As do I but I was thinking more of how McGilchrist always responds when people ask for specific things to do or work on in worrying about the direction society seems to be going. While it’s true we’ve put a lot of stress on the planet and may be headed toward collapse on a number of fronts he always responds that it is best to start by addressing what is going on with us and how we think. Otherwise just making a few tweaks won’t make a big enough difference and we’ll soon spiral into the same patterns. So that makes me think rushing off to fix things isn’t always a good idea and when we do we are apt to be acting along the concepts and systems we have thought up. But I don’t really see the conflict here.
One response to what O’Donohue offers is a note of caution for those in this discussion which is not a criticism of the sentiments he or you have expressed. Knowing human nature (sinful, LH dominated, fallen, power seeking, et al), caution is never a bad idea. Everyone will assume their good intention sets them on the side of right but so much can get in the way. Most of us will just retrench and justify whatever we already were doing. Of course O’Donohue’s piece wasn’t about any of that specifically. But I can’t fault anyone for worrying about how some may take it as enforcing their status quo.
Based on the religious pieces I’ve read by him, Kierkegaard didn’t seem sad about his understanding of God or their relationship. He seemed to find the position to be very good as do I in the unenlightened practice of my folk religion and it’s informing beliefs. Neither of us, as far as I can tell, is a mystic. As you know, that’s not possible for me anyway, and I don’t desire to seek it. As for SK, I see things in the sermons I’ve read that I imagine people latch onto, trying to claim he’s a mystic. I think from other pieces that “mystic” is not the right term for him. But I have no particular term to use to classify him, except “singular.”
This is from a sermon on learning joy from the Lily and the Bird:
And if you could learn to be entirely like the lily and the bird: ah, and if I could learn it, then the prayer would also be truth in you as in me, the last prayer in “The Prayer,” which (as an example for all true prayer, which of course prays itself joyful and more joyful and unconditionally joyful) in the end has nothing, nothing more to pray for or to desire, but, unconditionally joyful, ends in praise and worship, the prayer: “Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory.” Yes, his is the kingdom, and therefore you must unconditionally keep silent lest you direct disturbing attention at the fact of your existence—but through the solemnity of unconditional silence express that the kingdom is his. And his is the power, and therefore you must unconditionally obey and be unconditionally obedient in submitting to everything, for his is the power. And his is
the glory, and therefore in everything you do and everything you suffer you have unconditionally one more thing to do, to give him the glory, for the glory is his.
Oh, unconditional joy: his is the kingdom and the power and the glory—forever. “Forever”—behold, this day, the day of eternity, it indeed never comes to an end. Therefore, only hold unconditionally fast to this: that his is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever; then there is for you a “today” that never ends, a today in which you can eternally remain present to yourself. Then let the heavens fall and the stars change their places in the overturning of everything, let the bird die and the lily wither: this very day your joy in worship, and you in your joy, will nevertheless survive every destruction. Consider what concerns you, if not as a human being, then as a Christian: that from a Christian standpoint even the danger of death is so insignificant to you that it is said: “this very day you are in paradise.” And thus the transition from time to eternity—the greatest possible distance—is so swift that even if it were to take place through the destruction of everything, you are in paradise this very day, because from a Christian standpoint, you abide in God. For if you abide in God, then whether you live or die, whether things go well or badly for you while you are alive; whether you die today or only after seventy years; and whether you find your death at the bottom of the sea, at its greatest depth, or you are exploded in the air: you still do not come to be outside of God, you abide—thus you remain present to yourself in God and therefore on the day of your death you are in paradise this very day. The bird and the lily live only one day, and a very short day, and yet are joy because, as has been shown, they genuinely are today, are present to themselves in this “today.” And you, to whom the longest day is granted: to live today—and this very day to be in paradise—should you not be unconditionally joyful, you who even should, since indeed you could, far, far surpass the bird in joy? This is something you are assured of every time you pray this prayer, and something to which you also draw near every time you fervently pray this prayer of joy: “Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory—forever, Amen.”
You seem to be suggesting that people from the United States in particular are surprised by certain cultural traits or behaviours within their own culture, but as you also say, arrogance is not unique to U.S. Americans but a prevalent trait of humanity, it is not only your culture which excels in celebrating certain negative or base human tendencies. I think that there is an inherent danger when stressing moral purity for human beings to break their own codex. We see it in priests, nuns, and all kinds of moral apostles, but also in our own lives when we neglect our own carnality and forget that we are a body as much as a mind. Arrogance seems to me to be one way people choose to cope with that, whereas balance would probably be more effective.
Self-denialism is a problem for any cloistered society (or people living in such a way), and it is interesting that the Seven Deadly Sins Began as ‘Eight Evil Thoughts’ in the fourth century. When I was reading about the Desert Fathers in a book by Anselm OSB, who is a German Benedictine monk, he describes how a monk named Evagrius Ponticus wrote down what’s known as the “eight evil thoughts”: gluttony, lust, avarice, anger, sloth, sadness, vainglory and pride, and how these eight thoughts could interfere with their spiritual practice.
Also called Evagrius the Solitary (345–399 AD), he was a Christian monk and ascetic from Heraclea, a city on the coast of Bithynia in Asia Minor. One of the most influential theologians in the late fourth-century church, he was well known as a thinker, polished speaker, and gifted writer. Evagrius is believed to be one of the first people to begin recording and systematizing the erstwhile oral teachings of the monastic authorities known as the Desert Fathers, and several of his apothegms appear in the Vitae Patrum (a collection of sayings from early Christian monks). He was writing to other monks to develop a comprehensive spiritual system for addressing these passions, which is a precursor to later Christian monastic traditions and the Seven Deadly Sins concept. He considered Pride as the root of all sins and humility as the ultimate virtue, and he believed that recognizing one’s own weaknesses and dependence on God was crucial in overcoming pride. His other methods seem to reflect the older practise of Taoism and Buddhism, which according to historical records, was not unknown in the Mediterranean at the time.
