Mindful Theology

Letter to a friend

2009-02-05T07:41:00.000-08:00

Thanks!! That's helpful. My parents, particularly my Dad, are very conservative. I'm trying to do a better job at listening to his point of view other than judging it before he finishes a sentence (in my mind). If I can understand where he is coming from, some place deeper other than the Rush Limbaugh rhetoric, then I can find a place of common ground...I mean I think he wants similar things that I want in a government... but the flowering of those (maybe similar) desires looks completely different when put it into a philosophy. I just bought a book called "You don't have to be wrong for me to be right" written by a rabbi. It's focus is religious dialog but the praxis behind it can be applied to any seemingly conflictual viewpoints. In any case, my parents and Kelly and I have been hanging out a lot since we got here and we really love spending time with them... but if we can't talk about important things that are on all of our minds, then to whom can we speak about stuff? By the way, your daughter is also beautiful. I love the picts and videos of her. She and the Bear are at very fun ages right now, eh? he is finally walking (ahead of schedule for a baby with hypotonia) thanks to the rehab and home exercises. I really miss you guys. I miss the Caps a lot and the since of mission and living out one's vocation in their occupation. It's been hard to find a community here. Luckily we found a church (there are five within 10 miles of our house) closeby that seems to be very diverse and socially minded. My license just got approved, finally, after 5 months from IL to TX. I am hoping to see clients for about 10-15 hours/week at some point. I sent a resume and cover letter to a Catholic college here in town and also to the diocese of Dallas to counsel students and/or clergy/seminarians, esp Latinos. I do feel that I am liminal space or a threshold... it's a great place to be spiritually because it always leads to a new and deeper conversation, with time. But psychologically it's messy because there are a lot of questions and little clarity. I always feel this way, this holy restlessness, at the beginning of transition. I felt this way for the first 2 months in Nicaragua for example. In any case, please pray for me that I may have the eyes to see a path and an open heart to follow. I continue to pray for Cap Corps and your family. Love, D

33 and a New Start

2008-07-31T18:28:00.000-07:00

Today we learned that I don't have melanoma but rather an abnormal mole. It's being sent off for chromosomal studies to see if it was beginning to be cancerous. Just to be on the safe side, the doctors want to cut more out of my shoulder around the area of the excision. I feel that I have been given a new lease on life. And after we found out that our fears were not confirmed, my wife confided in me that if it had been melanoma, because of the rarity of the size and texture of the mole, it would have been fatal. I would have been dead within six months to a year. She had been living with this fact since Monday. My feelings right now are so overwhelming. I am grateful, relieved, still anxious...yet I see a new side of life that only scares like this can bring. I want to rededicate my life to God and you, my brothers and sisters. I don't know in what form this will take place, I am open. I further rededicate myself to being the best husband and father I can be. Thank you God for this gift tonight....This gift of life.

Atonement or At-one-ment?

2008-03-21T11:03:00.000-07:00

Today many Catholic churches offer adoration of the Cross. It's a moving liturgy whereby one is invited to walk up the aisle, come face to face with the cross, and make some gesture of adoration (kiss, bow, kneel, etc). For me, this gesture helps me to see how "off" I have been and how grateful I am and should be for the Death of Jesus, our Lord. However, I've been pondering the meaning of the cross further of late. I wonder if in some ways, we miss another meaning of the cross.

I remember from my graduates studies being struck by the notion that Atonement theology was more a product of medieval culture, and while useful, it is certainly not the only, nor I believe, the best approach to seeing the cross. Atonement theology, touted by St. Anselm, basically emphases a theological paradigm whereby God, being all good had ordered the world in goodness and perfection. Man, due to the Fall, threw off the divine compass, as it were, and created a cosmological skew, an off balance, that needed to be fixed. God then sent Christ to fulfill the great reckoning, to realign the cosmos. However, in order to do this, there needed to be a sacrifice, the Sacrifice, which would take all the bad that Man had done and allowed to happen (sins) and negate it through an Act of perfect surrender and love. Thus the terminologies, "Christ died for our sins", "He carried our sins to the Cross", "the Sacrifice of the Cross" were born. St. Anselm, like all theologians, built a Christology that speaks much more about his own historical time and place. A commonly held worldview of the medieval period was that social order followed a divinely inspired outline which was headed by the King and was "tailed" by the peasants. Those who lorded over the peasants were dukes and land owners. If a peasant did something against his or her land owner, then reparations were needed to rectify the situation. That is, somehow a skew in world happened and the cosmology was thrown off. In order to realign the cosmology, something must be done. This world paradigm was etched in every fabric of the social life, from the micro to the macro. For St. Anselm, then, it made sense to approach the Cross in the same way. God was the landlord, so to speak, and Man, the peasant. Since the peasant was in no way able to repair the damage he had caused, God had to send his Son to do the job.

