Encounter yesterday relates to Austen post (what Christ demands)

I read the piece that Austen referenced yesterday by Charles Chaput. One of the points Chaput made was that we typically back down in polite conversation when it to our Faith. I thought, he is absolutely right. I am not (currently) a gragarious Christian but, that doesn't excuse me letting comments slide by to go unchallenged.

So yesterday I challenged somebody in a polite conversation. We managed to keep the conversation civil and polite. The person turned out to be an ex-Catholic progressive. The conversation started with us commenting on the sad state of how folks are misbehaving today. My observatoin was that it all stemmed from the same thing, a lack of objective morality. This of course went into the question of God's existence. Upon conclusion I told this person that until you honestly and ernestly persue the question of God's existence, nothing else will ever make sense. I also learned, unless the premise of God is established, converstations tend to run in circles.

Hi stihl,

I don't know if you recognize me from the Syracuse forum, I only sporadically post there.
I tend to stick to OL, AL and NJ.

I didn't read Austen's post but I did want to discuss your conversation.

Did I read into your post, that the ex-Catholic progressive, didn't believe in God or didn't
have the correct Interpretation of God?

That is the one stumbling block I have, How people are searching for God.

Are they searching within or without?

Let the circle begin!

But I would definitely say I am searching for God outside of myself, rather than turning inward.

And I think that was in part the emphasis of AFan's link, in that what the bishop was saying is that there is an enormous sacrifice that comes with being a believer. You have to give things up, including at times your life. There is something that transcends you, something that is NOT you, that once you recognize it means that you are no longer your own.

That's, for me, the paradox of the whole "if you want to live, you must die first" paradox at the heart of the faith.

The inward turn, instead, seems to be about deifying the self.

Welcome aboard BHU!

Thanks for the Welcome!

Your answer relates to what I believe directly.

I have grown up in the Outward Teachings, and I honestly understand them from the Catholic view,
at least as one sees them from 19 years of experience.

(and I mean no disrespect in my terminology)

When I grew older I studied the Eastern Teachings of Inward thought, for a long with while within
what I later learned was an offshoot of Sant Mat. The focus here is all Inward.

But the goal is to learn that the Inner and Outer are one and the same.
That is the train of Though behind my view.

As to deifying oneself, there is always that scare for a person who has not experienced enough
to keep the True SELF from the self (mind), this is why all Spiritual Teachers show such a trait of Humility,
if your doing an action for your self and not for God (Love) then your not completely following your teaching.

BelievHUman wrote:
I have grown up in the Outward Teachings, and I honestly understand them from the Catholic view,
at least as one sees them from 19 years of experience.

Could you say more about this? I'm not familiar with the Outward Teachings, and I'm interested in what they are and the connections you see with Catholicism. I'd love to know more about your beliefs!

I guess could have 2 meanings, One being the Teachings Jesus Preached to the People as opposed the what he taught the Apostles, or Two, Teachings that focus on an outward source, in Christianity (not just Catholic) it is on Jesus, this is outward focus.

What I always say is that I am looking for and at the Christ Consciousness.

One thing is that this frees me from the Bible (no offense intended to anyone), I do not think it is in any way the complete word of God. I take my lead on what the Word is from Gnostic text and it's common theme with Eastern Studies.

Where I base much of my understanding of the Universe is the Light and Sound teachings, what I referred to in another post as Sant Mat. But I have been looking at how this relates to Christ and my focus always goes back to the original 'followers', Pre-Biblical and undefined. I think some of those sects have a common belief with mine.

I get it now. Are there any particular gnostic texts you're drawn to? A long time ago I read Elaine Pagels' book on the gnostic gospels and found it interesting.

2 that jump out are The Essene Gospel of Peace and the Gospel of Thomas.

Hey, it is great to have you here!!!

To answer your question regarding my conversation with the ex-Catholic Progressive; did he not believe in God or, did he have an inward view?

I can reasonably infer that he believes in something.

Your comments on focusing inward and outward are intriquing. I studied some Eastern Religon (mostly Buddahism) off and on over the last 10 years.

