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »
Today, Tall Skinny Kiwi provides us with Dr Paul Pierson’s criteria for How To Spot a
Church Movement.
Translator
This strikes me as having some bearing on the timely consideration of whether or not the
Emerging Church movement, as a movement, perdures even as, assuredly, it continues as a
conversation.
In reviewing Dr. Pierson’s list, it’s interesting to note
that, while propositional or theoretical or creedal By N2H
aspects of a movement are not unimportant, there Amos Yong apophatic
seems to be a much greater emphasis on the primacy Axiological axiologically-
of the participatory and practical and experiential Bernard
integral
aspects. Thus questions of ecclesiology and
pneumatology, or how to be church and respond in
Lonergan Brian
McLaren
the Spirit, are being answered existentially in the way
we live and move and have our being. One could not Charles
Sanders
better describe our 20th Century church-emergent. Peirce
contemplative
To the extent theological breakthroughs occur, there cosmology emergence
are no new discoveries in anthropology, soteriology, emerging church
Christology and eschatology, providing new Enlightenment
propositions about what it means to be human, what epistemology faith False
is wrong with humanity and how to fix it, Who Self fideism Hans
Jesus is and why our hopes are fixed on Him. Kung James K. A. Smith
Rather, there are rediscoveries of the truths long Jesus Creed John Duns
articulated in our creeds, of the beauties well Scotus kataphatic Kevin
cultivated in our celebrations of liturgy and ritual, of Beck Kurt Godel
the goodness well preserved in God’s laws and of the Merton
fellowship long enjoyed in our communities. There
are corrections in various over- and under-emphases metaphysics
Mike Morrell Natural
as we then eschew any decay (seemingly inevitable & Theology nihilism
recurring) of dogma into dogmatism, ritual into nondual nonduality
ritualism, law into legalism & moralism, and orthodoxy radical
institution into institutionalism. The latest iteration emergence radical
of our church-emergent precisely emulates such orthodoxy rationalism
retrieval, revival and renewal dynamics.
Richard Rohr
Science
And there is a reawakened nurturance of creative tensions as we re-cognize that life’s deepest
paradoxes remain ours to exploit, transformatively, and will not otherwise yield to our scientism semiotic
theodicy Theological
attempts to resolve (dialectically thru synthesis), dissolve (perspectivally thru paradigm Anthropology
shifts) or evade (practically by ignoring) them, reductively, as happens with life’s lesser
paradoxes of science, philosophy and metaphysics. Our world remains enchanted and needs Thomas
re-enchantment, on an ongoing basis it seems, but only in our stance toward reality and not Merton Tim King
transformation
in Nature, Herself, which is enchanted through and through! When it comes to life’s most True Self Walker Percy
important questions, then, the church-emergent du jour precisely resists the W P-C u m u l u s b y R o y T a n c k
fundamentalistic, rationalistic, reductionistic strategies of dualistic problem-solving and a n d Luke Morton requires
nurtures a robustly nondual contemplative stance toward our ultimate concerns. (See this F l a s h P l a y e r 9 or better.
Cathlimergent essay.) Cultivating the
Roots, Nurturing
the Shoots
The paradox is really the pathos of intellectual life and MARCH 2010
just as only great souls are exposed to passions it is M T W T F S S
only the great thinker who is exposed to what I call 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
paradoxes, which are nothing else than grandiose 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
thoughts in embryo. … … Take away paradox from 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
the thinker and you have a professor. ~ Soren 29 30 31
Kierkegaard « FEB
Recent Posts
To the extent our anthropologies, soteriologies, Christologies The Emerging Church is BIGGER
and eschatologies do get rearticulated propositionally, there t h a n C h r i s t i a n i t y – how to spot
does seem to be an ongoing and ever-growing universalizing tendency (an ecumenical and it in other traditions
inclusivistic catholicity) to affirm the radically egalitarian nature of the Good News as we Abortion & the Senate
better come to realize — over against our own marginalizations, hierarchicalisms, Healthcare Bill – a p r u d e n t i a l
colonialisms, patriarchicalisms, clericalisms, sexisms, ecclesiocentrisms, exclusivisms, judgment
traditionalisms, institutionalisms, gnosticisms and, finally, even movementisms — that, 10 historical developments
sooner or later, the Gospel’s preferential option for the poor will be consolation for every last propelling Emerging
one of us. To paraphrase Pogo: “We have met the poor and they are us.” Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
Why Brian McLaren’s Greco-
So, as the Spirit moves when He wills, where She wills, how They will, may the Spirit of God’s Roman Narrative is NOT a
love, now, move within me and you and all. That’s the fugal movement that perdures even as caricature
other movements, most assuredly, do come and go. When we look carefully at what is going THE BOOK: Christian
on, what we call emergent, in one sense, might be the re-emergence of a reality that, N o n d u a l i t y – Postmodern
inevitably, gets submerged, time and again. It’s a reignition and conflagration of a Fire lit Conservative Catholic
long ago. Pentecostal

104. Emergence also has a more generic sense and, in that sense, is inextricably associated with Recent Comments
novelty, a reality that will not go away for those of us who buy into telos, an inexorable
movement built into the very fabric of creation. What seems radically new is humankind’s christiannonduality.com Blog »
conscious appropriation of emergentist dynamics and how they possess an autopoietic (self- Blog Archive » Thoughts re:
organizing, for better or worse) trait, which is to say that we now know we can harness some t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
evolutionary impulses and possibly kedge forward (HT Mike Morrell & Frank Spencer) with a vs Dan Dennett on Intelligent
more consciously competent emergence (cf. Jamie Smith’s “Desiring the Kingdom”), shaping Design – a poorly designed
and forming, as co-creators (cf. Phil Hefner), the unfolding of the Kingdom that we desire inference
(Ps. 37:4). Conversely, we ignore this dynamic and forsake this movement at our own peril. christiannonduality.com Blog »
Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n
Below is Cathlimergent Response to Deacon Hall’s Response to Is the Emerging McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
Church Movement Waning? | Homebrewed Christianity Narrative is NOT a caricature on
A New Kind of Christianity?
Such wisdom. McLaren didn’t make this up. It’s
worse than that!
Amen to Emergence broadly conceived vis a vis the Church Universal. christiannonduality.com Blog »
Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n
The more narrowly conceived particular movement seems to be an ecclesial reiteration of a McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
constructive postmodernism. This pomo-impetus, in a nutshell, has transitioned science and Narrative is NOT a caricature on
philosophy, which I like to categorize as cosmological enterprises that are primarily E v e r y t h i n g T h a t’s Old is New
descriptive and normative, from a naive realism to a more critical realism. This changed the A g a i n – this (McLaren’s “ N e w”
way humankind engaged reality vis a vis propositional cosmology making our approach Christianity) is truly an old
more fallibilist. If in our descriptive sciences our knowledge advances mostly involved time religion
standing on the shoulders of our forefathers, in our normative philosophies our perspectival K i e r a n C o n r o y on A New Kind of
changes have often more so resembled standing on their necks. Christianity? McLaren didn’t
make this up. It’s worse than
There’s a related but distinct dynamism in play when we look at the effect of pomo-impetus that!
on our axiological enterprises of evaluative cultures and interpretive religions, which are less Philip Clayton on Thoughts re:
propositional and more relational and existential. I suppose this is to suggest that, if a t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
constructive postmodern approach will change the way we treat ideas, cosmologically, let’s vs Dan Dennett
say with an epistemic holism over against either the epistemic hubris of a sterile rationalism
with its a prioristic and apodictic certainties or the excessive epistemic humility of a radical
deconstructionism with its nihilistic tendencies, then, axiologically, we might expect it to Type, Hit Enter to Search
change the way we treat one another. We Distinguish in
For example, one way we might change the way we treat one another would be to take my Order to Unite
above two paragraphs with their dense and narrowly philosophic prose and to translate them
into an idiom that can be engaged by our children and young adults. The conversations we Select Category 6
are having in the academy are terribly important and we do not want to proceed without Blogroll
them. At the same time, without translation into a much more accessible and engaging form,
Andrew Sullivan
they remain regrettably irrelevant.
Beyond Blue
And I wrote all of this as an example and just to say: WOW !!! The questions Deacon raised Brian D. McLaren
and the response they evoked in Jo Ann are so incredibly right-on! To wit, Jo Ann wrote: Commonweal
Crunchy Con
Cynthia Bourgeault
Emergent Village
Emerging Women
“It is possible that it could take on even yet a “new form.” This is all good. Keep First Thoughts
people thinking, conversing, writing, communicating through song, dance, Fors Clavigera
loving each other, learning and experiencing God, sharing our stories, etc. All Francis X. Clooney, S.J.
of this is challenging and we must step up to the task. We must be “radicals” in Joseph S. O'Leary
a loving and spiritual way.” NCR Today – the Catholic Blog
Per Caritatem
Phyllis Tickle
Post Christian
This discussion continues here >>> Read the rest of this entry »
Postmodern Conservative
Radical Emergence
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send Sojourners
Tall Skinny Kiwi
The Website of Unknowing
Transmillenial
Vox Nova
Weekly Standard Blog
Worship Blog
Zoecarnate
Worthwhile Sites
Amos Yong
Boulder Integral
Brother David Steindl-Rast
Center for Action and
Catholics in the Emerging Church Conversation – Cathlimergent Contemplation
(an archive of articles) Christian Nonduality
Contemplative Outreach
JB on December 27, 2009 in Uncategorized | No Comments » David Group International
Dialogue Institute
Brian McLaren’s blog Catholics emerging: cathlimergent at Ecumene
http://www.brianmclaren.net/archives/blog/catholics-emerging-cathlimergent.html 10:34 Franciscan Archive
PM Dec 10th from web Innerexplorations
Institute on Religion in an Age of
Catholics & Others – Join Cathlimergent & our emerging church conversation at Science
http://cathlimergent.ning.com/ 9:06 AM Dec 17th from web Metanexus
Monastic Interreligious Dialogue
emergence = ecclesia reformata semper reformanda = aggiornamento (bring up to date) + National Catholic Reporter
ressourcement (return to earlier sources & traditions) 9:15 PM Dec 25th from web Radical Orthodoxy
Shalomplace
Anglimergent Baptimergent Presbymergent Methomergent Reformergent Luthermergent –
Sojourners
and now Cathlimergent http://cathlimergent.ning.com/ 6:46 PM Nov 24th from web
Thomas Merton Center

105. Cathlimergent at http://cathlimergent.ning.com/ is set up to foster Catholic participation in Virtual Chapel
emerging conversation. All are welcome. 6:56 PM Nov 24th from web Zygon Center for Religion and
Science
Cathlimergent on Facebook http://bit.ly/4JCYUG 9:07 AM Dec 23rd from API
Cloud of
Radical Emergence – It’s a small, small world – global dialogue http://bit.ly/7vDJzk 4:53 Unknowing
AM Dec 24th from web
Amos Yong apophatic
Catholics in the Emerging Church Conversation http://bit.ly/5TxhET 10:10 PM Nov 24th Axiological axiologically-
from web Bernard
integral
Lonergan Brian
Tall Skinny Kiwi: 3 Things the Emerging Church Took From the Catholics McLaren Charles
http://bit.ly/74NV7w 1:14 PM Dec 26th from web Sanders
Peirce
Andrew Jones asks: What do Catholics have to do with the emerging church? A lot, actually.
http://bit.ly/5QyCZT 9:05 PM Dec 25th from web
contemplative
cosmology emergence
emerging church
In Search of the Emerging Church? – look on the margins http://bit.ly/5ne3kI 6:55 AM Dec E n l i g h t e n m e n t epistemology
24th from API faith False Self fideism
Radical Emergence: about roots & shoots http://bit.ly/73eF0D 10:47 PM Dec 23rd from web Hans Kung James K. A.
Smith Jesus Creed John
The Emergent Roaming Catholic – a pictorial autobiography http://bit.ly/OFh2d 9:46 PM Duns Scotus kataphatic
Dec 23rd from web Kevin Beck Kurt
Godel Merton
What do we mean by Convergence in the emerging church conversation? metaphysics Mike
Morrell Natural Theology
http://bit.ly/80ruuX 1:50 AM Dec 24th from web
nihilism nondual
The 6 Moments, Dynamics & Dialogues of the Emerging Church Conversation nonduality orthodoxy
http://bit.ly/547HJk 2:51 AM Dec 24th from web radical emergence radical
orthodoxy rationalism
Emergence Happens When … http://bit.ly/2miXIx 8:56 AM Dec 24th from API Richard Rohr
Science scientism
Radical Emergence – the Emerging Church Conversation as Strategic Planning Exercise semiotic theodicy
http://bit.ly/6ROszC 3:52 AM Dec 24th from API Theological
The emerging church conversation is less about positions and more about dispositions:
Anthropology
http://bit.ly/80ruuX 9:36 AM Dec 22nd from web Thomas
Merton Tim King
transformation True
emerging church conversation: fugue-like interplay of boundary establishment, defense,
negotiation & transcendence. http://bit.ly/2Bd34i 2:33 PM Dec 4th from web Self Walker Percy
Join Other
Radical Emergence – Institutional Religion – what’s up with that? http://bit.ly/4lOFh 2:02 Visitors in Prayer
PM Dec 24th from API Light A Candle & Pray
Join Us in the
Cathlimergent – its origins http://bit.ly/5Ococe 5:54 AM Dec 24th from web Liturgy of the
Radical Emergence – Right questions can be more important than right answers Hours
http://bit.ly/4tNCtb 3:02 PM Dec 24th from web
Radical Emergence – What makes a Catholic, catholic? (nothing cultural, scientific,
philosophical or metaphysical) http://bit.ly/4y3hK3 8:57 AM Dec 24th from web
Radical Emergence – we are liturgical animals, Homo liturgicus http://bit.ly/EJeQm 10:59
AM Dec 24th from API
Radical Emergence – Liturgical Spirituality serves an erotic love http://bit.ly/3a21Ge 4:28
PM Dec 24th from web
Get the C a t h l i m e r g e n t o n
Radical Emergence – Map-making & Story-telling – the twain shall meet Twitter widget and many other
http://bit.ly/7YpQhf 4:28 PM Dec 24th from web great free widgets a t Widgetbox!
Not seeing a widget? (More info)
Radical Emergence – Searching for Reenchantment in all the wrong places
http://bit.ly/YVGYU 10:11 PM Dec 24th from API Tweets
johnssylvest: Abortion & the
Radical Emergence – Eucharist – sacrament of unity http://bit.ly/TL1z2 6:31 PM Dec 24th Senate Healthcare Bill – a
from web prudential judgment
Prayer, in the True Self, would be as quiet as a sewing machine but as powerful as a cement http://bit.ly/aS2DwT
truck http://bit.ly/3DjqiY 10:40 PM Dec 24th from API johnssylvest: 10 developments
propelling Emerging
Radical Emergence – Thomas Merton – contemplative prayer http://bit.ly/3ORdxP 10:37 Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
PM Dec 24th from API http://bit.ly/a4AMtg
johnssylvest: RT @pdclayton7:
Radical Emergence – Merton – insoluble problems? http://bit.ly/1TINf9 10:36 PM Dec 24th "Theology After Google" opens
from API Wed. - 23 of the best speakers on
emerging religion in Google Age;
Radical Emergence – Merton – It was Him! He done it! http://bit.ly/1uMs9e 9:35 PM Dec live stream at http://o ...
24th from web johnssylvest: RT @jonestony:
New Blog Post: Society for
Radical Emergence – Merton – on the risk of stagnation, desolation, aridity Pentecostal Studies Paper: What
http://bit.ly/42gcsv 9:35 PM Dec 24th from API Pentecostals Have to Learn from
Emergents http://ow.ly/16KREU
Radical Emergence – God is not a syllogism, Love is not a formal argument johnssylvest: THE BOOK: An
http://bit.ly/8Cb1Sb 9:10 PM Dec 24th from API Emerging Church Conversation
with a Postmodern Conservative
Radical Emergence – Merton – move into crisis to lose crisis http://bit.ly/4kW1xy 8:34 PM Catholic Pentecostal
Dec 24th from web http://bit.ly/91D570 #fb
Radical Emergence – Merton – the False Self (properly understood) http://bit.ly/4FaJMw
8:33 PM Dec 24th from web John Sobert Sylvest
Radical Emergence – love eternal will not be denied http://bit.ly/8EEH15 8:09 PM Dec 24th
from web
Radical Emergence – Merton- New Seeds of Contemplation http://bit.ly/34bYJm 7:33 PM
Dec 24th from API
Radical Emergence – Praying Our True Self http://bit.ly/qcLuq 7:32 PM Dec 24th from API
Radical Emergence – About Hesychasm http://bit.ly/5Lyxa 7:08 PM Dec 24th from API
Radical Emergence – Fundamentalists versus Heretics? not really, not always
http://bit.ly/38EUjD 7:07 PM Dec 24th from web
Radical Emergence – Pouring out a welter of confused thoughts http://bit.ly/5dxdbT 6:32
PM Dec 24th from web

106. Radical Emergence – Let There Be Peace on Earth – preambles to dialogue
http://bit.ly/3rbM8W 6:06 PM Dec 24th from web
Radical Emergence – Social Networks Can Be Thoreau’s Post Office http://bit.ly/1yFLTe
6:05 PM Dec 24th from API
Johnboy Was Here
Radical Emergence – Simone Weil – the rest of the story http://bit.ly/8aLIqr 5:30 PM Dec Feedjit Live Blog Stats
24th from web Feedjit Live Blog Stats
Radical Emergence – Simone Weil – unbaptized & outside the church http://bit.ly/UyKoq
5:29 PM Dec 24th from API
Follow this blog
Radical Emergence – the Oneness to which we can awaken http://bit.ly/7XBleG 5:04 PM
Dec 24th from API
Radical Emergence – Ecstatic, Enstatic & Epektasis – we bear the future Oneness now
http://bit.ly/s0gIu 4:04 PM Dec 24th from web
Science vs Natural Theology vs Theology of Nature http://bit.ly/4abouU 3:27 PM Dec 24th
from API
One: Essential Writings in Nonduality – a review http://bit.ly/3rZrNM 2:26 PM Dec 24th
from web
An elucidation of Buddhism by Dumoulin with an assist from Peirce, Polanyi and Lonergan
http://bit.ly/1ask9Z 2:25 PM Dec 24th from web
Radical Emergence – East Meets West interreligiously – but how? http://bit.ly/406Mli 1:25
PM Dec 24th from web
The Non-dual Way – Fr. Richard Rohr at Boulder Integral – podcasts http://bit.ly/5d0fxu
1:03 PM Dec 24th from web
Radical Emergence – The Spirit Poured Out on All Flesh http://bit.ly/CvRgM 1:02 PM Dec
24th from web
Radical Emergence – Desiring the Kingdom http://bit.ly/2onevG 12:24 PM Dec 24th from
web Visit Cathlimergent Conversations
Radical Emergence – Montmarte, Colorado Springs & the Kingdom http://bit.ly/YgLX0 Visit Anglimergent
12:24 PM Dec 24th from API Meta
Radical Emergence – Why PostmodernISM & ModernISM are Both Silly Log in
http://bit.ly/4p787B 11:59 AM Dec 24th from API Entries R S S
Comments R S S
Radical Emergence – From Mild Woman to Wild Woman (for the church, of course) WordPress.org
http://bit.ly/BQ16F 11:23 AM Dec 24th from web
Radical Emergence – Maiden, Mother, Crone & Queen: archetypes & transformation
http://bit.ly/3Mz1HH 10:22 AM Dec 24th from web
DOUBT: nagging late-night and early-dawn questions http://bit.ly/3b434r 9:58 AM Dec
24th from API
Radical Emergence – Ki, Qi, Chi, Prana & Kundalini (& Reiki) http://bit.ly/2VLXcX 9:22 AM
Dec 24th from API
Radical Emergence – Angel, let me help you with your wings … http://bit.ly/bq1Bn 8:21 AM
Dec 24th from web
Science, Theology, Zen, Contemplation – podcasts http://bit.ly/4A1sTg 7:20 AM Dec 24th
from web
Radical Emergence – What differentiates the Gospel in the marketplace? http://bit.ly/HI29Q
7:20 AM Dec 24th from API
Radical Emergence – Theodicy – love is all you need (Beatles) http://bit.ly/3d2kzk 6:19 AM
Dec 24th from web
Radical Emergence – Intelligent Design – a poorly designed inference http://bit.ly/vVNSe
5:18 AM Dec 24th from API
Radical Emergence – The New Atheism, a wimpy caricature of the old http://bit.ly/2XZfsS
4:17 AM Dec 24th from web
Radical Emergence – Church & State – aspiration & coercion http://bit.ly/49JTPM 4:16 AM
Dec 24th from web
Radical Emergence – Spirit Move When You Will, Where You Will, How You Will
http://bit.ly/1tjMBW 3:16 AM Dec 24th from API
Radical Emergence – There’s No Place Like Home – common sense & simple faith
http://bit.ly/rh68E 2:14 AM Dec 24th from web
Radical Emergence – to value our yearning, treasure our wanting & embrace our
incompleteness http://bit.ly/3EGqYK 1:13 AM Dec 24th from web
Radical Emergence – Science, Philosophy, Culture & Religion http://bit.ly/8G6alS 12:49 AM
Dec 24th from API
Radical Emergence – Meaning in Life – abundance for believers & unbelievers
http://bit.ly/2909vC 12:13 AM Dec 24th from API
Radical Emergence – Nonduality & the Emerging Church http://bit.ly/4cvmNc 11:48 PM
Dec 23rd from web
Radical Emergence – The Fugue: truth, beauty, goodness & unity http://bit.ly/77Y9A 11:12
PM Dec 23rd from web
What could one possibly mean by convergence in the emerging church conversation?
http://bit.ly/80ruuX 10:14 AM Dec 21st from web
I view the emerging conversation as dialogue & prayer, the fruits of which are quite
unpredictable http://bit.ly/547HJk 12:05 PM Dec 20th from web
johnssylvest

107. 4 ways we most often deal w/paradox & 1 way is very much related to prayer See
http://bit.ly/547HJk 12:03 PM Dec 20th from web Retweeted by you
The 6 Moments, Dynamics & Dialogues of the Emerging Church Conversation
http://bit.ly/547HJk 6:15 PM Dec 19th from web
Do Xtn universities do enough to instill DOUBT: those nagging late-night and early-dawn
questions? http://bit.ly/3b434r 11:25 AM Dec 19th from web
My Version of Mary & Elizabeth Story: Ode to Mothers Who Had Lost Their Boys
http://bit.ly/5jSEy2 3:41 AM Dec 19th from web in reply to revdebmatt
Many atheists have rejected gods whom I would never choose to worship either. Many
believers worship gods I wouldn’t X the street to meet. 7:18 PM Dec 18th from web
Merton – insoluble problems? http://bit.ly/1TINf9 4:33 PM Dec 18th from web
Merton – It was Him! He done it! (losing our existential fears thru praise)
http://bit.ly/1uMs9e 3:33 PM Dec 18th from web
johnssylvest
If You Are In Distress, Spiritual or Otherwise http://bit.ly/17kOVj 5:17 PM Oct 17th from
web Retweeted by you
Merton – on the risk of stagnation, desolation, aridity http://bit.ly/42gcsv 1:32 PM Dec 18th
from web
the 3rd Way; nondual thinking; contemplative stance – Richard Rohr video
http://tinyurl.com/rohr-newMind 1:09 PM Dec 18th from API
nondual thinking; a new reformation; Richard Rohr video: http://tinyurl.com/rohr-
emerging 1:06 PM Dec 18th from web
Merton – move into crisis to lose crisis http://bit.ly/4kW1xy 12:33 PM Dec 18th from API
Merton – the False Self (properly understood) http://bit.ly/4FaJMw 12:32 PM Dec 18th from
web
We don’t enter the monastery or undertake a life of prayer to make us better human beings
— rather http://bit.ly/34bYJm (Merton) 11:30 AM Dec 18th from web
honest vs dishonest questions? Richard Rohr video: http://tinyurl.com/rohr-honestQuestions
11:05 AM Dec 18th from API
being tribes without being tribal; Richard Rohr video: http://tinyurl.com/rohr-noTribalism
11:04 AM Dec 18th from API
Prayer, in the True Self, would be as quiet as a sewing machine but as powerful as a cement
truck http://bit.ly/3DjqiY 10:30 AM Dec 18th from web
an evening w/Brian McLaren video: http://tinyurl.com/McLaren-Quest Your questions can
send you on a Quest! 10:04 AM Dec 18th from web
Praying Our True Self http://bit.ly/qcLuq 9:29 AM Dec 18th from API
commonalities between emergents; Brian Mclaren video: http://tinyurl.com/mclaren-
commonality 9:03 AM Dec 18th from API
“The contemplative mind is really just the mind that emerges when you pray instead of think
first.” – Richard Rohr 8:38 AM Dec 18th from web
Ever think of John of the Cross as dark, dry, arid? Think again! http://bit.ly/4uzsh3 8:16 AM
Dec 18th from web
why so much focus on convincing others re: our versions of heaven and so little effort
providing them just a small taste of it NOW? 8:16 AM Dec 18th from web
Christianity’s not an intellectual system, collection of dogmas, or a moralism; it’s an
encounter, a love story, an event. Benedict XVI 4:08 PM Aug 31st from web Retweeted by
you and 5 others
johnssylvest
I think it pisses God off if you walk by the color purple in a field somewhere and don’t notice
it.~Alice Walker 11:48 AM Sep 4th from web Retweeted by you
the 3rd Way; nondual thinking; contemplative stance – Richard Rohr video
http://tinyurl.com/rohr-newMind 8:35 AM Dec 17th from web
Twitter’s a real Godsend to my longsuffering correspondents, who use to get 140,000 words
of my obfuscatorily dense prose but now enjoy the
What SECULAR society? The supermajority of humankind prays to a Spirit, Who is Holy,
variously conceiving God in our PLURALISTIC society! 12:14 PM Dec 16th from web
The preferential option for the poor, sooner or later, will be consolation for every last one of
us. http://bit.ly/5ne3kI 10:11 AM Dec 16th from web
the question one should pose to gurus, mystics & saints is not what they think about reality’s
essential nature, it’s Lord, teach us to pray 9:34 AM Dec 16th from web
It ain’t rocket surgery… 9:30 AM Dec 16th from web
Then he went away and hanged himself. Mt 27:5 Go and do thou likewise. Lk 10:37 Or why
we shouldn’t take (Biblical) things out of context. 9:29 AM Dec 16th from web
¿Who’s searching for YOU on social networking sites? Click to find out ►
http://tinyurl.com/tweetfinder411 To Share ► http://bit.ly/KHcw5 9:24 AM Dec 16th from
web
A Lucky Dog vendor in New Orleans’ French Quarter asked: “Would you like me to make
you one with everything?” Panentheism’s just everywhere! 9:19 AM Dec 16th from web
While theologians quibble over what’s necessary for salvation, let’s busy ourselves with what’s
necessary to give God the greatest glory! 9:00 AM Dec 16th from web

108. Faith provides a response, not an answer, to the mystery of suffering. We defer our “Why?” in
trust & proceed with our “Here I am” in love. 8:59 AM Dec 16th from web
I’ve met quite a few atheists over the years, all who’d rejected gods whom I would never
choose to worship either. 8:55 AM Dec 16th from web
Richard Rohr on Action and Contemplation: Homebrewed Christianity 41
http://34i26.th8.us 8:46 AM Dec 16th from web
And if u would know God be not therefore a solver of riddles. Rather look about u and u shall
see Him playing w/ your children. ~ Gibran 8:45 AM Dec 16th from web
Follow this link & its step by step directions & you will experience peace. Light A Candle
http://bit.ly/38RwEV Please Share 12:02 AM Dec 16th from web
@ROFTERS FT Influence the Obama Doctrine? Gary Dorrien: neocon Niebuhrians are
kidding selves about having much in common with Niebuhr 8:56 PM Dec 15th from web in
reply to ROFTERS
Liturgy
There are 37 responses to the discussion: There’s probably no God? http://bit.ly/7Uc2zS
Come and read, add your bit, & plz RT 12:28 AM Dec 15th from TweetDeck Retweeted by
you and 1 other
Resolved: not all traditionalists are fundamentalistic & not all emergents are hard pomos. In
sheer numbers, however, the bigger problem is? 8:28 PM Dec 14th from web
Denis Read OCD, calls Juan the “liturgical mystic” and sanjuanist spirituality “liturgical
spirituality” http://bit.ly/3a21Ge 8:00 PM Dec 14th from web Retweeted by you
There’s Probably No God? Be good for goodness’ sake! http://bit.ly/52V3yq 7:56 PM Dec
14th from web
Resource Center (mp3, DVD, books, CD, audiotape, Radical Grace Magazine, donations) –
Center for Action & Contemplation http://bit.ly/90V9pL 9:55 PM Dec 13th from web
template for a Liturgy of Lament (pdf) fr Center for Action & Contemplation (Fr. Rohr)
http://bit.ly/59sZJS 9:52 PM Dec 13th from web
We Need to Take Better Care Of Sister Earth by RichardRohr 2009-Nov-02 (pdf)
http://bit.ly/8uQMrT 9:47 PM Dec 13th from web
Fr Richard Rohr Homilies (mp3 files) at Holy Family Church Albuquerque NM
http://bit.ly/6JkIwe 9:45 PM Dec 13th from web
Subscribe to Center for Action & Contemplation Mailing Lists http://bit.ly/6hQVu incl Daily
Meditation (Reflections by Fr. Richard Rohr) 9:43 PM Dec 13th from web
Cathlimergent on Facebook http://bit.ly/4JCYUG 7:03 PM Dec 13th from web
Don’t waste years of your life being against anybody, talking past those who don’t even share
our concepts & categories http://bit.ly/4GpKWe 2:51 AM Dec 12th from web
Emerging fr modernity’s preoccupation w/boundary establishment & defense is a
postmodern openness to boundary negotiation & transcendence. 12:08 PM Dec 11th from
web
Have you experienced these tensions on your journey? Can you see them playing out in our
churches & culture? Join us! http://bit.ly/7S7JKf 7:47 AM Dec 11th from web
Here we are, as Fr. Rohr says, tribal but not tribalistic. We avoid, then, institutionalism and
hierarchicalism. 7:45 AM Dec 11th from web
more on the Manhattan Declaration http://bit.ly/65kdHb 11:14 AM Dec 9th from web
The Stem Cell Challenge (in response to Jesus Creed thread) http://bit.ly/6dr5fU 3:45 PM
Dec 8th from web
God is not a syllogism, Love is not a formal argument http://bit.ly/8Cb1Sb 10:30 AM Dec
7th from web Retweeted by you
Ain’t heterodox to believe that there ain’t a snowball’s chance in the Superdome that anyone
will ever end up in hell. http://bit.ly/8EEH15 2:12 PM Dec 6th from web Retweeted by you
love eternal will not be denied http://bit.ly/8EEH15 1:58 PM Dec 6th from web Retweeted by
you
sacrament & song & psalmody & story-telling & bread-breaking came first in our tradition &
remains first in our lives http://bit.ly/6ROszC 8:21 PM Dec 4th from web
Liturgy
Wonderful responses & discussions about: does blog exist? http://bit.ly/5QIwwp 2:32 PM
Dec 4th from TweetDeck Retweeted by you
mincemeat pie recipe fr scratch: 1) begin w/ quantum vacuum fluctuation 2) Big Bang 3)
Turn stardust into elements ~ more later 11:20 PM Dec 3rd from web
don’t miss @zoecarnate the Promiscuous Love of God http://bit.ly/7×5NX1 4:32 PM Dec 3rd
from web
Jesus was a Capricorn, but was He an ESFJ? an Enneagram 2? http://bit.ly/7NixyL 2:03
PM Dec 3rd from web
“Introverts In The Church: Finding Our Place In An Extroverted Culture” by Adam McHugh
http://bit.ly/7NixyL 2:02 PM Dec 3rd from web
Emergent Village is a growing, generative friendship among missional Christians
http://bit.ly/Xdlnv 1:31 PM Nov 29th from web
emergingchurch.info : a touching place for the emerging church http://bit.ly/4j492I 1:30
PM Nov 29th from web
changing church for a changing world | Fresh Expressions http://bit.ly/6pxKDd 1:30 PM
Nov 29th from web
common root http://bit.ly/4B9tPa 1:29 PM Nov 29th from web

109. Resonate: growing missional friendship of Canadians http://bit.ly/5okmNW 1:28 PM Nov
29th from web
presbymergent http://bit.ly/bbMYZ 1:27 PM Nov 29th from web
Luthermergent http://bit.ly/4b9X8 1:26 PM Nov 29th from web
emergingumc http://bit.ly/14tzW 1:25 PM Nov 29th from web
Convergent Friends http://bit.ly/6kjpKR 1:24 PM Nov 29th from web
Baptimergent – An emergent baptist network of friends. http://bit.ly/67uYN9 1:23 PM Nov
29th from web
Anglimergent http://bit.ly/1mfnft 1:23 PM Nov 29th from web
Emerging Pentecostal http://bit.ly/ed0PO 1:22 PM Nov 29th from web
Here’s how the sun came up on Cathlimergent on one of the very first days of its presence in
cyberspace: http://bit.ly/7vDJzk 12:30 PM Nov 28th from web
Our approach would be vastly changed if we shifted from universalis to katholikos in our
understanding of Catholicity http://bit.ly/7k6dRa 2:11 AM Nov 28th from web
Father Roy Bourgeois from our hometown, Lutcher, Louisiana, nominated for the 2010
Nobel Peace Prize. http://bit.ly/7a4d3u #fb 10:16 PM Nov 27th from web
The preferential option for the poor, sooner or later, will be consolation for every last one of
us. http://bit.ly/5ne3kI 10:08 AM Nov 27th from web
Set a guard, O LORD, over my monitor; Keep watch over the door of my keyboard. 8:28 PM
Nov 25th from web
RT @zoecarnate: Catholic? Emerging? Join the CATHLIMERGENT social network!
http://cathlimergent.ning.com // emerging is invading everywhere 8:24 AM Nov 25th from
SimplyTweet Retweeted by you
RT @transmillennial: Cutting edge Catholics. Emerging Catholics. Check out
CATHLIMERGENT. http://bit.ly/7k6dRa Thanks Kevin! 1:32 PM Nov 25th from CoTweet
Andrew’s right. Neither emergence nor convergence are novel for Catholics. Catholics &
Emerging Church http://bit.ly/6ThpfE 11:00 AM Nov 25th from web
tallskinnykiwi
What do Catholics have to do with the emerging church? A lot, actually.
http://bit.ly/5QyCZT 8:55 AM Nov 25th from TweetDeck Retweeted by you and 3 others
Where are all the ‘Emerging’ Catholics? « this fragile tent http://bit.ly/4NSdpu 10:49 AM
Nov 25th from web
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
What do we mean by Convergence in the emerging church
conversation?
JB on December 21, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, Uncategorized, the interpretive -
Religion | No Comments »
What could one possibly mean by convergence in the emerging church conversation,
especially once recognizing and acknowledging that we remain, in the same instance,
Anglimergent, Baptimergent, Cathlimergent, Luthermergent, Presbymergent and so on?
To the extent the conversation primarily involves a consideration of methods, practices and
experiences and not, rather, belief systems, conclusions and propositions, and given the
conversation’s postfoundational orientation, what emerges will not be in the form of
arguments in the strict sense. Instead, we are discovering a convergence that is more so of
nonpropositional nature.
This is to say that this convergence does not articulate, for example, a new narrative arch of a
distinctly descriptive, normative or speculative nature, which would be a cosmological
enterprise. Rather, this convergence has an axiological trajectory, which is to say that it
fosters a harmonic resonance of an evaluative, interpretive or existential nature.
Interpretively, we are coming away with a deepened sense of solidarity. Evaluatively, we
share a profound sense of compassion. We share, then, a great unity of mission even as
we recognize our diversity of ministry and acknowledge our plurality of belief
systems.
What emerges, then, is not so much a convergence of metanarratives but, instead, of
meta-perspectives. It is a convergence of perspectives that conditions HOW we will first
see and experience reality, so to speak, desiring the Kingdom, and not of narratives
setting forth WHAT we will eventually think about reality in order to somehow argue and
prove the Kingdom.

110. A lot of people, who remain immersed in dualistic mindsets with their problem-solving
orientation to all of reality, have a difficult time evaluating the emerging church
conversation. These are likely the same tweeple who are repeatedly tweeting their frustration
with trying to nail jello to the wall in their coming to grips with what the emerging
conversation is all about. For so many, apologetics is primarily evidential, rational and
presuppositional, proceeding with empirical, logical, practical and moral reasoning. And, by
all means, this approach to reality is indispensable and necessary. When it comes to life’s
deepest mysteries, more ultimate concerns and most significant value-realizations, however,
we must go beyond this dualistic approach and engage reality with a more nondual,
contemplative stance.
So, when we speak of a convergence in the emerging conversation, we are not suggesting a
novel set of concepts and categories. Neither should one look for a specific political agenda. It
is not a convergence of moral reasoning, such that emergent folk will all necessarily share the
same positions on one moral reality or another. Even regarding cosmological matters, we are
not suggesting a convergence of views regarding such things as philosophy of mind,
theological anthropology, divine interactions and so on.
A distinctly nonpropositional convergence of shared practice and shared experience, of a
deepened sense of solidarity and heightened sense of compassion, will very much condition
our approach to environmental & social justice, ecclesiology, worship and Jesus.
Notice how these are not primarily propositional realities but are, first and foremost,
relational realities. We are not first preoccupied with getting answers right as if we were
mostly dealing with ideas. This convergence is not about getting the correct relationships
between ideas, whether through a harmony of reasons or even intuitions. This is about
realizing the right relationships between humankind and God, ourselves and one
another, ourselves and nature and even our relationship to our own self.
This harmonic convergence, then, is like a symphony of many instruments, each with its
own sound and timbre, all playing together in the same key, in harmony and to the rhythm
of the same Drum.
This is not to deny, however, that to the extent that we are conditioned, shaped and formed
by a convergence of nonpropositional influences, that it will not eventually transvalue our
more propositional approaches, effecting their convergence also. It will. But that requires a
great deal of patience.
I have to run. The exigencies of life press in. But I will elaborate on all of this later and
hopefully in a more accessible way.
Update: Really, the best articulation of the emerging conversation trajectory from a Catholic
perspective is in this video clip of Fr. Richard Rohr: Fr. Richard Rohr describes the
Emerging Church Conversation
Also, here’s the latest HomeBrewed Christianity Podcast of Fr. Rohr: Get your Non-
dualism on with Richard Rohr
Day 3 – continuing
Beyond socialization, we are opening ourselves up to ongoing transformation and a deep
desiring of the Kingdom. We experience a deep desiring for environmental and social justice
in solidarity with and compassion for humankind and our cosmos. Ever more identified with
Jesus and His deep desiring of communion with the Father, we long for the coming of the
Cosmic Christ. Our ecclesiology is more ecumenical and egalitarian as we go beyond
institutional structures (and not necessarily without them) seeking authentic community in
manifold and multiform ways, wherever two or more can gather in His Name. Our worship
becomes the practice of the Presence of God as we seek an abiding relationship with Him –
not Whom we possess, but – Who possesses us.
In solidarity and sharing this same deep desiring, we may otherwise differ in HOW we see
justice playing out morally, practically and politically, in HOW we see the Kingdom unfolding
eschatologically and metaphysically. And we can abide with these differences because of our
deep humility and deep love for one another, encouraging and forgiving one another, sharing
a vision THAT in the Kingdom all may be well, all will be well, all shall be well and we will
know that all manner of things shall be well.
The emerging church conversation is less about positions and more about dispositions,
about being disposed to a Deep Awareness, Deep Solidarity, Deep Compassion, Deep
Humility, Deep Worship, Deep Justice, Deep Ecology and Deep Community. That these
realities will play out in our lives we are confidently assured. How they will play out is
something we explore in humility and civility with all people of goodwill. Ours is foremost a
shared axiology, interpretively and evaluatively, of what we deeply desire and deeply value.
We share practices that shape, form, cultivate and celebrate these desires and values. We
believe that, one day, this will lead also to a shared cosmology, descriptively and normatively,
consistent with the best science and best philosophy.
“Your life is shaped by the end you live for. You are made in the image of what
you desire.” Thomas Merton
Below is a contribution evoked by Kevin Beck’s question re: empathy & compassion: Read
the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: compassion, c o n t e m p l a t i v e, c o n v e r g e n c e, d i v e r s i t y o f m i n i s t r y, dualistic mindset, e m e r g i n g
c h u r c h c o n v e r s a t i o n, m e t a-n a r r a t i v e, m e t a-perspective, n o n d u a l, plurality of belief systems, s o l i d a r i t y,
unity of mission

111. The 6 Moments, Dynamics & Dialogues of the Emerging Church
Conversation
JB on December 19, 2009 in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »
This is a follow to the Emerging Church Conversation as Strategic Planning
Exercise.
Below are some touchpoints for the emerging church conversation as it represents the fruits
of prayer of individuals and of peoples gathered. This emerging church dialogue doesn’t really
lend itself to categories used to describe systems, products, conclusions or movements; rather,
it is more so about methods, processes, practices or conversations.
This dialogue, then, is best conceived as prayer, as people interacting with God and one
another. It is an ongoing exchange of Do You Hear What I Hear? as the Spirit moves among
the People of God as always.
Sometimes, the Spirit moves and we
respond competently even if not wholly
consciously. We respond implicitly even if
not with an explicit awareness. At different
times in church history, our response
becomes a tad more self-reflective,
explicitly-aware, self-critical and
consciously competent. That’s what the
emerging conversation is to me – not a
novel move of the Spirit per se or a
response of the church, but – another
moment in time where many are simply
paying more attention and appropriating a
new awareness of what our gracious God
has always been about. Certainly, efficacies
will always flow when implicit faith is
made explicit, when unconscious
competence is made conscious, when we
pause, from time to time, to reflect and
resource and retrieve and revive and
renew.
Because I view the emerging conversation as dialogue and prayer, the fruits of
which are quite unpredictable as they flow from the hand of a sovereign God, Who seems to
have quite the sense of humor, I find it helpful to view the conversation through the lens of
Lectio Divina, our prayer. If there is a “movement,” then it is really no more and no less
than prayer, itself, which does not lend itself to specific programs and definite agenda but
yields itself to transformation, solidarity and compassion. These are realities that come about
quite spontaneously and outside of our preconceived channels.
While in creation, novelty arises that transcends but does not violate the order from which it
emerged, still we cannot really look behind to get a sense of where we’re headed. Rather, we
can look back and realize that others have been in places like this before and have been
superabundantly rewarded in unpredictable, novel ways when they have trustfully
surrendered. Joy remains a surprise. What emerges from this conversation will inspire joy
but will be no less a surprise. The Spirit is like that is all I can observe. Seldom do we know
how God’s designs will be worked even as we look forward with a confident assurance that
all will be well.
Below, I will describe 6 moments in prayer and 6 dynamics at play during these moments.
They capture, for me, 6 dialogues going on in the emerging church conversation.
6 moments in prayer
1 ) Creation reveals God in a moment of
Creatio. In the beginning was The Word.
2 ) The Word is received in a moment of Lectio
by the Witnesses to Revelation.
3 ) The Word is pondered in a moment of
Meditatio as the Witnesses meditate together
on Revelation.
4 ) As the Word is accepted and spoken in a
moment of Oratio, Revelation transforms its
Witnesses.
5 ) As transformed Witnesses in a moment of
Contemplatio, we respire the Word in every
contemplative breath as the Word becomes life,
itself.
6 ) We act on the Word in a moment of
Operatio as the Word is integrated into every
aspect of our lives.
6 dynamics at play
1 ) In Creatio, Revelation pours forth in Truth, Beauty, Goodness & Unity in a
Teleological Dynamic which speaks to the transcendental imperatives and divine
attributes that we experience in our existential orientations. This includes a robustly
relational dynamic with four vectors as each value is realized in the self, the other, the
environment and God, trajectories emphasized by Merton and further explicated by his
description of Bernardian love – of self for sake of self, of God for sake of self, of God for sake
of God, of self for sake of God.
This is what some have called Beginning with the End in mind. It’s articulated in the
question What’s It All About Alfie? All of the great traditions have in their own way
articulated truth, celebrated beauty, preserved goodness and fostered unity.
2 ) In Lectio, we encounter the witnesses to Revelation in a Perspectival Dynamic which
listens to the voices of these witnesses from objective, intersubjective, interobjective and
subjective perspectives that mutually critique each other. For example and respectively,
Scripture, Tradition, Reason and Experience. Or, in apologetics, the evidential,
presuppositional, rational and existential approaches.

112. We might think here of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral, the Anglican Three-Legged Stool, Fides
et Ratio.
3 ) In Meditatio, we employ a Methodological Dynamic which has four moments, the
descriptive and normative moments of our cosmological methods and the evaluative and
interpretive moments of our axiological methods. For example, we employ descriptive
science and normative philosophy and evaluative culture and interpretive religion, each
which is methodologically autonomous but axiologically-integral, which is to say all
necessary but none sufficient, all intellectually-related though not strictly logically-related, in
every human value-realization.
Here we are reminded of the Science & Religion Dialogue, of Postmodern epistemology and
other such discussions.
4 ) In Oratio, we speak the word as a first moment of accepting it and allowing it to work
toward our transformation in a Developmental Dynamic, whereby we move toward
authenticity in ongoing intellectual, affective, moral, socio-political and religious conversion.
I especially think of Bernard Lonergan’s conversions as expanded and explicated by Donald
Gelpi.
5 ) In Contemplatio, we live out of a Paradoxical Dynamic which takes us beyond but not
without our dualistic, problem-solving mind to engage reality with a nondual approach that
is more robustly relational. In our dualistic mind we have grappled with some success in
dealing with paradoxical tensions, resolving some dialectically in synthesis, dissolving
some perspectivally through paradigm shifts that introduce new concepts and categories, and
evading others practically, although they are otherwise true antinomies, which reveal the
limits of our formal approaches (as they would require our forsaking of some aspects of
reason, itself, in order to eliminate certain apparent absurdities).
These strategies of resolving, dissolving and evading paradox are somewhat
successful as we grapple with life’s cosmological questions in science and philosophy, where
we deal with how to describe and norm reality. When it comes to life’s most important
questions, our most ultimate concerns and most significant value-realizations, as we grapple
with life’s axiological questions in human culture and religion, our strategy shifts from
getting the right answers through problem-solving to getting the questions right, in other
words, to embarking on the right quest. This is about getting relationships right.
Axiological paradox, which deals with how we value and interpret reality, does not yield to
cosmological speculation with its empirical, rational and practical resolutions, dissolutions
and evasions of paradox. Its paradoxical tensions are, instead, nurtured and maintained
creatively. Creative tensions are the stuff of life’s deepest mysteries and most profound
meanings and yield its most cherished value-realizations. One might say, then, when it
comes to life’s deepest paradoxes, we exploit them transformatively.
There is no better treatment of paradox and the nondual approach than that of Franciscan
Richard Rohr.
6 ) In Operatio, where we act on the Word and integrate it into every aspect of our lives, we
employ an Integral Dynamic, which fosters integrity and authenticity through an ongoing
process of boundary establishment, boundary defense, boundary negotiation and boundary
transcendence. These boundary dynamics can be healthy or unhealthy, hence efficacious or
counterproductive, if not maintained in a creative tension. Dogma can decay into
dogmatism, cult into ritualism, code into legalism and community into institutionalism.
Creed can otherwise articulate truth. Ritual can otherwise celebrate beauty. Code can
otherwise preserve goodness. Community can otherwise enjoy fellowship.
6 dialogues in the Emerging Conversation
1 ) The exploration of teleological dynamics is quite straightforward in that it reflects a
collective voice of prophetic protest that is coming from the margins of institutionalized
Christianity and calling us to snap back into awareness in order to quit mistaking the finger
pointing at the moon for the moon itself. It’s nothing less than the age old clarification of
means and ends.
See Brian McLaren break open the essentials of our quest.
Brian McLaren, author of the groundbreaking Everything Must Change,
again shows his penchant for challenging conventional thinking about faith
and religion in this interview with host Dean Nelson as part of the 2009
Writers Symposium by the Sea, sponsored by Point Loma Nazarene
University. Series: Writer’s Symposium By The Sea [5/2009]
2 ) The exploration of perspectival dynamics reflects the wisdom of mutual critique and
the avoidance of various over- and under-emphases, whether sola scriptura or solum
magisterium, whether a rationalistic foundationalism or a radically deconstructive
postmodernism.
See Diana Butler Bass set forth a fresh perspective or narrative arch in her
People’s History of Christianity.
In the same spirit as Howard Zinn’s groundbreaking work The People’s
History of the United States, Diana Butler Bass reveals the under-reported
movements, personalities, and spiritual practices that continue to inform and
ignite contemporary Christian worship, activism, and social justice reforms in
the name of Jesus.
3 ) The consideration of methodological dynamics looks at the methods that are
employed from within all of the perspectives and affirms their autonomy as each constrains
and mutually critiques the others. Thus we avoid the conflation of science and religion and
philosophy and respect what each contributes to every human value-realization. We
therefore eschew scientism as well as fideism, for example.