Is this a bad theology? I don't think so, and it can be helpful if it takes a person (or better yet, an institution) to realize his or her own ego issues and admit failings. But I don't think that happens so much. In my view, emphasizing Christ's horrible death on the cross from the standpoint of worship tempts us to thank Jesus, keep thanking him and thanking him, but not actually living as he did that put him up there. If God had to send himself down to earth to fix the mess, then that leaves little for real empowerment for conversion but rather enables us to continue living unexamined lives as long as we know that his Sacrifice covers(ed) us. To me, atonement theology is too mired in redemptive violence and too enmeshed into a patriarchal mindset.

What if the cross is seen as metaphor for a new social order on the macro level and an invitation to deeper connection to one's real self on the micro level. Expounding on the latter, I am convinced that most human misery is caused by people (me too) who do not realize that we've become so dependent on our own image of ourselves that we'll fight to defend any perceived slight against us. We live our lives almost entirely in a false image that we've constructed for ourselves, often tied to our occupation or material success or our different roles. The false self is easily offended and is always protective and defensive. The true self, on the other hand, is connected to the present moment without ties to future success or past failures. It is "at one" with God because our deepest self is God as we are material manifestations of Christ's Body in the universe. Some theologians reinterpret "atonement" for "at-one-ment" whereby we risk the pain of having our false self burned off to find a core self that is at one with God. By burning off our false image, I mean that when I am offended by what someone said or did, I must look first at myself to see what is below the offense. Pausing and being mindful before reacting helps me to discern if truly an injustice was committed that merits a response or did the "offense" touch a nerve because it injured my pride or ego. Sometimes I may need to react but it will come from a place of love and my ego is not tied to the outcome of a confrontation. Can the cross be seen as the Invitation to realize that my false self needs to constantly die because it's just not life giving to me or others? When I am acting at one with my false self, I am "killing" others and myself. When I am in one with Being, I am operating from my real self which means that I had to suffer real pain to get there (suffering can lead to wholeness). On the macro level, we must admit that systems and institutions are necessarily and always conservative because they were constructed to provide an order for which to operate, think, and affect the world. This fact is not bad in itself, but most systems or institutions have huge collective ego problems and can't handle challenges to their authority or power without a good fight. Unfortunately, some of the systems in which we live are so expansive and pervasive that we don't know the harm they cause much less how we contribute to the harm. But it was precisely these kinds the systems or institutions that put Christ on the cross to begin with. He always challenged the power structures, not because structures are bad, but because they weren't honest in their ultimate goals: to maintain power for a few and keep the poor (physical and spiritual) dependent and "less-than." Our systems largely do the same thing today and we don't even know it most of the time. For example, while capitalism begets creativity and efficiency, it also demands that there be an economical order with a majority of poor at the bottom supporting the top. The theory is that if the top gets richer, it should trickle down and pull the bottom up too. But this doesn't happen very often because those at the top (myself included) are tied to our false images of ourselves and we make decisions that keep the gap widening. Another example is how the Church leadership often falls to the temptation to serve the interests of itself by keeping the "poor" dependent on them rather than offering empowerment whose goal is to foster mature and adult spirituality. Mature, adult spirituality privileges a formed conscious grounded in practical lived experiences as a way to encounter God rather than a top-down approach. In earnest, both are needed but the institution of the Church still seems to be too concerned with it's own power. For me the sexual abuse crisis is the greatest blessing that has happened in the American Church, at least, because it has served to some extent as a leveler between the powerful and the laity. Denial has become less of an option, it seems.

The Cross, for me, is a symbol of what happens when an individual or an institution lives out of their own image and ego. It hurts others and ultimately crucifies the owner of the image. At the same time, the Cross is an invitation to die to oneself, to one's ego needs, and admit the plank in our own eye. At an institutional level, it is a constant reminder and check point to evaluate whether or not it is serving life or death.

Good Friday, 2008

2008-03-21T06:47:00.001-07:00

Right now outside my Chicago window, it is snowing outside when it "should" be warm and sunny this time of the year. I am not working today, Catholic Charities has the day off, and so I "should" be cleaning. I "should have been" more strict on myself during Lent, perhaps. I am profoundly mindful today of my failings and shortcomings today. Have I grown any during Lent this year? I don't know...

I realize that there are a lot of "shoulds" in my life and in the world at large. There "should" be a better economy. There "should not" be war in Iraq. There "should" be better recycling in Chicago (and I "should" do a better job a recycling). I feel this tension between where I am and where I want to be, the "should." But that's not where God is. God is located in the here and now embracing me where I am and lovingly inviting me to become more and more who I really am. It's precicely in the struggle of the "shoulds", the tension of the now, when my soul is torn open to receive the mercy of God. Señor, ayúdame ser quien realmente soy. Dame la sabiduría y el poder de vivir en el momento presente, en el ahoríta. Dame la forteleza a hacer lo que debo y la sabiduría a dejar las cosas cuando debo. Amen.

