A recurrent theme in the correspondence with one of my readers has been "literalism." One of the newer insights with which I began this quest was that scripture is to be understood not literally but metaphorically. Was I, then, basing too much of my criticism of the use of personal or anthropomorphic terms for God on my own literal understanding of those terms? And was I recognizing that to depart from traditional language would leave behind the many people whose faith remained at a Sunday School level? And did I recognize that literalism is a necessary early step in any journey of growth -- in childhood, in 12-step recovery, in the faith journey?

I have often been critical of clergy for not preaching and teaching the highest level of their own knowledge. Many of them have learned much that they never pass along because of their desire to speak to people "where they are,' and somehow there are always enough people at the elementary level so that the advanced lessons are never taught. Because there is much literalism at the elementary level, much simplistic understanding, or lack of it, far too many pastors, in their sermons and public prayers, sound as though they have never heard of modern Biblical scholarship, or the Dead Sea Scrolls, or the Jesus Seminar. There is a problem, then, simply a lack of opportunity within the church, for one who seeks a more advanced religious education.

Fortunately, I was able to attend a most unusual church at a stage in its life when exploration at more advanced levels was encouraged through exposure to Joseph Campbell, Carl Jung, dream analysis, Matthew Fox, Brian Swimme, non-Western Religions, modern physics, and the like. I would have been on this grail quest anyway, but not with as many resources.

* * * * *
Perhaps I have an uncommon store of intellectual curiosity, or I am directed uncommonly toward the spiritual quest. Perhaps it is my time in life to dwell on these matters. Whatever the impelling factor, I find it helpful to clarify my thoughts by sharing them with persons who now and then respond with more ideas to think about.

After a few of these documents had been distributed, one of you said, "Oh I see, you are sharing with us the learning process you are going through." Yes -- not universal truths, no intent to persuade or to arouse doubts, just insights that come to me as I continue to read and listen and think and meditate and dream.

One way of understanding my journey is through the scheme set forth by James Fowler in Stages of Faith. Presenting "faith" as a way of leaning into and making sense of life, Fowler's developmental pattern starts with intuitive, undifferentiated faith. Next is a stage of one-dimensional literalism, followed by a loyalist, conventional stage where one identifies with the group or denomination and its beliefs. These are unquestioning stages, and many people never move out of them. The fourth stage is one of critical thinking by which one moves to an individual, reflective faith, an intellectual sorting before one can move on to the next level. The transition beyond that level comes with the realization that rationality is too limited to capture spiritual truth and reality which are, at best, experienced partially. Stage five is an integration of the conscious with the unconscious, toward a reliance on internal experience and wisdom, acceptance of ambiguity, transcendence of paradox and duality with a "both/and" sense of a larger unity. Finally, stage six, which is rarely reached, has been called universalizing faith or wisdom. It transcends labels and is represented by Gandhi, Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Martin Buber, to name but a few. Here values, beliefs, and action are folded into a single response to life which is likely to include a vision of universal community and which may bring martyrdom as the vision is incarnated.

My own journey was somehow stuck at the leading edge of stage four -- critical thought -- until my life brought me to the 12 step movement and to a 12 step church. I didn't think of myself as believing literally, but neither had I taken any steps toward sorting out what it might mean to see scripture as poetic or mythic representations of the human journey. I thought I had left conventionality behind, but I had not moved to any new position. These were the insights that led me to begin to think:

1. Joseph Campbell's presentation of religions as parts of the great cultural myths, different culturally, but responding to the same great human experiences with that which was essentially beyond human understanding, and, though unique in expression, one not necessarily superior to another;

2. scripture as metaphor, not just here and there but predominantly so;

3. healing (recovery) as a spiritual process;

4. original blessing rather than original sin/redemption;

5. Jungian concepts of personal and collective unconscious as aspects of a deeper Self which can be understood as God;

6. moral action not because one should but as the natural expression of an overflow of unconditional love and as a response to a sense of unity with all that exists;

7. the apparent inconsistency between scientific cosmology and a god who acts in history (too much literalism, not enough metaphoric understanding);

8. and further awareness that the accounts of Jesus' life and teachings were suspect because of the mythologizing done by authors whose purpose was the founding and growth of the early church, plus canonization decisions based on the agenda of the early church, along with errors of copying and translation.

* * * * *
So I struggled with how to reconcile these issues within the process of building my own theology. You have seen a lot of that in my previous Musings. And in the most recent you saw something of my discovery of the limitations of intellectualizing. I had been trying to get my head and my heart in synch by doing head work, and I came to see that those efforts, helpful though they were, brought me back around to inner work, to the most central issue of finding and being the real authentic me. And with that discovery came the realization that this -- finding and being me -- is exactly where recovery and religion meet.

Health and wholeness = spirituality = salvation.

And I also discover that statements like that, anything definitional, are too simple. So along with thinking, I am doing more appreciating, paying attention to dreams, celebrating, relaxing, singing, exercising, reading poetry, trying to be open.

