The Kundalini Process: A Christian Understanding
Kundalini Energy and Christian Spirituality
- by Philip St. Romain
Paperback and digital editions
A Jerk-in-a-box? Hmmmn.
Well I will certainly reflect on the contents of your post Stephen …… and those Private Messages too that I have also received in this same regard.
Perhaps a few New Year’s resolutions will accrue from the reflecting. And maybe some dust and ashes.
Know though, that I never questioned your heart and that I neither rejected you nor cast you out. That’s not in play at all. I won’t be reflecting in those regards.
That's good! Keep talking it out and let's see where it goes. Willingness to forgive and to learn and grow is obvious between you two.
- - -
One of my duties as host and moderator of a board like this is to insure that people have a chance to say and share their ideas and experiences on a wide range of topics, including those that are esoteric and even "adventurous." I also have a duty to challenge ideas that stray too far from established Christian teaching. It's not always easy to keep this balance. One thing that helps is to remember that in Catholicism, at least, we speak of a "hierarchy of truth" -- that some teachings are more important than others. I like to think of this in terms of concentric circles, with the core essentials being in the inner circle, and those related to church practice being on the outer, with other kinds of teachings being in-between (though don't ask me to elaborate more . . . please! ). Generally, I give higher priority to challenging what I perceive to be distortions of core teachings than to others. Some of what BR writes, for example, impinges on core teachings. People referring to their experience of "past lives" doesn't bother me much, as, for one thing, we've already explored that topic in depth (search for "reincarnation" on the board search and you'll see). An experience isn't a doctrinal affirmation, nor a challenge to a doctrine, imo, and that includes non-dual experiences when they are presented as just that: experiences. It's when people start to draw philosophical and/or theological implications from experiences that the complications begin.
I also try to remember who's saying what on this board. Some of you have been hanging around here for awhile, and I much appreciate the little core group we have here for the hospitality you show to visitors, and for the exchanges we've had with each other. But my main point, here, is that I try to keep in mind what I already know about you, your faith convictions, your spiritual practice, etc. when you share, and that helps to keep things in perspective. A speculative conjecture doesn't necessarily mean that one is leaving the fold; sometimes it's an opening for a rich discussion. Questioning another's faith and/or salvation usually begins to move things in a bad direction, however.
I'm happy to keep going. No problem here.
Let me say again that my experiences over the past couple of years, strange and challenging as they've been, have arisen in the context of Christian contemplation. I have no interest in becoming a Hindu, a Buddhist, or a New Ager. Occasionally, however, I have to dip into these other faiths, even adopt their terminology, in order to understand or contextualise my experiences. I've dropped hints as to their nature here and there but haven't in any way bombarded this forum with them, sensitive to its Catholic core. I've also stated that these experiences haven't forced me to reject doctrine, only to shift perspective a little. Let me state:
God is still my Father.
Jesus is still my Lord.
The cross is still my salvation &
The resurrection is still my hope.
How I hold these core beliefs is personal and in keeping with the experiences which surround them.
Remember too I am not RC, so perhaps feel more at liberty to explore the furthest reaches of my spirituality.
Lots of people are having lots of really strange experiences these days. I don't think you know the half of it. Some of them are undoubtedly la la, to use a popism, but many of them, including my own, are genuine and need to be examined. It would be nice to be able to share them here without feeling one is constantly being "corrected". They're difficult enough to process as it is.
Again, I have no hard feelings. I value everyone here and hope I'm adding something of my own to a precious little community.
I hear you and have had much the same feeling
over the years. Things can be experienced from all types of beliefs but have always felt my core was Christian. I understand the need to process them.
Stephen, Mary Sue, and others. Please do feel free to share these "strange experience," including your sense of what they might mean. If you don't think they belong on this discussion, then maybe there's another already going, or you can start one.
Thanks, Mary Sue. It's important to be open, but grounded...
Phil, I may start something off in the days ahead, if the stress of Christmas doesn't get in the way .
Stephen, I've certainly appreciated your sharing, even if your experiences have been different from mine. Something you said the other day has really stayed with me as majorly insightful:
WOW. How am I supposed to take umbrage at such a lovely post (on 20 Dec)?
A hard act to follow. Aiyee. This is what Paul must have meant when he spoke about pouring coals on another’s head. (Rom 12:20).
You frustrate my nastiness. Dam!
I don’t know if all the following really needs to be said, but in the interest of self-defense and perhaps righting some wonderings amongst everyone here to their satisfaction … I’ll continue a ways.
There’s a biblical proverb I like that goes: “He gives a kiss on the lips who gives an honest reply.”
Phil had asked me a question. He had questioned where on the forums I felt I had detected anything that smelled funny. My response to him via PM was my honest reply, my kiss.
