N
Nick_A
Guest
"The tremendous greatness of Christianity", writes Simone Weil, "comes from the fact that it does not seek a supernatural remedy against suffering but a supernatural use of suffering."
Christianity in contrast to Christendom invites contradiction.
Notice Jesus doesn't tell Peter to get lost but rather to get behind. Peter provides a contradictory influence that is necessary as long as it isn't dominant. The purpose of this thread isn't to get deeply into the psychology of this but rather to admit certain basic implications.
The value of a contradiction is in our ability to experience it which requires a quality of conscious balance. But this is precisely what is discouraged in normal secular life. We prefer the lie that avoids the unpleasant experience of the contradiction.
I noticed this with my recent mob rule experience. Instead of keeping the question open a communal violent reaction became justified, not logically, but emotionally, and this emotionalism had to be pacified at the expense of the experience of the contradiction.
The suffering Simone refers to above is the conscious experience of our contradiction normal for our "being." This of course is opposite to secular thought which seeks pacification and the calm of suppressing the contradiction as an alternative to violently reacting to it. The remarkable conscious Christian option is to stay present to it - to consciously experience it with a quality of impartial detachment. Let the light shine on the darkness.
I was struck by Inuk's recent remark in contrast to the Christian approach:
Jacob Needleman writes in "Lost Christianity."
This self questioning is the contradiction that when experienced can lead to the door.
How we deal with contradiction becomes a fascinating question. We can suppress it and seek a calm based on avoidance. We can resolve it by taking a side and denying the other. We can resolve it through violent response. We also can make the effort to consciously experience the contradiction - the simultaneous experience of yes and no in ourselves.
Stunning! If she is right, consolation which is a big part of Christendom defeats the purpose of Christianity by denying the conscious experience of the contradiction in favor of consolation. This results in fantasy that the atheist rightly objects to.
I can only speak for myself and recognize that some will always justify righteous indignation and complaints as well as avoidance. For me though, I can see how important it is to become able, even to a lesser degree, to become open to the conscious experience of the contradictions in my life; not to judge but simply to experience. If I can take seriously the possibility of help from above through the door created by the conscious experience of the contradiction not resolved by a lie, it is logical to try and open the door.
Christianity in contrast to Christendom invites contradiction.
Matthew 16:
22Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. "Never, Lord!" he said. "This shall never happen to you!" 23Jesus turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men."
Notice Jesus doesn't tell Peter to get lost but rather to get behind. Peter provides a contradictory influence that is necessary as long as it isn't dominant. The purpose of this thread isn't to get deeply into the psychology of this but rather to admit certain basic implications.
When a contradiction is impossible to resolve except by a lie, then we know that it is really a door. Simone Weil
The value of a contradiction is in our ability to experience it which requires a quality of conscious balance. But this is precisely what is discouraged in normal secular life. We prefer the lie that avoids the unpleasant experience of the contradiction.
I noticed this with my recent mob rule experience. Instead of keeping the question open a communal violent reaction became justified, not logically, but emotionally, and this emotionalism had to be pacified at the expense of the experience of the contradiction.
The suffering Simone refers to above is the conscious experience of our contradiction normal for our "being." This of course is opposite to secular thought which seeks pacification and the calm of suppressing the contradiction as an alternative to violently reacting to it. The remarkable conscious Christian option is to stay present to it - to consciously experience it with a quality of impartial detachment. Let the light shine on the darkness.
I was struck by Inuk's recent remark in contrast to the Christian approach:
Talk about a theological difference! According to Inuk, Islam seeks to beat what Christianity seeks to consciously experience so as to "Know Thyself." Some student of theology could write a paper on this.In Islam the concept is tackled as a personal struggle, or Jihad. Or this is what your local Imam will tell you on seeking his advice. Rather than just give the command to cease thinking down the road of doubt it is transformed into an obstacle to be beaten. It is a clever device. It teaches the mind to not view doubt as a valid tool of human cognition but as an enemy to be overcome. Islam is a good example in this case as it does not even attempt to disguise what it is doing.
Jacob Needleman writes in "Lost Christianity."
What we need to learn is that merely to look at things as they are with bare attention can be a religious act.
The principal power of the soul, which defines its real nature, is a gathered attention that is directed simultaneously toward the spirit and the body. This is attention of the heart, and this is the principal mediating, harmonizing power of the soul. The mediating attention of the heart is spontaneously activated in the state of profound self-questioning. God can only speak to the soul, Father Sylvan writes, and only when the soul exists. But the soul of man only exists for a moment, as long as it takes for the question to appear and disappear.
This self questioning is the contradiction that when experienced can lead to the door.
Religion in so far as it is a source of consolation is a hindrance to true faith; and in this sense atheism is a purification. I have to be an atheist with that part of myself which is not made for God. Among those in whom the supernatural part of themselves has not been awakened, the atheists are right and the believers wrong.
- Simone Weil, Faiths of Meditation; Contemplation of the divine
the Simone Weil Reader, edited by George A. Panichas (David McKay Co. NY 1977) p 417
Stunning! If she is right, consolation which is a big part of Christendom defeats the purpose of Christianity by denying the conscious experience of the contradiction in favor of consolation. This results in fantasy that the atheist rightly objects to.
I can only speak for myself and recognize that some will always justify righteous indignation and complaints as well as avoidance. For me though, I can see how important it is to become able, even to a lesser degree, to become open to the conscious experience of the contradictions in my life; not to judge but simply to experience. If I can take seriously the possibility of help from above through the door created by the conscious experience of the contradiction not resolved by a lie, it is logical to try and open the door.