I continue to do some stage four work, but increasingly I feel my way into stage five. I am more "both/and" than I used to be, more universal in my outlook, more connective in my thinking and my relationships, less inclined to identify with any one church, less in need of a 12 step or recovery label, and more at home in my surroundings.

* * * * *
Following are a few pages from my journal:

"For a while, as I sorted through my theology, I wondered why I was so negative. ... I wondered why I couldn't just get on with the positive. Now ... I see that one cannot get on with the task of integrating one's own faith without a stage of questioning authority, of being critical.

"I found at my 12 step church, for the first time, I think, a ministry that was willing to let me be critical without shaming me or trying to hold me in the faith. I think most churches would subscribe to the idea of personal integration of faith, but very few would take the risk of encouraging questioning of the basics.

"My preference would be for a highly pro-active approach to questioning authority, taking risks, thinking for oneself -- openly (publicly) putting aside those portions of scripture, belief, and practice that are patriarchal, hierarchical, shaming, judgmental, exclusive, restrictive of growth in spirituality."

* * * * *
"We should celebrate a child's first NO the way we celebrate a first word, a first tooth, a first step. It is a step toward becoming a self, a risk-taker, one who defies convention."

* * * * *
"This is the way it is; I choose to be open to the way it is, the marvelous, sometimes painful, way it is, so that I may be in harmony with it. This is a very large role for us as humans; not a controlling role, but a placing role, a listening, aware, positioning role."

* * * * *
"The unity in the self is the unity of the universe.

The wisdom of the self is the wisdom of the universe.

Look inside."

* * * * *

"My daily affairs are quite ordinary;
but I'm in total harmony with them.
I don't hold on to anything, don't reject anything;
nowhere an obstacle or conflict.
Who cares about wealth and honor?
Even the poorest thing shines.
My miraculous power and spiritual activity:
drawing water and carrying wood."


                   -- eighth century Zen adept Layman P'ang
                             (The Enlightened Heart,
                           by Stephen Mitchell, P. 35)

* * * * *
"Self
   Soul
     Being above doing
       Integrated
         All together
           A sense of unity of self and with all
             Health and wholeness
               Salvation
                 Kingdom of God
                   Nirvana
                     Heaven
                       God"

* * * * *
"I will always have more questions than answers, and, in that sense of ambiguity, be closer to reality than those who know with certainty.

"Or is that my own claim to certainty? If so, it is also a commitment to openness, an acceptance of change as a good, to be learned from, to adapt to, and where possible, to influence."

* * * * *
"Is it enough, then, to gain the health and wholeness that recovery and therapy can bring? No. There is the necessity to find one's place, to feel at home in, to be in harmony with, the universe. To have a consistent cosmology. To discover how the universe works. To see Self as a microcosm of the macrocosm of time and space. This is the religious dimension -- this provision of perspective -- whether or not a religious institution helps provide it.

"Or is there no real health and wholeness without a perspective that large?"

* * * * *
"The important religious differences are not between Christians and Jews, Protestants and Catholics, Lutherans and Methodists, Eastern and Western faiths, or even between believers and atheists. The spiritual people in all of these categories have much in common, little that separates them. The significant separation is between the literalists and those who understand scripture as metaphor for the human condition, between Fundamentalists and those who find freedom through their commitment, between those who are exclusive and those who are inclusive, i.e., loving."

* * * * *
"So -- what are the common characteristics of the spiritual person? Here is a beginning:

-- a sense of being at home in the universe
-- a sense of the unity of it all
-- commitment to justice for all, though not judgmental
-- merciful, though not wish-washy
-- humble, though confident
-- feeling empowered
-- healthy and whole, at one with oneself, head and heart in harmony
-- able to transcend differences, both/and
-- able to celebrate diversity
-- open for the process of growth to continue
-- balancing thought and feeling
-- trusting instinct and intuition
-- appreciative and grateful
-- knowing there is more than can be known
-- meeting life with awe and wonder
-- playful
-- (add your own)

* * * * *
As the Zen Master said to the hot dog vendor,

"Make me one with everything."

* * * * *
Recommended reading:

Stephen Mitchell, The Gospel According to Jesus: A New Translation and Guide to His Essential Teachings for Believers and Unbelievers. An attempt to present the authentic sayings and doings of Jesus without the mythologizing and partisan passages added by the early church, with commentary and parallels from Buddhist, Hindu, Taoist, Sufi, and Jewish traditions.

Sukie Colgrave, By Way of Pain: Passage into Self. A psychotherapist looks at the process by which union with Self emerges by passage into our own wounding, we move to transformation and expanded possibilities for love and wisdom.

Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception. Two investigative reporters tell how the Dead Sea Scrolls, contemporaneous with the life of Jesus and the early church, have been suppressed for nearly fifty years by orthodox scholars who wish to "protect the faith" from new knowledge about New Testament times.