My current belief and understanding is predicated on the philosphy and approach by CS Lewis. Lewis concludes that God exists outside of the natural universe (the Christian view) yet, the evidence for God and His nature is found within us (Man). We are reflections of God.

There is some common ground between Buddahism and Christianity, being wary of attachment to the physical world.

is an important one, too much Attachment is not good for ones advancement.

When people ask about my beliefs , I generally link them to the following page, it is a good
overall view of where I think we need to be as the Human race.

http://personalpages.tds.net/~theseeker/WAYINTRO.HTM

Peace and a great day to you! :-)

BelievHUman wrote:is an important one, too much Attachment is not good for ones advancement.

When people ask about my beliefs , I generally link them to the following page, it is a good
overall view of where I think we need to be as the Human race.

http://personalpages.tds.net/~theseeker/WAYINTRO.HTM

Peace and a great day to you! :-)

Human,

Your page had me reaching for my Lewis books. Lewis refers to the objective morality shared by religons as the "Tao". Thumbing through Lewis's book "The Abolition of Man", I found introduced in a chapter titled "The Way". Small world ain' it?

I read the question on your page and I guess I qualify as a "traveler". I know the point and purpose of my life is to move closer to God and I can do that by following His law and will.

When I began my search, I stepped back from my Catholic Faith so I would not be searching from a defensive position. The funny thing is, what I found to be a Truth brought me back to the Catholic Faith. Now with a different understanding of my Faith, I am finding more Truth.

Peace with you too.

We are all travelers, this is a fact, in some form or another.

The Way and the Tao are pretty much in Sinc, this I have noticed.

As I have mentioned, since I have a History within Catholicism, I do not think this was a fluke
for my lifetime, so I have worked in recent years to reconcile the experiences I have had.
This is what lead me to the 'Followers of the Way', Early Christians (pre-name).

Without negative intent, I have simply grown to not trust Post Nicene doctrine as from this point,
politics and other motives came into play and I believe much truth was lost when the Gnostic interpretations
were removed. This is of course JMHO.

...this is an interesting part of Christian history. From the time of the Apolstales to the canonization of the Sacred Scriptures. There were some real battles regarding the nature of Christ and what He meant to mankind.

Why is the Nicene Creed the seminal moment for you?

That moment in time is important simply because it became to defining point for the Catholic Religion and in the process
any Truth of Christ's message that was not considered doctrine by this defined group became heresy.

I think Origen was negated when his message made more sense in the traditions of Spiritual Teachings.

I believe Jesus became aware of his divinity (Christ) through intense study, much not documented, but matches the path
most every Teacher otherwise has traveled.

But, Understand, I believe that within all of us, is the Divinity he became aware of and I believe his teachings
were pertaining to how to reach this awareness within ourselves.

Looking for the 'Father within'.

First, I will have to refresh myself on Origen. I have downloaded and read his works. I remember being impressed but I can't recall what made him heretical.

We have had this thread before, how far do you let a doctrine extend itself before it stops being what it is? Maybe I didn't phrase that right beause the forming of doctrine is the creation of orthodoxy. Doctrine defines something. I have contemplated when the Christian Church became the Catholic Church. I suppose it would have to be when there was another version of Christianity that create a contrast.

is that the Holy Spirit gives us the ability to (as far as possible in this life) to be transformed into the image of Christ. Paul's letters speak repeatedly about this. Orthodox understanding is not that we becomes God or gods. I don't want to be a God-at my better moments anyway. That probably explains why I am not a Gnostic, and why I have no interest in debating about whether we are to be divine. I don't mean to sound rude, and I'll read anyone's opionion, but that's where I am. And I've read quite a bit of Gnosticism.

understand why the desire to recognize one's own divinity would appeal to many modern people, aside from the people it apealed to in the early history of the church

Austenfan,
Thanks for the reply.

I think there is a common misunderstanding about finding Divinity within.

It is not about 'My' being a God or even wanting such, it is understanding what our true nature is.

If one accepts all beings as being part of God, it opens the door for inclusion and gives opportunity
for peaceful commonality of thought, leading to the Kingdom of heaven that so many are searching for.