113. See John Haught’s presentation: Genes and God: Explaining Life, Mind,
Morality and Religion
Scientists, philosophers and an increasing number of scholars in the
humanities now to look to Darwinian and Mendelian science for the ultimate
explanation of living phenomena including our own intellectual, ethical and
religious characteristics.
4 ) The dialogue about developmental dynamics respects the human growth trajectory
and recognizes that we are being transformed both as individuals and as a people. We think
here of Bernard Lonergan’s conversions, Clare Graves Spiral Dynamics and so on.
See Tim King’s Meeting at the Intersection of Humility & Mystery.
Summary: Tim King’s talk, delivered the International Peace & Reconciliation
conference in Amman Jordan, December 17, 2009. Read by Mike Morrell of
KedgeForward. For more on Tim & The David Group International, see
http://postchristianblog.com and http://davidgroupinternational.com
5 ) Our interest in paradoxical dynamics draws its impetus from life’s inescapable
mystery and inexhaustible depth dimensions. Here we explore the wisdom of uncertainty, the
reality of doubt even in the midst of faith, the nondual nature of the contemplative stance.
See Fr. Richard Rohr talk about The Contemplative Mind.
For Christians seeking a way of thinking outside of strict dualities, Fr. Rohr
explores methods for letting go of division and living in the present. He draws
his teachings from the Gospels, Jesus, Paul, and the great Christian
contemplatives. He reveals how many of the hidden truths of Christianity have
been misunderstood or lost and how to read them with the eyes of the mystics
rather than interpreting them through rational thought.
6 ) Our exploration of integral dynamics is an exploration of boundary realities and how
we are to establish, defend, negotiate and transcend this boundary or that, while maintaining
our integrity and growing our authenticity.
See Phyllis Tickle as she emphasizes: This is God we’re talking about.
Phyllis Tickle shares her thoughts on how we can spark new life in Christian
communities at the Christianity 21 conference. Jesus is God (no metaphor)
and this matters!
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: Contemplatio, C r e a t i o, Creative tensions, c u l t u r e, D e v e l o p m e n t a l D y n a m i c, I n t e g r a l D y n a m i c,
Lectio, Lectio Divina, Meditatio, Methodological Dynamic, Operatio, O r a t i o, P a r a d o x i c a l D y n a m i c,
P e r s p e c t i v a l D y n a m i c, philosophy, religion, Science, Teleological Dynamic, v a l u e-realizations
There’s Probably No God? Be good for goodness’ sake!
JB on December 14, 2009 in Uncategorized, the interpretive - Religion, the normative -
Philosophy | No Comments »
Rev. Bosco Peters blogs this week: There’s Probably No God?
He describes a situation:
New Zealand is following other
countries in having an “atheist
bus campaign”. Atheists are
raising $NZ10,000 to mimic the
UK campaign and place “There’s
probably no God. Now stop
worrying and enjoy your life”
on several buses in major New
Zealand cities.
But then Rev. Peters suggests:
Rather than fear, or tut-tut, this campaign, I welcome the
opportunity for some serious dialogue.

114. I agree with his suggestion and offer my comment below. Please click on the photo, above, to
visit Liturgy.com and to read his excellent post and comments.
It is true that the “New” atheists engage but a caricature of authentic belief. And they, in
turn, offer us naught but a caricature of a more philosophically rigorous atheism.
Those of us who subscribe to a radically incarnational view of reality certainly want to affirm
that humankind can indeed be good for goodness’ sake. We can and do pursue truth,
beauty, goodness and unity because such a pursuit is its own reward. Of course, we also view
our existential orientations to these intrinsically rewarding values as transcendental
imperatives. We believe that humans can recognize and realize these values without the
benefit of special divine revelation. So, we acknowledge the possibility of an implicit faith
even as we maintain that, with an explicit faith, believers can move more swiftly and with
less hindrance toward these values on life’s transformative journey.
I enjoy natural theology, metaphysics and philosophy but acknowledge that beyond our
evidential, rational and presuppositional arguments, which, at the most, establish the
reasonableness of faith, it is our existential experience of God that gifts us with a confident
assurance in the things we hope for. Beyond our abstract speculative formulations and
cognitive propositions, it is our participatory imagination that best engages reality, not just
religiously but also scientifically and philosophically and relationally. This imagination is
shaped and formed by liturgies of the mall, the marketplace, the stadium and our worship,
where we learn (and finally decide) to most desire one Kingdom or another.
So, we do not even want to deny that one can live a life of abundance and realize life’s great
values without an explicit belief in God (even as we have our own faith-based interpretations
of why this may be so and Who makes this possible). Neither would we deny, however, that a
life of faith is a life of SUPERabundance, enabling us to journey more swiftly and with less
hindrance along The Way.
This discussion continues at this link>>> Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: a t h e i s t b u s c a m p a i g n, existential orientations, implicit faith, m e t a p h y s i c s, N a t u r a l T h e o l o g y,
p a r t i c i p a t o r y i m a g i n a t i o n, t r a n s c e n d e n t a l i m p e r a t i v e s, t r a n s f o r m a t i v e j o u r n e y
President Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize Lecture
Administrator on December 10, 2009 in the evaluative - Culture | No Comments »
Your Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses, Distinguished Members of the Norwegian Nobel
Committee, citizens of America, and citizens of the world:
I receive this honor with deep gratitude and great humility. It is an award that speaks to our
highest aspirations — that for all the cruelty and hardship of our world, we are not mere
prisoners of fate. Our actions matter, and can bend history in the direction of justice.
And yet I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the considerable controversy that your
generous decision has generated. In part, this is because I am at the beginning, and not the
end, of my labors on the world stage. Compared to some of the giants of history who have
received this prize — Schweitzer and King; Marshall and Mandela — my accomplishments
are slight. And then there are the men and women around the world who have been jailed
and beaten in the pursuit of justice; those who toil in humanitarian organizations to relieve
suffering; the unrecognized millions whose quiet acts of courage and compassion inspire even
the most hardened of cynics. I cannot argue with those who find these men and women —
some known, some obscure to all but those they help — to be far more deserving of this
honor than I.
But perhaps the most profound issue surrounding my receipt of this prize is the fact that I am
the Commander-in-Chief of a nation in the midst of two wars. One of these wars is winding
down. The other is a conflict that America did not seek; one in which we are joined by 43
other countries — including Norway — in an effort to defend ourselves and all nations from
further attacks.
Still, we are at war, and I am responsible for the deployment of thousands of young
Americans to battle in a distant land. Some will kill. Some will be killed. And so I come here
with an acute sense of the cost of armed conflict — filled with difficult questions about the
relationship between war and peace, and our effort to replace one with the other.
These questions are not new. War, in one form or another, appeared with the first man. At
the dawn of history, its morality was not questioned; it was simply a fact, like drought or
disease — the manner in which tribes and then civilizations sought power and settled their
differences.
Over time, as codes of law sought to control violence within groups, so did philosophers,
clerics and statesmen seek to regulate the destructive power of war. The concept of a “just
war” emerged, suggesting that war is justified only when it meets certain preconditions: if it is
waged as a last resort or in self-defense; if the forced used is proportional; and if, whenever
possible, civilians are spared from violence.
For most of history, this concept of just war was rarely observed. The capacity of human
beings to think up new ways to kill one another proved inexhaustible, as did our capacity to
exempt from mercy those who look different or pray to a different God. Wars between armies
gave way to wars between nations — total wars in which the distinction between combatant
and civilian became blurred. In the span of 30 years, such carnage would twice engulf this
continent. And while it is hard to conceive of a cause more just than the defeat of the Third
Reich and the Axis powers, World War II was a conflict in which the total number of
civilians who died exceeded the number of soldiers who perished.

115. In the wake of such destruction, and with the advent of the nuclear age, it became clear to
victor and vanquished alike that the world needed institutions to prevent another World War.
And so, a quarter century after the United States Senate rejected the League of Nations — an
idea for which Woodrow Wilson received this Prize — America led the world in constructing
an architecture to keep the peace: a Marshall Plan and a United Nations, mechanisms to
govern the waging of war, treaties to protect human rights, prevent genocide and restrict the
most dangerous weapons.
In many ways, these efforts succeeded. Yes, terrible wars have been fought, and atrocities
committed. But there has been no Third World War. The Cold War ended with jubilant
crowds dismantling a wall. Commerce has stitched much of the world together. Billions have
been lifted from poverty. The ideals of liberty, self-determination, equality and the rule of law
have haltingly advanced. We are the heirs of the fortitude and foresight of generations past,
and it is a legacy for which my own country is rightfully proud.
A decade into a new century, this old architecture is buckling under the weight of new
threats. The world may no longer shudder at the prospect of war between two nuclear
superpowers, but proliferation may increase the risk of catastrophe. Terrorism has long been
a tactic, but modern technology allows a few small men with outsized rage to murder
innocents on a horrific scale.
Moreover, wars between nations have increasingly given way to wars within nations. The
resurgence of ethnic or sectarian conflicts, the growth of secessionist movements,
insurgencies and failed states have increasingly trapped civilians in unending chaos. In
today’s wars, many more civilians are killed than soldiers; the seeds of future conflict are
sown, economies are wrecked, civil societies torn asunder, refugees amassed and children
scarred.
I do not bring with me today a definitive solution to the problems of war. What I do know is
that meeting these challenges will require the same vision, hard work and persistence of those
men and women who acted so boldly decades ago. And it will require us to think in new ways
about the notions of just war and the imperatives of a just peace.
We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth that we will not eradicate violent conflict in
our lifetimes. There will be times when nations — acting individually or in concert — will find
the use of force not only necessary but morally justified.
I make this statement mindful of what Martin Luther King said in this same ceremony years
ago: “Violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: It merely creates
new and more complicated ones.” As someone who stands here as a direct consequence of Dr.
King’s life’s work, I am living testimony to the moral force of non-violence. I know there is
nothing weak, nothing passive, nothing naive in the creed and lives of Gandhi and King.
But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their
examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the
American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A nonviolent movement
could not have halted Hitler’s armies. Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaidas leaders to lay
down their arms. To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism — it is a
recognition of history, the imperfections of man and the limits of reason.
I raise this point because in many countries there is a deep ambivalence about military action
today, no matter the cause. At times, this is joined by a reflexive suspicion of America, the
worlds sole military superpower.
Yet the world must remember that it was not simply international institutions —
not just treaties and declarations — that brought stability to a post-World War II
world. Whatever mistakes we have made, the plain fact is this: The United States
of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades with
the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms. The service and sacrifice of
our men and women in uniform has promoted peace and prosperity from
Germany to Korea, and enabled democracy to take hold in places like the
Balkans. We have borne this burden not because we seek to impose our will. We
have done so out of enlightened self-interest — because we seek a better future for
our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if
other people’s children and grandchildren can live in freedom and prosperity.
So yes, the instruments of war do have a role to play in preserving the peace. And yet this
truth must coexist with another — that no matter how justified, war promises human
tragedy. The soldiers courage and sacrifice is full of glory, expressing devotion to country, to
cause and to comrades in arms. But war itself is never glorious, and we must never trumpet
it as such.
So part of our challenge is reconciling these two seemingly irreconcilable truths — that war is
sometimes necessary, and war is at some level an expression of human folly. Concretely, we
must direct our effort to the task that President Kennedy called for long ago. “Let us focus,”
he said, “on a more practical, more attainable peace, based not on a sudden revolution in
human nature but on a gradual evolution in human institutions.”
What might this evolution look like? What might these practical steps be?
To begin with, I believe that all nations — strong and weak alike — must adhere to standards
that govern the use of force. I — like any head of state — reserve the right to act unilaterally
if necessary to defend my nation. Nevertheless, I am convinced that adhering to standards
strengthens those who do, and isolates — and weakens — those who dont.
The world rallied around America after the 9/11 attacks, and continues to support our efforts
in Afghanistan, because of the horror of those senseless attacks and the recognized principle
of self-defense. Likewise, the world recognized the need to confront Saddam Hussein when he
invaded Kuwait — a consensus that sent a clear message to all about the cost of aggression.
Furthermore, America cannot insist that others follow the rules of the road if we refuse to
follow them ourselves. For when we don’t, our action can appear arbitrary, and undercut the
legitimacy of future intervention — no matter how justified.
This becomes particularly important when the purpose of military action extends beyond self-
defense or the defense of one nation against an aggressor. More and more, we all confront
difficult questions about how to prevent the slaughter of civilians by their own government,
or to stop a civil war whose violence and suffering can engulf an entire region.
I believe that force can be justified on humanitarian grounds, as it was in the Balkans, or in
other places that have been scarred by war. Inaction tears at our conscience and can lead to
more costly intervention later. That is why all responsible nations must embrace the role that
militaries with a clear mandate can play to keep the peace.

116. America’s commitment to global security will never waver. But in a world in which threats
are more diffuse, and missions more complex, America cannot act alone. This is true in
Afghanistan. This is true in failed states like Somalia, where terrorism and piracy is joined by
famine and human suffering. And sadly, it will continue to be true in unstable regions for
years to come.
The leaders and soldiers of NATO countries — and other friends and allies — demonstrate this
truth through the capacity and courage they have shown in Afghanistan. But in many
countries, there is a disconnect between the efforts of those who serve and the ambivalence of
the broader public. I understand why war is not popular. But I also know this: The belief that
peace is desirable is rarely enough to achieve it. Peace requires responsibility. Peace entails
sacrifice. That is why NATO continues to be indispensable. That is why we must strengthen
U.N. and regional peacekeeping, and not leave the task to a few countries. That is why we
honor those who return home from peacekeeping and training abroad to Oslo and Rome; to
Ottawa and Sydney; to Dhaka and Kigali — we honor them not as makers of war, but as
wagers of peace.
Let me make one final point about the use of force. Even as we make difficult decisions about
going to war, we must also think clearly about how we fight it. The Nobel Committee
recognized this truth in awarding its first prize for peace to Henry Dunant — the founder of
the Red Cross, and a driving force behind the Geneva Conventions.
Where force is necessary, we have a moral and strategic interest in binding ourselves to
certain rules of conduct. And even as we confront a vicious adversary that abides by no rules,
I believe that the United States of America must remain a standard bearer in the conduct of
war. That is what makes us different from those whom we fight. That is a source of our
strength. That is why I prohibited torture. That is why I ordered the prison at Guantanamo
Bay closed. And that is why I have reaffirmed America’s commitment to abide by the Geneva
Conventions. We lose ourselves when we compromise the very ideals that we fight to defend.
And we honor those ideals by upholding them not just when it is easy, but when it is hard.
I have spoken to the questions that must weigh on our minds and our hearts as we choose to
wage war. But let me turn now to our effort to avoid such tragic choices, and speak of three
ways that we can build a just and lasting peace.
First, in dealing with those nations that break rules and laws, I believe that we must develop
alternatives to violence that are tough enough to change behavior — for if we want a lasting
peace, then the words of the international community must mean something. Those regimes
that break the rules must be held accountable. Sanctions must exact a real price.
Intransigence must be met with increased pressure — and such pressure exists only when the
world stands together as one.
One urgent example is the effort to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, and to seek a
world without them. In the middle of the last century, nations agreed to be bound by a treaty
whose bargain is clear: All will have access to peaceful nuclear power; those without nuclear
weapons will forsake them; and those with nuclear weapons will work toward disarmament.
I am committed to upholding this treaty. It is a centerpiece of my foreign policy. And I am
working with President Medvedev to reduce America and Russia’s nuclear stockpiles.
But it is also incumbent upon all of us to insist that nations like Iran and North Korea do not
game the system. Those who claim to respect international law cannot avert their eyes when
those laws are flouted. Those who care for their own security cannot ignore the danger of an
arms race in the Middle East or East Asia. Those who seek peace cannot stand idly by as
nations arm themselves for nuclear war.
The same principle applies to those who violate international law by brutalizing their own
people. When there is genocide in Darfur, systematic rape in Congo or repression in Burma —
there must be consequences. And the closer we stand together, the less likely we will be faced
with the choice between armed intervention and complicity in oppression.
This brings me to a second point — the nature of the peace that we seek. For peace is not
merely the absence of visible conflict. Only a just peace based upon the inherent rights and
dignity of every individual can truly be lasting.
It was this insight that drove drafters of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights after the
Second World War. In the wake of devastation, they recognized that if human rights are not
protected, peace is a hollow promise.
And yet all too often, these words are ignored. In some countries, the failure to uphold
human rights is excused by the false suggestion that these are Western principles, foreign to
local cultures or stages of a nation’s development. And within America, there has long been a
tension between those who describe themselves as realists or idealists — a tension that
suggests a stark choice between the narrow pursuit of interests or an endless campaign to
impose our values.
I reject this choice. I believe that peace is unstable where citizens are denied the right to speak
freely or worship as they please, choose their own leaders or assemble without fear. Pent up
grievances fester, and the suppression of tribal and religious identity can lead to violence. We
also know that the opposite is true. Only when Europe became free did it finally find peace.
America has never fought a war against a democracy, and our closest friends are
governments that protect the rights of their citizens. No matter how callously defined, neither
America’s interests — nor the worlds — are served by the denial of human aspirations.
So even as we respect the unique culture and traditions of different countries, America will
always be a voice for those aspirations that are universal. We will bear witness to the quiet
dignity of reformers like Aung Sang Suu Kyi; to the bravery of Zimbabweans who cast their
ballots in the face of beatings; to the hundreds of thousands who have marched silently
through the streets of Iran. It is telling that the leaders of these governments fear the
aspirations of their own people more than the power of any other nation. And it is the
responsibility of all free people and free nations to make clear to these movements that hope
and history are on their side.
Let me also say this: The promotion of human rights cannot be about exhortation alone. At
times, it must be coupled with painstaking diplomacy. I know that engagement with
repressive regimes lacks the satisfying purity of indignation. But I also know that sanctions
without outreach — and condemnation without discussion — can carry forward a crippling
status quo. No repressive regime can move down a new path unless it has the choice of an
open door.

117. In light of the Cultural Revolution’s horrors, Nixon’s meeting with Mao appeared inexcusable
— and yet it surely helped set China on a path where millions of its citizens have been lifted
from poverty, and connected to open societies. Pope John Paul’s engagement with Poland
created space not just for the Catholic Church, but for labor leaders like Lech Walesa. Ronald
Reagan’s efforts on arms control and embrace of perestroika not only improved relations
with the Soviet Union, but empowered dissidents throughout Eastern Europe. There is no
simple formula here. But we must try as best we can to balance isolation and engagement,
pressure and incentives, so that human rights and dignity are advanced over time.
Third, a just peace includes not only civil and political rights — it must encompass economic
security and opportunity. For true peace is not just freedom from fear, but freedom from
want.
It is undoubtedly true that development rarely takes root without security; it is also true that
security does not exist where human beings do not have access to enough food, or clean
water, or the medicine they need to survive. It does not exist where children cannot aspire to
a decent education or a job that supports a family. The absence of hope can rot a society from
within.
And that is why helping farmers feed their own people — or nations educate their children
and care for the sick — is not mere charity. It is also why the world must come together to
confront climate change. There is little scientific dispute that if we do nothing, we will face
more drought, famine and mass displacement that will fuel more conflict for decades. For
this reason, it is not merely scientists and activists who call for swift and forceful action — it is
military leaders in my country and others who understand that our common security hangs
in the balance.
Agreements among nations. Strong institutions. Support for human rights. Investments in
development. All of these are vital ingredients in bringing about the evolution that President
Kennedy spoke about. And yet, I do not believe that we will have the will, or the staying
power, to complete this work without something more — and that is the continued expansion
of our moral imagination, an insistence that there is something irreducible that we all share.
As the world grows smaller, you might think it would be easier for human beings to
recognize how similar we are, to understand that we all basically want the same things, that
we all hope for the chance to live out our lives with some measure of happiness and
fulfillment for ourselves and our families.
And yet, given the dizzying pace of globalization, and the cultural leveling of modernity, it
should come as no surprise that people fear the loss of what they cherish about their
particular identities — their race, their tribe and, perhaps most powerfully, their religion. In
some places, this fear has led to conflict. At times, it even feels like we are moving backwards.
We see it in the Middle East, as the conflict between Arabs and Jews seems to harden. We see
it in nations that are torn asunder by tribal lines.
Most dangerously, we see it in the way that religion is used to justify the murder of innocents
by those who have distorted and defiled the great religion of Islam, and who attacked my
country from Afghanistan. These extremists are not the first to kill in the name of God; the
cruelties of the Crusades are amply recorded. But they remind us that no Holy War can ever
be a just war. For if you truly believe that you are carrying out divine will, then there is no
need for restraint — no need to spare the pregnant mother, or the medic, or even a person of
one’s own faith. Such a warped view of religion is not just incompatible with the concept of
peace, but the purpose of faith — for the one rule that lies at the heart of every major religion
is that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us.
Adhering to this law of love has always been the core struggle of human nature. We are
fallible. We make mistakes, and fall victim to the temptations of pride, and power, and
sometimes evil. Even those of us with the best intentions will at times fail to right the wrongs
before us.
But we do not have to think that human nature is perfect for us to still believe that the
human condition can be perfected. We do not have to live in an idealized world to still reach
for those ideals that will make it a better place. The nonviolence practiced by men like Gandhi
and King may not have been practical or possible in every circumstance, but the love that
they preached — their faith in human progress — must always be the North Star that guides
us on our journey.
For if we lose that faith — if we dismiss it as silly or naive, if we divorce it from the decisions
that we make on issues of war and peace — then we lose what is best about humanity. We
lose our sense of possibility. We lose our moral compass.
Like generations have before us, we must reject that future. As Dr. King said at this occasion
so many years ago: “I refuse to accept despair as the final response to the ambiguities of
history. I refuse to accept the idea that the ‘isness’ of man’s present nature makes him
morally incapable of reaching up for the eternal ‘oughtness’ that forever confronts him.”
So let us reach for the world that ought to be — that spark of the divine that still
stirs within each of our souls. Somewhere today, in the here and now, a soldier
sees he’s outgunned but stands firm to keep the peace. Somewhere today, in this
world, a young protestor awaits the brutality of her government, but has the
courage to march on. Somewhere today, a mother facing punishing poverty still
takes the time to teach her child, who believes that a cruel world still has a place
for his dreams.
Let us live by their example. We can acknowledge that oppression will always be with us, and
still strive for justice. We can admit the intractability of deprivation, and still strive for dignity.
We can understand that there will be war, and still strive for peace. We can do that — for that
is the story of human progress; that is the hope of all the world; and at this moment of
challenge, that must be our work here on Earth.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send

118. more on the Manhattan Declaration
JB on December 9, 2009 in Uncategorized, the evaluative - Culture, the normative -
Philosophy | No Comments »
In the old thomist tradition, distinctions were drawn between an essentialist or idealist
interpretation and application of Gospel norms and an existentialist or realist interpretation
and application of them. This distinction is necessary because we live in a tension where we
are undeniably realizing the Kingdom now even as we, as created co-creators, join all of
creation in the labor and groaning of the act of giving birth to an ever more full Kingdom
realization.
The essentialist understanding seizes upon the efficacies of the Spirit’s help and the Word,
itself, proclaimed and lived by faithful witnesses. The existentialist understanding recognizes
our human frailty due to our radical finitude and sinfulness and so makes allowances
knowing humankind will yet fall short of Gospel ideals. One would not want to say that the
essentialist approach is theoretical and the existentialist practical, because one would not
want to discourage any courageous persons from living out the Gospel, radically, as prophetic
witnesses and lovers of God and all. We can say that the existentialist approach is pastoral,
however, looking with compassion and understanding on us in our human condition, helping
us to do the best we can.
Concretely, then, for example, this tradition
affirms both pacifism and just war principles
as legitimate expressions of Gospel ideals.
While I am not a pacifist, myself, I am in deep
solidarity with and very much supportive of
my pacifist sisters and brothers in my
denomination and in other traditions. I would
not want to live in a world without their voice
of prophetic protest and without the witness
of their lives. Your sharing of your personal
experience with these tensions was depthful
and generous.
With respect to the law, the same distinctions
apply, I think. Those who eschew any active
and coercive legal and political engagements can also serve as authentic voices of prophetic
protest and witnesses to the reality of the Kingdom, now among us and yet to come more
fully. From a pastoral perspective, consistent with an incarnational outlook, we can also
legitimately seek to permeate and improve the temporal order. I am thankful that our US
founders integrated religion into the public square, strengthening its influence through
nonestablishment and free exercise provisions. This was a healthy response to Enlightenment
principles, healthier than the Enlightenment fundamentalism of the Continental experience,
where religion was marginalized by secularistic forces.
So, I’m for a robust engagement of religious and metaphysical
perspectives in the public square. That’s not what’s wrong per se with
the approach of the Manhattan Declaration drafters, in particular,
and many on the Religious Right, in general. Where they go wrong,
in my view, is two fold: 1) They too often fail to translate their moral
stances into a language that would give their moral intuitions a
normative impetus for other groups of believers and even
unbelievers. 2) They too often give jurisprudential considerations
short shrift, emphasizing form over substance, paying too little heed
to whether a law will, in actuality, be efficacious and bring about its
desired aim, especially in a pluralistic society where demographics
reveal a proposed law as not only unenforceable but possibly even
counterproductive.
There is a related problem, which is that the failure to successfully translate some
religiously-derived moral intuitions results from the fact that certain of those
intuitions are philosophically and anthropologically indefensible.
More discussion follows here>>> Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: essentialist, existentialist, Gospel ideals, Gospel norms, j u r i s p r u d e n c e, just war principles,
Manhattan Declaration, p a c i f i s m, pastoral, prophetic protest, religion in the public square, Religious
R i g h t, secularistic
The Stem Cell Challenge (in response to Jesus Creed thread)
JB on December 8, 2009 in Uncategorized, the normative - Philosophy | No Comments »
At Jesus Creed, there is a discussion about
The Stem Cell Challenge, which evoked my
response below.
The Catholic Church does not have a position
on ensoulment. Rather, the position is that,
for all practical purposes, from the moment of
conception, human life is to be treated with all
the dignity of a human person. The Catholic
teaching office addresses, in different ways,
the sanctity of human nature, human life and
human persons, and does not recognize a
parvity of matter regarding offenses against
same. This means that it views all offenses
against human nature, life and persons as
very grave matter.

119. Most people (most US Catholics, included) do draw distinctions in the relative gravity of such
moral realities. The moral objects of the generative aspects of life (e.g. birth control,
masturbation, erotic behaviors) are not deemed equal in significance to those of incipient
human life, itself (e.g. abortifacients, embryonic stem cells, cloning, in vitro fertilization).
Apparently, for many (most?) people, the moral status of the embryo increases as it advances
through gestation from incipient through sentient to sapient human life, such that any
human values in competition with the moral value of the embryo (e.g. medical research, life
of the mother) must become increasingly more significant if one is to justify its destruction.
The physicalist conception of the soul does not eliminate metaphysics; it advances yet
another metaphysical hypothesis. Whether one employs a substance, process or some other
root metaphor in one’s metaphysical approach, one will encounter the classical sorite
paradox, which asks when an aggregate of individual grains of sand becomes a heap of sand.
This paradox results from our conceptual confusion between efficient causation (adding
grains of sand, in other words, the gestation process) and logical causation (defining a heap,
in other words, a human person).
The substance approach doesn’t square with our moral intuitions because its essentialism
(overemphasis on logical causation) cannot account for the changing moral status of the
embryo, which most people seem to – not unreasonably – impute. The process approach is
equally unsatisfying because its nominalism (overemphasis on efficient causation) is
dismissive of our most deeply felt epistemic and moral sensibilities regarding a person’s very
identity, in which one’s personhood is grounded, even as a member of Homo sapiens, much
less, as an imago Dei.
I mentioned Charles Hartshorne’s concept of nonstrict identity based on asymmetric
temporal relations (in another context on another thread) and it has some bearing, here. The
practical upshot of this concept is that a human organism’s past, but not its future, comprises
its identity, which basically means that, once ensouled, personhood perdures with all of its
necessary and sufficient conditions (notwithstanding a lack of certain traits and
characteristics such as in sleep and coma) until death.
The collective moral intuitions that seem to ground the apparent consensus regarding the
increasing moral status of the embryo as gestation advances, I strongly suspect, do not derive
from most people’s metaphysical presuppositions and postures. Instead, they derive more
holistically from a constellation of irrational, pre-rational, nonrational, rational and supra-
rational dispositions, which honor, even if only implicitly, ethical approaches that are
somewhat aretaic (virtue), somewhat deontological, somewhat consequentialist
(teleological), somewhat authoritarian & traditional & scriptural, somewhat contractarian
and so on. For the most part, then, they are not apposite to formal argumentation with its
clearly disambiguated and rigorously defined concepts, apodictic certainties and moral
verities, but are more so an assortment of informal arguments, inclinations and dispositions
that gift us with probabilistic notions and deeply felt epistemic, aesthetic and moral
sensibilities.
We must prescind from our robustly
metaphysical approach to a more vague
phenomenological perspective, then, which
embraces a semiotic realism, while, at the
same time avoiding the mutual
unintelligibility, incommensurability and
occlusivity of the old substance-process,
essentialism-nominalism conundrum and
associated paradoxes. This is to say that we
are realizing values, making meaning and
attaining, albeit fallibly, absolute moral truths.
We have been gifted by scripture and
tradition, reason and experience, with basic
moral precepts, profound anthropological
truths and theological insights. Beyond the
most basic of precepts, however, we need to
come together in charity and dialogue to
wrestle with some very thorny bioethical
issues, remaining open to divine guidance and civil public discourse, wherein the Spirit
moves.
Some of the most compelling arguments, then, in the public square, can indeed come from
slippery slope appeals and reductio ad absurdum arguments, notwithstanding that they are
otherwise considered logical fallacies in formal arguments. We do not enjoy, in my view, the
luxury of indubitable formal arguments with apodictic certainties. Metaphysics, in the end,
are neither irrelevant nor unimportant, but they are only one rational appeal among many
others and, for manifold reasons, generally lack sufficient normative impetus because they
are otherwise so descriptively elusive. Some of the most compelling arguments in the public
square can come from nonbelievers, even, secularists like Nat Hentoff and Charles
Krauthammer.
One can read an excellent consideration of the topic at hand as articulated by Dr.
Krauthammer at the following link, which has similar statements by many others on the
Bioethics Commission appointed by Bush: Human Cloning and Human Dignity: An
Ethical Inquiry – Statement of Dr. Krauthammer
It is for reasons such as those given by Dr. Krauthammer and others, as well as deference to
the arguments advanced by the teaching office of my church and other conservative
Christian leaders, that I believe that human life is sacred and deserves respect from its
inception, requiring compelling reasons when one wants to manipulate it or interfere with it,
even therapeutically.
In my view, for all practical purposes, human life should be treated with the dignity of
a human person well before the origins of sapience and, absent the most serious
consideration and very compelling reasons, should still be considered inviolable well before
the origins of sentience. As for the earliest days and weeks following conception, it is difficult
to advance a formal metaphysical or theological argument, or even to make a more informal
appeal, based on ensoulment or personhood. Still, regarding this early post-conception period,
any such considerations and deliberations, in my view, if too casual, could have a morally
corrosive effect and so deserve our utmost moral circumspection and dutiful deliberation.
This discussion, now regarding soul & resurrection, continues here >>> Read the
rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send

120. Tags: abortifacient, a r e t a i c, Charles Hartshorne, C h a r l e s K r a u t h a m m e r, c l o n i n g, consequentialist,
deontological, Divine Matrix, efficient causation, embryonic stem cells, e n s o u l m e n t, equiplausibility
principle, essentialism, H a n s K u n g, h u m a n l i f e, h u m a n n a t u r e, h u m a n p e r s o n, imago Dei, i n v i t r o
fertilization, Jesus Creed, John Polkinghorne, Joseph Ratzinger, logical causation, moral status of the
e m b r y o, Nat Hentoff, noetic contributions, n o m i n a l i s m, n o n s t r i c t i d e n t i t y, p a n e n t h e i s t, p a r v i t y o f
m a t t e r, physicalist conception of the soul, radically deconstructive postmodernism, semiotic realism,
sorite paradox, Stem Cell
How tolerant are we to be of intolerance? (Tim King asks.)
JB on December 7, 2009 in Uncategorized, the normative - Philosophy | No Comments »
Brian McLaren and Tim King, among others, have been blogging about Uganda’s
proposed anti-homosexuality legislation, the Bahati Bill. Both ask some pointed
questions.
Tim closes with:
So I have a question on top of Brian’s insightful question, but this one pointed
at ‘us,’ the readers of this blog. 2,000 years ago Paul of Tarsus called those
seeking to walk in the way of friendship with God ‘ministers of reconciliation.’
Reconciliation is something near and dear to my heart; reconcilers often get
walked on by all kinds of shoes. Friends of God who are waking up and in the
reconciling business might find themselves befriending and welcoming groups
that are very different from one another; groups that do not like each other –
like evangelicals and Muslims and gay people! So as we’re trying to befriend
and extend hospitality to one other, what do we do with their prejudices?
(What do they do with ours?) What when your heterosexism clashes with my
poverty-phobia? How tolerant are we to be of intolerance? Do two
intolerations cancel each other out…does one bleed into the other? How do we
bear one another’s cultural convictions and burdens with integrity and love?
I don’t have the answers…I’m just a guy asking questions.
My musing follows:
First, we acknowledge our grief and then naturally grieve all of this pain and
misunderstanding. And we allow this pain to somehow transform us that we will not
continue to somehow transmit it. How can MY response change is my first responsibility.
Where others are concerned, we must recognize that such deeply held convictions, whether
wholly or partly erroneous, are a very complex combination of irrational, pre-rational,
nonrational, rational and supra-rational dispositions. As such, they do not yield in the face of
superior logical argumentation, debates about religious epistemology, scriptural proof-
texting, pragmatic appeals, enlightened self-interest, meta-ethical reformulations or natural
law syllogisms. Such approaches only serve to further harden hearts and close minds.
To reach people holistically, with a full body-soul-spirit and heart-mind “blow,” we need
parables, stories, poems, songs, plays, movies and other musical & dramatic arts
presentations. And, even more than that, primarily, we need to tell our relevant
personal stories, share and exchange our personal, real life experiences, reinforcing our
compassionate outlooks and forming and reforming our desires in prayer and liturgy.
And we need to recognize that, such seeds that we plant, we may not be around to see sprout
but others will assuredly reap the benefits. We must be willing to plant trees, the shade of
which will not be ours to enjoy.
Ministers of Reconciliation and Story-tellers are the most important people in the world (on
average, about two generations after they’re dead.)
In this vein, below is part of my personal story-telling, which I published years ago,
elsewhere.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
How would you like it if that happened to you? My Keys Unlock Your Shackles:
Our Unwitting Kinship?
My fourth child, now a young man on the verge of adolescence, has always brought a great
deal of sensitivity and tenderness to our family. From a young age, whenever he’d witness a
tragedy on TV, he’d exclaim, for example, to no one in particular: “How would you like it if
that happened to your house?!”
One can substitute any noun, any person, place or thing, in place of the word “house,” and
you’ll get my drift. His childhood angst remains palpable. Living in the New Orleans metro
area will do that to one nowadays.
I think it was in one of Rahner’s very first sermons, around 1946, that he noted that most
people do not seem to experience a theodicy problem until tragedy overtakes them personally,
this despite the fact that millions of “other” parents, each year, lose millions of “other”
children, for example.
I mention my son and Rahner’s sermon as a backdrop to my acknowledgment of how out of
touch I have often been with the depth of suffering of so many who have been marginalized
in different ways by our churches and societies.

121. Growing up in South Louisiana, I was sensitized to racial discrimination and am grateful
that my conscience was properly formed by family and church in that regard. Regrettably,
however, there is too much truth in one of my favorite jokes: “I was almost forty years old
before I learned that not every serious sin is sexual!” That may sound like hyperbole but,
realistically, possibilities for larceny, murder and heresy weren’t really blips on my ethical
radar screen (so, if I wanted permanent existential alienation from God, illicit sex was one of
my only options, as I understood such things).
I say all of this by way of admitting that, earlier on my journey, I simply did not seriously
engage many church-related issues and enjoy any ensuing aha moments until those issues
overtook me, personally. For example, only when I got married did I seriously look at the
birth control issue. Only when I had to catechize children did I try to better understand what
the church was trying to say regarding masturbation. Teachings on liturgical renewal, social
justice and just war theory were stimulating and engaging, compelling even, for those of us
coming of age in the sixties; a natural law discussion of homosexuality was not even
interesting to me.
Long story short, the more I dug into the underlying philosophy and metaphysics of the
church’s theology regarding gender and sexual behavior, prompted by my attempt to
reconcile my own personal experiences and beliefs regarding same with that of the teaching
office, the more it dawned on me that I had uncritically swallowed a doubtful perspective
regarding other matters, too, especially such as masturbation, celibacy, women’s ordination,
homosexual orientation and homoerotic behaviors. This realization was painful because
certain of my earlier responses to certain of my very good friends had been tremendously
hurtful and the resulting long estrangement so very unnecessary. (This is NOT to say that
my response at all squared with the church’s supposedly sensitive pastoral guidance.)
What could I say to my friends? How have I said it in so many ways? I am SO sorry.
Forgive me; I did not know what I was doing. It was only in my attempt to free myself that
I opened the gates that would free you, too.
The Archbishop of Canterbury has been in town the past few days and the wounds of my past
transgressions were feeling somewhat raw because of my again-raised consciousness
regarding this divisive, almost schism-inducing misunderstanding. I am slowly learning to
ask, more often: “How would you like it if that happened to you?”
It seems that gender and sexuality issues have broad implications. People need to be able to
see and understand that the keys that unlocked their fundamentalist shackles regarding
manifold moral doctrines and church disciplines are the very same keys that will free all who
are marginalized, in this way or that, by such as the “intrinsic disorder question.”
If one group remains bound, all of us remain enslaved.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: Bahati Bill, Brian McLaren, T i m K i n g, U g a n d a’s proposed anti-homosexuality legislation
God is not a syllogism, Love is not a formal argument
JB on December 7, 2009 in Uncategorized, the interpretive - Religion, the normative -
Philosophy | No Comments »
Jesus Creed introduced Peter Kreeft’s series on Thomas Aquinas in a post called Learning
St. Thomas Aquinas, recently, evoking these thoughts below.
I can relate to people’s ambivalence regarding “proofs” of God.
I like many of the distinctions Charles Sanders
Peirce offers. He says that we can interpret
Occam’s Razor vis a vis the word “simple” in
terms of epistemic facility rather than
ontological complexity. In other words, it’s
not the needless multiplication of ontologies
we need to avoid; instead, we need to pay
attention to the facility or ease with which an
abduction or hypothesis comes to mind when
we’re confronted with a problem because that,
in my words, is often truth-indicative. He also
distinguishes between an argument, the initial
abduction or hypothesis formulation, or, in his
words, “any process of thought reasonably
tending to produce a definite belief,” and
argumentation, in his words, “an argument
proceeding upon definitely formulated
premises.” Peirce devised what he called the “Neglected Argument for the Reality of God,”
but he derisively considered formal argumentation, where God was concerned, a fetish. He
distinguished, too, between God’s so-called “existence” and God’s “reality.”
I found it curious, at first, that folks like Charles Hartshorne and Kurt Godel would fool with
(modal) ontological arguments but better came to appreciate what they were doing through
time. One of the better modal arguments, in my view, has been advanced by Christopher
McHugh. Those are all names worth Googling if one likes this type of approach. Also,
Mortimer Adler and Ralph McInerny.
Peirce employs a cable metaphor for knowledge, which takes our different arguments to be
strands, any which alone could not lift this or that epistemic load without breaking (my crude
wording), that when wound together gain strength and resiliency.

122. In other words, most of our knowledge in life
does not proceed from mere formal
argumentation via indubitable premises with
clearly disambiguated concepts and logical
validity to incontrovertible proof. Most of our
knowledge comes from a cumulative case-like
approach, is very much informal and
probabilistic. From a rigorously philosophical
approach, formal proofs of God, taken alone,
lead only to Scottish verdicts of unproven.
Taken together as arguments (facile
abductions) along with other evidential,
experiential, presuppositional and existential
strands, we have quite a strong and resilient
cable of belief that is eminently reasonable
and existentially actionable, which is to say,
with more than sufficient epistemic warrant.
There is a reason that radical empiricism, logical positivism, scientism and modernistic
rationalism fell into general disrepute, philosophically: pragmatically, they don’t work.
Common sense is a better guide, as fallible as it is. Most people may not be able to articulate
the reasons for their beliefs using epistemological jargon and many may thus be
unconsciously competent, but they are competent, indeed, and their beliefs are very well
warranted.
My chief caveat is that metaphysical formal argumentation, taken to an extreme, can lead to
a sterile, scholastic and naive realism, foundationalism and essentialism (with their overly a
prioristic, physicalistic, biologistic, absolutistic, infallibilistic and rationalistic approaches to
human moral realities, such as regarding gender roles and human sexuality).
Postmodernity has gifted us a more critical realism, which comes in the form of weakened
foundationalism, nonfoundationalism or postfoundationalism, all pretty much the same
from a practical perspective as long as they affirm metaphysical and moral realism. Of
course, it has also “gifted” us with postmodernISM, which as a radically deconstructive
approach is epistemically bankrupt. I appreciate aristotelian-like thinkers as long as they do
not caricaturize as strawmen all postmodern approaches, such as fallibilism, in terms of
radical deconstruction. The postmodern, in and of itself, is not the bogeyman. Sometimes,
Peter Kreeft and his ilk can be a tad too syllogistic, in my view.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: a prioristic, absolutistic, biologistic, cable metaphor for knowledge, Charles Hartshorne, Charles
Sanders Peirce, Christopher McHugh, c r i t i c a l r e a l i s m, c u m u l a t i v e c a s e, e p i s t e m i c w a r r a n t, essentialism,
fallibilism, foundationalism, infallibilistic, Kurt Godel, logical positivism, m e t a p h y s i c a l r e a l i s m, m o d a l
o n t o l o g i c a l a r g u m e n t, m o r a l r e a l i s m, Mortimer Adler, n a i v e r e a l i s m, Neglected Argument for the
Reality of God, nonfoundationalism, Occam's Razor, Peter Kreeft, p h y s i c a l i s t i c, postfoundationalism,
p o s t m o d e r n i t y, Proofs of God, r a d i c a l e m p i r i c i s m, Ralph McInerny, r a t i o n a l i s m, rationalistic, scientism,
syllogistic, weakened foundationalism
« Older Entries Newer Entries »
© 2010 christiannonduality.com Blog is Proudly Powered By WordPress | Theme by The Cloisters

123. CHRISTIANNONDUALITY. C O M BL O G
beyond thinking & proposing to imagining & participating
Home About
T o d a y’ s L i t u r g y
love eternal will not be denied
JB on December 6, 2009 in Uncategorized, the interpretive - Religion | No Comments »
Translator
By N2H
Amos Yong apophatic
Axiological axiologically-
Bernard
integral
Lonergan Brian
McLaren
Charles
Sanders
Peirce
contemplative
cosmology emergence
emerging church
Enlightenment
epistemology faith False
Self fideism Hans
Kung James K. A. Smith
Jesus Creed John Duns
Scotus kataphatic Kevin
Beck Kurt Godel
Merton
metaphysics
Mike Morrell Natural
Mike Morrell muses in an evocative, for some, and provocative, for others, post at his blog, Theology nihilism
Blessings Not Just for the Ones Who Kneel – the Promiscuous Love of God: nondual nonduality
orthodoxy radical
emergence radical
orthodoxy rationalism
Bottom-line: God is love. Love is orthodoxy. (Agapetheism, as my friend Kevin Richard Rohr
Science
Beck likes to put it) It’s God’s kindness that leads to repentance, not the big
stick that you imagine God’s holiness to be. Let’s join together in the Great scientism semiotic
theodicy Theological
Work of our age – becoming the leaves of the Tree of Life for the healing of
our relationships, our neighborhoods, our ecosystems, our economies – in Anthropology
short, our world. This begins, as Brennan Manning says, with healing our Thomas
image of God – and the ones God loves. Which is all of us. God brings Merton Tim King
transformation
abundant blessings…not just for the ones who kneel. May we model this same
lavish, indiscriminate, sloppy, positively promiscuous love. True Self Walker Percy
W P-C u m u l u s b y R o y T a n c k
Amen and amen. a n d Luke Morton requires
F l a s h P l a y e r 9 or better.
PS: What songs, art, poetry and cultural artifacts remind you of God’s blessing Cultivating the
breaking out of the confines of empire and religion? Roots, Nurturing
the Shoots
MARCH 2010
As far as theological constructs go, I reckon one must affirm a reality like hell as necessary, M T W T F S S
in theory, only because true love is not coercive and God would force no one into relationship 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
with Him, respecting our freedom. (How such a self-imposed alienation might be experienced 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
in an atemporal existence, who knows? I doubt seriously fire and sulphur are involved.) 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31
As far as theodicy questions, trying to reconcile such disparate God-concepts such as « FEB
omnipotence and omnibenevolence, I’d affirm the latter and ditch the former. For one thing,
if creation was any less ambiguous for us and seemingly less ambivalent toward us, we might Recent Posts
experience the reality of God too coercively, diminishing the need for faith and thereby
limiting our freedom. The Emerging Church is BIGGER
t h a n C h r i s t i a n i t y – how to spot
In my view, we should abandon our puerile it in other traditions
notions of substitutionary and penal Abortion & the Senate
atonement. We needn’t conceive of the Healthcare Bill – a p r u d e n t i a l
incarnation as some type of divine initiative in judgment
response to some so-called felix culpa, as some 10 historical developments
type of cosmic repair job for an ontological propelling Emerging
rupture that took place in the past. Rather, Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
from an emergentist perspective of cosmic Why Brian McLaren’s Greco-
evolution, we can conceive of a God who so Roman Narrative is NOT a
loved created reality that the incarnation was caricature
in the plans from the cosmic get-go. THE BOOK: Christian
N o n d u a l i t y – Postmodern
What we experience, then, is His and our teleological striving ordered toward the future, Conservative Catholic
where our role as created co-creators is robustly participatory, where our questions change Pentecostal
from Why is there suffering? to What am I going to do about it? That all of creation is
groaning in one great act of giving birth need never be conceived as divine punishment or Recent Comments
retribution but can instead be envisioned as God’s shrinking to make room for creation,
finally shrinking so far as to take on human flesh without ever deeming equality with God as christiannonduality.com Blog »
something to be grasped at. Blog Archive » Thoughts re:

124. t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
Once we’ve recognized this divine initiative and fully vs Dan Dennett on Intelligent
experienced its efficacies in our lives, any notion that God Design – a poorly designed
employs the created order to punish us earthly heathen (as inference
temporal punishment) seems rather facile. As for a christiannonduality.com Blog »
theological construct like hell (an eternal punishment), Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n
such a theoretical necessity increasingly seems to be a McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
practical improbability, for our God may be coy but She’s Narrative is NOT a caricature on
not timid, for, as a wily seductress and charming temptress, A New Kind of Christianity?
She will, eventually, have Her way with each and everyone McLaren didn’t make this up. It’s
of us, I just have to believe. And so did many of the Church worse than that!
Fathers, who articulated the notion of apokatastasis, which christiannonduality.com Blog »
means that God’s loving initiatives are so overwhelmingly Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n
efficacious that, in the end, no one will escape them. McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
Narrative is NOT a caricature on
It might be heterodox to deny the reality of hell as E v e r y t h i n g T h a t’s Old is New
an indispensable theological construct but it is A g a i n – this (McLaren’s “ N e w”
manifestly not heterodox to hope and believe that Christianity) is truly an old
there ain’t a snowball’s chance in the Superdome time religion
that anyone will ever end up there. K i e r a n C o n r o y on A New Kind of
Christianity? McLaren didn’t
Rather, I believe that every make this up. It’s worse than
beginning of a smile, every trace of that!
human goodness, will be Philip Clayton on Thoughts re:
eternalized. We will each adorn the eternal firmament, filled to our t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
capacity with the ever unobtrusive but finally inescapable love of vs Dan Dennett
God, some of us, perhaps like Mother Teresa, a blindingly bright and
blazing helios, others, perhaps like that little altar boy, Hitler, but a
tiny votive candle. Type, Hit Enter to Search
Often, I imagine God singing, to each of us, that Moody Blues song: We Distinguish in
Order to Unite
Select Category 6
Blogroll
I Know You’re Out There Somewhere
Moody Blues Andrew Sullivan
Beyond Blue
I know you’re out there somewhere Brian D. McLaren
Somewhere somewhere Commonweal
I know I’ll find you somehow Crunchy Con
And somehow I’ll return again to you Cynthia Bourgeault
Emergent Village
The mist is lifting slowly Emerging Women
I can see the way ahead First Thoughts
And I’ve left behind the empty streets Fors Clavigera
That once inspired my life Francis X. Clooney, S.J.
And the strength of the emotion Joseph S. O'Leary
Is like thunder in the air NCR Today – the Catholic Blog
‘Cause the promise that we made each other Per Caritatem
Haunts me to the end Phyllis Tickle
Post Christian
CHORUS
Postmodern Conservative
I know you’re out there somewhere
Radical Emergence
Somewhere somewhere
Sojourners
I know you’re out there somewhere
Tall Skinny Kiwi
Somewhere you can hear my voice
The Website of Unknowing
I know I’ll find you somehow
Transmillenial
Somehow somehow
Vox Nova
I know I’ll find you somehow
Weekly Standard Blog
And somehow I’ll return again to you
Worship Blog
The secret of your beauty Zoecarnate
And the mystery of your soul
I’ve been searching for in everyone I meet Worthwhile Sites
And the times I’ve been mistaken Amos Yong
It’s impossible to say Boulder Integral
And the grass is growing Brother David Steindl-Rast
Underneath our feet Center for Action and
Contemplation
CHORUS
Christian Nonduality

