Glocal Christianity

As Above So Below

The closest Christianity comes to a doctrine of correspondences is in the teaching that Jesus is the incarnation of God, that as Jesus is, God is. And that as we come to imitate Christ we come to imitate God. The crucial difference though is in what we say about the will. In esoteric teaching the goal is mastery of the will. In Christian teaching the goal is surrender of the will, alignment of the will with God’s will.

The Magician: A Meditation

Ole Skjerbæk Madsen, a Lutheran Pastor and online mate of mine, has released more meditations on the tarot. I think I'll be posting a few of these over the next few weeks.

Google going ballistic over Occult Academy

For some reason a Japanese anime production called "Occult Academy" is hitting the top ten in Google trends. Here's the blurb:

This story revolves around a girl named Maya and a time-traveling agent named Uchida. Maya is the daughter of the former headmaster, who passed away in 1999, of a private Japanese academy dedicated to the study of the occult, and Uchida is a mysterious young man who has traveled back in time from 2012.

Notsradamous is mentioned in the Occult Academy trailer, so given that and the millenium and 2012 dates featuring so prominately I gather the writers are trying to capitalize on apocalyptic faddism. What will the industrie do when the Mayan calandar runs out (he says sarcastically)?

Related Articles on 2012:

Aquarius Rising
The Shift - Rebranding a Movement

The Fool: A Meditation

Ole Skjerbæk Madsen, a Lutheran Pastor from Denmark whom I've know for many years through a shared interest in tarot and Mind Body Spirit culture, has released a visual meditation on The Fool from the major arcana of the tarot. If you'd like to find out more about his community and work, see In the Master's Light.

Why esoteric Christianity will never reform the church

An unusual juxtaposition of reading material has got me thinking about esoteric Christianity and anabaptist Christianity and their relative strengths and weaknesses.

On the one hand I've been rereading "Inner Christianity: A Guide to the Esoteric Tradition" by Gnostic author Richard Smoley. In this book Smoley discusses the Secret Church, the Johnanine church within the Pererine church.

On the other hand the recent conversation on not going to church prompted me to reread "The Politics of the Cross: The Theology and Social Ethics of John Howard Yoder" by Craig A Carter. In the book Carter observes "Yoder contends there are three basic types of ecclesiology: [1] the theocratic vision, [2] the spiritualist reaction and [3] the believer's church."

It was Carter's description of the spiritualist church that grabbed me: "From the perspective of Pilgrim Marpeck [believer's church], the Spiritualizers and Zwingli [theocratic vision] were quite similar insofar as they both denied the ultimate importance of proper church order. Schwenckfeld [spiritualist reaction], because he thought only spiritual reality matters, did not challenged established worship and church structure of Christendom and thus suffered no persecution ... spiritualism is able to function quite well within the framework of the theocratic society that it rejects, as a 'church within a church.'"

Now, once we recognize esoteric Christianity as a variant of this spiritualist reaction that Yoder speaks of, it becomes immediately evident that many of the same criticisms apply. Thus we can say that, as esoteric Christianity functions as a "formless form" of church rather than an "alternate form" of church, it is unable to concretely challenge the "Christendom form" of church, even when that form becomes horrendously corrupt. 

In other words, esoteric Christianity doesn't challenge exoteric Christianity in any tangible way precisely because it devalues the tangible. It does not offer revolution, it merely offers reinterpretation.

Not so with anabaptist Christianity. Anabaptist Christians suggest alternative forms of church are essential if we wish to reform the church, and I'm convinced they are right. But where I find the anabaptist tradition sometimes lacking is precisely in the area that the esoteric tradition is strongest, in its development of a Christian psycho-theology. Therefore, if anabaptist Christians seek to be genuinely holistic I think they need to work more on developing a holistic understanding of humanity, an understanding that includes the psyche and psychological experience. So, while I reject esoteric Christianity as a dead end on the post-Christendom path, I think esoterics still ask some very good questions.

Story, Symbol and Spirituality

One of the reasons I value interfaith dialogue is that it helps me to see my own faith in new ways.

For example, in conversing with the esoteric community over the years one of the things that has been highlighted for me is how distinctive Christianity is in terms of its emphasis on story. Esotericists place much emphasis on symbolic correspondances. Christians, in contrast, place much more emphasis on story correspondances.

So, where esotericists draw extensively from various symbol systems, such as the major arcana of the tarot, the sephirot of the qabalah, the elements of alchemy, etc, etc, Christians draw much more extensively from story collections, not only in terms of the New and Old Testament collections, but also in terms of hagiography and testimony. This is not to say esotericists are indifferent to story or Christians are indifferent to symbol; what I'm saying is, the emphasis differs. It really differs.

