I love mystical rituals. I just do. I always go to midnight mass just to watch the nice old father throw incense around and hold his bible above his head and carry wooden jesus to his bed, followed by more incense throwing and me being blessed by a nun. I like it even more if it's orthodox and in latin.
I also love orthodox churches from the eastern tradition. The eastern tradition is so different from the west. They never had Augustine and Dante shoving hell down their throats with hell burning as a background to all belief. Salvation remained participation in God's restoration of the world (ie like the patriarchs felt) rather than becoming individual rescue from hell, as it did in the second millennium in the west.
Secondly, for better or worse, in the East...theology stayed in the monastaries and out of scholarly arena. Theology never went under the microscope like it did in post enlightenment western life. I think this kept religion focused on liturgy and pious prayer. The East doesn't think doctrinally and therefore never felt the vehemenant need to protect doctrine from distortion. Somehow, reason and revelation were never at odds and attaching oneself to God and knowing God came through prayer.
Finally...speaking of the Enlightenment...what a devil for the Western tradition. We never recovered from this crisis of confidence in the West. It seems (as Don Miller points out...or was it Rick McKinley...it all runs in a big mush pot in my head) that when the world pointed to new findings like evolution, the church suddenly decided it had to appeal to a jury of peers and science rather than appealing to something higher like art, beauty, truth. Suddenly the West is doubting whether we can know God at all, reason or revelation becoming weak vehicles in the light of scientific discovery. We've been scrabbling ever since to establish conditions under which we can know God, all the while the East has been unconcerned, optimistic about knowing God, obeying God, and participating in the restoration of the World through God.
The west is always moving toward some kind of elusive summit, while the east is more interested in basking in the beauty of God that is immediately present. And so, for the west, salvation comes from an event that God effects or a decision that he makes while, for the east, salvation is the transformation of the self into the beauty of God. Because the East never relished in humanity's depravity, they focus on the restoration of God's life while the West is obsessed with cross. Eastern churches have never had to fight the fight of icons and have embraced the arts as an expression of piety instead of a possible church divider.
To try to put the difference between Christian east and west sharply, we might say that Eastern Orthodoxy sees Christianity as a way of worship in the life of prayer and liturgy, while the west sees it as a way of thought, a set of ideas whose truth is to be perfectly worked out in order to dispel all false notions. And so, the East has a softer more relaxed feel to it, while the west is constantly defending and throwing punches.
Does it sound like i love me some eastern church? Sort of. What I really love is the Western church emerging into the Eastern. Reigning in the very best of both. For example, Imago Dei's emphasis on the arts -- allowing people to "participate in the creative life of the creator." Watching people worship through painting, music, and poetry is as uplifting as listening to a beautiful "traditional acapella" worship service. It allows the whole person to holistically become involved in knowing God when we open our view of worship.
Isn't it nice sometimes to just surrender to mysticism? To allow ourselves to NOT know something about God and be okay with it. Like not know how the trinity works, how creation "really" happened, and what a virgin conception means.
And, I, personally, enjoy not beating myself over the head about sin. Can we come off the sin wagon for just a minute and just bask in the fact we actually can and do KNOW the creator of the universe. Yes, sin is important but it is so secondary to just sitting in the light of the love of God that I wish I grew up Eastern orthodox sometimes just so I wouldn't have the big guilt complex. I've finally come to a point in my faith where hell and heaven are virtually irrelavent to my belief. With or without an afterlife (keep in mind the patriarchs didn't believe in one) just knowing and communitcating with the creator is enough. But, in light of an afterlife, it's not a fear of hell my faith dwells on, but the desire to be taken over by the light and beauty of God (and don't read that as thinking of mansions lined in silver on roads of gold). I mean heaven stops being a place i spend time in and a state of being in which i'm no longer existent but have been absolved into the glory of God. Damn that's cool.
And finally...incense makes churches smell good. And i like it. I wish Pastor Rick would throw some around, at least we have candles.
Oh ya, i like being blessed by nuns. If nothing else you feel loved by a complete stranger, and that's real christianity.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Be careful. The line between shame and guilt is dangerously thin. I as a person cannot make you feel guilt. I can make you feel shame. Guilt is brought about by doing something wrong and having the Holy Spirit let you know about it. Shame is being something wrong. It's how the enemy twists guilt. The church we grew up in didn't know the difference and therefor we have a history of shame. So you don't have a guilt complex you have a shame complex. It's a very interesting concept we should discuss sometime.
I suppose i was speaking about the kind of guilt complex or shame complex...if we're focusing on semantics...that becomes our motivator in obeying Christ. Guilt nor shame should ever be a motivator to follow Christ. Obediance is only born out of Love. "He that loves me will obey me." not vice versa. But all in all, it is an interesting concept and we should discuss :)
Once you get MSN we can.
This is all very interesting. What if another word for former western evangelicals/fundamentalists turning 'eastern' is 'emergent'?
LOL! exactly why i named the post what I did. I think you're correct Robert, the emergent church (which as a term is hard to define given the vast spectrum they fall on) is certainly turning more to the Eastern tradition...trying to take the best from both worlds (in the best case emergent church scenario...perhaps some go too far...). I heart the movement.
but remember, academics can be eastern as well. eastern does not mean eliminating ration and reason, it simply means allowing the mystical and miraculous to be just that. this is something that western theology has a difficult time doing as slaves (by choice) to a postmodern scientific world. attempting to prove christianity will ultimately lead to the downfall of that line of thought, and many many people's faith will be torn because they have been told by an evangelical world that christianity is rational and provable and that true archaeology supports everything the bible says and that the bible is perfect and infallible, etc. as science moves forward, this worldview does not hold up, and this brand of christianity cannot be maintained. we will see two basic reactions among those that choose to remain christians: one is fundamentalism, where a blind eye is turned to the world, science, and culture. this leads to isolationism and ultimately militancy. the other is what some are calling emergent, which can be understood in one sense as a move towards the east and to pre-council christianity. it's focus is not on doctrine, but on service and praise. i call it academic christianity (avoiding the term 'intelligent' christianity to maintain distance from our 'intelligent design' friends). it is a christianity that is critical, rational, and faithful, but discards notions of biblical infallibility, inerrancy, and de-emphasizes doctrine in exchange for focusing upon service and community. if the emergent/academic christianity movement fails, we'll be left with christianity that will move more and more into a position of diametric opposition to fundamentalist islam. the rhetoric and positioning will become reactionary, and the centers of both faiths will be lost. if this happens, the 12th century will look like kinderspiel.
I think the key is that the emergent church has shifted from proving things (fundys) to allowing God to by mystical. To accept the mystery with zeal. To actually ENJOY the mystery. And the manifestation of that acceptance and joy can be seen in the new outlets of worship that the emergent church generally takes on: The arts and social justice. The emergent church loves the arts because they mirror that mystical idea, that there is something beyond and, even, ABOVE science. And social justice because it is getting back to the roots of christainity...not proving it's right, but worshipping God as Jesus did --- mercy, justice, and compassion, "love thy neighbor..."
I agree, we'll be in a heap of trouble if Christian extremism becomes the norm. But never fear the emergent movement is strong!
Post a Comment