125. The words that I remember Contemplative Outreach
From my childhood still are David Group International
true Dialogue Institute
That there’s none so blind Ecumene
As those who will not see Franciscan Archive
And to those who lack the Innerexplorations
courage Institute on Religion in an Age of
And say it’s dangerous to try Science
Well they just don’t know Metanexus
That love eternal will not be Monastic Interreligious Dialogue
denied National Catholic Reporter
Radical Orthodoxy
CHORUS Shalomplace
Sojourners
You know it’s going to happen Thomas Merton Center
I can feel you getting near Virtual Chapel
And soon we’ll be returning Zygon Center for Religion and
To the fountains of our youth Science
And if you wake up wondering
In the darkness I’ll be there Cloud of
My arms will close around you Unknowing
And protect you with the truth
Amos Yong apophatic
Axiological axiologically-
Bernard
integral
Thus imagined, that song gives me chills and brings a tear. Lonergan Brian
McLaren Charles
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send Sanders
Peirce
contemplative
cosmology emergence
emerging church
E n l i g h t e n m e n t epistemology
faith False Self fideism
Hans Kung James K. A.
Smith Jesus Creed John
Duns Scotus kataphatic
Kevin Beck Kurt
Tags: A g a p e t h e i s m, apokatastasis, cosmic evolution, created co-c r e a t o r, felix culpa, h e l l, i n c a r n a t i o n, Godel Merton
Kevin Beck, Mike Morrell, p e n a l a t o n e m e n t, s u b s t i t u t i o n a r y a t o n e m e n t, t h e o d i c y metaphysics Mike
Morrell Natural Theology
nihilism nondual
nonduality orthodoxy
radical emergence radical
the Emerging Church Conversation as Strategic Planning Exercise orthodoxy rationalism
JB on December 4, 2009 in Axiological, Cosmological, Practices & Experiences, Provisional Richard Rohr
Science scientism
Closures & Systems, Uncategorized, the descriptive - Science, the evaluative - Culture, the semiotic theodicy
interpretive - Religion, the normative - Philosophy | 1 Comment » Theological
Anthropology
Below, I will employ a Strategic Plan Thomas
paradigm to characterize and organize the
emerging church conversation employing
Merton Tim King
transformation True
what might, at first, appear to be Self Walker Percy
characteristically Catholic categories. In doing Join Other
so, I hope to emphasize how this conversation Visitors in Prayer
proceeds more from a consideration of
Light A Candle & Pray
questions rather than answers, practices
rather than conclusions, methods rather than Join Us in the
systems. Liturgy of the
Hours
While there is certainly an implicit assumption
that one will take from these conversations
some best practices, which will then be
integrated into some otherwise disparate
ecclesial systems, we hope to show how such approaches as descriptive science, normative
philosophy, evaluative culture and interpretive religion can be methodologically autonomous
even while, at the same time, being axiologically integral, which is to say that each method is
necessary, none alone sufficient, in every human value-realization.
For example, put more plainly, how can we answer the normative question How does one
best acquire or avoid that? without first answering the descriptive question What is that? Get the C a t h l i m e r g e n t o n
much less the evaluative question What’s that to us? (I say to “us” rather than “me” in Twitter widget and many other
recognition of our radically social nature). And we dare not ignore our interpretive grand great free widgets a t Widgetbox!
narratives, which, sometimes for better and sometimes for worse, contextualize all of these Not seeing a widget? (More info)
questions with their (often implicit, very often unconscious even) answers to the question Tweets
How does all of this re-ligate or tie-back together?
johnssylvest: Abortion & the
Before laying out a Cathlimergent approach, I Senate Healthcare Bill – a
want to build a conceptual bridge to the prudential judgment
approaches taken by many of our Protestant http://bit.ly/aS2DwT
sisters and brothers. Dialogue about johnssylvest: 10 developments
prescriptive realities is very much dependent propelling Emerging
on fair and accurate descriptive Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
representations (avoiding unnecessary http://bit.ly/a4AMtg
strawmen and ad hominems). When it comes johnssylvest: RT @pdclayton7:
to good scholarship and civil discourse, few "Theology After Google" opens
have gone about it better than the author of Wed. - 23 of the best speakers on
Deep Church, Jim Belcher, so I will employ emerging religion in Google Age;
his categories in our bridge-building effort. live stream at http://o ...
johnssylvest: RT @jonestony:
To wit, when Jim — New Blog Post: Society for

126. Pentecostal Studies Paper: What
prescribes Deep Truth in response to a Pentecostals Have to Learn from
captivity to Enlightenment rationalism he’s Emergents http://ow.ly/16KREU
breaking open our category of normative philosophy; johnssylvest: THE BOOK: An
prescribes Deep Preaching in response to ineffective preaching he’s breaking open our Emerging Church Conversation
category of orthodoxy vis a vis boundary establishment and defense; with a Postmodern Conservative
prescribes Deep Evangelism in response to an overemphasis on belief before belonging he’s Catholic Pentecostal
breaking open our category of orthodoxy vis a vis inclusivism and boundary negotiation; http://bit.ly/91D570 #fb
prescribes Deep Worship in response to uncontextualized worship he’s breaking open our
category of orthopathy; John Sobert Sylvest
prescribes Deep Gospel in response to a narrow view of salvation he’s breaking open our
category of orthopraxy in relationship to orthodoxy;
prescribes Deep Ecclesiology in response to weak ecclesiology he’s breaking open our category
of orthocommunio vis a vis church as institution and tradition;
prescribes Deep Culture in response to tribalism he’s breaking open our category of
orthocommunio vis a vis church as organism, in the world, transcending boundaries to
permeate and improve the temporal order by being tribal not tribalistic (cf. Rohr).
The emerging church conversation is lyrical in a sense as a pattern presents that reveals a
fugue-like interplay of boundary establishment, boundary defense, boundary negotiation and
boundary transcendence.
Does everyone come out singing the same lyrics even if we all seem to be humming the same
melody? Of course not! But there’s a not too distant drumbeat that has us all marching,
sometimes swiftly with little hindrance, often bumbling and stumbling, to the same beat and
beckoning us into a banquet hall where the banner over us all is love.
To some extent, boundary establishment is largely a discursive, descriptive enterprise where
orthodoxy enjoys its moment and has its say; it describes such as our essential creeds,
theological anthropology and social ontology (marriage, children, family, institutions, etc).
Boundary defense is a normative enterprise where orthopraxy exerts its influence in loving
and compassionate action ordered to the end of orthocommunio or authentic unity in
community, where we realize our telic aim of boundary transcendence. Johnboy Was Here
Feedjit Live Blog Stats
None of these boundary dynamics enjoy any efficacy in and of themselves, however, apart Feedjit Live Blog Stats
from the boundary negotiation that occurs in orthopathy, where our desires, themselves, are
first shaped and formed by liturgy, whether of the mall, the marketplace or Eucharist. (I
cannot more highly recommend Jamie Smith’s Desiring the Kingdom, in this regard.)
Follow this blog
Liturgy, then, nurturing our nondual, contemplative stance, enjoys an epistemic primacy in
the fugal movement of orthopathic, orthodoxic, orthopraxic and orthocommunal moments.
This is to recognize that sacrament and song and psalmody and story-telling and
gathering for bread-breaking came first in our tradition, our ecclesial phylogeny, so to
speak, and that it remains first, even now, in each of our lives, our spiritual ontogeny, in
other words, as ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny in religion as well as biology and every
other emergent reality.
A question that begs regarding this exercise is if we are primarily about finding questions,
exploring methods and exchanging practices, where might the theoretical rubber hit the road
in next proposing concrete ecclesial changes?
Where I hope to take my questions and concerns is here:
American Catholic Council
The outline below is meant to be comprehensive but
not exhaustive. In each category are sample
strengths, weaknesses, threats and opportunities and
sample resources. It is intended as a catalyst for
constructive conversation and a guideline for
dialogue, a conceptual bridge-builder or heuristic
device. It is expected that you will engage this
outline, perhaps even suggesting an entirely different
paradigm, certainly adding different strengths, Visit Cathlimergent Conversations
weaknesses, threats, opportunities and resources,
raising new questions and concerns, breaking open Visit Anglimergent
new categories. Meta
I’m a retired Bank CEO so thought, immediately, Log in
that this resembles strategic planning. A spiritual Entries R S S
director might look and see a prayer ladder of lectio, Comments R S S
meditatio, operatio, contemplatio. A social media WordPress.org
consultant might see a P2P platform or a viral
meme. A conflict resolution mediator might see
(Greg, what DO you see?) … What, then, do YOU
see?
So, Catholics and nonCatholics, alike, please join us
at Cathlimergent!
What’s Up? wussup? or WOTS up?: the Emerging Church Conversation as
Strategic Planning Exercise (Risk Management)
EXTERNAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS
Axiological Visions as amplification of risks (through beliefs) ordered toward augmentation of
value thru:
DESCRIPTIVE SCIENCE (a cosmological methodology) asking What’s that?
Threats:
Scientism
Opportunities:
Technological Advance
Dualistic, problem-solving approach
Resources:
The Cosmic Adventure: Science, Religion and the Quest for
Purpose by John F. Haught

127. Institute on Religion in an Age of Science
Metanexus
Zygon Center for Religion and Science
EVALUATIVE CULTURE (an axiological methodology) asking
What’s that to us?
Threats:
Practical Nihilism
Consumerism
Narcissism
Opportunities:
Story-telling
Music & Dramatic Arts
Resources:
Inter Mirifica, Decree On the Means of Social Communication, 1963.
Gaudium et Spes, Pastoral Constitution On the Church In the Modern
World,1965.
Ad Gentes, Decree On the Mission Activity of the Church, 1965.
NORMATIVE PHILOSOPHY (a cosmological methodology) asking How do we acquire or
avoid that?
Threats:
Enlightenment Rationalism – naïve realism
Radically Deconstructive Postmodernism
Opportunities:
Critical Realisms thru weak foundationalism and nonfoundational (fallibilism) &
postfoundational epistemologies
Semiotic Realism
Resources:
Donald L. Gelpi, S.J.
Centre of Theology and Philosophy
INTERPRETIVE RELIGION & IDEOLOGY (an axiological methodology) asking How does
all of this re-ligate or tie-back together?
Threats:
Religious Fundamentalism
Enlightenment Fundamentalism
Colonialism
Paternalism
Opportunities:
Ecumenism
Inter-religious & Inter-ideological Dialogue
Resources:
Dialogue Institute
Ecumene
David Group International
Francis X. Clooney, S.J.
Innerexplorations
Dignitatis Humanae, Declaration On Religious Freedom,
1965.
Monastic Interreligious Dialogue
INTERNAL STRENGTHS & WEAKNESSES
Religion as a further amplification of risk ordered toward the further augmentation of value
thru:
ORTHODOXY & TRUTH ARTICULATED IN CREED (DOGMA) or boundary
establishment
Weaknesses:
Dogmatism
Ecclesiocentric Exclusivism
Strengths:
Pneumatocentric Vision
Christocentric Inclusivism
Theocentric Inclusivism
Honest Jesus Scholarship (cf. Rohr)
Resources:
Dei Verbum, Dogmatic Constitution On Divine Revelation, 1965.
Fides et Ratio
Gravissimum Educationis, Declaration On Christian Education, 1965.
Unitatis Redintegratio, Decree on Ecumenism, 1964.
Orientalium Ecclesiarum, Decree On the Catholic Churches of the Eastern
Rite,1964.
Nostra Aetate, Declaration On the Relation Of the Church to Non-Christian
Religions, 1965.
ORTHOPATHY & BEAUTY CELEBRATED & CULTIVATED (CULT / RITUAL) IN
LITURGY or boundary negotiation

128. Weaknesses:
Ritualism
Dualistic Approach
Traditionalism
Strengths:
Retrieval, Renewal, Revival of Tradition
Contemplative Stance
Nonduality
Resources:
Center for Action and Contemplation
Fors Clavigera (Jamie Smith)
Brother David Steindl-Rast
Christian Nonduality
Cynthia Bourgeault
Contemplative Outreach
Worship Blog
The Website of Unknowing
Shalomplace
Sacrosanctum concilium, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, 1963.
ORTHOPRAXY & GOODNESS PRESERVED IN CODE (LAW) or boundary defense
Weaknesses:
Legalism
Strengths:
Social Justice
Resources:
Religion Online – Social Issues
Sojourners
Center for Action and Contemplation
ORTHOCOMMUNIO & UNITY ENJOYED IN FELLOWSHIP or boundary transcendence
Weaknesses:
Institutionalism, Heirarchicalism,Patriarchalism, Sexism
Strengths:
Magisterial Reform
Democratization
Organic Growth
Noninstitutional Vehicles
Resources:
Lumen Gentium, Dogmatic Constitution On the Church,
1964.
Christus Dominus, Decree Concerning the Pastoral Office of
Bishops In the Church, 1965.
Perfectae Caritatis, Decree On Renewal of Religious Life,
1965.
Optatam Totius, Decree On Priestly Training, 1965.
Presbyterorum Ordinis, Decree On the Ministry and Life of Priests, 1965.
Apostolicam Actuositatem, Decree On the Apostolate of the Laity, 1965.
GENERAL RESOURCES
Brian D. McLaren
Commonweal
Emergent Village
Emerging Women
Per Caritatem
Phyllis Tickle
Post Christian
Radical Emergence
Transmillenial
Zoecarnate
Anglimergent
Boulder Integral
Catholica
Emerging Church Portal (international)
Phyllis Tickle
Taming the Wolf

129. Thomas Merton Center
Virtual Chapel
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: a x i o l o g i c a l l y-i n t e g r a l, belief before belonging, best practices, boundary defense, b o u n d a r y
e s t a b l i s h m e n t, b o u n d a r y n e g o t i a t i o n, b o u n d a r y t r a n s c e n d e n c e, C a t h l i m e r g e n t, c o n t e m p l a t i v e s t a n c e,
Deep Church, descriptive science, Desiring the Kingdom, e m e r g i n g c h u r c h c o n v e r s a t i o n, E n l i g h t e n m e n t
r a t i o n a l i s m, e v a l u a t i v e c u l t u r e, g r a n d n a r r a t i v e, h u m a n v a l u e-realization, interpretive religion, James
K . A . S m i t h, Jim Belcher, l i t u r g y, methodologically autonomous, n o n d u a l, n o r m a t i v e p h i l o s o p h y,
o n t o g e n y r e c a p i t u l a t e s p h y l o g e n y, social ontology, S t r a t e g i c P l a n, Theological Anthropology, t r i b a l i s m
“Introverts In The Church: Finding Our Place In An Extroverted
Culture” by Adam McHugh
JB on December 3, 2009 in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »
Adam McHugh’s “Introverts In The Church:
Finding Our Place In An Extroverted Culture” has
just been released. A few months ago, Jamie Arpin-
Ricci interviewed Adam McHugh (<<< click on link
to read this interview).
This brings to mind a post I wrote seven years ago along
the same lines. Enjoy!
Jesus was a Capricorn, but was He an ESFJ? an
Enneagram 2?
There are some religious sects that have been turning out
ESFJ’s based on research conducted utilizing MBTI
personality testing. Critics of such groups and movements
charge that leaders of these sects are 1) making members
over after their own image, 2) controlling them in such a
way that their personalities are changed to conform to the
group norm and 3) argue that such personality changes
are destructive psychologically and spiritually. Leaders of
these groups claim that such research simply proves that
Jesus was an ESFJ !
These are the ideas explored in __The Discipling
Dilemma__ the Second Edition by Flavil R. Yeakley, Jr.,
Editor, Howard W. Norton, Don E. Vinzant and Gene Vinzant, which can be read online at
the above link.
They write:
quote:
“In some religious sects, it is a fact that the observed changes presented a
clear pattern of convergence in a single type: ESFJ. There was a strong
tendency for introverts to become extraverts, for intuitors to become
sensors, for thinkers to become feelers, and for perceivers to become
judgers. The observed results indicate a dangerous falsification of type
produced by some kind of group pressure.”
What do you think?
The discussion continues with a poem, here>>> Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Cathlimergent – its origins
JB on December 3, 2009 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
Below is an e-mail response to an inquiry about my writing an article to explain what
Cathlimergent is and how it came about.

130. The emerging church conversation is an ecumenical meta-dialogue. While our different
denominations all have their propositional elements, which are not unimportant, such a
dialogue goes beyond the propositional to those aspects of religious experience that are more
robustly relational and participatory. Our focus, then, is less on what to think and see and
more on how to think and see. We search, then, less for the right answers and more for
the right questions. What we take away from our exchanges are new and different
practices, not so much new and different conclusions. In many ways, what we converse
about are methods and, from these conversations, what we take away are best practices;
we then discern for ourselves what their implications might be for our otherwise disparate
systems. Our conversation radically “roots” its orthodoxy in Jesus, orthopathy in
contemplation, orthopraxy in social justice & orthocommunio in authentic community.
Cathlimergent is only 9 days old today!
The most astonishing reality that has emerged with the network’s launch is the geographic
diversity of the site visitors. See this in real-time:
http://live.feedjit.com/live/cathlimergent.ning.com/
I quit counting the number of different countries represented, but one can look at the
Visitors’ Map in the right column toward the bottom of the page:
http://cathlimergent.ning.com/
I agree that an introductory article would be of interest to the wider emergent community, in
part because Catholics remain quite the curiosity to so many. In such an article, one would
need to address the historical-theoretical-theological context of the emerging church
conversation, in general, and then demonstrate how the Catholic participants are situated in
that context, in particular. A separate issue would be from the social-practical angle
regarding what’s been happening on the ground with Catholics and their emerging church
conversation partners.
Regarding the first matter, the context, if one understands how the Anglicans are situated,
then a conversation regarding how the Roman Catholics fit in would be something of a
redundancy, especially to those of us who maintain that we are one in essentials or core
elements or first order realities and differ only in accidentals or peripheral elements or second
order realities. In other words, when it comes to creed, sacrament, incarnational outlook and
liturgy, for example, we’re one. When it comes to certain moral doctrines, church disciplines
and church polity, we differ. Other than that, as Andrew Jones points out, there are many
things the emerging church movement inherited from the Catholics: Tall Skinny Kiwi: 3
Things the Emerging Church Took From the Catholics .
Regarding the second matter, the most visible concrete social reality has been the recent
collaboration between Fr. Richard Rohr of the Center for Action & Contemplation in
New Mexico and other leaders like Brian McLaren & Phyllis Tickle.
Less visible, but still very real, are the individual Catholics like myself who’ve been cyber-
squatting and inter-loping on the virtual real estate of the Protestant leaders of the emerging
church conversation, variously lurking or actively contributing to their conversations in
discussion forums, networking sites, Twitter, Facebook and so on.
Also, there are a few of us Catholics who have been blogging as individuals, perhaps most
notably, Carl McColman and Alan Creech, both whom personify, in my estimation, what
it means to be a Catholic in this emerging church conversation. Bryan Froehle is another
high profile Catholic participant, whom I met through Brian McLaren.
In my case, which may be typical for most bloggers and tweeters (Twitter), Mike Morrell (a
spiritual networking cyberforce extraordinaire) tapped Tim King’s cybershoulders, which
led to me “meeting” Kevin Beck, Brian McLaren, Tony Jones, Steve Knight, Doug
Pagitt and very notably, both TransFORM (a missional community formation network)
and Anglimergent, which are also on the ning network and from whom I got the idea for
Cathlimergent.
Cathlimergent had only 8 Google hits a week ago (abstract references) but now has 800 or
so (de novo virtual reality!).
And why?
Well, because everyone of my sisters and brothers aforementioned either implicitly endorsed
the Cathlimergent network launch by joining and/or by explicitly mentioning and
soliciting members for the network via their blogs, Twitter or Facebook. In other words,
they made a proactive and selfless effort to help me gather in my emergent coreligionists
from the vast regions of our great cyberdiaspora, with never a concern about poaching or
territoriality or cannibalizing their own bases (alas, there’s a lesson there, too, n’est pas?).
Here, I need to especially thank the Reverend Bosco Peters of @Liturgy, who is the
Oprah Winfrey of Twitter & Facebook, tens of thousands of followers but interacting with
each of us like BFFs (best friend forever, for those without access to urban dictionaries)!
A few short months ago, when my annual domain subscription came around, I had resolved
to surrender my domain name for http://christiannonduality.com/ . Instead, I even
started to blog and decided to keep my cyberhomestead intact, mostly because Tim King,
whom I did not know from Adam’s cat, was gracious and kind enough to e-mail me and
say that he was so happy to find me, so appreciated my writing and research and encouraged
me to persist because he thought it was a valuable contribution to inter-religious dialogue.
(Object lesson: encouragement matters. It’s a primary mode of the Spirit.)
And I’m here at Cathlimergent because Brian McLaren, about 10 days ago, encouraged me
and said to stay in touch regarding ways to reach out to “Catholic folk.” The next day it
dawned on me. No need to reinvent the wheel! Just look at what’s being done by my sisters
and brothers at Agmergent (Assemblies of God), Anglimergent (Anglicans),
Anglicans Fresh Expressions (Anglicans & Methodists in UK), Baptimergent
(Baptist), Convergent Friends (Quakers), Emerging Church (Emerging Church
Europe & UK), EmergeUMC (Methodist), Emerging Penetcostal, Emergent Village
(ecumenical, USA), Luthermergent (Lutheran), Presbymergent (Presbyterian),
Resonate (Canada. ecumenical) and The Common Root (Mennonite).
More than anything else or anyone else, from the standpoint of religious formation, I’m here
because of the ministry of my brother in the faith, Richard Rohr, whose books and other
media, over recent decades, have continued to inspire me to go on making friends and
exchanging stories, which is what Cathlimergent is all about, the greatest story of all being
the One, Whose life we’re getting ready to celebrate: Jesus.
If nothing else, this missive is a shout-out of gratitude to all of my sisters and brothers,
especially those mentioned above (some whom I’ve omitted only due to neglect on my part),
who are mentoring me and companioning with me on life’s journey. In some sense, this
journey, itself, has been my destination; this quest for Jesus has, itself, been my grail.

131. So, I wrote this all as a prelude to protesting that I am not the one to write such an article
and that it may be too early to do so. On the other hand, I may have provided a Letter to the
Editor of some interest, which tells folks: Stay tuned!
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: A l a n C r e e c h, Andrew Jones, A n g l i m e r g e n t, best practices, Brian McLaren, Bryan Froehle, C a r l
M c C o l m a n, C a t h l i m e r g e n t, Center for Action & Contemplation, Doug Pagitt, Fr. Richard Rohr, K e v i n
Beck, Mike Morrell, n i n g n e t w o r k, Phyllis Tickle, S t e v e K n i g h t, T i m K i n g, Tony Jones, TransFORM
Theology & Anthropology – body, soul, spirit?
JB on December 3, 2009 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
Consider this quote by Marc Cortez in EMBODIED SOULS, ENSOULED BODIES — AN
EXERCISE IN CHRISTOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE MIND/BODY
DEBATE:
quote:
The thesis thus comprises two major sections. The first develops an
understanding of Karl Barth’s theological anthropology focusing on three major
facets: (1) the centrality of Jesus Christ for any real understanding of human
persons; (2) the resources that such a christologically determined view of
human nature has for engaging in interdisciplinary discourse; and (3) the
ontological implications of this approach for understanding the mind/body
relationship. The second part of the study then draws on this theological
foundation to consider the implications that understanding human nature
christologically has for analyzing and assessing several prominent ways of
explaining the mind/body relationship.
This study, then, is an exercise in understanding the nature of a
christocentric anthropology and its implications for understanding human
ontology.
This doesn’t deny that science and metaphysics and philosophy are autonomous and even
narrower foci of human concern that get appropriated by theology as a broader focus of
human concern, but it does illustrate how theology can inform some of our axiomatic
commitments or presuppositions for these other foci, such as, for example, requiring moral
and metaphysical realism, epistemological realism, fundamental human dignity and so on.
Cortez closes with:
quote:
In this study, we have not attempted to resolve this theoretical conundrum.
In fact, the approach developed in the course of this study suggests that
theologians should resist the temptation to wed Christian theology to any
particular theory of human ontology.
This is echoed by Alfredo Dinis, who is the Dean, Associate Professor, and Lecturer of Logic,
Philosophy of Science and Cognitive Science, Faculty of Philosophy of Braga, Catholic
University of Portugal, in this paper , which is entitled Body, Soul and God: Philosophy,
Theology and the Cognitive Sciences. Dinis writes:
quote:
The concept of a soul is not theological but rather philosophical. As a
consequence, one may leave it out of the theological discourse. Concepts like
‘mind,’ ‘soul,’ ‘self,’ and ‘consciousness’ are not specifically theological
concepts. They are rather philosophical concepts.
Theology has over the centuries used such concepts to express some
religious beliefs, but such beliefs do not have a necessary connection with
those concepts and certainly not with the metaphysical meaning they have in
some philosophical traditions. Today, however, it is the sciences, especially
the cognitive sciences, that wish to clarify such concepts.

132. In this task, they are most of the time against religious beliefs because such
beliefs seem to be necessarily connected with those concepts. I want to
argue that this is a mistake, and that most authors in the cognitive sciences
are basing their analysis on misleading presuppositions.
But it is also true that a new theology needs a new anthropology, one that is
less dependent on the traditional metaphysics of Thomas Aquinas and more in
line with a relational paradigm.
And in the spirit of those two papers cited above, I commend the following work of Nancey
Murphy to all:
THEOLOGY IN A POSTMODERN AGE: which included three lectures: 1) BEYOND MODERN
LIBERALISM AND FUNDAMENTALISM; 2) BEYOND MODERN DUALISM AND REDUCTIONISM; and
3) BEYOND MODERN INWARDNESS.
A more concise summary can be found here and also here at Counterbalance, entitled
Neuroscience & the Person and Neuroscience, Religious Experience and the Self,
respectively.
Finally, here are some interview transcripts of Nancey Murphy’s The Conscious Mind.
Alfredo Dinis amplifies this:
quote:
The metaphysical mind-body dualism is now being systematically challenged
by a growing number of Christian philosophers and theologians (Murphy 1998,
Brown 1998, Clayton 1999, Gregersen 2000). Nancy Murphy, for example,
argues philosophically in favour of a non-reductive physicalism, which she
describes as “the view that the human nervous system, operating in concert
with the rest of the body in its environment, is the seat of consciousness
(and also of human spiritual and religious capacities).” (1998, 131) These
Christian philosophers and theologians believe that we do not need either the
concept of a metaphysical self or that of a metaphysical soul. A relational self
seems more adequate to understand the nature of human beings than a
metaphysical self. Indeed, every traditional metaphysical category appears
increasingly to be inadequate and in need to be abandoned in our search for
knowledge. A relational view of the person, and indeed of God, needs no
immortal soul to assure immortality. Instead, immortality is a relational
situation. Human relationships constitute the individuals as persons. For those
who believe in God, it is God’s foundational relation with the whole creation
that makes human immortality possible.
Now, let me say that the metaphysics of the human person remain an open question,
especially vis a vis philosophy of mind issues and the hard problem of consciousness. And
let me reassert that, on matters metaphysical, I am agnostic. I incline, however, to the
more nondual approaches to the human person. And to the human person’s relationship to
God as being only quasiautonomous. My panentheism is indifferent to metaphsyics, for the
most part, and very much indifferent to whether or not any subjective aspect of human
personhood is immortal.
Now, as to any teachings, dogmas or creedal elements, those are distinctly theological,
necessarily vague, and certainly open to interpretation and rearticulation, metaphysically and
philosophically. They certainly do not presuppose aristotelian or thomistic metaphysics, in
general, or the soul, in particular. The “descent into hell” was possibly understood by the early
church as an emphasis on Jesus’ death and the resurrection of the body is foundational for
the doctrine of the Communion of Saints, the church militant, penitent and triumphant. For
those in the church penitent (a state) and the church triumphant (heaven), we needn’t
conceive of them as disembodied. With Kung, we can argue against the idea of a separated
soul between particular judgment and the general resurrection as understood in either a
platonic or aristotelian-thomist way, recognizing that, in Kung’s words, “man dies a whole,
with body and soul, as a psychosomatic unity … into that eternity of the divine Now which,
for those who have died, makes irrelevant the temporal distance of this world between
personal death and the last judgement.”
While theology certainly does have implications for our metaphysical and philosophical
presuppositions, our authors above affirm, one will note that all of the above-listed authors
consider other anthropological approaches, other than the distinctly dualistic conception, to
be live options for the inquiring theological anthropologists.
A reader wrote:
quote:
Some of these teachings are dogmas, one is even in the Creed — all long
before the rediscovery of Aristotle and the teachings of Thomas Aquinas,
Scholasticism, etc.
and, in fact, many of the earliest Christian writers of both the 1st and 2nd centuries, and
even later Athanasius, did not believe in human immortality. It came later with hellenization.
Nancey Murphy summarizes:
quote:

133. Both Judaism and Christianity apparently began with a concept of human
nature that comes closer to contemporary nonreductive physicalism than to
Platonic dualism. But, both made accommodations to a prevailing dualistic
philosophy, and combined a doctrine of the immortality of the soul with a
doctrine of the resurrection of the body. The pressing question now, concerns
whether to return to those earlier nonreductive physicalist accounts of
human nature, as many Christian theologians have urged throughout this
century.
As for any persistence of the soul after death, while Kung, in Eternal Life, finds a two-fold
view of human nature unscientific and any life based thereon untenable, he allows for
resurrection, as does John Hick, right after death. Kung has tried to rehabilitate the concept
of purgatory, which is less problematical conceived as a state not a place (thanks JPII for
clearing that up).
Alfredo Dinis also wrote:
quote:
From this externalist point of view, it is possible to think about
immortality within a non-dualistic framework – within a
relational and dialogical framework. In his book Introduction
to Christianity Joseph Ratzinger, the actual Pope, has put
forward a relational view of the soul:
“ ‘having a spiritual soul’ means precisely being willed, known,
and loved by God in a special way; it means being a creature
called by God to an eternal dialogue and therefore for its own
part capable of knowing God and of replying to him. What we
call in substantialist language ‘having a soul’ we will describe in a
more historical, actual language as ‘being God’s partner in a
dialogue’.“ (2004, 355)
A dialogical concept of the human soul has for Ratzinger an
immediate consequence: an equally dialogical concept of
immortality: “man’s immortality is based on his dialogic
relationship with and reliance upon God, whose love alone
bestows eternity” (2004, 355). A dialogical concept of
immortality needs no body-soul scheme, no natural-supernatural
dualism. Thus, according to Ratzinger, “it is also perfectly
possible to develop the idea [of immortality] out of the body-
soul schema” (2004, 355), and so “it becomes evident once
again at this point that in the last analysis one cannot make a
neat distinction between ‘natural’ and ‘supernatural’,” (2004,
355-6), since it is the dialogue of love between God and the
human beings, and among the human beings themselves, that is
truly the essence of every religious experience.
It is precisely Occam, who applied his razor to any philosophical demonstration of the
immortality of the soul. Scotus, too, saw such arguments as inconclusive. Proper scriptural
exegesis doesn’t allow proof-texting either on this metaphysical issue. While it remains, in my
view, an open question, parsimony doesn’t needlessly multiply ontological layers for
explanations that have ever increasing probabilities based on empirically falsifiable and
verifiable observations regarding those faculties of the human brain once explained by those
of the soul.
With Peirce, I’m all for the mattering of mind and the minding of matter. Against Kung,
however, I’m not ready to toss out psychic phenomena and other paranormal evidence. It is
too early to draw such conclusions. Neither, however, do I want to foreclose on physicalist
and/or naturalist accounts of the soul.
I think we have a situation where revelation and theology can certainly help us with an
account that elevates human nature and dignity via a Christocentric anthropology. But I also
believe that theology has overstepped its bounds if it leaves anyone with the impression that
the metaphysics of philosophy of mind are loaded with inescapable philosophical
presuppositions.
This conversation continues at this link >>> Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: Alfredo Dinis, Chesterton, emergentist perspective, First Principles, god-of-t h e-g a p s, H a l d a n e, H a n s
K u n g, h e u r i s t i c, h u m a n s o u l, implicate order, John Hick, K a r l B a r t h, Marc Cortez, m a t e r i a l i s m,
m e t a p h y s i c s, m o r a l r e a l i s m, N a n c e y M u r p h y, negotiated concepts, Nietzsche, n i h i l i s m, philosophy of
m i n d, radical deconstructionism, reductio ad absurdum, r e l a t i v i s m, root metaphor, scientism, semiotic,
semiotic realism, semiotic science, solipsism, s p e c u l a t i v e m e t a p h y s i c s, theoretic, theoretical physics,
u n c e r t a i n r e a l i t y, W i t t g e n s t e i n

134. K994RATW26YU
Administrator on December 1, 2009 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
K994RATW26YU oh come on
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
K994RATW26YU
Administrator on December 1, 2009 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
K994RATW26YU
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
The Manhattan Declaration – yes & no
JB on December 1, 2009 in the evaluative - Culture, the interpretive - Religion, the
normative - Philosophy | 2 Comments »
The dignity of the human person, the sanctity of human life, legal
justice & the common good, and the primacy of our responsibility to
protect the weak & vulnerable are the core values being addressed in
the Manhattan Declaration. The document makes an appeal –
not only to religious foundations, but – to the nature of the human
person, the light of human reason, the historical institutions of
human society and vast human experience. The declaration, in my
view, presents an honest portrayal of how the Christian conscience
has influenced civilization with a tone and tenor that is both irenic
and self-critical (not triumphalistic).
This appeal is philosophically rigorous and
psychologically holistic in that it honors the integral nature of our
empirical, rational, practical, prudential, relational and religious
approaches to all human value-realizations. The language is
authentically dialogical. This document represents a legitimate
entrance of religious voices into the public square. And these voices,
because of the manner in which they have spoken (at least, in this
instance) deserve respect, deference and earnest engagement.
I don’t think anyone could seriously disagree that our world is badly
ailing from the evil that flows from the disregard of human dignity
and human life.
I do think that people of large intelligence and profound goodwill can
honestly disagree on a number of things declared in that document.
People might disagree about various specific moral realities, about
what is indeed right or wrong, good or evil, and why. People might
more broadly or narrowly conceive the concepts employed in the
document. People might disagree about specific diagnoses of societal
problems and/or about the prescriptions devised to cure those ills.
People might disagree about specific sociological facts and practical
solutions, including administrative (executive), legislative and
judicial remedies. It is for these types of reasons that I would not
wholly endorse the Manhattan Declaration. It is for all the reasons I
listed further above, though, that I welcome its introduction into our
public discourse.
This discussion continues at this link: Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: common good, dignity of the human person, Manhattan Declaration, sanctity of human life

135. It’s a small, small world – global dialogue
JB on November 28, 2009 in Uncategorized, the interpretive - Religion | No Comments »
A few days ago, I launched a social networking site called Cathlimergent for Catholics and
others who are participating in the Emerging Church Conversation. At midnight last night, I
installed a widget to keep track of where our visitors are coming from. When people join
Cathlimergent, it’s easy enough to know where they live but I also wanted to get some sense
of who might be listening in on our conversation.
Below are the flags of the countries and the names of the places from those first few hours. I
thought I would freeze-frame these hours for posterity because my first impression was how
so very small our world has become. My next impression was that I was literally watching
the sun rise and set around the globe. (Place your cursor over each flag to see that country’s
initials.)
If you are interested, you can click HERE and watch visitors come and go in real-time. One
object lesson is that we need to behave in cyberspace. Another is that we should not too
narrowly define participation in terms of active content contributors but should realize that
the listening audience, however quiet or lurking, can be much larger than we might
otherwise imagine and is an integral part of our global dialogue.
Here’s how the sun came up on Cathlimergent on one of the very first days of its presence in
cyberspace:
Madurai, Tamil Nadu (India)
Tehran, Esfahan (Iran)
Philippine, Benguet

136. Chongqing (China)
Palembang (Indonesia)
Antipolo, Rizal (Phillipines)
Bombay, Maharashtra (India)
Singapore
Palembang (Indonesia)
Calcutta, West Bengal (India)
Johor Bahru, Johor (Malaysia)
Hilo, Hawaii
Middlewich, Cheshire (United Kingdom)
Islamabad (Pakistan)
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
Malaya, Donets’ka Oblast’ (Ukraine)
Kuala Lumpur, Wilayah Persekutuan (Malaysia)
Algeria
Okinawa (Japan)
Killara, Victoria (Australia)
Warri, Rivers (Nigeria)
San Juan, Batangas (Phillipines)
Bombay, Maharashtra (India)
Fernando De La Mora, Central (Paraguay)
My Tho, Tien Giang (Viet Nam)
West Babylon, New York
Bacoor, Cavite (Phillipines)
Bangkok, Krung Thep (Thailand)
Beijing (China)
Central District (Hong Kong S.A.R., China)
Pune, Maharashtra (India)
Ephrata, Pennsylvania
San Antonio, Texas
Versailles, Kentucky
Oak Park, California
Toronto, Ontario
Warsaw, Warszawa (Poland)
Others in the Emerging Church Conversation
Agmergent (Assemblies of God).
Anglimergent (Anglicans)
Anglicans Fresh Expressions (Anglicans & Methodists in UK)
Baptimergent (Baptist)
Convergent Friends (Quakers)
Emerging Church (Emerging Church Europe & UK)
Emerging Penetcostal
EmergeUMC (Methodist)
Emergent Village (ecumenical, USA)
Luthermergent (Lutheran)
Presbymergent (Presbyterian)

137. Resonate (Canada. ecumenical)
The Common Root (Mennonite)
Update: In addition to visitors from many of the countries listed-above, last night, many
others from around the world visited Cathlimergent:
Rome, Lazio (Italy)
Nairobi, Nairobi (Kenya)
Bogot, Cundinamarca (Colombia)
Kathmandu (Nepal)
Radauti, Suceava (Romania)
Cairo, Al Qahirah (Egypt)
Prague, Hlavni Mesto Praha (Czech Republic)
Seoul, Seoul-t’ukpyolsi (South Korea)
Abidjan, Lagunes (Ivory Coast)
Doha, Ad Dawhah (Qatar)
Maracaibo, Zulia (Venezuela)
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: A g m e r g e n t, Anglicans Fresh Expressions, A n g l i m e r g e n t, B a p t i m e r g e n t, C a t h l i m e r g e n t,
Convergent Friends, E m e r g e n t V i l l a g e, EmergeUMC, e m e r g i n g c h u r c h, global dialogue, L u t h e r m e r g e n t,
P r e s b y m e r g e n t, S u b m e r g e n t
In Search of the Emerging Church? – look on the margins
JB on November 26, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, Uncategorized, the interpretive -
Religion | No Comments »
Tom Roberts is editor at large for the National Catholic Reporter. To get a better feel for
parish life today, he has been on the road visiting Catholics along the way.
Watch NCRonline.org for updates. He recently turned in his 19th installment.
http://ncronline.org/blogs/in-search-of-the-emerging-church
From reading Tom’s series, a reality that has been impressed upon me is how well so many
are doing and being church. And the way they live and move and have their being emulates
the aspirations our leaders have articulated in our emerging church conversations.
Many of these people will never blog, never tweet and never use Facebook or friend as a verb,
but they competently (even if unconsciously) integrate contemplative lives with social
justice in an honest relationship to Jesus finding, sometimes founding, authentic
community. And there you have it: Emergence with a capital “E”!

138. Of course, we recognize and affirm a diversity of
ministry in our unity of mission. When I was in
Louisiana’s nonpartisan think tank on poverty, I
sought out the Fourth World Movement, which
was working with the radically poor in New Orleans
(a precious little French missionary family, at that;
in other words, foreign missionaries in America!). I
learned that what the desperately poor want, sometimes more than a crumb of
bread or a sip of water, even, was a place at any table of dialogue where there
destinies were being worked out. (And I sigh and think of the lines that were drawn on
Middle Eastern maps by departing colonial powers.)
Another thing that was impressed upon me
was that they wanted to tell their stories and
to have their stories passed along, such that
they might matter as persons to somebody.
My eyes were opened by one quote relayed to
me by one of the 4th World missionaries. A
desperately poor person crying: “I don’t want
to be an icon of your fucking Christ!” That
made me a post-patriarchal, post-colonial,
post-paternalistic, post-hierarchical, post-
institutionalistic, post-whatever faster,
smoother and more efficaciously than all of
my immersion in abstract postmodern
philosophy and theology. We objectify people
when we make them a salve for our hurting
consciences or a badge of honor for our heroic
strivings.
And we learn this from Merton, that we all have crises of creativity and continuity, the first
corresponding to our need to feel like we make a difference to someone, the latter, all the
forms of death we encounter, literally and metaphorically.
And in this regard, I realized how poverty-stricken so many in America’s board rooms, war
rooms, classrooms, living rooms and even bedrooms are, how utterly miserable are so many
of the people we all rub elbows with daily. And I resolved to minister to what I came to call
The 5th World, in other words, this litany of rooms, which all too often has so much less joy
than we can find in either the 4th or 3rd world.
And this is no naive romanticization of poverty.
I know, now, in my heart of hearts, that the preferential option for the poor is the
Gospel because it is Good News for all, for at some time or another, sooner or
later, it is going to be consolation for every last one of us.
This is reproduced from my post at Cathlimergent Conversation: Catholics in the
Emerging Church Conversation. Please, join us there!
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: e m e r g i n g c h u r c h, Fourth World Movement, Merton, National Catholic Reporter, preferential option
for the poor, Tom Roberts
« Older Entries Newer Entries »
© 2010 christiannonduality.com Blog is Proudly Powered By WordPress | Theme by The Cloisters

139. CHRISTIANNONDUALITY. C O M BL O G
beyond thinking & proposing to imagining & participating
Home About
T o d a y’ s L i t u r g y
Catholics in the Emerging Church Conversation
JB on November 24, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, Uncategorized, the interpretive -
Religion | No Comments »
Translator
http://cathlimergent.ning.com/ By N2H
Amos Yong apophatic
Radically “rooting” orthodoxy in Jesus, Axiological axiologically-
orthopathy in contemplation, Bernard
integral
orthopraxy in social justice &
orthocommunio in authentic
Lonergan Brian
McLaren
community Charles
Sanders
Follow Cathlimergence on Twitter Peirce
contemplative
http://twitter.com/Cathlimergent cosmology emergence
emerging church
Enlightenment
epistemology faith False
Self fideism Hans
Kung James K. A. Smith
Send Jesus Creed John Duns
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Scotus kataphatic Kevin
Beck Kurt Godel
Merton
metaphysics
Mike Morrell Natural
Theology nihilism
nondual nonduality
orthodoxy radical
emergence radical
orthodoxy rationalism
Tags: C a t h l i m e r g e n t, c o n t e m p l a t i o n, e m e r g i n g c h u r c h, e m e r g i n g c h u r c h c o n v e r s a t i o n,
o r t h o c o m m u n i o, o r t h o d o x y, o r t h o p a t h y, o r t h o p r a x y, social justice
Richard Rohr
Science
scientism semiotic
theodicy Theological
Anthropology
Thomas
Vatican declares new Saint for New Orleans Merton Tim King
transformation
JB on November 23, 2009 in Uncategorized | No Comments » True Self Walker Percy
W P-C u m u l u s b y R o y T a n c k
In the Catholic Church (both the Latin Rite a n d Luke Morton requires
and Eastern Rites) the act of canonization is F l a s h P l a y e r 9 or better.
reserved to the Holy See and occurs at the Cultivating the
conclusion of a long process requiring Roots, Nurturing
extensive proof that the person proposed for the Shoots
canonization lived in such an exemplary and MARCH 2010
holy way that he or she is worthy to be
M T W T F S S
recognized as a Saint. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
The Church’s official recognition of sanctity 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
implies that the persons are now in heavenly 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
glory, that they may be publicly invoked and 29 30 31
mentioned officially in the liturgy of the « FEB
Church, most especially in the Litany of the
Saints (Ricky Jackson, Morton Anderson, Recent Posts
Archie Manning, Dalton Hilliard, Hokie Gajan, Pat Swilling and so on). The Emerging Church is BIGGER
Beatification is a statement by the church that it t h a n C h r i s t i a n i t y – how to spot
is “worthy of belief” that the person is in heaven. it in other traditions
To be canonized a saint, one (or more) miracle Abortion & the Senate
is necessary. The Pope can place these processes Healthcare Bill – a p r u d e n t i a l
on a fast track as he’s apparently done in this judgment
New Orleans case. 10 historical developments
propelling Emerging
First declared the Venerable Drew after Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
leading the Saints to their first NFC Title Game Why Brian McLaren’s Greco-
ever, the Blessed Drew was declared after he Roman Narrative is NOT a
led the Saints to their first 9-0 record in caricature
franchise history. He was declared Saint Drew THE BOOK: Christian
when the 10-0 season start was declared a N o n d u a l i t y – Postmodern
miracle. Can there be any serious doubt that Conservative Catholic
this man is now in heavenly glory? It is most Pentecostal
certainly worthy of belief. Assuredly, the faithful
will continue to petition this man for more Recent Comments
miracles. christiannonduality.com Blog »
Blog Archive » Thoughts re:
t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
vs Dan Dennett on Intelligent
Design – a poorly designed
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send inference
christiannonduality.com Blog »
Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n

140. McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
Narrative is NOT a caricature on
A New Kind of Christianity?
McLaren didn’t make this up. It’s
worse than that!
christiannonduality.com Blog »
Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n
McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
Narrative is NOT a caricature on
E v e r y t h i n g T h a t’s Old is New
A g a i n – this (McLaren’s “ N e w”
Christianity) is truly an old
The Folk Mass Revolution time religion
JB on November 23, 2009 in Uncategorized | No Comments » K i e r a n C o n r o y on A New Kind of
Christianity? McLaren didn’t
make this up. It’s worse than
You either hated it (see The Fire Is Out by Jeffrey Tucker) or you loved it (see Susan that!
Bailey’s review), but the Folk Mass Revolution is an integral part of every Roman Philip Clayton on Thoughts re:
Catholic Baby Boomer’s formation and heritage. t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
I’m not going to review the book, here, other than to agree with Susan Bailey: vs Dan Dennett
Type, Hit Enter to Search
We Distinguish in
I had expected a wonderful, nostalgic read but Keep the Fire Burning Order to Unite
proved to be so much more. Ken Canedo lay the ground work for what was to
become the folk mass by reviewing the history of reform (and how it affected Select Category 6
music) in the Roman liturgy. Canedo takes this history and weaves it through
the lives of people who were the movers and shakers in the reform movement, Blogroll
some of whom eventually became key players in the folk mass revolution. Andrew Sullivan
Beyond Blue
Brian D. McLaren
Commonweal
So, let it be resolved that this book is much more than a walk down memory lane. I devoured Crunchy Con
it in one, rather long, sitting. It took me extra time to read because, as the names of the Cynthia Bourgeault
different composers, artists and songs came up, I could not resist singing the songs to myself. Emergent Village
I could not keep reading without constantly putting the book down and pausing to reflect on Emerging Women
the places and the faces – not just of the singing artists, but – of the storyline of my young First Thoughts
life in the Spirit. ♫♪ We are one in the Spirit. We are one in the Lord. ♪♬ (See what I mean!)
Fors Clavigera
Let me just share with you a copy of the book cover, which I optimized to fit this blog space. Francis X. Clooney, S.J.
Below that, I will list a sampling of some of the artists and songs which are not only Joseph S. O'Leary
discussed in the book but made available via podcasts at Ken Canedo’s website. That’ll be NCR Today – the Catholic Blog
enough to set the hook for friends, family and acquaintances who walked right to that Glory Per Caritatem
Land with me! Phyllis Tickle
Post Christian
Postmodern Conservative
Radical Emergence
Sojourners
Tall Skinny Kiwi
The Website of Unknowing
Transmillenial
Vox Nova
Weekly Standard Blog
Worship Blog
Zoecarnate
Worthwhile Sites
Amos Yong
Boulder Integral
Brother David Steindl-Rast
Center for Action and
Contemplation
Christian Nonduality
Contemplative Outreach
David Group International
Dialogue Institute
Ecumene
Franciscan Archive
Innerexplorations
Institute on Religion in an Age of
Science
Metanexus
Monastic Interreligious Dialogue
National Catholic Reporter
Radical Orthodoxy
Shalomplace
Sojourners
Thomas Merton Center
Virtual Chapel
Zygon Center for Religion and
Science
Cloud of
Unknowing

141. Amos Yong apophatic
Axiological axiologically-
Bernard
integral
Lonergan Brian
McLaren Charles
Sanders
Peirce
contemplative
cosmology emergence
emerging church
E n l i g h t e n m e n t epistemology
faith False Self fideism
Hans Kung James K. A.
Smith Jesus Creed John
Duns Scotus kataphatic
Kevin Beck Kurt
Godel Merton
metaphysics Mike
Morrell Natural Theology
“The Witness Song” composed by Robert Blue, performed by the Dameans on their 1969
FEL recording Tell the World
nihilism nondual
nonduality orthodoxy
“Here We Are,” “Of My Hands,” “Hear, O Lord,” “And I Will Follow,” “Clap Your Hands,” radical emergence radical
“Hear, O Lord,” “Come Away,” and “Shout from the Highest Mountain,” by Ray Repp from orthodoxy rationalism
the 1966 FEL recording, Mass for Young Americans Richard Rohr
Science scientism
“The Spirit Is a-Movin’” by Carey Landry semiotic theodicy
from the 1973 NALR recording, Hi, God Theological
Anthropology
“The New Creation” by Gary Ault Thomas
from the 1970 FEL recording, Songs of the New Creation by the Dameans Merton Tim King
transformation True
“Sons of God” by James Theim, OSB from the 1966 FEL recording, Mass for Young Self Walker Percy
Americans Join Other
Visitors in Prayer
“Allelu” by Ray Repp from the 1968 FEL recording, Sing Praise!
Light A Candle & Pray
“They’ll Know We Are Christians by Our Love” by Peter Scholtes from the 1966 FEL Join Us in the
recording, Missa Bossa Nova Liturgy of the
Hours
“All of My Life,” “You Are My People,” “Fear Not,” “Jerusalem,” and “Love One Another” by
Sister Germaine Habjan from the 1966 FEL recording, Songs of Salvation
“Take My Hands,” “Sing, People of God, Sing,” “The Living God,” “We Are One,” and “The
Blessed Sacrament” by Sebastian Temple from the 1967 Franciscan Communications
recording, Sing! People of God, Sing!
“Make Me a Channel of Your Peace (Prayer of St. Francis)” by Sebastian Temple from the
1967 Franciscan Communications recording, Happy the Man
“Let All the Earth” by Gary Ault from the 1969 FEL recording, Tell the World by the Get the C a t h l i m e r g e n t o n
Dameans Twitter widget and many other
great free widgets a t Widgetbox!
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send Not seeing a widget? (More info)
Tweets
johnssylvest: Abortion & the
Senate Healthcare Bill – a
prudential judgment
http://bit.ly/aS2DwT
johnssylvest: 10 developments
propelling Emerging
Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
http://bit.ly/a4AMtg
johnssylvest: RT @pdclayton7:
"Theology After Google" opens
Wed. - 23 of the best speakers on
emerging religion in Google Age;
Ode to Mothers Who’ve Lost Children live stream at http://o ...
johnssylvest: RT @jonestony:
JB on November 22, 2009 in Uncategorized | 1 Comment » New Blog Post: Society for
Pentecostal Studies Paper: What
Long ago, in pain, I wrote an Pentecostals Have to Learn from
Ode to Mothers Who Had Lost Their Boys. Emergents http://ow.ly/16KREU
johnssylvest: THE BOOK: An
It expresses truths that satisfy no questions in our heads but that respond, instead, to broken Emerging Church Conversation
hearts. We realize through time that our hearts have broken, not in two, but open. And we with a Postmodern Conservative
recognize that we never get over such enormous pain and immense loss, only through it. Catholic Pentecostal
Together. http://bit.ly/91D570 #fb
Mary: Our road began with the Word of God, John Sobert Sylvest
Where a witness, Elizabeth’s son,
In a town in the hills of Judah,
Spoke of Jesus, the Chosen One.
Elizabeth: Little boys we carried in our wombs
Knew one another, even there !
And were destined, both, for early tombs,
Any mother’s worst nightmare.
Mary: My son was killed by Pilate,
With indignity and disgrace.
Elizabeth: My John was brutally murdered,
Beheaded at Herod’s place.
Narrator: I asked of Mary: “What of Pilate ?” Johnboy Was Here

142. Feedjit Live Blog Stats
“What of Herod ?” of Elizabeth. Feedjit Live Blog Stats
“Of the people who rejected them
Even in Nazareth ?”
Follow this blog
They both were silent, for a while
Then each, in their own turn,
Spoke openly and lovingly
Of the lessons they had learned.
Mary: Like my Joseph, through King David’s line,
Did my baby, Jesus, come
A Savior given unto us
Each and every one.
Elizabeth: Yes, adulterers and murderers
Like Herod (King David, too)
Were the reason that Our Lord was born
Mary: And also me and you.
Elizabeth: No it’s not for us to understand.
Visit Cathlimergent Conversations
It’s not for us to see:
Visit Anglimergent
What of David ? Pilate ? Herod ? Meta
Mary: What of them or you or me ? Log in
Entries R S S
Mary: Like the criminals murdered with Him Comments R S S
WordPress.org
On His left and on His right
‘Til one’s dying breath He’ll save you
Bathe you in Eternal Light.
Narrator: Elizabeth stood, took Mary’s arms.
They embraced with loving tears.
Then as at The Visitation
John and Jesus then appeared !
I watched in silence and in awe
With love and peace and joy,
As with such warmth and tenderness
Each mother hugged her boy.
They were little kids like yours and mine !
With faces oh so fair !
Their mommies kissed their little heads
Ran fingers through their hair.
They pinched their cheeks, held little faces
In between each hand,
Looked proudly down into their eyes
Each mother’s little man.
There they saw the face of God and lived
As the prophet said they’d see.
They all stared in little Jesus’ face
Then turned and said to me:
All: We’ll have all been there ten thousand years
Bright shining as the sun
Each generation’s moms and dads
Each daughter and each son;
The loves we’ll have shared continuing on,
The pains we’ll have shared forgotten,
With the God we’ll have known from ages hence
From Mary’s womb begotten.
For nothing can quench the love of God
Not anguish nor distress
Persecution, famine nor the sword
Peril nor nakedness.