It was a reply to him and not to you. There was in it no intent to injure you, nor reject you personally, nor to gossip behind your back; and it did not indicate intolerance of you. I had not initiated gossip nor initiated an attack on you. I was responding to his question. There would have been no PM had there been no question. The PM was not sourced in my self-initiated malice against either you or Derek. And that response discussed not merely you. (Of course, Derek may well have taken umbrage with its content as did you but have remained silent as he had before when I had made the identical comment in a public post.)
Now, while my PM did indeed reflect my concern, judgment or opinion (whichever word you prefer) there was no intention of malice against either of you, nor rejection of either of you, nor condemnation of either of you, nor the intent to ‘cast you out’ (as you’ve put it). Though obviously I do indeed reject some things to differing degrees and with varying emphasis which I had endeavored to caveat and express. Some of the PM’s content I had already engaged you on in the public forum. Some I hadn’t as yet engaged you on and possibly wouldn’t have so as not to be endlessly picking.
My focus has not been to put down or inhibit anyone’s experience or the discussion of their experience. I am sorry if I have come across that way. My focus has been (in my mind anyway) on the interpretation / conceptualization of experience and the danger of making an idol of one’s experiences or to prioritize them to the negation or superseding of doctrine.
Christ told us in one scriptural instance that we should not judge others. Yet He didn’t say we could not have opinions about anything. Indeed too, we are to test the spirits and form judgments and opinions concerning the testing. In another scripture he calls us to provide fraternal correction (which of course requires the forming of a judgment or an opinion that correction is warranted). The intent of the correction of course is to save not condemn the person, though the activity may be condemnable. Paul censured one of his communities for failing to make judgments (1 Cor 5). He himself gave folk over to the devil based most certainly on a judgment of his that such a course of action was necessary and appropriate. Abbots, abbesses, spiritual directors and spiritual companions, counselors, friends, spouses, juries, parents, etc. etc. all form opinions /make judgments. Is this all wrongdoing? Wrongdoing relates to the heart, to the action and the intent of the individual(s). And there is a difference between judging an act versus judging a motivation. Motivations are hidden typically. Anyway, that’s my man-on-the-street understanding of it all.
My act was the writing of a response to Phil’s question. My intention was to provide an honest and candid reply to him.
I subsequently disclosed the PM’s content publicly based upon Phil’s thinking there would be little to no harm in doing so (you might say Phil did not consider that the PM reeked of judgment, at least not all that much) and also upon your request, Stephen, to mitigate your paranoia -- to bring things out in the light so that the devil could do no further harm amongst us.
Some have questioned me relative to why I mentioned in a public post the sending of a response via a PM.
I did that because my PMs to Phil typically go undisclosed and I was letting him know there was one in the mill. I also did it so that readers would know I was rendering an answer to Phil in regard to his questioning … that I wasn’t sidestepping him or hiding.
All the above aside, perhaps I have been too much the old sheepdog barking at perceived wolves and perceived sheep at the perimeters of the sheepfold heading in a wrong direction. And maybe it’s not my job to be a sheepdog anyway.
A sheepdog that doesn’t bark (I recently heard a bishop say) isn’t worth much. A sheepdog that barks too much is an annoyance though. (Shasha is baby bear’s porridge in the sheepdog department, I think. I can like her.)
And perhaps I have been wielding my axe of Divine Revelation too much and too heavily. Certainly my youngest daughter has often enough exclaimed: “I know, Dad!!” and my son has on many an occasion admonished me to: “CHILL!”
I certainly don’t want to inhibit your sharing of your experiences nor be constantly correcting you (or anyone else for that matter) that’s for sure. And in truth there have been times I have thought about not hanging about at SP and instead hanging at Blue-meme clan.com …. or the local pub.… or just on my knees. And I do realize that my opinions can be wrong. My opinions on your spiritual pride have been sourced in my own spiritual pride. Sorry about that. My apologies.
So I will attempt to muzzle myself … as best I can anyway. Hopefully you will see a difference in the days ahead now that the world hasn’t ended as yet in the U.S.
All that said; that my posting: “One’s aphophatic encountering of God mystically, in ways beyond comprehension and expression should fulfill and should testify to the kataphatic encountering of God given us by Divine Revelation. Fulfill and testify to --- never strip away, and never supersede!” ….. A statement that Phil completely agreed with…. should have occasioned all of this …? Aiyee! (and an IPA ahead for me.)
p.s. There’s some breed of dog that doesn’t bark. I forget what they are called.
I make no apologies for my opinion on Heschel’s cockle and I will simply never prefer the terminology of ‘progressive’ over ‘disciple’. It’s in my blue-meme genes, I guess, as well as my blue jeans -- no tartans in my wardrobe as far as that goes.
Thanks for this, pop! We're ok. I certainly don't want to drive you off, although the local pub might be inviting.