Nowhere is this more important in how we understand deity. In my experience esotericists relate to their deities primarily through their symbol systems and only secondarily through their stories, their mythologies. Indeed, for some esotericists their deities are symbols. This can be vary difficult for Christians to understand, particularly Christians from more iconoclastic traditions.

Why do I mention this? Because of its implications for alternative worship, for contextualized ritual. Because, if we're committed to being in the world but not of the world, if we're committed to engaging our culture without loosing our Christian distinctiveness, then we have to learn to use symbol more effectively without story become subordinate. But I'm afraid, from what I've seen and heard, that, this has not always been the case.

So engagement with the esoteric community has given me a deeper appreciation for story and its significance for Christian spirituality. I have learnt I need to learn more about stories. How does story work? How does story relate to drama, to sacred reenactment, to crisis ritual, to life as we experience it? In the New Testament stories for instance, there can often be multiple characters involved. Disciples like Peter, Thomas, Mary. Opponents like the Pharisees, Herod, Pilate. Ambiguous characters like Judas and Nicodemus. Others like the tax collecters and the crowds. And, overarching them all, God. How do their struggles touch our struggles? How am I sometimes a Judas? A Nicodemus? How can I engage with the story on the level of symbol? Is this story something I find myself in? When I pray, how do these stories inform me? In this visual, interactive, multimedia age of ours, its important that Christians, evangelicals in particular, relearn how to relate story and symbol in ways that are distinctively Christian.

Missional Esotericism

To be in the world but not of the world is a well known phrase drawn from the prayer of Jesus for his disciples in John 17. But sometimes I wonder if it's too familiar, because I see many referring to it who quite clearly have no thought through the implications. I mix with a lot of occultists, so I would phrase it this way: I am called to be in the occult but not of the occult. Sound unorthodox? How is it any more unorthodox than the original statement?

Hidden can be Holy

I was chatting with my wife tonight and, not sure quite how it came up, but I made the comment, "You'd never make a good occultist," to which she responded, "Isn't that a good thing?" I was all very light hearted digging, but it got me digging and I would like to quote a few comments on Christian mysticism and the occult for you comment:

The word  occult is of Latin origin and simply means, "something which is hidden or concealed." All too often the connotation of the word "occult" is associated with evil. But, there are many things that are hidden from our sight that are not evil. Our inner organs are hidden from plain view for good reason. Does that make them evil? Most people cannot see through a wall to witness the activity on the other side. Does that make that activity evil? Most people believe they have a spirit and associate it with good but without ever having seen it. Clearly, pinning evil to that which is unseen or "occult" is a premature judgment based on blind, uninformed and prejudiced superstition.

In strictly spiritual terms; how many people alive today have seen the person of Jesus Christ with their own eyes? Shall we say; virtually no one! How do we know He existed or exists? The fact that most of us cannot see Him means that He is hidden from our view. This would make the Lord Jesus Christ by definition an occult figure. Yet, no one could conclude anything negative about the Lord Jesus Christ from this.

Mysticism in general, and Christian Mysticism in particular can be dealt with in the same manner.

The ability to discern hidden connections, to read signs, to see beyond the superficial, is this necessarily bad? How do you respond to the suggestion that some things which are occult may be orthodox? What's the gut reaction? What's your thoughts upon deeper reflection? How might this reframe how you converse with occultists?

Astrological Jesus

Here is another astrological Jesus image that I came across at pisces-sign.blogspot.com. It is a Byzantine image, apparently dated to 813-820 C.

It features Helios in the centre, identified as the Christ by the cross, twelve naked female figures represent the hours, twelve clothed apostles represent the twelve months, and surrounding that the twelve zodiac signs.

The thing I find interesting is the implication that many ancient Christians were obviously comfortable with astrological images, provided they were Christ-centered. This challenges both conventional counter-cult apologetics and contemporary astrology.

Esoteric Christianity versus Mystical Christianity

Ah, here's a guy who understands the difference between esoteric Christianity and mystic Christianity and can actually articulate it fairly well:

Esoteric Christianity is often, as in the case of this table, seen to be synonymous with Mystical Christianity. However, the fit is not quite exact. Esotericism is characterised by two main features: (1) an inner body of knowledge or interpretation of exoteric religious forms that were (2) taught to an inner group of students or practitioners. Mysticism, the practice of conscious personal communion with the Divine, can and is practiced by Christians who are not esoteric in the traditional understanding of that word and whom are not part of any inner tradition. Moreover, the majority of Christian mystics have never heard of Leadbeater and would be disturbed by much of his Christology which is reproduced in this table.

I commented on the same table elsewhere, as similarly, I feel it is unclear whether mystic Christianity should be labelled esoteric or exoteric under this schema, given that it is both orthodox and inner directed. You see, I'd quite happily accept the mystic label myself, but I'd feel very uncomfortable with an esoterical label (given the contemporary associations with reincarnation) but also with an exoteric label (given the contemporary associations with dry institutionalism).