143. Neither death nor life nor angels
Not any principality
Could stifle the love of these mothers’ boys
From here to Eternity.
The entire poem is here:
http://christiannonduality.com/the_passion
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
What makes a Catholic, catholic? (nothing cultural, scientific,
philosophical or metaphysical)
JB on November 20, 2009 in Axiological, Cosmological, Methods & Approaches, Provisional
Closures & Systems, Uncategorized, the descriptive - Science, the evaluative - Culture, the
interpretive - Religion, the normative - Philosophy | No Comments »
We must remain mindful of an important
distinction re: so-called common views, does
one mean a view commonly held by
academics & theologians or that held by the
majority of persons no matter their education.
That will be in play, below. Another critical
distinction is that between the Catholic
hierarchy or magisterial teaching office (a/k/a
Rome) versus mainstream theologians versus
even what the faithful (sensus fidelium)
actually believe and practice.
Perhaps the most critical distinction in play,
however, is that between more progressive
and more traditional believers. At the extreme,
progressives have a tendency, it seems, to treat what might really be essential or core as
accidental or peripheral. For their part, ultra-traditionalists have a tendency to treat what
might really be accidental or peripheral as essential or core.
A question that begs, then, is what could one
possibly mean by the qualifier REALLY core
or peripheral. While it is true that, in addition
to Scripture & Tradition, Faith & Reason,
Mysticism & Experience, Catholics have
another leg to our stool called the
Magisterium or hierarchical teaching office, in
THEORY the Magisterium is NOT structured
as a TOP-DOWN reality, although IN
PRACTICE, that dynamic does seem to be in
effect, at least in part, because their’s is a
“temporal” power of the purse and of juridical
authority that very much controls the destiny
of many people’s lives vis a vis their expression
of and experience of church. Being less
abstract: 1) women cannot be ordained 2)
some priests must remain celibate 3) some politicians get visibly interdicted at the
communion rail 4) some ex-priests cannot teach in a parochial school because they weren’t
laicized via a formal dispensation 5) some divorced and remarried teachers, similarly, are
turned away from church employment because they did not obtain a marriage annulment.
In theory though, the Magisterium is only supposed to articulate the faith and morals that it
has faithfully, diligently and dutifully observed via an active listening process, whereby it has
discerned, BOTTOM-UP, what has already been received through the aid of the Holy Spirit
by the Faithful, the sensus fidelium. In other words, the universal church asks: What is the
sense of the faithful? And the Magisterium, speaking on our behalf, should respond with
what the church, broadly conceived, has properly gathered and practiced via scripture,
tradition, reason and experience. Let’s just say that many of us recognize that, just like with
scriptural exegesis and interpreting God’s Word, this process of interpreting the sensus
fidelium and articulating its beliefs is a tad more problematical than many, including those
both in the hierarchy and the laity, seem able to imagine.
What do I think is going on?

144. Catholic progressives, both Roman and Anglican,
are more closely related hermeneutically to each
other than they are to their coreligionists in their
respective denominations. Same thing with our
traditionalist brothers and sisters. Increasingly, I
have found that progressive Roman and Anglican
catholics have a GREAT deal in common with
much of liberal Protestantism and the emerging
church conversation(s). This is to say that we are
in large agreement regarding essentials vs
accidentals, core vs peripheral beliefs. I am in
much more agreement with the Anglican
approach to moral doctrine, church disciplines
and church polity than I am with my own
Roman tradition, but these are not essentials in
my view, while our creeds, our sacraments, our
liturgical traditions and incarnational outlooks are.
Otherwise, out of personal integrity, I’d have to
offer myself up in the recent prisoner swap (yes,
that’s a euphemism for a recent impolitic event).
What makes one distinctly catholic?
It is not atonement theory. Most Franciscans, following Scotus, don’t buy into the notion that
the incarnation was a divine initiative in response to some earthly felix culpa.
It’s not Greek metaphysics. Even the hierarchy is clear in that
science and philosophy are autonomous from faith. While
theological discourse will employ inculturated language in
articulating beliefs, it is no more tied to this or that metaphysical
concept than it is tied to a particular language. It simply translates
the essentials of the faith into this or that idiom. I am heavily
invested in the American pragmatist tradition (Peirce, less so James,
much less so Dewey) and the best parts of our Transcendentalist
tradition (Josiah Royce) and don’t do substance metaphysics or
Thomism, so my (meta)metaphysical constructs are going to be
nondual vis a vis a triadic semiotic. Rome doesn’t publish catechisms
in this idiom, only a group of folks who belong to the John Courtney
Murray Society at Berkeley find it engaging (best I can tell, anyway; I’m not an academic
and I do not get around much).
I could go on dismissing what is not essential and trying to overcome stereotypes, which we
have earned, but …
Essentially, the catholic outlook on created reality is radically incarnational, rejects moral
depravity, sees all of creation as intrinsically good even if flawed, sees created realities
mediating the God-encounter & is thus sacramental. Catholicism embraces faith and reason
(fides et ratio) but rejects any conflation of science, philosophy and faith, viewing these
approaches to reality as methodologically autonomous, hence rejecting fideism and
scientism. Essential dogma is contained in the creeds with other stuff up for grabs, although
controversy surrounds the only two so-called infallible pronouncements ever articulated, the
Assumption and Immaculate Conception, which is more vs less problematical depending on
how one conceives so-called “original” sin. There is the matter of the Petrine Ministry, but
that, too, could be more narrowly or broadly conceived (e.g. creeping infallibilism).
Finally, coming full circle back to the aim of this thread, there is the question of whether or
not there can even be such a thing as a Christian Philosophy or a Theological Anthropology
or a Religious Epistemology. And my answer, and I’m pretty sure the orthodox Catholic
answer, is no. Anthropology is science. Epistemology is philosophy. Metaphysics belong to
various philosophical schools.
Do people articulate anthropologies,
epistemologies, metaphysics and philosophies
that would be incompatible with faith? Of
course, but that’s because they are doing bad
anthropology, bad epistemology, bad
metaphysics and bad philosophy, in ways that
don’t employ philosophical rigor and can’t
withstand philosophical scrutiny. Do believers
articulate scientific and philosophical
perspectives derived from their religious
stances? Sure, but that’s because they’re doing
bad science and bad philosophy. In other words,
category errors are not uncommon.
From the Archbishop of Canterbury to the
Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Promoting
Christian Unity, yesterday, 19 November 2009:
Therefore the major question that
remains is whether in the light of that
depth of agreement the issues that still
divide us have the same weight – issues
about authority in the Church, about
primacy (especially the unique position
of the pope), and the relations between
the local churches and the universal
church in making decisions (about matters like the ordination of women, for
instance). Are they theological questions in the same sense as the bigger issues
on which there is already clear agreement? And if they are, how exactly is it
that they make a difference to our basic understanding of salvation and
communion? But if they are not, why do they still stand in the way of
fullervisible unity? Can there, for example, be a model of unity as a
communion of churches which have different attitudes to how the papal
primacy is expressed?
The central question is whether and how we can properly tell the
difference between ’second order’ and ‘first order’ issues. When so
very much agreement has been firmly established in first-order matters about
the identity and mission of the Church, is it really justifiable to treat other
issues as equally vital for its health and integrity?”

145. This discussion continues below >>> Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: A m e r i c a n p r a g m a t i s t t r a d i t i o n, a t o n e m e n t t h e o r y, c a t e g o r y e r r o r s, Catholic progressives, Charles
Sanders Peirce, Christian Philosophy, church disciplines, c h u r c h p o l i t y, creeds, creeping infallibilism,
deontology, e l i m i n a t i v e m a t e r i a l i s m, Faith & Reason, fideism, fides et ratio, Immaculate Conception,
interaction problem, J o h n C o u r t n e y M u r r a y S o c i e t y, John Duns Scotus, Josiah Royce, l i t u r g i c a l
traditions, magisterial teaching office, M a g i s t e r i u m, m a t e r i a l i s m, m e t a p h y s i c a l, m e t a p h y s i c s, m o r a l
d e p r a v i t y, moral doctrine, nature of the soul, o n t o l o g y, p a r t i c i p a t o r y i m a g i n a t i o n, P e t r i n e m i n i s t r y,
phenomenological, Religious Epistemology, root metaphor, s a c r a m e n t a l, s a c r a m e n t s, scientism,
scriptural exegesis, Scripture & Tradition, sense of the faithful, sensus fidelium, s u p e r n a t u r a l, t h e
A s s u m p t i o n, Theological Anthropology, W i l l i a m J a m e s
Searching for Reenchantment in all the wrong places
JB on November 20, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, Uncategorized, the evaluative -
Culture, the interpretive - Religion | No Comments »
The New Age seems to be a dysfunctional response to postmodernity.
I use the word response to indicate an over against or counter-movement. For example, it
seems to me that the emerging church conversation is a response to Protestant
fundamentalism (and, I’m hoping, Catholic fundamentalism). For its part, the New Atheism,
is a form of Enlightenment fundamentalism. Another example, in the Catholic church our
new priests are tending toward a reactionary traditionalism, what sociologist, Fr. Andy
Greeley, has called “young fogeys.” Radical Orthodoxy seems to be another response to both
modernism and postmodernism; I’m sympathetic to and interested in RO’s response.
If I had to choose one word to describe what
many, many people seem to be searching for
it would be reenchantment and I would
reckon it is motivated by a nostalgia for an
experience of the world prior to it being
demythologized. (If only they understood our
true myth.)
If the transformative journey is marked by
movement from a naive understanding
through reflection to a novel hermeneutic of
the second naivete’, then some movements,
as responses, seem to entail an en masse
regression back to an original, first naivete’.
I’m no sociologist of religion but this dynamic
does seem to capture at least part of what is
going on.
I would like to add that, in my view, the New Age movement has
done violence to the wisdom of the Eastern traditions. It has engaged
them at a very superficial level, especially where ontological monism
is concerned. The East, for the most part, is not engaging in classical
Western metaphysics. It’s practices are geared toward leading people
into phenomenal experiences and not, rather, to metaphysical
conclusions. The New Age movement, in my view, is a superficial
engagement of the East that results in a perversion of those
traditions, which I treat here, for any interested: No-Self &
Nirvana elucidated by Dumoulin.
The New Age, then, is a facile syncretism and seems a kindred
spirit to the Prosperity Gospel movement in that it tries to do an end around the Cross.
What has often been called transrational, in the New Age movement, is actually an
arational gnosticism, which tells us spiritual pedestrians of the metaphysical bourgeoisie:
“You don’t see this truth because you are not at this stage, on our level.” And they are blind
to and caught up in this silly tautology, which is like saying you don’t see any elephants
around here because I carry an elephant gun and they wouldn’t dare come ’round here.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: arational gnosticism, C a t h o l i c f u n d a m e n t a l i s m, Eastern traditions, e m e r g i n g c h u r c h
c o n v e r s a t i o n, f a c i l e s y n c r e t i s m, F r . A n d r e w G r e e l e y, m o d e r n i s m, N e w A g e, N e w A t h e i s m,
p o s t m o d e r n i t y, Prosperity Gospel, P r o t e s t a n t f u n d a m e n t a l i s m, radical orthodoxy, r e e n c h a n t m e n t,
second naivete’, t r a d i t i o n a l i s m, t r a n s r a t i o n a l, t r u e m y t h
The Fugue: truth, beauty, goodness & unity
JB on November 19, 2009 in Cosmological, Methods & Approaches, Practices & Experiences,
Provisional Closures & Systems, Uncategorized, the descriptive - Science, the evaluative -
Culture, the interpretive - Religion, the normative - Philosophy | No Comments »

146. In the John Keats poem, Ode On A Grecian Urn, we hear:
“Beauty is truth, truth beauty, that is all Ye know on
earth, and all ye need to know.” I see what he was
driving at but that doesn’t withstand philosophical scrutiny.
I believe it was Thomas Merton who noted that truth
often comes flying in on the wings of beauty and
goodness. Let me set forth how this might indeed be so.
In epistemology, the competing schools have included 1)
correspondence theory 2) virtue epistemology 3) coherence
theory and 4) community of inquiry (semiotic theory).
In aesthetics, the competing schools have included 1)
formalism & essentialism 2) mimesis & imitationalism 3)
emotionalism & expressivism and 4) agency &
instrumentalism.
In ethics, the competing schools have included 1)
deontological ethics 2) virtue or aretaic ethics 3)
contractarian ethics and 4) teleological or consequentialist
ethics.
In natural theology, the “proofs” have included the 1) ontological 2) cosmological 3)
axiological and 4) teleological.
In religion, our approaches include 1) creed or dogma 2) cult or ritual 3) code or law and 4)
community or fellowship.
In religion, our apologetics have included the 1) evidential 2) rational 3) presuppositional
and 4) existential.
In science, our approaches include the 1) empirical 2) logical 3) practical and 4) relational
and peer review.
The pattern that seems to inevitably emerge in most human
enterprises seems to be a matrix that includes, on one axis,
the values of 1) truth 2) beauty 3) goodness 4) unity, and,
on the other axis, the different approaches to those values of
the 1) objective 2) subjective 3) intraobjective 4)
intersubjective.
Put differently, there seems to be a 1) descriptive 2)
interpretive 3) normative and 4) evaluative moment in every
type of human value-realization. This is to suggest that every
human value-realization involves 1) a description of a
given reality 2) an evaluation of that reality’s significance
to the individual, but even more so to the community 3)
norms regarding how to best acquire or avoid that reality
and 4) an interpretation of how it all re-ligates or ties-
back-together. What seems to have happened in almost every
academic discipline regarding various human endeavors or
human value-realization is that these integrally-related
moments, each which is methodologically autonomous,
have been variously overemphasized at the expense of the
other moments such that methods have been inflated into
systems, approaches into schools, practices into conclusions.
To avoid this confusion, this conflation of methods and systems, we can draw some helpful
distinctions.
The descriptive, the objective, the empirical, the evidential, the creedal, the ontological, the
deontological, the formalist, the essential – all derive from a fundamental presupposition that
reality is intelligible and include other such basic notions as the existence of other minds over
against solipsism, as various first principles such as noncontradiction and excluded middle
and other epistemic stances toward reality which cannot be proved but without which
knowledge itself would not be possible. Taken together, the categories represent a
correspondence theory of truth, including a metaphysical realism.
The postmodern critique did not challenge
correspondence theory or metaphysical
realism, a radically deconstructive
postmodernism did that but was not
successful, theoretically, which is not to say
that we do not see a practical nihilism
playing out in various aspects of
postmodernity. It is to recognize that, as a
system or school or conclusion, radical
deconstruction was philosophically bankrupt
and intrinsically incoherent.
The evaluative, the intersubjective, the
relational, the existential, community and
fellowship – all represent the end for which we exist and the unity and intimacy to which we
aspire, hence comprise the desired consequences, the instrumental purpose of our agency, the
very telos of our existence.
The normative, the intraobjective, the practical, the law, the contractarian, the prudential,
the axiological, the emotional even – all represent the means by which we aspire to attain
our end. Implicit in these means is the fundamental presupposition that the normative
inheres in the descriptive, that epistemology is inherently normative, that our
approaches to reality, even if not strictly logically-related, even if otherwise
methodologically autonomous, are intellectually-related, more specifically,
axiologically-integral. This coherence is not a “theory” of truth but a “test” of truth and
includes, if not a robust, at least, a rudimentary moral realism and an extrinsic reward
mechanism, pragmatic utility.

147. The interpretive, the subjective, the logical, the rational, the
ritual, the cosmological, beauty for beauty’s sake, virtue for
virtue’s sake – all represent the intrinsically rewarding
dynamics of pure play, of art, of symmetry, elegance,
parsimony, simplicity, of pattern dancing with paradox, of
order mingling with chaos, of chance teasing necessity, of
the systematic emerging from the random and similar
fugues in reality. Like utility and coherence, such realities as
symmetry, parsimony and elegance are not robustly truth-
conducive but are, instead, more weakly truth-
indicative. What is useful or beautiful will not necessarily
be true, but since what is true is useful and beautiful, we
have some probabilistic indication that a reality that is
pragmatic and beautiful is certainly more likely to be true
than other alternatives. Such is pragmatism, properly
conceived, which has no relationship to the corrosive
pragmatic so-called theory of truth, which most folks
suitably deride.
Thus it is that I have derived my heuristic that the
normative mediates between the descriptive and the
interpretive to effect the evaluative in a probabilistic,
fallibilistic manner, the probable prescinding from the necessary in the speculative grammar
of my meta-metaphysic.
When it comes to adjudicating between otherwise equiplausible interpretive systems, such as
religions and ideologies, I apply an equiplausibility principle, which chooses what is the
most beautiful, the most good (life-giving) and the most unitive (relationship-enhancing) as
likely being the most true. Ergo, Jesus.
One may wish to take a look at my related essay, Getting to Is from Ought, to see how one
can ground one’s moral realism in God in a manner that is philosophically rigorous but also
pluralistically aware.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: aesthetics, apologetics, aretaic ethics, Axiological, a x i o l o g i c a l l y-i n t e g r a l, b e a u t y, c o h e r e n c e t h e o r y,
c o m m u n i t y o f i n q u i r y, consequentialist ethics, c o n t r a c t a r i a n e t h i c s, correspondence theory,
correspondence theory of truth, Cosmological, deontological ethics, e m o t i o n a l i s m, epistemology,
equiplausibility principle, essentialism, e t h i c s, e x p r e s s i v i s m, First Principles, f o r m a l i s m, goodness,
i m i t a t i o n a l i s m, i n t e g r a l, i n t e g r a l i s t, i n t e r s u b j e c t i v e, i n t r a o b j e c t i v e, Jesus, John Keats, Ken Wilber,
m e t a-m e t a p h y s i c, m e t a p h y s i c a l r e a l i s m, m e t a p h y s i c s, methodologically autonomous, m i m e s i s, m o r a l
r e a l i s m, N a t u r a l T h e o l o g y, Ode On A Grecian Urn, ontological, p e e r r e v i e w, Postmodern Critique,
p r a c t i c a l n i h i l i s m, p r a g m a t i c, p r a g m a t i c u t i l i t y, p r a g m a t i s m, probabilistic, r a d i c a l l y d e c o n s t r u c t i v e
postmodernism, semiotic theory, teleological, telos, Thomas Merton, t r u t h, t r u t h-c o n d u c i v e, t r u t h-
i n d i c a t i v e, u n i t y, v a l u e-realization, v i r t u e e p i s t e m o l o g y
The Nature of the Soul
JB on November 19, 2009 in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »
If someone put a gun to my head and told me I had to get it right or else, I would opt for a
nonreductive physicalism to describe human nature, pretty much following Nancey
Murphy.
The better our anthropology, the better our theology will be.
At the same time, beyond a robust phenomenology, which
needn’t delve heavily into minute ontological particulars in
order to capture the essence of the human experience, it
seems to me that we will rather quickly reach a point of
diminishing returns with our investments in one speculative
metaphysic or another, one philosophy of mind or another.
To some extent, good old fashioned common sense and a
simple faith seem to be enough to properly understand
humanity.
We can successfully defend notions of downward causality
without any violations of physical causal closure. We
know that tacit dimensions can, in an ineluctably
unobtrusive manner, be utterly efficacious. By analogy, then,
if we do live in an hierarchical reality, it is not that difficult to
imagine divine causal joints that would be unobtrusive and
undetectable, in principle, even while quite effective in
actuality. We cannot know a priori whether such an
ontological discontinuity between Creator and creature is
the only such discontinuity in nature, itself.
In other words, such a
putative hierarchy could be multi-layered and there is no way
we could, in principle, empirically measure or logically
demonstrate same. An appeal to the notion that there is
scientific support for physicalism but not dualism seems
disingenuous; after all, if created reality is in any way
dualistic, we’re not going to be able to subject same to science.
At some point, our investigations could be thwarted and we’d
simply be left with metaphysical conceptions and inferences
that are not empirically measurable, logically conclusive or
hypothetically falsifiable. The soul, however, does not seem to
be one of those elusive realities; neuroscience seems to have
described its functions rather well.

148. Whatever the case may be, I don’t think Scripture or tradition
are inextricably intertwined with one particular anthropology
or one particular metaphysic. Science doesn’t ask the
questions that are the most meaningful to us, anyway. Its role
is not to “reduce” our culture, philosophy or religion or other
emergent realities that are terribly interesting and
tremendously significant as phenomena no matter what their
underlying mechanisms are. I’m not denying that folks don’t
devise wholly reductionistic explanations , only observing that they lack explanatory
adequacy and are question-begging tautologies, uninteresting at that (to me).
With no gun to my head, metaphysically, I’m agnostic regarding the created realm. My
nonduality is an epistemic stance and not an ontological position, except for my nuanced
panentheism and except for my sneaking suspicions, or very provisional closure, regarding
the soul.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: a n t h r o p o l o g y, d i v i n e c a u s a t i o n, d o w n w a r d c a u s a l i t y, d u a l i s m, e x p l a n a t o r y a d e q u a c y, falsifiable,
h i e r a r c h i c a l r e a l i t y, m e t a p h y s i c s, N a n c e y M u r p h y, n o n d u a l i t y, n o n r e d u c t i v e p h y s i c a l i s m, ontological
d i s c o n t i n u i t y, p a n e n t h e i s m, p h e n o m e n o l o g y, philosophy of mind, p h y s i c a l i s m, reductionistic, Science,
soul, tacit dimension
Getting from Is to Ought
JB on November 19, 2009 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
In essence, an authoritarian deontology ends up being an appeal – not to our Judaeo-
Christian heritage, but – to a foundational epistemology (a method) and a robust moral
realism (a conclusion). I am in deep sympathy with a moral realism that is ultimately
grounded in God, but adopt that interpretive stance as a basic presupposition, which is
indispensable to my faith outlook but otherwise not required as a presupposition for
knowledge, itself, a method, which is fallible and probabilistic and not foundational, providing
us with apodictic certainty.
As it is, with so many different authorities
(religious traditions) around, all appealing to
diverse foundational sources (scriptures &
traditions & natural laws) and no way to
successfully adjudicate between them in a
logically coercive way, appeals to a
foundational epistemology coupled with an
authoritarian deontology aren’t going to take
us very far, either meta-ethically or toward
the articulation of a more global ethic.
At the same time, we can expect to reason
successfully from an IS to an OUGHT, from
the given to the normative, from the
descriptive to the prescriptive, from a fact to a
value, notwithstanding Hume’s objections,
and we can distinguish between apparent and real goods, lesser and higher goods,
notwithstanding any so-called naturalistic fallacy. We can also recognize, with Sartre, that,
since we are similarly-situated in this somewhat universal human condition, the prescriptions
we devise for any human situation we describe are going to be remarkably consistent, for all
practical purposes, even if the interpretations in which we ground them are otherwise very
divergent (or even relativistic), theoretically speaking.
This discussion continues here>>> Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: a u t h o r i t a r i a n d e o n t o l o g y, Axiological, a x i o l o g i c a l l y-i n t e g r a l, Cosmological, D a v i d H u m e,
deontological, fallible, foundational epistemology, global ethic, m o r a l r e a l i t y, n a t u r a l i s t i c f a l l a c y,
ontological, Robert Cummings Neville, semiotic
Meaning in Life – abundance for believers & unbelievers
JB on November 18, 2009 in Provisional Closures & Systems, the evaluative - Culture, the
interpretive - Religion | No Comments »
We do not advance formal arguments for evaluative posits. In a similar vein, I can find no
grounds to dismiss the abundant meaning to be found in our human existence, whether by
people of implicit faith or no faith at all. Anthropology reveals, and no too few nontheistic
friends of mine faithfully report to me, profound existential orientations to such values as
truth, beauty, goodness and unity, even within their agnostic and atheistic interpretive
stances.

149. That I take such existential orientations and interpret
them also as transcendental imperatives in my theism
is viewed by some as a needless multiplication of
ontologies and a meaningless tautology. For their part,
they inhabit a different tautology. Those believers, like
myself, who view reality as radically incarnational and
who do not buy into traditional views of atonement or
see reality as morally depraved but as intrinsically good
even if flawed, would expect that all humans would
discover reality’s goodness and realize, in varying
degrees, reality’s values.
So, I
expect
most
people,
for the
most
part, to
report a
mostly
abundant life, once taking into account
economic disparities and other senseless
suffering (which doesn’t undermine many
people’s fundamental trust in God, anyway).
The only distinction I would offer is that I
persist in faith in a particular tradition because
FOR ME it seems to provide for a
superabundance in my human value-realizations (including personal integrity) vis a vis other
pathways and I would concede to others that this may be one of the reasons they choose
their particular path.
It is perhaps too early on humankind’s journey to successfully adjudicate between the
propositional elements of these otherwise disparate interpretive positions and evaluative
posits, the value of which gets cashed out in our practical lived experiences.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: agnostic, a t h e i s t, evaluative posits, existential orientations, f o r m a l a r g u m e n t s, h u m a n v a l u e-
realizations, i n c a r n a t i o n a l, interpretive stances, m o r a l d e p r a v i t y, t h e i s m
« Older Entries Newer Entries »
© 2010 christiannonduality.com Blog is Proudly Powered By WordPress | Theme by The Cloisters

150. CHRISTIANNONDUALITY. C O M BL O G
beyond thinking & proposing to imagining & participating
Home About
T o d a y’ s L i t u r g y
to value our yearning, treasure our wanting & embrace our
incompleteness
JB on November 18, 2009 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
The post below is in response to a post on the Reflecting on Awareness blog where today’s
reflection is on Strategy & the soft work of noticing. It is a very generous personal Translator
sharing and opens with:
One of the way I spend a huge amount of By N2H
energy on, is in order to avoid hurt in life Amos Yong apophatic
protecting myself; strategies. Axiological axiologically-
From putting on my make up in the Bernard
integral
morning, to staying in my room and closing Lonergan Brian
McLaren
the door. To the more subtle realm of
thoughts, and the inner manipulations and Charles
Sanders
movement to not feel any hurt, or
woundedness. Peirce
contemplative
There is some belief in me that says cosmology emergence
emerging church
‘I can avoid disappointments, I could avoid Enlightenment
hurt’ But can I? epistemology faith False
Self fideism Hans
Kung James K. A. Smith
Jesus Creed John Duns
Yes. Scotus kataphatic Kevin
Amen. Beck Kurt Godel
So be it. Merton
Well said.
Nicely felt.
metaphysics
Mike Morrell Natural
Theology nihilism
Increasingly, I have given up the old spiritual paradigm, which frames OUR journey in nondual nonduality
terms of perfection, and embraced another, which suggests we’re on a road, rather, to orthodoxy radical
completion. emergence radical
We will experience lacking and painfully and poignantly so. And, as Richard Rohr orthodoxy rationalism
emphasizes, that pain which we do not allow to somehow transform us we will continue to Richard Rohr
Science
transmit to others. Allowing pain to do its transformative work is precisely a journey into
intimacy because intimacy is what will complete us. So this pain impels us to longing and scientism semiotic
theodicy Theological
yearning. Anthropology
Consider my favorite Gerald May quotes: Thomas
Merton Tim King
transformation
True Self Walker Percy
W P-C u m u l u s b y R o y T a n c k
We are conscious not just because our hearts are beating but because they are a n d Luke Morton requires
yearning (1). F l a s h P l a y e r 9 or better.
Cultivating the
The only way to own and claim love as our identity is: Roots, Nurturing
the Shoots
to fall in love with love itself,
MARCH 2010
to feel affection for our longing, M T W T F S S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
to value our yearning, 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
treasure our wanting, 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31
embrace our incompleteness, « FEB
be overwhelmed by the beauty of our need (2). Recent Posts
Love is present in any desire … in all feelings of attraction, in all caring and The Emerging Church is BIGGER
connectedness. It embraces us in precious moments of immediate presence. It t h a n C h r i s t i a n i t y – how to spot
is also present when we experience loneliness, loss, grief and rejection. We may it in other traditions
say such feelings come from the absence of love, but in fact they are signs of Abortion & the Senate
our loving; they express how much we care. We grieve according to how Healthcare Bill – a p r u d e n t i a l
much of ourselves we have already given; we yearn according to how much judgment
we would give, if only we could (3). 10 historical developments
propelling Emerging
Christianity ~ Richard Rohr

151. Why Brian McLaren’s Greco-
So, our choices play out in terms of whether our Roman Narrative is NOT a
responses will be existential, which is to say life-giving caricature
and relationship-enhancing, or neurotic, which is to THE BOOK: Christian
say life-detracting and relationship-destroying. And N o n d u a l i t y – Postmodern
these are the choices whether we experience guilt, Conservative Catholic
anger, lust, greed, envy, jealousy, pride or any other Pentecostal
passion, whether somewhat bridled or not. We sit in the
front row of a crowded theater and, on the big screen, a Recent Comments
train is lurching toward us, picking up speed, getting
ever larger and ever louder. Our sympathetic nervous christiannonduality.com Blog »
system kicks in, adrenaline is released, our liver Blog Archive » Thoughts re:
glycogen converts to glucose, our muscles tense and our t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
heart starts pumping furiously as we enter fight or flight vs Dan Dennett on Intelligent
mode. To run out of the theater would be neurotic. On Design – a poorly designed
the other hand, should we be strolling down the railroad inference
tracks, leisurely tossing stones into the adjacent stream, christiannonduality.com Blog »
and a train rushes toward us, to jump off of the tracks Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n
into the stream would be existential. So, with Gerald McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
May, let us value our feelings as they give us Narrative is NOT a caricature on
information about both our external environment and A New Kind of Christianity?
internal milieu. And let us enjoy the ways we squirm, McLaren didn’t make this up. It’s
cringe, and avoid life and relationships, existentially worse than that!
rather than neurotically. christiannonduality.com Blog »
Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n
McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Narrative is NOT a caricature on
E v e r y t h i n g T h a t’s Old is New
A g a i n – this (McLaren’s “ N e w”
Christianity) is truly an old
time religion
K i e r a n C o n r o y on A New Kind of
Christianity? McLaren didn’t
make this up. It’s worse than
that!
Philip Clayton on Thoughts re:
Tags: existential, feelings, G e r a l d M a y, n e u r o t i c, Reflecting on Awareness, Richard Rohr, S t r a t e g y & t h e t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
soft work of noticing vs Dan Dennett
Type, Hit Enter to Search
We Distinguish in
we are liturgical animals, Homo liturgicus Order to Unite
JB on November 17, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, the interpretive - Religion | 2 Select Category 6
Comments » Blogroll
This is in response to a Jesus Creed blog post The Age of the Spirit – Sacrament and Andrew Sullivan
Mission: Beyond Blue
Brian D. McLaren
It seems we have learned from anthropology that we are story-tellers Commonweal
and that our intellectual, affective, moral and social growth comes Crunchy Con
not only from propositional cognition but also from our participatory Cynthia Bourgeault
imagination, our active participation in various narratives. Emergent Village
Emerging Women
One could say we are liturgical First Thoughts
animals, Homo liturgicus. And Fors Clavigera
this is true whether one practices Francis X. Clooney, S.J.
an explicit faith, implicit faith or Joseph S. O'Leary
no faith at all. And this is true for NCR Today – the Catholic Blog
better and for worse, as our Per Caritatem
desires are formed, shaped and Phyllis Tickle
reinforced by the liturgies of the mall, sports stadia and Post Christian
the marketplace as well as by our worship and fellowship. Postmodern Conservative
So, an approach that best articulates our faith (including Radical Emergence
propositions), best celebrates our hopes and best Sojourners
reinforces our love will, in my view, help us move more Tall Skinny Kiwi
swiftly and with less hindrance along our ongoing The Website of Unknowing
journeys of transformation, enjoying a life of Transmillenial
superabundance. So, I’m thinking there will be some type Vox Nova
of sacramental economy in play for all, again, for better Weekly Standard Blog
or worse, which helps order our orthodoxy, orthopathy Worship Blog
and orthopraxy. What that should be, precisely, is Zoecarnate
another consideration but there certainly will be norms in
play. Worthwhile Sites
Even people of implicit faith and Amos Yong
no “formal” sacramental access will be realizing life’s most important Boulder Integral
values of truth, beauty, goodness and unity, in other words, a life of Brother David Steindl-Rast
love and abundance (as various semiotic signs and symbols bring Center for Action and
into reality what they bring to mind). I don’t view these value- Contemplation
realizations in terms of all or nothing but more so in terms of degrees Christian Nonduality
of fullness of realization of the God-encounter (as well as frustration Contemplative Outreach
of). It is said that the God-encounter is a full body-blow (head & David Group International
heart, body, soul & spirit) and that seems an apt anthropological Dialogue Institute
description. Ecumene
Franciscan Archive
As for the nature of the soul, however dual or nondual or in-between Innerexplorations
(hylomorphic), I think it suffices to recognize that our temporal experience is radically Institute on Religion in an Age of
integral, which is to recognize that our experience is wholly embodied & wholly ensouled. Science
What happens transtemporally in an eternal realm is nothing God can’t handle insofar as Metanexus
He’s not constrained by our speculative metaphysical constructions. Monastic Interreligious Dialogue
National Catholic Reporter
For more on Homo liturgicus, see this article, Liturgy Forty Years after the Council, Radical Orthodoxy
written by Cardinal Godfried Danneels, Archbishop of Mechelen-Brussels. Shalomplace
Sojourners
This discussion continues with follow-up posts from Jesus Creed. Click on the following Thomas Merton Center
link to continue>>> Read the rest of this entry » Virtual Chapel
Zygon Center for Religion and
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send Science
Cloud of
Unknowing

152. Amos Yong apophatic
Axiological axiologically-
Bernard
integral
Lonergan Brian
McLaren Charles
Tags: a n t h r o p o l o g y, Cardinal Godfried Danneels, church discipline, Desiring the Kingdom, e n c u l t u r a t e d
Sanders
Peirce
t h e o l o g y, E u c h a r i s t, Homo liturgicus, implicit faith, James K. A. Smith, Jesus Creed, l i t u r g y, m o r a l contemplative
doctrine, nature of the soul, o r t h o d o x y, o r t h o p a t h y, o r t h o p r a x y, R o m a n-A n g l i c a n d i a l o g u e, s a c r a m e n t a l cosmology emergence
e c o n o m y, s a c r a m e n t a l t h e o l o g y, semiotic, transignification, t r a n s u b s t a n t i a t i o n emerging church
E n l i g h t e n m e n t epistemology
faith False Self fideism
Hans Kung James K. A.
Smith Jesus Creed John
build your life according to this necessity Duns Scotus kataphatic
Kevin Beck Kurt
JB on November 17, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, Uncategorized | No Comments » Godel Merton
Rainer Maria Rilke “Letters to a Young Poet”
metaphysics Mike
Morrell Natural Theology
nihilism nondual
nonduality orthodoxy
radical emergence radical
Nobody can counsel and help you. Nobody. There is only one single way. Go into orthodoxy rationalism
yourself. Search for the reason that bids you write; find out whether it is spreading Richard Rohr
Science scientism
out its roots in the deepest places of your heart, acknowledge to yourself whether
you would have to die if it were denied you to write. This above all – ask yourself in semiotic theodicy
the stillest hour of your night must I write? Delve into yourself for a deep answer. Theological
And if this should be affirmative, if you may meet his earnest question with a strong Anthropology
and simple “I must,” then build your life according to this necessity: your life even Thomas
into its most indifferent and slightest hour must be a sign of this urge and a Merton Tim King
transformation True
testimony to it.
Self Walker Percy
Join Other
Visitors in Prayer
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send Light A Candle & Pray
Join Us in the
Liturgy of the
Hours
Tags: "Letters to a Young Poet", Rainer Maria Rilke
Get the C a t h l i m e r g e n t o n
Twitter widget and many other
There’s No Place Like Home – common sense & simple faith great free widgets a t Widgetbox!
Not seeing a widget? (More info)
JB on November 16, 2009 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
Tweets
Carl McColman shared this quote of the day from Ralph Norman’s The Rediscovery of johnssylvest: Abortion & the
Mysticism, in The Blackwell Companion to Modern Theology Senate Healthcare Bill – a
prudential judgment
http://bit.ly/aS2DwT
johnssylvest: 10 developments
Now if God is beyond distinctions, God is also beyond language. This explains propelling Emerging
the mystics’ playful use of language to subvert itself… Whichever way Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
language is used, God is not named by it. It does not matter if language is used http://bit.ly/a4AMtg
only to deny things of God for these denials always fall short of the mark and johnssylvest: RT @pdclayton7:
have themselves to be denied. Thus apophaticism creates room for a great deal "Theology After Google" opens
of affirmative language about God (as long as it is remembered that these Wed. - 23 of the best speakers on
affirmations also fall short of the unknowable God)… Predictably, the mystics’ emerging religion in Google Age;
recognition that God ruptures language has been of great interest for live stream at http://o ...
postmodern philosophers. This is partly because of the mystics’ subversive johnssylvest: RT @jonestony:
playfulness with language, partly because they are nevertheless concerned New Blog Post: Society for
with unsaying the foundation of language that is the foundation of all — God Pentecostal Studies Paper: What
the creator who is outside the universe, indistinct from all that is, and Pentecostals Have to Learn from
therefore one with it. Emergents http://ow.ly/16KREU
johnssylvest: THE BOOK: An
Emerging Church Conversation
with a Postmodern Conservative
Be sure to check out Carl’s blog for yesterday’s post Amazing Books from Blackwell. Catholic Pentecostal
http://bit.ly/91D570 #fb
Because I was first immersed in the mystical literature of
both the patristic and medieval periods and also Merton, John Sobert Sylvest
when I did eventually encounter the postmodern critique,
it did not seem entirely new. Dionysian logic and Scotistic
semiotics, at least inchoately, recognized this language
play.
In some sense, modernism perverted the best of the
modern with a radical kataphaticism, while
postmodernism perverted the best of the postmodern with
a radical apophaticism. Contrastingly, the best modern
and postmodern insights thus seem to be in continuity
with our early church mothers and fathers and medieval
mystics. In my view, this is evident in those parts of an
emerging Christianity that, in different ways, is also
radically orthodox or properly rooted in our ancient
tradition, which is why I advocate a radical emergence.

153. While reality remains wholly
incomprehensible, it is still partly
apprehensible. We will fall short,
but our falling short involves such
a very tall reality. Thus our
alternating apophatic negations and kataphatic affirmations, which
tender very little knowledge of God’s nature, nevertheless provide us Johnboy Was Here
Feedjit Live Blog Stats
a great deal because to know very little about a reality that LARGE
Feedjit Live Blog Stats
still amounts to an overwhelming amount of information for us as
creatures. And this knowledge, which is more participatory &
relational (nondual) than propositional & cognitive (dual), is of
profound existential import insofar as it addresses our most insistent
longings, our most urgent needs and our most pressing ultimate concerns. And this Follow this blog
knowledge is accessible to us through simple common sense combined with a simple open
heart.
After studying epistemology in earnest, I came away with the distinct notion that all of the
most egregious errors of modernism and postmodernism came from academics who’d over-
thought, departing from common sense and a simple faith.
So, I came to the eventual realization that my childhood formation in my Catholic faith had
gifted me with all the competence I needed to realize life’s greatest values, even if my
competence had been somewhat, so to speak, an unconscious competence. The worldly
sophisticates, for their part, thus seemed to be consciously incompetent; this would include
both the new atheists, with their scientism, the radical deconstructionists, with their nihilism,
and the modern religious fundamentalisms, with their fideism.
In Bede’s Ecclesiastical History, where it
relates the conversion of King Edwin, a
nobleman counsels the King:
Life is like a banquet hall. Inside is light
and fire and warmth and feasting, but
outside it is cold and dark. A sparrow
flies in through a window at one end,
flies the length of the hall, and out Visit Cathlimergent Conversations
through a window at the other end.
That is what life is like. At birth we Visit Anglimergent
emerge from the unknown, and for a Meta
brief while we are here on this earth,
with a fair amount of comfort and Log in
happiness. But then we fly out the Entries R S S
window at the other end, into the cold Comments R S S
and dark and unknown future. If the new religion can lighten that darkness WordPress.org
for us, then let us follow it.
Like Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz, on my philosophical sojourns, I discovered there was no
place like home. James Taylor once said that, at bottom, all of his music is about going
home. I hope you’re home for Christmas. A cryptic note to my children: Remember the
spoons.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: a p o p h a t i c i s m, Bede’s Ecclesiastical History, Carl McColman, Catholic faith, C h r i s t m a s, Dionysian
logic, e a r l y c h u r c h f a t h e r s, epistemology, fideism, J a m e s T a y l o r, King Edwin, m e d i e v a l m y s t i c s,
m o d e r n i s m, new atheists, n i h i l i s m, postmodernism, radical deconstructionism, r a d i c a l e m e r g e n c e,
radical orthodoxy, R a l p h N o r m a n, r e l i g i o u s f u n d a m e n t a l i s m, scientism, Scotistic semiotics, T h e
Rediscovery of Mysticism
Cal Thomas is caricaturizing “diversity”
JB on November 15, 2009 in Uncategorized, the evaluative - Culture, the interpretive -
Religion, the normative - Philosophy | No Comments »
In E. Pluribus Diversity, Cal Thomas is
caricaturizing diversity as if it were a notion
over against metaphysical and moral realisms.
There IS a problem with the excessive
epistemic humility of a wimpy postmodernism
just like there is a problem with the epistemic
hubris of modernism and its various
fundamentalisms. However, to set diversity up
as opposed to objective truth is a strawman.
Regarding the
public order,
diversity applies to
accidentals, not
essentials. To be sure,
many conservative
extremists tend to
treat accidentals as essentials, just as many progressive extremists
tend to treat essentials as accidentals. Providentially, our system of
laws and jurisprudence adjudicates these matters as well as any on
the planet, even if imperfectly.

