not really sure how to word my question, but here goes my shot at it:

Christian theology states that salvation only comes through Christ. However, even after our initiation into Christ the inclination to sin remains- "while sin is washed away in the blood of Christ, concupiscence remains, the inclination to sin remains, the appalling disorder remains" (William Johnston, Mystical Theology, on Thomistic teaching).

Mystical Theology (St John of the Cross for example) says it requires meditation or contemplation to vanquish such desires: "A more intense enkindling of another better love is necessary for the vanquishing of the appetites and denial of all pleasure..." (St John of the Cross).

Question(s):

If Christ "saves" us but concupiscence remains and we have to perform certain kinds of works (meditation or whatever)- then

*what did Christ save us from?
*what is the necessity of Christ's work?
*how is salvation thru Christ then any different from Pelagianism?
*or different eastern practises that lead to enlightenment?

Again, Im not sure if I worded this question with clarity. But I hope its clear enough.

Also, I am not looking for theological/philosophical answers (mumbo jumbo) but a practical pragmatic answer.

I hope this question doesn't offend anyone. But its a question that has come up in conversation about Christian salvation claims, meditation, and eastern religions. I would appreciate others insights.

Thanks

Hi Fr. Aidan. Good to see that you were able to log on and post to the forum.

But, now . . . you ask theological questions but don't want theological answers?

Let's just start with the first question, what did Christ save us from? We can continue with the others (and feel free, forum friends, to jump in anytime).

Christ saved us from:
- vulnerability to the devil
- the ultimate consequences of sin: death, and God's judgment
- innate powerlessness to avoid sin
- a sense of the meaninglessness of life in the face of death
- confusion concerning God's true attitude toward us and expectations of us.

That would be how I would answer the question for myself without going into metaphysical teaching about the Incarnation and how this joined human nature to God in a new way.

One is saved by surrendering one's life to Christ's loving care. He gives us his Holy Spirit to enable us to live a new life that is victorious over sin and evil. Even though we still experience temptation, we experience a deeper desire to avoid it, and to grow in God's love and grace (sometimes we experience this more clearly than others, for sure). We live not for ourselves nor to assuage our selfish desires, but for God and our fellow human beings.

- - - -

A few links that might be helpful:
- http://www.gotquestions.org/Ch...trine-salvation.html
- http://www.ondoctrine.com/09whatsa.htm
- http://www.carm.org/christiani...ekers/what-salvation

Does this make sense?

Hi Phil,

Thanks for the reply. Yes, it does sound a bit funny to ask a theological question but not want a theological response. A bit more context might help.

What I'm really looking for is an experiential response to an experiential question. Mystical theology, though certainly based on theology, doesnt enter into the speculative debates much of theology does but tries to provide pastoral answers on the level of experience.

SO, my question(s) remain the same:

If salvation only comes through Christ (and I certainly believe it does) but the inclination to sin remains- "while sin is washed away in the blood of Christ, concupiscence remains, the inclination to sin remains, the appalling disorder remains;" and it requires meditation or contemplation (or other works we perform largely by our owb will-even if assisted by Grace-to vanquish such desires, then:

*what or where is the real experience of the effectiveness of Christs salvation?
*how is salvation thru Christ then any different from Pelagianism? i.e., pull ourselves up from our own boot straps.
*or different eastern practises that lead to enlightenment?

These questions stem partially out of a conversation I've been having with a former Christian now a Hindu.

Partially these questions come from my own experience with contemplative prayer. On one level Creedal faith (Truth) is necessary but on another level, comes a time when words are less important than just experiencing Christ in the quiet without words and theologies which sometimes get in the way with all the endless theological debates and speculations.

I think it was St John of the Cross that said "God's first language was silence." The rest is just translation.

Fr. Aidan, I shared some experiential-oriented response above, but have a better sense of your questions now.

*what or where is the real experience of the effectiveness of Christs salvation?

a. in our acceptance of God's forgiveness
b. in the new life communicated to us through the Holy Spirit
c. in our ability to overcome temptation
d. in the clarity we have concerning God's attitude toward us.

I don't see Hinduism or any other religion addressing a, b, and d so directly.

e. in the new identity we begin to develop
f. in the healing from the effects of original and person sin that begins.