Taoist philosophy emphasizes the importance of aligning oneself with the Tao, which is often described as the fundamental principle underlying the universe. Taoist monks and practitioners seek to cultivate inner harmony and balance by letting go of attachments, desires, and ego. This process involves practices like meditation, simplicity, and living in accordance with the natural flow of the Tao. The emphasis is on effortless action (wu-wei) and the idea that by not striving excessively, one can attain spiritual clarity. Of course, Meditation is also a central practice in Buddhism, helping individuals become aware of their thoughts and desires, and ultimately leading to liberation from suffering and ego. The principle of balance is also a fundamental concept in Ayurveda, a traditional system of medicine that originated in India thousands of years ago. Balance is considered essential for overall health and well-being, encompassing not only physical health but also mental and spiritual well-being. Practices like meditation, yoga, and herbal remedies are used to promote mental equilibrium.
Self-denialism, in the context of modern psychology, is not typically viewed as a healthy or sustainable approach to psychological well-being. Instead, modern psychology tends to prioritize self-awareness, self-acceptance, and emotional regulation as more constructive strategies for mental health. The conflict between the suppression of emotions and thoughts and the healthy expression of them seems to be a prevalent problem, as well being in touch with one’s feelings, understanding their origins, and learning to manage them effectively. The suppression of one’s true self is counter-productive, instead the balance of acknowledging both strengths and weaknesses is important to avoid various mental health issues, such as anxiety, depression, and personality disorders. This is why practices like mindfulness and self-reflection are widely endorsed in modern psychology.
John O’Donohue’s work also emphasized the importance of self-discovery, authenticity, and the inner journey. He encouraged individuals to explore their inner landscapes and connect with their true selves and to this end he frequently highlighted the interconnectedness of humans with nature and the spiritual realm. He encouraged people to recognize and embrace their place in the larger tapestry of existence. This perspective is more in line with the idea of finding unity and connection rather than denying or rejecting aspects of oneself, which is why he wrote about the importance of living a soulful life and encouraged people to be open to their vulnerabilities and the mysteries of life.
With regard to Tom Holland, I object to his way of trying to play down pertinent criticism by saying that we are only able to criticise Christian history because of the Christianity we are criticising. It doesn’t take away from the pain and suffering that not only people in history, but the victims of religious arrogance and dogmatism today, let alone victims of sexual abuse and misuse of trust, have been through. It may be true that Christian teaching revolutionised thinking, and that many of the evils of the world conflict with Christ’s teaching, but it doesn’t take away the fact that the church also participated in such vile behaviour, mostly by condoning it as a means for their purpose.
His way of pushing back on criticism doesn’t come across as very empathetic, and he seems very obstinate in that way.
This is, of course, very true, and one of the biggest failings in our times is the ability to self-reflect. However, it is the focus on the solitude and silence, and a respectful approach to the sacred that assists us with that, offering a kind of contrast to our own nature. Beauty in its many forms can have a similar effect, or the humility in someone, or the innocence of a toddler or a puppy. They all form contrasts to the egotism that stains our beliefs and devotions, our well-meaning and moral conviction.
This is suitable as a mantra in contemplative prayer, and I have used it often.
Of course, we use words that convey the human kingdoms, powers and glories as inappropriate metaphors for the spiritual realm, and I constantly return to the “dream of Pheidian fancies and embracing in heart of Symbols which cannot be the thing Thou art” of CS Lewis.
We can only follow the lead of Lewis when he prays,
“Take not, oh Lord, our literal sense. Lord, in thy great,
Unbroken speech our limping metaphor translate.”
Thanks, I needed that. I tend to ruminate and live with some degree of intrusive thoughts and regrets at what I should have done, or should be doing, and look with envy at some of those around me who seem to live life in the moment without those doubts and second guesses. The bird and the lily need to be my role models, and perhaps joy will follow.
I never thanked you for sharing your point of view. Worse than that I answered in a way that didn’t acknowledge the reasonableness of your holding your beliefs in the way that you do. It isn’t my place to approve or disapprove, and while others here have responded that way to me you have always generously extended that sort of respect to my (in this setting) odd ball beliefs. You deserved better.
Around here I’ve witnessed many more good examples than bad when it comes to how one holds their most deeply held beliefs. The worst are defensive about their own beliefs and treat any disagreement as a personal assault. Given the example you’ve embodied, I definitely short changed you. I’m sorry and promise never to be so quick to answer again that I wax glib, smug and condescending. I certainly do not to take that as my model for how I hold my newly emerging beliefs. It does give me a little more understanding for how that can happen. But that isn’t who I want to be.
True strength manifested itself not in the exercise of power, but in the willingness to give it up. So Tolkien, as a Christian believed. It was why, in the last year of the war against Hitler, he had lamented it as an ultimately evil job. ‘For we are attempting to conquer Sauron with the Ring. And we shall (it seems) succeed. But the penalty is, as you will know, to breed new Saurons.’
Tom Holland in “Dominion” speaking of and then quoting J.R.R. Tolkien from his “Letters”
Thankfully the story didn’t end at Calvary. And neither at the ascension. And nor with closing of the NT canon. The story continues in some remarkable ways. Azusa street. Wow what a wonderful display of God’s imperfect work that was.
How they worshipped God is what often stands out the most for me from the history of the revival.
A mature Christian is almost impossible to offend.
-Dallas Willard (as quoted by Skye Jethani in the Holy Post podcast “What We Get Wrong About Heaven” - where they have some interesting discussion about Christians and humor.)