I don't see any conflict between discipleship and progression. I like pioneering lambs and intrepid sheep. One has to be open to a little negative capability.
Just one more note of clarification. I'm happy with intellectual, philosophical concepts. My problem is more with what or how we imagine God to be - an imaginative concept of God which generally forms through childhood but gets peeled off because it limits Him to an immature personal vision and is superceded by that direct Presence I talked about, where His infinite abundance is soaked up like rain. Philosophy and intellect dance with this experience rather gracefully as far as I can see. When one is caught up in the experience of awareness, however, it tends to do the leading.
So let's carry on as we feel led. No one need feel anything bad about this little disagreement.
Good parents (finally) learn that our children are put in our lives to teach us as much as we are put in their lives to teach them!
Pop, you would be readily accepted by folks at blue-memeclan.com. Similarly, Stephen would be readily embraced by shamanic_flyers.org, etc.
Being accepted by those who share a narrow interest or one aspect of our personalities is easy. Being accepted is an elementary-level kind of relating. Being accepted is a start to love, but we desire more from one another. We have such dignity and worth, and need to exchange love.
I was thinking about how we feel loved, maturely loved, when we are deeply understood by others. For that kind of love, we take risks, challenge, screw up, start over, share our joys & suffering, sharpen our smarts, wonder out loud...yeah, that's what I like about Shalom Place. Hang in there, guys. I appreciate both your contributions to our precious little community.This message has been edited. Last edited by: Shasha,
Muzzled now…. by the leather of your post. The old sheepdog is resting.
His ears are down. Visions of sugarplums dance in his head.
Will his ears ever rise upright again?
Will the muzzle’s leather prove true?
Only time will tell.
Meantime … no MEAN times.
Merry Christmas, Oyster! --- from the bottom of that box I dwell in.
Peace and goodwill, Poppington. Give your kids a nice treat this Christmas.
Also, Derek, I meant to thank you for your last post. Appreciated .
Pop, you're a good and humble guy, that's for sure. There's no problem with you bringing up points that concern you; that's not at always Blue-memeish as it's obvious that the issue at stake for you is faith and discernment. Faith isn't Blue Meme; it transcends all that. The way it's packaged can be Blue Memish, however, and it's a huge mistake to conflate the two. Nevertheless, what we affirm about faith with our doctrines (including Scripture, here) provides a foundation that we can depend on, and that ought not be violated. I have an antennae out for that basic principle as well.
I've made rounds through the years at some of the "true-blue" Catholic sites and have felt constrained, after awhile, to do much more than spout or reframe doctrine in different ways. It really does seem difficult to try to shed the light of faith on current issues. I also think many of them are not only Christological exclusivists, but Cathological (new word!) exclusivists. They don't even seem to accept the Vatican II teachings on issues like salvation in other religions, or in Protestantism. So I can't stay for long. The moment they discover I've written a book on Kundalini, that's really the end. So I haven't been over to some of those boards (don't ask me to name them) for years now and have no intention of visiting them again. Fwiw, I don't think you'd bee too happy there, at least not for long.
Then there's the other side of the river, where the Blue vMeme foundational material, Christianity, religion, etc. is scorned. I view such boards and lists as a kind of "mission territory" and actually enjoy making a round in such groups much moreso than the right-wingy ones. Recently, I spent some time on a Spiritual Authors list made available on Linkedin. Some of you writers might consider checking it out. Wow! There's some very flakey stuff there. Many of the participants are more inclined to believe in dream material or channeled messages than the Gospel of John. I get tarred and feathered every time I set share faith on those lists, but maybe it helps some of them to think outside their relativistic Green vMeme boxes. Who knows?
One thing I will say is that I seem to pay a huge price for opening myself up to interaction with others in the New Agey forums. It's as though their energy and confusion (not to mention their hate -- yes: hate!) finds a way to hook into my psycho-spiritual innards, and it can take days sometimes before things balance out again (and that only after I quit reading and responding). Most of these people are pantheistic, neo-gnostics -- all supposing they are God, in some manner, or "part" of God. As I say: mission territory.
I think I understand what you mean, Phil. But as the years slowly go by I find myself more into the right wing. Not so much in terms of rejecting stuff like Eastern mysticism, meditation, yoga etc. as in terms of conservatism and distrust towards progress and modernist/postmodernist (what you would call Orange and Green) culture of the West. Evolution is certainly necessary, but a slow one, and always relying on the past, because our wisdom is in the past - it was revealed to us, now we have to understand it better and better. But progress and rational enlightenment is usually against tradition and the past and we just cannot afford to turn our back on the past and tradition. So I'm probably more "righty wingy"...
But still I feel very comfortable here :-)
Thank you Phil.
This is very generous of you.
|Powered by Social Strata||Page 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17|