Yes, after we are saved we are still sick for awhile, or sickly. Our healing is an ongoing process -- the spiritual journey, really.

*how is salvation thru Christ then any different from Pelagianism? i.e., pull ourselves up from our own boot straps

Pelagianism denied original sin and the efficacy of Christ's sacrifice, so its spirituality was really about saving oneself through the exercise of one's own will apart from grace. That's very different from the traditional understanding of sanctification, which is about growing in grace wherein the will is exercised to open oneself to the various channels of grace God makes available to us. Sanctification is ongoing surrender with concommitant healing; Pelagians have no need to do so. Practically speaking, sanctification is shown to be possible via the countless saints and mystics through the ages; Pelagianism turns out to be untenable.

*or different eastern practises that lead to enlightenment?

We've had lots of discussions on this board about enlightenment, and the general consensus is that it's a natural mysticism rather than supernatural. In other words, enlightenment is more a metaphysical mysticism than a supernatural mysticism; it leads to an awakening of the deep self and its union with all of creation, but not to a relational mysticism. For the latter, grace is necessary, as we can't know God without God's self-communication to us.

I'm not sure these responses would satisfy your Christian-turned-Hindu friend, so please feel free to share follow-ups.

My simple answer: Jesus saves us from a lifetime of separation from God.

To "pull ourselves up from our own boot straps" would be an action of the ego and therefore could not save us from the ego.

BTW I think "Silence is God's first language" is a quote from Fr. Keating -- or is there an earlier attribution?

Fr.Aidan,

I'll share an experience I had during the Good Friday liturgy.
I was wondering what was the meaning of Christ's Passion and Death, and I was asking Him this question. I heard Him saying "The Cross is about love. There was no other way". Of course, for God there was another way, but it was only through the total self-sacrifice of the Cross, that God could communicate to us what really happens in the Trinity. The Persons give themselves to each other totally in perfect joy. But we, people, because of the original sin, suffer when we do the same, when we give ourselves totally to others, because of our fallenness. That's why Mother Teresa used to say "Love until it hurts". It doesn't hurt God, it hurts us.
So Christ sacrifice - or at least that was what came to me through this intellectual illumination - was the closest and most understandable for humans metaphor or sign of God's inner life - total giving. But without Jesus we wouldn't be able to give ourselves - it hurts too much, we can give only conditionally, partially, egoistically etc. But in Jesus the pain of love is accompanied by God's joy, and supported by Grace.

Later during this liturgy I felt that I'm connected to Jesus as a branch to the vine, and I felt the powerful energy of Jesus running through my spiritual veins, the nadis and so on. It was like being plugged into the powerful source of sanctity and healing. But when I saw and felt this supernatural light pervading me and purifying me, I felt that my darkness and pain intensify from within. And I perceived this struggle between the power of life that is in Jesus and the power of sin and suffering that is in human nature since the fall. Jesus became the sin so that we could become God's justice. So I experienced in that moment that my wounds and my sins are transformed and are not only obstacles but sources of grace, precisely because Jesus did it first, and in Him our nature became transformed.

Later I had many visions of His wounds, and heard several times that through His wounds I'm transformed, my own wounds are transformed. It's a mystery that I don't fully grasp, but the importance of His Passion is for me very vivid, crucial.

I also saw many times in visions light and energy coming from Jesus wounds - like they're the gates through which His transforming grace is coming to us. And like in the visions of ST. Faustina Kowalska - from His wounded Heart.
I think theologically it means that our wounded human nature was transformed and even more - was made a means to sanctification, instead of a means to evil and isolation. But experientially it means that grace of Jesus allows us to go deep down into our darkness, our pain, our woundedness, and find light there - like Jesus descended into the abyss before resurrection. I'm not afraid that my pain and darkness will drown me. I can believe and trust that my salvation comes to me through my pain - inevitable pain.

I think there's so much more to the meaning of Christ's Passion.
But there's really this supernatural light running through our bodies and souls. This is not possible without hypostatic union and without final Ascension, that we honour today.

Thank you Phil, Derek, and Mt,

Your responses were helpful as well as confirming.