A more appropriate title for this section could well be "The Post-Modernist Spiritual Quest" whereby relativism has become the norm, or threatens to. But I won't digress since neo- or post- Modernism is a topic alone.
Many of today's spiritual theologians tend to wed the traditions mentioned previously, extracting from both what is appropriate to contemporary thinking and promoting methods according to various modalities. Some have further intermeshed Oriental Hinduist and Buddhist methods and philosophies with both Western traditions and emerged along syncratic pathways, most of which must be called into serious question. Practices referred to include 'Christian Zen' and yoga, TM [transcendental meditation], Tai Chi and so on. How far one can adopt Oriental methodology without imbibing its philosophy is a contentious issue. That such philosophies [or better called 'thoughts and aims'] presuppose, and are based on, the idea of Nirvana militates against wedding them to Christian methodologies which all hinge on the Resurrection Life and pure worship of a Trinitarian God for its own sake. That Oriental ways have penetrated our prayer life is evident and therefore call for an investigation.
Never the twain shall meet between Nirvana and Resurrection is a claim hardly in doubt, yet one constantly hears that we have a lot to learn from esoteric and non-Christian beliefs. One must ask: "What?". Even the disgraced Hans Kung, in his lengthy exposition on non-Christian religions, in his work, "On Being A Christian", eventually comes up without a common denominator. One would have thought the Yahwists called the people to worship the true God and that the bottom line of the New Covenant imposed on Christians the joyful task of bringing the ultimate Light to those still in the darkness of impersonal deities rather than the other way around. Too, I would claim that it's the shallow who find the ultimate "cool" in being non-conformist and esoteric as they replay their teenage anarchism. They can wave a red flag without doing too much damage, but should not play "chicken" with their very souls. [Having mentioned Yahwists reminds me to advise that I neither know if you are dabbling in Kabbalah nor will be discussing it here]. An accusation of "triumphalism" applied at this point to what I have said, may very well ignore "truthfulism".
Chanting "om" all day or some other monologia, while one's ankles are intertwined behind one's neck may eventually see one reach the 13th stage of self-denial Perfection [whereby one becomes a
Buddha] while opening one up to unknown powers, but that will hardly progress the spirituality of a Christian. I regularly receive blog posts from "Reclaiming Sovereignty" run by a Shaman so I am quite familiar with that ancient spiritism, while I have also investigated other esoteric systems so I do not come at all this in ignorance. But, I apologize here, for I have digressed from an evidence-based argument.
Should one care to try to pinpoint in history this modern phenomena of East meets West, one might not go past Teilhard de Chardin. Teilhard's cosmic evolutionary visions have not just influenced modern spiritual theology but provided those Christian-cum-orientalists with the platform to introduce Eastern philosophy into traditional methodologies. He is considered a doyen among New Agers as you would know. [I don't know how deeply you are into his work. I confess that I have only read one of his works: "The Divine Milieu"]. What may be good in Teilhardism has been taken to the Nth degree in an extremism that he surely intended. He was sanctioned by the Church but more recently has been mentioned in glowing terms by several recent Popes. The effect of his intrinsic theology is already enormous and has caused a certain rift within Church circles. Betraying both Platonic and Aristotelian traditions, de Chardin tends to claim a knowledge of the Essence of God in the cosmos, culminating in his Omega Point. I have enough notes from my reading of de Chardin from many years ago from which I could furnish a few paragraphs here, but that was pre-computer times, so I leave it to you to investigate him on any substantial orthodox web site. Personally, I advise staying away from anyone who has pinned down the Trinitarian Godhead, even into such a nebulous circumstance which itself is "evolving". There too is a danger to some in even reading him critically, since he can be as hypnotic as any clever charlatan.
That said, let me return to the present to mention two major popular works. Firstly Andre Louf and secondly Anthony de Mello [whom you say that you are presently reading in the case of the latter]. The Trappist, Andre Louf, in "Teach Us To Pray" typifies one who prays unceasingly in the Spirit. He does set aside a place for Teilhard's cosmic prayer but in the context of a rich tradition going right back to the early monks. It is of particular interest since, in writing, he has in mind those of "ever growing concern with all sorts of techniques, psychological and physical, of recollection and meditation". He explains "how time-honored instructors and masters of prayer had already found an answer to these questions". This answer, to Louf, is the running together of the various techniques of prayer "into a harmonious whole in which the Holy Spirit is continuously at work in us" [p10]. Louf's principles are Christocentric not self-centred, ascetic not indulgent, other-centred not egocentric, constant not fragmented, scriptural and traditional.
On the other hand, de Mello S.J. presents us with a catalogue of prayer techniques in "Sadhana". While I found the book quite informative, several of the prayer exercises need close inspection.
Exercise 32, a fantasy exercise, states: "If it is used judiciously, namely, as a means to deepening our recollection and our inner silence, rather than as a means of pleasant entertainment .........." While joy in prayer is to be welcomed, more than that is suggested here. The very possibility of an alternative between prayer and entertainment is suggested. Considering a prior instruction in the same exercise - to indulge in the fantasy as "you could not allow yourself to indulge in reality" - is there not a danger of letting this type of visualization get out of hand, of taking advantage of a seemingly religious practice for a spiritual turn-on?
Exercise 30 typifies a recurring theme throughout the book - the visualization of life scenes, past or future, with the express instruction that 'no value judgement be made!'. Why is this? We read: "The injunction about neither approving or condemning is not needed to reform your life or actions .......you will be needlessly caught up in an inner conflict" [Me:....he said What?]. So then, is this one of those pieces of Oriental wisdom which has a lot to teach the Christian? This 'wisdom' does away with the metanoia of the Gospel, examination of conscience, repentance for sin, Grace, and so on because, as we are told: "awareness alone will heal [and] will cause to die whatever is unhealthy and will cause to grow whatever is good and holy ..........there is no need to use your spiritual muscles ........only become calm". In this particular exercise it is obvious that Christ is tacked on as an afterthought to what is essentially an Eastern practice.