(sorry, didn't mean to go preachy on anyone) :-)

My concern is that this line of thought is not inductive towards Religion simply because the focus
has to be on self improvement before one can truly assist others in their advancement.

an AL (I think before you were this handle you had another one). I understand that that's what people say when they talk about finding their true nature.-that it's not about becoming a God or gods. I've met various people who want to discover their true nature. It always involves NOT being part of a community of believers but being single adepts. And I also recognize you like to instruct the folks and be a guide to the truth. That's fine. Some of us do that. ;^) You carry on. You do your thing I'll do mine.

I am not a pantheist or a panentheist either.

But I can understand why being on AL.com would give you a great opportunity to instruct the conservative Christians.

Sorry AustenFan,
I am not here or there to instruct, only pass on what I know. One can take it or leave it
it is their choice.

I do follow the panentheist mold, I believe everything is created by and is part of God.
Even evil has a purpose in teaching us what is good.

Not sure why you invoke Conservative Christians on AL specifically, I have no issue
with any viewpoint at a personal level.

I am aware that you think differently than I do, I accept that others do not follow my path and I would
not ask anyone to.

you passing on what you know and enjoying it very much, and the conservative Christians do give you a lot of room for that.

nothing is personal. You're above all that.

Take care.

it seems to suggest a deep, long look inward will engender community and commonality, rather than solipsism.

I haven't personally found that to be the case.

One danger of all Spiritual Teachings is the False prophet.

We are all aware of it from the Bible.

I have studied many who start a good path but are corrupted by Greed, Power and freedoms born of lack of understanding.

I believe if one is not fulfilling the 2 Great Commandments they are leading others down a wrong path by example.

Austen, Peace and Love your way! Disagreements aside! :-)

to assume that all prophets other than self are false, or even that self can't be a false prophet.

I guess the only litmus test might be what effect is involved if one didn't believe their teaching.

I they leave one in Peace and offer no retribution for non-belief, that would be a good sign.

If they say/act otherwise, it would be a sign that they didn't understand one's Inner Nature.

Discernment of the SELF vs the Self is not an easy task, the Mind has nearly absolute power
in this world. We are all subject to our thoughts, ideals, Culture etc.

You have a great interest in sharing what you know spiritually. That can be fine and helpful. My concern is this:. With people who are spiritual teachers or guides, I want to know that they have some accountability. I meet with a Spiritual Director and also have a Clergy Support Group. Both tell me if they think my spiritual view of things is myopic or if I'm simly on the wrong track. In addition, I have a supervisor-a Pastor-and a Bishop above him. If I started suggesting, for instance, that we worhip the moon naked it's going to get to the Pastor and My District Superintendent pronto. This chain of accountability doesn't always work, but the system is in place for that and I have added to that through my own initiative of having a Spiritual Director and a Support group (and no, support doesn't always mean nodding one's head and agreeing. It may, indeed, be the exact opposite. I have done several books studies for adults over the past year at the church I serve. The pastor is aware of the books I am teaching. You seem to do the faith thing on your own. That is, you are not part of a church, but have discovered your own truths over a long period. What's your chain of accountability? I hope this doesn't sound confrontational. You sound like a pleasant and sincere person. Whenever anyone mentions Spiritual teaching I always either ask or want to ask this question.

questions Austen and are ones I have constantly been working on over the years.

Actually, the forums have been very helpful as a Sounding Board as I review my thoughts
after they are interpreted by others, it is a great litmus test and the main reason why I still
frequent a place where views are not likely ever to be changed.

I have Studied under Teachers, priests and spiritual leaders enough to see when I get off path
and I make corrections as I go. The basic rule of thumb for me is the Golden Rule and 2 commandments.

At this point, my experiences and Understanding have not lead me down any sinister path.

I have broken a commandment due to divorce, I killed animals and stole when younger, and have ask God
for forgiveness and understanding.

Now I am on the Path which is defined in completion as Oneness with God and the goal of complete unconditional Love.

If I am wrong, I will answer for it after this life, if I am right and I passed on what I knew, then I have done so in the
service of God and I can do no more.