154. ALL the extremist fundamentalists
deserve a roadblock via our
nonestablishment clause such
that they cannot raise accidentals to
the level of essentials, and ALL
religions deserve protection via our
free exercise clause such that
diversity may flourish for matters
that are indeed accidental. Further,
our political and moral orders are
not expected to overlap except to the
extent necessary to preserve the
public order.
Finally, re: Army Maj. Nidal
Malik Hasan, responsible
journalists and politicians would
cease and desist from rhetoric
characterizing what took place and
who & how he really was until
investigations have been completed?
What’s good for the geese and White
House spin doctors is good for the ganders, like Cal Thomas and Charles Krauthammer.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, C a l T h o m a s, d i v e r s i t y, free exercise clause, f u n d a m e n t a l i s t s,
nonestablishment clause, public order
Why PostmodernISM & ModernISM are Both Silly
JB on November 14, 2009 in Axiological, Cosmological, Methods & Approaches, Practices &
Experiences, Provisional Closures & Systems, Uncategorized, the descriptive - Science, the
evaluative - Culture, the interpretive - Religion, the normative - Philosophy | 3 Comments »
Human knowledge advances incrementally, building on what we learned in and from the
past. We see how this plays out in our word usage as we add various prefixes and suffixes and
come up with new words (neologisms). Three prefixes come especially to mind: 1) post-, 2)
trans- and 3) meta-.
In the way I most often use these prefixes, 1) post- means after, 2) trans- means beyond or
through and 3) meta- means more comprehensive. None of these prefixes necessarily also
means without (which is most often indicated by the prefix a-). Not even the prefix non-
necessarily means without; it primarily means we are talking about something else.
The postmodern critique remains a critical assessment of modernism. In my view, it
suggests, for example, that modern methods should not be considered systems, modern
practices should not be confused with conclusions and philosophical approaches should not
misconstrued into schools of philosophy. It recognizes that the best methods, practices and
approaches are fallible but self-subverting, self-critical, self-correcting and guided
probabilistically (in other words, neither absolutely, infallibly nor apodictically). Our closures
are then provisional.
Ironically and tragically, there has been a
perversion of this critique from a method into
a system, a practice into a conclusion, an
approach into a school of thought. This
tragedy, postmodernism, mimics the failed
school of modernism in its over-reaching.
Modernism, for its part, was guilty of
epistemic hubris. Postmodernism, a tonic
turned toxic, proceeds with an excessive
epistemic humility, which is manifestly
unwarranted.
Silliness thus abounds. Modernity gone awry with its
conflation of methods into systems gave us
scientism, an arrogation of science into a full-blown
philosophical school, as well as fideism, a
subjugation of faith via its divorce from reason. A
metaphysic, misconstrued, imagines it can decouple
from physics and many claim to be transrational
whose approach is, in fact, arational. All manner of
insidious -isms abounded as the approaches of
modernity were inflated into such schools as logical
positivism and radical empiricism. Religious
approaches were perverted into encratism, pietism,
rationalism, quietism and every variety of absolutist
fundamentalism, including both sola scriptura and
solum magisterium approaches of Protestantism and
Roman Catholicism.

155. As a therapeutic critique, the postmodern perspective would have
us go beyond the modern not without it. We go beyond science
but not without it. Faith, narrowly conceived as an epistemic leap
beyond such nonrational presuppositions as nihilism, solipsism
and relativism, is an indispensable prerequisite to knowledge.
More broadly conceived, faith is a super-reasonable and
existential response to reality that can be considered a forced
(not to choose is to choose), vital (pertains to our ultimate
concerns, most urgent and insistent longings, and most deeply
cherished values) and live (neither empirically measurable nor
logically demonstrable but still rationally equiplausible and
practically defensible) option.
Our great traditions, with their interpretive approaches to ultimate reality, and our science
and philosophy, with their descriptive and normative approaches to more proximate realities,
are all ordered, evaluatively, toward human value-realizations, which can be in turn
assessed for how well they institutionalize our ongoing conversion and transformation,
intellectually, affectively, morally, socio-politically and religiously (what Gelpi building on
Lonergan might equate with a growth in human authenticity).
What is the way forward?
If it is indeed going to be posthierarchical, in addition
to being more dialogical and democratic, will it
necessarily be ahierarchical? or even necessarily
noninstitutional? Or will some hierarchical and
institutional apparatus inevitably emerge as a necessary
evil, at least where it is, so to speak, developmentally-
appropriate? For that matter, if authentically post-
Western, post-European and postcolonial, won’t we
much more narrowly conceive the meaning of
developmentally-appropriate, especially vis a vis
language, practices and cultural traditions? Under any
other circumstances, it positively must be
postpatriarchal and postpaternalistic?
Certainly, it will be postfoundational, recognizing a
plurality of methodologies and the primacy of narrative
in all human knowing, but will it also acknowledge
certain indispensable propositions and essential
metanarratives? Certainly metaphysical and moral
realisms are indispensable presuppositions?
It will affirm that science, philosophy, culture and
religion are methodologically-autonomous but will it acknowledge that they are also
axiologically-integral?
Will it eschew evidentialism, rationalism,
presuppositionalism and existentialism in
favor of a more holistic perspectivalism but
without defining holism in terms of a facile
moderation or simple balancing act,
acknowledging that certain approaches will
sometimes enjoy at least a primacy if not an
autonomy? This is to ask, then, if the dual and
nondual approaches to reality might better be
described as the transdual, which necessarily
goes beyond, but not without, our
dualistic, problem-solving mind in
approaching life’s most important values,
primarily, from a nondual approach?
Whatever we do, let’s not be silly. Let’s avoid
modernism and postmodernism as we
embrace the best of the modern and
postmodern, as we embrace reality, one
another, ourselves and our God.
When we encounter a seemingly insoluble conundrum or deep mystery, we
will not a priori know whether such a paradox might resolve dialectically (in
an Hegelian-like synthesis), dissolve perspectivally (from a simple paradigm
shift, changing how we approach the problem or overcoming a category
error), best be maintained in a creative tension between competing aspects in a
both-and manner or might present in a truly antinomial fashion (such that a
reductio ad absurdum cannot be overcome without sacrificing the basic
presuppositions of reason, itself).
For life’s most important questions and most pressing concerns, don’t expect
easy problem resolutions and dissolutions. One best learn to nurture creative
tensions and to live with absurdity. All of the great wisdom traditions are in
agreement about this reality; in Christianity, it’s called the Cross. In the end,
our trust in this process must go beyond our rational problem-solving and
apologetics to be grounded in a relationship, which believes and hopes for the
sake of love, alone, and loves for the sake of love, itself; in Christianity, this
relationship is grounded in Jesus.
Note: Most of the posts on this blog deal with epistemology, an exploration of how we know
what we know. And they eschew any notion of a religious epistemology over against any
other epistemologies, defending a stance that says that epistemology is epistemology is
epistemology. I invite you to explore both the Christian Nonduality Blog and Website
and to connect with me, Radical Emergence, on Twitter.
This conversation continues here>>> Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send

156. Tags: Bernard Lonergan, common sense, Daniel Helminiak, Donald Gelpi, E n l i g h t e n m e n t, E n l i g h t e n m e n t
f u n d a m e n t a l i s m, fideism, GK Chesterton, J. B. S. H a l d a n e, Kurt Godel, live option, m e t a n a r r a t i v e,
m e t a p h y s i c s, m o d e r n i s m, n i h i l i s m, n o n d u a l, p a t e r n a l i s t i c, p a t r i a r c h a l, p e r s p e c t i v a l i s m,
postfoundational, Postmodern Critique, postmodernism, postpaternalistic, scientific naturalism,
scientism, simple faith, sola scriptura, s o l u m m a g i s t e r i u m, t r a n s d u a l, Willem Drees
The Spirit Poured Out on All Flesh
JB on November 13, 2009 in Uncategorized, the interpretive - Religion, the normative -
Philosophy | No Comments »
Per Amos Yong, the coming Christendom will be radically pluralistic, centered not in Rome
or Canterbury but variously in Seoul, Beijing, Singapore, Bombay, Lagos, Rio, Sao Paulo and
Mexico City.
The emphases in dialogue will be: 1)
postmodern theology that hears the voices
of the marginalized 2) postpatriarchal
theology 3) postfoundationalist theology
that values methodological pluralism 4)
postcolonial theology that privileges local
traditions, languages and practices 5)
posthierarchical that embraces dialogical
and democratic processes 6) post-Cartesian
theology that gives recognition to the
inductive, lived, existential and nondual
character of reflection alongside deductive,
propositional, more abstract and dualistic
forms of theologizing 7) post-Western and
post-European theology open to engaging
the multiple religious, cultural and
philosophical voices of Asian traditions and
spiritualities
A pneumatological approach to
revelation will then be 1) transcendental –
Spirit breaks thru human condition from
beyond ourselves 2) historical 3) contextual, concerned w/real lives, real histories, real
societies 4) personal, both interpersonal and intersubjective 5) transformational 6)
communal 7) a verb not just a noun 8 ) progressive & dynamic Spirit calls us to
interpret, respond and act 9) marked by love, an unmistakable criterion for discernment 10)
received by humble faith seeking understanding 11) propositional and resisting our fallen
interpretations 12) eschatological
I commend Amos’ The Spirit Poured Out on All Flesh
(2005 Baker Academic). Therein he employs the semiotic
approach of Charles Sanders Peirce and discusses the work of
Don Gelpi, SJ, breaking open new categories and eschewing
the old (such as natural and supernatural). Amos is leading a
new generation of pentecostal scholars into a credible
dialogue with modern science, modern philosophy and
modern theology. The above inventories regarding
theological dialogue and a pneumatological approach to
revelation are slightly abbreviated, mostly verbatim excerpts
from pages 20 and 298, respectively, of Spirit Poured Out.
I bring this up in the context of suggesting that these
approaches have profound implications for ecclesiology.
What is emerging is nothing less than an ecumenical
pneumatological ecclesiology. It criticizes our Western
approach, which is largely discursive theology. It emphasizes
that Life in the Spirit is also an experience.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: A m o s Y o n g, Charles Sanders Peirce, Don Gelpi, ecclesiology, post-Cartesian theology, postcolonial
t h e o l o g y, postfoundationalist theology, posthierarchical theology, postmodern theology, postpatriarchal
t h e o l o g y, S J, The Spirit Poured Out on All Flesh
Spirit Move When You Will, Where You Will, How You Will
JB on November 12, 2009 in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »
This reflection was evoked by a post at the Jesus Creed,
Faith & the Future.

157. My primary interests have long been formative and
contemplative spirituality, inter-religious dialogue and the
interface of science and religion. My spiritual formation was
primarily Roman Catholic in the Charismatic Renewal circa
1970 at Loyola in New Orleans. My outlook is both radically
incarnational and radically pneumatological.
While there is much in tradition to conserve, there has been a
tendency in much of the North American pentecostal
experience toward fundamentalism and, in the RC
charismatic tradition, this has played out as a solum
magisterium, curiously analogous to the sola scriptura of our
Protestant fundamentalist counterparts. MANY RC
charismatic youth of the 70’s, a very evident majority of my
friends, traded-in their Catholicism for other Pentecostal
groups. In some cases, maybe moreso due to personality and
temperament, they kept their authoritarian inclinations
(trading institution for text, so to speak). In many cases, they
remained good, independent critical thinkers and self-critical
at that. I remain deeply sympathetic to their longing for a less
muted, less muffled, more robustly experiential encounter of God in their lives and remain in
great solidarity with them, cherishing our long-standing friendships and mutual love of God.
The Spirit that holds us together is stronger than any of our hermeneutical differences.
An honest self-description would label me a member of the loyal opposition where our
hierarchy is concerned. In my view, it was derailed by a sterile, scholastic and rationalistic
metaphysics and has been slow to get back on track; this largely accounts for its being out of
touch with the sensus fidelium on many issues related to gender and sex regarding both
moral doctrine and church discipline and otherwise out of touch regarding church polity. I’d
join the Episcopal Church tomorrow if I considered such doctrine, discipline and polity
essential rather than accidental. For its part, the ECUSA seems like it would benefit from a
better organized teaching office (if only we RCs could more narrowly conceive the petrine
ministry and better nuance its primacy, I wonder what could happen re: Christian unity).
Well, denominations are the means and not the End.
Modern semiotic science has reaffirmed a role for telos, hence formal and final causations,
although minimalistically conceived. Without going into detail, we now recognize that
otherwise tacit dimensions can remain ineluctably unobtrusive while still utterly efficacious.
By analogy, my own theology of nature (not natural theology), fired perhaps by what my
friend Amos Yong calls a pneumatological imagination, sees a robust telic dimension of
reality, which is to say that I affirm a highly nuanced panentheism. My own panentheism
doesn’t aspire to locate divine causal joints or to describe cosmological realities (as others do &
I see them being a tad misguided) but is much more ontologically vague and tends to
axiological realities (our ultimate concerns & semiotic meanings). The practical upshot is
that, semiotically, I can imagine the Spirit, gently but efficaciously, influencing reality from
its cosmic origins through its telic destinies, drawing us all together in ways no eye has seen
nor ear heard nor heart conceived.
I suppose this is to suggest that I think it is enough for us to focus on our phenomenological
experiences and value-realizations and THAT we have thus been gifted and less important to
concern ourselves with describing, in metaphysical parlance, just HOW this is so (e.g. one
philosophy of mind vs another). This is also to say that I do not see a whole lot to be gained
from fretting over one conception of the soul versus another (nonreductive physicalist vs
Cartesian dualist vs Aristotelian hylomorphism) or even over such distinctions as natural
versus supernatural (which, in my view, very often may have more to do with differences in
degrees of realization of our God-encounter and less to do with differences in origin, natural
vs supernatural). Another upshot of my approach is that it moreso resonates with the view of
atonement held by Scotus and the Franciscans than with the classical views that see the
Incarnation as a response to some felix culpa, which is to say that I imagine that God chose
an intimate involvement in creation from the very start.
I see the Spirit everywhere, meeting each of us
where we are and gently coaxing us to take the
next good step. It’s almost scandalous where the
Spirit seems willing to blow and on whom! I see
the Spirit at work in creation and enabling and
encouraging us as co-creators. I see the Spirit at
work in all of the Great Traditions and in each of
our denominations and in others who lack
explicit faith (while, at the same time, suspecting
that degrees of realization of our God-encounter
vary widely and fare better in certain environs). I
think the Spirit moves us toward a type of
balance that transcends our own notions of
moderation in that we are drawn by the Spirit
more toward a reality of completeness than
toward that of perfection (as classically-
described). The Spirit in us makes up for what is
lacking in others vis a vis its own indwelling and
in others makes up for what is lacking in us.
As my all-time favorite singing group, the Dameans, sang in the immediate aftermath of
Vatican II:
Spirit move when You will, where You will, how You will. Spirit of
God’s love now move within me.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: A m o s Y o n g, a t o n e m e n t, a u t h o r i t a r i a n, C h a r i s m a t i c R e n e w a l, Holy Spirit, Jesus Creed, N a t u r a l

158. T h e o l o g y, p a n e n t h e i s m, p n e u m a t o l o g i c a l, p n e u m a t o l o g i c a l i m a g i n a t i o n, Scotus, semiotic science, sensus
f i d e l i u m, sola scriptura, s o l u m m a g i s t e r i u m, teaching office, T h e D a m e a n s, Theology of Nature
The Non-dual Way – Fr. Richard Rohr at Boulder Integral –
podcasts
JB on November 6, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, Uncategorized | No Comments »
Visit Boulder Integral to learn what they say about the Integral
Age and how they define explicitly integral values and capacities.
New Podcast: Fr. Richard Rohr – Contemplative Consciousness:
The Non-Dual Way (Part 1)
New Podcast: Fr. Richard Rohr – Contemplative Consciousness:
The Non-Dual Way (Part 2)
New Podcast: Fr. Richard Rohr – Contemplative Consciousness:
The Non-Dual Way (Part 3)
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: Boulder Integral, c o n t e m p l a t i v e, n o n-d u a l w a y, Richard Rohr
The Color Chartreuse (or purple, whatever)
JB on November 6, 2009 in the evaluative - Culture | No Comments »
Robert Johnson, not the bluesman, Carl Jung’s protege’,
once asked an artist what color would not go with
chartreuse. The artist thought for a moment, turned
blue and then hurled.
Shug, a character in The Color Purple, says: “I think it
pisses God off when you walk by the color purple in a
field & don’t notice it.”
Honestly, I don’t know much
about aesthetic realism (except
that it’s been grievously
misapplied at times). I do know
it’ll piss your PawPaw off if the
sac-a-lait swim by his
chartreuse beetle-spin and don’t
notice it!
This just in from First
T h i n g s :G o d’ s F a v o r i t e
Color is Beige
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: aesthetic realism, C a r l J u n g, Robert Johnson, The Color Purple
« Older Entries Newer Entries »
© 2010 christiannonduality.com Blog is Proudly Powered By WordPress | Theme by The Cloisters

159. CHRISTIANNONDUALITY. C O M BL O G
beyond thinking & proposing to imagining & participating
Home About
T o d a y’ s L i t u r g y
Institutional Religion – what’s up with that?
JB on November 5, 2009 in the interpretive - Religion | No Comments »
In my view, all of the great traditions and even indigenous religions
are Spirit-animated human attempts to articulate truth in creed,
celebrate beauty in cult or ritual, preserve goodness in code or law, Translator
and celebrate fellowship in community. They engage us,
participatively, in myth, story-telling, song and symbol, addressing
our most insistent longings and ultimate concerns. They all suffer
tendencies for dogma to decay into dogmatism, ritual into ritualism,
law into legalism and community into institutionalism, but all have
By N2H
also gifted humankind with authentically transformed individuals.
Amos Yong apophatic
I buy into the notion that orthopraxy authenticates orthodoxy such that the efficacies of a Axiological axiologically-
religious approach would be reflected in how well it institutionalizes Lonergan’s conversions Bernard
integral
(as expanded by Gelpi): intellectual, affective, moral, social-political and religious. At the
same time, I don’t suggest that we can very easily gather and interpret such sociologic data in
Lonergan Brian
McLaren
order to adjudicate which path(s) work(s) best. I also think we should avoid any facile
syncretism, insidious indifferentism or false irenicism between traditions.
Charles
Sanders
This is all to say that I do not think it is unreasonable or uncharitable or that one is Peirce
contemplative
necessarily “stuck” in mythic membership consciousness, so to speak, when suggesting such cosmology emergence
distinctions as: emerging church
Enlightenment
1) Christianity has a robustly self-critical, self-correcting prophetic tradition. epistemology faith False
2) Christianity has elements of a true myth. Self fideism Hans
Kung James K. A. Smith
3) Even if other traditions or denominations enjoy a salvific efficacy via our own belief in a Jesus Creed John Duns
pneumatological inclusivity and even if one could live a life of abundance via an implicit Scotus kataphatic Kevin
faith, we might legitimately aspire, nonetheless, to a life of superabundance, to the most Beck Kurt Godel
nearly perfect articulation, celebration, preservation & enjoyment of truth, beauty, goodness Merton
and unity available even if it is terribly problematic figuring out what that might be. metaphysics
Mike Morrell Natural
4) Being on one path vs another might result in our moving more Theology nihilism
swiftly and with less hindrance on our ongoing journeys of nondual nonduality
conversion and transformation and we want to get this right out of orthodoxy radical
genuine compassion for all. emergence radical
orthodoxy rationalism
5) There may well be a dynamic in play of what is or is not
developmentally-appropriate for one individual or another, even one
Richard Rohr
Science
culture or another, or even for humankind as a whole, different scientism semiotic
theodicy Theological
pages for different stages, so to speak.
Anthropology
6) Christianity reveals a God inviting us into an ever more intimate and personal Thomas
relationship. Merton Tim King
transformation
7) Jesus did not answer the philosophical and metaphysical questions of old or provide a well- True Self Walker Percy
worked out theodicy in response to Job and the psalmists or fully address our propositional W P-C u m u l u s b y R o y T a n c k
concerns but responded to our deepest needs with Presence, both modeling and warranting a a n d Luke Morton requires
trust relationship with the Father and encouraging, even now, the same thru a Helper, the F l a s h P l a y e r 9 or better.
Spirit. Cultivating the
Roots, Nurturing
8 ) the Resurrection Event may be hard to describe in historical detail or a metaphysical the Shoots
account of HOW but has an overwhelming impetus and significance for us insofar as we can
be confidently assured THAT something happened and it is responsible for our being here MARCH 2010
together, now, in love. M T W T F S S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
I want to address the notion of “piping in 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
God” or mediated God-experiences. In an 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
incarnational view, we might see God coming 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31
to us and at us from many different angles « FEB
and perspectives, using His creatures,
indirectly, sometimes overwhelming us with Recent Posts
Her Beauty more directly. It seems that we
can recognize and affirm a sacramental The Emerging Church is BIGGER
economy that mediates presence, t h a n C h r i s t i a n i t y – how to spot
thanksgiving, reconciliation, healing and other it in other traditions
gifts of God, while at the same time Abortion & the Senate
acknowledging that these very same gifts are Healthcare Bill – a p r u d e n t i a l
available, variously directly and indirectly, judgment
sometimes more versus less mediated. As co- 10 historical developments
creators in a participatory unfolding, we are witnesses to and participants in a Divine propelling Emerging
Largesse that bowls us over from every angle. Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
Why Brian McLaren’s Greco-
That said, we do want to avoid clericalism, institutionalism and other insidious -isms. I fully Roman Narrative is NOT a
believe that there will be increasing numbers who will mindfully eschew and purposefully caricature
avoid institutional vehicles, as did Simone Weil, and that many of these folks are authentic THE BOOK: Christian
voices of prophetic protest, who don’t just critique by walking away but who then articulate N o n d u a l i t y – Postmodern
and live an alternative approach on its own terms and in a positive manner, which is to say Conservative Catholic
not in solely an over against manner. Pentecostal
At the same time, institutionalization is a natural response for humankind as radically social Recent Comments
animals, a necessary evil in our temporal juridical realm of social, economic, political and
cultural realities, which must employ civic coercion toward the end of fostering the common christiannonduality.com Blog »
good. Even then, such coercion only legitimately extends to the maintenance of that aspect of Blog Archive » Thoughts re:
the common good known as the public order. t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton

160. vs Dan Dennett on Intelligent
Our religious institutions are not ordered toward the juridical Design – a poorly designed
temporal realm, however, but are ordered to trans-temporal realities, inference
which admit of no coercion. If, in our early religious formation, christiannonduality.com Blog »
things are presented in an obligational mode, they are thus geared in Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n
a developmentally-appropriate way and religion will have, hopefully McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
minimalistically, juridical functions and a somewhat coercive tone Narrative is NOT a caricature on
and tenor. If, later on our journey, we have not realized that A New Kind of Christianity?
religious realities, instead, belong to a much more aspirational mode McLaren didn’t make this up. It’s
of life and relationship, then we will have very much missed the worse than that!
whole point, which is that the essential nature of love, beyond early christiannonduality.com Blog »
formation, knows nothing of coercion. Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n
McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
In other words, when you came to your Narrative is NOT a caricature on
parents’ table as a child, it may be that you E v e r y t h i n g T h a t’s Old is New
were required and also that you would not A g a i n – this (McLaren’s “ N e w”
have otherwise been fed. Coercion thus served Christianity) is truly an old
a function and met your extrinsic needs. time religion
Hopefully, as you return to your parents’ and K i e r a n C o n r o y on A New Kind of
grandparents’ tables for Thanksgiving, it will Christianity? McLaren didn’t
be for personal not functional reasons, for the make this up. It’s worse than
intrinsic rewards of being together and not that!
because you were coerced or would otherwise Philip Clayton on Thoughts re:
not be fed! t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
vs Dan Dennett
Afterward -
There is a Jewish concept: Type, Hit Enter to Search
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dayenu and dayenu basically means
“ I t w o u l d’ v e b e e n e n o u g h t h a t Y o u d i d T H I S b u t t h e n Y o u a l s o We Distinguish in
w e n t a n d d i d T H A T !” O v e r t h e y e a r s , I’ v e m a d e u p m y o w n v e r s e s , Order to Unite
which are very personal, which inventory my own manifold and
m u l t i f o r m b l e s s i n g s . I t t a k e s m e a h a l f a n h o u r to p r a y m y Select Category 6
Dayenu each day and it awes me when God responds with “Y o u Blogroll
a i n’ t s e e n n o t h i n g , y e t !” . L i f e r e m a i n s d i f f i c u l t b u t D a y e n u
trumps it all. Andrew Sullivan
Beyond Blue
Send Brian D. McLaren
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Commonweal
Crunchy Con
Cynthia Bourgeault
Emergent Village
Emerging Women
First Thoughts
Fors Clavigera
Francis X. Clooney, S.J.
Joseph S. O'Leary
NCR Today – the Catholic Blog
Tags: Bernard Lonergan, c l e r i c a l i s m, common good, d o g m a t i s m, Donald, indifferentism, indigenous Per Caritatem
religions, i n s t i t u t i o n a l i s m, i r e n i c i s m, l e g a l i s m, m y t h, mythic membership consciousness, Phyllis Tickle
p n e u m a t o l o g i c a l i n c l u s i v i t y, prophetic tradition, public order, Resurrection Event, r i t u a l i s m, Simone Post Christian
W e i l, s t o r y-t e l l i n g, s y n c r e t i s m, t h e o d i c y, t r u e m y t h, trust relationship Postmodern Conservative
Radical Emergence
Sojourners
Tall Skinny Kiwi
The Website of Unknowing
Church & State – aspiration & coercion Transmillenial
Vox Nova
JB on November 4, 2009 in the evaluative - Culture, the interpretive - Religion, the Weekly Standard Blog
normative - Philosophy | 1 Comment » Worship Blog
Zoecarnate
I commend to all the thoughts of John Courtney Murray
regarding the dangers of civic coercion. Humanity enjoys a rich Worthwhile Sites
institutional life, socially, economically, politically, culturally and
religiously. The socioeconomic-politico-cultural realm is ordered, Amos Yong
horizontally, toward interpersonal relations, which are juridical, Boulder Integral
and the church is not bound to any of their forms or systems. Brother David Steindl-Rast
Center for Action and
The dignity and rights of persons and families and the exigencies of Contemplation
the common good are essentially juridical. Even then, only the Christian Nonduality
public order aspect of the common good is the concern of the state, Contemplative Outreach
not the full common good, because excessive coercion, in the end, David Group International
can not advance public virtue as well as, for example, substantive Dialogue Institute
public argument, which makes for a better school of virtue. Moral Ecumene
statism thus violates the subsidiarity principle every bit as much as Franciscan Archive
excessive economic interventionism or, for that matter, excessive Innerexplorations
foreign interventionism (e.g. neoconservatism). Institute on Religion in an Age of
Science
For its part, then, the religious realm is ordered, vertically, in human relations to God, which Metanexus
are transtemporal. Monastic Interreligious Dialogue
National Catholic Reporter
While integrally-related, the juridical and transtemporal orders of Radical Orthodoxy
discourse are also distinct in their modes of freedom. In the Shalomplace
transtemporal order, the church enjoys a positive freedom “for” belief Sojourners
and evangelization. In the juridical order, the church enjoys a Thomas Merton Center
negative freedom “from” secular coercive constraints. Virtual Chapel
Zygon Center for Religion and
In my view, the church should not seek coercive assistance in Science
furtherance of its mission, neither via social conservatism nor
liberation theology. It DOES otherwise seek to permeate and Cloud of
improve the temporal order. Unknowing

161. Send Amos Yong apophatic
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Axiological axiologically-
Bernard
integral
Lonergan Brian
McLaren Charles
Sanders
Peirce
contemplative
cosmology emergence
emerging church
E n l i g h t e n m e n t epistemology
Tags: civic coercion, common good, J o h n C o u r t n e y M u r r a y, liberation theology, m o r a l s t a t i s m, faith False Self fideism
n e o c o n s e r v a t i s m, social conservatism, subsidiarity principle Hans Kung James K. A.
Smith Jesus Creed John
Duns Scotus kataphatic
Kevin Beck Kurt
Godel Merton
The New Atheism, a wimpy caricature of the old metaphysics Mike
Morrell Natural Theology
JB on November 3, 2009 in Uncategorized, the descriptive - Science, the interpretive - nihilism nondual
Religion, the normative - Philosophy | No Comments » nonduality orthodoxy
radical emergence radical
The New Atheism is a superficial conflation of descriptive orthodoxy rationalism
science, normative philosophy and interpretive metaphysics,
which amounts to an Enlightenment fundamentalism or
Richard Rohr
Science scientism
scientism. It is the obverse side of the epistemic coin of the semiotic theodicy
same philosophically bankrupt realm as religious Theological
fundamentalism or fideism, which similarly conflates these Anthropology
approaches to reality. Thomas
This wimpy atheism is but a caricature of the kind we
Merton Tim King
transformation True
encounter in the history of philosophy and I am thus reticent Self Walker Percy
to engage what’s tantamount to a straw-man argument in Join Other
bothering to refute it at length. For their part, however, the Visitors in Prayer
new atheists don’t hesitate to engage only those religious Light A Candle & Pray
fundamentalisms that are but a caricature of modern
theology. Join Us in the
Liturgy of the
As for any suggestion by David Hours
Bentley Hart that an authentic
Christianity nurtures its own
nihilism insofar as it’s our
supposed view that what we’re
given by nature and tradition is nothing if not transformed or
unredeemed, that is poppycock! At least there are those of us
with a radically incarnational outlook, who do not view at-
one-ment as a response to some ontological rupture located in
the past but instead as a teleological striving oriented toward
the future, who, with Scotus and the Franciscans, hold that
the incarnation was not occasioned by some felix culpa but Get the C a t h l i m e r g e n t o n
was otherwise in the cosmic cards from the get-go. Even Twitter widget and many other
among those who take a more classical approach to great free widgets a t Widgetbox!
atonement, not all buy into a notion of total depravity, Not seeing a widget? (More info)
anyway. And this leads into my next point, which is that we Tweets
do not believe that special revelation is or was necessary in
order for humankind to discern right from wrong, to johnssylvest: Abortion & the
distinguish good from evil. At the same time, we would not Senate Healthcare Bill – a
deny that the Good News helps us to journey more swiftly and prudential judgment
with less hindrance through all of Lonergan’s ongoing http://bit.ly/aS2DwT
conversions (intellectual, affective, moral, social and religious, johnssylvest: 10 developments
as expanded by Don Gelpi). propelling Emerging
Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
As a radically social animal and story-teller, humankind is http://bit.ly/a4AMtg
inescapably liturgical, although the liturgy will be either doxologic johnssylvest: RT @pdclayton7:
or nihilistic. Among the doxologic approaches, in addition to such "Theology After Google" opens
as the Eucharistic stance (of thanksgiving), there is the Wed. - 23 of the best speakers on
existentialistic, which even if not explicitly theistic need not be emerging religion in Google Age;
necessarily considered nihilistic, whereby people of large live stream at http://o ...
intelligence and profound goodwill realize such values as truth, johnssylvest: RT @jonestony:
beauty, goodness and unity, as they care deeply, are concerned New Blog Post: Society for
with ultimates and celebrate whole-heartedly. How such people Pentecostal Studies Paper: What
were formed and how many are where are historical and sociologic Pentecostals Have to Learn from
data, which are beyond me. That we should expect to encounter Emergents http://ow.ly/16KREU
them, however, is our own theological anthropology grounded in a johnssylvest: THE BOOK: An
pneumatological (or even Christocentric) inclusivity? (And I do not ground mine in any Emerging Church Conversation
Kantian-inspired, transcendental Thomism, which is a tad too optimistic.) with a Postmodern Conservative
Catholic Pentecostal
It does seem that the Enlightenment project ran amok on the Continent in its http://bit.ly/91D570 #fb
marginalization of religion but that the US approach properly integrated and even
strengthened the influence of religion through its separation and non-establishment John Sobert Sylvest
provisions. Still, while we needn’t bracket our metaphysical and religious views in the
marketplace, we must translate them in a pluralistic society. And to Peter Lawler, amen, “the
ground of our freedom in our (merely human) natures is evident to anyone who sees with his
or her own eyes.”
This was crafted in response to Peter Lawler’s essay, Postmodern Reflections on the
Inevitability of Our Post-Christian Thought.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: a t o n e m e n t, Bernard Lonergan, David Bentley Hart, Donald Gelpi, E n l i g h t e n m e n t f u n d a m e n t a l i s m,
fideism, John Duns Scotus, N e w A t h e i s m, Peter Lawler, r e l i g i o u s f u n d a m e n t a l i s m
Johnboy Was Here
Feedjit Live Blog Stats

162. Feedjit Live Blog Stats
another Design Inference, properly conceived
JB on November 3, 2009 in the descriptive - Science, the interpretive - Religion | No Follow this blog
Comments »
While I haven’t seen a design inference
regarding any particular reality that, in my
view, makes for good science or good
philosophy, at the same time, I very much
affirm a design inference regarding reality as a
whole. While the various “proofs” of the
reality of God are not empirically
demonstrable or logically coercive, they raise
valid questions that are left begging and they
frame answers that, vis a vis other interpretive
stances toward reality, are equiplausible.
Modern semiotic science has reinvigorated
notions of formal and final causation, which,
for quite awhile, had been abandoned by
science, which restricted its ambit to efficient
causation. Notions of formal, final, efficient,
material and instrumental causation have
variously given rise to such “proofs” of God as we might call, respectively, epistemological,
teleological, cosmological, ontological and axiological.
Whichever “root metaphor” one chooses for
one’s metaphysics, any account aspiring to Visit Cathlimergent Conversations
both completeness and consistency eventually
collapses due to question begging, circular Visit Anglimergent
referentiality, infinite regress, causal Meta
disjunction and so on. Still, just because an
account is tautological doesn’t mean it isn’t Log in
true; it only means we have not added any Entries R S S
new info to our system. Comments R S S
WordPress.org
At any rate, from a semiotic approach to
reality, we know that certain tacit dimensions
of reality can be ineluctably unobtrusive while
utterly efficacious. We also know that such
semiotic realities can effect a downward
causation without violating physical causal
closure. It is perhaps beyond the scope of this
consideration to explore this in more depth but I bring this up in the context of recognizing
the role of telos in ordinary physical reality. By analogy, one would not unreasonably
extrapolate this minimalist telos into a more robustly conceived telic dimension. This is
exactly what John Haught does in his writings such as regarding the Cosmic Adventure (or
even The New Atheists) and what Joe Bracken does in what he describes as The Divine
Matrix.
These approaches begin within the faith and are theologies of nature, which proceed via
analogy and metaphor and sheer poetry, and they go beyond the proofs of God of such as
natural theology as begins within philosophy but ends with the Scottish verdict, unproven.
In one sense, we can recognize that generic
faith is epistemologically prior to science,
which could not otherwise proceed without
our belief in reality’s intelligibility, a belief
which, itself, cannot be proved (just like our
belief in other minds over against solipsism).
This hermeneutical moment or basic
interpretive stance toward reality is thus
analogous to our belief in a Primal Design,
Primal Cause, Primal Meaning, Primal
Being, Primal Support, Primal Ground and
so on. Primal Reality would not, in principle,
lend itself to empirical measurement or logical demonstrability or rational proof, but the
inference of such a Cause as would be proper to the effect we know as reality-as-a-whole is in
no way unreasonable and remains eminently compelling to most of humankind. This
inference, epistemologically, precedes both descriptive science and normative philosophy, and
admits of no apologetic, whether evidential, presuppositional, rational or existential. It is
what Hans Kung describes as a justified fundamental trust in uncertain reality over against a
nowhere anchored and paradoxical trust in uncertain reality.
Faith’s chief foil is nihilism, a practical interpretive stance toward
reality that is essentially an evaluative posit, having no way to
articulate propositional cognitions. We either fundamentally trust
uncertain reality or we do not because we are presented with options
in faith and nihilism that are forced and vital. And make no mistake,
both of these options are “live” in that most of us choose between
them every moment of our waking life, living a life of vibrant faith
but lapsing, too often, into what a dispassionate observer might
otherwise conclude is a practical nihilism.

163. Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: design inference, f a i t h, H a n s K u n g, J o h n H a u g h t, Joseph Bracken, n i h i l i s m, Proofs of God, semiotic
Right questions can be more important than right answers
JB on November 3, 2009 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
When it comes to life’s most important
questions, most urgent longings, most
ultimate concerns … my goal has been to
provide my children with the right
questions.
It is not that there are no right answers, so to
speak, but those belong mostly to the
empirical, logical, practical and moral
reasoning of our problem-solving approach to
reality, which is mostly propositional. What
we value most, our relationships to others and
God, is realized by a participatory approach,
by a being present in love. It doesn’t ignore the
propositional but it so very FAR surpasses it in
significance.
The right questions will then deal with
relational realities like how to abide in faith,
hope, love, joy, courage, peace and trust. These are existential questions that break us open
and call for a response in the way we live and move and have our being, not academic
questions that we break open.
Good religion has WAY more to do with practices than with conclusions. And this is no less
true for good science and good philosophy, where methods are far more important than
systems, where philosophical norms trump philosophical schools, where cosmological
approaches are best done without a preconceived cosmology.
a follow-up consideration:
We often see these types of tensions introduced. A similar tension was being discussed
yesterday in the Religion or Revolution thread re: Greg Boyd. Andrew Jones, yesterday,
said that emerging church energies, in the coming decade, will be re-directed from creative
worship arts to creative social enterprises. Tim King, yesterday, wrote about the difference
between knowing that and knowing how.
Is the life of faith knowing THAT or knowing
HOW? Is it propositional or participatory? Is it
practices or conclusions? Is it about institution
or revolution? Is it about orthopraxy or
orthodoxy or orthopathy or orthocommunio?
Should religious apologetics be evidential,
presuppositional, rational or existential? Is
religion about creed (dogma), cult (ritual), code
(law) or community? Is it about truth, beauty,
goodness or unity?
I don’t think we are dealing with dichotomies in
such distinctions. Rather, I see these distinct
approaches as integrally related. I do think we
are often dealing with various over- and under-
emphases. Still, I do not think the correction of
these undue emphases is a simple matter of
giving each aspect equal attention or equal time.
In other words, I think we can honestly say that the life of faith includes THIS, to be sure,
but it has a whole lot more to do with THAT!
In other words, we might concede a certain
PRIMACY to one or another aspect of the life
of faith even if we maintain, at the same time,
that no particular aspect is otherwise
autonomous from the others. (This is a
normative question regarding what the life of
faith should be about, which is different from
the historical descriptive question, which asks
what religion has been about.)
I think it is proper, then, to ask what the life of
faith should mostly be about and how we
might best get on with it. Is this the right
question? If so, how would you answer it?

164. Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Intelligent Design – a poorly designed inference
JB on October 29, 2009 in the descriptive - Science, the interpretive - Religion, the normative
- Philosophy | 1 Comment »
At Jesus Creed, a discussion regarding Evolution & Evangelicals continues.
There are many different issues in play in such discussions as this. For me, there are three
that come quickly to mind. The first concerns biblical hermeneutics, which I won’t address.
The others involve the design inference and demarcation criteria for science.
Advocates of the design inference confuse complexity and improbability. When they say a
structure is irreducibly complex or suggest a specified complexity, they describe it as either
an inordinately high improbability or virtually zero probability and they further confuse
improbability (chance) and coincidence.
Coincidence is something that pertains to the present or past. Chance has meaning only
when information is lacking. So, we distinguish the two in temporal terms. If we are
considering an event a priori, chance is in play. If we consider it a posteriori, we have
coincidence (something which, however, over the course of a lifetime — even of a multiverse
— might otherwise be considered likely).
So, the concept of probability has no validity vis a vis a coincidence and statistical science
thus pertains to chance and not coincidence. Probability deals with the epistemically-
unavailable, is an empirical notion subject to empirical methods and is assigned to arguments
with premises and conclusions (and not rather to events, states or types of same).
Specified complexity and the strong anthropic
principle thus deal with the past and with
coincidence. It is not that one could not
imaginatively walk oneself backwards in time
and thereby properly invoke chance or
probability. However, we do not know enough
about the initial conditions of life’s origins
much less that of the universe to inform our
grasp of what should or should not be
expected of this reality.
This discussion continues at this link
>>> Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: anthropic principle, c h a n c e, Charles Sanders Peirce, coincidence, d e m a r c a t i o n c r i t e r i a, e v o l u t i o n,
intelligent design, irreducible complexity, Kitzmiller vs Dover Area School District, methodological
n a t u r a l i s m, philosophical naturalism, p r o b a b i l i t y, specified complexity
Which Denomination’s Got “IT” ? Anglican-Roman relations
(cont’d)
JB on October 27, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, the interpretive - Religion | No
Comments »
Continuing this conversation:
Canterbury Tails We Win, Heads You Lose (Anglican-Roman dialogue)
and elaborating on additional reflections by Rev. Bosco Peters:
Increasingly, it appears to me, denominational boundaries are no longer the
primary “partitioning”. If one visualises denominational boundaries, for
example, as vertical lines, then it seems to me that the horizontal lines are far
more significant – where people receive support and encouragement.
That has been my personal experience.

165. In East-West inter-religious dialogue, I recall
certain admonitions against any false
irenicism, facile syncretism or insidious
indifferentism. Sometimes, these dynamics
seem to be no less in play as we pursue
Christian unity, discerning what is truly
essential or accidental.
This discussion continues here>>> Read
the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: A n g l i c a n, Bernard Lonergan, Bosco Peters, R o m a n
Ecstatic, Enstatic & Epektasis – we bear the future Oneness now
JB on October 27, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, Uncategorized, the interpretive - Religion
| No Comments »
Even as we accept the view of atonement as a
teleological striving, we still affirm an
eschatological dynamic (even if not
apocalyptic), a mark toward which we
press vis a vis the epektasis [1] of
Philippians 3:13 and in our prayer for the
coming of the Kingdom, as taught by the
Master. And insofar as it is indeed your and
my inheritance as members of the Mystical
Body (and not just some esoteric privilege of
the so-called initiated) to both see the
Oneness, ecstatically [2], and to see from
Oneness, enstatically [3], we enjoy — in
this very present moment, in this very
Presence — a real participation in this
Oneness as we proleptically bear the future
consummation, now!
We accept our incompleteness and through
kenosis self-empty in order to be filled with the
utter fullness of God. Paradoxically, we are
not promised any cessation of the satiety of
our desire, according to Gregory of Nyssa (the
one who looks up to God never ceases in that
desire). Hence, through contemplation we see
with the Dionysian ray of darkness. Thus the
ecstatic yields to the enstatic. Thus Merton
says that we do not have an experience but
become an experience. Merton explains:
And here all adjectives fall to pieces.
Words become stupid. Everything you
say is misleading – unless you list
every possible experience and say: That is not what it is. Metaphor has now
become hopeless altogether. Talk about the darkness if you must: but the
thought of darkness is too dense and too coarse.
Notes follow beyond this link >>> Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: C y n t h i a B o u r g e a u l t, ecstatic, e n s t a t i c, epektasis, Gregory of Nyssa, J. Glenn Friesen, kenosis,
M y s t i c i s m, oneness, presence, Pseudo-Dionysius, Thomas Merton, Unitive consciousness
the Oneness to which we can awaken
JB on October 27, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, the interpretive - Religion | No
Comments »

166. Tim King writes: “I sometimes wonder what would happen if more teachers/pastors put
their emphasis not so much on ‘joining the body of Christ,’ but on ‘embodying’ Jesus. There’s
a big difference between these two perspectives.” And he clarifies in a follow-up comment:
“For many on this board, the way of non-institutional religion does not take away from some
form of community and is not about your typical American individualism.”
I agree with the distinction between (non)
institutional religion and community; those
are two different realities. One can enjoy
community fellowship outside of
institutionalized realities (the good, the bad
and the ugly).
Another distinction in play might be one’s
perspective on atonement or at-one-ment. In
my own tradition there is a less commonly
received take on atonement that is still not
considered heterodox. In a nutshell, the
incarnation is not considered some type of
cosmic repair job. If we are groaning, it is not
because we have been injured. Rather, it is
because we are participating in one great
cosmic act of giving birth.
The theo-wonk take on this is that we are not
unfortunate participants in some ontological
rupture located in the past but gifted co-
creators in a teleological striving oriented
toward the future and taking place right now,
in the present. The Franciscans with Scotus, and I reckon some of the Jesuits with Teilhard,
do not see the incarnation as God’s response to any felix culpa (happy fault) of humankind
but as an integral event foreordained in creation’s unfolding from the cosmic get-go. In other
words, God was indeed coming because He so loves the world and participates intimately
with the world and not because it was otherwise in need of a cosmic makeover.
Our solidarity is not, then, a reality to
establish or re-establish but a Oneness to
which we can awaken. We do not join the
Mystical Body but either realize it or not. We
are participating and will participate in this
embodiment and can either come knowingly,
willingly and celebrating or otherwise get drug
kicking and screaming into His banquet hall
where Her banner over us is love, for nothing
can separate us … as it is written.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: Felix Culpa. atonement, F r a n c i s c a n, Jesuit, John Duns Scotus, Mystical Body, oneness, s o l i d a r i t y,
Teilhard de Chardin, T i m K i n g
Our Encounter of the World is Inescapably Liturgical – for better
& worse
JB on October 26, 2009 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
What our own speech is not and cannot be reduced to is plain speech about some
other reality. It is itself part of the enchanted reality which is part of the
spokenness of God. ~ Melvyn Matthews in Both Alike to Thee
As far as I have been able to discern, the following formula best describes our human
interaction with reality:
The Liturgical = The Cosmological + The Axiological
where the Liturgical = participation in a Grand Narrative or Meta-narrative comprised of our
cosmological narratives (both descriptive and normative) and our axiological narratives
(both evaluative and interpretive).
Our descriptive, normative, evaluative and interpretive narratives, for the most part, roughly
correspond to science, philosophy, culture and religion. I explicate these interactions at great
length elsewhere on this blog and its related website.
This discussion also continues at this link >>> Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: Axiological, Catherine Pickstock, Cosmological, c u l t u r e, Cynthia R. Nielsen, descriptive, doxologic,
doxological, E n l i g h t e n m e n t f u n d a m e n t a l i s m, E u c h a r i s t i c, e v a l u a t i v e, existentialistic, i n t e r p r e t i v e, John

167. Milbank, l i t u r g i c a l, M e l v y n M a t t h e w s, m e t a-n a r r a t i v e, m e t a p h y s i c s, m o d e r n i s m, nihilistic, n o r m a t i v e,
philosophy, Postmodern Critique, postmodernism, radical orthodoxy, religion, Science, semiotic, s t o r y-
telling
« Older Entries Newer Entries »
© 2010 christiannonduality.com Blog is Proudly Powered By WordPress | Theme by The Cloisters

168. CHRISTIANNONDUALITY. C O M BL O G
beyond thinking & proposing to imagining & participating
Home About
T o d a y’ s L i t u r g y
Social Networks Can Be Thoreau’s Post Office
JB on October 25, 2009 in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »
When our life ceases to be inward and private, conversation degenerates into mere gossip. We
rarely meet a man who can tell us any news which he has not read in a newspaper or been
told by his neighbor; and for the most part, the only difference between us and our fellow is Translator
that he has seen the news paper, or been out to tea, and we have not. In proportion as our
inward life fails, we go more constantly and desperately to the Post Office. You
may depend upon it, that the poor fellow who walks away with the greatest number of
letters, proud of his extensive correspondence, has not heard from himself this long while. ~
Henry David Thoreau
By N2H
Amos Yong apophatic
Axiological axiologically-
Bernard
integral
Lonergan Brian
McLaren
Charles
Sanders
Peirce
contemplative
cosmology emergence
emerging church
Enlightenment
epistemology faith False
Self fideism Hans
Kung James K. A. Smith
Jesus Creed John Duns
Scotus kataphatic Kevin
Beck Kurt Godel
Merton
metaphysics
Mike Morrell Natural
Theology nihilism
nondual nonduality
orthodoxy radical
emergence radical
orthodoxy rationalism
Richard Rohr
Science
Social life, so-called worldly life, in its own way promotes this illusory and narcissistic
existence to the very limit. The curious state of alienation and confusion of modern man in
scientism semiotic
theodicy Theological
modern society is perhaps more bearable because it is lived in common, with a multitude of Anthropology
distractions and escapes — and is also with opportunities for fruitful action and genuine self- Thomas
forgetfulness. But underlying all life is the ground of doubt and self questioning which sooner
or later must bring us face to face with the ultimate meaning of life. ~ Thomas Merton,
Merton Tim King
transformation
Contemplative Prayer True Self Walker Percy
W P-C u m u l u s b y R o y T a n c k
a n d Luke Morton requires
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
F l a s h P l a y e r 9 or better.
Cultivating the
Roots, Nurturing
the Shoots
MARCH 2010
M T W T F S S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31
« FEB
Recent Posts
Krauthammer equates Fox with factions, interests & parties The Emerging Church is BIGGER
JB on October 23, 2009 in Uncategorized | 1 Comment » t h a n C h r i s t i a n i t y – how to spot
it in other traditions
Abortion & the Senate
Charles Krauthammer notes today that “The White House has declared war on Fox Healthcare Bill – a p r u d e n t i a l
News. White House communications director Anita Dunn said that Fox is opinion judgment
journalism masquerading as news.” 10 historical developments
He then goes on, in his usual eloquence, to propelling Emerging
frame his objection vis a vis Madisonian norms: Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
“Madison argued that the safety of a great Why Brian McLaren’s Greco-
republic, its defense against tyranny, requires Roman Narrative is NOT a
the contest between factions or interests. His caricature
insight was to understand the greater security THE BOOK: Christian
afforded by a greater variety of parties. They N o n d u a l i t y – Postmodern
would help guarantee liberty by checking and Conservative Catholic
balancing and restraining each other — and an Pentecostal
otherwise imperious government. Factions
should compete, but also recognize the Recent Comments
legitimacy of other factions and, indeed, their christiannonduality.com Blog »
necessity for a vigorous self-regulating Blog Archive » Thoughts re:
democracy. Seeking to deliberately undermine, t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
delegitimize and destroy is not Madisonian. It is vs Dan Dennett on Intelligent
Nixonian.” Design – a poorly designed
inference
Krauthammer, himself, thus characterizes Fox christiannonduality.com Blog »
in terms of factions, interests and parties. Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n