Some exercises do not even bother with the afterthought. For example, Ex 29 is simply a meditation/visualization on the rotting away of one's own corpse. [I kid you not, if you have not yet read that far]. What relationship does this bear to Christian prayer and spiritual practice? I would suggest none since we are told by de Mello that "I have borrowed this exercise from the Buddhist series of reality meditations. .........I would have you know that the purpose of this meditation is to offer you the gift of peace and joy........" [ Yes, he said that!] . The Christian tradition of annihilation of self is always proposed in the context of making way for Christ or for neighbour as applied to living the Resurrection Life. This and other Buddhist practices [e.g. meditation on the decomposing body] is nihilism for the cause of Nirvana, going with the floe, melting into Teilhard's cosmic energy of blissful nothingnerss.
"Fantasis", Ex 23 reminds us "do not only give you insight into yourself. In some mysterious way they also change you"!! Can we be sure that this is a change for good when often the motives and underlying principles of the meditations are of dubious origin and may often be indulged in without proper spiritual direction? Ex 22 begins with an Ignatian visualization exercise which de Mello turns into a healing method wrought by faith; but, to exemplify this faith we have a story from "the Saintly Hindu mystic, Ramakrishna". I would agree with the author as he expresses some frustration with those who are only concerned with the truth of history and miss the truth of mystery. However, there are parameters to mystical experience which contain that experience to Christian Truth, such as we find with the great mystics previously mentioned. Even the author admits: "Ignatian fantasy contemplations are grounded on some element of history which is not so with the ones I am going to propose to you now" [Ex 23].
The faith to which the author refers throughout the book smacks of a brand of faith which one sometimes finds in the charismatic/pentecostal movement. This prosperity/healing faith is based on the premise that it is God's immediate will to heal in a certain fashion here and now. All that is needed to unlock this miracle power is to have faith. This type of 'working' is more in accord with the tapping into metaphysical reality and when the miracle does not happen one may be bequeathed with all sorts of recriminations. Missing from this scene is poverty of spirit, self-abandoning trust and an understanding of the essence of God and His Will. Certainly one does not need to know of theology to have faith, but the above example displays the faith of the magician rather than the faith of a child. That said, and a little too harshly at that, I must say that the charismatic movement has 'mellowed' since it burst upon the scene [I don't know about the protestant version]. Otherwise morose church goers have stronger faith, certainly joy from revelling in their Christianity, and a real dynamic of community that puts the normies to shame. Then again, I have witnessed some damage, but admit that there is more good on balance .......... and that is only opinion.
In relation to healing prayer in general, there is another trend which appears to stretch limits and applies to inner healing specifically. Often the participant is taken far back into the past to deal with previous hurts through creatively visualizing an altered situation. This sometimes extends to "re-birthing' or even further into ancestry. Granted that this has often resulted in healing and forgiveness, however, without indulging in depth on the topic, there are two broad issues which must be faced.
Firstly, there is the legitimacy of 'altering' events which have taken place - not necessarily the historical physical events [although this is often visualized], but the attitudes and thought processes which accompanied these events, The changing of events past is close to denying reality, the lessons to be learnt from them, and the presence and action of God in them. This is not to deny the need to forgive past hurts or have a change of heart [repentance] in relation to the past but this new attitude is for the here and now. Applying this to future events [and this creative visualization often does], we believe as Christians that the future is in God's hands; the only certain future event is the parousia and that it is wrong to believe in pre-destination or fate. To handle the future we are gifted with hope, wisdom, prudence, free will etc. Hence, the prohibition against fortune telling, destiny by astrology, star signs and the like. If this applies to the Christian view of the future, does not the same apply to the past?
Secondly, we need to consider our response to God in this. It appears at times that inner healing assumes an autonomous nature - that one is capable of righting wrongs by the employment of a [CV] method. Really, the visualizing of Christ in such methods is at times just a crutch, or else He is simply there to serve the method. The question is: to what extent, if any, do we deny the Grace of the Sacraments, especially Penance, in all this; is not the love of God enough to heal, here and now, what relates to the past; do we deny in some way the power of the Holy Spirit; do we quantify Grace by going into the past to pick up some remnant of Grace we have left behind; was Jesus absent in that situation because we did not know Him then as we do now? It makes us ask: how effective are the sacraments; what does faith and prayer mean to us right now? It seems for some that faith and grace only have meaning when accompanied by a spiritual 'experience'.
SPIRITUAL EXPERIENCE .........
Some things can be safely said about experiential knowledge of God:
- God is not attainable by us, but is present to us as a freely given gift through faith
- God is the prime initiator of contact with man; we are to be actively receptive in response
- God, as a personal entity existing apart from all other reality, is to be given first place in our lives
- We are called to serve rather than be served
- We ought not to seek spiritual experiences for themselves, for this is to seek self, not God
- Spiritual experiences are not an affirmation of the correctness of our religious position
- The Gift from God of a spiritual experience is not a right, not automatic, not a reward, but has a
purpose, usually of preparation for service
- Spiritual experiences are meant to accord with the action of the Church and the Word of God
- A steady diet of spiritual experiences is reserved for Heaven
- Spiritual experience is only one aspect of our continuous relationship to God
- Spiritual experiences may emanate from God or from the realm of unknown spirits or evil spirits,
or from one's own mind.
.................... END PART 5 ..................
No comments:
Post a Comment