Trinity and Economics

2008-01-21T19:32:00.000-08:00

Originally written elsewhere in November 2005.

People are “selves-in-communion” with other objects (people)
When two or more are gathered together, an imago trinitarias is created. That is, people give to other people who receive from them, and then give back. To the degree that people give and receive completely, (a. selflessly, b. without their “pointness” (Enneagram) getting in the way, ) is to the degree that they “imitate” the Trinitarian life of God, the flow; and thereby participate in and with God’s love outpouring.
Economics addresses the material needs of each person individually within the group. Each person wants their needs met (autonomy or centripatal force) but must be mitagated by needs of each other person so that the group’s needs equals the equitable givingness and receiving of the individual (centriphical force)
Economics therefore works at the individual level, moving outward trying to get their own needs met (centripetal force: moving away); as well as at the group level (Imago Trinitas) requiring the individual to “share” with others and thereby being pulled back into others (centriphical force.).
Resources are what the individuals in the group give and receive with each other.
The amount of resources are akin to the degrees of healthiness in the point system of the Enneagram. If there are little resources, then the individuals fight over them and the group as a whole suffers. The fewer the needed resources there are, the “more unhealthy” the group is because disparity between individuals is created (rich get richer, poor get poorer); participation in the Trinitarian flow is lessened or stopped in the worst cases (Sin).
As awareness for a person about their “pointness” increases can lead to a more inner movement to more health (more participation in the Trinity); awareness of group problems can lead to more trinitarian participation.

Trinity and Enneagram: some thoughts

2008-01-21T19:28:00.000-08:00

Originally written elsewhere in November, 2005.

Enneagram is a system of personalities based primarily on genetics, secondarily on attachment.
Each point on the Enneagram represents a different response to the type of attachment and very early childhood experience (0-3 yrs) with PCG.
Each point also illustrates the best way (for that point) to reconnect with the Trinitarian flow, by awareness of that point’s level of manifestation of the personality.
The healthier the “2” the less the “2ness” gets in the way of the person in self-transcendence; entering into relationship; and therefore participating in and with the Trinity.
If there was no attachment with the PCG, then a person may be in the unhealthy area of all of the points which also may represent the area of personality disorders.
Knowing our point helps us know how we attach to others (the type of attachment) and therefore how we form relationships and finally how we participate in the Trinitarian flow. We also know from our point how we “detach” from the flow throught the “shadow side of the point.”
Awareness of our point and dealing with the shadow side increases our availability to participate in the flow.
The freer we are from ourselves, the freer we are to live the flow.
The more stuck we are in ourselves, the less we are able to participate in the flow. Although God does not love us any less. We are less able to love God.
The freer we are from ourselves, the freer we are for God.

Trinity and Attachment: some ideas

2008-01-21T19:23:00.000-08:00

Originally written in November, 2005.

God’s love is constant and unconditional and complete through the Trinitarian flow
We are invited into flow through self-transcendence relationships
Self-Transcendence form relationships: to the degree that a person is self-transcendent with an object (person) is to the degree that the person can form healthy relationships.
The ability to form relationships (being self-transcendent) is correlated to how well a person can form attachments.
Forming attachments is the basis for forming relationships
The degree to which a person forms healthy attachments depends upon childhood relationships with primary care givers.
Ages zero to three are critical the critical point between disorder and problems: If emotional bonding occurs between 0-3, then attachment occurs; if bonding does not occur, then the child does not attach.
If attachment does occur between 0-3, but problems in relationship occur afterwards between child and PCG(s), attachment issues arise. Can lead to features of PD’s.
If attachment does not occur between 0-3, child never learns attachment and therefore loses the ability to form relationships. This part of the brain dies (no firings of neurons); no connection between hemispheres’s of brain. Leads to Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD) in child; leads to personality disorders (PD) especially borderline (BPD) as adult.
God does not love the child less, but child’s ability to actively participate in Trinitarian flow does not exist because of inability to enter into relationships with anything.
However, RAD child’s (adult’s) existence can cause others to enter/remain and participate in flow of Trinitian love (mystery) as others see “Jesus” in RAD child/adult.
Therefore RAD child/ BPD adult can be “instruments” of God indirectly and are used by God to help care givers extend corporate works of mercy (7 of them) which work to “convert” the CG to the flow.