169. Yes, Charles, that’s the point. That’s the main McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
objection. Where’s the rub? Narrative is NOT a caricature on
A New Kind of Christianity?
McLaren didn’t make this up. It’s
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send worse than that!
christiannonduality.com Blog »
Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n
McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
Narrative is NOT a caricature on
E v e r y t h i n g T h a t’s Old is New
A g a i n – this (McLaren’s “ N e w”
Christianity) is truly an old
time religion
K i e r a n C o n r o y on A New Kind of
Christianity? McLaren didn’t
make this up. It’s worse than
that!
Philip Clayton on Thoughts re:
t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
the Anglican provision – comprehensive list of links vs Dan Dennett
JB on October 22, 2009 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
Type, Hit Enter to Search
We Distinguish in
Order to Unite
Select Category 6
Blogroll
Andrew Sullivan
Beyond Blue
Brian D. McLaren
Commonweal
Crunchy Con
Cynthia Bourgeault
Emergent Village
Emerging Women
First Thoughts
Fors Clavigera
Francis X. Clooney, S.J.
Joseph S. O'Leary
NCR Today – the Catholic Blog
Per Caritatem
Phyllis Tickle
Post Christian
Postmodern Conservative
Radical Emergence
Sojourners
Tall Skinny Kiwi
The Website of Unknowing
Transmillenial
Vox Nova
Weekly Standard Blog
Worship Blog
Zoecarnate
news release from Call to Action: An open letter to Anglicans http://bit.ly/4meevH2
minutes ago from web Worthwhile Sites
Amos Yong
Archbishop Vincent Nichols welcomes Anglican convert plan as an ‘opportunity’ – Telegraph Boulder Integral
http://bit.ly/AHG3n39 minutes ago from web Brother David Steindl-Rast
Center for Action and
Contemplation
asking if the Apostolic Constitution is the fulfilment of Cardinal Newman’s dream of an Christian Nonduality
Anglican Uniate Church http://bit.ly/4zWQN042 minutes ago from web Contemplative Outreach
David Group International
There are 30 more links below. Read the rest of this entry » Dialogue Institute
Ecumene
Send Franciscan Archive
Send article as PDF to Enter email address
Innerexplorations
Institute on Religion in an Age of
Science
Metanexus
Monastic Interreligious Dialogue
National Catholic Reporter
Radical Orthodoxy
Shalomplace
Sojourners
Thomas Merton Center
Virtual Chapel
Zygon Center for Religion and
Science

170. Let There Be Peace on Earth – preambles to dialogue Cloud of
Unknowing
JB on October 22, 2009 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
Amos Yong apophatic
Tim King, at his Post-Christian Blog, writes Axiological axiologically-
about change and says: “I hope I’m around to
see a world where diverse and disparate faiths
Bernard
integral
Lonergan Brian
learn to celebrate what each has to offer to McLaren Charles
help all of us understand the Numinous a bit
better than we do now.”
Sanders
Peirce
contemplative
The changes Tim describes, the moves he cosmology emergence
prescribes, very much resonate with what I emerging church
have gathered from reflecting on Thomas E n l i g h t e n m e n t epistemology
Merton’s writings over the years. And I have faith False Self fideism
been trying to say it in so many ways myself Hans Kung James K. A.
and keep trying different approaches. Smith Jesus Creed John
Duns Scotus kataphatic
Today’s thought is this: Kevin Beck Kurt
Our disparate faiths, including many indigenous religions as well as the great traditions, have
Godel Merton
a certain core competency. From that core competency derives the nature of their distinct metaphysics Mike
Morrell Natural Theology
contribution, their unique role, in our lives. This role is not to describe reality scientifically,
not to prescribe reality morally or ethically, not to norm reality philosophically, not to
nihilism nondual
manipulate reality practically, and not to govern reality politically. These functions belong,
nonduality orthodoxy
radical emergence radical
rather, to the cosmological story told by science and philosophy, what some have called orthodoxy rationalism
Everybody’s Story, and rightly so, because it transcends cultures. And it does include our
rather rudimentary, vague understanding of a Creator Spirit, one could say, Richard Rohr
Science scientism
pneumatologically. semiotic theodicy
There are other stories to be told by religions and cultures, which are axiological. Their role is Theological
to help us interpret reality evaluatively. More plainly, their distinct contribution is to help us Anthropology
celebrate and value reality. Thomas
Merton Tim King
transformation True
The opposite of good religion is neither bad science nor bad morality, although many would
leave us with that impression. The opposite of religion is indifference and nihilism, an attitude Self Walker Percy
that reality offers nothing of enduring value to celebrate. We cannot talk people out of such Join Other
an attitude with empirical evidence, logical reasoning or moral persuasion because these Visitors in Prayer
basic attitudes are not constructed of formal arguments. Instead, good religion forms people Light A Candle & Pray
through exchanges of stories about lives well-lived, and through moments of celebration, and Join Us in the
through the handing down of formative and transformative practices and through the Liturgy of the
comfort and enjoyment of fellowship in community. Hours
Inter-religious dialogue, then, is much more an exchange of practices and has very little to
do with conclusions. It has a lot more to do with celebratory methods and transformative
processes and very little to do with philosophical systems and products of moral reasoning.
Religion is more so a participatory engagement and much less a propositional exchange.
In my view, then, much of the strife on our
planet comes from religion masquerading as
cosmology, attempting but failing to co-opt
the prerogatives of good science and good
philosophy with pseudo-religion. Creationism
isn’t bad religion; it’s bad science. Theocratic Get the C a t h l i m e r g e n t o n
rule isn’t bad religion; it’s bad political science. Twitter widget and many other
Misogyny and homophobia aren’t bad great free widgets a t Widgetbox!
religion; they’re grounded in bad anthropology Not seeing a widget? (More info)
and are bad morality. Such dysfunctional Tweets
approaches to reality inevitably result when
johnssylvest: Abortion & the
religion departs from its core competency,
Senate Healthcare Bill – a
strays from its distinct role and fails to attend
prudential judgment
to its own unique contribution, which Merton
http://bit.ly/aS2DwT
emphasized was transformation not
johnssylvest: 10 developments
socialization.
propelling Emerging
Below is a more philosophically nuanced discussion of these dynamics. Read the rest of this Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
entry » http://bit.ly/a4AMtg
johnssylvest: RT @pdclayton7:
"Theology After Google" opens
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send Wed. - 23 of the best speakers on
emerging religion in Google Age;
live stream at http://o ...
johnssylvest: RT @jonestony:
New Blog Post: Society for
Pentecostal Studies Paper: What
Pentecostals Have to Learn from
Emergents http://ow.ly/16KREU
johnssylvest: THE BOOK: An
Emerging Church Conversation
Tags: Axiological, Bernard Lonergan, Cosmological, creative tension, c u l t u r e, descriptive, dialectical, with a Postmodern Conservative
d o g m a t i c, epistemic risk, epistemology, e v a l u a t i v e, e x i s t e n t i a l w a g e r, e x t r i n s i c r e w a r d, h e u r i s t i c, Catholic Pentecostal
Incompleteness Theorem, i n t e r p r e t i v e, i n t r i n s i c r e w a r d, John Polkinghorne, Kurt Godel, negotiated http://bit.ly/91D570 #fb
concepts, n o n d u a l i t y, n o r m a t i v e, o n t o l o g y, p a r a d o x, philosophy, religion, Science, semiotic,
socialization, S t e p h e n H a w k i n g, s t o r y-t e l l i n g, t h e o d i c y, theoretic, Thomas Merton, t r a n s c e n d e n t a l John Sobert Sylvest
i m p e r a t i v e s, t r a n s f o r m a t i o n
Fundamentalists versus Heretics? not really, not always
JB on October 21, 2009 in the interpretive - Religion | No Comments »
Today, in Ending Christian Euphemisms: “Fundamentalist,” Tony Jones makes the
point that “liberals and progressives often use ‘fundamentalist’ as a cheap and easy stand-in
for someone who has a more conservative biblical hermeneutic.

171. Many words that end in -ism and -ist are merely descriptive and only
get pejorative when morphed into -istic. There are some, however, that
describe realities precisely in terms of their normative implications,
typically involving over- and under-emphases of various epistemic
perspectives, e.g. empiricism, scientism, rationalism, positivism. In the
realm of faith, for example, an overemphasis on the 1) kataphatic and
affective is pietism, sometimes fideism 2) kataphatic and speculative is
rationalism 3) apophatic and speculative is encratism and 4) apophatic
and affective is quietism. Johnboy Was Here
Feedjit Live Blog Stats
There are many terms Feedjit Live Blog Stats
that otherwise describe what I like to consider in
terms of giftedness vis a vis the roles one might
play in community, for example, as a settler or
pioneer, conservative or progressive. Following Follow this blog
St. Augustine’s aphorism – in essentials, unity;
in accidentals, liberty or diversity; in all things,
charity – those with a conservative or
traditionalist charism help preserve and
celebrate the essentials of the faith, while those
with a liberal or progressive charism help
explore and celebrate the plurality of our faith
expressions.
In this vein, then, it
seems there have
always been some who
are traditionalistic or
fundamentalistic in
their tendency to treat
faith’s accidentals as if
they were essentials and
no too few who are, conversely, liberalistic or progressivistic in
that they tend to treat essentials as if they were accidentals. (Which
elements of the Christian faith are the essentials and which are the
accidentals is not the focus, here.)
Such considerations will often involve different epistemological schools and various theories
of truth and justification vis a vis modernism and postmodernism and various
non/foundationalist approaches. Visit Cathlimergent Conversations
I agree with Tony and others of you who are saying that many of these descriptors are Visit Anglimergent
misused and erroneously tossed around as facile pejoratives. It’s easier to label others than to Meta
engage in authentic dialogue.
Log in
Entries R S S
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send Comments R S S
WordPress.org
Tags: b i b l i c a l h e r m e n e u t i c, e n c r a t i s m, epistemology, fideism, f u n d a m e n t a l i s m, f u n d a m e n t a l i s t,
nonfoundationalism, p i e t i s m, postmodernism, quietism, r a t i o n a l i s m, scientism, S t . A u g u s t i n e, T o n y
Jones
Canterbury Tails We Win, Heads You Lose (Anglican-Roman
dialogue)
JB on October 20, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, Uncategorized, the interpretive - Religion
| 1 Comment »
Austen Ivereigh, in an article at America today, Rome
offers new home to Anglican trads, writes: “Rome
today has announced a legal means for disaffected
Anglicans to become Roman Catholic while hanging on
to their liturgies and rites.”
John L. Allen Jr., at the National Catholic Reporter, in an
article entitled Vatican reveals plan to welcome
disaffected Anglicans, writes: “In an unusual move,
the Vatican this morning issued a joint statement from
the Catholic Archbishop of Westminster, Vincent Nichols,
and the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan
Williams, attempting to calm the waters. ‘The apostolic
constitution [creating the new structures] is further
recognition of the substantial overlap in faith, doctrine
and spirituality between the Catholic Church and the
Anglican tradition,’ that statement said.”

172. In recent
years, I
wrote an
essay
entitled
Discipline, Doctrine & Dogma – Roman
& Anglican Dialogue wherein I wrote: “At
times, I truly have wondered if I belonged to
Rome or Canterbury, and I suspect many of
you have, too, and, perhaps, still do? My short
answer is: You’re already home; take a look
around … In other words, for example, take a
look, below, at some excerpts from the
September 2007 report of the International
Anglican – Roman Catholic
Commission for Unity and Mission:
Growing Together in Unity and Mission: Building on 40 years of Anglican –
Roman Catholic Dialogue. Does anyone see any differences in essential dogma? Are
some of you not rather surprised at the extent of agreement, especially given the nature of
same? Are our differences not rather located in such accidentals as matters of church
discipline or in such moral teachings where Catholics can exercise legitimate choices in their
moral decision-making?”
Whatever comes of the recent Apostolic Constitution, thankfully, denominations are means
and not ends. And as far as distinctly ecclesial means are concerned, realities like church
polity, juridical order, corporate discipline and moral doctrine are accidentals – not entirely
unimportant, but – not essentials. Any consideration of such means will very much involve
the cosmological thrusts of descriptive science and normative philosophy, which are clearly
propositional, very much evidential and rational, ordered toward empirical, logical and
practical/moral problem-solving. Strategically, we certainly want to get means right.
Contrastingly, though, religion’s distinct contribution and core competency in the
marketplace of human encounters is axiological, firing up our participatory imaginations,
interpretively and evaluatively, through liturgical practices, thereby transforming our
existential orientations to truth, beauty and goodness into the transcendental imperatives of
faith, hope and love, which, as intrinsically rewarding, are their own ends. This axiological
thrust is generally noninferential and nonpropositional, very much existential, relational and
contemplative, the end for which we were fashioned.
The Apostolic Constitution seems to affirm the full communion between Anglican and
Roman Catholics on these paramount essentials and ends, leaving us, perhaps, with Rome’s
implicit recognition and tacit admission that what remains at stake in future ecumenical
dialogue are accidentals and means.
As for any Petrine ministry, if it is narrowly and properly conceived,
then it need not be a stumbling block. Too broadly conceived,
however, one might reasonably suspect something else is going on?
At any rate, the traditionalistic fundamentalists will continue to
conflate the cosmological and axiological, to confuse means and ends
and to treat accidentals as essentials. And the mystics of all of the
great Traditions will continue to recognize that our solidarity is a
reality to which we can awaken but not something that needs to be
established — for we are One.
This discussion continues below. Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: A n g l i c a n t r a d i t i o n, Apostolic Constitution, Archbishop of Canterbury, A u s t e n I v e r e i g h, John L.
Allen Jr., P e t r i n e m i n i s t r y, Rowan Williams
Thom Stark’s Crying (in his Beer) Game
JB on October 19, 2009 in Axiological, Cosmological, Methods & Approaches, the descriptive
- Science, the evaluative - Culture, the interpretive - Religion, the normative - Philosophy | 2
Comments »
Thom Stark at Jesus Politics is sponsoring a competition, which I couldn’t really enter
because I don’t buy the contest’s premise that would require me to demonstrate that Thom
employs erroneous presuppositions that control his interpretive options, especially regarding
Biblical hermeneutics. The whole discussion is evocative though and, in response, I wrote this
tongue-in-cheek parody, below.
Hang Down Your Head Thom Stark
A thoroughgoing solipsist, still, Thom finds it useful to suspend his disbelief in other minds.
An incurable nihilist, still, Thom finds it useful to suspend his disbelief in reality’s
intelligibility.

173. As did Kurt Vonnegut, Thom enjoys his life in this incredible
chronosynclastic infundibulum, where all is at once both
true and false (this recognizing that Thom has also
suspended his disbelief in the silly notion that such concepts
as true and false successfully refer). While so-called First
Principles, like noncontradiction and excluded middle,
certainly entertain Thom, he sees that they only work
within formal symbol systems, the axioms of which remain
otherwise unprovable within that system, which, itself,
remains either incomplete or inconsistent. Incompleteness
and inconsistency are concepts which, paradoxically, do
appear to make successful references to reality insofar as
they add no new information to Thom’s otherwise
unintelligible tautological accounts.
Even if these interpretive stances remain otherwise
empirically indemonstrable and rationally unprovable, still,
Thom finds them practically indispensable. Of course,
Thom’s pragmatism is strictly strategic and in no way
philosophical. Thom feels this way notwithstanding any
reductio ad absurdum arguments, which could only serve
to suggest that his approach is to many unpalatable and not
to otherwise demonstrate that it is – to use their categories,
not Thom’s – untrue. So, Thom actively suspends his
disbelief in other minds, in reality’s unintelligibility and in so-called First Principles because he
finds such noninferential, nonpropositional, evaluative posits just positively liberating.
This silliness continues below. Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: a n a l y t i c a l p h i l o s o p h y, Biblical hermeneutics, b i b l i c a l i n e r r a n c y, c h r o n o s y n c l a s t i c i n f u n d i b u l u m,
cosmology, excluded middle, fallibilism, First Principles, Kurt Godel, K u r t V o n n e g u t, l i n g u i s t i c, n i h i l i s m,
noncontradiction, postmodernism, p r a g m a t i s m, solipsism, s t o r y-t e l l i n g, T h o m S t a r k, W i l l i a m J a m e s
giving credit to God – football, celebrity awards
JB on October 19, 2009 in Axiological, Cosmological, Uncategorized, the descriptive -
Science, the evaluative - Culture, the interpretive - Religion, the normative - Philosophy | No
Comments »
In a post, Football and Faith at Jesus Creed, Scot McKnight inquires about players
giving credit to God:
What do you make of this phenomenon? Does it
bother you?
We might consider this in the context of Merton’s description
of Bernardian Love which progresses from 1) love of self for
sake of self to 2) love of God for sake of self to 3) love of God
for sake of God to 4) love of self for sake of God. This is
reminiscent of but doesn’t map perfectly over C.S. Lewis’ 4
Loves.
Early on our journey, our loves of self & God for sake of self
reflect part of our problem-solving, empirical, logical and
practical rationalities, which we acquire through early
humanization & socialization processes. At this point on our
journey, we practice imperfect contrition, for example, sorry
for the consequences that we suffer from our sin. We also
enjoy an enlightened self-interest, which helps us function in
society as we focus on the extrinsic rewards of shunning vice
and embracing virtue (vis a vis Ignatius’ degrees of humility,
for example). Some say our faith, here, is clear but tentative.
Later on our journey, we come to love God for the sake of
God and pursue the intrinsic rewards of truth, beauty and goodness for their own sake. We
are sorry for the consequences that our sin has on others and on our relationship to God,
perfect contrition. We move beyond but not without our earlier loves, our imperfect
contrition and our enlightened self-interest. We move beyond but not without our problem-
solving, dualistic rationalities to a more contemplative (nondual) and robustly relational
approach to God and others and an agapic love. We move beyond the mere functionality of
socialization to the more robust relationality of transformation. Some say our faith, here, is
obscure but certain.
This discussion continues below. Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: Axiological, Cosmological, h u m a n i z a t i o n, Jesus Creed, K a r l R a h n e r, p i e t y, Prosperity Gospel, Scot
McKnight, socialization, St. Bernard, t h e o d i c y, Thomas Merton, t r a n s f o r m a t i o n

174. Panentheism explained in 2 min video – AWESOME.
JB on October 17, 2009 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
Click on this link for video: Wendy Francisco’s GoD and DoG
Also, please visit Wendy by clicking on goD, above.
As is often the case, thanks to Bosco Peters.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Theodicy – love is all you need
JB on October 17, 2009 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
Best I can understand, most theodicies, in one way or another,
all seem to suggest that, if the cosmos was any less ambiguous
for us & ambivalent toward us, then it would coerce our belief
in God, ergo limit our freedom & thereby diminish our love.
There are no
too few folks,
I’d imagine,
who’d be
willing to
sacrifice
themselves as a
guinea pig to
see if this is true
… who’d want
to climb into
the Maharishi’s
helicopter with John Lennon to see if the guru would slip him
the answer – listen to Paul.
But, not me, I don’t need those
answers.
Lennon & McCartney already had
‘em.
♫♪ All you need is love … love …
♫♪♬
Love is all you need. ♥
Yep, I’m good.
Hey, somebody
… peel me another grape …
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send

175. « Older Entries Newer Entries »
© 2010 christiannonduality.com Blog is Proudly Powered By WordPress | Theme by The Cloisters

176. CHRISTIANNONDUALITY. C O M BL O G
beyond thinking & proposing to imagining & participating
Home About
T o d a y’ s L i t u r g y
About Hesychasm
JB on October 17, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, the interpretive - Religion | No
Comments »
In the Byzantine East, the hesychast tradition had a tremendous influence and found a
powerful interpreter in Gregory Palamas in the 14th century. Palamas, the most influential Translator
Greek Orthodox theologian of the Middle Ages, taught that the most effective way to increase
our awareness, integrate body and soul, and open ourselves to God is to attend to our
breathing.
In The Triads in Defense of the Holy Hesychasts, Gregory described
the process of pure prayer beyond words or thoughts or concepts and By N2H
advised his students what to expect. Amos Yong apophatic
Axiological axiologically-
The first step is to enter into our own body, not to flee from it. While Bernard
integral
this is very difficult at the beginning, with repeated effort in time
attention to breathing gathers together the mind that has been
Lonergan Brian
McLaren
dissipated and produces inner detachment and freedom. Charles
Sanders
For Palamas, this activity is not itself grace (although it might better
be conceived in degrees of cooperation and participation and not in Peirce
contemplative
either/or terms), but he tells us that God works in and through the cosmology emergence
body and soul together to communicate supernatural gifts. As long as emerging church
we have not experienced this transformation, we believe that the body is always driven only Enlightenment
by corporeal and material passions. epistemology faith False
This discussion continues below. Read the rest of this entry » Self fideism Hans
Kung James K. A. Smith
Jesus Creed John Duns
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send Scotus kataphatic Kevin
Beck Kurt Godel
Merton
metaphysics
Mike Morrell Natural
Theology nihilism
nondual nonduality
orthodoxy radical
emergence radical
orthodoxy rationalism
Tags: A p a t h e i a, Buddhist, Byzantine East, George A. Maloney, Greek Orthodox, G r e g o r y P a l a m a s, H . Richard Rohr
Science
T r i s t r a m E n g e l h a r t J r ., h e s y c h a s t, Philip Clayton, William Johnston
scientism semiotic
theodicy Theological
Anthropology
Thomas
Mythopoeia, Myth & God Merton Tim King
transformation
JB on October 17, 2009 in Axiological, the evaluative - Culture, the interpretive - Religion | True Self Walker Percy
W P-C u m u l u s b y R o y T a n c k
No Comments » a n d Luke Morton requires
F l a s h P l a y e r 9 or better.
I appreciate the insights that folks like Campbell & Jung brought to anthropology. They are Cultivating the
important & deserve serious consideration from a scientific perspective. However, I’m not Roots, Nurturing
among those who consider them theologically competent. the Shoots
For some, all religious myth is mythopoeia, God’s expressions thru the minds of poets. MARCH 2010
M T W T F S S
For the Christian, the true myth of Christ is God’s expression of Himself through, with & in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Himself. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
For the Christian, for whom God’s moral nature was revealed in Christ, God’s essential 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
nature remains an unfathomable mystery. We do NOT, however, say that God is 29 30 31
inapprehensible (in part) even as we maintain that God is wholly incomprehensible. « FEB
We do not consider mystery to be wholly unintelligible even as Yahweh remains the Recent Posts
UnNameable One. The Emerging Church is BIGGER
This discussion continues at this link: Read the rest of this entry » t h a n C h r i s t i a n i t y – how to spot
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send it in other traditions
Abortion & the Senate
Healthcare Bill – a p r u d e n t i a l
judgment
10 historical developments
propelling Emerging
Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
Why Brian McLaren’s Greco-
Roman Narrative is NOT a
caricature
THE BOOK: Christian
Tags: a p o p h a t i c i s m, C a r l J u n g, Charles A. Coulombe, e n c r a t i s m, fallibilism, H e g e l, Joseph Campbell, N o n d u a l i t y – Postmodern
Kurt Godel, m y s t e r i a n, m y t h, m y t h o p o e i a, p i e t i s m, quietism, r a t i o n a l i s m, scientism, s o c i a l i m a g i n a r y, Conservative Catholic
William F. Buckley Pentecostal
Recent Comments
christiannonduality.com Blog »
If You Are In Distress, Spiritual or Otherwise Blog Archive » Thoughts re:
t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
JB on October 17, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, Uncategorized | No Comments » vs Dan Dennett on Intelligent
Design – a poorly designed
inference
christiannonduality.com Blog »
Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n

177. McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
Narrative is NOT a caricature on
A New Kind of Christianity?
McLaren didn’t make this up. It’s
worse than that!
christiannonduality.com Blog »
Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n
McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
Narrative is NOT a caricature on
E v e r y t h i n g T h a t’s Old is New
A g a i n – this (McLaren’s “ N e w”
Christianity) is truly an old
time religion
K i e r a n C o n r o y on A New Kind of
Christianity? McLaren didn’t
make this up. It’s worse than
that!
Philip Clayton on Thoughts re:
t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
vs Dan Dennett
Type, Hit Enter to Search
We Distinguish in
Order to Unite
Because of the nature of this website, I often getting inquiries from people suffering
from spiritual emergence issues, real spiritual emergencies, as well as those who Select Category 6
have suffered from a variety of debilitating emotional and mental illnesses, including Blogroll
depression, bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. Because I am not a trained spiritual Andrew Sullivan
director, social worker or psychological counselor, I cannot (should not) presume to Beyond Blue
Brian D. McLaren
be of much help to these people, but I have fashioned something of a boilerplate Commonweal
response below. I have kept all of you in earnest prayer and close to my heart. Crunchy Con
Cynthia Bourgeault
How Wide Is Your Moat? – our holistic moat Emergent Village
Emerging Women
The mutual fund industry has popularized the moat metaphor, a moat being that deep and First Thoughts
wide trench around the rampart of a castle , that is usually filled with water. There are even Fors Clavigera
pinball games, like Medieval Madness , in which players use different strategies to breach the Francis X. Clooney, S.J.
castle’s defenses, such as the moat, the drawbridge, the gate, the wall. Sometimes the Joseph S. O'Leary
madness is not so medieval but very much contemporary, within our own psychological NCR Today – the Catholic Blog
castle walls. Per Caritatem
Phyllis Tickle
I have often thought of the analogy of the moat in other than economic terms. It might also Post Christian
be a useful image in considering a person’s general well being , notwithstanding your 401K Postmodern Conservative
might now look more like a 201K. Radical Emergence
Sojourners
Like a castle with its multiple layers of defenses, one’s general well being is also bolstered by Tall Skinny Kiwi
its own moats and walls and gatekeepers and can be breached by many different types of The Website of Unknowing
attacks. Transmillenial
There are times in our lives when we know our well being will have to do battle, when we Vox Nova
need to both widen and deepen our psychological moats and pull up the drawbridges of our Weekly Standard Blog
physical ramparts. The size of such bulwarks must be determined by many factors. Worship Blog
Zoecarnate
Let’s consider some examples of the types of battles we must all fight and of the kinds of
defenses we might need to put in place to fortify our general well being. Worthwhile Sites
This discussion continues at this link: Read the rest of this entry » Amos Yong
Boulder Integral
Brother David Steindl-Rast
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send Center for Action and
Contemplation
Christian Nonduality
Contemplative Outreach
David Group International
Dialogue Institute
Ecumene
Franciscan Archive
Innerexplorations
Institute on Religion in an Age of
Science
Tags: p r a y e r, s p i r i t u a l i t y
Metanexus
Monastic Interreligious Dialogue
National Catholic Reporter
Radical Orthodoxy
Shalomplace
What differentiates the Gospel in the marketplace? Sojourners
JB on October 17, 2009 in Uncategorized | No Comments » Thomas Merton Center
Virtual Chapel
In the New Testament, the Gospel, the Good Zygon Center for Religion and
Science
News, Jesus revealed the aspirational aspects of

178. human transformation, a process that brings us Cloud of
Unknowing
i n t o a n i n t i m a t e D a d d y- l i k e r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h a
Amos Yong apophatic
tender, loving God. This differentiates the Axiological axiologically-
Gospel in the marketplace, so the aspirational Bernard
integral
Lonergan Brian
should be emphasized at least as much as the McLaren Charles
o b l i g a t i o n a l. M a y b e m o r e? Sanders
Peirce
contemplative
cosmology emergence
emerging church
Right & wrong. Good & evil. Merits & demerits. Debits & E n l i g h t e n m e n t epistemology
credits. Reward & punishment. Responsibility & faith False Self fideism
accountability. These are the obligational aspects of human Hans Kung James K. A.
socialization, a process of formation & reformation that helps Smith Jesus Creed John
us function in society. Every society already “gets” this Duns Scotus kataphatic
without the benefit of special revelation. The Old Testament Kevin Beck Kurt
revealed that a personal, faithful God was active & involved Godel Merton
with humanity, establishing covenants, making promises. metaphysics Mike
Morrell Natural Theology
In the New Testament, the Gospel,
the Good News, Jesus revealed the
nihilism nondual
nonduality orthodoxy
aspirational aspects of human radical emergence radical
transformation, a process that orthodoxy rationalism
brings us into an intimate Daddy-
like relationship with a tender, Richard Rohr
Science scientism
loving God. semiotic theodicy
Theological
This differentiates the Gospel in Anthropology
the marketplace, so the
Thomas
aspirational should be emphasized at least as much as the
obligational. Maybe more? Merton Tim King
transformation True
Self Walker Percy
So, the obligational aspect of our growth is about things like Join Other
enlightened self-interest, imperfect contrition (sorrow for Visitors in Prayer
consequences to ourselves), extrinsic rewards and eros (what’s in it
for me?). Light A Candle & Pray
The aspirational is about the intrinsic rewards of truth, beauty, goodness & unity, the pursuit Join Us in the
of which is its own reward. It’s about agape (what’s in it for others) and perfect contrition Liturgy of the
(sorrow for consequences that others suffer). Hours
Get the C a t h l i m e r g e n t o n
Twitter widget and many other
great free widgets a t Widgetbox!
Not seeing a widget? (More info)
Tweets
It’s about growing in intimacy. johnssylvest: Abortion & the
Senate Healthcare Bill – a
prudential judgment
The Old Covenant still works and the meeting of our basic obligations is still sufficient to http://bit.ly/aS2DwT
enter the Kingdom (& abundance). It’s just that, in the Gospel, the New Covenant, we are johnssylvest: 10 developments
called to so much more, to superabundance! propelling Emerging
Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
God, like any good father or mother, wants more for us than we want for ourselves. When http://bit.ly/a4AMtg
we see anyone settle for less, it is natural to grieve, but we should be gentle & accepting of johnssylvest: RT @pdclayton7:
where they are & respectful of their choices. "Theology After Google" opens
Wed. - 23 of the best speakers on
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send emerging religion in Google Age;
live stream at http://o ...
johnssylvest: RT @jonestony:
New Blog Post: Society for
Pentecostal Studies Paper: What
Pentecostals Have to Learn from
Emergents http://ow.ly/16KREU
johnssylvest: THE BOOK: An
Emerging Church Conversation
with a Postmodern Conservative
Catholic Pentecostal
http://bit.ly/91D570 #fb
John Sobert Sylvest
The Great Tradition properly conceived
JB on October 17, 2009 in Axiological, Cosmological, Methods & Approaches, the descriptive
- Science, the evaluative - Culture, the interpretive - Religion, the normative - Philosophy |
No Comments »
What might one mean by The Great Tradition?
Some conceptions of the Great Tradition are too broad in some ways and too narrow in
others. My categories work like this: Theological = Cosmological + Axiological, where
the cosmological includes our descriptive science & normative philosophy and the axiological
includes our evaluative cultural milieu & interpretive religious stance. This roughly maps
over a perspectivalism such that the evidential = science, rational = philosophy, existential =
cultural & presuppositional = interpretive. The only reason that our descriptive & interpretive
realms do not wholly conflate is b/c we are radically finite & fallible.

179. My Peircean rubric says that the normative mediates between the descriptive and the
interpretive to effect the evaluative, or, alternatively, that the philosophic (rational)
mediates between the scientific (evidential) and the religious (presuppositional) to effect the
cultural (existential). Some Religious Epistemologies often seem to be saying that the
Biblical mediates between the scientific and religious to effect our existential longings
(ultimate concerns). Johnboy Was Here
Feedjit Live Blog Stats
What happens, then, is that some folk seem to think that the Great Tradition has something Feedjit Live Blog Stats
to say about the cosmological, about science and philosophy, for example about
anthropology. In my view, this too broadly conceives the Great Tradition, which has only to
do with our axiological concerns. The Great Tradition shapes and influences the answers to
our questions: What’s it to me? (evaluatively & existentially) and How’s all of this tie back Follow this blog
together? or re-ligate (interpretively & presuppositionally)? It does not attempt to answer the
questions: What is that? or Is that a fact? (descriptively & evidentially) or How can I best
avoid or acquire that? (normatively or philosophically or ethically or morally). Special
revelation is not required for a human to live the good and moral life. (I’m not denying that
it might not otherwise allow us to run the good race more swiftly and with less hindrance as
it transvalues all of our value pursuits.)
More concretely, then, the Great Tradition has nothing to reveal to us about anthropology
such as regarding the nature of the soul or the history of the species. It does not rely on one
metaphysic or ontology vs another and does not help us adjudicate such questions. For
example, it does not tell us which theory of atonement is better, the classical theory of an
ontological rupture located in the past or the Scotistic view of a teleological striving oriented
toward the future. Presently, the evidence seems to support Scotus (the Franciscans) and
Teilhard?
Axiologically, however, the Great Tradition is often being conceived much too narrowly.
Mere Christianity is WAY more than creedal formulations. Creeds, in my view, are
secondary propositional articulations that grew out of our primary participatory
celebrations (cf Jamie Smith). There is more to be had from the retrieval of songs,
hymns, stories, letters, rituals and such and a more robust semiotic grasp of what they
conveyed in the way of truth articulated, beauty celebrated, goodness preserved and unity
enjoyed vis a vis the primary encounter of a People Gathered and properly understood. The
participatory understanding narratively precedes the propositional formulation.
As it is, these propositional formulations in creeds are too heavily encrusted in cosmological Visit Cathlimergent Conversations
speculations and there is a danger in overemphasizing them because there is a tendency to
take some of these cosmological accretions and to consider them essentials when they are not Visit Anglimergent
even accidentals but, instead, somewhat irrelevant, even. Meta
Log in
Entries R S S
Comments R S S
WordPress.org
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: a x i o l o g y, Charles Sanders Peirce, cosmology, Duns Scotus, epistemology, p e r s p e c t i v a l i s m, T i e l h a r d
Visit Christian Nonduality on the web
JB on October 17, 2009 in Uncategorized | No Comments »

180. In the East, a distinction is drawn between the “way of the baby monkey” and the “way of
the kitten,” the first way describing that of the ascetics in pursuit of Enlightenment,
Knowledge and Wisdom, the second that of Devotion.
The metaphorical implications are that there is more effort on the part of the baby monkey,
which must actively cling tightly to its parent in getting transported around, while, as we are
all aware, the kitten is passively transported by the nape of its neck in its mother’s teeth.
I offer another distinction, which is the “way of the baby goose,” implying an imprinted
following of the parent or an imitation of Action. Finally, we might consider the “way of the
baby martin,” which is familiar to any who’ve observed the parents knocking a fledgling off
of the Purple Martin House that it might thereby learn to fly, the implication here describing
the Way of the Cross via formative, reformative and transformative suffering.
If these are different path-ways, perhaps roughly corresponding to creed, cult, code and
community in our great traditions, where do they ultimately lead?
I will discuss, herein, how they are all ordered toward a unitive Life in the Spirit and are
animated via Lonergan’s conversions (intellectual, affective, moral, social and religious) by
the very same Spirit.
Click on the wizard to visit the Christian Nonduality website.

181. Click on the Bird to visit Radical Emergence on twitter.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: Christian Nonduality Website, Radical Emergence on Twitter
Tweets – offsite data storage
JB on October 17, 2009 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
johnssylvest
Which tradition best honors God is a valid question but’ll get adjudicated practically long b4
we know speculatively. U got game?7 minutes ago from web
Faith works w/ reason but we should lighten up re: this path vs that b/c that’s increasingly
an evaluative posit.14 minutes ago from web
When you’re mentally ill, no one brings you a casserole http://bit.ly/18nJNo44 minutes ago
from web
Science, fear, God and the mystical http://bit.ly/48cEg8 Beatrice Bruteau contemplative,
passionate scientist & philosopher (podcast)about 1 hour ago from web
Robert E. Kennedy ‘I wanted a faith that was deeper’: Jesuit priest and Zen master
http://bit.ly/14KqZ5 (podcast)
There are nearly 800 of my tweets archived at this link:
Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Science, Theology, Zen, Contemplation – podcasts
JB on October 17, 2009 in Axiological, Cosmological, Methods & Approaches, Practices &
Experiences, the descriptive - Science, the evaluative - Culture, the interpretive - Religion, the
normative - Philosophy | No Comments »
clickable banner
Beatrice Bruteau contemplative, passionate scientist & philosopher:
Science, fear, God and the mystical http://bit.ly/48cEg8
Robert E. Kennedy Jesuit priest and Zen master:
‘I wanted a faith that was deeper’ http://bit.ly/14KqZ5
Elizabeth Johnson:
The Quest for the Living God http://bit.ly/2vUOM3
Fr. Richard Rohr:
Seeing with God’s eyes http://bit.ly/T5mNJ
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send

182. Tags: Beatrice Bruteau, c o n t e m p l a t i v e, Elizabeth Johnson, Richard Rohr, Robert E. Kennedy, Science,
t h e o l o g y, Z e n
The Emergent Roaming Catholic – a pictorial autobiography
JB on October 17, 2009 in Practices & Experiences | No Comments »
After that act of defiance Grigor was never heard from again. And none in the company ever
spoke of the incident. He was my best friend.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Workplace Dynamics (and mnemonics for getting along)
JB on October 16, 2009 in Uncategorized, the normative - Philosophy | No Comments »
Many years ago, I was asked, in an online spirituality discussion forum, how to best engage a
CEO. (Never thought of myself as thus stereotyped, jeepers.) Below was my response.
Let me engage a little humor, not by way of being flippant or dismissive, but I think you’ll see
a grain of truth that may help you. First, to engage a CEO, you need his or her enneagram,
16PF and MMPI results. What I am suggesting is that, any answer of mine, responding to a
general stereotyping of CEO’s won’t be useful.
I’ll give you a more specific stereotyping, still general but maybe more useful. I encountered
three types of CEO’s/employees on my career path based on 3 major criteria: character,
competence and personality. Character involves honesty and integrity and ethical
matters; compassion, too. Competence involves knowledge, skills and experience; creativity,
too. Personality involves interpersonal relationship skills (self-explanatory?).
Too often, one encounters folks who lack one of these very important criteria and the
organization suffers. There is the CEO who:
1) is competent and has great interpersonal relationship skills but who lacks character,
otherwise known as the Con Artist;
2) has good interpersonal relationship skills and character but who otherwise is incompetent,
basically your Nice Guy;
3) has character and competence but lacks personality, your Straw Boss or Plantation Owner
(sometimes just known as a Jerk); etc
This discussion continues at this link: Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send

183. « Older Entries Newer Entries »
© 2010 christiannonduality.com Blog is Proudly Powered By WordPress | Theme by The Cloisters

184. CHRISTIANNONDUALITY. C O M BL O G
beyond thinking & proposing to imagining & participating
Home About
T o d a y’ s L i t u r g y
Angel, let me help you with your wings …
JB on October 16, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, the interpretive - Religion | No
Comments »
I just read my latest Parousia e-zine via Kevin Beck which had an article that I’m sure
(hope) will show up on his blog next week. [Update, here's Kevin's piece called Being Translator
Present.] In it, Kevin emphasized being really and truly and wholly present to others. I’ll
link back to it in a follow-up comment. It reminded me of a post I wrote in August 2002
which was called Stop! Drop! Roll! which I now share below.
Friends, I made up a little mnemonic to help me better answer certain e-mails, to better
engage others with “prudence, learning and experience” (per St. Teresa) and “genuineness, By N2H
caring and understanding” (per Carl Rogers?). Amos Yong apophatic
Axiological axiologically-
It is this: Stop. Drop. Roll. Bernard
integral
You recognize it as what to do if you are on fire. Lonergan Brian
McLaren
My take is that, when asked for advice, or when giving advice, however solicited or not, that Charles
Sanders
especially in e-mail, lacking invaluable nonverbal cues, to avoid misunderstanding (which is
EASY, the misunderstanding not the avoidance, that is), I will: Peirce
contemplative
STOP and not give my kneejerk, boilerplate answers. Stop the default, textbook response, cosmology emergence
interpretations or commentary. emerging church
Enlightenment
DROP my own agenda, which may involve me processing my own garbage and projecting epistemology faith False
my own issues into another’s situation, which might just involve the “need”, on my part, to Self fideism Hans
be consulted or considered knowledgeable (see the Litany of Humility, for instance), which Kung James K. A. Smith
might result more in transference dynamics and not legitimate journeying as fellow pilgrim, Jesus Creed John Duns
as kindred sojourner, or what have ya. Scotus kataphatic Kevin
Beck Kurt Godel
ROLL around in the other person’s FIRE and feel their joy or their pain or their energy Merton
upheaval. Wait a day or so to respond, to prayerfully ponder, to empathize. metaphysics
Mike Morrell Natural
Then, prayerfully and empathetically respond. Theology nihilism
nondual nonduality
I think of the lyrics to that Nickel Creek song: “My orthodoxy radical
greatest fear is that you will crash and burn emergence radical
and I won’t feel your fire” (from “When You orthodoxy rationalism
Come Back Down”). Richard Rohr
Science
Thus we can avoid giving easy answers to complex
problems. We can avoid inadvertently minimizing scientism semiotic
theodicy Theological
another’s feelings, grief, pain, struggles or joys. We Anthropology
can avoid trivializing transformative life events of
another. We can avoid invalidating another’s real ThomasTim King
Merton
problems by giving too casual a response, or too
cursorily dismissive an answer. Quite often, others
transformation
True Self Walker Percy
want to simply be well listened to and it is best we W P-C u m u l u s b y R o y T a n c k
stay in a non-directive, interrogatory mode. I think it a n d Luke Morton requires
was Rogers who taught us GCU’s? or genuineness, F l a s h P l a y e r 9 or better.
caring and understanding, something the Carmelites Cultivating the
have identified in John of the Cross’ letters (was it Roots, Nurturing
maybe Kevin Culligan OCD?). the Shoots
Thus, once another is convinced of the depth of our caring, our response will be somewhat MARCH 2010
healing, however on or off the mark we are academically. M T W T F S S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Anyone else have some little rubrics such as this, which we all might benefit from? 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Angel, let me help you with your wings … 29 30 31
« FEB
Recent Posts
The Emerging Church is BIGGER
t h a n C h r i s t i a n i t y – how to spot
it in other traditions
Abortion & the Senate
Healthcare Bill – a p r u d e n t i a l
judgment
10 historical developments
propelling Emerging
Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
Why Brian McLaren’s Greco-
Roman Narrative is NOT a
caricature
THE BOOK: Christian
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send N o n d u a l i t y – Postmodern
Conservative Catholic
Pentecostal
Recent Comments
christiannonduality.com Blog »
Blog Archive » Thoughts re:
t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
vs Dan Dennett on Intelligent
Design – a poorly designed
Tags: Carl Rogers, h e a l i n g, Kevin Beck, K e v i n C u l l i g a n, l i s t e n i n g, L i t a n y o f H u m i l i t y, Nickel Creek, inference
presence, St. Teresa of Avila christiannonduality.com Blog »
Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n

185. McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
Narrative is NOT a caricature on
A New Kind of Christianity?
Praying Our True Self McLaren didn’t make this up. It’s
worse than that!
JB on October 16, 2009 in Practices & Experiences | No Comments » christiannonduality.com Blog »
Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n
[The next paragraph is my embellishment of something I heard Fr. Rohr saying.] McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
Narrative is NOT a caricature on
So, we pray in that manner that best silences the false self, quieting it and its faculties, E v e r y t h i n g T h a t’s Old is New
however discursive or nondiscursive, and this manner may be for some the rosary, for others A g a i n – this (McLaren’s “ N e w”
the Eucharist, for others walking meditation or this or that practice coupled with this or that Christianity) is truly an old
discipline. And we thus pray in a manner that most fully engages the True Self, allowing it to time religion
commune with God in utter simplicity and most holistically and integratively — as quietly as K i e r a n C o n r o y on A New Kind of
a sewing machine but as powerfully as a cement truck. Christianity? McLaren didn’t
make this up. It’s worse than
Being quiet and simple and powerful results from being holistic, single-minded and whole-
that!
hearted – praying the True Self.
Philip Clayton on Thoughts re:
Being noisy and complex and inefficacious results from being disintegrated, monkey-minded t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
and divided in one’s affections – praying the false self. vs Dan Dennett
It is not so much what temperament or which faculties we bring to prayer or not but, rather, Type, Hit Enter to Search
which s/Self.
We Distinguish in
Discussion continues at length: >>> Order to Unite
Read the rest of this entry » Select Category 6
Blogroll
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Andrew Sullivan
Beyond Blue
Brian D. McLaren
Commonweal
Crunchy Con
Cynthia Bourgeault
Emergent Village
Emerging Women
First Thoughts
Fors Clavigera
Tags: a p o p h a t i c, C e n t e r i n g P r a y e r, c o n t e m p l a t i o n, e n e r g y u p h e a v a l s, E n l i g h t e n m e n t, False Self, Jacques Francis X. Clooney, S.J.
M a r i t a i n, k a t a p h a t i c, K u n d a l i n i, n a t u r a l m y s t i c i s m, Richard Rohr, T h o m a s K e a t i n g, TM, True Self, Z e n Joseph S. O'Leary
NCR Today – the Catholic Blog
Per Caritatem
Phyllis Tickle
Post Christian
Theological Anthropologies – optimism & pessimism Postmodern Conservative
Radical Emergence
JB on October 16, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, the interpretive - Religion, the normative Sojourners
- Philosophy | No Comments » Tall Skinny Kiwi
The Website of Unknowing
One thing of immediate interest to me is Pope Benedict’s augustinian rather than thomistic Transmillenial
perspective, which has large implications for our theological anthropologies. To keep it Vox Nova
simple, I would just say that Pope Benedict’s perspective on human nature is more Weekly Standard Blog
pessimistic than JPII’s. Worship Blog
Zoecarnate
One major issue such a perspective will address, for example, is what human nature is
capable of without the benefit of Divine revelation. Another issue would be to ask just how Worthwhile Sites
depraved we are vs how good we are (on a continuum, of course), before grace builds on
nature, which is to ask, perhaps, what type of foundation does human nature afford the Spirit Amos Yong
as each soul begins its journey of transformation? Boulder Integral
Brother David Steindl-Rast
Pope Benedict, in relying so much on Augustine, will be very aware of the very best that Center for Action and
Luther had to offer by way of critique and is in a very authoritative position, theologically, to Contemplation
advance ecumenical dialogue with Protestantism. This would make for a great papal legacy Christian Nonduality
and great strides have already been made, for example, regarding the joint accord between Contemplative Outreach
Catholics and Lutherans on the doctrine of justification. [Much credit is due Hans Kung, too, David Group International
whose role has, regrettably, been largely unacknowledged.] Dialogue Institute
Ecumene
This discussion continues at this link: Read the rest of this entry » Franciscan Archive
Innerexplorations
Send Institute on Religion in an Age of
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Science
Metanexus
Monastic Interreligious Dialogue
National Catholic Reporter
Radical Orthodoxy
Shalomplace
Sojourners
Thomas Merton Center
Virtual Chapel
Zygon Center for Religion and
Tags: A q u i n a s, A u g u s t i n e, A u g u s t i n i a n i s m, Bernard Lonergan, Donald Gelpi, False Self, H a n s K u n g, K a r l Science
R a h n e r, L u t h e r, Pope Benedict, Pope John Paul II, Pope John XXIII, T h o m i s m, t r a n s f o r m a t i o n, True Self
Cloud of
Unknowing