You HAVE studied under teachers, etc.

Now you don't need that anymore. You depend on forums to let you know when you're off track. It's just the "you and God" thing. That's groovy, man.

to my post, I said nothing about depending on the forums, I don't 'depend' on any other
fallible Human for Spiritual Advancement.

Discernment is up to the individual, it always has, it always will, you simply accept that what another told you
will validate or invalidate your belief. I simply do that from within.

Please, do not show a disdainful attitude towards my belief simply because you do not agree with me.
(that is the tone I am receiving)

You don't depend upon any other agency except for what is within, and what is within is infallible.

Perhaps We shouldn't dicuss it anymore because it all sounds very "new ageish" to me and I know from previous experince with you that you don't like that term. I don't care for teachers that have no accountability except to the great Divine within. My background is with Quakers. Even Quakers have a susyem of accountabiility within their congregations.

I sound irritable. , I know that and I apologize, You see, I am a aware of dangers from people within the church. I am also aware of dangers from people outside the church, even from people who think they are very advanced.

I wish you well. I'm sure some others will enoy what you have to share.

Someone saying that they don't depend on any fallible human being for spiritual advancement REALLY raises red flags for me. I'm sorry, but that's the way I think.

is accountability to who?

To Jesus Christ? If so Excellent but any reference to him comes through fallible human minds, as such
you make discernment of what is right and wrong based on the words of others.

I grant that my moral structure was based during my youth as a Catholic, I cannot recall it being the
Religion or my very Loving Mother that brought me to my understanding (most likely the later).

As to the Quakers, I have been impressed with the ones I have talked to, they impress me as closer to
the original Followers.

The reason I don't like the 'new age' term is that there is no such thing, what I believe has been around
as long as any in existence, Mystic Teachings have been within every Religion.

If you wish to not converse, that is your choice, I only post what I believe.
I did not come here with intent to troll or harass, only to discuss.

the fallible mind Red Flag statement.

If I thought there was a perfect interpretation of US and God in existence here, I would be drawn
like a Moth to Flame.

Since I have not found one I have to trust God to lead me through the weave of Right and Wrong
and make the best choices I can based on learning and Understanding.

the mystic tradtion within Christianity. I've been studying it and reading about it for 30 years and meditation and contemplation are things that are part of my spiritual disciplines. The people I admire the most (with a very few exceptions) generally had Spiritual Directors or Advisors. They also exhibited the fruit of the Spirit in abundance. Knowing you from a forum is no whay for me to discern if you have that. You don't depend on fallibale people. You have Jesus only apparently which gives you a direct line. Yes, Gnosticism has been around for ages. Paul warms about some of it's dangers-one of them being spiritual elitism, and going of the track.

As I said, there may very well be other people who need or desire you spiritual direction; I don't. I know you said you don't wish to do that, but I am familar with your posts from Al.com, so I doubt that even though you may not recognize that's what you're about.

I'm done now. perhaps we'll chat on another thread.

Austen, I am glad to see that you understand where I come from.

I did not think you needed anything from me, again I am here for discussion.

Elitism is a danger that I fully recognize, I don't know if I portrait that on forums so well.

Humility is where I attempt to post, it is a subject I am working hard to do and convey,
but I don't know that it comes across as such.

Have a great day!

If you are trying to "portray" humility, with due respect I think you're off the track. Humility is a gift from God and pride is something most Christians struggle with. I do anyway. If someone is humble that comes across without them consciously trying to portray it.
C.S. Lewis shares some thoughts about this i(as the voice of a devil-Screwtape) in "The Screwtape Letters."

There is a poster here who is, IMO, quite humble. His handle is "Humble Hank" My sense is that he uses it not because he thinks himself as a great model of humility , but because he values that virtue and seeks for it in his own life.

I bid you peace.

have work to do......

Should I apologize for speaking my belief?

Is it wrong to disagree respectfully?

What makes my sense of humility any less than any others?

I don't force my beliefs, I don't care if anyone agrees, I simply
state what I believe.

I LOVE everyone to the best of my abilities and I post with that in mind.