Monastics and Babies: The Wee Hours

2008-01-20T05:59:00.000-08:00

I'm sitting in our baby's room this morning waiting for others to get up. It's early in the morning, baby's asleep, and I feel very peaceful and still. Luckily for us, our son has been a good sleeper and for two months, sleeps through the night (he's 4.5 months now). However, for the first couple of months, we'd fed him around 9 pm, then at 12 am, then at 3 am, then again at 6: every three hours. That schedule made me think about the time-honored schedule of many monastics, such as the Trappists. They get up at 3:00 am to pray. Then what follows is a schedule that includes work, community, and prayer, the latter taking place formally every three hours or so. Interesting. So, it's fun to suggest that maybe one of the reasons why the monks' daily routine was made that way is because, like a baby needing to be fed every three hours, they realized that they must go to God's bosom also every three hours to feed, to grow, and to unite.

Mind the Gap

2007-12-31T12:17:00.000-08:00

I am mindful that I have a gap in my life. I wonder how in my life that on one side, I am constantly drawn to religious and spiritual literature. I relish the insights, the inspiration, the new ideas, or new twists on old themes that come with reading prayerful people's work. Sometimes I get overwhelmed with joy and a feeling of being truly alive when I am drawn into an article or text that brings me back to a sense of Vocation. My vocation, my purpose. It's like entering into a inner place of security and rightness and connectedness to all things. That's how I know that it's real: I get a sense of being connected to reality, to ultimate timelessness, to the Present, to God. However, on the other hand, I don't take the time to pray. Why not, I wonder? I do pray in the sense of every moment is prayer when done intentionally, but to take time out and pray, to meditate, to read the Bible, to pray the psalms, etc... this I don't do. I think that I am afraid of the transformation that would occur. I would let go some of my selfishness, I might even begin to realize my greatness... that's a scary thought. In short, I would be drawn out of the life in which I am now comfortable. I instinctively know that if I really want to live in the joy that the spiritual texts lead me to, then I would chose to cultivate this discipline. To truly deepen, I need to truly spend time with God. To spend time with God, on an I-Thou level, I would need to make the time. If I am going to go forward in my life, and be an instrument of God's love, and to live out the vocation that is mine, to live out the life that is mine, to be who I already am, then I must stop now, be with God in the present, and fill in the gap between my ontological reality and my praxis.

Who Is This Child?

2007-12-05T07:22:00.000-08:00

This question was posed by the director of the young adult ministry in Chicago, Fr. John Cusick. He asked for reflections. The following is mine:

Who Is This Child?

Another question that is connected to this one is “Why did he come at that time, at that place?” When viewed from the story of human evolution, Jesus came at the perfect time because he represents the fulfillment of one phase and the beginning of another. The human story began a few million years ago and by the time Jesus came to earth, are bodies and brains had reached their full potential and we had some pretty good experience already with living in civilizations. While living in civilizations lumped people together in some form of unity, real “oneness” was not evident. Class systems developed and a few privileged people, mostly men, lorded over their subjects. While our technologies have evolved, we seem to still be stuck in power systems where people are being oppressed. We even oppress ourselves by being deeply frustrated by who we think we are and who we want to be.

However, the next phase of evolution is on the horizon but it began with Jesus, 2000 years ago. This phase will not be characterized by physical domination, Darwin’s theory of survival of the fittest, or building up and hording of resources to ensure physical survival. Instead, the next phase is a spiritual phase where people “awaken” to who they already (truly) are. It is a global movement of humans reconnecting to the earth and to each other where artificial barriers such as nation states, racial segregation, gender gaps, economic disparities, and even our own self-imposed limitations implode. Jesus teachings consistently challenged the power structures that oppressed people while inviting the oppressed to live more fully and freely. On a smaller scale, he challenged individuals to live with such freedom that their culturally enforced and self-imposed stereotypes (“false selves”) were no longer necessary. Never before in our human story did teachings come forth that were as radical, challenging, exciting, and life-giving. His own Jewish heritage could not have prepared him to live with such freedom as it was itself steeped in patriarchal ideology that allowed a few powerful men to control the rest. It seems that only through his total connection to Being, to God, could he speak with such a freshness, free from the mindset of his time, that his message remains universally applicable regardless of any historical or cultural context. In other words, this new phase of human evolution is a spiritual realization of the prayer that he prayed in John’s Gospel, “May they be one” (Jn 17:21). And Jesus’ teaching is the blueprint of how to do just that.

Jesus coming to earth also affirmed that God loves the human body, that creation is good (se we better take care of it), and that all of the life-cycles that enervate the universe such as birth, death, sexuality, love, and forbearance are the manifestations of God’s self. Because he came as a baby to a family, we are affirmed in our desires to parent, to marry, to bring forth life…and to be vulnerable. During the time he grew into his Personhood, his needs were met by his family and friends. It is a reminder that it is okay to have needs and to receive help from people.

In sum, God’s coming to the world as Jesus is the Great Morning that marked the end or fulfillment of our bodily growth while we slept and the beginning of a new dawn of wakefulness, of oneness, and of authentic self-love.