186. Amos Yong apophatic
Merton- New Seeds of Contemplation Axiological axiologically-
Bernard
integral
JB on October 16, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, the interpretive - Religion | No Lonergan Brian
Comments » McLaren Charles
One of the richest reflections on this I have ever come across is in Merton’s __New Seeds of
Sanders
Peirce
Contemplation__, especially in the preface and first three chapters, which reflect on what contemplative
contemplation is and is not and what the true self and false self are. cosmology emergence
emerging church
The most concise summary I could come up with would be that, E n l i g h t e n m e n t epistemology
faith False Self fideism
1) for our true self, our joy is found in God’s glory; Hans Kung James K. A.
Smith Jesus Creed John
2) our will is oriented to God’s love; Duns Scotus kataphatic
3) the work of our journey is to co-create with God our identity through and with and in Kevin Beck Kurt
God; Godel Merton
metaphysics Mike
Morrell Natural Theology
4) that we may become wholly in His image, holy in His image;
nihilism nondual
5) when we do have our memory, understanding and will integrated and holistically nonduality orthodoxy
operative, we experience our true self but radical emergence radical
orthodoxy rationalism
6) this co-creation of our identity and this surrender of our memory, understanding and will
to faith, hope and love are effected through theological virtue gifted by the Spirit by an
Richard Rohr
Science scientism
elevation of nature through grace and transmutation of experience through grace and not by semiotic theodicy
a perfection of the natural order by our natural efforts, which is to say Theological
Anthropology
7) we are in need of salvation to overcome both death and sin and the most fundamental Thomas
vocational call we answer is Merton Tim King
transformation True
8 ) to be saved and then Self Walker Percy
Join Other
9) transformed. Visitors in Prayer
In other Light A Candle & Pray
words, we Join Us in the
don’t enter Liturgy of the
the Hours
monastery or
undertake a
life of prayer
to make us
better human
beings —
rather, we
urgently and
in crisis and
seriously and
radically Get the C a t h l i m e r g e n t o n
place the Twitter widget and many other
utter great free widgets a t Widgetbox!
dependency Not seeing a widget? (More info)
and abject Tweets
poverty of
our selves johnssylvest: Abortion & the
(which are Senate Healthcare Bill – a
nevertheless prudential judgment
good) at http://bit.ly/aS2DwT
God’s johnssylvest: 10 developments
disposal in propelling Emerging
order to be Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
dramatically http://bit.ly/a4AMtg
rescued. johnssylvest: RT @pdclayton7:
"Theology After Google" opens
Teresa of Avila did say that we must desire and occupy ourselves in prayer not so much so as Wed. - 23 of the best speakers on
to receive consolations but so as to gain the strength to serve. Still, a careful reading and emerging religion in Google Age;
parsing will note that she didn’t negate or eliminate our desire for consolations but only added live stream at http://o ...
to them. I like the simple distinction between eros or what’s in it for me? and agape or what’s johnssylvest: RT @jonestony:
in it for God & others? New Blog Post: Society for
Pentecostal Studies Paper: What
Agape, however, does not extinguish or negate eros, but, rather, transvalues it and Pentecostals Have to Learn from
recontextualizes it. Thus we do not let go of what’s in it for me? even as we strive to Emergents http://ow.ly/16KREU
transcend it with agapic love. johnssylvest: THE BOOK: An
Emerging Church Conversation
This discussion continues at this link: Read the rest of this entry » with a Postmodern Conservative
Catholic Pentecostal
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send http://bit.ly/91D570 #fb
John Sobert Sylvest
Tags: c o n t e m p l a t i o n, Merton, St. Bernard, Teresa of Avila
Merton – the False Self (properly understood)
JB on October 16, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, the interpretive - Religion | No
Comments »
Below is a sidebar conversation I was having with someone else re: the Rohr-Keating retreat,
where the subject of the true-false self terminology came up. I thought I’d tack it on here:
It turns me off in this sense. It is bad terminology. Unfortunate use of words. But we work
with them because of their heritage in our tradition. Johnboy Was Here
Feedjit Live Blog Stats

187. Why unfortunate? Because of what you said: False self is not bad. Feedjit Live Blog Stats
I prefer to use: early on our journey and later on our journey thus and such happens. [This is
not to deny that many unduly put off the journey to such things as transformation and even
adulthood.] The early stages of formation and transformation are good. So are the later. And Follow this blog
nothing that takes place on our early journey is abandoned.
The false self represents our socialization, moving from little animals to humans. It
represents our humanization. And our humanization and divinization are inextricably
intertwined, not really distinguishable really. The more fully human we become, the more we
reflect the Divine Image, the imago Dei. So, we don’t abandon the false self. Not at all.
Rather, we take full possession of it in order to surrender it to crucifixion. [And one cannot
surrender what one does not form and possess.] We give it up in order to be radically saved
(from sin and death); it is no mere pious gesture. Thus the seed falls to the ground and dies …
Thus every other metaphor for the Paschal Mystery …
This is my False Self.
I give it up for you.
This discussion continues at this link: Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Visit Cathlimergent Conversations
Visit Anglimergent
Meta
Tags: False Self, Merton, t r a n s f o r m a t i o n, True Self
Log in
Entries R S S
Comments R S S
WordPress.org
Merton – move into crisis to lose crisis
JB on October 16, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, the interpretive - Religion | No
Comments »
Another Mertonesque thought: We are moving toward an existential realization of how
critical to our spiritual survival prayer really is. This realization is attained when we feel our
need for prayer as acutely as we would feel the need for a breath when underwater.
That is my crude rendering from memory. I think this has something to say to us all whether
we are called to discursive mediation, lectio, meditatio, oratio, contemplatio, operatio or what
have ya. Whatever our prayer gift as led by the Spirit, it is to be engaged with the sense of
critical and acute and urgent need that affirms our radical dependence and perennial state of
existential crisis.
Now, don’t get Merton wrong. This is all dialectical. One moves into crisis to lose crisis. One
loses self to gain self. First, there is a mountain. Then, there is no mountain. Then, there is.
One recognzies one’s radical dependency to move to place of radical trust. One experiences
one’s emptiness and abject poverty to realize one’s utter fullness. One moves into paradox and
pain and contradiction to realize that, whatdaya know, all is well.
This discussion continues at length at this link: Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: C.S. Lewis, False Self, Hasidic Mystics, Leonard Cohen, Merton, St. Bernard, Sufi Mystics,
t r a n s f o r m a t i o n, True Self, V i k t o r F r a n k l
Merton – on the risk of stagnation, desolation, aridity
JB on October 16, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, the interpretive - Religion | No
Comments »
Love, eminently reasonable, needs no reason, inasmuch as it is sufficient unto itself.
Happiness, finally, cannot be pursued but must ensue. So, too, with good feelings. They aren’t
needed but will often ensue, which is to say, follow, love.
Merton noted that often, when we are in pain and conflict and contradiction, we incorrectly
associate same with old wounds, with old injuries that truly have been resolved and healed
already. During such times, Merton encourages us to consider the very real possibility that we
are, rather, being invited to open ourselves to a new level of being through such pain and
conflict and contradiction. In other words, if we are not properly attentive, then we run the
risk of stagnation, desolation and aridity, sometimes for months or years, dwelling on the
wrong integrative and transformative issues, missing the invitation to move to another level,
a level that could be attained in a day even.
This discussion continues at this link: Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send

188. Tags: a r i d i t y, desolation, Merton
Merton – It was Him! He done it!
JB on October 16, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, the interpretive - Religion | No
Comments »
Another distinction from Merton.
Merton discusses two of the types of confessio, of confession, but I don’t recall the latin terms
for both. One was laude or praise. The other was re: the more familiar “It was me. I done it.”
that we know from the Rite of Reconciliation and from police shakedowns, or parental busts
re: hands in cookie jars.
This distinction makes for rich reflection and meditation but I’ll try to control my
imagination and focus on the transformative process.
The confession of praise is the converse: “It was God. He done it.”
The psalms are about 50:50 penitential supplication taking the form of “I done it” and of
praise taking the form of adoration of “He done it.”
The discussion continues at this link: Read the rest of this entry »
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: confessio, J a m e s T a y l o r, Louis Evely, Merton, St. Bernard
Merton – insoluble problems?
JB on October 16, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, the interpretive - Religion | No
Comments »
Merton has touched upon a dynamic, when he speaks of existential crisis, which is very
much related to the Cross for Christians although it happens with all people, even in science.
The dynamic, more specifically, involves our confrontation with a problem. We initially
perceive the problem as soluble and we work mightily to solve it. It matters not whether it is
a philosophical conundrum or some scientific hypothesis or some existential crisis/spiritual
emergency. We exhaust all of our resources and then arrive at the point where we pretty
much conclude that this particular issue is insoluble. At this point, we resolve to leave it
alone, give it a rest, to forget about it altogether.
So, we do.
Then, when you least expect it, whether in a dream or while playing or working or chopping
wood and carrying water, the solution comes to us in a flash, totally gratuitously and
unmerited as pure grace, so to speak.
Now, this dynamic is very natural and involves the workings of the human mind at a
subconscious level, intuitions bubbling up to the surface, to be sure, not unaided by the Holy
Spirit.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: Merton
Natural Mysticism & Enlightenment
JB on October 16, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, the interpretive - Religion | No
Comments »
To the extent that natural mysticism and enlightenment seem to gift humans with what I
think are authentic insights and intuitions about cosmotheandric unity and human solidarity
and Divine immanence, then I truly believe they foster human authenticity in the fullest
lonerganian sense. They contribute, in my view, to Lonergan’s secular conversions:
intellectually, affectively, morally and socially. So it is with anything that truly humanizes a
human being: good diet, good hygiene, good discipline, good awareness, good asceticism,
good habits, etc Even the construction of the false self, the social persona, is part of the
humanization process of this animal, Homo sapiens. So, this drives at the question of
whether or not humanization and divinization are the same thing, perhaps. And I think we
can answer in the affirmative.

189. However, complete humanization, into the Imago Dei, seems to require the Lonerganian
religious conversion, too, and seems to require Helminiak’s theotic focus or realm of concern.
Humanization and divinization go hand in hand but the process can be frustrated before one
undergoes religious conversion and before one’s realm of concern opens up beyond the
positivistic, philosophic and theistic into the theotic.
So, I think, yes, there is something dynamically ordered about Zen and TM and natural
mysticism, that moves one toward humanization and authenticity and which can improve
on human nature in such a way that grace can build on a better foundation. That is what the
Holy Spirit does n’est pas? Grace builds on nature. So, anything that helps us more fully
realize our humanity and authentic human nature can help dispose us to gifts of the Spirit,
among which is infused contemplation. [Especially since enlightenment seems to gift one
with docility, openness, quietness, stillness, solitude, solidarity, compassion, good asceticisms
and habits that transmute into true virtue, all related to the life of love and prayer that help
properly dispose others to infused contemplation etc?] The Spirit, however, as with anyone
who progresses in the prayer life on through advanced stages of meditation to the simplest
forms of active prayer, remains sovereignly in control, in my view, of contemplative grace.
Further, it does seem that one must have habitually nurtured kataphatic devotion and loving
intentionality in a fully relational approach, in addition to any apophatic experience of
nonduality or void, if one is to then expand their focus of concern to include the theotic, if one
is to have their secular conversions transvalued by a distinctly religious conversion, which is
clearly explicit and kataphatic, devotional and intentional and relational. In other words, for
example, ditching one’s mythic-membership consciousness (credally) is NOT the way to go,
for that is a negation of a stage and not rather a transvaluation.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: Bernard Lonergan, d i v i n i z a t i o n, E n l i g h t e n m e n t, h u m a n i z a t i o n, n a t u r a l m y s t i c i s m, theosis
« Older Entries Newer Entries »
© 2010 christiannonduality.com Blog is Proudly Powered By WordPress | Theme by The Cloisters

190. CHRISTIANNONDUALITY. C O M BL O G
beyond thinking & proposing to imagining & participating
Home About
T o d a y’ s L i t u r g y
Thomas Merton – contemplative prayer
JB on October 16, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, the interpretive - Religion | No
Comments »
“there must be a renewal of communion between the traditional, contemplative
disciplines and those of science, between the poet and the physicist, the priest and Translator
the depth psychologist, the monk and the politician.” Merton
While Merton affirms that our symbols can bring us into closer contact with reality, he
cautions against identifying them with reality. In a sense, he was saying, with Ralph Waldo
Emerson : “Heartily know, When half-gods go, The gods arrive.”.
By N2H
“What is this (contemplative prayer) in relation to action? Simply this. He (and Amos Yong apophatic
she) who attempts to act and do things for others or for the world without this Axiological axiologically-
deepening of his own self-understanding, freedom, integrity, and capacity to love, Bernard
integral
will not have anything to give others. He will communicate to them nothing but
the contagion of his own obsessions, his aggressiveness, his egocentered
Lonergan Brian
McLaren
ambitions, his delusions about ends and means, his doctrinaire prejudices and
ideas.” Thomas Merton,” The Climate of Monastic Prayer” Charles
Sanders
Send
Peirce
contemplative
Send article as PDF to Enter email address cosmology emergence
emerging church
Enlightenment
epistemology faith False
Self fideism Hans
Kung James K. A. Smith
Jesus Creed John Duns
Scotus kataphatic Kevin
Beck Kurt Godel
Merton
T a g s : c o n t e m p l a t i v e p r a y e r, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Thomas Merton metaphysics
Mike Morrell Natural
Theology nihilism
nondual nonduality
orthodoxy radical
Catholic Bishops’ Advice on Afghanistan emergence radical
orthodoxy rationalism
JB on October 16, 2009 in the normative - Philosophy | No Comments » Richard Rohr
Science
scientism semiotic
theodicy Theological
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Anthropology
Thomas
Committee on International Justice and Peace
3211 FOURTH STREET NE • WASHINGTON DC 20017-1194 • 202-541-3160 Merton Tim King
transformation
WEBSITE: WWW.USCCB.ORG/JPHD • FAX 202-541-3339 True Self Walker Percy
October 6, 2009 W P-C u m u l u s b y R o y T a n c k
a n d Luke Morton requires
General James L. Jones, USMC (Ret.) F l a s h P l a y e r 9 or better.
National Security Advisor Cultivating the
Roots, Nurturing
National Security Council the Shoots
MARCH 2010
Washington, DC
M T W T F S S
Dear General Jones: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14

191. 15 16 1 7 18 19 20 21
As the Administration reviews U.S. strategy in Afghanistan, I write on behalf of the United 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
States Conference of Catholic Bishops and its Committee on International Justice and Peace. 29 30 3 1
While we are pastors and teachers and not military experts, we can share Catholic teaching « FEB
and experience which may help inform various policy choices. We recognize that the
situation in Afghanistan and neighboring Pakistan is at a critical juncture. Should these states Recent Posts
fail, particularly with Pakistan possessing nuclear weapons, there are grave implications for
regional and international security. Electoral problems and corruption have led many, The Emerging Church is BIGGER
including Afghans, to question the legitimacy of the Afghan government. t h a n C h r i s t i a n i t y – how to spot
it in other traditions
In the face of terrorist threats, we know that our nation must respond to indiscriminate Abortion & the Senate
attacks against innocent civilians in ways that combine a resolve to do what is necessary, the Healthcare Bill – a p r u d e n t i a l
restraint to ensure that we act justly, and the vision to focus on broader issues of poverty and judgment
injustice that are unscrupulously exploited by terrorists in gaining recruits. In a pastoral 10 historical developments
message, “Living with Faith and Hope after September 11,” we bishops offered criteria for propelling Emerging
moral discernment and a call to solidarity in response to the terrorist attacks on our nation Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
and the subsequent military action in Afghanistan. In that statement we warned, “Probability Why Brian McLaren’s Greco-
of success is particularly difficult to measure in dealing with an amorphous, global terrorist Roman Narrative is NOT a
network. Therefore, special attention must be given to developing criteria for when it is caricature
appropriate to end military action in Afghanistan.” We noted some principles to help guide THE BOOK: Christian
U.S. actions: N o n d u a l i t y – Postmodern
Conservative Catholic
• Restrain use of military force and ensure that civilians are not targeted: When military Pentecostal
force is used, it should be directed against terrorist or insurgent combatants, not at the
Afghan people, and its use should be monitored. Military force must be discriminate and Recent Comments
proportional, especially if our nation is to be perceived as acting justly and is to win popular
support for the struggle against terrorism. christiannonduality.com Blog »
• Address the root causes of terrorism rather than relying solely on military means to solve Blog Archive » Thoughts re:
conflict: Military force alone cannot deal with the terrorist threat. Non-military measures t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
must be pursued to defend the common good, protect the innocent and advance peace. These vs Dan Dennett on Intelligent
non-military actions include addressing poverty and injustice, exercising diplomacy, and Design – a poorly designed
engaging in dialogue with Muslims. inference
• Encourage international collaboration to provide humanitarian assistance and rebuild christiannonduality.com Blog »
Afghanistan: The United States, working with the UN and other interested parties, must deal Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n
with the long-standing humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan, especially Afghan refugees and McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
displaced persons, and help Afghans rebuild their political, economic and cultural life. Narrative is NOT a caricature on
A New Kind of Christianity?
We observe that some military leaders now share the view that the success of U.S. operations McLaren didn’t make this up. It’s
in Afghanistan cannot come from military measures alone. In light of the current situation, worse than that!
the moral guidance of our earlier pastoral message still seems applicable. We urge the christiannonduality.com Blog »
Administration to consider the following actions: Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n
McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
• Review the use of military force–when force is necessary to protect the innocent and resist Narrative is NOT a caricature on
terrorism–to insure that it is proportionate and discriminate; E v e r y t h i n g T h a t’s Old is New
• Develop criteria for when it is appropriate to end military action in Afghanistan; A g a i n – this (McLaren’s “ N e w”
• Focus more on diplomacy, long-term development (particularly agricultural programs), Christianity) is truly an old
and humanitarian assistance; time religion
• Strengthen local governance and participation of local groups in planning their own K i e r a n C o n r o y on A New Kind of
development; and Christianity? McLaren didn’t
• Encourage international support to create effective national and local governments and to make this up. It’s worse than
foster economic development. that!
Philip Clayton on Thoughts re:
We understand that for humanitarian assistance and development projects to be carried out t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
in Afghanistan, security is important. But too much development assistance appears to be vs Dan Dennett
directed to short-term security objectives or channeled through the military. These funds,
often used for building projects with little community involvement, are less-effective in Type, Hit Enter to Search
building stable communities and meeting the legitimate needs of Afghan citizens. Whenever
possible, U.S. policy and funding should more clearly delineate and differentiate foreign We Distinguish in
assistance provided through military channels versus civilian channels. Otherwise, Order to Unite
integrating these strategies, capabilities and activities on the ground may undermine recovery
and sustainable development in Afghanistan. Military involvement in development should be Select Category 6
phased out as local situations stabilize and civilian agencies resume activity. Catholic Relief Blogroll
Services (CRS) has been working with local communities in Afghanistan on projects in
agriculture, water, income generation, education and health since 1998. CRS’ ability to Andrew Sullivan
develop local partnerships, involving people in examining their needs and determining Beyond Blue
priorities, has meant that those communities have a greater commitment to their own Brian D. McLaren
development, as well as protecting CRS programs and staff. CRS’ approach exemplifies how Commonweal
long-term efforts can lead to sustainable development and contribute to improved security. Crunchy Con
Cynthia Bourgeault
We bishops acknowledge that our nation has moral responsibilities to combat terrorism and Emergent Village
to help rebuild Afghanistan. Unfortunately, there are no easy answers on how best to Emerging Women
accomplish these objectives, but we offer these reflections based upon our teaching and the First Thoughts
experience of CRS as the Administration formulates future strategy for Afghanistan. Fors Clavigera
Francis X. Clooney, S.J.
Sincerely, Most Rev. Howard J. Hubbard Bishop of Albany Joseph S. O'Leary
Chairman, Committee on International Justice and Peace NCR Today – the Catholic Blog
Per Caritatem
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send Phyllis Tickle
Post Christian
Postmodern Conservative
Radical Emergence
Sojourners
Tall Skinny Kiwi
The Website of Unknowing
Transmillenial
Vox Nova
Weekly Standard Blog
Worship Blog
Tags: A f g h a n i s t a n, J u s t W a r Zoecarnate
Worthwhile Sites
Amos Yong
Ki, Qi, Chi, Prana & Kundalini (& Reiki) Boulder Integral
Brother David Steindl-Rast
JB on October 16, 2009 in Practices & Experiences | 1 Comment » Center for Action and
Contemplation
Rather than treat these so-called energies, specifically, for there is much written elsewhere, Christian Nonduality
let me raise another issue from a wider perspective. Much of the thrust of the epistemological Contemplative Outreach
approach advocated throughout this website has been directed at the need to prescind from David Group International
robustly metaphysical accounts of reality to more vaguely phenomenological perspectives, Dialogue Institute
precisely to avoid saying more than we know, to refrain from telling untellable stories — or, Ecumene
quite simply, to avoid certain dogmatisms and gnosticisms (as well as a host of other Franciscan Archive
insidious -isms or epistemic vices). Innerexplorations

192. Institute on Religion in an Age of
Generically, then, to assert any type of energy paradigm apart from science would involve Science
gnosticism or superstition. In my view, it is not helpful to interpret our life experiences in Metanexus
such paradigms while asserting metaphysical reality to such phenomena. Monastic Interreligious Dialogue
National Catholic Reporter
The wider perspective asks whether or not various Eastern techniques — practices, rituals and Radical Orthodoxy
exercises — might not be abstracted from their classical metaphysical (or even, Shalomplace
sometimes, robustly theological) accounts and interpreted from a more vague Sojourners
phenomenological perspective, especially when they are associated with certain therapeutic Thomas Merton Center
efficacies realized in genuine life experiences, some of these efficacies yet to be fully described Virtual Chapel
scientifically regarding their precise mechanisms of action, in which case it is best left to such Zygon Center for Religion and
entities as the National Institute of Health (http://nccam.nih.gov/) to sort out. Science
In my view, when we reappropriate such “technologies” to situate them in a Christian Cloud of
perspective, while they will no longer be classically metaphysical and, just perhaps, not even Unknowing
authentically Eastern, there should be no a priori dismissal of their efficacies, especially when
legitimate research remains underway due to the global ubiquity of this or that technology; Amos Yong apophatic
such a dismissal would, itself, be gnostic! Axiological axiologically-
In any case, practitioners should be more clear, in their employment of related terminology, Bernard
integral
like chakras and ki and kundalini, that these words are being employed as general concepts Lonergan Brian
corresponding to real life experiences (various constellations of experiences and symptoms in McLaren Charles
association with specific practices that recur in noticable patterns that merit investigation) of Sanders
Peirce
millions of people that are to best be understood as vague phenomena, which are still being contemplative
researched by science, and not rather as specific terms, which are heavily invested in gnostic cosmology emergence
metaphysics. Such a distinction is easy enough to make and quite valid. References to energy emerging church
paradigms should not be taken literally but claims regarding these patterns of experience E n l i g h t e n m e n t epistemology
deserve to be taken seriously. faith False Self fideism
Gosh knows, Christianity’s had its own problems with gnostic metaphysics, for example, Hans Kung James K. A.
interpreting life, gender and sexual realities in rationalistic categories little resembling, and Smith Jesus Creed John
thus not well corresponding to, the lived experiences of the faithful. Some of its teachers Duns Scotus kataphatic
would do well to take their own counsel and guidelines Kevin Beck Kurt
(http://www.usccb.org/dpp/Evaluation_Guidelines_finaltext_2009-03.pdf). Godel Merton
metaphysics Mike
Morrell Natural Theology
All of our deontologies should be as modest as our ontologies are tentative, both East and
West. And, if one’s ontology is not tentative, then, one is way out in front of science, nihilism nondual
themselves. nonduality orthodoxy
radical emergence radical
To be more clear in the practical implications of my view: a redacted excerpt from orthodoxy rationalism
recent (April 2009) correspondence with a friend who’s a Reiki practitioner: Richard Rohr
Science scientism
The way I like to approach this is to say that we can appropriate reiki, like so many semiotic theodicy
other wonderful spiritual technologies of the East, as a practice, as an exercise, as a Theological
Anthropology
ritual. This is true of other meditative practices, yogic exercises and so on, all of which Thomas
are being actively researched by the NIH-CAM precisely because of the efficacies Merton Tim King
transformation True
reported by MILLIONS. Science does not have to fully understand what is going on
Self Walker Percy
with, for example, acupuncture, in order for it to be efficacious. Gosh knows, this is true Join Other
for most psychoactive pharmaceuticals where we can only speculate about the precise Visitors in Prayer
mechanisms of action. So, my position is to continue to prayerfully minister and practice Light A Candle & Pray
all of these time-honored Eastern technologies and to situate them within one’s Join Us in the
Christian worldview while refraining from characterizing them in precise physical Liturgy of the
and/or metaphysical terms. We do not need to know HOW something works in order to Hours
discover THAT it works. It is enough to say that science does not fully understand; we
do not need to offer any physical or metaphysical hypotheses along with our treatments;
only our loving intentionality.
When I speak of kundalini or reiki (both of which I have experienced), I consider them
realities yet to be explained. I have experienced phenomena associated with certain
“practices.” I don’t feel a need to label these metaphysically even as I cannot account for
them scientifically. So, I actually agree with the bishops that it would be gnostic or
superstitious to make definitive metaphysical assertions about the putative reality of
chakras, life forces or subtle energies. I adamantly disagree and am saddened that they Get the C a t h l i m e r g e n t o n
do not avail themselves of such distinctions as I’ve proposed, whereby we can Twitter widget and many other
successfully abstract spiritual technologies — useful rituals, devotionals, practices and great free widgets a t Widgetbox!
exercises — from their classical metaphysical accounts and enjoy the many efficacies Not seeing a widget? (More info)
that flow therefrom, as attested by you and so many other people of large intelligence Tweets
and profound goodwill and actual experience, which they ignored.
johnssylvest: Abortion & the
Senate Healthcare Bill – a
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send prudential judgment
http://bit.ly/aS2DwT
johnssylvest: 10 developments
propelling Emerging
Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
http://bit.ly/a4AMtg
johnssylvest: RT @pdclayton7:
"Theology After Google" opens
Wed. - 23 of the best speakers on
emerging religion in Google Age;
Tags: c h a k r a s, C h i, e n e r g y m e d i c i n e, gnosticism, K i, K u n d a l i n i, m e t a p h y s i c s, National Institute of live stream at http://o ...
H e a l t h, NIH-C A M, P r a n a, Q i, r e i k i johnssylvest: RT @jonestony:
New Blog Post: Society for
Pentecostal Studies Paper: What
Pentecostals Have to Learn from
Emergents http://ow.ly/16KREU
johnssylvest: THE BOOK: An
Maiden, Mother, Crone & Queen: archetypes & transformation Emerging Church Conversation
JB on October 16, 2009 in Axiological, Cosmological, Practices & Experiences, the descriptive with a Postmodern Conservative
- Science, the evaluative - Culture, the interpretive - Religion, the normative - Philosophy | Catholic Pentecostal
No Comments » http://bit.ly/91D570 #fb
John Sobert Sylvest

193. Johnboy Was Here
Feedjit Live Blog Stats
Feedjit Live Blog Stats
Follow this blog
There are rather clear archetypal themes playing out in our cosmologies and axiologies, likely
related to brain development and individuation processes.
A cosmology engages mostly our left-brain (thinking function of the left frontal cortex &
sensing function of the left posterior convexity) as the normative and descriptive aspects of
value-realization alternately establish and defend boundaries; we encounter the King-Queen
and Warrior-Maiden with their light and dark (shadow) attributes as expressed in the
journeys of the spirit and the body, primarily through a language of ascent.
An axiology engages mostly our right-brain (intuiting function of the right frontal cortex &
feeling function of the right posterior convexity) as the interpretive and evaluative aspects of
value-realization alternately negotiate (e.g. reconciliation of opposites, harnessing the power
of paradox) and transcend boundaries; we encounter the Crone-Magician and Mother-Lover
with their light and dark attributes as expressed in the journeys of the soul and the other
(Thou), primarily through a language of descent.
Visit Cathlimergent Conversations
Visit Anglimergent
Meta
Log in
Entries R S S
Comments R S S
WordPress.org
Our propositional cosmologies and participatory axiologies seem to best foster
transformation when, beyond our passive reception of them as stories about others, we
actively engage the archetypal energies of their mythic dimensions for ourselves, with a
contemplation ordered toward action, and further, when, in addition to our rather selfish
inclinations and puerile expectations, they also include:
1) a priestly voice that sings of the intrinsic beauty to be celebrated in seemingly repugnant
realities
2) a prophetic voice that is robustly self-critical when speaking the truth
3) a kingly voice that articulates a bias for the bottom, expressing both a privileging of the
marginalized and a principle of subsidiarity when preserving goodness
4) a motherly voice that, seeing and calling all as her children, draws every person into her
circle of compassion and mercy with no trace of exclusion, only a vision of unity.
The Judaeo-Christian Mythos thus articulates a Way of the Cross, where the Magician,
Warrior, King & Lover are further initiated as Priest, Prophet, King & Mother. The virtues
and vices, health and dysfunctions, light and shadow, of each archetype play out in terms of
boundary negotiation, defense, establishment and transcendence, which have both authentic
and counterfeit expressions. Such are the dynamics explored in spiritual direction, enneagram
work, personality & adjustment psychology, individuation processes and the manifold stage
theories for intellectual, affective, moral, socio-political and faith development of humans
along the purgative, illuminative and unitive ways. Such are the themes, then, that run
through the dynamics of addiction psychology and codependency, the false self and true self,
sexual exploitation versus intimacy, socialization versus transformation, ego defense
mechanisms and the persona, inordinate attachments and disordered appetites, idolatry and
kenosis, as they all involve healthy and unhealthy, loving and sinful, boundary realities.

194. Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: a r c h e t y p e s, a x i o l o g y, cosmology, t r a n s f o r m a t i o n
From Mild Woman to Wild Woman (for the church, of course)
JB on October 16, 2009 in Axiological, Practices & Experiences, the evaluative - Culture, the
interpretive - Religion | 2 Comments »
I want to challenge, now, the notion that THE trajectory of the spiritual journey is the
language of descent. This is certainly how one would view it thru the lens of a patriarchal
bias, which is suggesting that, early on our journeys, MEN are quite naturally to be about the
business of Kings and Warriors, busy w/boundary establishment & defense, while later on
the journey, with a move from animus to anima, they are initiated as Wizards and Lovers.
Men begin life as Sky & Spirit and are later brought down to Earth & Soul. Men start off in
their heads and move, if they’re lucky, into their hearts.
Women, for their part, begin as Earth & Soul, birthing and nurturing, quite naturally
negotiating and transcending boundaries as Alchemists and Mothers, speaking the language
of descent, experiencing in their bones the bottom, marginalization, the power of paradox
and the mysterious strength of powerlessness. What for a man is an eventual destiny on his
transformative journey, for a woman is her natural born inheritance as Gaia, who plucks the
parsley, drinks the dew and hugs the oak, wondering if she could ever be the oak. Our
natural tendency is to see women as if they have already arrived since their native dwelling
place is the destiny of men.
This is beautiful and poetic but it also seems to me to be a little wrong-headed. If Initiation is
about 1) separation 2) liminal space and 3) reintegration, then women have a journey of
transformation to embark on, also. It is a journey from the earth, the dew and the oak’s roots
to the oak’s upward reaching branches, the rain clouds and the sky. It is a journey from the
heart to the head, from descending soul to ascending spirit, from boundary negotiation &
transcendence, sometimes perversely manifested as boundary-less-ness, to boundary
establishment and defense. We’ve got enough Matrons and Crones but need more Warriors
& Queens! (Actually, one may not be called to any of these themes, in particular, but one
would want to, generally speaking, “get in touch” with these inner dynamisms, which reside
in all of us.)

195. For example, one practical upshot of all of this is that, if you wonder why our culture is
overrun with so many male alcoholics, then, it is because so many of our women are natural
born codependents. Humility is not about meekness; it’s about knowing who you really are!
Jesus was not all anima and no animus! Jesus threw the moneychangers out the temple and
He spent most of His time questioning “authorities” and challenging the established order by
establishing new boundaries for the Kingdom! It is true that His boundary defense was
nonviolent but His approach was wholly subversive, submitting to no will but His Father’s
and taking no cue but His Mother’s. There are nonviolent, but wholly efficacious, ways, to
subvert, re-establish and defend the Kingdom of God, on Earth as it is in Heaven, especially if
we are as wise as serpents (yes, women theologians) when gentle as doves. I wonder if we
need to re-conceive the journey of transformation for our women? The archetypes and
symbols and sacraments belong to everyone and they will usher in the realities that they
bring to heart AND MIND, soul AND SPIRIT, lover AND WARRIOR.
I have one daughter and my message to her is PLEASE establish and defend some
boundaries. Not just your happiness but your transformation into a fully individuated person
and TRUE SELF depend on it.
Clearly, both the languages of ascent & descent have their place. Boundary establishment,
defense, negotiation and transcendence are an integral dynamism, wherein each aspect
presupposes each other aspect in an ongoing cycle of renewal and transformation for each of
us as persons and for all of us as church in ecclesia semper reformada est. Hence, where we
begin should determine where we end up on the spiritual journey and this applies not
only to gender issues but also to personality and temperament as well (Enneagram, Myers-
Briggs and so on). There are general patterns but each journey is incredibly unique.
Ed Murray, SM said the 8th sacrament was ignorance. While it is true that most of us are not
ever going to lead a life that is optimally enlightened, fully individuated, completely
transformed or utterly holy, and while it is also true that this is because we will somehow fail
to cooperate with grace, we must distinguish between those failures to cooperate that result
from refusal (sin) and those that come from ignorance (mistakes). Most such failures come
from ignorance and from not having drunk deeply from the cup of transformative suffering
or from not having enjoyed the opportunity to have been formed in the way of contemplative
prayer. Most such ignorance comes from the quite obvious fact that we are simply finite. So,
if others do suffer more of our unenlightened, codependent, addicted, pain-transmitting, false
selves and less of our True Selves, it seems very likely it may be because we have become as
holy as God desires and, if so, there is certainly no sense in beating ourselves and others up
over this. I’m totally with Teresa of Avila on this: If God has so few really close friends, well,
just look at the way He treats them! As the Desiderata says, beyond a wholesome discipline,
be gentle with yourself. Folks who are hard on others, you can bet, are equally harsh with
themselves and this ain’t nothing but a false self run amok with pride. Easy does it …
______________________________________________
Afterward:
As one might imagine, many of these musings come from the concrete situations of my own daily
life, such as Veronica and I discuss on our daily walk. Today, she asked me what “women’s work”
would look like as compared to the men’s work & initiation rites made familiar to us by Richard Rohr.
I told her that I wasn’t really sure about the answers to the questions I was raising but was still at the
stage of figuring out if my questions were even right. As all know, we teach best what we need to
learn the most.
I responded to Veronica, though, that if Rohr’s workshop was called (and I dunno, just guessing)
“Wild Man to Wise Man,” then I would call women’s work “Mild Woman to Wild Woman.” Well,
she reflexively recoiled from that but then we broke open the meaning of the word “wild” as more
broadly conceived with all of its positive connotations. So, we went on to identify certain tasks: 1)
finding one’s voice and using it 2) actively demanding & “taking” one’s place at the table of dialogue
in any arena where one’s destiny is being worked out 3) empowerment thru exercising power
directly & not just indirectly 4) cultivating an interest in ideas and not just in persons & events 5)
making choices & accepting consequences.
So, the theme was an outward directing of energy rather than an inner repression & suppression, but
in a constructive & reconstructive manner not destructive. Before reconstructive work can begin we
must do our painful d e-constructive work, for we cannot solve a problem using the same
consciousness that created the problem (Rohr quoting Einstein).
We discussed distractions in prayer (when meditative, not contemplative) and I told Veronica that I
use a stream. Across the stream is a grotto with a cross and I keep refixing my heart on that image
letting each distraction float downstream. Some distractions are cares placed by the Spirit in our
hearts but even those are candles I light and let float down the stream w/no concern of whether they
are blown out by a breeze and w/every confidence that, if they are meant to burn, the forest fire of
the Spirit will reignite it in due time at the proper place. More than anything else, though, whenever
we get too attached to outcomes, we can be sure that we are AT WORK on our own agenda and not,
rather, AT PLAY in the fields of the Lord.
To the extent we feel resistance to lowering our expectations, I counsel folks to hold fast their higher
expectations re: their deepest aspirations but to be willing to DEFER seeing them fulfilled, for, what
no eye has seen nor ear heard, such are the things prepared for us. In the mean time, life is an
admixture of joy and suffering as we live in a Cosmic Boot Camp where we are learning how to love
(Scott Peck).

196. Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: a r c h e t y p e s, women's spirituality
Montmarte, Colorado Springs & the Kingdom
JB on October 15, 2009 in Axiological, Practices & Experiences, the evaluative - Culture, the
interpretive - Religion | No Comments »
Some redacted conversations (my contributions only):
I f w e w a n t p e o p l e t o l a u g h , w e d o n’ t o r d e r t h e m
t o l a u g h , w e t e l l t h e m a j o k e . L a u g h i n g’ s m o r e
so a participatory reality & much less so
p r o p o s i t i o n a l . I t’ s t h e s a m e w / t e a c h i n g r e l i g i o n ,
w h e r e m o r e i s c a u g h t t h a n t a u g h t . S o l i d a r i t y…
is not a reality we need to pursue or establish;
i t’ s o n e w e n e e d t o r e c o g n i z e . W h e n w e a w a k e n
to our solidarity, compassion, like laughter,
will ensue. What awakened you?
Even when we draw such distinctions as between the propositional & participatory, the
descriptive/normative & the interpretive/evaluative, the cosmological & axiological, the
cognitive & affective AND even if we rightly recognize that one aspect enjoys a certain
PRIMACY, being more foundational or fundamental, we do NOT want to introduce a false
dichotomy, which suggests that any one aspect is AUTONOMOUS from the others b/c,
instead, they are integrally-related. There has been some tendency 1) in evangelical &
Arminian traditions to overemphasize the evidential (evidence that demands a verdict) 2) in
reformed & Calvinist traditions – the presuppositional (belief as philosophically basic) 3) in
fideist, Lutheran & neoevangelical traditions – the existential (faith as experience) and 4) in
Catholic, both Roman & Anglican, the rational (logical argument). In all of these traditions,
a more holistic approach is EMERGING.
All that said, once we recognize the primacy of the social imaginary (hometown know-how)
over doctrinal propositions (map-reading), as an anthropological datum, it then behooves us
to come to grips w/the fact that the para-liturgical realities & liminoid experiences of mall &
marketplace & stadiums, where the wrong values are often caught, will not be re-formed
thru propositional-instructional teaching or catechesis, alone, but must also (even primarily)
be gifted thru participatory liturgy & liminal experiences. That’s why I intentionally
employed the qualifiers “more so” and “less so” in order to convey the “necessary but not
sufficient” dynamic; we do not want to claim that any given aspect is “enough.” This is, in
large measure, what a nondual approach is all about. There ARE some either/or realities, just
not as many as some would imagine.
What you describe sounds like what my tradition calls mystagogia, whereby symbols effect
what they signify, bring into reality precisely what they bring to body, soul & spirit via a
pedagogy of right desire. The liturgical celebration engages our social imaginary thru which
we understand our world as we sing and pray and dance and engage our rituals & practices.
From this understanding, via noncognitive dispositions (values & desires) acquired thru
participation, there FOLLOWS an attempt at theoretical articulation of cognitive beliefs in
propositional doctrine. Doctrine should not be superimposed (added as the dominant feature)
such that liturgy expresses it; it is quite the other way around!
In the same way that hymns, psalms, doxologies, letters & worship practices (breaking of the
bread) preceded the NT canon, as well as articulated doctrines & a Xtn worldview,
ecclesiologically (via a vis the church), worship precedes & births & forms an individual’s
beliefs & worldview as practices precede ideas. Transformation is a full body-blow and DOES
include theological abstractions or scientia, eventually, but, first and foremost, we are Homo
sapiens, so sapienta, or wisdom or practical knowledge, is how we encounter life’s deepest
mysteries and engage our most ultimate concerns. Orthopathically, thru Worship, and
orthopraxically, thru Walk, we became an orthocommunio, a We, and expressed it all
orthodoxically, thru Word.
And so one could suggest that the Kingdom looks more like Montmarte than Colorado
Springs!
from Jamie Smith’s Desiring the Kingdom

197. Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send

198. Tags: A n g l i c a n, A r m i n i a n, C a l v i n i s t, C a t h o l i c, Desiring the Kingdom, e v a n g e l i c a l, James K. A. Smith,
L u t h e r a n, N e o e v a n g e l i c a l, Reformed
Get “Naked Now”
JB on October 15, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, Uncategorized, the interpretive - Religion
| No Comments »
The Naked Now: Learning to See as the Mystics See (Paperback)
For Christians seeking a way of thinking outside of strict dualities, this guide explores
methods for letting go of division and living in the present. Drawn from the Gospels, Jesus,
Paul, and the great Christian contemplatives, this examination reveals how many of the
hidden truths of Christianity have been misunderstood or lost and how to read them with the
eyes of the mystics rather than interpreting them through rational thought. Filled with
sayings, stories, quotations, and appeals to the heart, specific methods for identifying dualistic
thinking are presented with simple practices for stripping away ego and the fear of dwelling
in the present. (Amazon Publishers Intro)
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: c o n t e m p l a t i v e, m y s t i c s, n o n d u a l i t y, Richard Rohr, The Naked Now
Desiring the Kingdom
JB on October 15, 2009 in the evaluative - Culture, the interpretive - Religion | 3 Comments
»
If human value-pursuits have both cosmological and axiological aspects, and a cosmology
includes both descriptive (scientific, positivist) and normative (philosophic) approaches, then
what’s involved in our axiological pursuits, which are interpretive and evaluative?
If a cosmology articulates knowledge, an axiological vision of the whole conveys
understanding via an interpretation, which articulates what Charles Taylor calls a social
imaginary, which he describes as much like hometown know-how, this contrasted with
scientific and philosophic knowledge, which are more like map-reading. The social imaginary
engages us through stories, narratives, myths and icons. Arguably, the great traditions and
many native religions, in one way or another, articulate a pneumatological social imaginary,
all invoking some image of spirit. Evaluatively, these pneumatological social imaginaries
address profound human aspirations, hopes, desires; the value pursued is love.

199. Often, our axiological visions of the whole, AVOWs, lose touch with their spirit-filled roots
and lose sight of their spirit-animated vision and we then pursue inordinate desires (Ignatius)
with disordered appetites (John of the Cross). Often, these AVOWs operate subconsciously,
but operate they will – for every human value-pursuit derives from the integral relating of
our cosmologies and axiologies as the normative mediates between the descriptive and the
interpretive to effect the evaluative, for better or for worse. This is the basic epistemological
architectonic which I’ve employed as a heuristic when evaluating human value-pursuits. It
has served as a foil and has provided a critique, integrating all of the best insights I have been
able to absorb from my favorite pastor-theologians, Richard Rohr and Amos Yong, and
contemplative sojourners, Thomas Merton and Thomas Keating.
Much of what Christian Nonduality has been about is exploring, cross-culturally and
interreligiously, the role of contemplation, a nondual stance, 3rd Eye seeing and such on the
transformative journey. More needs to be said about basic religious formation and how it fits
into this architectonic, theoretically. Even more needs to be said about the practicalities of
religious formation. I’m very pleased to report that all of this has already been said and it has
been said so very well by Jamie Smith.
Desiring the Kingdom: Worship, Worldview, and Cultural Formation (Cultural Liturgies)
(Paperback) by James K. A. Smith is the most stimulating and enriching book I’ve read this
year (and Rohr’s latest is pre-ordered). It resonates beautifully with my own axiological
vision of the whole. It affirms the primacy of our affective, desiring, loving self without
asserting its autonomy from our cognitive, propositional, thinking (and even believing) self.
It recognizes that an axiological vision of the whole operates, even if subconsciously and
implicitly, in the quasi-liturgies of mall and marketplace and urges a conscious-competence
on us all in our rituals, practices and liturgies.
Others say this much better:
From Amazon: Desiringthe Kingdom: Worship, Worldview, and
Cultural Formation (Cultural Liturgies) (Paperback)
Malls, stadiums, and universities are actually liturgical structures that influence and shape
our thoughts and affections. Humans–as Augustine noted–are “desiring agents,” full of
longings and passions; in brief, we are what we love. James K. A. Smith focuses on the
themes of liturgy and desire in Desiring the Kingdom, the first book in what will be a three-
volume set on the theology of culture. He redirects our yearnings to focus on the greatest
good: God. Ultimately, Smith seeks to re-vision education through the process and practice of
worship. Students of philosophy, theology, worldview, and culture will welcome Desiring the
Kingdom, as will those involved in ministry and other interested readers.
From the Back Cover
A Philosophical Theology of Culture
Philosopher James K. A. Smith reshapes the very project of Christian education in Desiring
the Kingdom. The first of three volumes that will ultimately provide a comprehensive
theology of culture, Desiring the Kingdom focuses education around the themes of liturgy,
formation, and desire. Smith’s ultimate purpose is to re-vision Christian education as a
formative process that redirects our desire toward God’s kingdom and its vision of flourishing.
In the same way, he re-visions Christian worship as a pedagogical practice that trains our
love.
“James Smith shows in clear, simple, and passionate prose what worship has to do with
formation and what both have to do with education. He argues that the God-directed,
embodied love that worship gives us is central to all three areas and that those concerned as
Christians with teaching and learning need to pay attention, first and last, to the ordering of
love. This is an important book and one whose audience should be much broader than the
merely scholarly.”–Paul J. Griffiths, Duke Divinity School

200. “In lucid and lively prose, Jamie Smith reaches back past Calvin to Augustine, crafting a new
and insightful Reformed vision for higher education that focuses on the fundamental desires
of the human heart rather than on worldviews. Smith deftly describes the ‘liturgies’ of
contemporary life that are played out in churches–but also in shopping malls, sports arenas,
and the ad industry–and then re-imagines the Christian university as a place where students
learn to properly love the world and not just think about it.”–Douglas Jacobsen and
Rhonda Hustedt Jacobsen, Messiah College; authors of Scholarship and Christian Faith:
Enlarging the Conversation
“This is a wise, provocative, and inspiring book. It prophetically blurs the boundaries between
theory and practice, between theology and other disciplines, between descriptive analysis and
constructive imagination. Anyone involved in Christian education should read this book to
glimpse a holistic vision of learning and formation. Anyone involved in the worship life of
Christian communities should read this book to discover again all that is at stake in the
choices we make about our practices.”–John D. Witvliet, Calvin Institute of Christian
Worship; Calvin College and Calvin Theological Seminary
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: C h a r l e s T a y l o r, C u l t u r a l L i t u r g i e s, Desiring the Kingdom, James K. A. Smith, s o c i a l i m a g i n a r y
Emergence Happens When …
JB on October 15, 2009 in the interpretive - Religion | No Comments »
An archive of Tweets ♫♪♬♪♫♪♬♪♫
from twitter
Emergence Happens: when people are robustly self-critical, privilege the marginalized, can
see beauty in ugly realities & are inclusive.
Emergence Happens: when prophets are robustly self-critical, othodoxically, vis a vis their
articulation of truth.
Emergence Happens: when priests celebrate the beauty in ugly realities, orthopathically, vis
a vis crux probat omnia.
Emergence Happens: when kings privilege the marginalized, orthopraxically, vis a vis the
preservation of goodness.
Emergence Happens: when communities are inclusive in enjoying fellowship vis a vis
orthocommunio.
Emergent conversation is not elusive; beyond mere dialogue, it’s meta-discourse, thus
inherently vague/indeterminate, not specific.
The essence of Emergent Meta-Discourse is the healthy negotiation & transcendence of
dysfunctionally established boundaries & defenses.
A preoccupation w/boundary establishment & defense reveals a sick identity structure for
religious institutions focused on who’s in/out.
There can be healthy establishment & defense of boundaries (radical orthodoxy) in religious
institutions that nurture self-criticality.
Boundary establishment, defense, negotiation & transcendence integrally presuppose each
other w/in healthy institutions.
Dogma decays into dogmatism, ritual to ritualism, code to legalism and community to
institutionalism w/ dysfunctional boundaries.
When boundary dynamism is dysfunctional, conditions do not favor emergent realities.
Emergence introduces unpredictable novelty; it’s epistemically & ontologically open.
The emergentist paradigm is only a heuristic device, placeholder for ideas, even in
biosemiotics.
Borrowing fr Peirce’s semiotic: normative mediates between descriptive & interpretive to
effect evaluative.
Orthopathos mediates between orthodoxy & orthopraxy to effect orthocommunio.
Boundary negotiation mediates between establishment & defense to effect transcendence.
When boundaries are negotiated, are they authentic? suitably normed? do they foster robust
transformation?
Boundaries negotiated w/o various ortho-norms are ontologically open, indeed; false
transcendence & quasi-liturgical emerge.
http://twitter.com/johnssylvest
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send

201. Tags: e m e r g e n c e, k i n g, o r t h o c o m m u n i o, o r t h o d o x y, o r t h o p a t h y, o r t h o p r a x y, priest, prophet, t w i t t e r
Radical Emergence – Nonduality & the Emerging Church
JB on October 15, 2009 in Uncategorized | No Comments »
Richard Rohr speaks of the four pillars of the Emerging Church 1) honest Jesus scholarship
2) peace & social justice 3) contemplation & nonduality and 4) noninstitutional vehicles.
I would like to unpack this a little because I think it speaks directly to his approach to
apologetics, which is merely “doing it better,” this over against any overt proselytizing or
critiquing of others (putting them down, maybe, to preserve our own sick identity structures).
This fits well with the approach to evangelism articulated by the founder of Richard’s order,
the little man from Assisi, whom I’ll roughly paraphrase: Take every opportunity to
evangelize and, only if absolutely necessary, use words!
There is clearly a self-subversive reform underway in the Emerging Church. The first pillar of
honest Jesus scholarship, in its efforts to articulate the truth we have encountered, addresses
an orthodoxy that eschews dogmatism . The second pillar of peace & social justice, in its
efforts to preserve the goodness we have encountered, addresses an orthopraxy that eschews
legalism . The third pillar of contemplation & nonduality, in its efforts to celebrate the beauty
we have encountered, addresses an orthopathos that eschews ritualism. The fourth pillar of
noninstitutional vehicles, in its efforts to enjoy the fellowship (unity) we have encountered,
addresses an orthocommunio that eschews institutionalism.
So, in some sense, the great traditions have always been about the articulation of truth in
creed, preservation of goodness in code, celebration of beauty in cult (or ritual) and
enjoyment of fellowship in community.
An authentically integralist approach, then, will recognize Wilber’s quadrants such that the
objective enjoys its moment of primacy in our pursuit of truth, the interobjective in our
pursuit of goodness, the subjective in our pursuit of beauty and the intersubjective in our
pursuit of community. In what I have called 1) the descriptive focus of human concern, we
pursue truth in asking What is it? 2) the normative focus, we pursue goodness in asking How
do I acquire/avoid it? 3) the evaluative focus, we pursue beauty in asking What’s it to me?
and 4) interpretive focus, we pursue unity in asking How does all this tie-together (re-ligate)?
Each focus is a distinctly different value-pursuit and entails distinctly autonomous
methodologies, which is only to recognize that science, philosophy, culture and religion are,
indeed, autonomous disciplines, methodologically. What relates them integrally is that they
are anything but autonomous, axiologically, which is only to recognize that none of these
value-pursuits, alone, can effect a value-realization without some involvement of the other
foci of human concern, each which presupposes the others, each which nests within the
others, holonically. We can say that they are intellectually-related but not logically-related;
this is a vague heuristic and not some purely formal system.
Where we are headed, ecclesiologically, in my view then, is toward a model of church that,
respectively, vis a vis Rohr’s pillars, is 1) pneumatological, which is to say that it will
primarily engage in interreligious dialogue from the perspective of the Spirit, this over against
any ecclesiocentric approach and perhaps even bracketing our various Christological
approaches 2) servant, which is to actively grapple with the questions of social justice &
peace 3) herald, which is to recognize the orthopathic efficacies of the contemplative,
nondual stance, inviting others to transformation via a shared social imaginary as cultivated
by authentically transformative liturgical approaches, this participatory approach
emphasized over (while complementing) the sterile and stale propositional apologetics of
yesteryear and 4) mystical body, a visible manifestation of an invisible reality, to be sure,
but dropping our old and insidious overemphases on the manifold and varied institutional
structures. (cf. Dulles’ models of church)
Wim Drees defines theology as a cosmology plus an axiology. Drees notes that, and serious
emergentists might pay special attention, the discontinuity in emergent reality threatens the
unity of the sciences. Because laws, themselves, emerge, we are on thin theoretical ice when
speculating metaphysically re: the nature of primal reality, causal joints for divine
prerogatives, and so on.
While cosmological and axiological approaches are integrally-related, they are
methodologically autonomous. Cosmology answers the questions 1) Is that a fact?
(descriptively) and 2) How do I best acquire/avoid that? (normatively). Daniel Helminiak, a
Lonergan protege, would describe these as positivist and philosophic activities and rightly
affirms, in my view, the philosophic as spiritual quest.
Even if one concedes, for argument’s sake, our ability to travel from the descriptive to the
prescriptive, given to normative, is to ought (and Mortimer Adler well-demonstrates that we
can get from an is to an ought) still, due to our universal human condition, wherein we are
all, for the most part, similarly situated, even if our reasoning differs for certain precepts &
would be theoretically relativistic, still, from a practical perspective our precepts are going to
be remarkably consistent.
The practical upshot of all of this is that cosmology, thus narrowly conceived, is truly
Everybody’s Story, which is to say we really shouldn’t go around wily-nily just making this
stuff up because it isn’t really negotiable but is given.
Axiology answers the questions 3) What’s it to me? (evaluatively) and 4) How’s all this tie-
together? (interpretively). Here we are dealing with human value-realizations, their
definitions and prioritization, and with religion. The reason we even have such a category as
interpretation results from our radical human finitude. It is not that we don’t affirm such a
metaphysical realism as recognizes the validity and soundness of a putative best
interpretative “vision of the whole,” but that, at this stage of humankind’s journey, it is
exceedingly problematical to fallibly discern and adjudicate between competing
interpretations, especially as they fit into elaborate tautologies, all which are variously taut in
their grasp of reality.

202. In some sense, our cosmology comprises the propositional aspect of our metanarratives
(aspiring to successful and robust descriptions with indications of correspondence) and our
axiology comprises the narrative aspect (aspiring to vague but successful references with
invitations to particpate). The postmodern critique does not instill incredulity toward our
metanarratives per se; rather, it takes note of how every narrative aspect of our
metanarratives is rooted in myth (yes, including scientism no less than fideism). Analogous
to Gödel’s incompleteness theorems, we cannot prove our system’s axioms within the system
(evidentially, rationally, presuppositionally or propositionally), itself, but this does not mean
that we cannot taste and see (existentially, as recommended by Ignatius, the Psalmist &
enlightened speculative cosmologists …) the truth of those axioms, which we would
necessarily express – not formally, but – through narrative, story, myth.
This framework establishes a certain amount of epistemic parity between worldviews and
religions, which then get authenticated by how well they institutionalize conversions:
intellectual, affective, moral, social and religious and adjudicated with an equiplausibility
principle, which looks for life-giving and relationship-enhancing criteria when choosing
between otherwise ambiguous courses of action. We can also remain on the lookout for
Gospel norms like a language of descent or “downward mobility” and a prophetic element
(self-criticism). So, we do draw distinctions between a theory of truth and a test of truth and
we do recognize that some aspects of reality are best grasped through correspondence while
other aspects grasp us through participation.
One lesson we take away is that our reliance on myth reveals that reality overflows our
ability to process it, that creation, Creator and people present unfathomable depth dimensions
that no encounter can capture or exhaust. If in our cosmologies, with their empirical, logical
and practical foci, it is very much our intent to get the right answers, when it comes to our
axiologies, with their relational foci, then, our quest is to get the right questions (Whom does
the grail serve?).
Our fundamental trust in uncertain reality requires no apologetic, then, and fashioning one is
as futile as explaining why we love our Beloved in empirical, logical and practical terms (as if
only extrinsically rewarding). Embodiments of truth, beauty, goodness and unity are their
own rewards (intrinsically); they grasp us and possess us as we participate in these values
with our existential orientations to these transcendental imperatives. As we distinguish
between wants and needs, real and acquired desires, lesser and higher goods, our axiologies
orient and dispose us to the higher goods, which we can enjoy without measure, and properly
dispose us to the created goods that we really need in moderation and not in a disordered
(John of the Cross) or inordinate (Ignatius) way.
Our cosmology, which is scientific and philosophic, descriptive and normative, also includes
our essentially spiritual quest, which is shaped by the positivist and normative sciences and
addresses the orthopraxes of our ethical and moral strivings as well as those ascetical
practices and disciplines that enhance awareness, including certain meditative practices,
many which come from the East and are not inextricably bound to any religion or worldview
(hence some are indeed spiritual without being religious, explicitly anyway). In our
cosmology, we better come to grips with our empirical, logical and practical foci of concern
and foster intellectual, moral and social conversions.
Our axiology, which is interpretive and evaluative, goes beyond but not without our
cosmology and is shaped by our religious myths and liturgical celebrations, which address the
orthopathos of our prayer and worship, public and private, forming and reinforcing our
aspirations and hopes, answering the question “What’s it to me?” in a manner that is properly
ordered, truly fitting and proper, which is to say, Eucharistically. There is no worldview or
metanarrative without either an implicit or explicit axiology that is integrally related to one’s
cosmology (so we’d best tend to an explicit axiology in a consciously-competent manner). In
fact, in addition to their methodological autonomy, our axiologies enjoy a primacy in relation
to our cosmologies, although otherwise axiologically-integrated. It is our orthopathos that
mediates between our orthodoxy and orthopraxis to effect an authentic orthocommunio. If
our unitive strivings come up short, whether geopolitically or in our primary communities
and families, we might look at our prayer lives for, if we invoke, it is only because we have
been convoked. In our axiology, we better come to grips with our relational foci of concern,
where our value-realizations are trust, assent, fidelity, loyalty, faith, hope, love, eros, philia,
agape and so on and we better foster affective and religious conversions.
We do our best to discern where Lonergan’s conversions have been institutionalized, looking
to see which interpretive approach best fosters ongoing intellectual, affective, moral and
social growth and development, leading to human authenticity. But we’re clearly in more
negotiable territory here with discourse dominated more by dogmatic (non-negotiated) and
heuristic (still-in-negotiation) concepts, this contrasted to cosmological discourse, which has
more theoretic (negotiated in community) concepts and semiotic concepts (non-negotiable
b/c meaning, itself, is invested in them).
In defining what my own Radical Emergence approach would be about, then, I see it as
an axiological vision of the whole. In such a metanarrative, cosmology is left to the
positivist, empirical scientific methodologies, and to the philosophic, normative sciences.
Religion, an interpretive endeavor, is constrained by the positivist & normative sciences, and
employs a different & autonomous methodology (myth and liturgy), even though integrally-
related to the other methodologies in every value-realization. To be clear, by “integrally-
related,” I am suggesting that a cosmology presupposes an axiology and vice versa, that our
descriptive, normative, interpretive and evaluative foci of human concern presuppose each
other.
As an axiological endeavor, the Emerging Church would foster the intentional evolution of
the interpretive and evaluative aspects of human value-realizations, which would enhance
(and transvalue), also, our cosmological modeling power without interfering with its
autonomous methodologies (faith illuminating understanding). Over against both scientism
and fideism, the Emerging Church would not conflate or compromise the autonomous
methodologies of science, philosophy and religion, of descriptive, normative and interpretive
endeavors, but would integrate them axiologically.
What would intentional evolution address? Nothing less than creed, cult, code and
community (institutionalized), which are deconstructible, as semiotic realities ordered toward
truth, beauty, goodness and unity, which are not deconstructible. How would it address
them? Through the amplification of epistemic risks as ordered toward the augmentation of
human value-realizations.
Less abstractly and more concretely, how does one amplify epistemic risks? Understanding
yields to faith, memory to hope, will to love and alienation to community.
More programatically, what route do I advocate? A Radical Emergence, rooted in the
orthopathos and orthodoxy of tradition, as articulated and valued by some in the Radical
Orthodoxy movement, and open to the orthopraxes and orthocommunio of the future, as
articulated and valued by some in the Emerging Church conversation.

203. Specifically, one efficacious route to ecclesial and personal transformation is the surrender to
the contemplative stance, the 3rd Eye seeing, of nonduality, which is what
http://christiannonduality.com/ is all about.
Update on 06 Sept 2009 -See Tom Roberts “In Search of the Emerging Church” the
contemplative tradition grounds emerging Christianity
Emerging Church Pillars:
I orthodoxy = honest Jesus scholarship
I I orthopraxy = peace & social justice
I I I orthopathy = contemplative tradition, nonduality
IV orthocommunio = noninstitutional vehicles (complementary & happily on the side)
There are rather clear archetypal themes playing out in our cosmologies and axiologies, likely
related to brain development and individuation processes.
A cosmology engages mostly our left-brain (thinking function of the left frontal cortex &
sensing function of the left posterior convexity) as the normative and descriptive aspects of
value-realization alternately establish and defend boundaries; we encounter the King-Queen
and Warrior-Maiden with their light and dark (shadow) attributes as expressed in the
journeys of the spirit and the body, primarily through a language of ascent.
An axiology engages mostly our right-brain (intuiting function of the right frontal cortex &
feeling function of the right posterior convexity) as the interpretive and evaluative aspects of
value-realization alternately negotiate (e.g. reconciliation of opposites, harnessing the power
of paradox) and transcend boundaries; we encounter the Crone-Magician and Mother-Lover
with their light and dark attributes as expressed in the journeys of the soul and the other
(Thou), primarily through a language of descent.
Our propositional cosmologies and participatory axiologies seem to best foster transformation
when, beyond our passive reception of them as stories about others, we actively engage the
archetypal energies of their mythic dimensions with a contemplation ordered toward action,
and also, when in addition to our rather natural expectations, they include 1) a priestly voice
that sings of the intrinsic beauty to be celebrated in seemingly repugnant realities 2) a
prophetic voice that is robustly self-critical when speaking the truth 3) a kingly voice that
articulates a bias for the bottom, expressing both a privileging of the marginalized and a
principle of subsidiarity when preserving goodness 4) a motherly voice that, seeing and
calling all as her children, draws every person into her circle of compassion and mercy with
no trace of exclusion, only a vision of unity.
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: a r c h e t y p e s, A v e r y D u l l e s, axiological vision of the whole, a x i o l o g y, Bernard Lonergan,
c o n t e m p l a t i o n, cosmology, Daniel Helminiak, e m e r g e n c e, e m e r g i n g c h u r c h, Ignatius of Loyola, Jesus
scholarship, John of the Cross, Ken Wilber, Kurt Godel, Mortimer Adler, n o n d u a l i t y, r a d i c a l e m e r g e n c e,
radical orthodoxy, Richard Rohr, social justice, Willem Drees
« Older Entries Newer Entries »
© 2010 christiannonduality.com Blog is Proudly Powered By WordPress | Theme by The Cloisters

204. CHRISTIANNONDUALITY. C O M BL O G
beyond thinking & proposing to imagining & participating
Home About
T o d a y’ s L i t u r g y
East Meets West interreligiously – but how?
JB on October 15, 2009 in Practices & Experiences, the evaluative - Culture, the interpretive -
Religion | No Comments »
“Awakening to beauty, truth, and goodness is to waken to the unfoldment of Divine Life
within us.” Translator
Thomas Keating
“In philosophy classes we were told that there were three things that especially opened us to
the
By N2H
Transcendent: the good, the true, and the beautiful. Amos Yong apophatic
Axiological axiologically-
Come join us as we again put together what was never really apart!”
Bernard
integral
Lonergan Brian
Richard Rohr
McLaren
“The philosophers are wrong, he [Scotus] argues; ordered love, not knowledge, defines and
perfects human rationality. Human dignity has it foundation in rational freedom. In
Charles
Sanders
contrast to the philosophical, intellectualist model of human nature and destiny, the
Franciscan offers and strengthens the Christian alternative, centered not merely on
Peirce
contemplative
knowledge but on rational love. Throughout his brief career, Scotus works to put together a cosmology emergence
more overtly Christian perspective on the world, the person, and salvation that might stand emerging church
Enlightenment
up to this philosophical intellectual/speculative model and, by using the best of its resources,
transcend it. The Franciscan tradition consistently defends a position wherein the fullest epistemology faith False
perfection of the human person as rational involves loving in the way God loves, rather than Self fideism Hans
knowing in the way God knows. His position in this overall project can be best understood Kung James K. A. Smith
within Franciscan spirituality, which emphasizes the will and its attraction to beauty, love, Jesus Creed John Duns
and simplicity.” Scotus kataphatic Kevin
Beck Kurt Godel
Ingham and Mechthild’s Merton
The Philosophical Vision of John Duns Scotus
metaphysics
Mike Morrell Natural
Theology nihilism
We do well to learn from India’s very long history of reflection on God and gods, Goddess nondual nonduality
and goddesses, if we are to speak intelligently of the God in whom we believe and to whom orthodoxy radical
we pray. Faith ought to be single-minded, but theology has a duty to be broad and ever emergence radical
more open to new learning. orthodoxy rationalism
Francis X. Clooney, S.J. Richard Rohr
Science
America Blog, Teaching God at Harvard, Spring 2009 scientism semiotic
theodicy Theological
Fr. Richard Rohr OFM describes much of Buddhism as gifting one with “practices” and not Anthropology
“conclusions.” In this consideration, I’d like to open up the gift of this succinct insight and Thomas
offer one interpretation of what this might mean for Christianity. Merton Tim King
transformation
The Advaita Vedanta and Bhakti schools of Hinduism, and the Mahayana school of True Self Walker Percy
W P-C u m u l u s b y R o y T a n c k
Buddhism, are now the major (larger) schools of these great living traditions and all have
a n d Luke Morton requires
prominent devotional elements. While the dualist and modified nondualist Vedantic schools
F l a s h P l a y e r 9 or better.
are primarily associated with Bhakti thought, even the Advaitic school can be associated with
devotional elements through its founder, Shankara. Even in Zen Buddhism (Mahayanan), Cultivating the
both Chinese (Chan) and Korean (Soen) schools integrate devotional elements. Roots, Nurturing
the Shoots
What about the “reform” movement of the Japanese (Soto) school, which, by many MARCH 2010
accounts, does not so readily accommodate devotional elements? Some say this movement
was rooted in the late 19th-early 20th Century Japanese nationalist tendencies, which both M T W T F S S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
sought to differentiate itself from other schools in Asia and to support the country’s 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
militaristic approach. Others say the reform was a response to Zen’s commercialization in 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Japan. Whatever the case may be, for manifold and varied historical reasons, the Japanese 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
school lineages predominate in North America. To the extent that Japanese Zen lacks a 29 30 31
governing body and a per se orthodoxy, unlike other Asian schools, it naturally lends itself to « FEB
what would otherwise be considered heterodox adaptations, such as the emergent Christian
Zen lineage. Recent Posts
The Emerging Church is BIGGER
My purpose in providing this background is to dispel any facile misconception that Eastern
t h a n C h r i s t i a n i t y – how to spot
spiritual practices writ large, even when otherwise associated with various
it in other traditions
nondualities, necessarily lack a robust relationality or are otherwise incompatible with
Abortion & the Senate
devotional elements. This is also to suggest that Americans, who have been primarily exposed
Healthcare Bill – a p r u d e n t i a l
to the Soto school, may especially fall prey to caricaturizing what are in fact the largest and
judgment
most predominant living traditions of the East based on what for them has otherwise been a
10 historical developments
very narrow exposure to a “reform” element that turns out to otherwise be somewhat
propelling Emerging
aberrant. I say this to affirm that, in my view, relationality is essential in all aspects of the life
Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
of the radically social animal known as Homo sapiens. I would argue that it is considered
Why Brian McLaren’s Greco-
essential by most people in most all sects and denominations of the great traditions.
Roman Narrative is NOT a
It therefore seems likely that there is no, so to speak, “essential” Enlightenment experience for caricature
most people, neither East nor West, which is to suggest that most people, who undertake the THE BOOK: Christian
ascetic disciplines and nondiscursive and/or apophatic meditative practices that can lead to N o n d u a l i t y – Postmodern
experiences of absolute unitary being, cosmic awareness or even various energy arousals and Conservative Catholic
awakenings, are already both formatively prepared and kataphatically situated in a Pentecostal
devotional environs that is, more or less, conducive to an orderly unfolding of the psychic
energies often associated with spiritual emergence such that they will not otherwise fall prey Recent Comments
to what can be some very unsettling spiritual emergencies. christiannonduality.com Blog »
Blog Archive » Thoughts re:
This has profound implications for our inter-religious dialogue, especially as it pertains to our
t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
mutually enriching exchanges of spiritual technologies (ascetic and meditative practices),
vs Dan Dennett on Intelligent
which might be a lot more adaptable (abstracted from doctrinal elements) between Eastern
Design – a poorly designed
and Western traditions than one might first suspect, especially if only familiar with Japanese
inference
Zen as is the case with most Americans .
christiannonduality.com Blog »

205. Normatively speaking, this is to suggest that our emergent Christian Zen lineages need not Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n
feel compelled to turn away from devotional practices and may indeed want to more actively McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
engage the many other schools of Hinduism and Buddhism precisely in search of their Narrative is NOT a caricature on
devotional modalities. Another problem in the West is the fact that there is an emergent pop- A New Kind of Christianity?
Advaitan and/or neo-Advaitan lineage that facilely engages Shankara’s illuminative McLaren didn’t make this up. It’s
teachings while ignoring the founder’s devotional practices. This can only exacerbate the worse than that!
misconceptions, hence misapplications, that arise from the already narrow and misguided christiannonduality.com Blog »
view of the Eastern traditions. Thankfully, many Western and Christian Zen lineages do offer Blog Archive » W h y B r i a n
caveats regarding any such over-conceptualizations of Zen. McLaren’s Greco-R o m a n
Narrative is NOT a caricature on
At the same time, as Robert Sharf points out: “… there is a world of difference between E v e r y t h i n g T h a t’s Old is New
issuing such warnings in a monastic environment where ritual and doctrinal study are de A g a i n – this (McLaren’s “ N e w”
rigueur, and issuing such warnings to laypersons with little or no competence in such areas. Christianity) is truly an old
In short, the Sanbokyodan has taken the antinomian and iconoclastic rhetoric of Zen time religion
literally, doing away with much of the disciplined ceremonial, liturgical, and intellectual K i e r a n C o n r o y on A New Kind of
culture of the monastery in favor of the single-minded emphasis on zazen and a simplified Christianity? McLaren didn’t
form of koan study.” Sanbokyodan: Zen and the Way of the New Religions p. 427-428 make this up. It’s worse than
that!
Whatever the divergent ontological views of our many traditions, for the most part, in the Philip Clayton on Thoughts re:
East, there is a subtle distinction that is drawn between ultimate or absolute reality and t o d a y’s debate – Philip Clayton
phenomenal or practical reality, such that it is lost on many Westerners that various vs Dan Dennett
words/cognates, in fact, retain their conventional or pragmatic usefulness in a movement
that, first, suspends our naive affirmations, then, subjects them to philosophical scrutiny and, Type, Hit Enter to Search
finally, returns them back to their conventional understanding with deeper insights and with
maybe a hygienic hermeneutic of suspicion. This insight and hermeneutic does not cast We Distinguish in
suspicion with the skeptics on all matters unseen but instead invites us to go beyond (not Order to Unite
without) our senses and reason to penetrate reality more depthfully.
Select Category 6
In Christianity, Richard of St. Victor thus informs the Franciscan tradition thru Bonaventure Blogroll
about the occulus carnis (eye of the senses), the occulus rationis (eye of reason), and the
occulus fidei (eye of faith). This “eye of faith” is what Rohr refers to as the “third eye” and, Andrew Sullivan
consistent with Merton, it integrally takes us beyond our senses and reason but not without Beyond Blue
them. This conceptually maps fairly well, but not completely, over such as Jewish and Brian D. McLaren
Tibetan concepts of Third Eye seeing. Commonweal
Crunchy Con
Rohr often refers to knowledge through connaturality, which, per Maritain is knowledge Cynthia Bourgeault
through union or inclination, connaturality or congeniality, where the intellect is at play not Emergent Village
alone, but together with affective inclinations and the dispositions of the will, and is guided Emerging Women
and directed by them. It is not rational knowledge, knowledge through the conceptual, First Thoughts
logical and discursive exercise of Reason. But it is really and genuinely knowledge, though Fors Clavigera
obscure and perhaps incapable of giving account of itself, or of being translated into words. Francis X. Clooney, S.J.
Joseph S. O'Leary
NCR Today – the Catholic Blog
Rohr writes: “Contemplation is also saying how you see is what you will see, and we must Per Caritatem
clean our own lens of seeing. I call it knowing by “connaturality” (Aquinas), or knowing by Phyllis Tickle
affinity or kinship, it is the participative knowing by which the Indwelling Spirit in us knows Post Christian
God, Love, Truth, and Eternity. LIKE KNOWS LIKE, and that is very important to know. Postmodern Conservative
There definitely is a communion between the seer and the seen, the knower and the known Radical Emergence
Hatred cannot nor will not know God, fear cannot nor will not recognize love. Because this Sojourners
deep contemplative wisdom has not been taught in recent Catholic centuries, and hardly at Tall Skinny Kiwi
all among Protestants, it is a great big lack and absence in our God given ability to know The Website of Unknowing
spiritual things spiritually, as Paul would say (1 Cor.2:13).” Transmillenial
Vox Nova
Clearly, then, Rohr advocates nonduality and not nondualism. The latter is a metaphysical
Weekly Standard Blog
proposition; the former is an epistemic method. In philosophy, we have recognized that
Worship Blog
methods can be successfully extricated from systems. In our East-West dialogue, we have
Zoecarnate
recognized that some practices can be successfully extricated from their doctrinal contexts.
Nonduality is a practice, a method, that can be successfully extricated from nondualism (as
system or doctrine). In fact, it has a philosophical meaning vis a vis the false dichotomy Worthwhile Sites
fallacy that is quite independent of any Eastern traditions. That’s the meaning employed by Amos Yong
Rohr. Boulder Integral
Brother David Steindl-Rast
Here’s a quote on the same theme from Pseudo-Dionysius: “Do thou, in the intent practice of Center for Action and
mystic contemplation, leave behind the senses and the operations of the intellect, and all Contemplation
things that the senses or the intellect can perceive, and all things which are not and things Christian Nonduality
which are, and strain upwards in unknowing as far as may be towards the union with Him Contemplative Outreach
who is above all being and knowledge. For by unceasing and absolute withdrawal from David Group International
thyself and all things in purity, abandoning all and set free from all, thou wilt be borne up to Dialogue Institute
the ray of the Divine Darkness that surpasses all being.” Ecumene
Franciscan Archive
Christianity is recovering its mystical core via a neoplatonic-influenced dionysian logic. The
Innerexplorations
classical emphasis has been on the dialectic between the apophatic and kataphatic, the
Institute on Religion in an Age of
former referring literally to what God is not, the latter an affirmation of what God is like,
Science
analogically. This has reduced all God-talk to metaphor and leaves a question begging as to
Metanexus
how there can be any causal efficacy between Creator and creatures with such a causal
Monastic Interreligious Dialogue
disjunction as is necessarily implied by such a weak analogy.
National Catholic Reporter
The classical logic looks like this: Radical Orthodoxy
Shalomplace
1) God is | x | is true analogically and kataphatically. Sojourners
Thomas Merton Center
2) God is | not x | is true literally and apophatically. Virtual Chapel
Zygon Center for Religion and
Dionysian logic breaks out of this dualistic dyad, going beyond it but not without it: Science

206. 3) God is neither | x | nor | not x | is true unitively. Cloud of
Unknowing
This triadic perspective resolves the tension between the classical neoplatonic henosis, which
refers to the dance between intersubjectivity and identity with ultimate reality, and Amos Yong apophatic
dinonysian theosis, which refers to the growth in intimacy with ultimate reality, by affirming Axiological axiologically-
both an intraobjective identity between creature and Creator, in a panentheistic divine matrix
Bernard
integral
of interrelated causes and effects, as well as an intersubjective intimacy between creature and
Lonergan Brian
Creator, the creature thus being quasi-autonomous. (auto = self)
McLaren Charles
The practical upshot, then, which might be quite the essence (pun intended), of such a Sanders
Peirce
nondual perspective is that all may be well and that all are radically interrelated and this is contemplative
true whether one is indeed an absolute monist, qualified monist, panentheist or classical cosmology emergence
theist. The theoretical rub would be ontological but all traditions, in fidelity to right emerging church
speech, had better remain in search of a metaphysic at this stage on humankind’s journey? E n l i g h t e n m e n t epistemology
For Rohr, I’d say the nondual refers mostly to an epistemic process, such as in Zen’s faith False Self fideism
dethroning of the conceptualizing ego in order to otherwise relate to some seeming Hans Kung James K. A.
contradictions, instead, as paradoxes, which might perdure as mystery, resolve dialectically, Smith Jesus Creed John
or even dissolve from a stepping out of an inadequate framework of logic or any other Duns Scotus kataphatic
dispositions (or lack thereof) known to this paradox or another. This maps well with the Kevin Beck Kurt
broad conceptions of nonduality such as at Nonduality Salon and Wikipedia. Predominantly, Godel Merton
though, Rohr affirms nondual thinking in an over against fashion as related to either-or metaphysics Mike
Morrell Natural Theology
thinking, i.e. false dichotomies, and as related to a failure to self-critique one’s own systems
and logical frameworks, as a failure, too, to affirm the rays of truth in other perspectives and nihilism nondual
traditions. It is a failure to move beyond the Law thru the Prophets to the Wisdom tradition, nonduality orthodoxy
not to do away with them but to properly fulfill them. radical emergence radical
orthodoxy rationalism
We can draw a distinction between Rohr’s philosophical treatment or method of nonduality Richard Rohr
Science scientism
or nondual consciousness and the practice of contemplative prayer forms. The former is at
the service of the latter, to be sure, but it is also at the service of all other value-realizations, semiotic theodicy
as one should expect from a whole brain approach. Here we come full circle back to our Theological
consideration of the devotional elements that can be fruitfully employed in conjunction with Anthropology
any nondual approach, whether conceived from an epistemic and/or ontological stance. Thomas
Rohr thus goes beyond any Mertonesque Zen-like formulations when he says that
Merton Tim King
transformation True
contemplation is a long, loving look at what really is. He writes: “Contemplation means Self Walker Percy
returning to this deep source. Each one of us tries to find the spiritual exercise that helps us Join Other
come to this source. If reading the Bible helps you, then read the Bible. If the Eucharist helps, Visitors in Prayer
then celebrate the Eucharist. If praying the rosary helps, pray the rosary. If sitting in silence Light A Candle & Pray
helps, just sit there and keep silence. But we must find a way to get to the place where Join Us in the
everything is. We have to take this long, loving look at reality, where we don’t judge and we Liturgy of the
simply receive. Of course, emptiness in and of itself isn’t enough. The point of emptiness is to Hours
get ourselves out of the way so that Christ can fill us up. As soon as we’re empty, there’s a
place for Christ, because only then are we in any sense ready to recognize and accept Christ
as the totally other, who is not me.” (Simplicity revised from 1991, Crossroad Publishing
2003)
In a nutshell, the general thrust of this whole brain approach is that, in order to have a
relationship with your spouse in marriage, as was intended in creation, one has to approach
one’s spouse with more than words, logic, science, math, analytical skills and pragmatic
considerations. One has to go beyond (NOT WITHOUT) these ways of knowing (Aquinas-
like approach) to a knowledge that comes from love (Bonaventure’s approach). One must
enter a relational realm, in addition to the logical, empirical and practical realm. One must
move beyond the language of math, philosophy, business & commerce, engineering and so Get the C a t h l i m e r g e n t o n
on to learn the language of relationship, the grammar of assent, loyalty, fidelity, trust, faith, Twitter widget and many other
hope, love. We tend to eventually “get this” in marriage, or it dissolves (and half of all great free widgets a t Widgetbox!
marriages do). There is reason to suspect, then, that “getting this” in our relationship with Not seeing a widget? (More info)
God is similarly problematical for most people. Tweets
In the story of Malunkyaputta, who queried the Buddha on the fundamental nature of johnssylvest: Abortion & the
reality by asking whether the cosmos was eternal or not, infinite or not, whether the body Senate Healthcare Bill – a
and soul are the same, whether the Buddha lived on after death, and so on, the Buddha prudential judgment
responded that Malunkyaputta was like the man who, when shot with an arrow, would not http://bit.ly/aS2DwT
let another pull it out without first telling him who shot the arrow, how the arrow was made johnssylvest: 10 developments
and so on. Thus the Buddha turns our attention to the elimination of suffering, a practical propelling Emerging
concern, and away from the speculative metaphysical concerns. Christianity ~ Richard Rohr
http://bit.ly/a4AMtg
This story of Malunkyaputta might thus help us to reframe some of our concerns, both johnssylvest: RT @pdclayton7:
regarding Buddhism, in particular, and metaphysics, in general. For example, perhaps we "Theology After Google" opens
have wondered whether, here or there, the Buddha was ever 1) “doing” metaphysics or 2) Wed. - 23 of the best speakers on
anti-metaphysical or 3) metaphysically-neutral. In fact, we might have wondered if the emerging religion in Google Age;
soteriological aspects of any of the great traditions were necessarily intertwined with any live stream at http://o ...
specific ontological commitments. In some sense, now, we certainly want to say that all of johnssylvest: RT @jonestony:
the great traditions are committed to both metaphysical and moral realisms. However, at the New Blog Post: Society for
same time, we might like to think that, out of fidelity to the truth, none of our traditions Pentecostal Studies Paper: What
would ever have us telling untellable stories, saying more than we know or proving too Pentecostals Have to Learn from
much. Emergents http://ow.ly/16KREU
johnssylvest: THE BOOK: An
One interpretation of Malunkyaputta’s story, then, might suggest that it is not that the Emerging Church Conversation
Buddha eschewed metaphysics or was even ontologically neutral; rather, it may be that the with a Postmodern Conservative
Buddha just positively eschewed category errors. This would imply that the Buddha would Catholic Pentecostal
neither countenance the categorical verve of yesteryear’s scholastics nor the ontological vigor http://bit.ly/91D570 #fb
of our modern fundamentalists (neither the Enlightenment fundamentalists of the scientistic
cabal nor the radical religious fundamentalists, whether of Islam, Christianity, Zen or any John Sobert Sylvest
other tradition). Thus we might come to recognize that our deontologies should be as modest
as our ontologies are tentative, that we should be as epistemically determinate as we can but
as indeterminate as we must, that we should be as ontologically specific as we can but as
vague as we must and that our semantics should reflect the dynamical nature of both reality
and our apprehension of same, which advances inexorably but fallibly. The Buddha seemed
to at least inchoately anticipate this fallibilism and, in some ways, to explicitly preach and
practice it.

207. To the Buddha’s point, then, regarding the no-self — humankind, as a community of earnest
inquiry, has no better grasp now than we did then of the ultimate nature of the cosmos or the
soul. The Mahayanan Buddhists, and many in other traditions and schools, apparently have
no problem dealing with the self in conventional, hence practical terms, whether in the
temporal or celestial sphere, and have a lively devotional practice, affirming a robust inter-
relationality vis a vis their pantheon of goddesses and gods, whom they worship, and all
sentient beings, whom they offer karuna. They would thus seem to have no more trouble,
practically speaking, in relating to “self” or “other” as a phenomenal experience than
Westerners would have. Where they would have trouble is when, theoretically speaking, it
comes to defining self using ontological categories, whether substantialist or process,
essentialist or nominalist, in ways that would pretend to exhaustively comprehend primal
reality. This, one might observe, is the type of trouble more Westerners should have. I am
otherwise inclined, then, having some exposures to certain phenomenal experiences myself,
not to interpret the no-self experience, ontologically, and instead associate the experience Johnboy Was Here
with what Jim Arraj calls the loss of the affective ego. Feedjit Live Blog Stats
Feedjit Live Blog Stats
As Arraj writes and I agree: “It would probably by wrong, as well, to imagine that Zen
Buddhism, or even the advaitan Vedanta is making any kind of ontological nondualist
claims. Rather, they are trying to take into account a nondual experience, and sometimes
their post-experience reflections can leave the impression that they are creating a nondual Follow this blog
ontology. But they are not interested in philosophy in the Western sense, but rather, leading
people to the experience, itself. The real question, which we will pursue later, is whether
enlightenment is nondual in itself, or is presented in a nondual way because of the very
means by which the enlightenment experience is attained. There should be no rush to
judgment on the part of Christians as if they need to express Christianity in some nondual
ontological fashion. This is not precisely what Zen Buddhists, and advaitan Hindus are
doing.” Christianity in the Crucible of East-West Dialogue
It would be considered comical, if it were not otherwise so distressing, the way Advaitan
accounts of absolute reality are manipulated in cyberforums and some popular literature,
drawing the most absurd conclusions as they are misapplied to the practical considerations of
our phenomenal experience, when conventional usage would otherwise indeed be the
prescribed approach even for orthodox nonduality.
Arguably, even Shankara’s philosophy need not be interpreted as an absolute monism,
especially once taking into consideration its account of causation in phenomenal reality,
which at least resembles Aristotle’s vis a vis its teleological dimension, even if otherwise
approaching Plato’s idealist conceptions. The Advaitan ontology addresses causes and effects
in sufficiently vague references and its epistemology is most notably triadic, wherein the
pramana (sources of knowledge, Sanskrit) each form one part of a triputi (trio), which
include the subject and object mediated by the cause or means of knowledge.
There are thus inchoate traces of the ontological vagueness, epistemic indeterminacy and
semantical versatility that have made their way through the West vis a vis such as the
Dionysian logic of the Neoplatonists, Meister Eckhart’s apophatic predications, Scotus’ formal Visit Cathlimergent Conversations
distinction, Peirce’s triadic semeiotic and some postmodern criticisms. One might properly
wonder if Hindu’s Rita successfully refers to, even if it does not robustly describe, such Visit Anglimergent
regularities as Peircean Thirdness, deontological accounts of right and wrong, liturgical
celebrations of ritual or other analogs, maybe even modalities, of the eternal Logos and Spirit Meta
at the mystical core of all of our traditions? Thus we might think of Hindu’s Dharma and Log in
Rita, Taoism’s Tao, Buddhism’s Dhamma, Judaism’s Torah and Christianity’s Pneuma & Entries R S S
Logos. Comments R S S
WordPress.org
Toshihiko Izutsu poetically describes certain regularities that, in my view, demonstrate a tacit
dimensionality that, like the Spirit, is ineluctably unobstrusive but utterly efficacious: “Listen!
Do you not hear the trailing sound of the wind as it comes blowing from afar? The trees in
the mountain forests begin to rustle, stir, and sway, and then all the hollows and holes of
huge trees measuring a hundred arms’ lengths around begin to give forth different sounds.
There are holes like noses, like mouths, like ears; some are (square) like crosspieces upon
pillars; some are (round) as cups, some are like mortars. Some are like deep ponds; some are
like shallow basins… However, once the raging gale has passed on, all these hollows and holes
are empty and soundless. You see only the boughs swaying silently, and the tender twigs
gentle moving.” Sufism and Taoism, p. 368-369
Father Rohr spent five weeks, during Lent 2008, in a hermitage, in solitude. He spent this
time reflecting and writing a new book, The Third Eye. On Easter Monday, he made a
presentation of an outline of these thoughts. Fr. Rohr defines his conception of the Third Eye
as derived from two 11th Century monks, Hugh and Richard of the Monastery of St. Victor in
Paris. The flowering of this thinking in his Franciscan tradition, he tells us, took place in the
12th and 13th centuries. Although the metaphor is similar to the same concept of Hindu and
Buddhist traditions, it is apparently independent of those in that there was no contact
between those and this Christian conceptualization, which is talking about the eyes of 1)
sense, 2) reason and 3) faith. Basically, Fr. Rohr is amplifying his teaching on contemplative
living, which, in my view, continues to be heavily informed by his love of Thomas Merton.
He makes frequent references to Merton, False Self and True Self and compares and contrasts
them in many different ways, using many different adjectives and metaphors.
Fr. Rohr likes the word “realization” and sees it as being richer than the word “experience” for
he describes the robust encounter of God as a “total body blow,” where not only head and
heart are engaged but the body, too. Unfortunately, he says, we “localize knowing” and too
often try to access God only in the top 3 inches of the body and only on the left side at that.
This dualistic, binary or dyadic thinking, which we employ in math, science and engineering,
or when we are driving a car, is of course good and necessary. It is the mind that “divides the
field” into classes and categories and then applies labels through compare and contrast
exercises. It is the egoic mind that is looking for control and order, but, unfortunately, also
superiority. It can lead to both intellectual and spiritual laziness, however, to an egoic
operating system (Cynthia Bourgeault), which views all through a lens of “How does it affect
me?”
The contemplative mind goes beyond the tasks of the dualistic mind to deal with concepts like
love, mercy, compassion and forgiveness. It doesn’t need to “divide the field” for such tasks.
The contemplative mind is practicing heaven in that it sees the Divine image as being
“equally distributed” and present in all others. We see that presence, honor it and know it. The
contemplative mind starts each moment with “yes.” It is vulnerable before the moment,
opening “heart space.” It is present to people and does not put them in a box. So, in our
primary level encounter with others, we do not prejudge. At the secondary and tertiary level,
a “no” may be absolutely necessary. Once you know you can say “yes,” then it is important to
be able to say “no,” when appropriate. Rohr makes clear, in his words, that we “include
previous categories” and “retain what we learn in early stages.” Our goal, in his words, is to
master both dualistic and nondualistic thinking. This matches my interpretation of the
different perspectives engaged in the East, both the absolute and phenomenal.

208. We must go beyond (not without) that part of our tradition that was informed mostly by
Greek logic in order to be more open to paradox and mystery. Rohr described some of the
early apophatic and nondual elements of the Christian tradition, especially in the first three
centuries with the Desert Mothers and Fathers, especially in the Orthodox and eastern
Christian churches, and describing John of the Cross and Teresa of Avila as the last
supernovae. The apophatic and unknowing tradition has not been constant.
For 400 years after these Carmelites there has been no real tradition. He credits Merton with
almost single-handedly retrieving authentic contemplative teaching that has not been taught
for almost 500 years. This type of mysticism, he, like Merton says, is available to all but it
takes a type of humility to “let go of our control tower.”
We and others are living tabernacles, even given the contrary evidence. That God dwells in us
is the foundation of human dignity. Fr. Rohr discusses the Gift of Tongues in this
contemplative vein and notes that when it died out, prayer-based beads emerged. He went on
to discuss prayer beads in other traditions. Fr. Rohr notes that the East and West differ in that
more emphasis is placed on discipline, practice and asceticism in the East, while, in the West,
we emphasize surrender and trust. Both East and West have elements of all of these
approaches, of course. Our Christian path is more one of letting go and yielding of self. He
believes that most of us, a very high percentage, have enjoyed unitive moments, but that
there was no one there to say “that’s it.” He thinks that it would be useful to retrieve our
contemplative tradition because we apparently need some degree of discipline or practice to
keep seeing and trusting our unitive moments, our union, our communion. The Spirit will
thus teach us all things and re-mind you that you are in union with God, that you are select;
you are chosen; you are beloved. We need to learn how to live in communion, now, for that
is what we’ll enjoy in heaven.
Fr. Rohr then describes practices that open up this contemplative mind: silence, stillness,
solitude, patience about needing to know everything, poetry, art, body movement, music,
humility and redemptive listening. He describes how we need to stand back and
compassionately and calmly observe reality, without initial regard for how it affects us, but to
see persons and events nakedly, seeing our drama almost as if it wasn’t us. If we cannot thus
detach, then we are over-identified. Whenever we’re defensive, it is usually our false self.
What characterizes an addict is typically all or nothing thinking. We do not hate the False
Self. We must simply see it. It is not our “bad” self, just not our “true” self. We need to better
learn to hold together opposites and contradictions. A modern retrieval of our ancient
practices of contemplative seeing can foster this type of non-judging awareness.
Rohr says that a master of nondual thinking needs to also be a master of dualistic thinking.
The Catholic tradition has great wisdom in retaining icon and art and symbols and music.
The primary teachers of this approach to God and others and all of reality are great love and
great suffering. Our primary paths have been suffering and prayer. When head and heart
and body are all connected, that is prayer. This, says Fr. Rohr, is not esoteric teaching.
Everybody has the Holy Spirit!
What appears to be the new theme emerging from Fr. Rohr’s latest thought is that of
supplementing and complementing our traditional approach to belief-based religion with
more practice-based religion. In particular, he sees great wisdom in retrieving those practices
which have been lost or deemphasized that we can better cultivate a contemplative outlook.
In prayer, we are like “tuning forks” that come in to God’s presence and seek to abide inside
of a resonance with God. We need to set aside whatever blocks our reception, especially a lack
of love or lack of forgiveness. And we need to embrace the gifts of the East, which, as Rohr
properly recognizes, are “practices” and not “conclusions.” I see the Buddha smiling.
May namaste, then, become more than a greeting but a way of life, as we look always and
everywhere and in everyone for the pneumatological realities we profess herein. May our
inter-religious stance be more irenic as we acknowledge the Spirit in one another with true
reverence, in authentic solidarity and utmost compassion. A most fundamental aspect of the
unqualified affirmation of human dignity would seem to be our nurturance of the attitude
that all other humans come bearing an irreplaceable gift for us, that we are to maintain a
stance of receptivity toward them, open to receive what it is they offer us through, with and
in the Spirit. Whether the Magi were occidental or oriental, Jesus was receptive. When John
offered baptism, Jesus was receptive. When Mary anointed his feet, Jesus was receptive.
When invited to dine with tax collectors and prostitutes, Jesus was receptive. A critical gaze
not first turned on oneself and one’s ways of looking at reality will have very little efficacy
when it is otherwise habitually and arrogantly turned first on others.
All of this is to observe that, beyond whatever it is that we offer to the world as our unique
gift, rather than always approaching our sisters and brothers as fix-it-upper projects in need
of our counsel and ministry, sometimes the Spirit may be inviting us to listen, observe and
learn from them in a posture of authentic humility and from a stance of genuine affirmation
of their infinite value and unique giftedness. While our encounters of the Spirit may be
manifold and varied from one phenomenal experience to the next, especially when situated in
one major tradition versus another, we may be saying more than we know if we attempt to
describe such experiences with more ontological specificity than can be reasonably claimed
metaphysically or theologically, suggesting, for example, that such experiences necessarily
differ in either origin or degree even if they otherwise differ, as might be expected, in other
cognitive, affective, moral, social or religious aspects.
More than semantics is at stake, here. We are not merely saying the same thing using
different words when we draw such distinctions as between nature and grace, natural and
supernatural, acquired and infused, existential and theological, immanent and transcendent;
such explicit denotations also have strong connotative implications that might betray
attitudes of epistemic hubris, pneumatological exclusivity or religious hegemony, which are
clearly unwarranted once we understand that our faith outlooks are effectively evaluative. I
say this because, in my view, our belief systems are otherwise, at best, normatively justified
existentially after essentially attaining, minimally, an epistemic parity with other
hermeneutics vis a vis our best evidential, rational and presuppositional approaches. While
there are rubrics for discernment of where the Spirit is active and where humans are
cooperative, they do not lend themselves to facile and cursory a priori assessments, neither by
an academic theology with its rationalistic categorizing nor by a popular fideistic piety with
its supernaturalistic religiosity, predispositions that tend to divide and not unite, to arrogate
and not serve, with their vain comparisons and spiritual pretensions.

209. “It is a serious thing, to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the
dullest and most uninteresting person you talk to may one day be a creature which, if you
saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship, or else a horror and a corruption
such as you now meet, if at all, only in a nightmare. All day long we are, in some degree,
helping each other to one or other of these destinations. It is in the light of these
overwhelming possibilities, it is with the awe and the circumspection proper to them, that we
should conduct all our dealings with one another, all friendships, all loves, all play, all
politics. There are no ‘ordinary’ people. You have never talked to a mere mortal. Nations,
cultures, arts, civilizations — these are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat.
But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub and exploit — immortal
horrors or everlasting splendours. This does not mean that we are to be perpetually solemn.
We must play. But our merriment must be of that kind (and it is, in fact, the merriest kind)
which exists between people who have, from the outset, taken each other seriously – no
flippancy, no superiority, no presumption. And our charity must be a real and costly love,
with deep feeling for the sins in spite of which we love the sinner — no mere tolerance or
indulgence which parodies love as flippancy parodies merriment.”
C.S. Lewis
__The Weight of Glory__
Send article as PDF to Enter email address Send
Tags: A d v a i t a V e d a n t a, A d v a i t i c, B h a k t i, B u d d h a, C.S. Lewis, Christian Zen, Christianity in the Crucible
of East-West Dialogue, c o n n a t u r a l i t y, c o n t e m p l a t i v e, C y n t h i a B o u r g e a u l t, Dionysian logic, Duns Scotus,
E n l i g h t e n m e n t, False Self, Francis X. Clooney, Gift of Tongues, Holy Spirit, Jacques Maritain, J i m A r r a j,
John of the Cross, k a r u n a, M a h a y a n a, M a l u n k y a p u t t a, M a r y B e t h I n g h a m, Meister Eckhart,
Neoplatonists, Pseudo-Dionysius, Richard of St. Victor, Richard Rohr, Robert Sharf, Sanbokyodan: Zen
and the Way of the New Religions, S h a n k a r a, Soto school, Teresa of Avila, T h i r d E y e, T h o m a s K e a t i n g,
Thomas Merton, Toshihiko Izutsu, True Self, V e d a n t i c, Ze